Matthew 5:5: A Powerful Beatitude Inspiring the Zealots

Matthew 5:5: The Beatitude Inspiring Hope for the Fulfillment of God’s Promise to Israel

The first matter to discuss regarding Matthew 5:5 and why it is such A Powerful Beatitude Inspiring the Zealots, surrounds the fact that many modern New Testament scholars have doubts that all of the sayings and teachings attributed to Jesus in the Gospels were actually said, or taught by Jesus. Matthew 5:5 just happens to be one of these teachings that these particular modern New Testament scholars have doubts about its authenticity as a genuine teaching of Jesus![1]

Most of the reasons given by these scholars for having such doubts derives from their belief that the “authentic” teachings of Jesus would not have utilized quotes from the Hebrew Scriptures, (or what is generally referred to as the “Old Testament”), and Matthew 5:5 just happens to be an almost direct quote from Psalm 37:11. Yet, there are many other New Testament scholars who are of the opinion that Matthew 5:5 is indeed an authentic saying and teaching of Jesus, and to which these scholars offer much stronger evidence to back up their opinions on this matter![2]

Since there are differing opinions amongst the modern New Testament scholars surrounding the authenticity of many of the sayings and teachings of Jesus, including Matthew 5:5, it becomes necessary to offer proof as to the authenticity of Jesus’ saying and teaching in Matthew 5:5. Yet, one might ask, because there are differing opinions amongst the many modern New Testament scholars as to the authenticity of many of Jesus’ sayings and teachings, including Matthew 5:5, then how can proof be offered as to the authenticity of Jesus’ saying and teaching in Matthew 5:5? The answer to this question derives from two facts that are overlooked by the modern New Testament scholars who have doubts as to the authenticity of Matthew 5:5!

The first overlooked fact is that all modern New Testament scholars agree that the Gospel of Matthew is the most Jewish of the four New Testament Gospels,[3] and the second overlooked fact is that virtually all modern New Testament scholars now agree that Jesus was “wholly Jewish dedicated to the Torah”![4]

With these two overlooked facts in mind, it becomes essential to quote Rabbi David J. Wolpe:[5] “In Judaism, one who writes and does not borrow upon the wisdom of the past, who does not quote the sages or reframe their insights, one who wishes to create meanings without referring to all the meanings that have gone before is one trying to build without first laying the foundation.” Thus, as Wolpe rightly indicates, since Jesus desired to be recognized as an authentic teacher to “the lost sheep of Israel,” (Matthew 15:24), then quoting from the Hebrew Scriptures would have been required of him before being regarded as an authentic teacher.

Now that we have these two overlooked facts established, the next matter to discuss in offering proof as to the authenticity of Jesus’ saying and teaching in Matthew 5:5 is whether or not Matthew 5:5 is indeed “wholly Jewish” and in-line with the teachings of not only the Torah, but also other teachings from the Hebrew Scriptures during the time of Jesus as well, other than just Psalm 37:11! In regards to this matter we turn to Yael Eckstein[6] who provides an excellent explanation as to how Matthew 5:5, all of the other Beatitudes, and the entirety of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount is “wholly Jewish” with Jewish roots in the Hebrew Scriptures!

The final matter to discuss in regards to offering proof as to the authenticity of Jesus’ saying and teaching in Matthew 5:5 derives from the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, and specifically, the discovery of the Dead Sea Scroll fragment 4Q525[7], in which contains nine Beatitudes that parallel the nine Beatitudes in Matthew’s Gospel. Virtually all Biblical scholars agree that the authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls were of the Jewish Philosophy of the time of Jesus known as the Essenes, which just so happens to be the only Jewish Philosophy described by the Jewish historian, Josephus, (Antiquities 18.1.2-6), from that time who are nowhere directly mentioned in the New Testament!

Thus, we now have a proven fact that the nine Beatitudes found in the Gospel of Matthew, which, of course, includes Matthew 5:5, were taught by at least one of the four Jewish Philosophies from the time of Jesus! Therefore, before analyzing why Matthew 5:5 was such A Powerful Beatitude Inspiring the Zealots it is necessary to identify the language in which Jesus taught. We know that Jesus did not teach in English, the language in which the majority of Bibles are printed, nor did Jesus teach in Latin, the language of the Vulgate used in early Catholicism. We also know that Jesus did not teach in the language of Greek in which the New Testament was written.

Now, too many scholars for centuries have claimed that the primary language of the Jewish people in Judea and Galilee, (the primary locations of Jesus’ teachings), was Aramaic![8] This is not to say that Aramaic was not used at all at this time and place in history, it is simply a questioning as to why so many New Testament scholars have made such claims for so long!

It is essential to demonstrate why such scholarly claims regarding Aramaic being the dominant language of Jesus’ time and place in history are in error and without merit! So, let’s begin by quoting Bruce Chilton,[9] who writes, “By the time of Jesus, Aramaic had become the common language of Judea, Samaria, and Galilee (although distinctive dialects were spoken); Hebrew was understood by an educated (and/or nationalistic) stratum of the population,[10] and some familiarity with Greek was a cultural necessity, especially in commercial and bureaucratic contexts.”

Chilton goes on[11] to discuss the meturgeman, or “translator,” in Synagogues who, after the liturgist would read in Hebrew, this meturgeman would “translate” into Aramaic. Yet, Chilton’s implications regarding the usage of the meturgeman as an indication that Aramaic was the dominant language used are simply erroneous.[12]

Chilton then claims[13] that in Mark 4:11-12 Jesus uses the Aramaic Targum of Isaiah 6:9-10 by “interpreting” Mark 4:12 as reading, “… lest they repent and it be forgiven them.” Now, the word Targum simply means, “translation,” or “interpretation,” which are actually synonyms.[14] Chilton’s rendering of Mark 4:12 though, is derived from the Greek, yet neither Hebrew, or Aramaic readily translate into either Greek, Latin, or English, (nor does Hebrew always readily translate into Aramaic, or Greek readily translate into English), thus, one must be careful not to make such an assumption as Chilton.

Yet, the fact is that after the Hasmonean-Seleucid war Hebrew once again was called upon as the dominate language in Judea and Galilee. In fact, many of the scholars claiming Aramaic was the dominant language in Judea and Galilee at the time of Jesus contradict themselves by admitting that after the Hasmonean-Seleucid war Hebrew was once again called upon as the dominant language of Judea and Galilee![15] Now, Sean Freyne sees the Hebrew and Aramaic used in Judea and Galilee from the time of Jesus as being a diglossia.[16] Yet again, these two languages do not always readily translate into each other!

Joseph Fitzmyer rightly refers to the scholarly debates[17] regarding the “native tongue” of Josephus, mentioned in Antiquities 20.12.1(263-265).[18] The fact is though, that the “native tongue” of Josephus was Hebrew, as Josephus clearly denotes in Antiquities 10.10.6 when Josephus states that he once translated Hebrew books into Greek, as well as Josephus’ clear statements regarding his “native tongue” in Antiquities Preface 2; Jewish Wars Preface 1; Jewish Wars 5.6.3; Jewish Wars 5.9.2; Jewish Wars 6.2.1 where Josephus further clearly denotes that not only his “native tongue” was Hebrew, but that the “native tongue” of all of Judea and Galilee was Hebrew!

It is true though, that the Hebrew used in Galilee was slightly different than the Hebrew used in Judea,[19] something that can be compared to the English used in say, Boston or New York City as opposed to the English used in Atlanta or New Orleans! Furthermore, as Albert Schweitzer, (quoting Gustav Dalman), states,[20] “According to Josephus the knowledge of Greek in Palestine at that time, even among educated Jews, can only have been of a quite elementary character. He himself had to learn it laboriously in order to be able to write in it.”

As Lewis Glinert writes concerning this,[21] “The number of Hebrew speakers is unknown, but probably in the tens of thousands,” and in regards to the discovered letters written during the 132-135 CE revolt, written by Bar Kochba himself, Glinert writes, “They suggest that the writers still used Hebrew as a spoken language, since languages that exist only in writing don’t have vernacular forms.”[22] The inscription on Jesus’ cross, (Luke 23:38), is proof that Hebrew was the dominant language of the Jews! For it clearly states, “Greek, Latin, and Hebrew,” not Aramaic![23]

Acts 21:40-22:2 clearly states that Paul addressed a crowd in Hebrew, and not Aramaic! Baba Kamma 82b; Sotah 49b clearly states that learning Greek was perfectly okay, yet usage of Greek as opposed to the “sacred tongue” of Hebrew, or even usage of Aramaic should not be done. R. Judah ha-Nasi (“The Prince”), despised Aramaic, (Talmud, Sotah 49b),[24] and more and more modern New Testament scholars are beginning to agree that while the Gospels were written in Greek, they were derived from an original Hebrew oral transmission and possibly even an original Hebrew text.[25]

Therefore, now that it has been demonstrated as fact that the nine Beatitudes in Matthew’s Gospel are an authentic teaching of Jesus, and it has been demonstrated as fact that Jesus taught in Hebrew then scholars must also now analyze the Beatitudes from the standpoint of their Hebrew meaning![26] Furthermore, since our primary focus is on the Beatitude of Matthew 5:5 and why it was such A Powerful Beatitude Inspiring the Zealots, and since Matthew 5:5 is a partial quote of Psalm 37:11, it is necessary to analyze the correct Hebrew meaning derived from Psalm 37:11 in regards to its relationship to the whole context of Psalm 37![27]

There are two key Hebrew words from the portion of Psalm 37:11 quoted in Matthew 5:5 that need to be correctly translated as they relate to the overall context of Psalm 37 in order to properly understand Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 5:5. Yet, there is also a third key word as well that needs to be correctly analyzed and understood, and this being the Hebrew word, “‘anawim,” or “‘aniyyim,” which generally gets translated as, “meek.” Such a translation as “meek” though, does not provide the complete understanding of this Hebrew word! For, “‘aniyyim,” also means, “humble,” “modest,” “afflicted,” and “oppressed,” and at the time of Jesus this was a chosen lifestyle by one of the four Jewish philosophies – the Essenes!

Now, Psalm 149:4-9 clearly indicates that the “‘aniyyim,” are also referred to by the Hebrew word, “hasidim,” (“pious ones”), and therefore, as being the ones who would be the “warriors” to “execute vengeance upon the nations.” Thus, we find that the Essenes were recognized as being a faction of the “Zealots.”[28] In the Talmud the Essenes were referred to by various terms besides just “hasidim,” such as “zenu’im,” (“chaste ones”), “anav” (“humble ones”), “kesherim,” (“blameless ones”), “hashsha’im,” (“silent ones”), “watikim,” (“men of firm principles”), “kadoshim,” (“saints”), “banna’im,” (“builders”), “anshe ma’aseh,” (“men of miraculous deeds”), and, “`osey ha-Torah,” (“observers of the Torah”).[29]

The Zealots derived their name from Numbers 25:13.[30] As Hyam Maccoby states,[31] “The Zealots took their name from Phinehas the Zealot, the son of Aaron, who ‘was zealous for his God’ (Numbers 25:13) with sword in hand. It was believed that Phinehas, as a reward for his violent zeal, had never died and was identical with the prophet Elijah who would come back one day to act as the fore-runner of the Messiah (Malachi 4:5). The choice of this name as the watchword of the movement had, therefore, messianic overtones.” In essence then, the Zealots of the time of Jesus were “zealous for the Torah!”

At the time of Jesus, based on the interpretation of Numbers 25:10-11, it was believed that, “only someone with Ahavos Yisroel (‘love of his fellow Jew’) could be zealous for God’s honor, and His Torah,” and such a leader, (based on the interpretation of Numbers 27:16-17), was “expected to be at the forefront of the battle.”[32] Acts 21:20-22 clearly notes the fact that Jesus and his immediate Jewish followers were such Zealots who were “zealous for the Torah”[33] exactly like Phineas the Zealot, the son of Aaron!

Furthermore, 1 Corinthians 13:1 mentions the “clanging cymbal,” which was an indication, “to raise the war cry,” and “to shout for victory,” with “a war cry.”[34] Likewise, 1 Corinthians 14:8 refers to the “blowing of the trumpet” and the “call to war” that was used by the ancient Israelites after their exodus from Egypt,[35] (yet see also what is stated in Romans 11:26 and 2 Thessalonians 2:4-8).[36]

The importance of pointing out these matters will be made clear by correctly understanding the remaining two key Hebrew words from Psalm 37:11 quoted in Matthew 5:5. The first of these other more essential to correctly understand key Hebrew words is the word generally translated as, “earth,” (“eretz” in Hebrew). Now, while it is true that the Hebrew word “eretz” can have a meaning that indicates the entire “earth,” it also offers a meaning that indicates a more specific area of “land,” or even a “country,”[37] which is how “eretz” is most often contextually utilized in all of Biblical Scripture!

This is precisely the meaning of “eretz” in Psalm 37:11, and Matthew 5:5 as indicating the specific land promised by God to Israel – the land at the time of Jesus known as Judea, Galilee, and Samaria, (Deuteronomy 4:1; 16:20 for examples)! This “promised land”, or “eretz,” “is a ‘theological variant’ for possessing the Kingdom of God,” which, “also stands as a parallel to the Kingdom of Heaven in Matthew 5:3,” and which, “the land was part of Israel’s prerogative as the People of God,” for which it, “came to be an expression of God’s intervention on their behalf in the future as seen, for example, in Isaiah 61:7….”[38]

This brings us to the final and most essential to correctly understand key Hebrew word of Psalm 37:11 quoted in Matthew 5:5, which gets translated into English as, “inherit!” The word, “inherit” should raise eyebrows for anyone reading Matthew 5:5 simply because even the English definition of the word, “inherit,” connotes a meaning of, “receiving of property, possessions or power” upon the death of another individual or that individual’s “loss of a controlling influence” over such, (see for example Mark 12:7), and at the time of Jesus, those individuals who were in “possession, power,” and the “controlling influence” of the “land” promised by God to Israel – Judea, Galilee, and Samaria – were the Romans, the mortal enemy of the Zealots!

Now, the Hebrew word in Psalm 37:11 quoted in Matthew 5:5 translated as, “inherit,” is the word, “yireshu,” which derives from the Hebrew root word, “yarash,” which means, “to seize,” “to rob,” “to drive others out,” and as the Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance Hebrew Dictionary #3423 adds to this meaning, “to occupy or possess, by driving out those who are currently, or formerly, occupying or possessing something and to possess it in their place”! As proof of this intended meaning in Matthew 5:5, we find another derivative of the root word “yarash,” (“yoresh”), in Deuteronomy 18:14. which is where the Israelites were instructed to drive out the inhabitants of Canaan and take possession of the land that God promised to Israel.

Further proof of this meaning is found in another derivative of, “yarash,” (“horishow,” or (“horish”), as found in Numbers 32:21, which says: “and will go all of you armed over the Jordan before the Lord, until he has driven out (horishow) his enemies before him,” and likewise Deuteronomy 11:23: “Then will the Lord drive out (horish) all these nations before you.” Further examples can be found in, Leviticus 20:24; Numbers 33:52-53; 33:55; Judges 1:19; Jeremiah 8:10; 30:3; 32:23; Ezekiel 11:15; 33:24-25, and even Acts 7:45 helps to understand the meaning of, “yarash,” as well as does, Paul, (Galatians 4:30 citing Genesis 21:10): “… for the child of the slave will not drive out (yirash) the child of the free woman.”

Therefore, by Jesus making reference to Psalm 37:11 in Matthew 5:5, (in Hebrew), Jesus was not teaching as a pacifist preaching ethical eschatology or sapiential eschatology, he was indeed teaching as an activist preaching insurrection, and the kind that was most notable of first century Jewish Zealots in Judea and Galilee – apocalyptic eschatology! Jesus was, literally, telling his listeners that, “we need to organize ourselves and drive the Romans out of Judea, Galilee, and Samaria and establish the Kingdom of Heaven in their place.”

As Gersom Scholem puts this fact into words,[39] “But we can understand why such an attitude was again and again in danger of being overrun by the apocalyptic certainty that the End had begun and all that was still required was the call to in-gathering. Ever and again the revolutionary opinion that this attitude deserves to be overrun breaks through in the Messianic actions of individuals or entire movements. This is the Messianic activism in which utopianism becomes the lever by which to establish the Messianic Kingdom.”

Likewise, as Paul William Roberts quite accurately states it,[40] “People did their duty, fought with absolute ‘zeal for the law.’ What more could Zealots have done? And there was no difference between Zealots, Essenes, Ebionites, Nazoreans, or Nazarites, et.al. These distinctions are more obfuscation of a truth the Church has been reluctant to face: the purpose of Jesus’ life was to prevent such a Church, such an institutionalization of spirituality, from ever existing.”[41] Matthew 5:5 is indeed and in fact A Powerful Beatitude Inspiring the Zealots!

D. C. Thielmann (excerpts from my books, On Earth As It Is In Heaven, Volume II; You Say So: The Trial of Jesus of Nazareth)

[1]  See for example, The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant, John Dominic Crossan, p. 447.

[2]  See for example, A Marginal Jew, John P. Meier, vol. II, pp. 334-336; An Aramaic Approach, Matthew Black, pp. 156-157.

[3]  See the comments on this in Judaism for the Modern Age, Robert Gordis, p. 220, n. 3.

[4]  You Say So: The Trial of Jesus of Nazareth, D. C. Thielmann, pp. 88-90; The Misunderstood Jew, Amy-Jill Levine, p. 47; Kosher Jesus, Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, pp. 24, 108; The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism, David Daube, pp. 55-89; Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus, David Bivin and Roy Blizzard, pp. 105-109.

[5]  In Speech and In Silence, Rabbi David J. Wolpe, p. 118.

[6]  https://www.ifcj.org/learn/holy-land-moments/radio-shows/the-jewish-roots-of-the-beatitudes ; yet see also https://www.postost.net/commentary/beatitudes

[7]  https://cojs.org/beatitudes_found_among_dead_sea_scrolls-_benedict_t-_viviano-_bar_18-06-_nov-dec_1992/ ; https://www.bible.ca/manuscripts/bible-manuscripts-dss-dead-sea-scrolls-4Q525-Beatitudes-Jesus-Matthew5-blessed-recognizable-format-structure-8short-1long-50bc.htm ; https://www.persee.fr/doc/rhpr_0035-2403_2000_num_80_1_5590 .

[8]  See for example, The Historical Jesus in Context, Levine, Allison Jr., and Crossan, pp. 7 and 15; Who is Jesus, Darrell L. Bock, pp. 22-23; Jesus, C. Leslie Mitton, p. 76; Jesus and Israel, Jules Isaac, pp. 27-28; The New Testament, Bart D. Ehrman, p. 219; A Wandering Aramean, Joseph A. Fitzmyer.

[9]  See The Historical Jesus in Context, Levine, Allison Jr. and Crossan, p. 238.

[10]  Other scholars claim that “Hebrew” was only “used widely as the religious language,” as claimed in, Caiaphas, Helen K. Bond, p. 25.

[11]  The Historical Jesus in Context, Levine, Allison Jr., and Crossan, p. 239.

[12]  See “Meturgemen,” Jewish Encyclopedia, Solomon Schechter and Casper Levias; “Targum,” Jewish Encyclopedia, William Bacher; and see also the correct comments in The Parable of the Wicked Tenants, Klyne Snodgrass who points out that “Aramaic” was simply a language used occasionally at the time of Jesus, yet not the dominant language of Jews at the time and place of Jesus’ teachings.

[13]  The Historical Jesus in Context, Levine, Allison Jr., Crossan, pp. 245-246.

[14]  See On Earth As It Is In Heaven, D. C. Thielmann, n. 52, pp. 158-159.

[15]  See for example A Wandering Aramean, Joseph A. Fitzmyer, pp. 29-30, 38-39.

[16]  See Galilee, Sean Freyne, p. 144.

[17]  A Wandering Aramean, Joseph A. Fitzmyer, pp. 33-34.

[18]  A Wandering Aramean, Joseph A. Fitzmyer, n. 36, p. 51.

[19]  Introduction to the Talmud and Midrash, H.L Strack and G. Stemberger, pp. 114-115.

[20]  The Quest of the Historical Jesus, Albert Schweitzer, p. 276.

[21]  The Story of Hebrew, Lewis Glinert, p. 39.

[22]  The Story of Hebrew, Lewis Glinert, p. 41.

[23]  Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus, David Bivin and Roy Blizzard, p. 8.

[24]  Studies in the History of the Sanhedrin, Hugo Mantel, n. 125, p. 21.

[25]  Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus, David Bivin and Roy Blizzard, p. 15.

[26]  https://www.hebrew4christians.com/Scripture/Brit_Chadashah/Beatitudes/beatitudes.html#loaded

[27]  https://www.blainerobison.com/bible1/psalm37notes.htm

[28]  See Kaufmann Kohler, “Essenes,” Jewish Encyclopedia.

[29]  Jesus the Pharisee, Harvey Falk, pp. 39-62.

[30]  Kosher Jesus, Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, p. 22.

[31]  Revolution in Judaea, Hyam Maccoby, pp. 65-66.

[32]  Love Your Neighbor, Rabbi Zelig Pliskin, pp. 361-367.

[33]  Christianity: A Jewish Perspective, Rabbi Moshe Reiss, 2.IV; Judas Iscariot and the Myth of Jewish Evil, Hyam Maccoby, n. 1, p. 178.

[34]  Problems of New Testament Translation, Edgar J. Goodspeed, pp. 160-161.

[35]  See the comments on this in On Earth As It Is In Heaven, D. C. Thielmann, pp. 677-678, and n. 1, pp. 733-734; Maccabees, Zealots, and Josephus, W. R. Farmer, pp. 159-172.

[36]  The Crucified Messiah and other Essays, Nils Dahl, p. 47.

[37]  A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew Language, Klein, p. 57; Etymological Dictionary of Biblical Hebrew, Clark, p. 17.

[38]  A Marginal Jew, vol. II, John P. Meier, n. 173, p. 387.

[39]  The Messianic Idea in Judaism, Gershom Scholem, p. 15.

[40]  In Search of the Birth of Jesus, Paul William Roberts, p. 359.

[41]  See also the comments of Kaufmann Kohler, “Essenes,” Jewish Encyclopedia.