Waiting Maidens Parable

How to cite this article:
Joshua N. Tilton and David N. Bivin, “Waiting Maidens Parable,” The Life of Yeshua: A Suggested Reconstruction (Jerusalem Perspective, 2024) [https://www.jerusalemperspective.com/29062/].

(Matt. 25:1-13)

(Huck 227; Aland 298; Crook 340)^[209]

‏[וַיִּמְשׁוֹל לָהֶם מָשָׁל לֵאמֹר לְמָה הַדָּבָר דּוֹמֶה]‏ לְעֶשֶׂר בְּתוּלוֹת שֶׁנָּטְלוּ לַפִּידִים וְיָצְאוּ לִקְרַאת הֶחָתָן חָמֵשׁ מֵהֶן הָיוּ טִפְּשׁוֹת וְחָמֵשׁ מֵהֶן הָיוּ פִּקְחוֹת הַטִּפְּשׁוֹת לֹא נָטְלוּ שֶׁמֶן וְהַפִּקְחוֹת נָטְלוּ שֶׁמֶן בַּפַּכִּים וְנִתְנַמְנְמוּ כּוּלָן וְיָשְׁנוּ כַּחֲצֹת הַלַּיְלָה וְהָיְתָה צְעָקָה הֲרֵי הֶחָתָן צְאוּ לִקְרָאתוֹ וְנִתְעוֹרְרוּ כָּל אוֹתָן הַבְּתוּלוֹת וְהֵטִיבוּ אֶת הַלַּפִּידִים וְאָמְרוּ הַטִּפְּשׁוֹת לַפִּקְחוֹת תְּנוּ לָנוּ מִשַּׁמְנְכֶן וְעָנוּ הַפִּקְחוֹת לוֹמַר שֶׁמָּא לֹא יִהְיֶה מַסְפִּיק לָנוּ וְלָכֶן אֲבָל לְכוּ לַמּוֹכְרִים וּקְחוּ וְהָלְכוּ וּבָא הֶחָתָן וְהַבְּתוּלוֹת הַפִּקְחוֹת נִכְנְסוּ עִמּוֹ [לְבֵית הַמִּשְׁתֶּה] וְנִנְעֶלֶת הַדֶּלֶת וּבָאוּ הַבְּתוּלוֹת הַטִּפְּשׁוֹת [וְהִתְחִילוּ לַעֲמוֹד בַּחוּץ וְלִדְפּוֹק עַל הַדֶּלֶת] לוֹמַר אֲדוֹנֵנוּ פְּתַח לָנוּ וְעָנָה וְאָמַר לֹא יָדַעְתִּי אֶתְכֶן

[And he told them a parable, saying, “To what may the matter be compared?] To ten maidens who took torches and went out to meet a groom. Five of them were foolish, and five of them were sensible. The foolish ones did not take oil, but the sensible ones took oil in cruses. They all became weary and fell asleep. At about midnight there was a shout: ‘The groom approaches! Go out to meet him!’ All those maidens awoke and trimmed their torches. The foolish ones said to the sensible ones, ‘Give us some of your oil.’ But the sensible ones answered, saying, ‘We fear there may not be enough for all of us. But go to the sellers and buy some.’ So off they went. The groom arrived and the sensible maidens entered with him [into the wedding hall], and the door was closed. Then the foolish maidens arrived [and they began to stand outside and to knock on the door], saying, ‘Our lord! Open up! Let us in!’ But in reply he answered, ‘I don’t know who you are!’”^[210]

Reconstruction

To view the reconstructed text of Waiting Maidens parable click on the link below:

Conclusion

Jesus addressed the Waiting Maidens parable to an audience that was acting foolishly. They balked at his demand for social justice that would come at the expense of their own wealth, power and privilege. By relating their situation to the sensible and foolish maidens, Jesus demonstrated the wisdom of acquiring repentance and good deeds now for the sake of participation in the final redemption, and portrayed the folly of inaction.

---

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

---

• ^[1] Flusser’s Hebrew translation/reconstruction of the Waiting Maidens parable appeared in David Flusser, “The Parables of Jesus and the Parables in Rabbinic Literature,” in his Jewish Sources in Early Christianity: Studies and Essays (Tel Aviv: Sifriat Poalim, 1979 [in Hebrew]), 150-209, esp. 166-167. We have used the term translation/reconstruction because at certain points Flusser does not strictly adhere to the Greek text of Matt. 25:1-13 and because he attempted to use vocabulary he believed would have occurred in the original form of the parable. ↩
• ^[2] The English translation of Flusser’s translation/reconstruction of the Waiting Maidens parable is our own—DNB and JNT. ↩
• ^[3] The two parts of Faithful or Faithless Slave, though separated by Unexpected Thief, closely parallel one another in form and vocabulary. ↩
• ^[4] This we know from Matthew’s agreement with Luke to place Unexpected Thief ahead of the second part of Faithful or Faithless Slave. Cf. C. H. Dodd, The Parables of the Kingdom (rev. ed.; New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1961), 132-133. ↩
• ^[5] On the First Reconstructor’s expansion of Jesus’ prophecy as it was preserved in Anth., see the introduction to the “Destruction and Redemption” complex. ↩
• ^[6] Cf. Dodd’s puzzlement (The Parables of the Kingdom, 130 n. 1) at the relationship between Mark 13:37 and Luke 12:41. Wenham argued that Luke and Mark drew on a common source, Luke preserving the question and Mark preserving the answer. See David Wenham, The Rediscovery of Jesus’ Eschatological Discourse (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1984), 57-62. Cf. Gundry, Mark, 2:797. ↩
• ^[7] Bauckham, too, believed that “Luke’s group of three parousia parables” in Luke 12:35-46 “were probably already collected in the sayings source.” See Richard Bauckham, “Synoptic Parousia Parables and the Apocalypse,” New Testament Studies 23.2 (1976): 162-176, esp. 166. ↩
• ^[8] Pace Dodd (The Parables of the Kingdom, 137-138), Knox (2:70, 80) and Flusser (Die rabbinischen Gleichnisse und der Gleichniserzähler Jesus [Bern: Peter Lang, 1981], 177), who believed that Luke 12:35-36 preserves reminiscences of the Waiting Maidens parable. ↩
• ^[9] Cf. Jeremias, Parables, 51. ↩
• ^[10] Ibid. For other allegorical interpretations of the Waiting Maidens parable, see McNeile, 360; Beare, Earliest, 217 §227; Davies-Allison, 3:392. And see especially Karl Paul Donfried, “The Allegory of the Ten Virgins (Matt 25:1-13) as a Summary of Matthean Theology,” Journal of Biblical Literature 93.3 (1974): 415-428. ↩
• ^[11] Cf. McNeile, 363; Manson, Sayings, 243; Kilpatrick, 76; Bundy, 474 §387; Beare, Earliest, 218 §227; Jeremias, Parables, 52; Schweizer, 466. ↩
• ^[12] Cf. Luz, 3:228; Peter J. Tomson, “Parables, Fiction, and Midrash: The Ten Maidens and the Bridegroom (Matt 25:1-13),” in his Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2019), 253-260, esp. 260. Pace Bultmann, 176. ↩
• ^[13] See Creed, 176; Manson, Sayings, 242; Donfried, “The Allegory of the Ten Virgins,” 422; Beare, Matt., 483; Gundry, Matt., 497. Cf. A. B. Bruce, 560; Bundy, 474 §387; Bovon, 2:229. See also Randall Buth, “Distinguishing Hebrew from Aramaic in Semitized Greek Texts, with an Application for the Gospels and Pseudepigrapha” (JS2, 247-319), esp. 296-297 n. 81. ↩
• ^[14] See McNeile, 363; Bundy, 474 §387; Davies-Allison, 3:393. Cf. Nolland, Matt., 1002, 1009. See also Llewellyn Howes, “‘I Do Not Know You!’: Reconsidering the Redaction of Q 13:25-27,” Journal of Theological Studies NS 67.2 (2016): 479-506, esp. 484. ↩
• ^[15] See Plummer, Luke, 330; Dodd, The Parables of the Kingdom, 137-138; Knox, 2:70, 80; Jeremias, Parables, 96. See also David Flusser, “Two Anti-Jewish Montages in Matthew” (JOC, 552-560), esp. 555 n. 2; idem, Die rabbinischen Gleichnisse und der Gleichniserzähler Jesus, 87, 177; Jan Lambrecht, Once More Astonished: The Parables of Jesus (New York: Crossroad, 1981), 161; François Bovon, “Tracing the Trajectory of Luke 13,22-30 Back to Q: A Study in Lukan Redaction,” in From Quest to Q: Festschrift James M. Robinson (ed. Jon Ma. Asgeirsson, Kristin de Troyer, and Marvin W. Meyer; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2000), 285-294, esp. 288-289. Cf. Bundy, 474 §387. ↩
• ^[16] Cf. Fitzmyer, 2:988. Wenham (The Rediscovery of Jesus’ Eschatological Discourse, 82) offered yet another alternative. He suggested that Luke 12:35 “was the pre-synoptic conclusion to the parable of the virgins.” In support of his thesis Wenham argued that Luke 12:35 “would be an eminently suitable conclusion to the parable,” despite the fact that Luke 12:35 refers to lamps, not torches, and the fact that the Waiting Maidens parable never refers to the maidens girding their loins. Wenham (ibid., 91) considered Luke 13:25 to be “a fragment/echo of the parable of the virgins.” ↩
• ^[17] Cf. Lambrecht, Once More Astonished, 157; Tomson, “Parables, Fiction, and Midrash: The Ten Maidens and the Bridegroom (Matt 25:1-13),” 260. ↩
• ^[18] Cf. Tomson, “Parables, Fiction, and Midrash: The Ten Maidens and the Bridegroom (Matt 25:1-13),” 257-258. ↩
• ^[19] Cf. Tomson, “Parables, Fiction, and Midrash: The Ten Maidens and the Bridegroom (Matt 25:1-13),” 259. ↩
• ^[20] The combining of Song 5:2 and Exod. 11:4 is actually attested in a late rabbinic midrash:

  אני ישנה ולבי ער קול דודי דופק פתחי לי וג′ אמרה כנסת ישר′ לפני הקב″ה, רבון העולמים, אני ישנה מבית המקדש ולבי ער בבתי כנסיות ובבתי מדרשות, אני ישנה מן הקרבנות ולבי ער במצות וצדקות, אני ישנה מן המצות ולבי ער לעשותן, אני ישנה מן הקץ, ולבי ער לגאולה, אני ישנה מן הגאולה ולבו של הקב″ה ער לגאלינו...קול דודי דופק זה משה, ויאמר משה כה אמר י″י כחצות הלילה אני וג′ פתחי לי, א″ר יסא א′ הקב″ה פתחי לי פתח כחרירה של מחט ואני פותח לכם פתח שיהו אהליות וכצוצטריות ניכנסין בו

  I am asleep, but my heart is awake. The voice of my lover! He knocks! “Open to me!” etc. [Song 5:2]: The congregation of Israel said before the Holy One, blessed be he, “Master of the Worlds, I am asleep with respect to the Temple [since it has been destroyed], but my heart is awake in the synagogues and the houses of study. I am asleep with respect to the sacrifices, but my heart is awake with mitzvot and acts of social justice. I am asleep with respect to the commandments [pertaining to the divine service], but my heart is awake to do them. I am asleep with respect to the time, but my heart is awake to the redemption. I am asleep with respect to the redemption, but the heart of the Holy One, blessed be he, is awake to redeem us.... The voice of my lover! He knocks! [Song 5:2]. This is Moses [as it said], And Moses said, ‘Thus says the Lord, about the middle of the night I am’ etc. [Exod. 11:4]. Open to me! [Song 5:2].” Rabbi Yose said, “The Holy One, blessed be he, said, ‘Open to me an opening [of repentance] the size of the eye of a needle, and I will open for you an opening that camps and siege engines may enter it.’” (Pesikta de-Rav Khana 5:6 [ed. Mandelbaum, 1:87]; cf. Song Rab. 5:2 §2 [ed. Etelsohn, 198])

  Pesikta de-Rav Khana not only combines Song 5:2 and Exod. 11:4, it also combines thoughts of Israel’s redemption from Egypt (identifying Moses as the lover who knocks in the night) with hopes for Israel’s final redemption (Israel is “asleep” with regard to the time [i.e., it does not know when redemption will come], but it is awake to the redemption [i.e., it hopes and longs for redemption]).

  Another midrashic treatment of Song 5:2 combines thoughts of the past and future redemptions, but without explicit reference to Exod. 11:4:

  אני ישנה ולבי ער זש″ה הנה לא ינום ולא יישן שומר ישראל ישנה אני במלכיות ולבי ער זה הקב″ה שנאמר צור לבבי וחלקי אלהים לעולם קול דודי דופק על ידי הנביאים פתח לי פתח של תשובה כדי שאבוא ואגאל אתכם אחותי רעיתי יונתי תמתי כנגד ארבע מלכיות...ד″א אני ישנה במצרים שבאותו לילה הקב″ה שלח עליהם שינה ערבה שלא יפחדו מחמת המחבל ואפילו כן היו רואים שונאיהם תשתנקים בשנתם

  I am asleep, but my heart is awake [Song 5:2]. This is what the Scripture says: Behold, the guard of Israel does not slumber or sleep [Ps. 121:4]. I am asleep because of the empires, but my heart is awake, this is the Holy One, blessed be he, as it is said, God is the rock, my heart and my portion forever [Ps. 73:26]. The voice of my beloved! He knocks! [Song 5:2] through the prophets. Open to me [Song 5:2] an opening of repentance so that I may come and redeem you. My sister, my beloved, my dove, my blameless one [Song 5:2]: corresponding to the Four Empires [⟨Babylon, Persia-Media, Greece, Rome⟩ destined to dominate Israel before the final redemption—DNB and JNT].... Another interpretation. I am asleep [Song 5:2] in Egypt, for on that very night the Holy One, blessed be he, sent upon them a pleasant sleep so that they would not be afraid of the destroying wrath, and yet they would see their enemies strangled in their sleep. (Midrash Shir HaShirim 5:2 [ed. Grunhut-Wertheimer, 94])

  Text according to Eliezer Halevi Grunhut, ed., Midrash Shir HaShirim: Printed from a Geniza Manuscript (2d ed.; ed. Joseph Chaim Wertheimer; Jerusalem: Ktav Yad VaSefer Institute, 1981 [1897]), 93. ↩

• ^[21] The table below shows the parallels between Song 2:10-13 and details of Luke’s version of the Fig Tree parable:

  Song of Songs 2:10-13	Luke 21:28-31
  2:10 My beloved answered and said to me,
  “Arouse yourself, my beloved, my beauty, and go,	21:28 When these things begin to happen, straighten yourself and lift up your head,
  2:11 for the winter is past, the rain is over and gone.
  2:12 The flowers appear in the land,
  the time of zāmir [‘singing/pruning’] has arrived,	for the time of your redemption has arrived.
  and the voice of the turtledove is heard in our land.
  	21:29-30 And he told them a parable:
  2:13 The fig tree forms its green figs,	“Look at the fig tree...when it has already put forth
  	you see and know for yourselves that the summer is near.
  and the flowering vines give their scent.
  Arouse yourself, my beloved, my beauty, and go.”	21:31 In the same way, when you see these things happening, you know that the Kingdom of God is near.”

  The connection between Song 2:10-13 and the Fig Tree parable is discussed in greater detail in the LOY commentary to our reconstruction of the Fig Tree parable. ↩

• ^[22] On the Song of Songs in the teachings of Jesus, see Peter J. Tomson, “The Song of Songs in the Teachings of Jesus and the Development of the Exposition of the Song,” New Testament Studies 61 (2015): 429-447. ↩
• ^[23] Cf. A. B. Bruce, 299; Bundy, 474 §387; Beare, Matt., 482. ↩
• ^[24] See Luz, 3:228, 234-235. Cf. Kilpatrick, 32. ↩
• ^[25] See Lost Sheep and Lost Coin, Comment to L38. ↩
• ^[26] See Houses on Rock and Sand, Comment to L9-20. ↩
• ^[27] See Closed Door, under the “Story Placement” subheading. ↩
• ^[28] Since the Gospel of Luke has more instances of double vocatives than Matthew, it appears unlikely that the author of Luke or the First Reconstructor would have eliminated the double vocative if it had occurred in their source(s) for Closed Door. See Houses on Rock and Sand, Comment to L10, and Closed Door, Comment to L10. ↩
• ^[29] Cf. Hagner (2:727) and Culpepper (489), who supposed that the influence went in the opposite direction. ↩
• ^[30] On the relationship between the Didache and the Gospel of Matthew, see Huub van de Sandt, “The Didache and its Relevance for Understanding the Gospel of Matthew,” Jerusalem Perspective (2016) [https://www.jerusalemperspective.com/16271/]. ↩
• ^[31] As we noted in the introduction to the “Torah and the Kingdom of Heaven” complex, Wolves in Sheep’s Clothing (Matt. 7:15) likely reflects the influence of Did. 16:3. ↩
• ^[32] Cf. France, Matt., 948 n. 53. ↩
• ^[33] Cf. Bultmann, 176; Luz, 3:228. ↩
• ^[34] Cf. A. B. Bruce, 299; Jeremias, Parables, 51; Schweizer, 466; Davies-Allison, 3:394; Nolland, Matt., 1003; France, Matt., 948. See also Lambrecht, Once More Astonished, 154. For a different view, see McNeile, 360. ↩
• ^[35] Cf. Jeremias, Parables, 52; Gundry, Matt., 497. On τότε as an indicator of Matthean redaction, see Jesus and a Canaanite Woman, Comment to L22. ↩
• ^[36] The verb form ὁμοιωθήσεται occurs only in Matt. 7:24, 26; 25:1. ↩
• ^[37] Cf. Gundry, Matt., 497; Nolland, Matt., 1003. ↩
• ^[38] Cf. Dodd, The Parables of the Kingdom, 137; Beare, Matt., 481; Young, JHJP, 189. ↩
• ^[39] Pace Lambrecht, Once More Astonished, 161; Davies-Allison, 3:394. ↩
• ^[40] We employed the same reconstruction in Darnel Among the Wheat, L2. ↩
• ^[41] Cf. A. B. Bruce, 299; Jeremias, Parables, 174; Beare, Matt., 481; Snodgrass, 515. ↩
• ^[42] Cf. Flusser, Die rabbinischen Gleichnisse und der Gleichniserzähler Jesus, 186. ↩
• ^[43] Ibid. ↩
• ^[44] Ibid., 187. ↩
• ^[45] The word קוֹנְדֵס (qōn^edēs), here translated “pole,” is evidently a corruption of קוֹנְטוֹס (qōn^eṭōs, “pole”), derived from κοντός (kontos, “pole”). See Jastrow, 1334. ↩
• ^[46] See Lightfoot, 2:322; Gill, 7:302; Strack-Billerbeck, 1:969; Luz, 3:229 n. 25. See also, Gerhard Schneider, “λαμπάς, άδος, ἡ,” in Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament (ed. Horst Balz and Gerhard Schneider; 3 vols.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), 2:338-339, esp. 338. Lightfoot (2:322) attributed this testimony to a Rabbi Solomon. Gill (7:302) attributed this testimony to “Jarchi.” Luz (3:299 n. 25) and Schneider (“λαμπάς, άδος, ἡ,” 338) followed Strack-Billerbeck (1:969) in attributing this testimony to Rashi, but as Tomson noted (“Parables, Fiction, and Midrash: The Ten Maidens and the Bridegroom [Matt 25:1-13],” 256 n. 14), the correct attribution must be to ר″ש, i.e., Rabbi Samson ben Abraham of Sens (RaSh) (ca. 1150-ca. 1230) on m. Kel. 2:8, although רא″ש, i.e., Rabbi Asher ben Jehiel (“the Rosh”) (1250 or 1259-1327) records the same testimony in his commentary on m. Kel. 2:8. This is a cautionary tale of what happens when scholars fail to check the primary sources. ↩
• ^[47] Luz (3:229 n. 25) incorrectly states that this custom pertained to the land of Israel. ↩
• ^[48] Of even more dubious relevance are the late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century wedding customs in Cairo and in Arab villages of Palestine upon which F. C. Burkitt (“The Parable of the Ten Virgins,” Journal of Theological Studies 30.119 [1929]: 267-270, esp. 268 n. 2) and Joachim Jeremias (Parables, 172-174; “Lampades in Matthew 25:1-13,” in Soli Deo Gloria: New Testament Studies in Honor of William Childs Robinson [ed. J. McDowell Richards; Richmond, Va.: John Knox, 1968], 83-87, 147-149, esp. 84, 86 [translated by Shirley C. Guthrie from idem, “ΛΑΜΠΑΔΕΣ Mt 25 1. 3.f. 7.f.,” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 56.3/4 ⟨1965⟩: 196-201]) based their interpretations of the Waiting Maidens parable. Cf. Beare, Matt., 481; Luz, 3:229 n. 25; France, Matt., 947 n. 48; Snodgrass, 513. ↩
• ^[49] See Hatch-Redpath, 2:1070. ↩
• ^[50] See Dos Santos, 31. ↩
• ^[51] See Yohanan the Immerser’s Execution, L44, L78. ↩
• ^[52] Delitzsch translated παρθένος in the Waiting Maidens parable as עַלְמָה (‘almāh, “virgin”). In LXX παρθένος occurs only once as the translation of עַלְמָה (Gen. 24:43). ↩
• ^[53] “Bridesmaids” is both anachronistic (cf. France, Matt., 946; Culpepper, 487) and eisegetical, since the parable nowhere indicates that the maidens were attendant upon the bride (cf. Burkitt, “The Parable of the Ten Virgins,” 268; pace Jeremias, “Lampades in Matthew 25:1-13,” 86; Albright-Mann, 302). ↩
• ^[54] Burkitt, on the other hand, preferred to think of the maidens as “little girls,” for which παιδία (paidia, “little children”) or κοράσια (korasia, “girls”) might have been more appropriate. See Burkitt, “The Parable of the Ten Virgins,” 268. ↩
• ^[55] See Demands of Discipleship, L10, L22, L32. ↩
• ^[56] Cf. McNeile, 360; Schweizer, 465; Gundry, Matt., 498; Davies-Allison, 3:395; Luz, 3:229. ↩
• ^[57] Luz (3:229 n. 22) refuted the few examples generally cited in favor of λαμπάς meaning “lamp.” ↩
• ^[58] Cf. Samuel Krauss, Talmudische Archäologie (3 vols.; Leipzig: Buchhandlung Gustav Fock, 1910-1912), 1:68; Shmuel Safrai, “Home and Family” (Safrai-Stern, 2:728-792), esp. 746. ↩
• ^[59] Cf. Jeremias, “Lampades in Matthew 25:1-13,” 84; Gundry, Matt., 498; Luz, 3:229; Culpepper, 487. ↩
• ^[60] Cf., e.g., Eta Linnemann, The Parables of Jesus: Introduction and Exposition (trans. John Sturdy [Gleichnisse Jesu, Einfuhrung und Auslegung, 1961]; London: SPCK, 1977), 124; H. B. Green, 205. ↩
• ^[61] See Davies-Allison, 3:396; Wenham, The Rediscovery of Jesus’ Eschatological Discourse, 81; Culpepper, 487. Cf. Nolland, Matt., 1004. ↩
• ^[62] Cf. Jeremias, “Lampades in Matthew 25:1-13,” 83.
  
  Descœudres and Harrison touched on this etymological peculiarity in Jean-Paul Descœudres and Derek Harrison, “Greek and Roman Lamps in the Abbey Museum, Caboolture,” Mediterranean Archaeology 9/10 (1996/1997): 77-103. There they note (78-79) that “In northern countries, where no fuel comparable to olive oil in terms of efficiency and economy was available..., the torch and the candle remained the more common means of lighting,” and further explain (79 n. 6) that “It may be worth remembering in this context that the English ‘lamp’, like its French and German counterparts, derive from the Greek word ‘torch’ (λαμπάς), rather than from λύχνος (Gk. for lamp) or from Latin lucerna.” ↩
• ^[63] Jeremais, Parables, 174; idem, “Lampades in Matthew 25:1-13,” 84; Schweizer, 465-466; Gundry (Matt., 498), Davies-Allison (3:395), Nolland (Matt., 1004-1005, 1007) and France (Matt., 948) envisioned this kind of torch. ↩
• ^[64] See August Friedrich von Pauly and Georg Wissowa, Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft 6.12 (1909): 1948; Krauss, Talmudische Archäologie, 1:68. ↩
• ^[65] Cf. A. B. Bruce, 299; Luz, 3:230. ↩
• ^[66] See Luz, 3:230 n. 27. The repeated contention (cf. Jeremias, “Lampades in Matthew 25:1-13,” 84; Schweizer, 466; Lambrecht, Once More Astonished, 158; Gundry, Matt., 489-499; France, Matt., 949; Witherington, 460) that torches burn for only about fifteen minutes pertains to firebrand-type torches, not to vessel torches. ↩
• ^[67] It is surprising that Jeremias (“Lampades in Matthew 25:1-13,” 148-149 n. 14) rejected the identification of the torches in Waiting Maidens as “vessel” or “receptacle” torches, but Jeremias relied too heavily on nineteenth- and twentieth-century Arab customs in Palestine. ↩
• ^[68] See Hatch-Redpath, 2:852-853. ↩
• ^[69] See Dos Santos, 101. ↩
• ^[70] See Krauss, Talmudische Archäologie, 1:68; Jastrow, 715; Blackmann, 6:40 n. 1; Luz, 3:230 n. 28. ↩
• ^[71] Jeremias (“Lampades in Matthew 25:1-13,” 84), on the other hand, preferred אֲבוּקָה as the equivalent of λαμπάς. ↩
• ^[72] See Jeremias, Parables, 175; idem, “Lampades in Matthew 25:1-13,” 86; Schweizer, 466; Lambrecht, Once More Astonished, 158, 159; Gundry, Matt., 498-499. Cf. France, Matt., 947; Witherington, 460. ↩
• ^[73] See, for instance, the dancing of the ḥasidim with torches in the Temple reported in m. Suk. 5:4 and t. Suk. 4:2. ↩
• ^[74] See Jeremias, “Lampades in Matthew 25:1-13,” 84. Cf. Davies-Allison, 3:396; Luz, 3:234 n. 56. ↩
• ^[75] Cf. McNeile, 360-361. ↩
• ^[76] See McNeile, 361; Burkitt, “The Parable of the Ten Virgins,” 267-270; Bundy, 473-474 §387; Beare, Matt., 481-482; Albright-Mann, 302. ↩
• ^[77] Cf. Allen, 262; Metzger, 62-63; Luz, 3:226 n. 3. ↩
• ^[78] Cf. Jeremias, Parables, 174 n. 2. The fact that Shem Tov’s Even Bohan (ed. Howard, 124) includes the phrase חתן וכלה (“a groom and a bride”) in its version of the Waiting Maidens parable is yet another indication that this Hebrew version of Matthew is not the Hebrew text upon which the canonical Gospel of Matthew was based but a late translation of the Gospel of Matthew into Hebrew. For other examples indicating the unreliability of Even Bohan as a textual witness to the Gospel of Matthew, see David N. Bivin, “Has a Hebrew Gospel Been Found?” including the comments section at the end. ↩
• ^[79] See Hatch-Redpath, 2:951. ↩
• ^[80] See Dos Santos, 72. ↩
• ^[81] So Schweizer, 467. ↩
• ^[82] McNeile (361-322), Jeremias (“Lampades in Matthew 25:1-13,” 85-86), Gundry (Matt., 498), Luz (3:227), Nolland (Matt., 1003) and Snodgrass (509) preferred this interpretation. ↩
• ^[83] Pace Jeremias (Parables, 52, 171), who maintained that the parable described an actual wedding. ↩
• ^[84] If there was no oil in the torches, they could safely be laid down while the maidens slept. ↩
• ^[85] Cf. Nolland, Matt., 1005. ↩
• ^[86] See Safrai, “Home and Family,” 758. ↩
• ^[87] See Jastrow, 351. ↩
• ^[88] See Allen, 262; Burkitt, “The Parable of the Ten Virgins,” 269. ↩
• ^[89] See A. B. Bruce, 299; Jeremias, “Lampades in Matthew 25:1-13,” 86. Manson (Sayings, 242) supposed that the maidens were waiting for the groom to collect the bride from her parents’ home. The maidens join the groom as he approaches the home of the bride and then accompany the couple as the groom takes his bride back to his home for the wedding banquet. Cf. Luz, 3:228. Such an interpretation presumes more coming and going on the part of the maidens than the parable allows. See Nolland, Matt., 1004-1005 n. 168. ↩
• ^[90] Cf. Hagner, 2:728; Snodgrass, 513. ↩
• ^[91] In some textual witnesses the sensible maidens are mentioned prior to the foolish. See Gill, 7:302-303; A. B. Bruce, 299. But this reversal is probably a scribal “correction” meant to bring the Waiting Maidens parable in line with Houses on Rock and Sand, in which Matthew’s version mentions the sensible builder before mentioning the foolish builder. In a Hebrew translation/reconstruction of the Waiting Maidens parable Flusser placed the mention of the sensible maidens first, but since he did not discuss his reason for doing so, it is not clear whether he did this intentionally on the basis of this variant reading, or whether the reversal was an accidental slip of the pen. For this Hebrew translation/reconstruction of the Waiting Maidens parable, see Flusser, “The Parables of Jesus and the Parables in Rabbinic Literature,” 166-167 (in Hebrew). ↩
• ^[92] In the Pentateuch πέντε occurs as the translation of חָמֵשׁ in Gen. 5:6, 10, 11, 15, 17, 21, 23, 30; 7:20; 11:12, 32; 12:4; 14:9; 18:28 (3xx); 25:7; 45:6, 11, 22; 47:2; Exod. 21:37; 26:3 (2xx), 9, 26, 27 (2xx), 37 (2xx); 27:1 (2xx), 15, 18; 37:6 [36:38] (2xx), 16 [38:18]; 39:2 [38:25], 5 [38:28]; Lev. 26:8; 27:6; Num. 1:35[37], 37[25]; 2:15, 23; 3:47, 50; 7:17 (3xx), 23 (3xx), 29 (3xx), 35 (3xx), 41 (3xx), 47 (3xx), 53 (3xx), 59 (3xx), 65 (3xx), 71 (3xx), 77 (3xx), 83 (3xx); 11:19; 18:16; 26:45[41], 50; 31:8, 32, 37. Instances in the Pentateuch where πέντε does not occur as the translation of חָמֵשׁ are found in Gen. 46:27; Exod. 1:5; Num. 4:3. These exceptions may reflect textual variants. ↩
• ^[93] See Hatch-Redpath, 2:938. ↩
• ^[94] Jastrow (869) does not have an entry for the adjective נָבָל. ↩
• ^[95] The irregular form טפשה—the usual feminine form is טִפֶּשֶׁת (see Jastrow, 549)—does occur in a medieval Hebrew manuscript (MS B) of Ben Sira corresponding to Sir. 42:6, but a Hebrew fragment of Ben Sira from Masada dating to the first century C.E., which also contains Sir. 42:6, does not support this reading. There was also the trio הַחֵרֵשׁ וְהַשּׁוֹטֶה וְהַקָּטָן (haḥērēsh v^ehashōṭeh v^ehaqāṭān, “the deaf person and the fool and the minor”), frequently attested in rabbinic sources, but since these were deemed to lack competence and culpability, שׁוֹטֶה (shōṭeh, “fool”) is not suitable for HR. The underlying supposition of the parable is that the foolish maidens were culpable for their actions. ↩
• ^[96] We suspect that the wording of Yohanan ben Zakkai’s parable in b. Shab. 153a was, to a certain extent, influenced by the parable, quoted above, in b. Shab. 152b (e.g., כשהן מלוכלכין and שמח המלך לקראת פיקחים וכעס לקראת טיפשים). A different (more original?) form of the parable occurs in Eccl. Rab. 9:8, which we will discuss in greater detail in Comment to L8. ↩
• ^[97] See Lightfoot, 2:322-323; Gill, 7:303; Lachs, 391; Davies-Allison, 3:392; Keener, 595; France, Matt., 947 n. 51; Snodgrass, 508. ↩
• ^[98] Cf. Strack-Billerbeck, 1:969; Flusser, “The Parables of Jesus and the Parables in Rabbinic Literature,” 166 (in Hebrew). ↩
• ^[99] See Hatch-Redpath, 2:1439. ↩
• ^[100] We find חָכָם contrasted with טִפֵּשׁ in examples such as the following:

  יפה שתיקה לחכמים וקל וחומר לטפשים

  Silence is befitting of the wise [לַחֲכָמִים], and how much more the foolish [לַטִּפְּשִׁים]! (t. Pes. 9:2; Vienna MS)

  אשירה ליי כי גאה גאה מלך בשר ודם שנכנס למדינה והיו הכל מקלסין לפניו שהוא גבור ואינו אלא חלש שהוא עשיר ואינו אלא עני שהוא חכם ואינו אלא טפש שהוא רחמני ואינו אלא אכזרי שהוא דיין שהוא נאמן ואין בו אחת מכל המדות הללו

  I will sing to the Lord, for he has triumphantly triumphed [Exod. 15:1]. [A parable. To what may the matter be compared? To] a king of flesh and blood who entered a province and everyone was praising him that he is mighty, but he is not but rather weak, that he is rich, but he is not but rather poor, that he is wise [חָכָם], but he is not but rather foolish [טִפֵּשׁ], that he is merciful, but he is not but rather cruel, that he is judicious and that he is trustworthy, but none of these attributes are in him. (Mechilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, Shirata §1 [ed. Lauterbach, 1:174])

  תלמיד ששימש את הרב והרב אינו רוצה להשנותו, עושה כלם יי מי שעשה זה חכם סוף יעשהו טפש ומי שעשה לזה טפש סוף יעשהו חכם

  A disciple who served his master but the master is unwilling to teach him, [to this situation applies the verse] the Lord is maker of them all [Prov. 22:2]: The One who made this one wise [חָכָם] in the end will make him foolish [טִפֵּשׁ], and the One who made this one foolish [טִפֵּשׁ] in the end will make him wise [חָכָם]. (Mechilta de-Rabbi Ishamel, Amalek §4 [ed. Lauterbach, 2:288])

  כי השוחד יעור עיני חכמים, ואין צריך לומר עיני טפשים

  For a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise [חֲכָמִים] [Deut. 16:19], and it is not necessary to say [that it also blinds] the eyes of the foolish [טִפְּשִׁים]. (Sifre Deut. §144 [ed. Finkelstein, 199]; cf. Midrash Tannaim to Deut. 15:8 [ed. Hoffmann, 82])

  לא ארוך ולא גוץ...ולא חכם ולא טפש

  Not tall and not short...not wise [חָכָם] and not foolish [טִפֵּשׁ]. (b. Ber. 31b)

  תני ר′ חייה כנגד ארבעה בנים דיברה תורה בן חכם בן רשע בן טיפש בן שאינו יודע לשאול

  Rabbi Hiyah said [in a baraita], “The Torah spoke concerning four types of sons: a wise [חָכָם] son, a wicked son, a foolish [טִיפֵּשׁ] son, and a son that does not know how to ask....” (y. Pes. 10:4 [70b])

  ↩

• ^[101] Cf. Strack-Billerbeck, 1:969; Schweizer, 467; Linnemann, The Parables of Jesus, 125; Flusser, “The Parables of Jesus and the Parables in Rabbinic Literature,” 166 (in Hebrew). ↩
• ^[102] Cf. Jastrow, 1208. Note that in Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai’s parable in b. Shab. 153a פִּקֵּחַ occurs on the lips of a first-century C.E. Hebrew speaker. Another tannaic source to use פִּקֵּחַ in contrast to טִפֵּשׁ is the following:

  ויאמר מצרים אנוסה מפני ישראל הרשעים והטפשים שבהם היו אומרים מפני דוויין וסחופין הללו אנו בורחין הפקחים שבהם היו אומרים אנוסה מפני ישראל כי יי נלחם להם במצרים אמרו מי שעשה להם נסים במצרים הוא עושה להם נסים על הים

  And Egypt said, “Let us flee from before Israel” [Exod. 14:25]. The most wicked and foolish ones [וְהַטִּפְּשִׁים] among them were saying, “From these wretches and wanderers we are running away?” The most sensible ones [הַפִּקְחִים] among them were saying, Let us flee from before Israel, for the Lord fights for them against Egypt [Exod. 14:25]. They said, “The One who did miracles for them in Egypt, he will do miracles for them on the sea.” (Mechilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, BeShallaḥ, §6 [ed. Lauterbach, 160]; cf. Mechilta de-Shimon ben Yohai 14:25 [ed. Epstein-Melamed, 65-66])

  ↩

• ^[103] The LXX translators usually rendered חָכָם as σοφός. See Dos Santos, 63. ↩
• ^[104] We reconstructed σοφός with חָכָם in Yeshua’s Thanksgiving Hymn, L7, and in Innocent Blood, L6. ↩
• ^[105] See Flusser, “The Parables of Jesus and the Parables in Rabbinic Literature,” 169 (in Hebrew). ↩
• ^[106] Cf. McNeile, 361; Gundry, Matt., 499. ↩
• ^[107] See Hatch-Redpath, 1:447. ↩
• ^[108] See Dos Santos, 212. ↩
• ^[109] On olive oil as a foodstuff, see Y. Feliks, “Nutrition in Biblical Israel,” Pediatric and Adolescent Endocrinology 7 (1979): 2-9, esp. 4; Magen Broshi, “The Diet of Palestine in the Roman Period—Introductory Notes,” Israel Museum Journal 5 (1986): 41-56, esp. 44-45. ↩
• ^[110] See Safrai, “Home and Family,” 743; Joshua N. Tilton, “‘Look at…all the trees’: Trees in the New Testament Gospels,” Jerusalem Perspective (2024) [https://www.jerusalemperspective.com/28823/]. ↩
• ^[111] See Shimon Applebaum, “Economic Life in Palestine” (Safrai-Stern, 2:631-700), esp. 674. ↩
• ^[112] Pace A. B. Bruce, 301; France, Matt., 497; Snodgrass, 515, 758 n. 195. ↩
• ^[113] On variants of Rabbi Yose’s saying, see Rich Man Declines the Kingdom of Heaven, Comment to L78. ↩
• ^[114] Text according to Grunhut and Wertheimer, eds., Midrash Shir HaShirim: Printed from a Geniza Manuscript, 93. ↩
• ^[115] Although the printed editions and Kiperwasser’s critical text read, ר′ יהודה הנשיא (“Rabbi Yehudah ha-Nasi”), Flusser (Die rabbinischen Gleichnisse und der Gleichniserzähler Jesus, 191 n. 8) noted that an important manuscript (Parma 541) reads, “Yohanan ben Zakkai,” to whom the parable is attributed elsewhere in rabbinic literature. Kohelet Zuta attributes the parable to Rabbi Yehuda ha-Nasi, who quoted it in the name of Yohanan ben Zakkai (Kiperwasser, 186). Similarly, Semahot de-Rabbi Hiyyah (2:1 [ed. Higger, 216]) attributes the parable to Rabbi Yehudah in the name of Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai. And as we saw above (Comment to L5), the Babylonian Talmud (b. Shab. 153a) also attributes the parable to Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai. ↩
• ^[116] Noted by Donfried, “The Allegory of the Ten Virgins,” 427. According to another tradition, oil symbolizes the whole of Torah, which, of course, encompasses repentance and good deeds:

  בכל הקרבנות נמשלו דברי תורה...מקריבין שמן על גבי המזבח שנאמר סולת בלולה בשמן ונמשלה תורה בשמן שנאמר בכל עת יהיו בגדיך לבנים ושמן על ראשך אל יחסר

  To all the offerings they compared the words of Torah.... They offer oil on the altar, as it is said, fine flour mixed with oil [Lev. 2:5]. And the Torah is compared to oil, as it is said, At all times let your clothes be white and let oil on your head not be lacking [Eccl 9:8]. (Midrash Tanḥuma, Ahare Mot §16 [ed. Buber, 2:69])

  ↩

• ^[117] See Donfried, “The Allegory of the Ten Virgins,” 422, 423, 427; Flusser, Die rabbinischen Gleichnisse und der Gleichniserzähler Jesus, 182, 187; Lambrecht, Once More Astonished, 165; Culpepper, 488-489. ↩
• ^[118] See Hatch-Redpath, 1:7. ↩
• ^[119] See Dos Santos, 167. ↩
• ^[120] See LSJ, 1913; Muraoka, Lexicon, 710. ↩
• ^[121] Cf. Safrai, “Home and Family,” 743. ↩
• ^[122] Another option we considered for GR is כּוּז (kūz), the name of an object used in the Temple for the trimming of lamps (m. Tam. 3:6, 9; 6:1; 7:2). The appearance of the כּוּז is described as follows:

  וְ^הַכּוּז דּוֹמֶה לְ[קִית]וֹן גָּדוֹל שֶׁלַּזָּהָב

  And the kūz is like a large golden ladle. (m. Tam. 3:6)

  A קִיתוֹן (qitōn) was a ladle used for scooping wine from the mixing bowl into cups (Jastrow, 1371). Because it was used for scooping rather than transporting liquids, and because its use was ceremonial, the כּוּז does not appear to be the vessel intended in the Waiting Maidens parable. ↩

• ^[123] Cf. Gundry, Matt., 499. On genitives absolute in the Gospel of Matthew as indicative of redactional activity, see LOY Excursus: The Genitive Absolute in the Synoptic Gospels, under the subheading “The Genitive Absolute in Matthew.” ↩
• ^[124] Cf., e.g., Beare, Earliest, 218 §227; Snodgrass, 516. ↩
• ^[125] Cf. Nolland, Matt., 1002. ↩
• ^[126] Jeremias (Parables, 53; Joachim Jeremias, “νύμφη, νυμφίος,” TDNT, 4:1099-1106, esp. 1104) opined that the cry at midnight was unexpected, but surely the logic of the parable presumes that the maidens fell asleep because they had been waiting for the groom (and expecting the announcement of his arrival) for a long time. His coming was hardly a surprise. Cf. Beare, Earliest, 218 §227. Nevertheless, as any child waiting for Christmas or a birthday to finally arrive knows, a long wait does not necessarily imply a delay. ↩
• ^[127] Cf. McNeile, 361; Gundry, Matt., 499; Nolland, Matt., 1006. ↩
• ^[128] On the author of Matthew’s interest in the eschatological timetable, see Possessed Man in Girgashite Territory, Comment to L45. ↩
• ^[129] See Jeremias, “νύμφη, νυμφίος,” 1104. Cf. Lambrecht, Once More Astonished, 152. ↩
• ^[130] If Anth.’s version of Waiting Maidens had referred to a delay, perhaps it would have been worded as καὶ ἐχρόνισεν ὁ νυμφίος (kai echronisen ho nūmfios, “and the groom delayed”). ↩
• ^[131] But supposing Anth. had read, καὶ ἐχρόνισεν ὁ νυμφίος (see previous note), we might have reconstructed this as וְאֵחַר הֶחָתָן (v^e’ēḥar heḥātān, “and the groom delayed”).

  In LXX the verb χρονίζειν (chronizein, “to lengthen a stay,” “to delay”) does not occur terribly often, but when it does occur most instances are the translation of אֵחַר (’ēḥar, “delay”). See Hatch-Redpath, 2:1476. The LXX translators rendered אֵחַר more often as χρονίζειν than as any other alternative. The pi‘el verb אֵחַר occurs in MT 15xx (Gen. 24:56; 34:19; Exod. 22:28; Deut. 7:10; 23:22; Judg. 5:28; Isa. 5:11; 46:13; Hab. 2:3; Ps. 40:18; 70:6; 127:2; Prov. 23:30; Eccl. 5:3; Dan. 9:19). The LXX translators rendered eight of these instances as χρονίζειν (Gen. 34:19; Deut. 23:22; Judg. 5:28; Ps. 39[40]:18; 69[70]:6; Eccl. 5:3; Hab. 2:3; Dan. 9:19). Another instance of אֵחַר (Prov. 23:30) the LXX translators rendered with the compound ἐγχρονίζειν (enchronizein, “to continue in,” “to delay”). Since אֵחַר continued to be used in Mishnaic Hebrew, this verb would have been a reasonable option for HR. Another option for HR might be הִמְתִּין (himtin, “tarry,” “be slow”). See Jastrow, 863.

  Flusser (“The Parables of Jesus and the Parables in Rabbinic Literature,” 167 [in Hebrew]) rendered χρονίζοντος δὲ τοῦ νυμφίου as וכאשר בושש החתן לבוא (“And when the groom delayed to come”; cf. Exod. 32:1), but it appears that in Mishnaic Hebrew ב-ו-שׁ had lost the meaning “delay.” See Jastrow, 151.

  On reconstructing νυμφίος (nūmfios, "bridegroom") with חָתָן (ḥātān, "bridegroom"), see above, Comment to L4. ↩

• ^[132] See Jeremias, Parables, 172-174; Lambrecht, Once More Astonished, 158-159; Keener, 597; France, Matt., 947. Burkitt (“The Parable of the Ten Virgins,” 268), on the other hand, suggested that the bride caused the delay. ↩
• ^[133] See McNeile, 361; Donfried, “Allegory of the Ten Virgins,” 424-425; Culpepper, 488. ↩
• ^[134] Cf. Gundry, Matt., 500. ↩
• ^[135] Cf. Gundry, Matt., 499. ↩
• ^[136] See Hatch-Redpath, 2:956. ↩
• ^[137] See Dos Santos, 130. ↩
• ^[138] Cf. Jastrow, 887. ↩
• ^[139] Cf. Lightfoot, 2:323; Flusser, “The Parables of Jesus and the Parables in Rabbinic Literature,” 167 (in Hebrew). ↩
• ^[140] See Hatch-Redpath, 2:700. ↩
• ^[141] Cf. Lightfoot, 2:323; Flusser, “The Parables of Jesus and the Parables in Rabbinic Literature,” 167 (in Hebrew). ↩
• ^[142] See Sermon’s End, Comment to L1. ↩
• ^[143] See Nolland, Matt., 1006-1007. Cf. Schweizer, 467; Gundry, Matt., 499. ↩
• ^[144] Cf. Schweizer, 46; Beare, Matt., 482; Nolland, Matt., 1006-1007. ↩
• ^[145] McNeile (362) and Goulder (438) were close to the mark in suggesting that the midnight hour and the shout in Matt. 25:6 alluded to Exod. 12:29-30, where the prediction made in Exod. 11:4-6 is fulfilled. See Michael D. Goulder, Midrash and Lection in Matthew (London: SPCK, 1974). ↩
• ^[146] See Tomson, “Parables, Fiction, and Midrash: The Ten Maidens and the Bridegroom (Matt 25:1-13),” 259. ↩
• ^[147] See Marvin H. Pope, Song of Songs (AB 7C; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1977), 512. ↩
• ^[148] The indefinite phrase חֲצוֹת לַיְלָה (ḥ^atzōt laylāh, “midnight”) occurs twice more (Ps. 119:62; Job 34:20). The LXX translators rendered Job 34:20 quite freely, but the instance of חֲצוֹת לַיְלָה in the Psalms is instructive. There the LXX translators rendered חֲצוֹת לַיְלָה as μεσονύκτιον (mesonūktion, “middle of night,” “midnight”; Ps. 118[119]:62). ↩
• ^[149] We do find a few instances of חֲצוֹת לַיְלָה in rabbinic sources, for instance:

  [ויחלק עליהם לילה]...ורבנין אמ′ יוצרו חלקו, אמר הקב″ה אברהם פעל עימי בחצות אף אני פועל עם בניו בחצות הלילה, ואימתי במצרים שנ′ ויהי בחצי הלילה

  [And the night was divided against them ⟨Gen. 14:15⟩.] ...and the rabbis said, “Its creator divided it. The Holy One, blessed be he, said, ‘Abraham worked with me at midnight, so I, too, will work with his sons in the middle of the night [בחצות הלילה].’ And when was this? In Egypt, as it is said, And it happened at midnight [Exod. 12:29].” (Gen. Rab. 43:3 [ed. Theodor-Albeck, 1:417])

  א″ר שמעון חסידא כנור היה תלוי למעלה ממטתו של דוד וכיון שהגיע חצות לילה בא רוח צפונית ונושבת בו ומנגן מאליו

  Rabbi Shimon Hisda said, “A lute was hung above David’s bed, and as soon as midnight [חֲצוֹת לַיְלָה] arrived the north wind would come and blow on it and play upon it....” (b. Ber. 3b)

  Note, however, that both of these instances concern Scriptural verses (Gen. Rab. 43:3 citing Exod. 12:29; b. Ber. 3b concerning Ps. 119:62). ↩

• ^[150] See Hatch-Redpath, 2:784. ↩
• ^[151] See Dos Santos, 178. ↩
• ^[152] Cf. McNeile, 362. ↩
• ^[153] See Luz, 3:226 n. 2. ↩
• ^[154] Cf. Nolland, Matt., 1002. ↩
• ^[155] On the formation of feminine plural imperatives in Mishnaic Hebrew, see
  Segal, 71 §153. ↩
• ^[156] Cf. Tower Builder and King Going to War, Comment to L16. ↩
• ^[157] See Hatch-Redpath, 1:364. ↩
• ^[158] See Hatch-Redpath, 1:490; Dos Santos, 152. ↩
• ^[159] Cf. Flusser, “The Parables of Jesus and the Parables in Rabbinic Literature,” 167 (in Hebrew). ↩
• ^[160] See Jastrow, 521. ↩
• ^[161] Cf. Flusser, “The Parables of Jesus and the Parables in Rabbinic Literature,” 167 (in Hebrew). ↩
• ^[162] Schweizer (466) took αἱ λαμπάδες ἡμῶν σβέννυνται to mean “Our torches will go out too soon.” Cf. Lambrecht, Once More Astonished, 159; Nolland, Matt., 1007. ↩
• ^[163] See Segal, 224 §475. ↩
• ^[164] The passage we have cited is a rabbinic quotation of Ben Sira 42:9-10. In some respects it is more similar to a first-century Hebrew fragment of Ben Sira from Masada (Mas IV, 16-19) than LXX, while in other respects it more closely resembles LXX than the Masada fragment. The Masada fragment does not include the phrase שמא לא יהיו. ↩
• ^[165] See Hatch-Redpath, 1:158. ↩
• ^[166] See BDB, 593-594. ↩
• ^[167] Cf. Vermes, Religion, 113. ↩
• ^[168] See Keener, 597-598; Snodgrass, 516-517. Cf. Luz, 3:234. ↩
• ^[169] Cf. Nolland, Matt., 1008. ↩
• ^[170] Cf. Schweizer, 467; Lambrecht, Once More Astonished, 155; Hagner, 2:729; Davies-Allison, 3:399; Nolland, Matt., 1007. Jeremias (“Lampades in Matthew 25:1-13,” 85) interpreted the reference to the sellers as evidence that the parable takes place in an urban rather than a rural setting. ↩
• ^[171] See A. W. Argyle, “Wedding Customs at the Time of Jesus,” Expository Times 86 (1974/1975): 214-215 (citing no evidence but drawing conclusions on what was “probably” the case) and Snodgrass, 510 (citing a parable in the minor tractate Semaḥot 8:10 in which shops are open late at night), 755 n. 157 (citing the experience of modern travelers to the Middle East who observe shops open late at night). Neither of Snodgrass’ proofs inspire much confidence. Contrast Buchanan (2:936), who maintained that “In the Middle East the shops close when the sun goes down.” Evidently, customs changed between Buchanan’s writing (1996) and Snodgrass’ (2008). Either that, or it is perilous to generalize anecdotal evidence, and doubly so to project modern experience back onto first-century parables. ↩
• ^[172] Cf. Culpepper, 488. ↩
• ^[173] Cf. Gundry, Matt., 501. On genitives absolute as characteristic of Matthean redaction, see above, Comment to L11. ↩
• ^[174] And cf. our reconstruction in Darnel Among the Wheat, L9. ↩
• ^[175] Cf. McNeile, 362-363. ↩
• ^[176] Cf. Nolland, Matt., 1008. ↩
• ^[177] The noun γάμος occurs 9xx in Matthew (Matt. 22:2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12; 25:10), 0xx in Mark and 2xx in Luke (Luke 12:36; 14:8). ↩
• ^[178] See Jastrow, 859. ↩
• ^[179] The adverb ὕστερον occurs 7xx in Matt. (Matt. 4:2; 21:29, 32, 37; 22:27; 25:11; 26:60), 1x in the spurious ending of Mark (Mark 16:14) and 1x in Luke (Luke 20:32). ↩
• ^[180] On the author of Matthew’s redactional use of the adverb ὕστερον, see Yeshua’s Testing, Comment to L20. ↩
• ^[181] See Stephanie L. Black, “The Historic Present in Matthew: Beyond Speech Margins,” in Discourse Analysis and the New Testament: Approaches and Results (ed. Stanley E. Porter and Jeffrey T. Reed; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999), 120-139. Cf. Nolland, Matt., 1009. Pace Jeremias (Parables, 175), who regarded the use of the historical present as “evidence of early tradition.” ↩
• ^[182] We discussed the author of Luke’s redactional use of καί in the sense of “also” in Sign-Seeking Generation, Comment to L42-43. ↩
• ^[183] The table below shows all of the instances of λοιπός in the Gospel of Matthew and the synoptic parallels (if any):

  Matt. 22:6 DT (cf. Luke 14:21) Matt. 25:11 U Matt. 26:45 [adv.] TT = Mark 14:41 (cf. Luke 22:[--]) Matt. 27:49 Mk-Mt (cf. Mark 15:36) Key: TT = pericope has parallels in all three Synoptic Gospels; DT = Lukan-Matthean pericope; Mk-Mt = Markan-Matthean pericope; Lk-Mk = Lukan-Markan pericope; U = verse unique to a particular Gospel; [--] = no corresponding word and/or verse

  ↩

• ^[184] Cf. A. B. Bruce, 300. ↩
• ^[185] See Houses on Rock and Sand, Comment to L9-20, and Closed Door, Comment to L4-15. ↩
• ^[186] On reconstructing κρούειν with הִרְתִּיק, see Friend in Need, Comment to L25. ↩
• ^[187] Cf. Gundry, Matt., 501. ↩
• ^[188] On the double vocative as the product of Matthean-cross pollination with Houses on Rock and Sand/Closed Door, see Closed Door, Comment to L10. ↩
• ^[189] Cf. Flusser, Die rabbinischen Gleichnisse und der Gleichniserzähler Jesus, 179; Lambrecht, Once More Astonished, 163; Gundry, Matt., 501. ↩
• ^[190] See Flusser, “The Parables of Jesus and the Parables in Rabbinic Literature,” 167 (in Hebrew). ↩
• ^[191] Cf. Flusser, Die rabbinischen Gleichnisse und der Gleichniserzähler Jesus, 191 n. 1. ↩
• ^[192] Cf. LHNS, 179 §227. ↩
• ^[193] In John’s Gospel, too, ἀμήν appears exclusively on the lips of Jesus. ↩
• ^[194] See Flusser, Die rabbinischen Gleichnisse und der Gleichniserzähler Jesus, 191 n. 12. Cf. Luz, 3:235. ↩
• ^[195] See Snodgrass, 510. ↩
• ^[196] See Jeremias, Parables, 175; B. Green, 205; Linnemann, The Parables of Jesus, 126; Lambrecht, Once More Astonished, 160. Cf. Keener, 598; France, Matt., 950. ↩
• ^[197] Cf. Flusser’s translation/reconstruction in his “The Parables of Jesus and the Parables in Rabbinic Literature,” 167 (in Hebrew). ↩
• ^[198] Flusser, Die rabbinischen Gleichnisse und der Gleichniserzähler Jesus, 188, 191 n. 12. ↩
• ^[199] Cf. Luz, 3:234 (“They [i.e., the characters in the parable—DNB and JNT) do so because that is what the story requires”). ↩
• ^[200] This rule does not always hold true, however. Sometimes parables were recycled to illustrate points for which they were not originally intended. When that happened, a parable could have superfluous details that no longer served the secondary purpose to which the parable was put. ↩
• ^[201] See Gundry, Matt., 502. ↩
• ^[202] See Allen, 263; Bultmann, 176; Kilpatrick, 32; Bundy, 474 §387; Schweizer, 466; Gundry, Matt., 502; Catchpole, 56. ↩
• ^[203] See McNeile, 363; Kilpatrick, 76; Bundy, 474 §387; Jeremias, Parables, 52; Beare, Earliest, 218 §227; Schweizer, 466; Lambrecht, Once More Astonished, 157; Catchpole, 57; France, Matt., 948. Cf. Manson, Sayings, 243. ↩
• ^[204] Pace Flusser, Die rabbinischen Gleichnisse und der Gleichniserzähler Jesus, 178, 180. Bultmann (176) and Snodgrass (517) concluded that Matt. 25:13 does fit the message of the parable. ↩
• ^[205] Did. 16:1 may also have played a role in the composition of Matt. 25:13. ↩
• ^[206]

  Waiting Maidens parable
  Matthew’s Version		Anthology’s Wording (Reconstructed)
  τότε ὁμοιωθήσεται ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν δέκα παρθένοις αἵτινες λαβοῦσα τὰς λαμπάδας ἑαυτῶν ἐξῆλθον εἰς ὑπάντησιν τοῦ νυμφίου πέντε δὲ ἐξ αὐτῶν ἦσαν μωραὶ καὶ πέντε φρόνιμοι αἱ γὰρ μωραὶ λαβοῦσαι τὰς λαμπάδας αὐτῶν οὐκ ἔλαβον μεθ’ ἑαυτῶν ἔλαιον αἱ δὲ φρόνιμοι ἔλαβον ἔλαιον ἐν τοῖς ἀγγείοις μετὰ τῶν λαμπάδων ἑαυτῶν χρονίζοντος δὲ τοῦ νυμφίου ἐνύσταξαν πᾶσαι καὶ ἐκάθευδον μέσης δὲ νυκτὸς κραυγὴ ἐγένετο ἰδοὺ ὁ νυμφίος ἐξέρχεσθε εἰς ἀπάντησιν τότε ἠγέρθησαν πᾶσαι αἱ παρθένοι ἐκεῖναι καὶ ἐκόσμησαν τὰς λαμπάδας ἑαυτῶν αἱ δὲ μωραὶ ταῖς φρονίμοις εἶπαν δότε ἡμῖν ἐκ τοῦ ἐλαίου ὑμῶν ὅτι αἱ λαμπάδες ἡμῶν σβέννυνται ἀπεκρίθησαν δὲ αἱ φρόνιμοι λέγουσαι μήποτε οὐ μὴ ἀρκέσῃ ἡμῖν καὶ ὑμῖν πορεύεσθε μᾶλλον πρὸς τοὺς πωλοῦντας καὶ ἀγοράσατε ἑαυταῖς ἀπερχομένων δὲ αὐτῶν ἀγοράσαι ἦλθεν ὁ νυμφίος καὶ αἱ ἕτοιμοι εἰσῆλθον μετ’ αὐτοῦ εἰς τοὺς γάμους καὶ ἐκλείσθη ἡ θύρα ὕστερον δὲ ἔρχονται καὶ αἱ λοιπαὶ παρθένοι λέγουσαι κύριε κύριε ἄνοιξον ἡμῖν ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν οὐκ οἶδα ὑμᾶς γρηγορεῖτε οὖν ὅτι οὐκ οἴδατε τὴν ἡμέραν οὐδὲ τὴν ὥραν		[εἶπεν δὲ πρὸς αὐτοὺς παραβολὴν λέγων τίνι ὁ λόγος ἐστὶν ὅμοιος ὅμοιός ἐστιν] δέκα παρθένοις αἵτινες λαβοῦσαι λαμπάδας ἐξῆλθον εἰς ὑπάντησιν τοῦ νυμφίου πέντε ἐξ αὐτῶν ἦσαν μωραὶ καὶ πέντε ἐξ αὐτῶν ἦσαν φρόνιμοι αἱ μωραὶ οὐκ ἔλαβον ἔλαιον αἱ δὲ φρόνιμοι ἔλαβον ἔλαιον ἐν τοῖς ἀγγείοις καὶ ἐνύσταξαν πᾶσαι καὶ ἐκάθευδον μέσης δὲ νυκτὸς κραυγὴ ἐγένετο ἰδοὺ ὁ νυμφίος ἐξέρχεσθε εἰς ἀπάντησιν αὐτοῦ καὶ ἠγέρθησαν πᾶσαι αἱ παρθένοι ἐκεῖναι καὶ ἐκόσμησαν τὰς λαμπάδας καὶ εἶπαν αἱ μωραὶ ταῖς φρονίμοις δότε ἡμῖν ἐκ τοῦ ἐλαίου ὑμῶν ἀπεκρίθησαν δὲ αἱ φρόνιμοι λέγουσαι μήποτε οὐ μὴ ἀρκέσῃ ἡμῖν καὶ ὑμῖν πορεύεσθε μᾶλλον πρὸς τοὺς πωλοῦντας καὶ ἀγοράσατε καὶ ἀπῆλθον καὶ ἦλθεν ὁ νυμφίος καὶ αἱ παρθένοι αἱ φρόνιμοι εἰσῆλθον μετ’ αὐτοῦ [εἰς τοὺς γάμους] καὶ ἐκλείσθη ἡ θύρα καὶ ἦλθον αἱ παρθένοι αἱ μωραὶ [καὶ ἤρξαντο ἔξω ἑστάναι καὶ κρούειν τὴν θύραν] λέγουσαι κύριε ἄνοιξον ἡμῖν καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν οὐκ οἶδα ὑμᾶς
  Total Words:	170	Total Words:	126 [150]
  Total Words Identical to Anth.:	109 [112]	Total Words Taken Over in Matt.:	109 [112]
  Percentage Identical to Anth.:	64.12 [65.88]%	Percentage of Anth. Represented in Matt.:	86.51 [74.67]%

  ↩

• ^[207] Perhaps this is one reason why Martin (Syntax 1, 115 no. 37; Syntax 2, 50 no. 29) did not find Waiting Maidens to be more like “translation” Greek. ↩
• ^[208] Cf. Bundy, 474 §387. ↩
• ^[209] For abbreviations and bibliographical references, see “Introduction to ‘The Life of Yeshua: A Suggested Reconstruction.’” ↩
• ^[210] 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. ↩