Article contents
Greek Proverbs in the Gospel
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 August 2011
Extract
Christianity arose in an environment which was, on the one hand, still dependent upon the traditions of the Jewish Church but, on the other, wide open to Hellenistic civilization. There exists today a strong and in many respects very healthy tendency to test the Gospels for Aramaic origin, the results of which are at the same time stimulating and challenging. However, even if the view that major portions of the four canonical Gospels are translations from the Aramaic be accepted, we are still faced with the question where the ideas behind the words came from. For it is not only risky to assume that the translations themselves were uncritical, quasi-mechanical versions, especially in view of the fact that the contemporary Greek translations of the Old Testament as well as the early translations of the Greek New Testament into other languages show a fair amount of skill; but also the Aramaic original itself may have been influenced by Greek ideas and in this way may have determined the translator's method. The original Aramaic language does not also guarantee the Semitic origin of the thought expressed thereby.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1953
References
1 Cf. the excellent study by Black, M., An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts (1946)Google Scholar.
2 Augustine's verdict on the Vetus Latina, Doctr. Christ. 2.11 fin. ut enim cuique primis fidei temporibus in manus venit codex Graecus et aliquantulum facultatis sibi utriusque linguae habere videbatur, ausus est interpretari, is hardly fair.
3 Dibelius, M., From Tradition to Gospel (1934) 233 sq.Google Scholar, assumes that “the text (of Q) used by Matthew and Luke was in Greek,” but even he, reluctantly, allows for the possibility that the earliest collection of Sayings of Jesus was in Aramaic.
4 It is with a certain concern that we see Greek and Hebrew thought so diametrically opposed as black and white, as has been done recently, e.g., by J. A. T. Robinson, In the End God … (1950) 11; 49 and passim.
5 Cf. the text in Strack, H. L., Die Sprueche Jesus des Sohnes Sirach (1903) 22Google Scholar; Peters, N., Der juengst wiederaufgefundene hebraeische Text des Buches Ecclesiasticus (1902) 107Google Scholar. Smend, R., Die Weisheit des Jesus Sirach (1906)Google Scholar, has been inaccessible to me.
6 Καὶ στενἁζων is spurious, mechanically repeated from v. 20a. In order to claim the priority of the Hebrew over the Greek, it would have to be assumed either that the mistake was already made by Ben-Sira himself whose ms. was translated by his grandson and served as the ultimate source of the Genizah ms. or that the same mistake was committed by a Greek and a Hebrew copyist independently.
7 Juvenal l. 22.
8 Lucian, Adv. Indoct. 19.
9 Leutsch-Schneidewin, , Paroemiographi Graeci 1 (1839) 459Google Scholar.
10 According to Ryssel, V. in Kautzsch, E., Apokryphen und Pseudepigraphen (1900) 1, 382 sq.Google Scholar, “he that is persecuted of the Lord” is a sick person.
11 Oesterley, W. O. E., An Introduction to the Books of the Apocrypha (1935) 242Google Scholar.
12 Schuerer, E., Jued, Gesch. d.. Volkes 4th ed. 3 (1909) 316Google Scholar, and Box, G. H. in Charles, R. H., Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha (1913) 2, 549Google Scholar, should not have combined 5. and 6. Ezra in claiming their Christian origin, neither is the general argument proposed by Riessler, P., Altjued. Schrifttum ausserhalb der Bibel (1928) 1285Google Scholar, convincing, who says that they are Jewish, as “it is impossible that a Christian should have written a book under the name of an O. T. Saint.”
13 In Kautzsch, E., Apokryphen und Pseudepigraphen (1900) 2, 332Google Scholar, Gunkel says of 5. and 6. Ezra, “das erstere Stueck ist sicher christlichen Ursprungs, vielleicht auch das zweite.”
14 P. Riessler, op. cit. 1287, who believes that 6. Ezra was written in the late 1st century B.C., gives an impressive list of contemporary events to which the book refers — if the date is correct.
15 Pausan. 5.18.2.
16 Cf. the illustration in Fraser, J. G., Pausanias Descript. of Greece (1898) 3, 612Google Scholar, also in Baumeister, A., Denkmaeler (1888) 2, 1300 pl. 1442Google Scholar. Cf. also Hitzig-Bluemner's commentary and my remark in Harv. Th. Rev. (1945) 182 n. 16.
17 Boehlig, P., Geisteskultur von Tarsos (1913) 103Google Scholar; 104 n. 2, derives the Pauline idea of the struggle between truth (ἁλήθεια) and injustice (ἀδικία) from Persian examples, quoting as evidence Bundahish 30.29 “afterwards Aûharmazd seizes on the evil spirit … true speaking on what is evil speaking,” E. W. West, Pahlavi Texts 1 (1880) 128Google Scholar. It seems possible that the fact that these are the only abstract ideas matched in the great struggle may be indicative of an influence of Greek philosophical thought upon the Persian text.
18 Darmsteter, J., The Zend Avesta 2 (1883) 307Google Scholar, cf. P. Boehlig, cit.
19 Another instance, the parallel between Matth. 8.21/2 par. “let the dead bury their dead” — also originating from Q — and Eurip. Alcest. 894 schol. ed. E. Schwartz 2, 304, 3 sq., and related texts, demands a more detailed examination, which I hope to give elsewhere.
20 Cf. Dibelius, M., From Tradition to Gospel (1934) 244 sq.Google Scholar
21 M. Dibelius, op. cit. 245.
22 Weiss, B., Die Quellen des Lukas-Evangeliums (1907) 249Google Scholar sq.
23 Quoted from E. Klostermann, Matthaeus 2nd ed. (1927) 101, who does not refer to any specific work of Wellhausen's.
24 Black, M., An Aramaic Approach (1946) 118Google Scholar sq.
25 How, W. W. and Wells, J., A Commentary on Herodotus 2nd ed. (1928) 1, 118Google Scholar.
26 Th. Zahn, Evangelium des Matthaeus (1903) 430 n. 27.
27 This may be the reason for the change from ἐκóψατε in Matth. to ἐκλαύσατε in Luke, stated but not explained by G. B. Kilpatrick, The Origins of the Gospel according to St. Matthew (1946) 15. For the law of Solon restricting funeral rites, which is repeatedly quoted by later authorities, e.g. Cic. De Leg. 2§59, although it did not prohibit the beating of breasts, contained, according to Plut. Solon 21.5, the words ἀμυχὰς κόπτειυ, and consequently made the word κόπτειυ obnoxious. For as a legal term κόπτειυ was used to describe an activity which, on the authority of Solon, came to be regarded as immoral.
28 Billerbeck, P., Kommentar z. N. T. aus Talmud und Midrasch 1 (1922) 604Google Scholar. Schlatter, A., Der Evangelist Matthaeus 2nd ed. (1933) 372Google Scholar sq., has no convincing analogy to offer.
29 Bultmann, R., Synopt, Gesch. d.. Tradition 2nd ed. (1931) 219 n. 1Google Scholar, quotes an Arabic proverb as a parallel to Matth. 11.17, saying “when he applauds you acclaim him.” This is but a remote analogy, for this proverb says hardly more than the Latin manus manum lavat, and shows nothing of the “too late,” which is so prominent in Aesop and Matthew. The Talmudic parallels to Rom. 12.15 in Billerbeck, are also rather late, especially that from Derek Erez which Billerbeck puts first, and prove little. It is, however, interesting to notice that b. Ta'an. 11a, says only “weep, with them that weep,” like Ecclus. 7.34.
30 Op. cit. 84; 103; 112, where Bultmann strongly insists upon a Semitic proverb as the pattern for Jesus' Saying. However, in an aside on p. 179, he allows for the Saying to have been added in Hellenistic surroundings, and it shows good judgment that Klostermann, E., Matthaeus 2nd ed. (1927) 195Google Scholar, has taken this up and calls Matth. 24.28 “a Greek secular proverb,” although he gives no evidence for it, and we are not convinced that it was secular. — Stevenson, W. B., Critical Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Poem of Job (1951) 159Google Scholar.
31 It has already been mentioned, that neither Bultmann nor Billerbeck 1, 955, have noted the parallel. It may be added that Schlatter, A., Der Evangelist Matthaeus 2nd ed. (1933) 709Google Scholar, too, gives only a list of passages from Josephus as parallels, which are chosen so as to illustrate various grammatical points.
32 I prefer the future μευεῖ because of the corresponding στροβήσει. The “dark day” contains a reference to Amos 5.18; Zeph. 1.15, cf. also the Hebrew Apocalypse of Elijah 7.5, German translation by P. Riessler, Altjued. Schrifttum 238, quoting Is. 18.6.
33 These two emendations, first suggested in England by G. H. B. Wright, are repeated here on the authority of J. F. Schleusner, Novus Thesaurus (1820/1) s.vv. γύψ and πτῶμα. The first is virtually certain, and the second has at least the value of a brilliant conjecture. On the question whether they should be taken for the Hebrew original, and the Masoretic text for a later misunderstanding, cf. the following note.
34 W. B. Stevenson, op. cit. 63 sq., and Kissane, E. J., The Book of Job (1939) 87Google Scholar; 91, regard the LXX text as the original. In this case Hellenistic influence would have to be assumed in the composition of the poem itself.
35 Πτῶμα occurs in the meaning of “carcase” occasionally in Polybius, Plutarch and Herodian. — How close Greek and Jewish bird-lore could come, may be illustrated by the following instance: in 1. Enoch (aeth.) 96.2 we read,
“on the day of sorrow for the sinners your children will be lifted up and will rise like eagles,
and your nest will be higher than that of the vultures.”
This saying is explained by the legend in Antigon. Mirab. 42 (48) “some say that no one has ever seen a young male or female vulture. Therefore it was alleged by Herodorus, the father by some woman of Bryson the Sophist, that they belong to another world beyond the clouds. They have their young ones on inaccessible rocks.”
36 Cornutus ed. Lang (1881) 41.
37 Liddell and Scott give no other reference. This is also the only explicit witness that the vulture was the sacred bird of Ares. Nevertheless, although the vulture was also associated with Pallas, Eurip. Troad. 534, and with Hercules, Plutarch Quaest. Rom. 93, cf. SirThompson, d'Arcy W., A Glossary of Greek Birds 2nd ed. (1936) 85Google Scholar, Stoll in Roscher, Lexikon der Mythologie 1 (1890) 487Google Scholar, was right to accept the evidence. For, were not the vultures observed by Romulus and Remus, Livy 1.7.1 par., sent by their father Mars-Quirinus? O. Keller in Pauly-Wiss., R. E. 7 (1912) 934, seems to be wrong when saying that the vulture had no connection with religion outside Egypt.
38 Wettstein's quotation, Ep. 46, is incorrect.
39 To these may be added: Prudentius Cathemer. 10.41 sq.:
Quae pigra cadavera pridem
tumulis putrefacta iacebant,
volucres rapientur in aures
animas comitata priores,
a verse voicing pagan sentiments, though written by a Christian poet. Cf. Holland, R., Arch. Relig. Wiss. 23 (1925) 211Google Scholar, on the vulture as a “soul-bird.”
40 Phrynichus ed. Lobeck (1820) 375, cf. Rutherford, The New Phrynichus (1881) 472.
41 Keller, O. in Pauly-Wiss., R. E. 7 (1912) 935Google Scholar, who says that this was done in all cases where vultures are mentioned in the Hebrew Old Testament.
42 Cf., e.g., the vision of the eagle in 2. Esdras 11.
43 In Nu. 14. 52 sq., Aquila and Theodotion say πτώματα, whereas Symmachus whose command of Greek was superior to theirs wrote σώματα. For this reference I am obliged to Prof. T. W. Manson. — Suidas' remark that πτῶμα was a body without a head, hardly deserves any attention.
44 Weiss, B., Die Quellen des Lukas-Evangeliums (1907) 249Google Scholar sq.
45 P. Billerbeck 2, 220 sq.
46 It ought to be remembered, however, that the Dead Sea Scrolls in the possession of the Museum for Jewish Antiquities in Jerusalem contain one which describes the struggle between the sons of light and the sons of darkness and in that way provides a certain amount of support to the Aramaic origin of Luke 16.8b.
47 I cannot find any reason for accepting Bultmann's claim, Gesch. d. Synopt. Trad. 2nd ed. (1931) 190, that Luke 16.8b is secondary: it is the necessary corollary of the fable. I also feel uneasy with regard to his views stated on p. 190 n. 1. It has to be realized that even the Dead Sea Scrolls do not provide any immediate analogy to the “children of this world.” Hellenistic analogies derived from Jewish apocalyptic writings on the present and the future Aeon have been collected by Sasse, H. in Theol. Woerterb. 1 (1933) 206Google Scholar, 25 sq., who ibid. 207, 30 sq., refers to pagan parallels. — The “children of light,” on the other hand, are mentioned in the New Testament in 1. Thess. 5.5; Eph. 5.8; John 12.36, as well as in the Dead Sea Scrolls and in 1. Enoch (aeth.) 108.11.
48 Klostermann, E., Lukas 2nd ed. (1929) 216 n. 1Google Scholar.
49 On Aquilius, M. Regulus cf. P. v. Rohden in Pauly-Wiss., R. E. 2 (1896) 331Google Scholar.
50 “If he had used that forcefulness, or by what other name the firm resolve to obtain one's own ends regardlessly is to be called, for worthier objectives, how much good he might have done. Although the good possess less power than the wicked, and just as ‘lack of learning creates zeal, deliberation laziness,’ so also are just minds weakened through respect, whereas perverse ones are encouraged by their impudence.”
51 The quotation goes back ultimately to Pericles' speech on the fallen Athenians, Thuc. 2.40.3, but its proverbial character has been recognized long since, cf. Otto, A., Sprichwoerter der Roemer (1890) 172Google Scholar.
52 R. Bultmann, op. cit., 216 n. 1. P. Billerbeck 2,217 sq., does not mention these analogies.
53 The Stoic background of Pliny's saying may be illustrated by a comparison with Chrysippus' definition of ὄκνoς as ϕόβoς μελλoύσης ἐνεργείας in v. Arnim, Stoic. Vet. Fragm. 3, 98, 39; 101, 30.
54 An apt illustration of Rom. 12.15, discussed before, may be found in Horace Epist. 1.18.89,
oderunt hilarem tristes, tristemque iocosi.
Other striking analogies are frequent: Rom. 7.19 “for the good that I would I do not; but the evil which I would not that I do,” responds to Ovid Metamorph. 7.19,
….. aliudque cupido
Metis aliud suadet. Video meliora proboque,
Deteriora sequor.
Also 1. John 4.18 “there is no fear in love, but perfect love casteth out fear,” has its analogy in Seneca Medea 416,
amor timere neminem verus potest.
All these quotations which may be easily multiplied have a proverbial character.
55 Liebermann, S., Greek in Jewish Palestine (1942) 144 sqGoogle Scholar.
- 1
- Cited by