The Expository Times http://ext.sagepub.

com/

Jesus and Moses (Mt 5:1-2)

C. Allison, JR The Expository Times 1987 98: 203 DOI: 10.1177/001452468709800703 The online version of this article can be found at: http://ext.sagepub.com/content/98/7/203.citation

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for The Expository Times can be found at: Email Alerts: http://ext.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://ext.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

>> Version of Record - Jan 1, 1987 What is This?

Downloaded from ext.sagepub.com by guest on February 9, 2013

203
response of prayer to preaching. In the office, this and he opened his mouth and taught them, saying... easily be achieved by having the sermon soon (Mt 5:1-2). Should these two verses, which lead off after the collects and keeping the customary further the Sermon on the Mount, send our minds back to prayers to follow the sermon. Justin suggests this Moses and the revelation of the Torah on Mount sequence in his description of worship as involving Sinai? Were they intended by their author, the readings from the apostles memoirs or the evangelist Matthew, to make Jesus appear as a new prophets, a discourse on these by the president, and law-giver, the counterpart of the old law-giver? then the prayers of the congregation (Apology i. 67). ~hile perhaps most modem commentators on the The pattern of the early church points towards an irst Gospel have returned an affirmative answer to integrating of the spirituality of scripture, preacher, these questions, Terence L. Donaldson, in his recent congregation, and liturgy, into a spirituality of study, Jesus on the Mountain: A Study in Matthean preaching. Theology (JSNT Suppl. 8, JSOT Press [1985]), has given us cause for doubt. In a hefty tome which runs This article was read as an Anglican contribution (as will to over three hundred pages, he has examined in at some points be evident) to a combined clergy school of minute detail every mountain scene in Matthew, the Manchester and Salford dioceses in September with this result: the dominant typology expressed by 1985. the mountain motif is not that of Sinai but that of 1 See e.g. Explorations in Theology 1 (SCM [1977]), 106. Zion, the mount of assembly. The mountain motif 2 Cf. The New Testament as the ChurchsBook (Fortress is a device used by the evangelist to make the christhe actual comes from a lec[1972]), 44-63, though phrase tological statement that Christ has replaced Zion as ture Professor Marxsen gave in Nottingham some years the centre of Gods dealings with his people; in him ago. 3 See e.g. L. E. Keck, The Bible in the Pulpit (Abingdon all the hopes associated with Zion have come to fruition and fulfilment (p. 200). [1978]), 100-105. 4 It is not the purpose of this brief note to subject Eight Lectures on Preaching (1877; reprinted SPCK [1959]), 5. Returning to this book recently reinforced my convic- Donaldsons major conclusions to critical scrutiny. tion that it remains the single best book on preaching. His original contribution, which is rich in compara5 W. W. See Johnson, The Ethics of Preaching, Interpreta- tive source material and full of fresh observations, tion 20 [1966], 425. demands the sort of comprehensive review I cannot 6 See Keck, 53-54. 7 See R. Bultmann, e.g. The New Testament and Mythology now afford to give it. I do, however, wish to express reservations concerning the exegesis of Mt 5:1-2. and other basic writings (Fortress [1984]), 145-53. 8 See J. Killinger, Fundamentals of Preaching (Fortress/SCM Should we now, in the light of Donaldsons [1985]), 25-26. painstaking work, give up the common opinion? 9 The Strange Silence of the Bible in the Church (Westminster/ Must we henceforth refrain from connecting the SCM [1970]), 163. Sermon on the Mount with Mount Sinai? - or at 10 See e.g. R. W. Funk, Language, Hermeneutic and Word of least view the connection as greatly muted? The
can

God(Harper [1966]).
11

So F. H. Borsch, Gods Parable

(SCM/Westminster

following four observations strongly incline

me

to

[1975]).
See D. Forrester, J. I. H. McDonald, and G. Tellini, Encounter with God (T. & T. Clark [1983]). 13 Cf. P. A. Bird, The Bible as the Churchs Book
12

(Westminster [1982]). 14 See Killinger, 24.

15 Cf. J. -J. von Allmen, Preaching and Congregation (Lutterworth [1962]), 14-15.

Jesus and Moses

(Mt 5:1-2)

BY DALE C. ALLISON, JR., PH.D., SAINT PAUL SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY

AND seeing the crowds he went up on the mountain, and when he sat down, his disciples came to him,

think not. (1) Jesus sits on the mountain. Most commentators remark that this reference to posture emphasizes Jesuss role as teacher, for rabbis and others sat when they taught. But there could well be more. In Dt 9:9 (a text which might be alluded to in Mt 4:2), Moses speaks these words: When I went up the mountain to receive the tables of stone, the tables of the covenant which the Lord made with you, I remained on the mountain forty days and forty nights; I neither ate bread nor drank water (RSV). The word translated, remained, is w1/:z. BDB lists, as the second and third meanings of y1ag, remain and dwell respectively. But the first meaning given for the verb is sit, and in b. Meg. 21a we find this: One verse says, &dquo;And I sat in the mountain&dquo; [Dt 9:9], and an other verse says, &dquo;And I stood in the mountain&dquo; [Dt 10:10]. Rab says: He [Moses] stood when he learnt and sat while he went over [what he had learnt]. R. Hanina said: He was neither sitting nor standing, but stooping. R

Downloaded from ext.sagepub.com by guest on February 9, 2013

204

Johanan said:
as

&dquo;Sitting&dquo; here means only &dquo;staying&dquo;, it says, &dquo;And ye stayed in Kadesh many days&dquo; [Dt 1:46]. Raba said: The easy things [he leamt] standing and the hard ones sitting.2 This rabbinic text, which is also found in b. Sota 49a, proves that Dt 9:9 could be taken to mean - and was by at least some rabbis taken to mean - that Moses sat on Mount Sinai. We cannot, of course, move from this to Mt 5:1-2 without further ado, for the rabbinic text and the tradition contained therein cannot be dated with any certainty.3 Nonetheless, b. Meg. 21a and b. Sota 49a plainly reveal the ambiguity of the verb in Dt 9:9 and raise the possibility of a Jewish tradition about Moses sitting on Sinai. This is all the more significant given that Matthew not only knew the Hebrew text of the Old Testament but was also probably acquainted with Jewish exegetical tradition.5 (2) Jesus goes up on the mountain. The Greek is, aneb eis to oros (cf. 14:23; 15:29). Now in the Septuagint, anabaino + eis to oros occurs only twentyfour times. Of these, a full eighteen belong to the Pentateuch, and most refer to Moses (Ex 19:3, 12, 13; 24:12,13, 18; 34:1, ~ (A), 4; Num 27:12; Dt 1:24, 41, 43; 5:5; 9:9; 10:1, 3; 32:49). Surely this fact strengthens whatever association there might be between Mt 5:12 and the Old Testament account of Moses receiving the Torah. Note also that Deut 9:9 (see above) is one of the verses from the Pentateuch to contain the construction anabaino + eis to oros. (3) If the vocabulary Lf Mt 5:1-2, which introduces the Sermon on the Mount, can be linked up with Old Testament texts about Moses, so can the vocabulary of Mt 8:1, a redactional verse which closes the sermon: katabantos de autou apo tou orous. This is almost identical with Exod 34:29 LXX A, which recounts Mosess descent from Sinai: katubainontos de autou apo tou orous (cf. also 19:14; 32:1, 15). Moreover, a participial form of katabaiti6 + de + autou + apo + tou orous appears in the Old Testament only once, in the passage cited (LXX B has ek for apo). (4) Mt 5:1-2 should not be discussed in isolation from its broader context. Whether the two verses standing by themselves would recall the giving of the Law on Sinai is uncertain. But consider for a moment what comes before chapter 5. Matthews Gospel opens with infancy traditions which, among other things, call to mind the circumstances of Mosess birth, especially as these are recorded by Josephus and the Liber Biblicarum Antiquitaturn. Into the details of this I need not enter here: others have made the facts clear.6 What then follows Mt 12 ? Mt 3-4, where Jesus is first baptized and then tempted by the devil. That exodus themes are here to be recalled cannot be gainsaid. Having passed through the waters of a new exodus at his baptism, Jesus enters the desert to suffer a time o~ testing, his

forty days of fasting being analogous to Israels forty years of wandering. Like Israel, Jesus is tempted by hunger. And, like Israel, Jesus is tempted to idolatry. All important for a right understanding of Mt 3-4 is
Dt 8:2-3: And you will remember all the way the Lord your God has led you these forty years in the wildemess, in order to humble you and test you, to know what was in your heart, whether you would keep his commandments or not And he humbled you and let you hunger .... How does all of this relate to Mt 5:1-2? If the opening of the Sermon on the Mount_be linked up with Sinai, then Mt 1-5 in all its parts reflects a developed exodus typology. The Gospel opens with events recalling the birth and childhood of Moses. Then there is Jesuss baptism, which parallels Israels passing through the waters. There follows next the temptation, in which Jesus reexperiences the desert temptations recounted in Deuteronomy. Finally, there is 5:1-2, where Jesus, like Moses, sits on a mountain. In other words, every major event in Mt 1-5 apparently has its counterpart in the events surrounding Israels exodus from Egypt. Moreover, the order of the events in Matthew childhood of Jesus, baptism, temptation, mount of revelation - lines up with the chronological order of events in the Pentateuch - childhood of Moses, exodus from Egypt, entry into the wilderness, Sinai. The typology is thus extensive and consistently
-

thought through. If the points I have called-attention to are not to be dismissed as the capricious workings of happenstance, then Donaldsons provocative study of
the mountain in Matthew has underestimated the presence of Sinai motifs in Mt 5:1-2. This causes one to wonder whether Donaldson has also underestimated the influence of Sinai elsewhere in the Gospel. In my judgment, there are good reasons to think he has, which means that, despite its being a very good book, Jesus on the Mountain is not the last word on its subject.

sïbä, e y

Cf. Ezk 8:1; Mt 23:2; Lk 4:20-27; Acts 16:13; m. Abot 1.4; Eus. H.E. 5.20. The Hebrew word for school, means sitting (cf. Sir 51:23). 2 Trans. of M. Simon for the Hebrew-English Edition of the Babylonian Talmud, Seder Moed: Megillah, ed. I. Epstein (Traditional Press [n.d.]), 40. 3 Hanina and Rab were Tannaitic, Johanan and Raba Amoraic. Donaldson himself notes the rabbinic tradition that Moses sat on Sinai, but he cites only Pirqe R. El. 46 and Memar Marqah 4.6 and fails to observe the ambiguity of Dt 9:9 (p. 253, n. 33). 4 See G. M. Soares Prabhu, The Formula Quotations in the Infancy Narrative of Matthew (AnBib 63, Biblical Institute (1976]), 63-106.
1

3.2, 6; ARN 6;

Press

Downloaded from ext.sagepub.com by guest on February 9, 2013

205
5

See Dale C. Allison, Jr., The Structure of the Sermon on the Mount (JBL, forthcoming). 6 E.g. R. E. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah (Doubleday

[1977]),
7

111-16.

See W. D. Davies, The Setting of the Sermon on the Mount s (CUP [1964]), 25-48; B. Gerhardsson, The Testing of God Son (Matt 4: 1-11 & Par.) (ConBNT 2/1, Gleerup [1966]).

Paul be present at the Corinthian assembly through his written judgment; presumably read out or recalled on the oclasion?6 Further, Robert W. Funk has argued cogently that Paul could conceive of his coming (or presence) to a group Christians in three ways: by letter (e.g. through the salutation, dialogue and greeting at the

least), by delegate (e.g. Timothy), or personally (the apostles physical presence). If the writers own
very

Short Comments
1 Cor 5:4 ... with my

spirit

is correct, then a fourth way may be added to Funks list (or at least a variant on his first way). Pauls presence at Corinth in I Cor 5:4 could have taken the form of an authoritative verbal one, located in his written judgment.

suggestion

In what sense could Paul be present at Corinth when the Corinthians assembled to hand over the immoral brother to Satan? Some standard commentaries dont even mention the difficulties Pauls words raise for interpretation. In still others, a wide range of possible explanations are to be found. Their plausibility differs markedly. For some, Paul is present in some spiritual way that is not physical but real.2 This approach states a mystery rather than solves an interpretative puzzle. Others argue for an associative presence. The Lord of the church would be present at such a gathering (Mt 18:20) and Paul as his apostle would be present by association with the Head of the church.3 The ontology apparently presupposed in this solution is itself question begging. Still others suggest an action or vision at a distance presence. Perhaps Paul, like Jesus, could participate in the lives of others is such a manner, though not present in body.4 And some maintain that tou einou pneumatos means that the Corinthians would recall Pauls character (i.e. his ways in Christ) when they gathered to discipline the offender. They would ask themselves what would Paul do in such a situation.5 Another possibility, however, is that Paul is present in his written judgment on the disciplinary question. For in the letter Paul makes his mind on the disciplinary matter very clear (cf. 1 Cor 5:3-4, 1213). Thus Pauls judgment would have played the substantive role when the Corinthians gathered. Moreover it is the judgment of Christs apostle (sun te(i) dunamei tou kuriou emon /sou). Additionally, already in the epistle a close relationship between thoughts, words and spirit has been established both at a human and divine level (cf. 1 Cor 2:11-16). Dunn hints at such a solution when he suggests that 1 Cor 5:4 might parallel Mt 18:20. Perhaps, in Mt 18:20, Christ is present through the word of prophecy (op. cit., 73). if so, one might ask, could not

(Philadclphia [1975]), disappointing in this respect. E.g. J. Héring, The First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians (London [1962]), 35. 3 E.g. F. Godet, Commentary on 1 Corinthians (Edinburgh [1886]), 250-251. 4 E.g. J. D. G. (London and the Spirit[1975]), 73, Jesus Dunn, suggests both possibities, and A. Robertson and A. Plummer, First Epistle to the Corinthians (Edinburgh [1914]), 99100, accent the visionary one. 5 E.g. both F. W. Grosheide, Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians (London [1954]), 122, and C. K. Barrett,A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians (London [1968]), 124, suggest this possibility. 6 In 1 Cor 14:37-38 Pauls judgments concerning the exercise of charismata are described by the apostle as a command of the Lord. Further these judgments are identified
97-98, is
2

E.g.

H. Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians

with the text of the letter itself. Jesuss command is Pauls written words 7 See Funks essay in W. R. Farmer, C. F. D. Moule and R. R. Niebuhr (eds.), Christan History and Interpretation (Cambridge [1967]), chapter 12, especially pp. 249, 258, 263ff. For criticisms of aspects of Funks thesis see T. Y. Mullins, Visit Talk in the New Testament (CBQ 35 [1973], 350-

358).
THE REVEREND G. A. COLE, B.A., B.D., M.TH. MOORE THEOLOGICAL COLLEGE NEW SOUTH WALES

Romans 11:17-21
In the Talmudic tractate Yebamoth 63a there is
a

suggestive passage, where R. Eleazar asks what is meant by the verse, And in you will all the families of the earth be blessed (Gen 12:3), and says that the Holy One, Blessed be He, said to Abraham: I have two good shoots to graft onto you, Ruth the
Moabitess and Naamah the Ammonitess. Both these women were non-Jews, but were grafted onto Israel. Ruth, of course, was the ancestress of King David, and, ultimately, the Messiah (see Ruth 4:13ff.). Naamah was the ancestress of Rehoboam, Asa, Jehoshaphat and Hezekiah (1 Kgs 14:31).

Downloaded from ext.sagepub.com by guest on February 9, 2013