Beatitudes
VIEW:56 DATA:01-04-2020
BEATITUDES.This word comes from the Latin abstract beatitudo, used in Vulg. [Note: Vulgate.] of Rom_4:6, where David is said to pronounce the beatitude or blessedness of the forgiven soul. Since the time of Ambrose the term has been used to describe the particular collection of sayings (cast in the form of which Psa_32:1 is an OT specimen) in which Christ depicts the qualities to be found in members of His kingdomas an introduction to the discourse known as the Sermon on the Mount (Mat_5:3-12 = Luk_6:20-23). Each of these sayings follows the form Blessed (happy) are
, because
Mt. records eight of these general declarations, with a special application of the last of them; Lk. has only four, to which are added four corresponding Woes. There is no guarantee that even Mt. gives all the Beatitudes pronounced by Jesus on different occasions, or again that those he does give were all pronounced on that occasion. It is at least possible that in other parts of the NT we have quotations from sayings of the same kind. Thus 1Pe_4:14, Jam_1:12, Rev_14:13 might easily be supposed to rest on words of Christ.
According to the prevailing view of the history of our Gospels, the Beatitudes are derived from an early collection of Logia, or sayings of Jesus, in the original Aramaic language. To a very large extent the authors of Mt. and Lk. seem to have used identical translations of this document; but in the Beatitudes there is a considerable divergence, together with some significant agreements in phraseology. Putting aside Nos. 3, 5, 6, 7 in Mt., which have no counterparts in Lk., we see the following main lines of difference(1) Lk.s are in the second person, Mt.s in the third, except in the verses which apply No. 8 (Mat_5:11-12); (2) Lk.s are apparently external: the poor, the hungry, those that weep, receive felicitation as such, instead of the commiseration (Woe) which the world would give them. But since in Lk. disciples are addressed, the divergence does not touch the real meaning. A theodicy is proclaimed in which the hardships of the present, sanctified to the disciple as precious discipline, will be transformed into abiding blessedness. Such a reversal of the order of this life involves here, as elsewhere, the casting down of those whom men count happy (cf. Isa_65:13-14, Luk_1:52-53; Luk_16:25, Joh_16:20, Jam_1:9-10). The paradoxical form of the sayings in Lk. produces a strong impression of originality, suggesting that here, as often elsewhere, Mt. has interpreted the words which Lk. has transcribed unchanged. Mt. has arranged them according to the form of Hebrew parallelism: observe how the first and last have the same refrain, the poem beginning and ending on the same notecf. Psa_8:1-9. His No. 8 sums up in the form of the other Beatitudes the principle of the appendix Psa 8:11, 12, which Luk_6:22-23 shows to be original: he then inserts this as a comment, much as he appends a sentence of comment to the Lords Prayer (Luk_6:14-15). It may perhaps be doubted whether the Beatitudes peculiar to Mt. are in their original context. No. 3, proclaiming the triumph of those who do not struggle to survive, is quoted from Psa_37:11; No. 5 is found as early as Clement of Rome, in the form Show mercy, that mercy be shown to you; No. 6 reproduces the sense of Psa_24:4; No. 7, echoed in Jam_3:18, may have been altered in form to fit the appropriate context. We seem to be justified in conjecturing that Lk. inserts all the Beatitudes he found in his source under the same context, and that he faithfully preserved the words as they stood: the Woes likewise belonged to the same discourse. (Note the support given to them by Jam_5:1, and the use of the commercial technical term have received, so characteristic of the Sermon; cf. Mat_6:2; Mat_6:5; Mat_6:16). The gloss with which Mt. interprets the Messing on the poor was not apparently known to St. James (Jam_2:5), whose very clear allusion to the Beatitude in its Lukan form determines the exegesis. The rich man could bring himself within the range of the blessing by accepting the humiliation that Christian disciple-ship brought (Jam_1:10); so that Mt.s interpretation is supported by the writer, who shows us most clearly that the exact words have not been preserved by him. In No. 2 Mt. seems to have slightly altered the original (Luk_6:21). under the influence of Isa_61:1the prophecy from which Jesus preached in the synagogue at Nazareth, and the obvious suggestive cause of the appearance of the poor at the opening of the Beatitudes. It should be observed, however, that all attempts to ascertain the original form of sayings of Jesus have at best so large a subjective element that we cannot afford to dogmatize. There are scholars of great weight, reinforced most recently by Harnack, who regard Mt. as generally preserving the lost Logia-collection in a more exact form than Lk. Moreover, we must always allow for the probability that modifications introduced by Mt. or Lk. may often rest on early traditions, so that elements not included in the principal Gospel sources may nevertheless be derived from first-hand authority.
James Hope Moulton.
Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible
Edited by James Hastings, D.D. Published in 1909
bē̇-at?i-tudes:
1. The Name
The word ?beatitude? is not found in the English Bible, but the Latin beatitudo, from which it is derived, occurs in the Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 ad) version of Rom_4:6 where, with reference to Psa_32:1, Psa_32:2, David is said to pronounce the ?beatitude? of the man whose transgressions are forgiven. In the Latin church beatitudo was used not only as an abstract term denoting blessedness, but in the secondary, concrete sense of a particular declaration of blessedness and especially of such a declaration coming from the lips of Jesus Christ. Beatitudes in this derivative meaning of the word occur frequently in the Old Testament, particularly in the Psalms (Psa_32:1, Psa_32:2; Psa_41:1; Psa_65:4, etc.), and Jesus on various occasions threw His utterances into this form (Mat_11:6; Mat_13:16; Mat_16:17; Mat_24:46, with the Lukan parallels; Joh_13:17; Joh_20:29). But apart from individual sayings of this type the name Beatitudes, ever since the days of Ambrose, has been attached specifically to those words of blessing with which, according to both Matthew and Luke, Jesus began that great discourse which is known as the Sermon on the Mount.
2. The Two Groups
When we compare these Beatitudes as we find them in Mat_5:3-12 and Luk_6:20-23 (24-26), we are immediately struck by the resemblances and differences between them. To the ordinary reader, most familiar with Matthew's version, it is the differences that first present themselves; and he will be apt to account for the discrepancy of the two reports, as Augustine did, by assigning them to two distinct occasions in the Lord's ministry. A careful comparative study of the two narratives, however, with some attention to the introductory circumstances in each case, to the whole progress of the discourses themselves, and to the parabolic sayings with which they conclude, makes this view improbable, and points rather to the conclusion that what we have to do with is two varying versions given by the Evangelists of the material drawn from an underlying source consisting of Logia of Jesus. The differences, it must be admitted, are very marked. (a) Matthew has 8 Beatitudes; Luke has 4, with 4 following Woes. (b) In Matthew the sayings, except the last, are in the 3rd person; in Luke they are in the 2nd. (c) In Matthew the blessings, except the last, are attached to spiritual qualities; in Luke to external conditions of poverty and suffering. Assuming that both Evangelists derived their reports from some common Logian source, the question arises as to which of them has adhered more closely to the original. The question is difficult, and still gives rise to quite contrary opinions. One set of scholars decides in favor of Matthew, and accounts for Luke's deviation from the Matthean version by ascribing to him, on very insufficient grounds, an ascetic bias by which he was led to impart a materialistic tone to the utterances of Jesus. Another set inclines to theory that Luke's version is the more literal of the two, while Matthew's partakes of the nature of a paraphrase. In support of this second view it may be pointed out that Luke is usually more careful than Matthew to place the sayings of Jesus in their original setting and to preserve them in their primitive form, and further that owing to the natural tendency of the sacred writers to expand and interpret rather than to abbreviate an inspired utterance, the shorter form of a saying is more likely to be the original one. It may be noted, further, that in Mat_5:11, Mat_5:12 the Beatitude takes the direct form, which suggests that this may have been the form Matthew found in his source in the case of the others also. On the whole, then, probabilities appear to favor the view that Luke's version is the more literal one. It does not follow, however, that the difference between the two reports amounts to any real inconsistency. In Luke emphasis is laid on the fact that Jesus is addressing His disciples (Luk_6:20), so that it was not the poor as such whom He blessed, but His own disciples although they were poor. It was not poverty, hunger, sorrow or suffering in themselves to which He promised great rewards, but those experiences as coming to spiritual men and Thus transformed into springs of spiritual blessing. And so when Matthew, setting down the Lord's words with a view to their universal application rather than with reference to the particular circumstances in which they were uttered, changes ?the poor? into ?the poor in spirit,? and those that ?hunger? into those that ?hunger and thirst after righteousness,? he is giving the real purport of the words of Jesus and recording them in the form in which by all men and through all coming time they may be read without any chance of misunderstanding.
As regards the Beatitudes of the meek, the merciful, the pure in heart, the peacemakers, which are given by Matthew only, they may have been spoken by Jesus at the same time as the rest and have been intended by Him in their association with the other four to fill out a conception of the ideal character of the members of the Kingdom of God. In view, however, of their omission from Luke's list, it is impossible to affirm this with certainty. That they are all authentic utterances of Jesus Himself there is no reason to doubt. But they may have been originally scattered through the discourse itself, each in its own proper place. Thus the Beatitude of the meek would go fitly with Luk_6:38, that of the merciful with Luk_6:43, that of the pure in heart with Luk_6:27, that of the peacemakers with Luk_6:23. Or they may even have been uttered on other occasions than that of the Sermon on the Mount and have been gathered together by Matthew and placed at the head of the Sermon as forming along with the other four a suitable introduction to our Lord's great discourse on the laws and principles of the Kingdom of God.
3. Number, Arrangement, Structure
With regard to the number of the Beatitudes in Matthew's fuller version, some have counted 7 only, making the list end with Mat_5:9. But though the blessing pronounced on the persecuted in Mat_5:10-12 differs from the preceding Beatitudes, both in departing from the aphoristic form and in attaching the blessing to an outward condition and not to a disposition of the heart, the parallel in Lk (Luk_6:22 f) justifies the view that this also is to be added to the list, Thus making 8 Beatitudes in all. On the arrangement of the group much has been written, most of it fanciful and unconvincing. The first four have been described as negative and passive, the second four as positive and active. The first four, again, have been represented as pertaining to the desire for salvation, the second four as relating to its actual possession. Some writers have endeavored to trace in the group as a whole the steadily ascending stages in the development of the Christian character. The truth in this last suggestion lies in the reminder it brings that the Beatitudes are not to be thought of as setting forth separate types of Christian character, but as enumerating qualities and experiences that are combined in the ideal character as conceived by Christ - and as exemplified, it may be added, in His own life and person.
In respect of their structure, the Beatitudes are all alike in associating the blessing with a promise - a promise which is sometimes represented as having an immediate realization (Mat_5:3, Mat_5:10), but in most cases has a future or even (compare Mat_5:12) an eschatological outlook. The declaration of blessedness, therefore, is based not only on the possession of the quality or experience described, but on the present or future rewards in which it issues. The poor in spirit are called blessed not merely because they are poor in spirit, but because the kingdom of heaven is theirs; the mourners because they shall be comforted; those that hunger and thirst after righteousness because they shall be filled; those who are persecuted because a great reward is laid up for them in heaven. The Beatitudes have often been criticized as holding up an ideal of which limitation, privation and self-renunciation are the essence, and which lacks those positive elements that are indispensable to any complete conception of blessedness. But when it is recognized that the blessing in every case rests on the associated promise, the criticism falls to the ground. Christ does demand of His followers a renunciation of many things that seem desirable to the natural heart, and a readiness to endure many other things from which men naturally shrink. But just as in His own case the great self-emptying was followed by the glorious exaltation (Phi_2:6), so in the case of His disciples spiritual poverty and the bearing of the cross carry with them the inheritance of the earth and a great reward in heaven.
Literature
Votaw in HDB, V, 14ff; Adeney in Expositor, 5th series, II, 365ff; Stanton, The Gospels as Historical Documents, II, 106ff, 327 f; Gore, Sermon on the Mount, 15ff; Dykes, Manifesto of the King, 25-200.
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
PRINTER 1915.
Beatitudes
the name frequently given to the first clauses of our Savior's Sermon on the Mount (q.v.), beginning with the phrase Blessed, etc. (Mat_5:3-11). The present Mount of the Beatitudes on which they are said to have been delivered is the hill called Kurun Hattin, or Horns of Hattin, on the road from Nazareth to Tiberias-a not unlikely position (Hackett, Illustr. of Script. p. 313).
CYCLOPEDIA OF BIBLICAL, THEOLOGICAL AND ECCLESIASTICAL
press 1895.
According to the prevailing view of the history of our Gospels, the Beatitudes are derived from an early collection of Logia, or sayings of Jesus, in the original Aramaic language. To a very large extent the authors of Mt. and Lk. seem to have used identical translations of this document; but in the Beatitudes there is a considerable divergence, together with some significant agreements in phraseology. Putting aside Nos. 3, 5, 6, 7 in Mt., which have no counterparts in Lk., we see the following main lines of difference(1) Lk.s are in the second person, Mt.s in the third, except in the verses which apply No. 8 (Mat_5:11-12); (2) Lk.s are apparently external: the poor, the hungry, those that weep, receive felicitation as such, instead of the commiseration (Woe) which the world would give them. But since in Lk. disciples are addressed, the divergence does not touch the real meaning. A theodicy is proclaimed in which the hardships of the present, sanctified to the disciple as precious discipline, will be transformed into abiding blessedness. Such a reversal of the order of this life involves here, as elsewhere, the casting down of those whom men count happy (cf. Isa_65:13-14, Luk_1:52-53; Luk_16:25, Joh_16:20, Jam_1:9-10). The paradoxical form of the sayings in Lk. produces a strong impression of originality, suggesting that here, as often elsewhere, Mt. has interpreted the words which Lk. has transcribed unchanged. Mt. has arranged them according to the form of Hebrew parallelism: observe how the first and last have the same refrain, the poem beginning and ending on the same notecf. Psa_8:1-9. His No. 8 sums up in the form of the other Beatitudes the principle of the appendix Psa 8:11, 12, which Luk_6:22-23 shows to be original: he then inserts this as a comment, much as he appends a sentence of comment to the Lords Prayer (Luk_6:14-15). It may perhaps be doubted whether the Beatitudes peculiar to Mt. are in their original context. No. 3, proclaiming the triumph of those who do not struggle to survive, is quoted from Psa_37:11; No. 5 is found as early as Clement of Rome, in the form Show mercy, that mercy be shown to you; No. 6 reproduces the sense of Psa_24:4; No. 7, echoed in Jam_3:18, may have been altered in form to fit the appropriate context. We seem to be justified in conjecturing that Lk. inserts all the Beatitudes he found in his source under the same context, and that he faithfully preserved the words as they stood: the Woes likewise belonged to the same discourse. (Note the support given to them by Jam_5:1, and the use of the commercial technical term have received, so characteristic of the Sermon; cf. Mat_6:2; Mat_6:5; Mat_6:16). The gloss with which Mt. interprets the Messing on the poor was not apparently known to St. James (Jam_2:5), whose very clear allusion to the Beatitude in its Lukan form determines the exegesis. The rich man could bring himself within the range of the blessing by accepting the humiliation that Christian disciple-ship brought (Jam_1:10); so that Mt.s interpretation is supported by the writer, who shows us most clearly that the exact words have not been preserved by him. In No. 2 Mt. seems to have slightly altered the original (Luk_6:21). under the influence of Isa_61:1the prophecy from which Jesus preached in the synagogue at Nazareth, and the obvious suggestive cause of the appearance of the poor at the opening of the Beatitudes. It should be observed, however, that all attempts to ascertain the original form of sayings of Jesus have at best so large a subjective element that we cannot afford to dogmatize. There are scholars of great weight, reinforced most recently by Harnack, who regard Mt. as generally preserving the lost Logia-collection in a more exact form than Lk. Moreover, we must always allow for the probability that modifications introduced by Mt. or Lk. may often rest on early traditions, so that elements not included in the principal Gospel sources may nevertheless be derived from first-hand authority.
James Hope Moulton.
Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible
Edited by James Hastings, D.D. Published in 1909
bē̇-at?i-tudes:
1. The Name
The word ?beatitude? is not found in the English Bible, but the Latin beatitudo, from which it is derived, occurs in the Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 ad) version of Rom_4:6 where, with reference to Psa_32:1, Psa_32:2, David is said to pronounce the ?beatitude? of the man whose transgressions are forgiven. In the Latin church beatitudo was used not only as an abstract term denoting blessedness, but in the secondary, concrete sense of a particular declaration of blessedness and especially of such a declaration coming from the lips of Jesus Christ. Beatitudes in this derivative meaning of the word occur frequently in the Old Testament, particularly in the Psalms (Psa_32:1, Psa_32:2; Psa_41:1; Psa_65:4, etc.), and Jesus on various occasions threw His utterances into this form (Mat_11:6; Mat_13:16; Mat_16:17; Mat_24:46, with the Lukan parallels; Joh_13:17; Joh_20:29). But apart from individual sayings of this type the name Beatitudes, ever since the days of Ambrose, has been attached specifically to those words of blessing with which, according to both Matthew and Luke, Jesus began that great discourse which is known as the Sermon on the Mount.
2. The Two Groups
When we compare these Beatitudes as we find them in Mat_5:3-12 and Luk_6:20-23 (24-26), we are immediately struck by the resemblances and differences between them. To the ordinary reader, most familiar with Matthew's version, it is the differences that first present themselves; and he will be apt to account for the discrepancy of the two reports, as Augustine did, by assigning them to two distinct occasions in the Lord's ministry. A careful comparative study of the two narratives, however, with some attention to the introductory circumstances in each case, to the whole progress of the discourses themselves, and to the parabolic sayings with which they conclude, makes this view improbable, and points rather to the conclusion that what we have to do with is two varying versions given by the Evangelists of the material drawn from an underlying source consisting of Logia of Jesus. The differences, it must be admitted, are very marked. (a) Matthew has 8 Beatitudes; Luke has 4, with 4 following Woes. (b) In Matthew the sayings, except the last, are in the 3rd person; in Luke they are in the 2nd. (c) In Matthew the blessings, except the last, are attached to spiritual qualities; in Luke to external conditions of poverty and suffering. Assuming that both Evangelists derived their reports from some common Logian source, the question arises as to which of them has adhered more closely to the original. The question is difficult, and still gives rise to quite contrary opinions. One set of scholars decides in favor of Matthew, and accounts for Luke's deviation from the Matthean version by ascribing to him, on very insufficient grounds, an ascetic bias by which he was led to impart a materialistic tone to the utterances of Jesus. Another set inclines to theory that Luke's version is the more literal of the two, while Matthew's partakes of the nature of a paraphrase. In support of this second view it may be pointed out that Luke is usually more careful than Matthew to place the sayings of Jesus in their original setting and to preserve them in their primitive form, and further that owing to the natural tendency of the sacred writers to expand and interpret rather than to abbreviate an inspired utterance, the shorter form of a saying is more likely to be the original one. It may be noted, further, that in Mat_5:11, Mat_5:12 the Beatitude takes the direct form, which suggests that this may have been the form Matthew found in his source in the case of the others also. On the whole, then, probabilities appear to favor the view that Luke's version is the more literal one. It does not follow, however, that the difference between the two reports amounts to any real inconsistency. In Luke emphasis is laid on the fact that Jesus is addressing His disciples (Luk_6:20), so that it was not the poor as such whom He blessed, but His own disciples although they were poor. It was not poverty, hunger, sorrow or suffering in themselves to which He promised great rewards, but those experiences as coming to spiritual men and Thus transformed into springs of spiritual blessing. And so when Matthew, setting down the Lord's words with a view to their universal application rather than with reference to the particular circumstances in which they were uttered, changes ?the poor? into ?the poor in spirit,? and those that ?hunger? into those that ?hunger and thirst after righteousness,? he is giving the real purport of the words of Jesus and recording them in the form in which by all men and through all coming time they may be read without any chance of misunderstanding.
As regards the Beatitudes of the meek, the merciful, the pure in heart, the peacemakers, which are given by Matthew only, they may have been spoken by Jesus at the same time as the rest and have been intended by Him in their association with the other four to fill out a conception of the ideal character of the members of the Kingdom of God. In view, however, of their omission from Luke's list, it is impossible to affirm this with certainty. That they are all authentic utterances of Jesus Himself there is no reason to doubt. But they may have been originally scattered through the discourse itself, each in its own proper place. Thus the Beatitude of the meek would go fitly with Luk_6:38, that of the merciful with Luk_6:43, that of the pure in heart with Luk_6:27, that of the peacemakers with Luk_6:23. Or they may even have been uttered on other occasions than that of the Sermon on the Mount and have been gathered together by Matthew and placed at the head of the Sermon as forming along with the other four a suitable introduction to our Lord's great discourse on the laws and principles of the Kingdom of God.
3. Number, Arrangement, Structure
With regard to the number of the Beatitudes in Matthew's fuller version, some have counted 7 only, making the list end with Mat_5:9. But though the blessing pronounced on the persecuted in Mat_5:10-12 differs from the preceding Beatitudes, both in departing from the aphoristic form and in attaching the blessing to an outward condition and not to a disposition of the heart, the parallel in Lk (Luk_6:22 f) justifies the view that this also is to be added to the list, Thus making 8 Beatitudes in all. On the arrangement of the group much has been written, most of it fanciful and unconvincing. The first four have been described as negative and passive, the second four as positive and active. The first four, again, have been represented as pertaining to the desire for salvation, the second four as relating to its actual possession. Some writers have endeavored to trace in the group as a whole the steadily ascending stages in the development of the Christian character. The truth in this last suggestion lies in the reminder it brings that the Beatitudes are not to be thought of as setting forth separate types of Christian character, but as enumerating qualities and experiences that are combined in the ideal character as conceived by Christ - and as exemplified, it may be added, in His own life and person.
In respect of their structure, the Beatitudes are all alike in associating the blessing with a promise - a promise which is sometimes represented as having an immediate realization (Mat_5:3, Mat_5:10), but in most cases has a future or even (compare Mat_5:12) an eschatological outlook. The declaration of blessedness, therefore, is based not only on the possession of the quality or experience described, but on the present or future rewards in which it issues. The poor in spirit are called blessed not merely because they are poor in spirit, but because the kingdom of heaven is theirs; the mourners because they shall be comforted; those that hunger and thirst after righteousness because they shall be filled; those who are persecuted because a great reward is laid up for them in heaven. The Beatitudes have often been criticized as holding up an ideal of which limitation, privation and self-renunciation are the essence, and which lacks those positive elements that are indispensable to any complete conception of blessedness. But when it is recognized that the blessing in every case rests on the associated promise, the criticism falls to the ground. Christ does demand of His followers a renunciation of many things that seem desirable to the natural heart, and a readiness to endure many other things from which men naturally shrink. But just as in His own case the great self-emptying was followed by the glorious exaltation (Phi_2:6), so in the case of His disciples spiritual poverty and the bearing of the cross carry with them the inheritance of the earth and a great reward in heaven.
Literature
Votaw in HDB, V, 14ff; Adeney in Expositor, 5th series, II, 365ff; Stanton, The Gospels as Historical Documents, II, 106ff, 327 f; Gore, Sermon on the Mount, 15ff; Dykes, Manifesto of the King, 25-200.
International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
PRINTER 1915.
Beatitudes
the name frequently given to the first clauses of our Savior's Sermon on the Mount (q.v.), beginning with the phrase Blessed, etc. (Mat_5:3-11). The present Mount of the Beatitudes on which they are said to have been delivered is the hill called Kurun Hattin, or Horns of Hattin, on the road from Nazareth to Tiberias-a not unlikely position (Hackett, Illustr. of Script. p. 313).
CYCLOPEDIA OF BIBLICAL, THEOLOGICAL AND ECCLESIASTICAL
press 1895.
BUSCADAVERDADE
Visite o nosso canal youtube.com/buscadaverdade e se INSCREVA agora mesmo! Lá temos uma diversidade de temas interessantes sobre: Saúde, Receitas Saudáveis, Benefícios dos Alimentos, Benefícios das Vitaminas e Sais Minerais... Dê uma olhadinha, você vai gostar! E não se esqueça, dê o seu like e se INSCREVA! Clique abaixo e vá direto ao canal!
Saiba Mais
-
Nutrição
Vegetarianismo e a Vitamina B12 -
Receita
Como preparar a Proteína Vegetal Texturizada -
Arqueologia
Livro de Enoque é um livro profético?
Tags