University of Pennsylvania, 1975

RT 435 Sources for the Life of Jesus

Dr. Ross S. Kraemer

Jesus'Self-Understanding

According to theSo-Called Q Material

Robert C. Newman

§1. Introduction

Ever since the work of H. J. Holtzmann in the latter part ofthe nineteenth century,[1]a large number of New Testament scholars have looked to the two-document theoryas the most likely solution to the Synoptic problem. In this view, the chronological framework and the narrativeaccounts of Matthew and Luke are seen as coming principally from the Gospel ofMark (or a slightly different edition, no longer extant), whereas many of theirdiscourses are derived from a hypothetical document named "Q"(presumably from the German Quelle– source), sometimes identified with the Matthean λόγιαmentioned by the early church father Papias.[2]

Numerous attempts have been made to reconstruct Q from thecanonical gospels. Moffatt giveshis own view and sketches those of sixteen others.[3]  Rosché has pointed out that 487different verses of Luke have been assigned to Q by eleven different NewTestament scholars, even though the most common suggestions involve only abouttwo hundred verses.[4]

Even the existence of Q has come under renewed attack inrecent years,[5] not onlyfrom those who deny that Mark was written before Matthew,[6]but also from those who reject the Matthean priority but account for the Qmaterial as entirely oral,[7]partially oral,[8] written buttoo complex to be a single document,[9]or due to Luke's use of Matthew.[10]  A number of scholars have come forwardto defend the existence of Q as a single written document, however,[11]and at present the mass of New Testament work which rests upon Q makes itunlikely that the majority will soon abandon belief in its existence.

In this century, several studies have been made of Q'spicture of Jesus by scholars of both liberal[12]and conservative[13]persuasion. Recently, interest inthe new field of redaction criticism, in which the gospels are studied ascomplete works, seems to have reawakened interest in studying Q as awhole. So, H. E. Tödt devotesconsiderable attention to Q as it speaks of the Son of man,[14]and R. A. Edwards has published a preliminary paper on the theology of Q[15]and is preparing a full-blown book on the subject.

The purpose of thispaper is to examine the so-called Q material to consider what it has to sayabout Jesus' opinion of himself. Since almost all of Q is discourse material in which Jesus is speaking,no attempt will be made to remove the small amount of material not found in hismouth from the large amount that is, though such passages will be noted inpassing. For the sake of brevity,we shall speak of Jesus' opinion, etc., even though it is recognized that manydo not think the Q material gives us Jesus' own statements.

As regards a definition of Q, we shall not pre-judge theissue of its existence, nature or extent, but follow the suggestion of Rosché:[16]

… the least committal of alldefinitions of "Q" is the description of the location of itsmaterial, viz., that it is the non-Markan common material found in Matthew andLuke.

For convenience, the English synopsis of Throckmorton[17]will be employed, which uses the Revised Standard Version of the gospels forits text and the Huck-Lietzmann synopsis[18]for order and section numbering. In each citation we shall give the common section number from thesesynopses as well and the chapter and verse reference in Matthew and Luke.  Both gospels will be quoted where thedifferences seem to be significant; otherwise the Matthean account will begiven. Italicized words in aScripture quotation will be my emphases. Occasional reference will be made to the Greek when appropriate.

In attempting to interpret this material, we shall try tomake as few assumptions as possible about early church history.  First priority in exegesis will begiven to the near context in the Q material, and second, to the more distant Qcontext. Occasional reference willbe made to Old Testament allusions, as the OT was known to be in existence atthis time, and Q assuredly refers to it several times.

The order of discussion will be as follows.  In section two we shall consider Jesus'statements about his own person and nature. Section three will deal briefly with Jesus' view of hismission and message, and section four will speak of Jesus' destiny.  Finally, we shall summarize the resultsof our study in section five.

§2. Jesus' Understanding of His Person

For convenience, let us divide the material about Jesus'person into two categories. In thefirst, we shall consider passages which apply some title or epithet toJesus. In the second, let usexamine those materials which speak of his person with using such terms.

Titles Applied to Jesus

Interestingly enough, the title "Christ" is notfound in Q, whether applied to Jesus or not. At first sight this seems quite striking, yet furtherreflection seems to modify this impression. The Q material is virtually nothing but Jesus' owndiscourse, and Jesus only rarely uses the term himself.  This in Matthew and Luke, the wordappears on Jesus' lips on eight occasions, but only two of these are found inboth Matthew and Luke. Each ofthese two times, the Gospel of Mark is also present, and therefore the materialis not in Q by definition. But ifthe Triple Tradition of 480 verses has the word "Christ" in Jesus'mouth only twice, its non-occurrence in Q, only 170 verses in length, may wellbe accidental.[19]

Son of Man

On the other hand, the term "Son of man" is rathercommon in Q, more so than any other designation but "Jesus."  In #49 (Mt 8:18-22; Lk 9:57-60), a mansays to Jesus, "I will follow youwherever you go." Jesus answers, "Foxes have holes,and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man has nowhere to lay his head."  Likewise in #65 (Mt 11:7-19; Lk7:24-35), after applying Malachi 3:1 to John the Baptist as one who wouldprepare the way, Jesus says:

John came neither eating nor drinking,and they say, "He has a demon"; the Son of man came eating anddrinking and they say, "Behold a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of taxcollectors and sinners!"

These passages alone show that the Q material applies thetitle "Son of man" to Jesus, even though the first is occasionallyassumed to be merely proverb in which "son of man" means no more than"mankind,"[20]and the second an Aramaic idiom meaning "I."[21]

There are, moreover, three passages in which Matthew or Lukealone has "Son of man" when the other has "I, me" or "my."  In #19, the Beatitudes, Mt 5:11 has, "Blessedare you when men revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evilagainst you falsely on my account. Lk 6:22 ends with "on account ofthe Son of man" instead. In#60 (Exhortation to Fearless Confession, Mt 10:32; Lk 12:8), the situation issimilar, whereas in #189 (The Rich Young Man, Mt 19:28; Lk 22:29), it isMatthew which has "Son of man" when Luke has "me."  These passages suggest that Jesus wasunderstood to have used the term "Son of man" interchangeably withthe first person pronoun as a self-designation. At least this seems more probably than a widespread plot tointroduce "Son of man" into the Q material (not to mention Mark, Mand L) where it was otherwise unknown.

Besides these "Son of man" passages, there arefour others in which Matthew and Luke agree on the use of the term but whichmight in isolation be assumed to refer to some unknown figure other thanJesus. In #86 (Mt 12:32; Lk12:10), we have:

And whoever says a word against the Son of man will beforgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven,either in this age or in the age to come.

And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of man willbe forgiven; but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not beforgiven.

Both passages occur in contexts which clearly indicate thatJesus is to be understood as the Son of man, and in both cases the contexts aretotally Q material, although admittedly not the same Q material.

The context is somewhat less helpful in #158 (Mt 24:43-44;Lk 12:39-40), which reads:

But know this, that if the householderhad known in what part of the night (Lk: at what hour) the thief was coming, hewould have watched and would not have let his house be broken into.  You also must be ready, for the Son ofman is coming at an hour you do not expect.

Still, even here both passages are followed by the Q parablecontrasting the faithful and wicked servants, which seems to put Jesus'disciples in the role of servants and Jesus as returning master.

The third passage, #184 (Mt 24:25-27; Lk 17:22-24), has:

So if they say to you, "Lo, he is in the wilderness,"do not go out; if they say, "Lo, he is in the inner rooms," do notbelieve it. For as lightning comesfrom the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Sonof man.

The days are coming when you will desire to see one of thedays of the Son of man, and you will not see it. And they will say to you, "Lo, there!" or "Lo,here!" Do not go, do notfollow them. For as the lightningflashes … so will the Son of man be in his day.

Both of these are followed (Lk immediately, Mt about nineverses later) by a comparison of the coming of the Son of man to the days ofNoah, another Q passage of this sort.

Finally, in #87 (Mt 12:38-42; Lk 11:29-32), Jesus says, "Anevil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign; but no sign shall be given toit except the sign of the prophet Jonah." Then Matthew and Luke diverge:

For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly ofthe whale, so will the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heartof the earth.

For as Jonah became a sign to the men of Nineveh, so willthe Son of man be to this generation.

Without making any guesses about the original reading in ahypothetical Q document, both extant gospels agree in paralleling theactivities of the Son of man with those of Jonah. But agree by following this passage with another from Q:

The men of Nineveh will arise at thejudgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at thepreaching of Jonah and behold, something greater than Jonah is here. Thequeen of the South will arise at the judgment with this generation and condemnit; for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, andbehold, something greater than Solomon is here.

But in this passage, Jesus identifies himself ("is here")with the Son of man, who is to be a sign to "this generation."

Thus, whatever one may think of the authenticity of thetitle "Son of man" as a self-designation of Jesus, it seems clearthat the Q material so describes him. But what is meant by the title?

First of all, "Son of man" is used of Jesus whilepresent with his disciples in his earthly ministry (## 49, 65, presumably #86),where he is lowly (#49, "nowhere to lay his head"; #86, less guiltincurred blaspheming him than the Holy Spirit), but not ascetic (#65, "eatingand drinking"). Even so, heis already claiming to be a prophet greater than Jonah, and a sage wiser thanSolomon.

In addition, Jesus calls himself "Son of man" inregard to the time of his absence, when his followers will face severepersecution and temptation to deny him (##19, 60). In the latter passage (Mt 10:32-33; Lk 12:8-9):

So everyone who acknowledges me before men, I will alsoacknowledge before my Father who is in heaven; but whoever denies me beforemen, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven.

And I tell you, everyone who acknowledges me before me, theSon of man also will acknowledge before the angels of God; but he who denies mebefore me will be denied before the angels of God.

Jesus will repay them by public acknowledgment, possiblyafter their death but before their resurrection ("in heaven"),possibly at his coming kingdom ("of heaven").  The thrust of #19 is similar ("yourreward is great in heaven").

Yet Jesus also calls himself "Son of man" in hiseschatological coming as judge and ruler (##158, 184, 189).  Although we shall postpone most of ourdiscussion of these passages until later, it is these, #189 especially (Mt19:28; Lk 22:29-30), which suggest the origin of the term "Son of man":

In the new world, when the Son of man shall sit on hisglorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones,judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

As my Father appointed a kingdom for me, so do I appoint foryou that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thronesjudging the twelve tribes of Israel.

The obvious allusion is to Daniel 7:13-14, which reads:

I saw in the night visions, and behold,with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancientof Days and was presented before him. And to him was given dominion and glory and kingdom, that all peoples,nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlastingdominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not bedestroyed.

Lord

Another title applied to Jesus is κύριος– "lord, master." This epithet occurs only twice in the material we are considering, andthese are in somewhat different contexts. In #49 (Mt 8:18-22; Lk 9:57-60), just after Jesus answers a potentialdisciple that "the Son of man has nowhere to lay his head," anothersays, "Lord, let me first go andbury my father." On thisoccasion it is not Jesus himself who uses the title. Yet, since Jesus makes no attempt to refuse this form ofaddress, it would seem that Q sees the term as appropriate.

The other passage using "Lord" likewise has othersspeaking, but in this case (#42: Mt 7:21-22; Lk 6:46, 13:26-27) the "others"are themselves quoted by Jesus:

Not everyone who says to me, "Lord, Lord" shallenter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father … On thatday many will say, "Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name…?"  Then I will declare to them, "Inever knew you; depart from me, you evil doers."

Why do you call me "Lord, Lord" and not do what Itell you? (6:46)

Then you will begin to say, "We ate and drank in yourpresence and you taught in our streets." But he will say, "I tell you, I do not know where youcome from; depart from me, all you workers of iniquity." (13:26-27)

What, if anything, can be made of this title?  The Greekκύριος has rather modest meanings on the onehand: "owner, master,husband," but on the other hand extends through political rulers to a formof address for deity in both Jewish and pagan usage.[22]  But what can be said of Jesus' lordshipin these two passages?  In #49, the person addressing Jesus isa potential disciple, and therefore nothing more need be implied than arespectful form of address, like our English "sir."  Jesus' response, however, is certainlyarresting, and it causes one to wonder how he understood the term.  To the man's request to go and bury hisfather, he responds, "Follow me, and leave the dead to bury their owndead." (Mt 8:22; Lk 9:59-60). Thus Jesus sees his lordship, even during his public ministry, astranscending even the closest family ties. Contrast this with Deuteronomy 24:5,

When a man is newly married he shallnot go out with the army or be charged with any business; he shall be free athome one year, to be happy with his wife whom he has taken.

Apparently Q pictures Jesus as claiming a greater lordshipthan the OT allows to human government.

Our other passage (#42) seems to confirm this.  The latter part pictures Jesus as theeschatological Lord who controls men's access to the kingdom (indirectly inLuke, through the parable of the householder). As with the term "Son of man," we see Jesus asLord both during his public ministry and at his return to institute hiskingdom. Matthew, in addition,implies that he is also called "Lord" during an intervening absence(Mt 7:22), when many will be prophesying and performing miracles in his name.

Son (of God)

In Q, the title "Son of God" is used explicitlyonly by Satan (#8: Mt 4:3-10; Lk 4:3-12), where it occurs twice in thetemptation of Jesus. This passageis also noteworthy as the only clearly narrative section in Q.  The usual English rendering "if you are the Son of God" tends to conceal thefact that the Greek use of the particle ει with the presentindicative verb gives a condition assumed to be true,[23]which would therefore better be translated "since you are the Son of God."  In Satan's mouth, this might beunderstood as a forced admission (as, perhaps, from several demons in othergospel accounts), but it seems more likely in this context to be a concessionfor the sake of argument, probably tinged with mockery or irony.  Clearly the title is intended to meanmore than "a son of God like all other human beings," as Satanassumes that Jesus as Son should be able to do miracles and to count on thespecial intervention of God for his protection.

In another passage (#67: Mt 11:25-27; Lk 10:21-27), Jesus calls himself the "Son."  Although the genitive "of God"is not given, it is implied as strongly as possible:

I thank, thee, Father, Lord of heavenand earth, that thou hast hidden these things from the wise and understandingand revealed them to babes; yea, Father, for such was thy gracious will.  All things have been delivered to me by my Father; and no one knows the Son (Lk: who theSon is) except the Father, and no one knows the Father (Lk: who the Father is)except the Son and any one to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.

This passage not only reinforces the former one, but itintroduces an intimate personal relationship between the "Father, Lord ofheaven and earth," and Jesus. The "all things" handed over to Jesus would seem, from thecontext, to be the lordship of heaven and earth or knowledge of theFather. The term "no one"would seem to mean "no other man on earth" at least.  Thus Jesus appears as mediator ofrevelation concerning God. Howthis is to be understood relative to the revelation in the OT scriptures is notindicated. We also see in thestatement, "No one knows the Son except the Father," a picture ofJesus as a mysterious being whose real nature is hidden from those around him.

Non-Titular Indications of Jesus' Person

Having exhausted the so-called Q material which speaks ofJesus under a specific title (except for a possible title we shall mentionlater in this section), we turn now to materials which speak of his personwithout using such designation. For convenience, let us divide this material into two parts"  (1) negatively, the unworthiness ofothers relative to Jesus, and (2) positively, the greatness of his own personor activity.

Unworthiness of Others

Under this topic one would naturally think of John theBaptist's statements of unworthiness relative to Jesus, both in his preachingand when Jesus came to him for baptism. By our definition, however, neither of these incidents are in Q, for thefirst (#4) occurs in the Triple Tradition, and the second (#6) is found only inMatthew. It is true that a part of#4 (Mt 3:12; Lk 3:17) is in Q: "and with fire. His winnowing fork …" This appears to require some more context to make sense,thereby raising questions about the extent or existence of Q as a writtendocument, but these matters are beyond the scope of this paper.

In #46 (Mt 8:5-13; Lk 7:1-10), a centurion seeking Jesus toheal his servant says, "I am not worthy to have you come under my roof."  Jesus' response highly commends theofficer's faith.

Jesus himself, in #62 (Mt 10:37-39; Lk 14:26-27) makes amuch stronger statement of this sort:

He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy ofme; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and hewho does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.

If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father andmother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes and even his own life,he cannot be my disciple. Whoeverdoes not bear his own cross and come after me, cannot be my disciple.

Here, indeed, Matthew might seem to imply that one can beworthy of Jesus, but if so, it is only when that person has denied even himself("take his cross"). Lukeis even more explicit, but does not use the term "worthy."  Compare this with #49, discussed under "Lord"(page 6, above).

Greatness of Jesus' Person or Activity

Turning to the positive aspect of this material, #92 (Mt13:16-17; Lk 10:23-24) is significant. Jesus tells his disciples they are especially blessed because of whatthey are seeing:

Many prophets and righteous men (Lk:kings) longed to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what youhear, and did not hear it.

This seems to presuppose the OT prophecies of his coming;otherwise, how would these men know enough to long for these things?  In a somewhat similar vein is #87 (Mt12:38-42; Lk 11:29-32), cited on page 5. Jesus is greater than the prophet Jonah and greater than the wise kingSolomon.

An even stronger statement is made in #65 (Mt 11:7-19; Lk7:24-35). Having identified Johnthe Baptist as the (Messianic) forerunner of Malachi 3:1, as the end of the lawand the prophets, and as the greatest person born of women, Jesus neverthelesscontinues, "Yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven (Lk: of God) isgreater than he." But byimplication, it is Jesus who is to be king of this coming kingdom, andtherefore so much the further above John!

The immediately preceding secton (#64: Mt 11:2-6; Lk7:18-23) is also Q and only separated from #65 for convenience.  Here the Messianic implications areeven clearer, as John uses something like a title when he asks Jesus, "Areyou he who is to come, are shall we lookfor another?" Title or not,it is clear that John is referring to someone who is expected, presumably onthe basis of OT prophecy.[24]

Another indication of the greatness of Jesus' activities(and indirectly of his person) is found in #66 (Mt 11:20-24; Lk 10:13-15),which immediately follows the above sections in Matthew but not in Luke:

Woe to you, Chorazin!  Woe to you, Bethsaida!  For if the mighty works done in you hadbeen done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth andashes. But it shall be moretolerable in the judgment for Tyre and Sidon than for you.

Because they rejected Jesus, the inhabitants of thesecities, though Jews, will fare worse than the pagans of Phoenicia.

Less obvious, but in my opinion more striking, is the significancefor Jesus' person of his lament over Jerusalem in #167 (Mt 23:37-39; Lk13:34-35):

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing theprophets and stoning those who are sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together as ahen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not!  Behold your house is forsaken (Mt: anddesolate). And I tell you, youwill not see me (Mt: again) until you say, "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord."

In addition to the judgment called down on Jerusalem forrejecting Jesus and the phrase "he who comes" that we noticed in #64,the temporal scope of the saying is noteworthy. The first sentence seems to encompass a large sweep ofsalvation history, something like Jesus' denunciation of the Pharisees in #154(esp. Mt 23:35; Lk 11:50) and Stephen's speech in Acts 7.  Yet the "how often" ofsentence two then seems to give Jesus an existence over the same hundreds ofyears of Israel's history! Likewise the figure of the mother bird protecting its chicks, hereapplied to Jesus ("would I havegathered"), is always applied to God in the OT: Ruth 2:12; Psalms 17:8; 36:7;57:1; 61:4 and 91:4.

To summarize the Q material on Jesus' person, we have seenthat Jesus is pictured as a Messianic figure, although the usual title "Messiah"or "Christ" is not used. Instead the more ambiguous "Son of man" is employed (followingDaniel 7:13) to designate Jesus both before and after he receives his Messianicrule. The term "Lord" isused of Jesus only twice, yet a lordship over man's closest ties and fondesthopes is envisioned. "Son"or "Son of God" also occurs, and it is apparently to be understood interms of a unique relationship between God the Father and Jesus, rather than asa general designation for mankind or the righteous. A precedent for "Son" as a Messianic title can befound in Psalm 2:7. Anotherpossible title, though we have treated it under the other material, is "hewho is to come," which is once quoted from Psalm 118:26.

Going beyond the titles, we see Jesus' person as exaltedabove all men, greater than Jonah, greater than Solomon, greater than John theBaptist. He alone understands God,and he himself is understood by no one but God. In fact, Jesus is put in the place of God in Q's citation ofMalachi 3:1, in the "hen and chicks" figure, and in his "often"calling Israel to himself. Itwould appear, then, that there is little ground for a lower view of Jesus inthe Q material than that found in the later NT writings, although there is agreater air of mystery about him. In fact, Wrede's "Messianic secret"[25]seems to be present in Q also!

§3. Jesus' Understanding of His Mission and Message

When John the Baptist was in prison, he sent messengers toJesus asking, "Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?"  Jesus' answer (#64: Mt 11:2-6; Lk7:18-23) will serve to outline this section:

Go and tell John what you hear and see,the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deafhear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have good news preached tothem. And blessed is he who takesno offense at me.

Thus Jesus' activities consisted of: (1) healing, (2)preaching (and teaching), and (3) confrontation ("blessed is he who takesno offense"), to which we shall add (4) gathering disciples.  Let us look at Jesus' mission andmessage under these headings.

Healing

According to #64, Jesus saw a significant part of hismission to be healing. This initself should warn us against the too-facile assumption that the Q materialcomes from a sect which saw Jesus only as a teacher and knew little or nothingof his other activities. Thisparticular passage lists healings of several maladies, both local (blindness,deafness, lameness) and general (leprosy), as well as resurrection of thedead. In #85 (Mt 12:22-30; Lk11:14-23), exorcism of demons in mentioned, and in #46 (Mt 8:5-13; Lk 7:1-10),the centurion's servant is cured of some unspecified disease.  No nature miracles are mentioned in Q,but #66 (Mt 11:20-24; Lk 10:13-15) speaks of unnamed "mighty works"which were done in Chorazin and Bethsaida, and perhaps in Capernaum also.

Preaching and Teaching

Volumes have been written on the preaching and teaching ofJesus, and anything at all detailed on the subject is far beyond the scope ofthis paper. It is clear that,according to Q, this activity was a very significant part of Jesus'mission. The justification foradding "teaching" when our introductory quotation only mentionspreaching is the sign-seeking incident of #87 (Mt 12:38-42; Lk 11:29-32).  There we are told of "thepreaching of Jonah" and the "wisdom of Solomon," andcorresponding to each, the "something greater" in Jesus'activity. So, in regard to form,we can characterize Jesus' message a preaching and teaching, or alternatively,as prophecy and wisdom.[26]  In any case, no attempt will be made tosort the material into such categories.

As regards content, Jesus' message includes considerableethical material, involving attitudes toward God and man, life in general, andone's self in particular. Althoughthis teaching contains numerous parallels with the OT legal, prophetic andwisdom literature, as well as with the later rabbinic literature, many feelthere is a certain fresh flavor to the whole. In fact, Jesus claims to offer an unprecedented view of God,as we noted in #67: "No oneknows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to revealhim."

The other major topic of Jesus' preaching and teaching isthe kingdom of God. Most, but not all,of this material is eschatological, and therefore it finds its principalparallels in the OT prophetic and apocalyptic literature.  In #64, Jesus speaks of proclaiming "goodnews," but the term is not explicitly defined in Q.  However, in Luke 16:16, which is otherwise a Q passage (parallel to Mt 11:12), the "goodnews" is associated with the kingdom of God, and in both gospels thekingdom seems to be distinguished chronologically from "the law and theprophets," with the division occurring at the coming of John the Baptist:

From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom ofheaven has suffered violence …

For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.

The law and the prophets were until John; since then thegood news of the kingdom of God is preached, and every one enters it violently.

We shall return to this subject in section four.

Actually, Jesus' teaching cannot be easily separated intoethical and eschatological either, as the last judgment will involve individualbehavior, the kingdom itself will be characterized by righteousness, and Jesus'disciples are to live each day in the light of the coming kingdom.  In any case, it is clear that Jesus'preaching and teaching are pictured as new in some sense, and as heralding anew era, at least in God's dealings with Israel, for whom the law and theprophets were given.

Confrontation

As we read in #64, "blessed is he who takes no offenseat me," Jesus' mission was not seen merely as a series of wonders toastound the senses, nor of teachings to grip the heart and mind, but it wasalso intended to confront men with the necessity of making a decision for oragainst his claims and message. Terrible judgments would await those who rejected him (#66, above, page10; #87, page 5), especially the scribes and Pharisees (#154 or 210), for whomis reserved his longest and most scathing rebuke.

Yet even for his followers, Jesus' message calls for morethan an easy decision to jump on the Messianic bandwagon.  The blessings (#19: Mt 5:3-12; Lk 6:20-23)are directed toward the future, but the hard things come first.  The disciple will have to leave familyand security (##49, 62) to face shame and death (#62) in order to follow Jesus.

Gathering Disciples

According to Q, Jesus' activities of healing and teachingwould lead to a confrontation which would produce disciples as well asenemies. Jesus saw these disciplesas "babes" (#67: Mt 11:25; Lk 10:21) in contrast to the "wiseand understanding," as "poor" (#64: Mt 11:5; Lk 7:22) ratherthan rich. Yet he immediatelybegan to reveal hidden things about God to them (#67) in order to make themwise, and he promised in the kingdom to make them rich and happy (#19) andgreater than John the Baptist (#65: Mt 11:11; Lk 5:28).  To the twelve apostles he promised thatthey would be rulers over the twelve tribes of Israel (#189: Mt 19:28; Lk22:29-30).

Not only did he make disciples himself through his ministry,but he also sent out his disciples to confront men with the kingdom, to teach,work miracles, and to proclaim judgment on those who rejected them as likewiserejecting Jesus and God (#139: Mt 9:37-39, 10:7-16; Lk 10:1-16).

As indicated above, the disciples were called upon to puteven love for family and self behind love for Jesus (##49, 62).  They were warned to expect persecution,since they were like lambs sent into the midst of wolves (#58: Mt 10:16; Lk10:3), that they would face opposition from their closest relatives (#61: Mt10:34-36; Lk 12:51-53), perhaps even death (#62: Mt 10:38; Lk 14:27).  Yet even the loss of life was nothingcompared to the greater danger of rejecting Jesus (#60: Mt 10:28; Lk 12:4):

And do not fear those who kill the bodybut cannot kill the soul; rather fear him who can destroy both body and soul inhell.

Instead, steadfastness in persecution would be the way totrue happiness (#19):

Rejoice and be glad, for your reward isgreat in heaven, for so men persecuted the prophets who were before you.

In summary, our examination of Jesus' mission and messageaccording to Q shows one who performed miracles at least on a par with Elijahand Elisha, who taught that a new age had arrived with the coming of John theBaptist, yet who proclaimed himself the central actor of this new age, the onewho alone could reveal the Father. He confronted men with the responsibility of accepting orrejecting him, warning them of the judgment to come. He made those who accepted him his disciples and sent themout on the same mission, preparing them for suffering now that they might havejoy and great reward din his kingdom.

§4. Jesus'Understanding of His Destiny

Let us now examine the Q material for the picture it givesus of the results Jesus expected from his activities. For convenience we shall divide the subject into five parts:  (1) opposition and rejection, (2) deathand resurrection, (3) parousia, (4) judgment, and (5) kingdom.

Opposition and Rejection

According to Q, Jesus saw not only opposition to hisdisciples, but also rejection of his own claims and growing opposition to himself.  In #64, mentioned several timesalready, he says, "Blessed is he who takes no offense at me,"obviously opening up the possibility that some would be offended.  He saw the perversity of his opponents(#65: Mt 11:18-19; Lk 7:33-34), who could somehow find fault both with theasceticism of John the Baptist and with his own non-ascetic behavior.  The opposition is even more pronouncedin his opponents' ability to ascribe his exorcisms to Beelzebul while ascribingtheirs to God (#149: Mt 12:22-30; Lk 14:14-23, selecting only the materials notfound in Mark).

Jesus' statement regarding the extent of salvation alsosuggests that a general rejection is foreseen (#40: Mt 7:13-14; Lk 13:23-24):

Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the wayis easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many.  For the gate is narrow and the wayhard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few.

And some one said to him, "Lord, will those who aresaved be few?" And he said tothem, "Strive to enter by the narrow door; for many, I tell you, will seekto enter and not be able.

Likewise Jesus' lengthy rebuke of the Pharisees (#154)certainly sees a very influential segment of Palestinian Judaism in theopposition camp.

Death and Resurrection

The Q material is unusually sparse on Jesus' death andresurrection. Yet I believe itwould be incorrect to assert that nothing of this sort appears.

First, let us notice (#167: Mt 23:37-39; Lk 13:34-35) thatJesus rebukes Jerusalem for consistently "killing the prophets and stoningthose who are sent." Then hesays, "You will not see me again until you say …" What is Jesusplanning to do? Go away, or bekilled? In #62 (Mt 10:38; Lk14:27), he says a disciple must "take his cross and follow me."  Although frequently understoodfiguratively, the literal meaning, that Jesus will be crucified and that hisdisciples must be ready to follow him, makes perfectly good sense.  Would it not be a striking coincidenceif this statement got into Q by accident even though its author(s) know nothingof the manner of Jesus' death?

In any case, #154 (Mt 23:34-36; Lk 11:49-51) makes it clearthat some of Jesus' disciples will die under persecution (following hisexample?):

Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, someof whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will scourge in your synagoguesand persecute from town to town, that upon you may come all the righteous bloodof innocent Abel to the blood of Zechariah … Truly, I say to you, all this willcome upon this generation.

Therefore the wisdom of God said, "I will send themprophets and apostles, some of whom they will kill and persecute, that theblood of all the prophets shed from the foundation of the world may be requiredof this generation, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah … Yes, Itell you, it shall be required of this generation.

Thus Jesus' own generation is singled out to receivepunishment far beyond the ordinary. Their killing of Jesus, in view of his status in Q, would certainly makethis woe more understandable.

What is to be done with the "sign of Jonah" (#87:Mt 12:39; Lk 11:29)? Here, too, itis certainly an impressive "accident" that this rather obscureprophet who was "buried" three days and three nights in a "whale"was chosen to give his name to a sign relating to Jesus, who (according totradition outside Q) was buried "three days and three nights" in theearth. But this is just what wemust assume, if Q knows nothing of Jesus' burial and resurrection!  Attempts to find another interpretationof the sign of Jonah, e.g., that his preaching was the sign,[27]or that the repentance of the Gentiles was the sign,[28]do not erase this striking coincidence,nor does the absence of any specific reference to the whale in Luke. These arguments only show that theremay be even more resemblances between Jonah and Jesus than this one.

It cannot be fairly maintained that the Q material knowsnothing of bodily resurrection, as though its author(s) denied thedoctrine. #60 (Mt 10:28; Lk12:4-5) contrasts killing the body only with killing both body and soul.  In #62 (Mt 10:39; Lk 17:33), Jesusassures his disciples, "He who loses his life will find it."  #46 (Mt 8:11; Lk 13:28) picturesAbraham, Isaac and Jacob feasting in the eschatological kingdom.  Nor is resurrection confined only toeschatology, for in #64 Jesus raises the dead during his public ministry.

In summary, the Q material sees Jesus (1) rebuking the Jewsfor killing the prophets while warning them they will soon not see him for sometime; (2) urging his disciples to take up their crosses and follow him, to losetheir lives that they might regain them; (3) warning his generation that theblood-guilt of many generations would come upon them, yet offering them one moresign, that of Jonah. It isdifficult to avoid references to Jesus' death and resurrection in thesestatements, though it is clear that no atonement or resurrection theory is hereworked out. The significance ofthis fact will depend strongly on whether Q is seen, for instance, as anindependent sayings-document reflecting the peculiar theology of some earlyChristian sect, or as a group of sayings intended to supplement the Markannarratives and reflecting Jesus' pre-crucifixion teachings.

Parousia

More specific are the references in Q to the return of Jesussome time in the future. In #167(Mt 23:37-39; Lk 13:34-35), Jesus ends his lamentation over Jerusalem with thestatement:

Behold your house is forsaken.  And I tell you, you will not see me (Mt:again) until you say, "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord."

Here Jesus speaks of his return in the words of Psalm118:26, employing the phrase "he that comes" discussed briefly insection two. This psalm alsocontaines (v 22) the cryptic passage concerning the stone which the buildersrejected (Triple Tradition, #204: Mt 21:42; Mk 12:10-11; Lk 20:17), whichraises the possibility that Jesus is here alluding to his rejection andexaltation as well as to his return and acclamation.

In #158 (Mt 24:43-51; Lk 12:39-46), Jesus tells hisfollowers to be prepared for his return, "for the Son of man is coming atan hour you do not expect." Asimilar theme is seen in #184 (Mt 24:26-41; Lk 17:22-30), where the coming ofthe Son of man is compared to the sudden coming of the flood in Noah'sday. In addition, this return willbe unmistakable. "For as thelightning comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be thecoming of the Son of man" (Mt 24:27; parallel in Lk 17:24).

So the return of Jesus will be sudden and unexpected, butunmistakable, apparently exalted and glorious.

Judgment

Q also pictures a coming judgment which seems to occur at orafter the parousia. John theBaptist warns the crowds of one coming after him (#4: Mt 3:11-12; Lk 3:16-17):

He will baptize you … with fire, hiswinnowing fork is in his hand and we will clear his threshing floor and gatherhis wheat into the granary, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.

Presumably this is the time when Jesus' opponents, who haverejected his message and his claims, will face their condemnation.  To the Pharisees he says (#86: Mt12:37; Lk 11:19):

If I cast out demons by Beelzebul, bywhom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they shall be your judges.

To Chorazin and Bethsaida, "It will be more tolerablein the judgment for Tyre and Sidon than for you" (Lk 10:14, par. Mt11:22). Similarly, Jesus sends outhis disciples with the warning that "it shall be more tolerable on the dayof judgment (Lk: that day) for Sodom and Gomorrah" than for the towns thatreject their message (Mt 9:15; Lk 10:12).

In fact, Jesus warns his whole generation, saying (#87: Mt12:41; Lk 11:32):

The men of Nineveh will arise at thejudgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at thepreaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is here.

In this verse and the following one, the presence oflong-dead Ninevites and the Queen of the South places the judgment at a futureeschatological resurrection.

John the Baptist's remark above (#4) and the followingpassage picture Jesus himself as the eschatological judge (#42: Mt 7:22-23; Lk13:26-27):

On that day many will say, "Lord, Lord, did we notprophesy in your name…? Then Iwill declare to them, "I never knew you; depart from me, you evil doers."

Then you will begin to say, "We ate and drank in yourpresence and you taught in our streets." But he will say, "I tell you, I do not know where youcome from; depart from me all you workers of iniquity."

Possibly in this category is the statement which says Jesuswill acknowledge those who acknowledge him and deny those who deny him (#90: Mt10: 32-33; Lk 12:8-9), which is set before the Father (Matthew) or the angels(Luke).

Thus we see a future judgment with Jesus as judge,apparently before God and his heavenly host, but certainly in the presence ofthe resurrected dead, where Jesus will judge men for their response to himselfand to God's revelation, consign his foes to unquenchable fire, and gather his disciples("wheat") to himself ("granary").

Kingdom

The chronological relationship of the kingdom to the otherevents described in this section is somewhat complex, but it is not out ofplace to discuss it last.

First of all, we should note that in some sense the kingdomof God begins with the ministry of John the Baptist, so that Jesus can say(#65: Mt 11:12-13; Lk 16:16):

From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom ofheaven has suffered violence and men of violence take it by force.  For all the prophets and the lawprophesied until John.

The law and the prophets were until John; since then thegood news of the kingdom of God is preached, and everyone enters it violently.

In agreement with this, Jesus sees the kingdom as present inhis own ministry. He argues withthe Pharisees (#86: Mt 12:28; Lk 8:20):

But if it is by the Spirit (Lk: finger)of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.

Yet there is also some form of the kingdom which worksslowly and unobtrusively as in the parable of the leaven (#98: Mt 13:33; Lk13:20-21), for neither the activity of John the Baptist nor Jesus could becalled "unobtrusive"! Perhaps this is the form of the kingdom envisioned for Jesus' followersin the period while he is to be away (#158: Faithful Servants; #195: Parable ofthe Talents/Pounds), when they are to be "salt" and "light"to the world (#20), when they are to face the persecutions discussed in sectionthree (##19, 58, 61, 62).

There is a third aspect of the kingdom as well, which seemsto be associated with the return of Jesus. His disciples are to pray for the kingdom to come (#30: Mt6:10; Lk 11:12), to look forward to the day when they will receive the kingdomof heaven and its rewards (#19: Mt 5:3-12; Lk 6:20-23), and presumably to layup treasures for it now in heaven (#32: Mt 6:19-21; Lk 12:33-34).  At this time Jesus will returnsuddenly, judge his enemies, reward his friends, and begin his rule inassociation with his apostles, who will judge the twelve tribes of Israel(#189: Mt 19:28; Lk 22:29-30).

§5. Conclusions

Having now completed a brief examination of the so-called Qmaterial for information on Jesus' self-understanding, let us summarize theresults. Notice that we haveattempted to base our discussion on the exegesis of this material as it stands(using the definition of Q prescribed in section one), rather than uponassumptions about the pre-literary history of the material.

Summary of Results

We have seen that Q pictures Jesus as a man, yet much morethan a man, in agreement with Tödt:[29]

The transcendent sovereignty of the Sonof man has attained so high an importance that prerogatives of God pass over to[him].

This is quite broadly evidenced in the Q material, althoughmost of the data has been collected in our section two.

Jesus is seen as a coming king, who proclaims both a presentand future kingdom, the former apparently being internal and individual, thelatter glorious and universal. Atthe inception of the eschatological kingdom, Jesus as Son of man will judge menon the basis of their response to him before his parousia.

In addition, Jesus is seen as a miracle worker, even thoughthe Q material (by our definition) contains almost no narrative.  Likewise he appears as a preacher andteacher, or prophet and wise man, and it is not surprising that the discursivenature of Q gives more scope to the display of these characteristics.

But all of these characteristics may be summarized under thetitle "Messiah," at least as that title is understood in the NT,where OT passage involving each of these aspects are applied to Jesus.  Of course, the absence of the term "Messiah"from Q is surprising, yet "Son of man" seems to be a functionalequivalent which retains a greater ambiguity. A certain mystery about the person of Jesus is as clearlypresent in Q as in Mark.

Jesus' destiny is thus to reign, but not immediately.  Instead, he is to be absent from theworld for some time and then return suddenly in a glorious and unmistakableway. Jesus' absence itself seemsto be associated with opposition to him, and remarks occur which suggest thathe will be killed by crucifixion. In that case, as we have suggested, resurrection would be assumed.  But the only evidence whether thisresurrection would be immediate or eschatological lies in the intriguing "signof Jonah." There is nodiscussion of the atoning significance of Jesus' death, nor any statementsabout his person explicitly based upon his resurrection.

Significance of Results

What is the significance of the results we have justsummarized? Some things may besaid which are relatively model-independent; others will depend strongly uponone's view of Q.

First of all, at the point when this material was firstwritten down, we must contend with a belief in the person of Jesus which isconsistent with his being deity but which does not seem to be consistent with alower view of him. Of course Jesusis distinguished from the Father, but as much can be said for the mysterious "angelof the LORD" in the OT. Thisseems to go beyond representation of the Messiah in the extra-canonicalapocalyptic literature.

Second, Jesus is pictured in his earthly ministry as acombination of miracle-worker, prophet and wise man. Any alleged disjunction of these features would thus have toprecede Q.

Third, the kingdom which Jesus proclaims is likewisecomplex, both a present phenomenon spreading quietly like leaven in dough andan eschatological event to be seen everywhere like lightning.  Any attempt to see a simpler picturemust therefore also "go behind" Q.

On the other hand, the significance of other features, suchas the negative ones: lack ofexplicit reference to the term "Christ," to his death, atonement andresurrection – will depend strongly on what is to be made of the Qmaterial. Thus if a minimal Q ofabout 200 verses is seen as a separate document which circulated independentlyand which represented the only theological statement acceptable to itsauthor(s), then one may imagine an early sect for which the death andresurrection of Jesus was unknown or (more defensibly) unimportant.

If, however, Q is seen as a larger document, perhapsincluding some of the material peculiar to Matthew or Luke, and overlapping theTriple Tradition in places, then it is not clear that any such theologicaldistinctions can be maintained. Thus the term "Christ" appears in Mt 11:2, which s otherwise apart of Q by our working definition, and the "sign of Jonah" is quitereasonably explained in material peculiar to Matthew. As Palmer has ably pointed out,[30]on the assumption that Matthew and Luke used Mark, it would not be possible toreconstruct Mark were it not extant, for substantial parts of Mark were used byMatthew alone, and a number of verses occur in Luke alone.  Therefore a minimal Q ismethodologically suspect even though men may have insufficient data to agree ona larger specific version. Buteven the existence of Q as a written source is being increasingly questions, asnoted in section one.

Whether written or oral, independent or only a part ofMatthew, the Q-material may have been intended as a supplement to the Markannarrative, as seems to be the case in regard to miracles.  Thus Mark concentrates upon miraclesand Q has almost none, yet Q mentions Jesus' many miracles almost incidentallyseveral times. Perhaps the factthat Mark's rather scanty discourse material already includes material aboutthe significance of Jesus' death and resurrection has led the compiler of Q torefrain from further illustrations of this subject.

---

[1] H. J.Holtzmann, Die synoptischen Evangelien: Ihr Ursprung und geschichtlicher Charakter (1863).

[2] Cited inEusebius, Church History 3.39.16.

[3] JamesMoffatt, An Introduction to the Literature of the New Testament (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1911), 197-202.

[4] Theodore R.Rosché, "The Words of Jesus and the Future of the 'Q' Hypothesis," Journalof Biblical Literature 79 (1960), 216.

[5] NigelTurner, "Q in Recent Thought," Expository Times 88 (1969), 324-28.

[6] W. R. Farmer,The Synoptic Problem: ACritical Analysis (New York: Macmillan, 1965); B. C. Butler, TheOriginality of St. Matthew: ACritique of the Two-Document Hypothesis(Cambridge: University Press,1951).

[7] Rosché, "Wordsof Jesus," JBL 79 (1960), 210-20.

[8] Robert M.Grant, A Historical Introduction to the New Testament (New York: Harper and Row, 1963), 113-16.

[9] E. P.Sanders, "The Overlaps of Mark and Q and the Synoptic Problem," NewTestament Studies 19 (1972-73), 453-65.

[10] A. M.Farrer, "On Dispensing with Q," in Studies in the Gospels, ed. D. E. Nineham (Oxford:  Basil Blackwell, 1955), 55-88; R. T.Simpson, "The Major Agreements of Matthew and Luke Against Mark," NewTestament Studies 12 (1965-66), 273-84.

[11] F. G.Downing, "Towards a Rehabilitation of Q," New Testament Studies 11 (1964-65), 169-81; K. P. G. Curtis, "InSupport of Q," Expository Times84 (1972-73), 309-10.

[12] AdolfHarnack, The Sayings of Jesus: The Second Source of St. Matthew and St. Luke, translated J. R. Wilkinson (New York: Putnam, 1908).

[13] A. T.Robertson, The Christ of the Logia (NewYork: Doran, 1924).

[14] Heinz E.Tödt, The Son of Man in the Synoptic Tradition (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1965).

[15] Richard A.Edwards, "An Approach to a Theology of Q," The Journal of Religion 4 (1971), 247-69.

[16] Rosché, "Wordsof Jesus," 211.

[17] Burton H.Throckmorton, Jr., ed., Gospel Parallels: A Synopsis of the First Three Gospels, 3^rd ed. (Nashville:  Thomas Nelson, 1967).

[18] Albert Huckand Hans Lietzmann, Synopsis of the First Three Gospels, 9^th ed., translated F. L. Cross (NewYork: American Bible Society,1935).

[19] Joseph B.Tyson, A Study of EarlyChristianity (New York: Macmillan, 1973), 184-85.

[20] Edwards, "Theologyof Q," 260.

[21] T. W.Manson, The Sayings of Jesus (1949),70f, cited in Tödt, Son of Man,115n4.

[22] WalterBaur, William F. Arndt, and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek and English Lexiconof the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957), 459-61.

[23] F. Blass,A. Debrunner, and Robert W. Funk, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament andOther Early Christian Literature(Chicago: University of ChicagoPress, 1961), §§ 360, 371; A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the GreekNew Testament in the Light of Historical Research, 4^th ed. (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1934), 1004-22.

[24] S.Mowinckel, He That Cometh: TheMessianic Hope in the Old Testament and in the Time of Jesus (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1951).

[25] WilhelmWrede, Das Messiasgeheminis in den Evangelien (Göttingen, 1901); ET by james C. Greig (Napierville, IL: Alec R. Allenson, 1972).

[26] It isinteresting, in the light of Bultmann's claim that proverbial materials in thegospels are later borrowings from the Jewish stock of proverbs, that we have in#87 an attribution of proverbs to Jesus.

[27] A. W.Argyle, The Gospel According to Matthew(CBCNEB: Cambridge: UniversityPress, 1963), ad. loc.

[28] Paul D.May, "The Community of Q," (PhD dissertation, University of Iowa,1967), cited in Edwards, "Theology of Q," 268.

[29] Tödt, TheSon of Man in the Synoptic Tradition, 52

[30] HumphreyPalmer, The Logic of Gospel Criticism(London: Macmillan, 1968), 225-31.