adapt their primary source for this saying, the sayings gospel Q. In order to understand how they have altered the content and, hence, intended meaning of the Q version of the saying, one must first reconstruct this earlier Q version. In the process of reconstruction, by noting some of the redactional tendencies of Matthew and Luke, some of the answers to the question of how Matthew and Luke use and adapt the Treasure saying will begin to become clear. Subsequent to the reconstruction of Q will be a discussion of the following: (1) how the composers of these three texts used the Treasure in Heaven saying; (2) how these texts might be related to the larger context of Jewish wisdom and eschatology; (3) the place of Mark 10:21 in the history of the transmission of this saying.
Q 12:33
Q 12:330: Is Luke 12:33 par. Matt 6:(19–)20 in Q?
1
This variant is occasioned by the different positions of the sayings in Matthew and Luke, the difference in the internal order of the adversity clauses in the two versions, and the lack of verbal agreement between the versions (relative to most Q texts in Matthew and Luke). The only significant “minimal Q” words and phrases are θησαυρο– (“treasure”), ἐν οὐραν– (“in heaven), ὅπου (“where”), σήϚ (“moth”), and κλέπτ– (“rob”).2
A number of arguments, however, support Luke 12:33/Matt 6:(19–) 20 as coming from Q. (1) This saying is found in Matthew and Luke, but not in Mark—the fundamental premise for identifying Q material.3 (2) Both versions of the saying have Q 12:34 (“For where you treasure is, there will your heart be also”) attached as a rationale for the behaviors recommended in the Treasure saying (against GTh 76:3 and all other versions of the saying to be identified in this study). It is not likely that the two sayings would be attached independently in pre-gospel oral traditions. (3) Both gospels group Q 12:33–34 with the Free from Anxiety like Ravens and Lilies pericope of Q 12:22–31 (Matt 6:19–21, 25–34). (4) A catchword connection exists between Luke 12:33/Matt 6:19–20 and the Son of Humanity Coming as a Robber saying of Luke 12:39/Matt 24:43 (“thief” and Matt 6:19–20’s “dig through”). This connection is most especially significant since Matt 24:43 is located quite some distance from the sayings clusters of Matthew 6.4 Taking into account the cumulative force of these observations, and starting with the presupposition of the Q hypothesis, there should be little doubt that this saying existed in Q.
Q 12:331: Position of the Pericope in Q
Determining the position of Q 12:33(–34) in Q must take into consideration several issues. Are there good redactional rationales for Matthew or Luke to have moved the saying to its present position in one or the other gospel? Matthew’s present position preceding the Generous Eye and Two Masters sayings (Matt 6:22–24) is almost universally recognized as being secondary. But what if Matt 6:19–21 (Q 12:33–34) immediately preceded Matt 6:25–34 (Q 12:22–31) in Q?5 How well do the respective positions fit in the larger context of Q 12:2–40?
Ordinarily, one would expect the issue of redactional rationales to provide the strongest argument for one choice or the other. Such is not the case here. It could be argued that Matthew has very good reasons for placing Q 12:33–34 (Matt 6:19–21) ahead of Q 12:22–31 (Matt 6:25–33).6 This repositioning is suggested by the last saying in the “Cult Didache” (Matt 6:1–18) on the Father’s reward for proper and pious behavior and/or by the antithetical parallelism of Matt 6:1–18. After repositioning Q 12:33–34, Matthew then would have added Matt 6:22–24 to create a three-saying aphoristic collection on the subject of greed and divided loyalties.7 Matthew 6:19–24 would thus provide an apt transition from the “Cult Didache” to the Free from Anxiety like Ravens and Lilies pericope (Matt 6:25–33/Q 12:22–31), which addresses concerns about obtaining food and clothing.8 All of these redactional arguments, however, are mitigated by the simple fact that if Q 12:33–34 already preceded Q 12:22–31 in Q, then all of the above advantages would have been gained merely by inserting Q 12:33–34, 22–31 as a block into the Sermon on the Mount after Matt 6:18 and inserting Q 11:34–36 and Q 16:13 (Matt 6:22–24) between them.9
On the other hand, one could argue that Luke has moved Q 12:33–34 to its present position in Luke, modified Q 12:33, and inserted a complex of sayings and parables (Parable of the Rich Fool, etc.—Luke 12:13–21) in 12:33’s former position in order to frame the Q Free from Anxiety like Ravens and Lilies pericope with Lukan ethical interests regarding the hoarding of possessions and almsgiving.10 The addition of Luke 12:32 (“Do not be afraid, little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom”) creates a summary that frames the speech (“do not be anxious” [12:22]/”fear not” [12:32]), and exposes the lack of a good original connection between Q 12:31 and Q 12:33. If Luke 12:33–34’s position is original, however, then framing the Free from Anxiety like Ravens and Lilies pericope with Lukan concerns would have been accomplished merely by redacting Q 12:33 and inserting 12:13–20 into its present position, with a Lukan moral, 12:21, created from Q 12:33’s original vocabulary. In short, redactional rationales in either direction are mitigated by simpler arguments based on the sayings being located in their present positions. Having thus disposed of the issue of redactional rationales, the following arguments seem most cogent to me:
1. Obvious catchword connections exist with Q 12:2–12/12:22–2411 and Q 12:33/12:39,12 but not with either Q 12:2–12/12:33–34 or Q 12:22–31/12:39–40.
2. Conceptual and metaphorical connections exist between Q 12:4–7, 11–12 (Not Fearing the Body’s Death, Hearings before the Synagogues) and 12:22–24: God’s providence in a crisis or concerning daily needs and God’s care for birds as an a minore ad maius (“from the lesser to the greater”) argument for God’s concern for people.13
3. The assertion of God’s providence in Q 12:11–12 provides a strong rationale for the transitional διὰ τοῦτο (“for this reason”) in Q 12:22, which allows for the rhetorical development of the argumentation in Q 12:22–31 without explicit mention of God’s providence until Q 12:24. The location of Q 12:33–34 preceding 12:22–31 would interrupt this (and the μεριμνάω [“be anxious”] catchword) connection.14 Luke’s insertion of 12:13–21 also interrupts this development of thought in favor of Luke’s thematic concern for dealing with wealth. The issue of earthly/heavenly concerns is shared by Q 12:22–31, but Q 12:22 and its διὰ τοῦτο (“for this reason”) does not logically follow Luke 12:21.
4. There is a thematic connection between Q 12:31 and 12:33 in that the two imperatives call for seeking divine or heavenly things over earthly things. However, the redactional Luke 12:32 creates a better summary to 12:22–31 as a whole, and in the process obscures this thematic connection between Q 12:33 and 12:31 that may have been part of the original reason for placing the two pericopae together in Q. Any such connections noted here or in (1) and (2) above would have been lost with Matthew’s relocation of Q 12:22–31, 33–34 in the Sermon on the Mount.
5. Consideration should also be given to the reminiscence theory, that Luke 12:21 recalls the original position of Q 12:33 (as found in Matthew), since Luke does appear to frame Q 12:22–31 with Luke 12:13–21 and Q 12:33–34.15 However, Luke 12:21 may now stand as an indication of Luke’s ethics-based intentionality in framing Q 12:22–31, not as a reminiscence of 12:33’s prior position in Q.
Q 12:332: Luke’s πωλήσατε . . . ἐλεημοσύνην or Matthew 6:19
The Lukan introduction to Q 12:33 reflects Lukan thematic interests concerning the stewardship of one’s possessions and the giving of alms to the poor.16 While the specific terminology is not especially Lukan (except ὑπάρχω),17 the framing of Luke 12:22–31 with 12:13–21 and 12:32, 33–34 suggests that Luke has a different
