not allow for its use at this position in the saying.
On the other hand, if Matt 6:19 was not in Q, one is left with only the connective argument, which is itself quite weak. Matthean creation of 6:19 would provide a clear and obvious reason for δέ being in Matt 6:20. I am left undecided on this variant.
Q 12:335: Luke’s ἑαυτοῖϚ or Matthew’s ὑμῖν
Three texts seem particularly relevant: Luke 12:21; 16:9; Q 12:31. Luke 12:21 has θησαυρίζων ἑαυτῷ (“the one who lays up treasure for himself”) in what appears to be a saying based on Q 12:33. Q 12:31 immediately precedes Q 12:33 and uses the dative pronoun ὑμῖν. Luke 16:9 appears to be a redactional addition of Luke, and is the only other place in the NT where the expression ποιήσατε ἑαυτοῖϚ is found.
Several arguments support Luke’s reflexive as the Q reading. Though 12:21 is a redactional creation of Luke, if it was suggested by Q 12:33 and includes Q’s θησαυρίζω (“treasure”), then the reflexive may have been taken from Q as well. ῾Υμῖν (“for yourselves”) is found more often in Q, but ἑαυτο– is found in Q in at least nine places, and ὑμῖν is never used reflexively elsewhere in Q.39 ῾Υμῖν is used in Q 12:31, but not reflexively. Assuming previous arguments for the position of the pericope (see above, Q 12:331 above), it seems peculiar for Q to have used ὑμῖν twice in the space of four words, but with different grammatical functions.40
On the other hand, Luke might have preferred a proper reflexive for both 12:21 and 12:33, changing ὑμῖν in Q 12:33 and adding ἑαυτοῦ redactionally in 12:21.41 The slight discomfiture between Q 12:31 and Matt 6:(19–)20 may have been a result of Q’s placing two previously unrelated sayings side-by-side, if 12:31 existed prior to its incorporation in Q. Luke would have eliminated this difficulty both by changing Q 12:33’s ὑμῖν and by inserting Luke 12:32. In Luke 16:9, Luke uses the full expression ἑαυτοῖϚ ποιήσατε (“provide for yourselves”) redactionally in a saying that is very similar to Luke 12:33a in its eschatologically-based ethic.
One other observation seems pertinent to the discussion. The personal pronoun is almost never used reflexively in the NT without a preceding preposition.42 Matthew 6:19–20 is unique in this, lending weight to Matthew’s ὑμῖν being the more difficult and hence more original reading. One of Matthew’s tendencies is to use the personal pronoun as a reflexive, but always with a preceding preposition (Matthew uses the reflexive with prepositions as well).43 It has been suggested that referring back to a Semitic original might be of help, since “Hebrew and Aramaic pronominal suffixes do not allow the distinction between personal and reflexive.”44 In other words, a translator may have accidentally translated a pronoun suffix as a personal pronoun, rather than a reflexive. This observation assumes, however, that Q was being translated in written form from an Aramaic original (be it oral or written). This is highly unlikely.45
Matthew’s reading is therefore the lectio difficilior (more difficult reading) in at least two different ways (suggesting that it is the more original reading). Matthew’s tendency to use the personal pronoun as a reflexive would balance Luke’s probable redactional preference for a proper reflexive if not for the fact that Matthew always uses a preceding preposition elsewhere. Hence, the evidence leans in favor of ὑμῖν in Q.
Q 12:336: Luke’s βαλλάντια μὴ παλαιούμενα
The phrase βαλλάντια μὴ παλαιούμενα (“purses that do not wear out”) is decidedly Lukan vocabulary. Βαλλάντιον (“purse”) is found in the NT only in Luke (4 times!).46 Its presence in Q 10:4 is due to Lukan redaction.47 Παλαίοω (“wear out”) is also found only in Luke among the gospels.48 Since Luke’s initial verb ποιήσατε (“provide”) appears tied to this subsequent phrase, it, too, should be rejected as Lukan redaction.49
A general problem with Luke’s version of the saying is that minimal Q words like “treasure,” “in (the) heaven(s)” (i.e., a place), “moth,” and “thief” (κλέπτηϚ, “thief”; not λῃστήϚ, “bandit”) imply a treasure to be found in a somewhat fixed location, whereas Luke’s version with “purses” that do not “wear out” (from regular use?) and a thief that “approaches” (presumably the treasure in the purse) suggests the mobility of the treasure. Matthew’s version, on the other hand, is consistent with minimal Q terminology: moths and other things eat away at a sedentary treasure—like fine linen, perhaps—and thieves break into homes or storehouses to steal such treasures. In other words, while Lukan redaction scores style points for creating an appositive parallelism in Luke 12:33b (“make purses that do not wear out, a treasure unfailing in the heavens”) and a tighter structure in Luke 12:33c (the adversity clauses), it does so by using Q terminology that better fits another context, one which is best represented by Matthew (as well as the Gospel of Thomas).
Q 12:337: Luke’s θησαυρόν or Matthew’s θησαυρούϚ
Конец ознакомительного фрагмента.
Текст предоставлен ООО «ЛитРес».
Прочитайте эту книгу целиком, купив полную легальную версию на ЛитРес.
Безопасно оплатить книгу можно банковской картой Visa, MasterCard, Maestro, со счета мобильного телефона, с платежного терминала, в салоне МТС или Связной, через PayPal, WebMoney, Яндекс.Деньги, QIWI Кошелек, бонусными картами или другим удобным Вам способом.
