Horace Abram Rigg, Jr. Source: Journal of Biblical ... - YoYo.pl

Recommendations

Info

RIGG: BARABBAS 437 everybody dabbles with it sooner or later.72 Jesus' understanding and interpretation of that fatherhood cannot readily be con- densed here - even were it pertinent. But a noteworthy charac- teristic of Judaic piety in general at this time is the increasing use of Father when addressing God. It is not the only charac- teristic and it is far from universally used, as Guignebert (Jesus, 357) explains; but we cannot now deny its existence and its reasonably well known usage. In the Scriptures themselves God is the father of Israel and the Israelites, considered collectively and individually.73 It is, in no small sense, basic to the rabbinic thought of the time.74 The pious Jew was considered as a son of the father--which relation not even sin could annul.75 Furthermore, "this is the type of piety in which Jesus and his disciples were brought up, and the Gospel of Matthew is a most instructive illustration of it". (G. F. Moore, Judaism II, 211; cf. Allen, Matthew 44). Now let us ask: to whom could this name Barabbas have been more appropriately applied than to Jesus? Forget, for the moment, the circumstances attached to it in the Gospels as we now have them. It is beside the point to belabour the notion that it was not unique with Jesus, that he may or may not have 72 In it can be found the normal distribution from solemn piffle to the worthwhile. 73 A most important point. I do not understand why W. Robertson Smith, Religion of the Semites (London, 1901) 41, categorically denies this - unless he bespeaks an early period; cf. G. F. Moore, History of Religions II. 74, 116. It is distinctly controverted in Sifre Deut. ? 48 (ed. Friedmann 84b) where the father in heaven is distinguished from the father on earth; cf. Baba Bathra 10a (on Deut. xiv. 1, which W. R. S. quotes) and Pesihta Rabbati 27 (ed. Friedmann 132b). See, also, L. Ginsberg, Legends of the Jews V (Philadelphia, 1925) 48; cf. P. Volz, Die Eschatologie d. jiid. Gemeinde (Tiibingen, 1934) 99 ff., 166 ff. 74 Thus, S. Schechter, Some Aspects of Rabbinic Theology (New York, 1910) 21 ff. esp. 50 ff.; and A. Biichler Types of Jewish-Palestinian Piety; Jews' College Publications 8. London, 1922) ch. II, esp. 106 ff. 75 Kiddushin 36a. On this whole subject see the excellent treatment of G. F. Moore, Judaism II (Cambridge, 1927) 201-11 and Levy, Neuhebrdisch. u. Chalddisch. Worterbuch I (Leipzig, 1876) s. v. zR. For interesting linguistic peculiarities, cf. Th. Noldeke, Beitr. z. semitisch. Sprachwissenschaft (Strassburg, 1904) 69 ff.
438 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE been correct in his interpretation of it. The mass of statistics and charts brought forth on these points do not always avoid the charge of being ineptly dull and are often enthusiastically irrelevant. What is certain is that Jesus - possibly among others of whom there are, nonetheless, no records - often stressed a deeply personal relation he felt he had with the Father.76 No one can read the Gospels without being impressed with their remembrances of his sonship to the Father. Some such words were often on his lips.77 What exactly he said and what exactly he meant are probably still beyond us. But, unless we want to assume the Gospels are pure fiction on this point, we have got to admit that Jesus must have talked - and talked often - about such relation.78 It is not at all improbable that his talking so much this way may have offended the rabbis (certainly some of them in Jerusalem) more than anything else he may have said. It is not at all impossible that some Jews may have (and possibly some non-Jews, too) - perhaps even facetiously and sometimes with sarcasm - dubbed him with the phrase, even as a nickname (cf. Montefiore, Synoptic Gospels I, 374).79 76 The Lord's Prayer alone is warrant for our adding that the relation was not to be confined to him. 77 See Kittell, TWNT s. v. /33,a and, just to mention some recent available accounts, G. Johnston, The Doctrine of the Church in the N. T. (Cambridge, 1943) 54-8; A. E. J. Robinson, Christ in the Gospels (London, 1944) 31 n. 1, 41-2, 56; cf. H. J. Holtzmann, Die Synoptiker (Handkommentar z. N. T. I. Tiibingen-Leipzig, 1901) 418. I particularly recommend L. Hodgson, The Doctrine of the Trinity (London, 1943) 38 ff. I bought this book when I was "in the services" in England; I have the impression it has not yet appeard in this country - which is to be regretted. 78 Cf. Hastings, Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels, s. v. "Father, Father- hood"; C. J. Cadoux, The Historic Mission of Jesus (New York-London, 1941) 27 ff., et passim; C. G. Montefiore, The Religious Teaching of Jesus (London, 1910) 88 ff. 79 Names of persons and groups are often the result of what those outside call them. It may be historical accident, such as the Assyrian Urartu. But the very word 'Christian' is a case in point! In general see J. Klausner, Jesus of Nazareth (New York, 1926) 377-80, and C. Guignebert, The Jewish World in the Time of Jesus (New York, 1939) 93-5 (a book well received because its obvious virtues obscure its unobvious weaknesses). Montefiore (Hibbert Jour-
Page 1 and 2: Barabbas Author(s): Horace Abram Ri
Page 3 and 4: 418 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE
Page 21: 436 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE
Page 41: 456 JOURNAL OF BIBILCAL LITERATURE

Horace Abram Rigg, Jr. Source: Journal of Biblical ... - YoYo.pl

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?