Yohanan the Immerser’s Question

Matt. 11:2-6; Luke 7:18-23
(Huck 64, 81; Aland 106; Crook 122)^[178]

Updated: 1 November 2023

וַיַּגִּידוּ לְיוֹחָנָן תַּלְמִידָיו עַל כָּל הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה וַיִּקְרָא לִשְׁנֵי תַּלְמִידִים מִתַּלְמִידָיו וַיִּשְׁלַח אֶל הָאָדוֹן לֵאמֹר הַאַתָּה הוּא הַבָּא אוֹ לְאַחֵר נְיַחֵל וַיָּבֹאוּ אֵלָיו וַיֹּאמְרוּ יוֹחָנָן הַמַּטְבִּיל שָׁלַח אוֹתָנוּ אֵלֶיךָ לוֹמַר הַאַתָּה הוּא הַבָּא אוֹ לְאַחֵר נְיַחֵל בְּאוֹתָהּ הַשָּׁעָה רִפֵּא רַבִּים מֵחֳלָאִים וּמִמַּכּוֹת וּמֵרוּחוֹת רָעוֹת וּלְעִוְרִים רַבִּים נָתַן לִרְאוֹת וַיַּעַן יֵשׁוּעַ וַיֹּאמֶר לָהֶם לְכוּ הַגִּידוּ לְיוֹחָנָן מַה שֶּׁאַתֶּם רוֹאִים וְשׁוֹמְעִים עִוְרִים נִפְקָחִים וּפִסְחִים מִתְהַלְּכִים מְצֹרָעִים מְטוֹהָרִים וְחֵרְשִׁים שׁוֹמְעִים וּמֵתִים קָמִים וַעֲנִיִּים מִתְבַּשְּׂרִים וְאַשְׁרֵי מִי שֶׁלֹּא יִכָּשֵׁל בִּי

Now, Yohanan’s disciples told him all about these things, so he picked two of his disciples and sent them to the Lord, saying, “Are you he who is coming, or must we continue waiting for someone else?”

So they came to Yeshua and said, “Yohanan the Immerser sent us to ask you, ‘Are you he who is coming, or must we continue waiting for someone else?’”

(Now at that time Yeshua healed many from sickness and injury and demonic oppression, and he gave many blind people the ability to see.)

So Yeshua replied, “Go tell Yohanan about what you yourselves can see and hear: people who were blind are now seeing and people who were lame are now walking around. People who were impure from bearing the marks of scale disease on their bodies are now being purified and people who were deaf are now hearing sounds. And what’s more, people who were dead are now living and people who are poor are receiving the good news that the Kingdom of Heaven is here.

“So my answer is this: blessed is the one who does not get tripped up trying to define me.”^[179]

Reconstruction

To view the reconstructed text of Yohanan the Immerser’s Question click on the link below:

---

Click here to return to The Life of Yeshua: A Suggested Reconstruction main page. _______________________________________________________

---

• ^[1] See Burnett H. Streeter, “On the Original Order of Q,” in Studies in the Synoptic Problem (ed. W. Sanday; Oxford: Clarendon, 1911), 141-164, esp. 152; Catchpole, 42; Luz, 1:130. ↩
• ^[2] See our discussion in “Yohanan the Immerser and the Kingdom of Heaven” complex. ↩
• ^[3] We owe this insight to Robert Lindsey, who noticed that the Mustard Seed and Starter Dough parables make an excellent conclusion to The Kingdom of Heaven Is Increasing. See Lindsey, JRL, 76-77. ↩
• ^[4] See Robert L. Lindsey, “Introduction to A Hebrew Translation of the Gospel of Mark,” under the subheading “Double Tradition.” ↩
• ^[5] See David N. Bivin and Joshua N. Tilton, “LOY Excursus: Criteria for Distinguishing Type 1 from Type 2 Double Tradition Pericopae.” ↩
• ^[6] Cf. Marshall, 287; Fitzmyer, 1:662; Davies-Allison, 2:235. ↩
• ^[7] See Beare, Earliest, 88 §64. ↩
• ^[8] See Stephan Witetschek, “What Did John Hear? The Reconstruction of Q 7:18-19 and its Implications,” Novum Testamentum 56 (2014): 245-260, esp. 246-247. ↩
• ^[9] See Bultmann, 23. ↩
• ^[10] For a defense of the integrity and historicity of the Yohanan the Immerser’s Question pericope, see Luz, 2:130. ↩
• ^[11] Either καὶ ἀκούσας Ἰωάνης or ἀκούσας δὲ Ἰωάνης would be closer to Hebrew word order (וַיִּשְׁמַע יוֹחָנָן) than Matthew’s ὁ δὲ Ἰωάνης ἀκούσας. ↩
• ^[12] Delitzsch’s translation of Matt. 11:2 simply ignores the διά: וַיִּשְׁלַח שְׁנַיִם מִתַּלְמִידָיו (“and he sent two of his disciples”). ↩
• ^[13] See Hatch-Redpath, 1:114-115. ↩
• ^[14] See Dos Santos, 128. ↩
• ^[15] Delitzsch’s translation, for example, reads וְתַלְמִידֵי יוֹחָנָן הִגִּידוּ לוֹ (“And the disciples of John told him...”). ↩
• ^[16] Examples of the הִגִּיד + messenger + -לְ + recipient order include:

  וַיַּגִּדוּ עַבְדֵי שָׁאוּל לוֹ

  And the servants of Saul reported to him.... (1 Sam. 18:24)

  καὶ ἀπήγγειλαν οἱ παῖδες Σαουλ αὐτῷ

  And the servants of Saoul reported to him.... (1 Kgdms. 18:24; NETS)

  וַיַּגִּדוּ עֲבָדָיו לְדָוִד אֶת הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה

  And his servants reported to David these things.... (1 Sam. 18:26)

  καὶ ἀπαγγέλλουσιν οἱ παῖδες Σαουλ τῷ Δαυιδ τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα

  And the servants of Saoul told Dauid these words.... (1 Kgdms. 18:26; NETS)

  וַיַּגֵּד יְהוֹנָתָן לְדָוִד לֵאמֹר

  And Jonathan reported to David, saying.... (1 Sam. 19:2)

  καὶ ἀπήγγειλεν Ιωναθαν τῷ Δαυιδ λέγων

  And Ionathan told Dauid, saying.... (1 Kgdms. 19:2; NETS)

  וַיַּגֵּד אֶבְיָתָר לְדָוִד

  And Abiathar reported to David.... (1 Sam. 22:21)

  καὶ ἀπήγγειλεν Αβιαθαρ τῷ Δαυιδ

  And Abiathar told Dauid.... (1 Kgdms. 22:21; NETS)

  וַיַּגֵּד אַחְאָב לְאִיזֶבֶל

  And Ahab reported to Jezebel.... (1 Kgs. 19:1)

  καὶ ἀνήγγειλεν Αχααβ τῇ Ιεζαβελ

  And Achaab told Iezabel.... (3 Kgdms. 19:1; NETS)

  וַיַּגֵּד שָׁפָן הַסּוֹפֵר לַמֶּלֶךְ לֵאמֹר

  And Shaphan the scribe reported to the king, saying.... (2 Chr. 34:18)

  καὶ ἀπήγγειλεν Σαφαν ὁ γραμματεὺς τῷ βασιλεῖ λέγων

  And Saphan the scribe reported to the king, saying.... (2 Chr. 34:18; NETS)

  ↩

• ^[17] Other examples of the order לְ- + הִגִּיד + recipient + messenger include:

  וַיַּגֶּד לוֹ יְהוֹנָתָן אֵת כָּל הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה

  And Jonathan told him all these things.... (1 Sam. 19:7)

  καὶ ἀπήγγειλεν αὐτῷ πάντα τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα

  ...and [Jonathan] related all these words to him.... (1 Kgdms. 19:7; NETS)

  וַתַּגֶּד לוֹ אִשְׁתּוֹ אֶת הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה
  

  And his wife reported to him these things.... (1 Sam. 25:37)

  ἀπήγγειλεν αὐτῷ ἡ γυνὴ αὐτοῦ τὰ ῥήματα ταῦτα

  ...his wife told him these things.... (1 Kgdms. 25:37; NETS)

  וַיַּגֶּד לָהּ שְׁלֹמֹה אֶת כָּל דְּבָרֶיהָ

  And Solomon reported to her all her words.... (1 Kgs. 10:3)

  καὶ ἀπήγγειλεν αὐτῇ Σαλωμων πάντας τοὺς λόγους αὐτῆς

  And Salomon reported to her all her words.... (3 Kgdms. 10:3; NETS)

  וַיַּגֵּד לָהֶם מִכָיְהוּ אֵת כָּל־הַדְּבָרִים

  And Michaiah reported to them all the words.... (Jer. 36:13)

  καὶ ἀνήγγειλεν αὐτοῖς Μιχαιας πάντας τοὺς λόγους

  And Michaias told them all the words.... (Jer. 43:13; NETS)

  ↩

• ^[18] Meier suggested that Luke reported John’s imprisonment prior to Jesus’ baptism in order to avoid having to explicitly state that John baptized Jesus. See John P. Meier, “John the Baptist in Matthew’s Gospel,” Journal of Biblical Literature 99.3 (1980): 383-405, esp. 384. ↩
• ^[19] The noun δεσμωτήριον does not occur elsewhere in the Synoptic Gospels, but the author of Luke was certainly willing to use this word, since it occurs 3xx in Acts (Acts 5:21, 23; 16:26). It seems reasonable to suggest, therefore, that δεσμωτήριον in Matt. 11:2 came not from the author of Matthew’s source, but from his own pen. ↩
• ^[20] See Yohanan the Immerser’s Execution, Comment to L16. ↩
• ^[21] See Malcolm Lowe and David Flusser, “A Modified Proto-Matthean Synoptic Theory,” New Testament Studies 29.1 (1983): 25-47, esp. 43 n. 36. Cf. Meier, “John the Baptist in Matthew’s Gospel,” 392. ↩
• ^[22] According to Luz (2:132 n. 20), “There are in Judaism no particular concepts of ‘messianic deeds.’ ...The expression ἔργα τοῦ Χριστοῦ is a Matthean creation and is to be interpreted on Matthew’s terms.” ↩
• ^[23] See Catchpole, 43-45; Witetschek, “What Did John Hear? The Reconstruction of Q 7:18-19 and its Implications,” 252. ↩
• ^[24] See Davies-Allison, 2:235. ↩
• ^[25] Cf. Fitzmyer, 2:666. ↩
• ^[26] On reconstructing πᾶς (pas, “all,” “every”) with כָּל (kol, “all,” “every”), see Demands of Discipleship, Comment to L32. In LXX περί + πᾶς is the translation of עַל כָּל in Exod. 24:8; Lev. 16:33; Num. 15:25; Deut. 9:18; 2 Chr. 29:24; 2 Esd. 8:35; Eccl. 1:13; Jer. 1:16; 3:8; 12:14; 38:35 [31:37]; 40[33]:5, 9 (2xx); Lam. 1:22. ↩
• ^[27] Examples of אֶת + הִגִּיד which occur in the Pentateuch include Gen. 41:25; 42:29; 44:24; 45:13; 49:1; Exod. 4:28; 19:9; Deut. 4:13; 5:5; 17:9. Cf. Gen. 27:42. We encounter הִגִּיד combined with the phrase אֶת כָּל הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה in 1 Sam. 19:7; Jer. 16:10; 36:16. By contrast, the only examples of עַל + הִגִּיד we could find in the entire MT are found in 1 Sam. 27:11; Job 36:33; Esth. 6:2; 1 Chr. 19:5. Cf. Gen. 26:32; 43:7. ↩
• ^[28] Our best guess is that by “concerning all these things” the narrator of the Hebrew Life of Yeshua meant, at least in a general way, everything he had related about Jesus’ words and deeds up to this point in his biography of Jesus. ↩
• ^[29] France (422, 425) suggested that John’s doubts about Jesus arose when he heard that Jesus associated with sinners, but this interpretation seems improbable, since both Matthew and Luke agree that tax collectors, sex workers and other sinners attached themselves to John as well as to Jesus (Matt. 21:31b-32; Luke 3:12-14; 7:29). ↩
• ^[30] For this interpretation of the meaning of Jesus’ use of the bridegroom imagery, see R. Steven Notley, “Luke 5:35: ‘When the Bridegroom Is Taken Away’—Anticipation of the Destruction of the Second Temple,” in The Gospels in First-Century Judaea (ed. R. Steven Notley and Jeffrey Paul García; Leiden: Brill, 2016), 107-121. ↩
• ^[31] Scholars who suppose that the report John received about Jesus caused him to doubt include Meier (“John the Baptist in Matthew’s Gospel,” 392-393) and Keener (335). See also R. Steven Notley, “The Kingdom of Heaven Forcefully Advances,” in The Interpretation of Scripture in Early Judaism and Christianity: Studies in Language and Tradition (ed. Craig A. Evans; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000), 279-322, esp. 306. ↩
• ^[32] Luz (2:132) adopts this interpretation. ↩
• ^[33] The one exception is the exchange between John the Baptist and Jesus prior to Jesus’ baptism, in which John declares that he ought to be baptized by Jesus (Matt. 3:14-15). But this exchange is unique to the Gospel of Matthew and was probably invented by the author of Matthew in order to explain why Jesus, who was guilty of no sin, needed a baptism of repentance for the release of sin indebtedness, and also to explain how Jesus, who was greater, could be baptized by John, who was lesser. In other words, Matt. 3:14-15 is apologetic and polemical, treating problems of Christian theology rather than reporting historical facts. ↩
• ^[34] See Return of the Twelve, Comment to L1. ↩
• ^[35] According to Marshall (289), whereas in Koine Greek δύο τινάς means “a certain two,” in Classical Greek δύο τινάς would mean “about two.” ↩
• ^[36] Examples of מִן + שְׁנַיִם in the Mishnah include:

  אַרְבָּעָה אָחִין שְׁנַיִם מֵהֶן נְשׂוּאִין שְׁתֵּי אַחְיוֹת

  Four brothers, two of whom married two sisters.... (m. Yev. 3:1; cf. m. Edu. 5:5)

  שְׁלוֹשָׁה אַחִין שְׁנַיִם מֵהֶן נְשׂוּאִין שְׁתֵּי אַחְיוֹת אוֹ אִשָּׁה וּבִתָּהּ אוֹ אִשָּׁה וּבַת בִּתָּהּ אוֹ אִשָּׁה וּבַת בְּנָהּ

  Three brothers, two of whom married two sisters, or a woman and her daughter, or a woman and her daughter’s daughter, or a woman and her son’s daughter.... (m. Yev. 3:4; cf. m. Yev. 3:5, 6, 7; m. Edu. 4:9)

  כִּסֵּא שֶׁנִּיטַּלוּ שְׁנַיִם מֵחֲפוּיָיו

  A chair from which two of its seat-boards were removed.... (m. Kel. 22:7; cf. m. Edu. 2:8)

  ↩

• ^[37] See Dos Santos, 209. ↩
• ^[38] See Hatch-Redpath, 2:1116. ↩
• ^[39] See Black, 84. Black claimed that there is a Hebrew equivalent to πέμπειν διά in the Jerusalem Talmud, but without stating what that equivalent is. Presumably, the equivalent Black had in mind was שִׁלַּח בְּיָד (shilaḥ b^eyād, “send by the hand [of]”), which occurs, for example, in y. Bik. 1:5 (4a):

  שלקטן לשלחן ביד אחר אבל אם להביאן הוא לא ישלחן ביד אחר

  [This applies in a case] when he harvested them to send them by the hand of [לשלחן ביד] another, but if [he harvested them with the intent] to bring them [himself] he may not send them by the hand of another.

  Why Black needed to cite such an obscure example is unclear, since שׁ-ל-ח בְּיָד occurs in MT (cf., e.g., Lev. 16:21; 1 Sam. 16:20; 2 Sam. 11:14; 12:25; 15:36) and the Mishnah (cf., e.g., m. Bab. Kam. 6:4; m. Shevu. 4:12; m. Meil. 6:2). In LXX שׁ-ל-ח בְּיָד is usually translated as ἀποστέλλειν/ἐξαποστέλλειν ἐν χειρί, although we do find an example of שָׁלַח בְּיָד translated as ἐξαποστέλλειν διά in Esth. 8:10 (cf. Esth. 3:13). ↩

• ^[40] See Luz, 2:133 n. 22, citing Moulton-Milligan, 502. ↩
• ^[41] The sole exception is in the spurious ending of Mark (Mark 16:20). Other references to Jesus as “the Lord” in the voice of the narrator occur in Luke 7:13; 10:1, 39, 41; 11:39; 12:42; 13:15; 17:5, 6; 18:6; 19:8; 22:61 (2xx); 24:3. ↩
• ^[42] Additional examples of לֵאמֹר + שָׁלַח are found in 1 Kgs. 5:22; 21:14; 2 Kgs. 5:8; Jer. 23:38; Neh. 6:8; 2 Chr. 35:21. ↩
• ^[43] Additional examples of הַאַתָּה + (demonstrative or pronoun) + identifier are found in 2 Sam. 2:20; 9:2; 20:17. ↩
• ^[44] Scholars who interpret John’s question as asking whether Jesus is the (Davidic) Messiah include Hagner (1:300); J. Green (295); Bock (137); France (Matt., 423). Cf. Davies-Allison (2:241), where they hover between identifying “he who is coming” as Elijah or the Messiah. Luz (2:132-133) thought that “he who is coming” refers to the Son of Man. ↩
• ^[45] There is no evidence that “the Coming One” was a messianic title in DSS or rabbinic sources. Even in NT there is no explicit identification of “the Coming One” with “the Messiah.” ↩
• ^[46] For an introduction to the concept of dual priestly and royal messiahs, see David Flusser, The Spiritual History of the Dead Sea Sect (trans. Carol Gluker; Tel Aviv: MOD Books, 1989), 83-89. ↩
• ^[47] For references to a pair of priestly and royal messiahs in DSS, see, inter alia, CD A XII, 23-XIII, 1; XIV, 19; CD B XIX, 10; XX, 1. ↩
• ^[48] For references to a pair of eschatological figures (one priestly, the other royal) in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, see T. Sim. 7:2; T. Jud. 21:2-4; T. Gad 8:2; T. Jos. 19:11. ↩
• ^[49] For a description of the coins of the Bar Kochva period naming Eleazar the priest on one side and the name of the royal messianic pretender on the other, see Leo Mildenberg, “The Eleazar Coins of the Bar Kochba Rebellion,” Historia Judaica 11 (1949): 77-108; idem, The Coinage of the Bar Kochba War (ed. Patricia Erhart Mottahedeh; Frankfurt am Main: Sauerländer, 1984), esp. 29-31. Buchanan (1:479, 481-482) supposed that initially Jesus and John the Baptist regarded themselves as the Davidic and priestly messiahs. ↩
• ^[50] References to an eschatological prophet include 1 Macc. 4:46; 14:41; 1QS IX, 11; Philo, Spec. Leg. 1:64-65; Luke 7:16; John 1:21. ↩
• ^[51] John 1:21 distinguishes between Elijah and the eschatological prophet. It may be that Elijah played the role of the priestly messiah rather than the eschatological prophet. ↩
• ^[52] On the other hand, some sources did fuse the Son of Man and royal messiah concepts. For a brief discussion of the various identifications of the Son of Man figure, see David Flusser, “Son of Man,” in Encyclopaedia Judaica (2d ed.; 22 vols.; ed. Michael Berenbaum and Fred Skolnik; Detroit: Macmillan, 2007), 19:25. ↩
• ^[53] Is Melchizedek in the role of eschatological judge to be identified as the Son of Man? This is not explicitly stated in 11QMelch, but the description of Melchizedek as being “without father or mother or genealogy” in Heb. 7:3 might hint that Melchizedek was regarded as a “son of man” (i.e., member of the human race) but not the son of any man in particular. We owe this observation to Daniel R. Schwartz, who commented upon these texts in a 2005 lecture in his “Approaching Classical Jewish Texts” course at the Rothberg International School of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. For a fuller discussion on Melchizedek and the Son of Man, see Flusser, JOC, 186-192. ↩
• ^[54] Cf., e.g., John A. T. Robinson, “Elijah, John and Jesus: An Essay in Detection,” in his Twelve New Testament Studies (London: SMC Press, 1962; repr. from New Testament Studies 4 [1958]: 263-281), 28-52, esp. 38; Marshall, 290; Catchpole, 61; Luz, 2:130; Christopher M. Tuckett, “John the Baptist In Q,” in his Q and the History of Early Christianity: Studies on Q (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1996), 107-137, esp. 119, 125; Simon J. Joseph, “‘Blessed Is Whoever Is Not Offended by Me’: The Subversive Appropriation of (Royal) Messianic Ideology in Q 3-7,” New Testament Studies 57.3 (2011): 307-324, esp. 319. ↩
• ^[55] See R. Steven Notley’s lecture “The Gospel According to John the Baptist,” from the lecture series Are You the One Who Is to Come? Jesus in First-Century Understanding, recorded September 19-21, 2002 in Zeeland, Michigan and distributed by the En-Gedi Resource Center. And see also Yohanan the Immerser’s Eschatological Discourse, Comment to L28. ↩
• ^[56] On the defilement of the Temple, cf. CD A IV, 15-19; V, 6-8. The halachic letter 4QMMT specifies ways in which the Essenes believed the Jerusalem priesthood had defiled the Temple. ↩
• ^[57] On the Essenes’ non-participation in the Temple cult, see Philo, Prob. §75; Jos., Ant. 18:19; 1QS IX, 3-6; CD A VI, 11-19. ↩
• ^[58] Points of similarity between John the Baptist and the Essenes include non-participation in the Temple cult, withdrawal from society to live in the desert, describing their role in terms of Isa. 40:3, voluntary poverty, and the expectation of imminent eschatological judgment. On affinities between John the Baptist and the Essenes, see David Flusser, “The Magnificat, the Benedictus and the War Scroll” (Flusser, JOC, 126-149, esp. 143ff.). ↩
• ^[59] On the influence of Malachi 3 on John the Baptist’s preaching, see Jeffrey A. Trumbower, “The Role of Malachi in the Career of John the Baptist,” in The Gospels and the Scriptures of Israel (ed. Craig A. Evans and W. Richard Stegner; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994), 28-41, esp. 34-36. ↩
• ^[60] Already in the Hebrew Bible Elijah played a priestly role in offering sacrifices on Mount Carmel (1 Kgs. 18:16-38). On Elijah as (high) priest in ancient Jewish and early Christian sources, see Ginzberg, 2:996 n. 3. On Elijah as the priestly messiah, see John C. Poirier, “The Endtime Return of Elijah and Moses at Qumran,” Dead Sea Discoveries 10.2 (2003): 221-242, esp. 227-236; idem, “Jesus and Elijah in Luke 4:16-30.” ↩
• ^[61] Other possible Scripture passages that have been proposed as the background to “the Coming One” include Ps. 118:26 (Fitzmyer, 1:666, rejects this); Dan. 7:13 (cf. Flusser, Jesus, 259); Zech. 9:9.

  Another possibility is Gen. 49:10, which in 4Q252 V, 1-4 is given a messianic interpretation, and which was interpreted christologically among early Christian writers (cf. Justin Martyr, 1 Apol. 32:1-3; Dial. chpt. 110). The verse in Genesis reads:

  לֹא יָסוּר שֵׁבֶט מִיהוּדָה וּמְחֹקֵק מִבֵּין רַגְלָיו עַד כִּי יָבֹא שִׁילֹה [שִׁילוֹ] וְלוֹ יִקְּהַת עַמִּים

  A scepter will not turn aside from Judah nor a ruler’s staff from between his feet until what is his comes and peoples will obey him. (Gen. 49:10)

  A Qumran document interprets this verse in the following manner:

  [ -- לו]לא יסור שליט משבט יהודה בהיות לישראל ממשל [לוא י]כרת יושב כסא לדויד כי המחקק היא ברית המלכות [ואל]פי ישראל המה הדגלים ⟦ ⟧ עד בוא משיח הצדק צמח דויד כי לו ולזרעו נתנה ברית מלכות עמו עד דורות עולם אשר שמר [ -- ]התורה עם אנשי היחד כי [ -- ] היא כנסת אנשי

  A ruler will not turn aside from the tribe of Judah [Gen. 49:10]. While Israel has dominion, someone sitting on David’s throne will not be cut off, for the ruler’s staff [Gen. 49:10], that is, the covenant of the kingship, [and the thousan]ds of Israel, they are the banners...until the coming of the rightful anointed one [עד בוא משיח הצדק], the branch of David. For to him and to his seed was given the covenant of kingship with him until everlasting generations that kept...the Torah with the men of the Community. For...it is the assembly of the men of.... (4Q252 V, 1-4)

  In the Qumran text the reference is to a royal Davidic messiah.

  John the Baptist’s question contains vocabulary similar to the LXX translation of Gen. 49:10:

  John’s Question	Gen. 49:10 (LXX)
  σὺ εἶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος ἢ ἕτερον προσδοκῶμεν;	οὐκ ἐκλείψει ἄρχων ἐξ Ιουδα καὶ ἡγούμενος ἐκ τῶν μηρῶν αὐτοῦ, ἕως ἂν ἔλθῃ τὰ ἀποκείμενα αὐτῷ, καὶ αὐτὸς προσδοκία ἐθνῶν.
  Are you the coming one or might we expect another?	A ruler shall not be wanting from Ioudas and a leader from his thighs until the things stored up for him come, and he is the expectation of nations. (NETS)

  Justin Martyr paraphrased the crucial line of Gen. 49:10 as ἕως ἂν ἔλθῃ ᾧ ἀπόκειται καὶ αὐτὸς ἔσται προσδοκία ἐθνῶν (“until he comes for whom it is laid up, and he will be the expectation of the Gentiles”; Dial. chpt. 120), which is even closer to John’s question in that it is the coming of the messianic figure himself, not the things rightfully due him, that is predicted.

  Genesis 49:10 is given a messianic interpretation in rabbinic literature as well. Cf. b. Sanh. 98b. ↩

• ^[62] See Robinson, “Elijah, John and Jesus: An Essay in Detection,” 30-31. ↩
• ^[63] See James Keith Elliott, “The Use of ἕτερος in the New Testament,” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 60.1-2 (1969): 140-141. ↩
• ^[64] See Hatch-Redpath, 2:1213. ↩
• ^[65] Delitzsch made חִכָּה the translation of προσδοκᾶν in Matt. 11:3 and Luke 7:19, 20. ↩
• ^[66] Attributing the addition of redundant material to the author of Luke seems especially unlikely in view of Cadbury’s observation that Lukan redaction tends to eliminate repetition. See Cadbury, Style, 85. ↩
• ^[67] For a discussion of repetition in Hebrew narrative, including verbatim and near verbatim repetition, see Robert Alter, “The Techniques of Repetition,” in his The Art of Biblical Narrative (New York: Basic Books, 1981), 88-113. ↩
• ^[68] The Lukan-Matthean agreement makes it all but certain that the repetition occurred in Anth. ↩
• ^[69] Mark’s version of the Entering Yerushalayim pericope omits the repetition. The author of Matthew followed Mark in this instance. ↩
• ^[70] Other scholars who suppose that Matthew omitted the description of the arrival of John’s disciples and their repetition of his question include Manson (Sayings, 66), Beare (Earliest, 88 §64), Marshall (290), Davies-Allison (1:240) and Hagner (1:299). ↩
• ^[71] On παραγίνεσθαι as an indicator of Lukan redaction, see Friend in Need, Comment to L6. ↩
• ^[72] Examples of ἔρχεσθαι πρός as the translaton of בָּא אֶל occur in Gen. 18:21; 24:30; 26:27; 32:7; 33:14; 41:14; 47:18; 48:2, 5; Exod. 3:13; 18:16; Lev. 13:16; Num. 13:26; 22:7, 14, 16; Deut. 17:9; 26:3. ↩
• ^[73] On the author of Luke’s redactional preference for ἀνήρ, see Generations That Repented Long Ago, Comment to L10. ↩
• ^[74] See Robert L. Lindsey, “The Major Importance of the ‘Minor’ Agreements,” under the subheading “An Un-Hebraic Element in Mark’s Version of Jesus’ Baptism.” ↩
• ^[75] Authorial asides comparable to Luke 7:21 are found in Gen. 6:4 (in the middle of the reasons for the flood; Gen. 6:1-8); Josh. 4:14 (in the middle of the account of taking twelve commemorative stones from the Jordan; Josh. 4:1-18); Judg. 17:6 (in the middle of the story of Micah; Judg. 17:1-13); Judg. 20:27b-28a (in the middle of describing Israel’s inquiring of the LORD before going to battle with Benjamin; Judg. 20:24-28); 2 Sam. 16:23 (in the middle of the story of Absalom’s advisors; 2 Sam. 16:15-17:14); 2 Kgs. 10:32 (in the middle of describing the reign of Jehu; 2 Kgs. 10:30-36); 2 Kgs. 15:37 (in the middle of describing the reign of Jotham; 2 Kgs. 15:32-38); 2 Chr. 15:5 (in the middle of Azariah’s speech to Asa; 2 Chr. 15:2-7). ↩
• ^[76] See Black, 80; John F. Craghan, “A Redactional Study of Lk 7,21 in the Light of Dt 19,15,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 29.3 (1967): 353-367, esp. 358-361. ↩
• ^[77] We also used רִפֵּא to reconstruct θεραπεύειν in Sending the Twelve: Conduct in Town, L103. ↩
• ^[78] Additional examples of the substantival use of רַבִּים for “many” in MT are found in Isa. 8:15; 52:14; 53:12; Ps. 3:2, 3; 4:7; 31:14; 40:4. ↩
• ^[79] The combination of חֳלִי and מַכָּה in MT occurs only in Deut. 28:59, 61 and Jer. 6:7. ↩
• ^[80] In 1 Kgdms. 16:16 πνεῦμα πονηρόν translates רוּחַ אֱלֹהִים רָעָה (“an evil spirit of God”), and in 1 Kgdms. 16:23, referring to the same spirit, πνεῦμα πονηρόν translates רוּחַ־אֱלֹהִים (“spirit of God”). We also find πνεῦμα κυρίου πονηρόν (“an evil spirit of the Lord”; 1 Kgdms. 16:15) as the translation of רוּחַ אֱלֹהִים רָעָה (“an evil spirit of God”) and πνεῦμα θεοῦ πονηρόν (“an evil spirit of God”; 1 Kgdms. 19:9) as the translation of רוּחַ יי רָעָה (“an evil spirit of the LORD”). ↩
• ^[81] See Dos Santos, 152. ↩
• ^[82] The two exceptional cases where τυφλός translates something other than עִוֵּר occur in Lev. 22:22 and Isa. 61:1. In Lev. 22:22 τυφλός is the translation of עַוֶּרֶת (‘averet, “blind”), which comes from the same Hebrew root as עִוֵּר. In Isa. 61:1 τυφλός is the translation of אָסוּר (’āsūr, “bound”). ↩
• ^[83] See Hatch-Redpath, 1:221. ↩
• ^[84] Additional examples of נָתַן + infinitive construct are found in Gen. 20:6; Num. 22:13; Josh. 10:19; Judg. 1:34; 3:28; 1 Sam. 18:2. ↩
• ^[85] Nevertheless, it should be noted that there is one instance in LXX where καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν (without the name of the speaker) occurs as the translation of וַיַּעַן וַיֹּאמֶר (Isa. 21:9). ↩
• ^[86] Additional examples of לְכוּ + imperative (without the intervening conjunction) occur in Gen. 29:7 (לְכוּ רְעוּ; “Go, pasture [the flock]!”); Gen. 42:19 (לְכוּ הָבִיאוּ שֶׁבֶר; “Go, bring grain!”); Gen. 45:17 (לְכוּ בֹאוּ אַרְצָה כְּנָעַן; “Go, enter the land of Canaan!”); Exod. 5:11 (לְכוּ קְחוּ לָכֶם תֶּבֶן; “Go, take for yourselves straw!”); Exod. 8:21 (לְכוּ זִבְחוּ לֵאלֹהֵיכֶם; “Go, sacrifice to your God!”); Exod. 10:8 (לְכוּ עִבְדוּ אֶת יי אֱלֹהֵיכֶם; “Go, serve the LORD your God!”); Josh. 2:1 (לְכוּ רְאוּ אֶת הָאָרֶץ; “Go, see the land!”); Judg. 18:2 (לְכוּ חִקְרוּ אֶת הָאָרֶץ; “Go, explore the land!”); 1 Sam. 15:6 (לְכוּ סֻּרוּ רְדוּ מִתּוֹךְ עֲמָלֵקִי; “Go, turn aside, go down from among the Amalekites!”); 2 Kgs. 1:2 (לְכוּ דִרְשׁוּ בְּבַעַל זְבוּב; “Go, inquire of Baal Zevuv!”), 2 Kgs. 1:6 (לְכוּ שׁוּבוּ אֶל הַמֶּלֶךְ; “Go, return to the king!”); 2 Kgs. 22:13 (לְכוּ דִרְשׁוּ אֶת יי; “Go, inquire of the LORD!”); Isa. 55:1 (לְכוּ שִׁבְרוּ בְּלוֹא כֶסֶף; “Go, buy grain without silver!”); Jer. 12:9 (לְכוּ אִסְפוּ כָּל חַיַּת הַשָּׂדֶה; “Go, gather all the animals of the field!”); Zech. 6:7 (לְכוּ הִתְהַלְּכוּ בָאָרֶץ; “Go, walk about in the land!”); Ps. 46:9 (לְכוּ חֲזוּ מִפְעֲלוֹת יי; “Go, see the works of the LORD!”); Ps. 66:16 (לְכוּ שִׁמְעוּ; “Go, listen!”); Neh. 8:10 (לְכוּ אִכְלוּ; “Go, eat!”); 1 Chr. 21:2 (לְכוּ סִפְרוּ אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל; “Go, count Israel!”). ↩
• ^[87] Delitzsch translated πορευθέντες ἀπαγγείλατε as לְכוּ הַגִּידוּ in Matt. 11:4, but in Luke 7:22 he translated the same phrase as לְכוּ וְהַגִּידוּ. ↩
• ^[88] Examples of “hear→see” are found, inter alia, in Deut. 4:12; 2 Kgs. 19:16; 20:5; Isa. 6:9; 21:3; 30:30; 37:17; 38:5; 64:3; 66:8, 19; Ps. 45:11; 48:9; Prov. 20:12; Dan. 9:18. Examples of “see→hear” are found, inter alia, in Gen. 24:30; Exod. 3:7; Deut. 4:28; 29:3; Isa. 6:10; 18:3; 32:3; Jer. 4:21; 5:21; 23:18; 42:14; Ezek. 12:2; Job 13:1; Song 2:14. ↩
• ^[89] We have reconstructed βλέπειν with רָאָה in Mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven, L21, L22; Blessedness of the Twelve, L5, L6, L16. Likewise, in Widow’s Son in Nain, L10; Rich Man Declines the Kingdom of Heaven, L57; Blessedness of the Twelve, L14, L17, we reconstructed ἰδεῖν as רָאָה. ↩
• ^[90] See Luz, 2:134. ↩
• ^[91] Scholars also note that by adopting the order “hear→see” the author of Matthew achieves a chiastic structure in Jesus’ reply: “what you hear and see” is followed by a list of miracles and the climactic statement “meek persons receive a good report.” See Luz, 2:134; Nolland, Matt., 451. ↩
• ^[92] See Marshall, 291; Luz, 2:130. ↩
• ^[93] Tabor and Wise write: “It is surprising to encounter the relative pronoun ש in this text, as it is rarely used in Qumranic Hebrew.” See James D. Tabor and Michael O. Wise, “4Q521 ‘On Resurrection’ and the Synoptic Gospel Tradition: A Preliminary Study,” Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 10 (1992): 149-162, esp. 155. ↩
• ^[94] Given the very clear allusion to Ps. 146:7-8 in 4Q521 2 II, 8, it is noteworthy that Ps. 146:6 describes God as “maker of heaven and earth, the sea and all that is in them” (עֹשֶׂה שָׁמַיִם וָאָרֶץ אֶת־הַיָּם וְאֶת־כָּל־אֲשֶׁר־בָּם), which is similar to “heaven and earth will listen to his anointed and all that is in them will not turn back” (השמים והארץ ישמעו למשיחו וכל אשר בם לוא יסוג‎; 4Q521 2 II, 1-2). See Tabor and Wise, “4Q521 ‘On Resurrection’ and the Synoptic Gospel Tradition,” 151. ↩
• ^[95] Tabor and Wise (“4Q521 ‘On Resurrection’ and the Synoptic Gospel Tradition,” 152) cite Ps. 80:19 (וְלֹא נָסוֹג מִמֶּךָּ; “and we will not turn back from you”) as a parallel to 4Q521 2 II, 2, but in Zeph. 1:6 we find a reference to “those who have turned back from the LORD and who did not seek the LORD” (הַנְּסוֹגִים מֵאַחֲרֵי יי וַאֲשֶׁר לֹא בִקְשׁוּ אֶת יי), which matches the references “not turning back from the commandments of the holy ones” (4Q521 2 II, 2) and “seekers of my Lord” (4Q521 2 II, 2). ↩
• ^[96] Tabor and Wise (“4Q521 ‘On Resurrection’ and the Synoptic Gospel Tradition,” 152) prefer reading מצות in 4Q521 2 II, 2 as a singular. ↩
• ^[97] In addition to Zech. 1:6, cf. “the Lord whom you are seeking” (הָאָדוֹן אֲשֶׁר אַתֶּם מְבַקְשִׁים; Mal. 3:1). ↩
• ^[98] Compare “empower yourselves...all who expect in their hearts” (התאמצו...כל המיחלים בלבם) to “be strong and empower your hearts, all who expect the LORD” (חִזְקוּ וְיַאֲמֵץ לְבַבְכֶם כָּל־הַמְיַחֲלִים לַיי; Ps. 31:25). See Tabor and Wise, “4Q521 ‘On Resurrection’ and the Synoptic Gospel Tradition,” 152. ↩
• ^[99] Cf. Gen. 1:2, where the Spirit of God hovers over the waters. ↩
• ^[100] The combination of הֶחְלִיף with כֹּחַ occurs only in Isa. 40:31 (וְקוֹיֵ יי יַחֲלִיפוּ כֹחַ; “and those who hope in the LORD will renew their strength”) and Isa. 41:1 (וּלְאֻמִּים יַחֲלִיפוּ כֹחַ; “and peoples will renew their strength”). ↩
• ^[101] Compare “everlasting kingdom” (מלכות עד;‎ 4Q521 2 II, 7) to “the LORD will reign forever” (יִמְלֹךְ יי לְעוֹלָם; Ps. 146:10). ↩
• ^[102] Here, an allusion is made to Ps. 146:7-8: “...the LORD frees captives; the LORD gives sight to blind persons; the LORD straightens bowed down persons...” (יי מַתִּיר אֲסוּרִים יי פֹּקֵחַ עִוְרִים יי זֹקֵף כְּפוּפִים). ↩
• ^[103] Compare “I will cling to the expectant, and to his covenant faithfulness” (אדבק במיחלים ובחסדו;‎ 4Q521 2 II, 9) to “the LORD is pleased with those who fear him, and with those who expect his covenant faithfulness” (רוֹצֶה יי אֶת יְרֵאָיו אֶת הַמְיַחֲלִים לְחַסְדּוֹ; Ps. 147:11). ↩
• ^[104] Kvalbein (91) noted that חללים “pierced (hullelim) is a frequent description of those who were mortally wounded (by sword) in a fight (1 Sam. 17.52; Jer. 14.18),” and further added (100) that “The same two words for dead and pierced (metim, chalalim) [that appear in 4Q521 2 II, 12—DNB and JNT] are used as parallels in Ps. 88:6.” See Hans Kvalbein, “The Wonders of the End-time: Metaphoric Language in 4Q521 and the Interpretation of Matthew 11.5 Par.,” Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 18 (1998): 87-110. ↩
• ^[105] “To meek ones he will proclaim good news” (ענוים יבשר) is an allusion to Isa. 61:1: “The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me because the LORD anointed me to proclaim good news to meek ones” (רוּחַ אֲדֹנָי יי עָלָי יַעַן מָשַׁח יי אֹתִי לְבַשֵּׂר עֲנָוִים). ↩
• ^[106] Compare 4Q521 2 II, 13 to “he gives bread to the hungry” (נֹתֵן לֶחֶם לָרְעֵבִים; Ps. 146:7). ↩
• ^[107] Moreover, no other convincing scriptural basis for the revival of the dead in 4Q521 and Jesus’ reply to John has been found.

  A portion of 4Q521 not quoted above that refers to “the blessing of my Lord in his favor” (ברכת אדני ברצונו;‎ 4Q521 2 III, 3) might also allude to Isa. 61:2, in which the anointed figure is commissioned to proclaim the year of the LORD’s favor (לִקְרֹא שְׁנַת רָצוֹן לַיי). ↩

• ^[108] But see Nolland, Matt., 451-452: “Jesus’ response is theocentric rather than christological, but it is quite clear that Jesus accepts the role of one who functions as the agent of God in this fresh initiative.” ↩
• ^[109] On the likelihood that an intermediary figure is presupposed in 4Q521, see Tabor and Wise, “4Q521 ‘On Resurrection’ and the Synoptic Gospel Tradition,” 157-158; John J. Collins, “The Works of the Messiah,” Dead Sea Discoveries 1.1 (1994): 98-112, esp. 100. ↩
• ^[110] See Collins, “The Works of the Messiah,” 101. ↩
• ^[111] Certain rabbinic traditions also identify Isaiah’s מְבַשֵּׂר as a messianic figure, although in the rabbinic sources the distinction between priestly and royal messiahs and the messiah of the spirit attested in Second Temple times has been forgotten, and only the royal messiah remains. For instance:

  ר′ ברכיה בש′ ר′ לוי אמר בזכות ולקחתם לכם ביום הראשון הרי אני נגלה לכם ראשון, ופורע לכם מן הראשון, ובונה לכם ראשון ומביא לכם ראשון. אני נגלה לכם ראשון, שנאמר אני י″י ראשון. ופורע לכם מן הראשון, זה עשו הרשע דכתיב ביה ויצא הראשון אדמוני. ובונה לכם ראשון, זה בית המקדש, דכתיב ביה כסא כבוד מרום מראשון. ומביא לכם ראשון, זה מלך המשיח דכתיב ביה ראשון לציון הנה הנם

  Rabbi Berekiah said in the name of Rabbi Levi, “By the merit of [the commandment of the palm branch, which states,] and you shall take for yourselves on the first day [Lev. 23:40], behold, I am revealing myself to you first, and I am punishing you from the first, and I am building for you the first, and I am bringing for you the first. I am revealing myself to you first, as it is said, I, the LORD, am first [Isa. 41:4]. And I am punishing for you from the first, that is, wicked Esau [i.e., Rome—DNB and JNT], as it is written, the first came out red [’admōni] [Gen. 25:25]. And I am building for you the first, that is the Temple, as it is written, a throne of glory on high from the first [is the place of our Temple] [Jer. 17:12]. And I am bringing for you the first, this is the anointed king [i.e., the Messiah], as it is written, the first for Zion, behold them [and for Jerusalem I will give a messenger] [Isa. 41:27].” (Lev. Rab. 30:16 [ed. Marguiles, 2:714]; cf. Pesikta de-Rav Kahana 27:10 [ed. Mandelbaum, 2:416-417])

  הגיע זמנה של מלכות הרשעה שתעקר מן העולם, הגיע זמנה של מלכות השמים שתגלה, והיה י″י למלך על כל הארץ וג′. וקול התור נשמע בארצינו, א″ר יוחנן קול תייר טב נשמע בארצינו, זה מלך המשיח, מה נאוו על ההרים רגלי מבשר

  The time has arrived when the wicked kingdom will be uprooted from the world, the time has come when the Kingdom of Heaven will be revealed, and the LORD will be king over all the earth [Zech. 14:9]. And the voice of the turtle dove will be heard in our land [Song 2:12]. Rabbi Yohanan said, “The voice of the good guide will be heard in our land, this is the anointed king [i.e., the royal Messiah—DNB and JNT], [as it is said,] How beautiful on the hills are the feet of the messenger [Isa. 52:7].” (Pesikta de-Rav Kahana 5:9 [ed. Mandelbaum, 1:97])

  ↩

• ^[112] See Collins, “The Works of the Messiah,” 102-103; John C. Poirier, “Jesus as an Elijianic Figure in Luke 4:16-30,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 71.2 (2009): 349-363, esp. 356. ↩
• ^[113] The handwriting of the scroll indicates that 4Q521 was copied in the Hasmonean period. See Collins, “The Works of the Messiah,” 99. If 4Q521 is a copy, then the original date of composition is earlier still. ↩
• ^[114] It is not necessary to suppose that Jesus knew 4Q521 itself. See Collins, “The Works of the Messiah,” 107; Kvalbein, “The Wonders of the End-time,” 93; Tomson, If This Be, 131. Prior to the discovery of DSS, Bultmann (126) opined that “it is impossible for any Jewish tradition to provide an origin” for Jesus’ reply to the Baptist’s question. It is fascinating to see how perceptions change in light of new discoveries from the past and new historical circumstances in the present. ↩
• ^[115] Puech has argued for an Essene attribution. See Émile Puech, “Resurrection: The Bible and Qumran,” in The Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls (2 vols.; ed. James H. Charlesworth; Waco, Tex.: Baylor University Press, 2006), 247-281, esp. 268. ↩
• ^[116] Flusser doubted that 4Q521 was of Essene origin, noting that חָסִיד (ḥāsid, “pious”) is not a typical self-designation in Essene compositions, though this term occurs twice in 4Q521. Flusser also noted that terminology that is distinctive to the Qumran sectarians is lacking in 4Q521. Likewise, the concept of an eschatological resurrection, which appears in 4Q521 7+5 II, 6, is at odds with the Essene belief in the immortality of the soul (Jos., J.W. 2:154; Ant. 18:18). See David Flusser, “A Qumran Fragment and the Second Blessing of the Amidah” (Flusser, JSTP1, 66-69, esp. 66). On the absence of resurrection in Essene compositions, see George E. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, Immortality, and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism and Early Christianity (rev. ed.; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006), 179-209. See also Devorah Demant, “Resurrection, Restoration, and Time-curtailing in Qumran, Early Judaism, and Christianity,” Revue de Qumrân 19.4 (2000): 527-548, esp. 527-529. Collins (“The Works of the Messiah,” 106) also entertained doubts as to whether 4Q521 was a “product of the Dead Sea Sect.” ↩
• ^[117] Pace Joseph, who wrote: “Jesus’ answer to John’s query appeals to a Qumranic sequence of ‘proof texts’, which not only implies that John the Baptist would recognize them, but establishes that Jesus himself knew what they were. Q 7.22 thus represents Jesus as fulfilling John the Baptist’s and Qumran/Essene messianic expectations, although not quite in the way they may have anticipated.” Simon J. Joseph, “‘Blessed Is Whoever Is Not Offended by Me’: The Subversive Appropriation of (Royal) Messianic Ideology in Q 3-7,” New Testament Studies 57.3 (2011): 307-324, esp. 323. ↩
• ^[118] Cf. Robinson, “Elijah, John and Jesus: An Essay in Detection,” 38. ↩
• ^[119] A more distant parallel to Jesus’ reply to John the Baptist than 4Q521 in rabbinic literature also attributes eschatological redemptive works to God:

  ר′ אחא בשם ר′ שמעון בן חלפתא כל מה שהקב″ה עתיד לעשות בעולם הבא כבר הקדים ועשה מקצת על ידיהם של נביאיו הצדיקים בעולם הזה. הקב″ה א′ אני עתיד להחיות את המתים, כבר עשה כן על ידי אליהו ועל ידי אלישע ועל ידי יחזקאל. א′ הקב″ה אני עתיד לעשות את הים יבשה, לא כבר עשה כן על ידי משה, ובני ישראל הלכו ביבשה בתוך הים. א′ הקב″ה אני עתיד לפקוח עיני עיורים, לא כבר עשה כן, ויפקח אלהים את עיני הנער. א′ הקב″ה אני עתיד לפקוד עקרות, לא כבר עשה כן, וי″י פקד את שרה.‏

  Rabbi Aha said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Halafta, “All that the Holy one, blessed be he, intends to do in the world to come he has already proceeded to do on a small scale through his righteous prophets in this world. The Holy One, blessed be he, said, ‘I intend to raise the dead.’ He has already done so through Elijah and Elisha and Ezekiel. The Holy One, blessed be he, said, ‘I intend to make the sea dry.’ Has he not already done so through Moses, [as it is said,] And the children of Israel walked on dry land in the midst of the sea [Exod. 14:29]? The Holy One, blessed be he, said, ‘I intend to open the eyes of blind people.’ Has he not already done so, [as it is said,] And God opened the eyes of the servant [2 Kgs. 6:17]? The Holy One, blessed be he, said, ‘I intend to visit barren women [in order to make them fecund].’ Has he not already done so, [as it is said,] And the LORD visited Sarah [Gen. 21:1]?” (Pesikta de-Rav Kahana 9:4 [ed. Mandelbaum, 1:152; cf. Lev. Rab. 27:4 [ed. Marguiles, 2:630])

  (The text above mainly follows Mandelbaum’s edition, but we have accepted a few readings from Buber’s edition [76a] and from the parallel in Lev. Rab. 27:4.) We have characterized the above rabbinic tradition as a more distant parallel to Jesus’ reply to John than 4Q521, not only because it is further removed chronologically, but also because the rabbinic tradition lacks the crucial Isaiah 61 basis. Moreover, unlike Jesus’ reply to John and 4Q521, this rabbinic source completely lacks an intermediary figure through whom God will accomplish the redemptive works it describes.

  Regarding Sarah’s visitation, we find the following tradition, with a list of healings similar to that in Jesus’ reply to John the Baptist:

  כל עקרות שהיו בעולם נפקדו עמה, היא שכתב וה′ פקד את שרה, ולא זו בלבד אלא כשילדה שרה כל סומא שהיה בעולם נפתח, וכל פסח [נעשה] שוה, וכל אלם נפקח, וכל שוטה נתרפא

  All the barren women in the world were visited with her, this is what was written, and the LORD visited את Sarah [Gen. 21:1]. And not only this, but when Sarah gave birth every blind person who was in the world was given sight, and every lame person was made straight, and every mute person was given speech, and every mentally ill person was healed. (Pesikta Rabbati 42:4 [ed. Friedmann, 177])

  Evidently, the genesis of this midrash is the interpretation of the definite object marker את according to its second meaning, “with,” which allows the midrashist to conclude that God visited others along “with” Sarah. ↩

• ^[120] As Vermes (280) observed, Jesus “envisioned his healings and exorcisms, not as evidence of personal greatness, but as indicators of the nearness or presence of the Kingdom.” ↩
• ^[121] According to Flusser, “The image of the Messiah in Judaism is usually less important than the idea of redemption.... The Messiah is the person who is to fulfill this redemption.” See David Flusser, Jewish Sources in Early Christianity (trans. John Glucker; Tel Aviv: MOD Books, 1989), 55. Cf., idem, “Messiah: Second Temple Period,” in Encyclopaedia Judaica (2d ed.; 22 vols.; ed. Michael Berenbaum and Fred Skolnik; Detroit: Macmillan, 2007), 14:111-112. ↩
• ^[122] On Jesus’ disdain for personality cults, see David Flusser, “Two Anti-Jewish Montages in Matthew” (Flusser, JOC, 552-560, esp. 555-556); idem, “Hillel and Jesus: Two Ways of Self-Awareness,” in Hillel and Jesus: Comparative Studies of Two Major Religious Leaders (ed. James H. Charlesworth and Loren L. Johns; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1997), 71-107, esp. 102; idem, “The Synagogue and the Church in the Synoptic Gospels” (JS1, 17-40, esp. 25, 32). ↩
• ^[123] On this theme, see Peter J. Tomson, “The Core of Jesus’ Evangel: ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΣΑΣΘΑΙ ΠΤΩΧΟΙΣ (Isa 61),” in The Scriptures in the Gospels (ed. C. M. Tuckett; Leuven: Peeters, 1997), 647-658. ↩
• ^[124] Allusions to Isaiah 61 in the Beatitudes include the blessing upon the poor in spirit (Matt. 5:3; cf. “to proclaim good news to the meek/poor”; Isa. 61:1) and the blessing upon those who mourn (Matt. 5:4; cf. “to comfort all who mourn”; Isa. 61:2). On allusions to Isaiah 61 in the Beatitudes, see David Flusser, “Blessed are the Poor in Spirit...” (Flusser, JOC, 102-114). ↩
• ^[125] Cf. Davies-Allison, 1:245-246. ↩
• ^[126] The sole exception is 1 Kgdms. 14:27, where the ketiv is רָאָה, although the qere is אוֹר (’ōr, “be/become light”). ↩
• ^[127] The phrase ἀναβλέπειν τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς occurs in Gen. 13:14; 18:2; 22:4, 13; 24:63, 64; 31:12; 37:25; 43:29; Exod. 14:10; Deut. 3:27; Josh. 5:13; Judg. 19:17; Zech. 5:5; Ezek. 8:5 (2xx); cf. Isa. 40:26. ↩
• ^[128] Tabor and Wise (“4Q521 ‘On Resurrection’ and the Synoptic Gospel Tradition,” 160) suggest that the LXX translators understood וְלַאֲסוּרִים פְּקַח קוֹחַ to mean “the opening (of the eyes) of those bound (by blindness).” ↩
• ^[129] If we kept the Greek word order with פ-ק-ח in the qal stem, this would yield עִוְרִים פֹּקְחִים (“blind people are opening”), leaving us with the question, “What are the blind people opening?” ↩
• ^[130] See Nolland, Luke, 1:330. ↩
• ^[131] See Davies-Allison, 2:242. ↩
• ^[132] See Marshall, 291. ↩
• ^[133] See Hatch-Redpath, 2:1480. ↩
• ^[134] See Hatch-Redpath, 2:1124. ↩
• ^[135] See Kvalbein, “The Wonders of the End-time,” 87-110. See also N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996), 243. ↩
• ^[136] Cf. Davies-Allison, 2:245; Luz, 2:132 n. 20. On the other hand, Flusser suggested that a popular belief in a wonder-working messiah did exist, but this popular conception was suppressed by the rabbinic sages. See David Flusser, “The Gospel of John’s Jewish-Christian Source,” under the subheading “The Sources of John’s Gospel.” See also Barry L. Blackburn, “The Miracles of Jesus,” in The Cambridge Companion to Miracles (ed. Graham H. Twelftree; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011), 113-130, esp. 123. ↩
• ^[137] Kvalbein, “The Wonders of the End-time,” 109. ↩
• ^[138] For an introduction to ritual purity in Second Temple Judaism, see Joshua N. Tilton, “A Goy’s Guide to Ritual Purity.” ↩
• ^[139] See Hatch-Redpath, 2:698. ↩
• ^[140] See Dos Santos, 73. ↩
• ^[141] For a discussion of the status of “the deaf person, the insane person, and the minor” in rabbinic sources, see Daniel R. Schwartz, “Rabbinic Law between Biblical Logic and Biblical Text: The Pitfalls of Exodus 21:33-34,” Harvard Theological Review 107.3 (2014): 314-349. See also David M. Feldman, “Deafness and Jewish Law and Tradition,” in The Deaf Jew in the Modern World (ed. Jerome D. Schein and Lester J. Waldman; New York: New York Society for the Deaf, 1986), 12-23, for a discussion on developments within Judaism of a more positive understanding of people who are unable to hear. ↩
• ^[142] See Dos Santos, 71. ↩
• ^[143] Examples of the root ח-י-ה in the nif‘al stem include the following:

  אין דרך המתים להחיות

  It is not the way of the dead to be made alive [לְהֵחָיוֹת]. (y. Sanh. 9:3 [47b])

  ר′ יהודה אומ′ כיון שהגיע החרב על צוארו פרחה ויצאה נפשו של יצחק, וכיון שהשמיע קולו מבין הכרובים ואמ′ לו אל תשלח ידך נפשו חזרה לגופו וקם ועמד יצחק על רגליו וידע יצחק שכך המתים עתידים להחיות

  Rabbi Yehudah says, “As soon as the knife touched his neck, Isaac’s soul fled and went out. But as soon as he [i.e., God—DNB and JNT] made his voice heard from between the cherubim and said to him [i.e., Abraham—DNB and JNT], Do not put forth your hand [Gen. 22:12], his [i.e., Isaac’s—DNB and JNT] soul returned to his body and Isaac arose and stood on his feet and Isaac knew that in this manner the dead are to be made alive [לְהֵחָיוֹת] in the future.” (Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer chpt. 31)

  ר′ שמעון אומ′ מכח צדקות המתים עתידים להחיות

  Rabbi Shimon says, “By virtue of almsgiving the dead are to be made alive [לְהֵחָיוֹת] in the future.” (Pirke de-Rabbi Eliezer chpt. 33)

  ↩

• ^[144] See George Howard, The Gospel of Matthew according to a Primitive Hebrew Text (Macon, Ga.: Mercer University Press, 1987), 48. ↩
• ^[145] We have reconstructed ἐγείρειν with קָם in Widow’s Son in Nain, L15, L22; Friend in Need, L19. ↩
• ^[146] Other places in LXX where the passive or middle form of ἐγείρειν is used to translate qal forms of ק-ו-מ include: 1 Chr. 10:12; 22:19; 2 Chr. 21:9; 22:10; Ps. 126[127]:2; Prov. 6:9. Also, the active form of ἐγείρειν is used to translate hiph‘il forms of ק-ו-מ in LXX: Gen. 49:9; Judg. 2:16, 18; 3:9, 15; 7:19; 2 Kgdms. 12:17; 3 Kgdms. 11:14; Ps. 112[113]:7; Eccl. 4:10 (2xx); Isa. 14:9; 26:19; Jer. 28[51]:12. ↩
• ^[147] See Jeremias, Theology, 104. ↩
• ^[148] So Davies-Allison, 2:243; but see Nolland, Luke, 1:320. ↩
• ^[149] In Greek, “meek persons receive a good report” might have been expressed as ταπεινοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται (tapeinoi evangelizontai) or πραεῖς εὐαγγελίζονται (praeis evangelizontai). ↩
• ^[150] See R. Steven Notley and Jeffrey P. García, “Hebrew-Only Exegesis: A Philological Approach to Jesus’ Use of the Hebrew Bible” (JS2, 349-374, esp. 355). ↩
• ^[151] An argument that Jesus taught in Greek is advanced by Turner, who bizarrely appeals to the tradition of Byzantine iconography to make his case. See Nigel Turner, “The Language of Jesus and His Disciples,” in his Grammatical Insights into the New Testament (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1965), 174-188. ↩
• ^[152] For another example where Jesus may have followed a non-Masoretic version of a scriptural text, see Joseph Frankovic, “Remember Shiloh!” under the subheading “The Connection.” On the history and development of MT, see Martin Jan Mulder, “The Transmission of the Biblical Text,” in Mikra: Text, Translation, Reading and Interpretation of the Hebrew Bible in Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity (ed. Martin Jan Mulder; Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988), 87-135. ↩
• ^[153] In the table below departures in Luke 4:18-19 from the LXX version of Isa. 61:1 are marked in red:

  Isa. 61:1-2 (LXX)	Luke 4:18-19
  πνεῦμα κυρίου ἐπ᾿ ἐμέ	πνεῦμα κυρίου ἐπ᾿ ἐμὲ
  οὗ εἵνεκεν ἔχρισέν με	οὗ εἵνεκεν ἔχρισέν με
  εὐαγγελίσασθαι πτωχοῖς	εὐαγγελίσασθαι πτωχοῖς
  ἀπέσταλκέν με	ἀπέσταλκέν με
  ἰάσασθαι τοὺς συντετριμμένους τῇ καρδίᾳ	[omission]
  κηρύξαι αἰχμαλώτοις ἄφεσιν	κηρύξαι αἰχμαλώτοις ἄφεσιν
  καὶ τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν	καὶ τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν
  	ἀποστεῖλαι τεθραυσμένους ἐν ἀφέσει
  καλέσαι ἐνιαυτὸν κυρίου δεκτὸν....	κηρύξαι ἐνιαυτὸν κυρίου δεκτόν

  While the verbal agreements between Luke 4:18-19 and the LXX version of Isa. 61:1-2 suggest that the Greek translator of the Hebrew Life of Yeshua was willing to utilize LXX where it conformed to his Hebrew text, the stark departures from LXX in Luke 4:18-19 indicate that where LXX did not agree with the biblical quotation as it appeared in the Hebrew Life of Yeshua, the Greek translator adhered to the wording of his Hebrew source. ↩

• ^[154] See Notley and García, “Hebrew-Only Exegesis: A Philological Approach to Jesus’ Use of the Hebrew Bible” (JS2, 355-356). See also R. Steven Notley, “Jesus’ Jewish Hermeneutical Method in the Nazareth Synagogue,” in Early Christian Literature and Intertextuality (2 vols.; ed. Craig A. Evans and H. Daniel Zacharias; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2009), 46-59, esp. 52-53. ↩
• ^[155] See Tomson, “The Core of Jesus’ Evangel,” 650. ↩
• ^[156] See Tomson, “The Core of Jesus’ Evangel,” 648. ↩
• ^[157] See Hatch-Redpath, 1:568. ↩
• ^[158] See Dos Santos, 31. ↩
• ^[159] Examples of ב-שׂ-ר in the pu‘al stem include:

  אמר רבי שמואל בר נחמני אם כוונת את לבך בתפילה תהא מבושר שנשמעה תפילתך...אמר ריב″ל אם עשו שפתותיו של אדם תנובה יהא מבושר שנשמע תפילתו

  Rabbi Shmuel bar Nahmani said, “If you directed your heart in prayer, be informed [מְבוּשָּׂר] [of the good news] that your prayer has been heard.” ...Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said, “If a man’s lips were fluent, let him be informed [מְבוּשָּׂר] [of the good news] that his prayer was heard.” (y. Ber. 5:5 [41a])

  יצתה בת קול ואמרה להן כל מי שלא נתעצל בהספדו של רבי יהא מבושר לחיי העולם הבא

  A bat kol went out and said to them, “Everyone who did not excuse himself from the funeral of Rabbi [Yehudah ha-Nasi], let him be informed [מְבוּשָּׂר] [of the good news] that he is to have life in the world to come.” (y. Kil. 9:3 [42a]; cf. y. Ket. 12:3 [65a])

  ↩

• ^[160] See O. Schiling, “בשׂר bśr; בְּשׂוֹרָה b^eśôrāh,” in Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (15 vols.; ed. G. Johannes Botterweck et al.; trans. John T. Willis et al.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974-2006), 2:313-316. ↩
• ^[161] See Gerhard Friedrich, “εὐαγγελίζομαι, κ.τ.λ.,” TDNT, 2:707-737, esp. 724-725; Tomson, “The Core of Jesus’ Evangel,” 648; Craig A. Evans, “Mark’s Incipit and the Priene Calendar Inscription: From Jewish Gospel to Greco-Roman Gospel,” Journal of Greco-Roman Christianity and Judaism 1 (2000): 67-81, esp. 70. ↩
• ^[162] Text according Wilhelm Dittenberger, ed., Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae (2 vols; Leipzig: S. Hirzel, 1903-1905), 2:55. Translation according to Adolf Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East: The New Testament Illustrated by Recently Discovered Texts of the Graeco-Roman World (2d ed.; trans. Lionel R. M. Strachan; London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1911), 371. ↩
• ^[163] Text and translation according to W. H. Buckler and David M. Robinson, “Greek Inscriptions from Sardes V: Decrees of League of the Greeks in Asia and of Sardians Honoring Menogenes,” American Journal of Archaeology 18.3 (1914): 321-362, esp. 323, 330. ↩
• ^[164] Cf. Jos., Ant. 18:124. ↩
• ^[165] In a papyrus from the third century (ca. 236) C.E. we read this correspondence between two imperial officials regarding the appointment of the emperor’s son to the throne:

  ἐπεὶ γν[ώ]στ[ης ἐγενόμην τοῦ] εὐανγελ[ίο]υ περὶ τοῦ ἀνηγορεῦσθαι Καίσαρα τὸν τοῦ θεοίλεστάτου κυρίου ἡμῶν Αὐτοκράτορος Καίσαρος Γαΐου Ἰουλίου Οὐήρου Μαξιμίνου...χρή, τιμιώτατε, τὰς θεὰς κωμάζεσθαι.

  For as much as I have become aware of the tidings of joy [εὐανγελίου] concerning the proclaiming as Emperor of Gaius Verus Maximus, the son of our Lord, most dear to the gods, the Emperor Caesar...it is necessary, O most honourable, that the goddesses be celebrated in festal procession.

  Text and translation according to Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, 371-372.

  Here, too, we find the “gospel” of Caesar celebrated through religious expressions. ↩

• ^[166] See Notley, “Jesus’ Jewish Hermeneutical Method in the Nazareth Synagogue,” 56ff. ↩
• ^[167] See Notley and García, “Hebrew-Only Exegesis: A Philological Approach to Jesus’ Use of the Hebrew Bible,” 356. ↩
• ^[168] See Nolland, Luke, 1:331. ↩
• ^[169] On Lulianus and Pappus, the two martyrs of Lod, see Zev Vilnay, Legends of Judah and Samaria (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1975), 159. ↩
• ^[170] According to Shmuel Safrai, no distinction is to be made between the Hasidim and men of deeds. “Men of deeds” was simply an additional epithet by which the Hasidim were known. See Shmuel Safrai, “Teaching of Pietists in Mishnaic Literature,” Journal of Jewish Studies 16 (1965): 15-33, esp. 16 n. 11. ↩
• ^[171] On the mixing of metaphors of sin forgiveness and debt cancellation, see Lord’s Prayer, Comment to L19. ↩
• ^[172] Cf. Flusser, Jesus, 53, where he wrote: “The Hebrew verb [viz., יִכָּשֵׁל—DNB and JNT] which in those days was expanded to mean, ‘to be led into sin, to go astray from the right understanding of the will of God,’ was rendered into the Greek of the Gospel literally ‘to stumble.’” ↩
• ^[173] See Flusser, Jesus, 49 n. 22. ↩
• ^[174]

  Yohanan the Immerser’s Question
  Luke’s Version		Anthology’s Wording (Reconstructed)
  καὶ ἀπήγγειλαν Ἰωάνῃ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ περὶ πάντων τούτων καὶ προσκαλεσάμενος δύο τινὰς τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ ὁ Ἰωάνης ἔπεμψεν πρὸς τὸν κύριον λέγων σὺ εἶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος ἢ ἕτερον προσδοκῶμεν παραγενόμενοι δὲ πρὸς αὐτὸν οἱ ἄνδρες εἶπαν Ἰωάνης ὁ βαπτιστὴς ἀπέστειλεν ἡμᾶς πρὸς σὲ λέγων σὺ εἶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος ἢ ἄλλον προσδοκῶμεν ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ὥρᾳ ἐθεράπευσεν πολλοὺς ἀπὸ νόσων καὶ μαστείγων καὶ πνευμάτων πονηρῶν καὶ τυφλοῖς πολλοῖς ἐχαρίσατο βλέπειν καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς πορευθέντες ἀπαγγείλατε Ἰωάνῃ ἃ εἴδετε καὶ ἠκούσατε τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται καὶ μακάριός ἐστιν ὃς ἐὰν μὴ σκανδαλισθῇ ἐν ἐμοί		καὶ ἀπήγγειλαν Ἰωάνῃ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ περὶ πάντων τούτων καὶ προσκαλεσάμενος δύο τινὰς τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ ἔπεμψεν πρὸς τὸν κύριον λέγων σὺ εἶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος ἢ ἕτερον προσδοκῶμεν καὶ ἐλθόντες πρὸς αὐτὸν εἶπαν Ἰωάνης ὁ βαπτιστὴς ἀπέστειλεν ἡμᾶς πρὸς σὲ λέγων σὺ εἶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος ἢ ἕτερον προσδοκῶμεν ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ὥρᾳ ἐθεράπευσεν πολλοὺς ἀπὸ νόσων καὶ μαστείγων καὶ πνευμάτων πονηρῶν καὶ τυφλοῖς πολλοῖς ἔδωκεν βλέπειν καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς πορευθέντες ἀπαγγείλατε Ἰωάνῃ ἃ βλέπετε καὶ ἀκούετε τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν καὶ χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν καὶ νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται καὶ πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται καὶ μακάριός ἐστιν ὃς ἐὰν μὴ σκανδαλισθῇ ἐν ἐμοί
  Total Words:	103	Total Words:	103
  Total Words Identical to Anth.:	93	Total Words Taken Over in Luke:	93
  Percentage Identical to Anth.:	90.29%	Percentage of Anth. Represented in Luke:	90.29%

  ↩

• ^[175] Note that Martin (Syntax 1, 91) classified Luke’s version of Yohanan the Immerser’s Question as a pericope of the “translation Greek” type, whereas he classified Matthew’s version in the indeterminate category between “original Greek composition” and “translation Greek.” ↩
• ^[176]

  Yohanan the Immerser’s Question
  Matthew’s Version		Anthology’s Wording (Reconstructed)
  ὁ δὲ Ἰωάνης ἀκούσας ἐν τῷ δεσμωτηρίῳ τὰ ἔργα τοῦ Χριστοῦ πέμψας διὰ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ εἶπεν αὐτῷ σὺ εἶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος ἢ ἕτερον προσδοκῶμεν καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς πορευθέντες ἀπαγγείλατε Ἰωάνῃ ἃ ἀκούετε καὶ βλέπετε τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν καὶ χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν καὶ νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται καὶ πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται καὶ μακάριός ἐστιν ὃς ἂν μὴ σκανδαλισθῇ ἐν ἐμοί		καὶ ἀπήγγειλαν Ἰωάνῃ οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ περὶ πάντων τούτων καὶ προσκαλεσάμενος δύο τινὰς τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ ἔπεμψεν πρὸς τὸν κύριον λέγων σὺ εἶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος ἢ ἕτερον προσδοκῶμεν καὶ ἐλθόντες πρὸς αὐτὸν εἶπαν Ἰωάνης ὁ βαπτιστὴς ἀπέστειλεν ἡμᾶς πρὸς σὲ λέγων σὺ εἶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος ἢ ἕτερον προσδοκῶμεν ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ὥρᾳ ἐθεράπευσεν πολλοὺς ἀπὸ νόσων καὶ μαστείγων καὶ πνευμάτων πονηρῶν καὶ τυφλοῖς πολλοῖς ἔδωκεν βλέπειν καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς πορευθέντες ἀπαγγείλατε Ἰωάνῃ ἃ βλέπετε καὶ ἀκούετε τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν καὶ χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν καὶ νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται καὶ πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται καὶ μακάριός ἐστιν ὃς ἐὰν μὴ σκανδαλισθῇ ἐν ἐμοί
  Total Words:	63	Total Words:	103
  Total Words Identical to Anth.:	46	Total Words Taken Over in Matthew:	46
  Percentage Identical to Anth.:	73.02%	Percentage of Anth. Represented in Matthew:	44.66%

  ↩

• ^[177] See Tuckett, “John the Baptist in Q,” 125. ↩
• ^[178] For abbreviations and bibliographical references, see “Introduction to ‘The Life of Yeshua: A Suggested Reconstruction.’” ↩
• ^[179] This translation is a dynamic rendition of our reconstruction of the conjectured Hebrew source that stands behind the Greek of the Synoptic Gospels. It is not a translation of the Greek text of a canonical source. ↩