Monday, April 21, 2025

the Origin of the Easter Faith



An Account of the Origin of the Easter Faith



Introduction: Deciphering the Nicodemus Scroll

In one of the most remarkable archaeological discoveries of recent decades, researchers have deciphered a previously unreadable carbonized scroll discovered from the ruins of Herculaneum. The text—a narrative concerning Jesus of Nazareth and the early years of the Christian movement—is interwoven with excerpts from the epistles of Paul, for unknown reasons that remain debated. The narrative portion claims authorship by Nicodemus of Jerusalem, the Pharisee who appears in the Gospel of John as a secret inquirer and later defender of Jesus. This attribution has led scholars to refer to the manuscript as the “Nicodemus Scroll.” Though its origin, authorship, and intent remain under scholarly debate, the scroll offers what may be the earliest known account of the events at the heart of the Easter faith that became Christianity—presented here for the first time in full English translation.


The scroll was first uncovered in October of 2018 during excavations southeast of the Palestra in the ancient Roman city of Herculaneum. Archaeologists found it in a partially collapsed wooden chest in the storeroom of an ancient private home, sealed beneath the volcanic debris from the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in 79 CE. Like the scrolls from the Villa of the Papyri, the heat from the slag caused the scrolls to become carbonized and brittle, and thus impossible to open and read with conventional means.

The structure where it was discovered, designated Domus 24N, has since been informally nicknamed the “Domus of Theophilus” by researchers. The house—likely the residence of a prosperous Herculanean merchant or ship owner with ties to the eastern Mediterranean—featured a private east-facing exedra or meeting room with built-in benches and what some researchers think could be a menorah graffito, details that suggest it belonged to an educated Roman god-fearer, a non-Jewish sympathizer of Judaism and its scriptures. How, why, and from where the owner of the domus procured the text remains unclear, leaving the provenance a matter of speculation.

The scroll was recovered alongside several other carbonized papyri forming part of the same collection. These similarly deciphered texts included treatises by Philo of Alexandria, a number of complete books from the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament), and partial texts of Paul's epistles to the Galatians and the Corinthians. The Nicodemus Scroll itself measures approximately 28 cm tall and 8 cm across in its rolled form, unrolling to about 1.8 meters. It is composed of fine papyrus, written in Koine Greek using a carbon-based ink, and appears to be the work of a single practiced scribe.


The decipherment of the Nicodemus Scroll was made possible through a combination of conservation, advanced imaging techniques, and sophisticated data analysis, work that was carried out between 2019 and 2024. The project was led by a team from the University of Naples in collaboration with the ENEA research center, the Italian National Institute of Nuclear Physics, and the Vesuvius Scrolls Project. Using a technique known as X-ray phase-contrast tomography and a synchrotron X-ray source at the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility in Grenoble, researchers were able to virtually unroll each scroll from the Theophilus Domus without physically opening it. By detecting subtle variations in carbon density, the team reconstructed ink traces and letter forms layer by layer, ultimately revealing a near-complete Greek text. The successful decipherment was announced in February 2025, paving the way for translation and scholarly analysis.

The scroll contains a structured literary composition blending two distinct strands: a narrative account in the voice of Nicodemus of Jerusalem and a series of interwoven excerpts from the letters of Paul, primarily drawn from 1 Corinthians, but also including material from Romans, Galatians, and 2 Corinthians. The narrative purports to be a personal letter from Nicodemus, a Pharisee mentioned in the Gospel of John, addressed to Simon of Samaria, also known as Simon Magus—the infamous magician encountered by Peter in the Acts of the Apostles. The text is written in an elevated formal Greek and framed as an orderly eyewitness account of Jesus's life, death, and the emergence of his followers.

The voice of Nicodemus narrates clearly the major events, while the Pauline passages appear as inserted quotations—sometimes aligning with the narrative, sometimes in tension with it—creating a layered and complex literary structure. The narrative, though spanning the life, death, and purported resurrection appearances of Jesus of Nazareth, compresses much of his Galilean ministry into a few brief yet vivid episodes before moving swiftly to the final week in Jerusalem. It then extends into the very early history of the church under James, Peter, and John, followed by a section recounting Paul's autobiography: first as a persecutor of the movement, then as the apostle to the Gentiles.

Jesus's baptism by John, the calling of disciples, and the preaching in Galilee are summarized with minimal elaboration. Particular emphasis is placed on the passion in Jerusalem—his confrontation in the temple, his arrest, and his execution under Pontius Pilate. The burial by Joseph of Arimathea is described in detail, including a striking and much-debated episode in which Joseph returns to the tomb on the night before Easter morning and reburies the body of Jesus. The resurrection appearances that follow closely align with Paul's list of appearances in the tradition he transmits in 1 Corinthians 15 and include moments that closely resemble events from Jesus's earthly ministry as accounted in the Gospels, sparking debate about chronology and retrojection.

The trial scenes before the Sanhedrin, while similar in outline to those found in the book of Acts, contain significant dialogues from the apostles and council members not preserved in the New Testament. Whoever composed together the narrative and Pauline epistles was clearly aware of the connections between the two; they may have been simply juxtaposing them for comparison.


Dr. Alessia Manfredi
, professor of New Testament Studies at the University of Naples, remarked in a press release:

“What we're looking at is not just another fragment of early Christian literature. This is a sustained, structured, and dispassionate narrative that appears to predate or run parallel to the gospels, and it engages directly with Paul in theology. The layers may go back to the very earliest years of the church. So the value to the study of Christian origins cannot be overstated. Whether it was composed in support of Paul or in response to him is still unclear—but it is not derivative.”

Scholars remain sharply divided over the scroll’s purpose and point of view. Some argue that it reflects a pro-Pauline stance, using the embedded narrative to reinforce the authority of Paul's teachings, validate his list of resurrection witnesses, and support his authority. Others see it as anti-Pauline, subtly challenging Paul's version of events by embedding his quotations in a framework that emphasizes the authority of the Jerusalem apostles and portrays Paul as a latecomer and upstart. A third view holds that the juxtaposition is deliberately ambiguous, intending to explore—or even satirize—the growing tensions between competing interpretations of Jesus's legacy in the mid-first century. The literary strategy—placing Pauline material within a non-Pauline narrative—has fueled ongoing debate about whether the scroll represents a synthesis, a critique, or a theological provocation.

While the physical scroll has been securely dated to the first century through radiocarbon analysis and stratigraphic context, the question of when the text itself was composed remains unsettled. Most scholars agree that the core narrative, dubbed “The History of the Nazoreans,” likely originated around 35 to 40 CE—within just a few years of the events it describes. The finished composition, including the Pauline material, is generally dated somewhat later, possibly by 60 CE.

Despite the early manuscript date, some evangelical scholars have dismissed the scroll as a later theological fiction retrojected into an earlier period. A few voices, particularly within apologetic circles, have even raised the possibility of a modern forgery. But this view has not gained traction among papyrologists or archaeologists, who cite the material integrity, handwriting, and archaeological context as compelling evidence of authenticity.

A spokesperson from the Vatican responded to our request for comment:

“Whatever its origin, this document does not alter the Church's understanding of the apostolic tradition or the authority of the canonical Gospels. It may reflect a fringe voice from an unsettled time, but it holds no theological weight.”


Dr. Nathan Carr
, senior fellow at the Evangelical Theological Research Institute, dismissed the scroll’s implications more bluntly:

“We've seen alleged discoveries like this before. People once said the Dead Sea Scrolls proved a proto-Christian movement existed before Jesus, but they ended up proving only how reliably the Bible was transmitted. This discovery will pass like all the others.”

Yet for some observers, the confidence in these responses only underscores the unease with which the scroll is being received. A small number of fringe voices have proposed that the scroll is an elaborate modern forgery planted to undermine Christian faith.


Reverend Dr. Alan Brewer
, an independent apologist and former professor at the now-defunct Baptist Bible College of Clark Summit, Pennsylvania, suggested on his weekly podcast:

“We can't rule out the possibility that this so-called scroll was planted during the excavation. It could have been carbon dated using compromised methods and forged in Greek by someone with an anti-theological agenda and access to advanced imaging knowledge. For all we know, the enemy himself may have placed it there to lead the faithful astray or to test our discernment in these last days.”

Such claims have been widely dismissed by experts in archaeology, paleography, and material science.

The scroll is currently housed in a secure conservation facility within the National Archaeological Museum of Naples, under the joint stewardship of the University of Naples and the Herculaneum Conservation Project. It is not on public display, and access remains restricted to qualified researchers. While debate continues over its theological significance, its historical and archaeological importance is already beyond dispute.

What follows is the first full English-language translation of the deciphered text. Readers, especially those of faith, are advised to continue with discretion and an openness to historical curiosity.

The History of the Nazoreans

Paul, an apostle—not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead—grace be to you and peace from God the Father and from our Lord Jesus Christ, who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen.

I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel, which is not another; but there be some that trouble you and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again: if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; by which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you—unless ye have believed in vain.

I, Nicodemus, son of Gurion of Jerusalem, being myself an eyewitness and having carefully investigated all things from the beginning, write to you, most excellent Simon of Samaria, Magus, an orderly account of the man Jesus called Christ and of the course of his followers after he was put to death. For it seemed good to you to know the certainty and truth of the many things said of him.

Now concerning the sect of the Nazoreans—those who have faith in the Christ crucified and raised from the dead—the origin was as follows:

Jesus had been a mason from the town of Nazareth in Galilee, the son of Mary, and, as was supposed, the son of Joseph, son of Jacob, of the line of David. He went down to the Jordan in the days of John the Baptizer and was baptized by him and was numbered among his closest disciples.

After Herod Antipas put John to death, Jesus returned to Galilee, preaching repentance throughout the synagogues and proclaiming the nearness of the kingdom of God. He debated with scribes and Pharisees and was a doer of wondrous deeds, healing many and casting out devils, and was held in great respect by the elders and teachers of the law.

Jesus ordained twelve disciples and sent them out. And they went forth, preaching that all should repent and that the kingdom of God had come near. They cast out many devils and anointed with oil many that were sick and healed them.

When his fame spread, many believed he was John the Baptizer raised from the dead, and some believed he was a prophet like those in the days of old. Some said Elijah, others Jeremiah, but others said he was the Christ of the line of David, the King. And great crowds gathered to him to hear his teaching, to be healed, and to receive the baptism of John for the remission of sins.

In the seventeenth year of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea and Caiaphas was high priest, Jesus went up to Jerusalem with his disciples for the feast of unleavened bread.

And when they drew near to Bethany at the Mount of Olives, they brought a colt to Jesus, threw their garments on it, and he sat upon it. Many spread their garments on the road, and others cut branches from the trees and laid them down before him. Those who went before and those who followed cried out, saying:

Hosanna! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!
Blessed is the kingdom of our father David that comes in the name of the Lord!
Hosanna in the highest!

Jesus entered Jerusalem and went into the temple. He began to drive out those who bought and sold in the temple, overturning the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who sold doves. He would not allow anyone to carry wares through the temple.

Then he taught, saying to them:

Is it not written, My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations? But you have made it a den of thieves.

When the Roman guards heard this, they reported it to the centurion, who sought how they might arrest him, for great crowds had gathered, astonished at his teaching. And though they sought to lay hold of him, they feared the people, for the crowds seemed ready to do whatever he commanded, lest his great influence would lead them to rebellion.

So the Romans watched him and sent spies from among the Herodians, who pretended to be righteous, that they might seize on his words in order to deliver him to the power and authority of the governor. But they were not able to catch him in his words in the presence of the people.

When evening had come, he went out of the city. During the daytime, he taught in the temple, but at night he went out and stayed on the Mount of Olives. Early each morning, all the people came to him in the temple to hear him.

On the day before the Passover lambs were slain, Jesus came with the twelve into the city to a guest chamber in a large upper room. When the hour had come, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him. Then he said to them:

With fervent desire I have desired to eat this coming Passover with you. For I say to you, I will not eat of it again until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.

Then he took the cup, gave thanks, and said:

Take this and divide it among yourselves. For I say to you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.

They sat and ate and drank. And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives. They came to a place called Gethsemane, and there they prayed and slept.

Then Judas, son of Simon Iscariot, one of the twelve, having slipped away, came with a detachment of Roman soldiers bearing swords and clubs, along with officers from the chief priests, the scribes, and the elders.

Now his betrayer had given them a sign, saying:

Whomever I kiss, he is the one. Seize him and lead him away safely.

As soon as he arrived, he went straight to Jesus and kissed him. Then they laid hands on him and took him.

His disciple Simon, surnamed Cephas—who is called Peter—drew his sword and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear. Then they all forsook him and fled.

They led Jesus away and bound him in prison. In the night, the chief priests, the elders, and the scribes came to visit him. Though they debated with him and, in fear for his life, urged him to recant, Jesus answered:

O you of little faith, do you not think that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he will provide me with more than twelve legions of angels?

And though they continued to plead with him, he answered nothing. They went away astonished and grieving, for they all knew he would be found guilty of death.

And immediately in the morning, when the sun had risen, the guards bound Jesus, led him away, and delivered him to Pilate. The centurion came, saying:

We found this man inciting the nation, forbidding them to pay taxes to Caesar, and saying that he himself is the Messiah, a king. We heard him say, ‘I will destroy this temple made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.’ He stirs up the people, teaching throughout all Judea, beginning from Galilee even to this place.

Then Pilate called together the chief priests, the leaders, and the elders of the people to question Jesus. And Caiaphas the high priest stood up in the midst and asked him, saying:

Are you the Christ, the son of the Blessed David?

Jesus said:

I am. And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power and coming with the clouds of heaven.

Then the high priest tore his robe and said:

You have heard him. What do you think?

And Pilate replied:

Am I a Jew?

For he did not understand the interpretation, being:

The Lord shall make my enemies my footstool, and the kingdom and dominion and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven shall be given to us, the people of the saints of the Most High.

Then he asked Jesus plainly:

Are you the king of the Jews?

And Jesus answered and said to him:

You have said it.

The witnesses continued making accusations against him, so that Pilate asked him again, saying:

Do you answer nothing? See how many things they testify against you.

But Jesus still answered nothing, so that Pilate marveled.

For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received: how that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures.

And so Pilate, after he had scourged Jesus, delivered him to be crucified.

Then the soldiers led him away into the hall called the Praetorium and called together the whole garrison. They twisted a crown of thorns and put it on his head, and they began to salute him:

Hail, King of the Jews!

They struck him on the head with a reed and spat on him. And when they had mocked him, they led him out to crucify him.

They compelled a certain man to bear his cross—Simon, a Cyrenian, the father of Alexander and Rufus, who would be deacons of the church in Rome—as he was coming out of the country. And they brought him to Golgotha, which is translated "Place of a Skull."

It was the third hour, and they crucified him. The inscription of his accusation was written above:

The King of the Jews.

With him, they also crucified two other men, one on his right and the other on his left. The inscription of their accusation was insurrectionist.

There were also women looking on from afar, among whom were Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of Jesus, James the Just, and Joseph, and Salome—who also followed him and ministered to him when he was in Galilee—as well as many other women who came up with him to Jerusalem.

Those who passed by blasphemed Jesus, wagging their heads and mocking him. Others mourned and turned their faces away from him, and Jesus wept.

At the ninth hour, Jesus cried out with a loud voice:

Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?

When some of the bystanders heard this, they said:

Look, he is calling for Elijah.

Then someone ran, filled a sponge with sour wine, put it on a reed, and gave it to him to drink, saying:

Wait, let us see if Elijah will come to take him down.

Then Jesus cried out with a loud voice and breathed his last.

And that he was buried...

Now when evening had come—because it was the preparation day and the bodies should not remain on the cross on the Sabbath—the chief priests and elders sent forth a man from among them named Joseph of Arimathea, an honorable council member who himself was waiting for the kingdom of God.

He came and went in boldly to Pilate and asked for the bodies of the condemned, saying:

For Moses said in our law: The body shall not remain overnight on the tree, but you shall surely bury him that day, for he who is hanged is accursed of God, that your land may not be defiled, which the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance. And it is a holy day.

Though Pilate at first refused, Joseph earnestly pleaded with him. And Pilate marveled that they were already dead. At last, calling for the centurion, he commanded that their legs be broken so that they might be buried.

Then the soldiers came and broke the legs of Jesus and of the others who were crucified with him. When he had confirmed it with the centurion, Pilate gave over the bodies to Joseph. He bought fine linen, took them down, and wrapped each of them in linen.

Now in the place where they were crucified, there was a garden, and in the garden, a tomb hewn out of the rock. There they laid Jesus and the other crucified men because of the preparation day—for it was evening, and the tomb was nearby. They rolled a great stone against the door of the tomb.

And Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Jesus saw where he was laid. As the evening was quickly approaching, each of them returned to their homes to eat the Passover. And they rested on the Sabbaths according to the commandments.

When both the Sabbaths had passed, Mary Magdalene and the other women went out after evening and bought sweet spices, that they might come in the morning to anoint the body of Jesus.

And that he rose again the third day according to the Scriptures...

Joseph of Arimathea, however, came to the tomb after the Sabbaths in the first watch of the night, with his servants bearing torches and shovels. And Joseph said:

This Jesus, called Christ—was he not a son of David and a son of God? But he has borne the cross of the Law, being made a curse for us. For it is written: Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree. Wise and righteous as he was, now he is numbered with the transgressors. Come, let us bury these men in cursed ground.

Then they rolled back the great stone, lifted the bodies, and carried them through the valley of Gehenna to that field known to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, called in their own tongue Akeldama—that is to say, the field of blood. There they dug graves in the earth and laid the bodies of Jesus and the brigands therein. Then, having purified themselves, Joseph and his servants returned to the city and to their homes.

And it was night.

Very early in the morning on the first day of the week, as the sun was rising, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, Salome, and the other women came to the tomb. They said among themselves:

Who will roll away the stone from the door of the tomb for us?

But when they looked up, they saw that the stone had been rolled away—for it was very large. And entering the tomb, they saw a man sitting on the right side, handling the long white linen cloths, and they were afraid. The man's name was Malchus, who was the gardener.

He turned and asked them:

Whom are you seeking?

Mary Magdalene, taking courage, said to him:

Sir, if you have carried my Lord away, tell me where you have laid him, and I will take him away.

And he said to them:

Do not be afraid. You seek Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has been raised. He is not here. Behold the place where they laid him.

Then they went out quickly and fled from the tomb, for they trembled and were amazed. And they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.

But Mary Magdalene alone ran and came to Simon Peter and said to him:

They have taken away the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.

Then Peter and Mary set out and went toward the tomb. The two ran together—Peter following Mary—but she outran Peter and reached the tomb first. She stooped down to look in and saw the linen wrappings lying there, but she did not go in.

Then Simon Peter came, following after her, and went into the tomb. He saw the linen wrappings lying there, and the cloth that had been on Jesus’s head—not lying with the linen wrappings, but folded together in a place by itself.

Then Mary Magdalene, who had reached the tomb first, also went in, and she saw and believed that he must rise from the dead. And she cried out:

Rabboni! He has been taken up!

But Peter was amazed, and he departed, marveling to himself at what had happened.

Then Mary returned from the tomb and told all these things to the eleven and to all the rest. But her words seemed to them like idle tales, and they did not believe them.

And that he was seen of Cephas...

Now it was the final day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, and many went out, returning to their homes, since the feast was over. But the twelve disciples of the Lord were weeping and sorrowful, and each one, grieving over what had come to pass, departed to his home.

But Simon Peter and his brother Andrew, having taken their nets, went off to the Sea of Galilee with several of the other disciples. Simon Peter said to them:

I am going fishing.

They said to him:

We will go with you.

So they went out and got into the boat and fished late into the evening. Now it was dark, and they set out across the sea toward Capernaum. But the sea became rough, for a strong wind was blowing, and they were straining at the oars against the wind.

Now about the fourth watch of the night, when they had rowed about three or four miles, they saw the figure of a man coming toward them, walking on the sea—and he would have passed by them. They supposed it was a ghost and cried out, for they all saw him and were troubled.

Just as day was breaking, Simon Peter cried out:

Lord, if it is you, command me to come to you on the water.

Then he put on his outer garment, for he had removed it, and cast himself into the sea, coming toward the man—for they were not far from the land, about a hundred yards off. But seeing the wind, he became afraid, and beginning to sink, he cried out:

Lord, save me!

Immediately, the man stretched out his hand, took hold of him, and said:

Be of good cheer. It is I. Do not be afraid.

And when Peter lifted up his eyes, he saw only a fisherman standing on the shore. Yet the disciples did not recognize who he was. When they reached land, they saw a charcoal fire in place, with fish laid on it and bread.

None of them dared ask the man, “Who are you?” Yet Peter knew it was the Lord. He came, took the bread, and gave it to them, and likewise the fish—and they ate.

Having fished all night, they became drowsy and slept. But when they fully awoke, they saw no one.

... then of the twelve.

Then the disciples of Jesus went out into the towns of Caesarea Philippi, to the mountain where Jesus had appointed them his twelve disciples, and where he had said to them:

In the coming kingdom, when I shall sit on the throne of my glory, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

And along the way they asked among themselves, “Who do men say that Jesus is?” And some answered, “John the Baptizer,” but some said, “Elijah,” and others, “One of the prophets.”

Then they asked among themselves, “But who do you say that he is?”

And Peter answered and said to them:

He is the Christ.

Then he began to teach them that the Christ must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed—and after three days rise again. And he spoke this saying openly.

Then the disciples took Peter and began to rebuke him. But when he had turned and looked at the other disciples, Peter rebuked them, saying:

Get behind me, you of Satan, for you do not savor the things of God, but the things of men.

And after six days, the twelve went up a high mountain by themselves. There they saw Jesus, and he was transfigured before them. His form had become radiant, exceedingly white, as no launderer on earth could whiten. And Elijah appeared also, with Moses, and they were talking with Jesus.

When they saw him in his glory, they worshiped him—but some doubted. And as they were departing, Peter said to Jesus:

Master, it is good for us to be here. Let us make three tabernacles—one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah,

—not knowing what he was saying.

While he was still speaking, a cloud came and overshadowed them. And they were afraid as they entered the cloud. And from the cloud, Peter heard a voice saying:

Listen to him.

And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their faces and were greatly afraid. When they lifted up their eyes, they saw no one.

Some of the disciples standing there heard it and said it was thunder. Others said, “An angel has spoken to him.”

As they came down from the mountain, Peter said:

Let us tell this to everyone, for the Christ is risen from the dead.

Then the other disciples asked him, “Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?”

And Peter answered and said to them:

Indeed, Elijah comes first and restores all things. And how can it be of the Christ, that he must suffer many things and be treated with contempt? But I say to you that Elijah has already come, and they did to him whatever they wished.

So also the Christ suffered at their hands. Then the disciples understood that he spoke to them of John the Baptizer.

After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once—of whom the greater part remain until this present, but some are fallen asleep.

Afterwards, having come to Capernaum, they departed in a boat to a city called Bethsaida. Some who had followed Jesus saw them going and recognized them, and many ran there together on foot from all the surrounding cities and arrived ahead of them.

When the disciples went ashore, they saw a large crowd and had compassion on them, because they were like sheep without a shepherd. And they began to teach them that the Christ, who was the Son of Man, must suffer many things, be rejected by the elders, the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed—and after three days rise again, saying:

This is Jesus, whom God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses.

The people rejoiced and praised God and were filled with the Holy Spirit.

Then Stephen, a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. And he said:

Look, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!

And the people looked up in fear and amazement. For many believed this was the coming of the Son of Man on the clouds of heaven in judgment, as foretold by Daniel.

Some said, “There he is,” and others, “Look, here is the Christ.” Some cried out, “Look, he is in the wilderness,” and others, “Look, he is in the inner rooms.” And many ran to and fro in fear and excitement.

And on that day there were more than five hundred men who saw the Lord—besides women and children.

After that, he was seen of James…

Now the feast of Weeks was near, and the disciples, along with many from Galilee, went up to Jerusalem. Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with gladness and sincerity of heart.

Now James, the brother of Jesus, had sworn that he would abide in the temple and not eat bread from the hour in which he had drunk the Lord’s cup until he should see him risen from the dead. For James was so zealous for God that he was known as James the Just, and was respected among the scribes and elders. He never left the temple but worshiped night and day, fasting and praying.

Then Jesus appeared to James in a vision and said,

Bring a table and bread.

He took bread, blessed it, broke it, and gave it to James his brother, saying:

My brother, eat your bread, for the Son of Man is risen from the dead.

And when he had eaten, James saw him no more. He arose and joined the other disciples, telling them what he had seen and glorifying God.

… Then of all the apostles.

When the day of Pentecost had come, they gathered at the house of Mary, the wife of Shabbatai the priest, the mother of John whose surname was Mark, where many were assembled together in prayer. And when they had entered, they went up into the upper room where they had eaten with the Lord. For they were staying there—Peter, James, John, and Andrew, Philip, James the Just, Simon the Zealot, and Judas, the brothers of Jesus.

These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication with the women, among whom was Mary the mother of Jesus, and the other Mary, with the sons of her husband Shabbatai—Joseph surnamed Justus, and Matthias. And the apostles were all together in one place.

While they were praying, Jesus himself stood among them and said to them,

Peace be with you.

They were startled and terrified and thought that they were seeing a ghost. Then their eyes were opened and they recognized him—and he vanished from their sight.

And suddenly from heaven there came a sound like the rush of a violent wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. Divided tongues, as of fire, appeared among them, and a tongue rested on each of them. All of them were filled with the Spirit and began to prophesy and speak in tongues, as the Spirit gave them ability.

And as it was the time of the feast, there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews—devout men from every nation under heaven. And when this sound occurred, the multitude came together and were confused, saying to one another,

Whatever could this mean?

Some said,

The Spirit of the Lord has come upon them.

Others mocked them, saying,

They are full of new wine.

Thereafter James began to teach in the temple, saying:

"Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested by God to us by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through him in our midst, as you yourselves also know—him, being delivered by the determined counsel and foreknowledge of God, the Gentiles have taken, and by lawless hands have crucified and put to death, whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that he should be held by it."

And he said to them:

"Oh foolish ones and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into his glory? These are the words which he spoke to us while he was still with us, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses and the prophets and the psalms concerning him."

Then he opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the scriptures, saying:

Moses declared:
‘The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your brethren; him you shall hear.’

David spoke concerning the Messiah:
‘I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is at my right hand that I may not be shaken. My flesh also will rest in hope, for you will not leave my soul in Sheol, nor allow your holy one to see corruption.’
And again:
‘The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand till I make your enemies your footstool.’

Isaiah proclaimed:
‘A root of Jesse shall stand as a banner to the people; the nations shall seek him, and his rest shall be glorious. Behold my servant, my elect one. I have put my spirit upon him; he will bring forth justice.’
And again:
‘He was despised and rejected, a man of sorrows acquainted with grief. Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows. He was wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities. The chastisement for our peace was upon him, and by his stripes we are healed.’

Hosea foretold:
‘After two days he will revive us; on the third day he will raise us up, that we may live in his sight.’

Joel spoke of the last days:
‘I will pour out my spirit on all flesh. Your sons and daughters shall prophesy. Your old men shall dream dreams. Your young men shall see visions.’

Jeremiah prophesied of a renewed covenant:
‘I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and Judah. I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they shall be my people. For I will forgive their iniquity and remember their sin no more.’

Daniel saw in visions:
‘Behold, one like the Son of Man coming with the clouds of heaven. To him was given dominion and a kingdom, that all nations should serve him. His dominion is everlasting, and his kingdom shall not be destroyed.’
And again:
‘There shall be a time of trouble such as never was since there was a nation. But at that time your people shall be delivered. And many who sleep in the dust shall awake—some to everlasting life, some to everlasting contempt.’

"Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead on the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name. Therefore, let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has raised up this Jesus, whom they crucified, as his Christ—of which we are all witnesses."

Now when the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to James and the rest of the apostles:

"Men and brethren, what shall we do?"

Then James said to them:

"Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand, and receive the baptism of John, every one of you, for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is to you and to your children, as many as the Lord our God will call. Sell everything and give to the poor, the widows, and the orphans, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. If you truly fulfill the royal law according to the scripture—‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself’—you do well. Keep yourselves unstained from the world, but store up for yourselves treasure in heaven. Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God. Indeed I say, the time is short, and we shall live to see the Christ return in glory and judgment. For judgment will be without mercy to anyone who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment. Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will exalt you."

And with many other words he testified and exhorted them, saying:

"Save yourselves from this perverse generation."

Then those who gladly received his word were baptized. And in those days about 600 souls were added to them. And the apostles all agreed that James should be the chiefest among them for his great wisdom and righteousness and his nearness to Jesus. With him, Simon Peter and John the son of Zebedee were next most chief, and they were the three of them called the pillars of the church. And so James the brother of the Lord has ruled the church in Jerusalem to this day. Indeed, he is so revered among the churches that it is commonly said:

"Wherever you go, you will turn to James the Just, for whose sake heaven and earth were created."

And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread and in prayers. Then fear came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles.

Now all who believed were together and had all things in common, and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need. And thus they were known as Ebionim—that is, the Poor of Jerusalem—asking alms for their daily bread.

So they continued daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart, praising God and having favor with all the people. And they added to the church daily those who were being saved.

Now it was the festival of Booths, and James the brother of Jesus, with Peter and John, went up together to the temple at the hour of prayer—the ninth hour. And many people ran together to them in the porch of Solomon, and they preached and taught of Jesus and the resurrection.

Now as they spoke to the people, the priests, the captain of the temple, and the Sadducees came upon them, being greatly disturbed that they taught the people and preached Jesus as Christ and the resurrection from the dead. And they laid hands on them and put them in custody until the next day, for it was already evening. However, many of those who heard the word believed, and the number of the men came to be about five hundred.

And it came to pass on the next day that their rulers, elders, and scribes—and Joseph of Arimathea, as well as Annas the high priest, Caiaphas, John, and Alexander, and as many as were of the family of the high priest—were gathered together at Jerusalem. And when they had set them in the midst, they asked:

“By what authority do you teach these things? For this man who did wonders and was called the Christ was crucified, as all of us know. Now the Christ is to liberate Israel, not die as a hanged man. For any man hung on a tree is cursed, and no savior. So this Jesus of Nazareth cannot have been the Christ. And his mighty works must then have been done of Beelzebul. How then do you say he is the Christ?”

And James boldly answered and said:

“I proclaim it by the authority of the living God, who raised up from the dead Jesus the Christ, my own brother, and set him at his right hand. For we profess we have seen him with our own eyes, and he shall return in power and glory to judge the living and the dead and to restore the kingdom to the righteous of Israel.”

Then the council murmured against them, saying:

“Shall we listen again to these deceivers? Have we not seen how their leader perished? Did not the Lord strike him down for his blasphemy?”

But Joseph of Arimathea, a man of great honor, stood up among them and said:

“Hear me, O men of Israel. I know well this Jesus they speak of, for I was there when he was crucified. I was the one who asked Pilate for the bodies of Jesus and the others, to bury them that they might not hang on the cross after evening. And when Pilate had handed them over to me, I had them taken down and placed in the tomb in the garden. Never had I in mind to keep them there. But I placed them there only because the Sabbath was approaching and the tomb was at hand. But after the Sabbaths, I and my servants returned in the night, opened the tomb, carried away the bodies of Jesus and the others, and buried them in the potter’s field. Behold, come, and I will show you where he lies.”

And there was a great silence as the council sat amazed and awaiting a reply, but none of the apostles dared speak. The high priest arose and asked them:

“Men of Galilee, shall we then go to the grave and dig up the remains of this Jesus? Will you know him by his bones? For if you see them, truly, you cannot declare he is either risen or Christ.”

And others cried out:

“Surely by now there should be a great stench, for he has been dead these six months.”

Many were astonished, yet others scoffed, saying:

“If this Christ is not raised, then your faith is in vain.”

But John, surnamed Boanerges, filled with indignation and the Spirit, stepped forward and said:

“By the living God, I too will testify. We have seen Jesus our Lord, who was crucified, risen in glory from the dead. O you learned ones—Pharisees, Sadducees, and all who search the Scriptures—do you not know that the body which is raised is not the same as the body which is sown, but God gives a new body: glorious, powerful, eternal, heavenly, and shining as the stars?

As it was written by Isaiah:
‘All flesh is grass, and all its loveliness is like the flower of the field. The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God stands forever.’

And as it was spoken by Daniel:
‘Those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the firmament, and those who turn many to righteousness like the stars forever and ever.’

There is a body of earth, and there is a body of heaven. For flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God. What we saw was not the corpse of dust but the risen Lord—glorious and powerful, in a body of spirit given by God. For he is the firstfruits of those who sleep in Sheol.”

Then Peter, taking courage from John’s boldness, said:

“Men of Israel, the word which God sent to the children of Israel, proclaiming peace through Jesus the Christ—this word you know, for it was spread throughout all Judea, beginning from Galilee after the baptism which John preached. How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power, who went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the evil one—for God was with him.

And we are witnesses of all that he did both in Galilee and in Jerusalem, whom they put to death by hanging upon a tree. Him God raised on the third day and showed him openly—not to all the people, but to witnesses chosen beforehand by God, even to us who saw him in his glory after he rose from the dead.

And so we preach to the people and testify that he is the one appointed by God to be judge of the living and the dead. To him all the prophets bear witness that through him the kingdom of God shall be brought to Israel.

For this Jesus, whom you rejected, is the stone which the builders despised—yet he has become the chief cornerstone. And there is salvation in no other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

When they saw the courage of James, Peter, and John, and realized that they were unschooled, ordinary men, they were astonished, and they took note that these men had been with Jesus. So they ordered them to withdraw from the Sanhedrin and then conferred together:

“What are we going to do with these men?”

They asked. Some said:

“Let us hand them over to the Romans to be crucified also, for do they not follow their own king of the Jews?”

But others replied:

“Heaven forbid, or the last martyrdom will be worse than the first.”

So they agreed to stop this thing from spreading any further among the people.

“We must warn them to speak no longer to anyone in this name.”

Then they called them in again, and after flogging them, they commanded them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. But the apostles replied:

“Which is right in God’s eyes—to listen to you or to him? You be the judges. As for us, we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard.”

Seeing they could do no more, after further threats, they let them go.

And being let go, they went to their own companions and reported all that the chief priests and elders had said to them. So when they heard that, they raised their voice to God with one accord and prayed for boldness to preach Jesus, the risen Christ.

Now the multitude of those who believed were of one heart and one soul. Neither did anyone say that any of the things he possessed was his own, but they had all things in common. And with great power the apostles gave witness to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was upon them all. Nor was there anyone among them who lacked, for all who were possessors of lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of the things that were sold, and laid them at the apostles' feet, and they distributed to each as anyone had need.

Ananias with Sapphira his wife, and Joses a Levite of the country of Cyprus, the nephew of Shabbatai the priest, having land, sold it and brought the money and laid it at the apostles' feet.

And through the hands of the apostles, many signs and wonders were done among the people, and they were all with one accord in Solomon's porch. Yet none of the rest dared join them, though many esteemed them highly. And believers were added to the Lord, gathered from the surrounding cities to Jerusalem, bringing sick people and those who were tormented by unclean spirits—and they were healed.

Then the high priest rose up, and all those who were with him (which is the sect of the Sadducees), and seeing their arrogance and contempt for their threats, they were filled with indignation and laid their hands on the apostles and put them in the common prison.

Early in the morning the captain went with the officers and brought them without violence, for they feared the people lest the prisoners should be stoned. And when they had brought them, they set them before the council. And the high priest asked them, saying:

“Did we not strictly command you not to teach in this name? And look, you have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine and intend to bring this man's blood on us.”

But the apostles answered and said:

“We ought to obey God rather than men. The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you murdered by hanging on a tree. Him God has exalted to his right hand to be Prince and Savior, to give deliverance to Israel and forgiveness of our sins. And we are his witnesses to these things.”

When they heard this, many were furious and plotted to kill them. Then one in the council stood up, a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law held in respect by all the people, and commanded them to put the apostles outside for a little while. And he said to them:

“Men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what you intend to do regarding these men. For some time ago, Judas son of Hezekiah rose up, claiming to be somebody. A number of men, about four hundred, joined him. He was slain, and all who obeyed him were scattered and came to nothing.

After this man, his son Judas of Galilee rose up in the days of the census and drew away many people after him. He also perished, and all who obeyed him were dispersed.

And now I say to you, keep away from these men and let them alone. For shall we join the side of Rome, striking at those who profess this is the Christ? And behold, the one these men call Christ is crucified and buried in the potter's field.

If this plan or this work is of men, it will come to nothing. But if it is of God, you cannot overthrow it—lest you even be found to fight against God.”

And they agreed with him. And when they had called for the apostles and beaten them, they again commanded that they should not speak in the name of Jesus, but did not threaten them, and let them go.

So they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were once more counted worthy to suffer shame for his name. And daily in the temple, and in every house, they did not cease teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ.

And the sect of the Nazoreans—those who call themselves the followers of the Way—has endured to this day. Persecuted yet growing in number, they are led in faith and righteousness in the holy city Jerusalem by the one they call the brother of the Lord.

As for myself, O great Simon, if you wonder whether I believe in the crucified Christ, I can only say this: I wish that I could help my unbelief. Within me burns the longing for a savior—one who will put all enemies beneath his feet, raised in glory from the dead to the right hand of the Father, coming with the clouds and the hosts of heaven to bring the kingdom of God and restore the throne of David to Israel.

But knowing what became of the man Jesus, and what his disciples are said to have seen—as I have already told you—I cannot help but confess: to me, it seems a faith in vain. The true Christ is yet to come.

This is the testimony of Nicodemus of Jerusalem.

I write to you what I have seen and known.

The grace of God be with you.

Amen.

And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.

For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews’ religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God and wasted it, and profited in the Jews’ religion above many my equals in my own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.

I verily thought with myself that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth—which thing I also did in Jerusalem. And many of the saints did I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests. And when they were put to death, I gave my voice against them. I punished them oft in every synagogue and compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto strange cities.

Whereupon, as I went to Damascus with authority and commission from the chief priests, at midday I saw in the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round about me and them which journeyed with me. And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me and saying in the Hebrew tongue,

“Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.”

And I said,

“Who art thou, Lord?”

And he said,

“I am Jesus whom thou persecutest. But rise and stand upon thy feet, for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose—to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee, delivering thee from the people and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, to open their eyes and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God; that they may receive forgiveness of sins and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.”

But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb and called me by his grace, to reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen—immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood. Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me, but I went into Arabia and returned again unto Damascus.

Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days. But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother. Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not. Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia and was unknown by face unto the churches of Judea which were in Christ. But they had heard only that he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed—and they glorified God in me.

Am I not an apostle? Am I not free? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord?

I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago (whether in the body I cannot tell, or whether out of the body I cannot tell—God knoweth); such a one caught up to the third heaven. And I knew such a man (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell—God knoweth), how that he was caught up into paradise and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.

Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more.

For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you: that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread; and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said,

“Take, eat. This is my body, which is broken for you. This do in remembrance of me.”

After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying,

“This cup is the new testament in my blood. This do ye, as often as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.”

And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God. For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ and him crucified. And I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling. And my speech and my preaching were not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, that your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.

Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect—yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought. But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the world unto our glory— which none of the princes of this world knew, for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

I am crucified with Christ. Nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me. And the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not frustrate the grace of God, for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

Then, fourteen years after, I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also. And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles. And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship—that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

For they who seemed to be somewhat, in conference, added nothing to me. For I suppose I was not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles.

Are they Hebrews? So am I.
Are they Israelites? So am I.
Are they the seed of Abraham? So am I.
Are they ministers of Christ? (I speak as a fool) I am more—in labors more abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequent, in deaths oft.

But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. For before that, certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles. But when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.

But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all:

“If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?”

We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by the faith of Jesus Christ—even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law—for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

For I, through the law, am dead to the law, that I might live unto God.

And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; to them that are without law, as without law—being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ—that I might gain them that are without law.

To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak.
I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.
And this I do for the gospel's sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you.

For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female—for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham’s seed and heirs according to the promise.

But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

As we said before, so say I now again: If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel—for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness, whose end shall be according to their works.

But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost—in whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

But by the grace of God I am what I am. And his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain. But I labored more abundantly than they all—yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed.

Now to him that is of power to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ—according to the revelation of the mystery which was kept secret since the world began, but now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God—made known to all nations for the obedience of faith: to God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ forever.

If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema. Maranatha.
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.
My love be with you all in Christ Jesus.
Amen.

Μὴ ἐκθαμβεῖσθε· Ἰησοῦν ζητεῖτε τὸν ἐσταυρωμένον·
ἠγέρθη, οὐκ ἔστιν ὧδε· ἴδε ὁ τόπος ὅπου ἔθηκαν αὐτόν.

[Do not be afraid. You seek Jesus who was crucified:
He has been raised, he is not here. Behold the place where they laid him.]

Sunday, October 30, 2022

Constantinism in Exegesis: "Meek" Doesn't Mean "Meek"?

Blessed are the Meek

We all have heard the famous beatitudes, offered by Jesus at the opening of the Sermon on the Mount in the gospel of Matthew, delivered to his disciples and the gathered crowds at the beginning of his ministry. Jesus begins by blessing the poor in spirit, the mourners, and later the hungry and thirsty for righteousness, the merciful, the pure in heart, the peacemakers, and finally the persecuted for righteousness. But in between we find:

Μακάριοι οἱ πραεῖς, ὅτι αὐτοὶ κληρονομήσουσιν τὴν γῆν.
Matthew 5:5Blessed [are] the meek, for they will inherit the land. 

The word translated as "meek" is πραυς, corresponding to Strong's G4235 or G4239. The standard definition of this word is "meek, humble, gentle, mild of disposition, tame, quiet" with its antonym being "angry, aggressive, resistant, violent, harsh, wild".

Πραυς is likely derived from the Proto-Indo-European *preyH- meaning "to love, to please". It is thus likely related to the Sanskrit प्रिय (priya) "beloved, favored", Old Church Slavonic приꙗзнь (prijaznĭ) “friendship, fidelity”, and, through Germanic languages, to English "free, friend". 

In Luke 6:20-22, we find a similar set of beatitudes in the less-famous Sermon on the Plain. Luke's set is shorter and simpler, and less spiritualized than Matthew's version. For example, Jesus blesses the poor rather than the poor in spirit, and the hungry rather than the hungry for righteousness. This overlap extends far beyond this case, where Matthew and Luke contain many highly similar sections not found in Mark. The hypothesized explanation for this is the existence of a now-lost hypothetical document named "Q" (Short for "Quelle," German for "source"). Presumably, the original document would have been more like the simpler form found in Luke, also more similar to some sayings in the non-canonical gnostic Gospel of Thomas (e.g. sayings 54, 68, 69). The author of the Gospel of Matthew chose to fill out his version with the verse in question, found nowhere else. 

Or, nearly nowhere else, for a clear parallel can be found in Psalm 37, verse 11

וַעֲנָוִים יִירְשׁוּ-אָרֶץ וְהִתְעַנְּגוּ עַל-רֹב שָׁלוֹם

οἱ δὲ πραεῗς κληρονομήσουσιν γῆν καὶ κατατρυφήσουσιν ἐπὶ πλήθει εἰρήνης (LXX)

But the meek shall inherit the land and delight themselves in abundant prosperity. 

Note that the Septuagint translation is very nearly verbatim identical to the words used in the Greek of Matt 5:5. The word being translated is ענו/עני, corresponding to Strong's H6035. Other translations of this word are "poor, needy, lowly, weak, afflicted, humble". Another Hebrew word the Septuagint translates as πραυς is עָנִי, obviously related to the other. The only other occurrence is in Job 36:15, though here the Greek differs substantially from the Hebrew (Hebrew: "He delivers the afflicted by their affliction, and opens their ear by adversity." vs. Greek: "Because they afflicted the weak and helpless, and he will vindicate the judgment of the meek.") 

One particular usage of πραυς is worth noting, namely Zechariah 9:9, as it is (inexactly) quoted in Matthew 21:5:

גִּילִי מְאֹד בַּת-צִיּוֹן, הָרִיעִי בַּת יְרוּשָׁלִַם, הִנֵּה מַלְכֵּךְ יָבוֹא לָךְ, צַדִּיק וְנוֹשָׁע הוּא; עָנִי וְרֹכֵב עַל-חֲמוֹר, וְעַל-עַיִר בֶּן-אֲתֹנוֹת
Εἴπατε τῇ θυγατρὶ Σιών, Ἰδοὺ ὁ βασιλεύς σου ἔρχεταί σοι, πραῢς καὶ ἐπιβεβηκὼς ἐπὶ ὄνον, καὶ ἐπὶ πῶλον υἱὸν ὑποζυγίου.
“Tell the daughter of Zion, Look, your king is coming to you, humble and mounted on a donkey, and on a colt, the foal of a donkey.”

As the historical Jesus likely spoke Aramaic rather than Greek (though it's not impossible he knew some Greek), it would be a safe bet that, if the saying in question goes back to the historical Jesus, the word he used was probably ענו/עני, with the aforementioned meaning. This is strongly backed up by the comparison of its usage in the Septuagint. 

The only other usages of πραυς in the New Testament are:

Matthew 11:29 "Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle [πραΰς] and humble [ταπεινὸς] in heart, and you will find rest for your souls."

1 Peter 3:4 "rather, let your adornment be the inner self with the lasting beauty of a gentle [πραέως] and quiet [ἡσυχίου] spirit, which is very precious in God’s sight." 

There are a dozen usages of the related words πραυτης (Strong's G4240) and πραοτης/πραοτητος (Strong's G4240/G4236) both nominalization of πραυς, translated as "gentleness, humility, affliction, meekness, the quality of being πραυς". We can look at the instances below:

1 Cor 4:21 "What would you prefer? Am I to come to you with a stick, or with love in a spirit of gentleness [πραΰτητος]?"

2 Cor 10:1 "I myself, Paul, appeal to you by the meekness [πραΰτητος] and gentleness [ἐπιεικείας] of Christ—I who am humble [ταπεινὸς] when face to face with you, but bold toward you when I am away!"

Gal 5:22-23 "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness [πραΰτης] and self-control. Against such things there is no law."

Gal 6:1 "My brothers and sisters, if anyone is detected in a transgression, you who have received the Spirit should restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness [πραΰτητος]. Take care that you yourselves are not tempted."

Eph 4:1-3 "I, therefore, the prisoner in the Lord, beg you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness [πραΰτητος], with patience, bearing with one another in love, making every effort to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace."

Col 3:12 "Therefore, as God’s chosen ones, holy and beloved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, meekness [πραΰτητα], and patience."

1 Tim 6:9-11 "But those who want to be rich fall into temptation and are trapped by many senseless and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, and in their eagerness to be rich some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pains. But as for you, man of God, shun all this; pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, endurance, gentleness [πραϋπαθίαν]."

2 Tim 2:24-26 "And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kindly to everyone, an apt teacher, patient, correcting opponents with gentleness [πραΰτητι]. God may perhaps grant that they will repent and come to know the truth and that they may escape from the snare of the Devil, having been held captive by him to do his will."

Titus 3:1-2 "Remind them to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show every courtesy [πραΰτητα] to everyone."

James 1:19-21 "You must understand this, my beloved brothers and sisters: let everyone be quick to listen, slow to speak, slow to anger, for human anger does not produce God’s righteousness. Therefore rid yourselves of all sordidness and rank growth of wickedness, and welcome with meekness [πραΰτητι] the implanted word that has the power to save your souls."

James 3:13-18 "Who is wise and knowledgeable among you? Show by your good life that your works are done with gentleness [πραΰτητι] born of wisdom. But if you have bitter envy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not be arrogant and lie about the truth. This is not wisdom that comes down from above but is earthly, unspiritual, devilish. For where there is envy and selfish ambition, there will also be disorder and wickedness of every kind. But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, willing to yield, full of mercy and good fruits, without a trace of partiality or hypocrisy. And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace."

1 Peter 3:13-17 "Now who will harm you if you are eager to do what is good? But even if you do suffer for doing what is right, you are blessed. Do not fear what they fear, and do not be intimidated, but in your hearts sanctify Christ as Lord. Always be ready to make your defense to anyone who demands from you an accounting for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness [πραΰτητος] and respect. Maintain a good conscience so that, when you are maligned, those who abuse you for your good conduct in Christ may be put to shame. For it is better to suffer for doing good, if suffering should be God’s will, than to suffer for doing evil."

This article by Margaret Mowczko offers many usage examples, notably several from Second Temple Jewish literature: 

In 2 Maccabees 15:12, which was written sometime between 150 and 120 BCE, Onias the High Priest is presented as “virtuous, good, modest in all things, gentle (πρᾶον/ praon) of manners, and well-spoken.[14]

In the Testament of Abraham 1.3, possibly written in the first century CE, it is said that Abraham lived all his life “in quietness (hēsuchia) and gentleness (πραότητι/ praotēti) . . .” [15] (Cf. 1 Peter 3:4.)

In Against Appion 1.29 §267, Josephus (b. 37 CE) used the word praoteroi/ πρᾳότεροι to describe the attitudes of people who had been badly treated by the king of Egypt; they had a reason to be angry and hateful but had rather grown “milder.”[16]

In Jewish Antiquities 19.3 §330, Josephus describes Herod Agrippa’s manner as “mild” (πραῢς/ praus). He then explains how Agrippa is praus: he was “equally liberal to all men. He was humane to foreigners, and made them sensible of his liberality. He was in like manner rather of a ‘gentle and compassionate’ (chrēstos kai sympathēs) temper.” In §333, Herod Agrippa addresses a man who had slandered him and speaks to him “quietly (ērema) and gently (πρᾴως/ praōs).”[17]

From all these examples, we can be confident to state that, strictly from the textual evidence in the New and Old Testaments, the word πραυς (and related terms) has the connotation space of "gentle, humble, meek, mild, lowly, peaceful, courteous, respectful, yielding, forgiving, merciful, patient, longsuffering, forbearing, returning good for evil, submissive and obedient to a higher will." If we take it as a Greek translation of ענו/עני (as well it may be, given that it is a near-verbatim duplicate of Psalm 37:11), then it would mean "poor, needy, lowly, weak, afflicted, humble." The Hebrew word has a somewhat different meaning, but the Greek is not too dissimilar. For contrast, the meaning is antithetical to "aggressive, violent, arrogant, ambitious, retaliatory, haughty, selfish, harsh."   

How and why will the meek inherit the earth? Clearly not because they will conquer it themselves. Instead, they will inherit the earth in one of two circumstances: (1) the advent of a just world-order built from the bottom up by human beings or with God's help in which all will be or become meek and live in peace and goodwill, or (2) the advent of the End of Days, the Eschaton, in which God will destroy or reform the wicked and invite the righteous meek, led by Jesus, the Meek King himself, into the inaugurated Kingdom of God, the New Jerusalem (as in Revelation 5:10). Any suggestion that "the meek" are themselves the conquerors is incoherent. Importantly, they will "inherit" as in "be given". They will not win it for themselves and will not have to. 

As a final note, "Blessed are the meek" does not imply that everyone is or even should be meek (no more than "Blessed are those who mourn" implies we all should mourn) but rather that there is something positive to being meek. It does not necessarily imply "Un-blessed are the un-meek." There may well be a way for the non-πραυς to get some other blessing or benefit or even the same blessing by another means.

Translations in Other Languages

Let's look at how this specific verse has been translated into other languages.

English translations translate πραυς in Matt 5:5 as "meek, humble, gentle" the Amplified Bible gives the full "gentle: kind-hearted, the sweet-spirited, the self-controlled."

The Vulgate translates πραυς in Matt 5:5 as "mitis" meaning "mild, mellow, light, calm, gentle, placid, peaceful" when applied to non-humans, but specifically "meek, peaceful, gentle, mild, tolerable, soft, harmless" when applied to humans.

Italian translations translate πραυς in Matt 5:5 as "mite"="mild, moderate, meek" or "mansueto"="tame, gentle, docile". 

French translations translate πραυς in Matt 5:5 as "doux" meaning "soft, sweet, mild, gentle, meek quiet genial" or "débonnaire"="kind, gentle, good (weak-willed, soft)".

Spanish translations translate πραυς in Matt 5:5 as "humilde"="humble, low" or "manso"="tame, meek, non-threatening". These are substantially the same as the words used in Portuguese translations

Romanian translations translate πραυς in Matt 5:5 as "blând"="mild, tame, gentle, harmless, kind, calm".

German translations translate πραυς in Matt 5:5 as "auf Frieden bedacht" = "intent on peace" "Sanftmütig" = "gentle-minded, gentle, meek".

Dutch translations translate πραυς in Matt 5:5 as "vriendelijk en geduldig"="friendly/kind/obliging and patient" or "zachtmoedig"="mild, gentle, meek".

Swedish translations translate πραυς in Matt 5:5 as "ödmjuk"="meek, submissive, humble, unobtrusive, modest" or "saktmodig"="sweet/soft-minded, meek, gentle" or "milda och anspråkslösa"= "gentle and unassuming". 

Norwegian translations translate πραυς in Matt 5:5 as "ydmyk"="humble, meek" or "saktmodig"="meek, gentle". The Danish translations are substantially the same. 

Serbian translations translate πραυς in Matt 5:5 as "кротак"= "meek, tame, gentle, pacific". This is substantially the same as the Russian word used in their translations: "кро́ткий"="gentle, meek mild", and the Bulgarian "кро́тък"="gentle, meek"

Polish translations translate πραυς in Matt 5:5 as "cichy"="quiet, silent" or "pokorny"="humble, modest".

Hungarian translations translate πραυς in Matt 5:5 as "szelíd"="gentle, meek, empathic, tame" or "alázatos"="humble, submissive, servile."

Arabic translations "مُتَوَاضِع"="humble, modest; insignificant; condescending." 

Chinese translations translate πραυς in Matt 5:5 as "谦和" = "modest and gentle" or "温和" = "mild, temperate" or "温柔" = "gentle". This is basically the same as the Japanese translation "柔和な"="meek, bland, gentle, mild-mannered." 

In Tagalog, "maaamo"="gentle, tame, docile, domestic" or "mapagpakumbaba"="humble, modest, lowly."

In Thai, "อ่อน น้อม"="meek, docile, submissive, biddable, tame." or "ใจอ่อนโยน"="gentle".

In Punjabi "ਦੀਨ"="forlorn, humble, indigent, lowly, meek, miserable, needy, poor".

Hindi translations translate πραυς in Matt 5:5 as "नम्र" = "gentle, mild, subservient, humble, meek."

These are quite consistent, giving a consensus connotation of "gentle, meek, humble, mild-mannered", as can be expected from an honest and accurate translation of the Greek. 

Aristotle and other Extra-Biblical Comparanda

A primary reference for the application of this term before  Jesus is Aristotle in his Nicomachean Ethics (book 4 chapter 5, or Bekker page 1125b and 1126). There, he defines the virtue of πραότης (gentleness, meekness) in his discussion of dispositions related to anger: 

Gentleness [πραότης] is the observance of the mean in relation to anger. There is as a matter of fact no recognized name for the mean in this respect—indeed there can hardly be said to be names for the extremes either—, so we apply the word Gentleness to the mean though really it inclines to the side of the defect. This has no name, but the excess may be called a sort of Irascibility, for the emotion concerned is anger, though the causes producing it are many and various.

Aristotle, however, famously adds that anger is not itself a vice, but has its place if it is applied with proper measure, with the proper object, and at the proper place and time, though this is hard to generalize. This is worth quoting at length:

Now we praise a man who feels anger on the right grounds and against the right persons, and also in the right manner and at the right moment and for the right length of time. He may then be called gentle-tempered, if we take gentleness to be a praiseworthy quality (for ‘gentle’ really denotes a calm temper, not led by emotion but only becoming angry in such a manner, for such causes and for such a length of time as principle may ordain; although the quality is thought rather to err on the side of defect, since the gentle-tempered man is not prompt to seek redress for injuries, but rather inclined to forgive them). The defect, on the other hand, call it a sort of Lack of Spirit or what not, is blamed; since those who do not get angry at things at which it is right to be angry are considered foolish, and so are those who do not get angry in the right manner, at the a right time, and with the right people. It is thought that they do not feel or resent an injury, and that if a man is never angry he will not stand up for him self; and it is considered servile to put up with an insult to oneself or suffer one's friends to be insulted... We consider the excess to be more opposed to Gentleness than the defect, because it occurs more frequently, human nature being more prone to seek redress than to forgive; and because the harsh-tempered are worse to live with than the unduly placable... [I]t is not easy to define in what manner and with whom and on what grounds and how long one ought to be angry, and up to what point one does right in so doing and where error begins. For he who transgresses the limit only a little is not held blameworthy, whether he errs on the side of excess or defect; in fact, we sometimes praise those deficient in anger and call them gentle-tempered, and we sometimes praise those who are harsh-tempered as manly, and fitted to command. It is therefore not easy to pronounce on principle what degree and manner of error is blameworthy, since this is a matter of the particular circumstances, and judgement rests with the faculty of perception. But thus much at all events is clear, that the middle disposition is praiseworthy, which leads us to be angry with the right people for the right things in the right manner and so on, while the various forms of excess and defect are blameworthy—when of slight extent, but little so, when greater, more, and when extreme, very blameworthy indeed. It is clear therefore that we should strive to attain the middle disposition.

However, Aristotle is giving a narrowed philosophical definition, as opposed to a broader descriptive definition going on popular usage. Obviously, the word preceded Aristotle and he is giving a philosophical and hence somewhat idiosyncratic and specific definition as he uses it in his ethical system. In his system, it is a technical term, and so cannot be taken to represent any given other usage or broader usage in general Greek culture. That is, it would be a mistake to assume that the word πραυς should be taken in the Aristotelian sense in Matt 5:5. We must always give preference to how the term is used elsewhere in the New Testament or Septuagint.  

Other extra-biblical usages of this word or related words do not substantially change our understanding. It is sometimes applied to animals, specifically horses, where it has the general meaning of "tame", "docile", or "un-wild" and thus usable in agriculture, transportation, or the military, and not dangerous to their masters. Other times it is applied to winds to describe them as mild or soothing, to sounds to describe them as soft or gentle, or to medicines if they produce a soothing, palliative, or healing effect. If anything, we only slightly expand the breadth of meaning to include "reasonable, quiet, pleasant, soothed/soothing". 

A curious idea comes from an article by Sam Whatley in River Region's Journey Magazine, which claims that πραυς is "A Greek military term":

The Greek word “praus” (prah-oos) [πραυς] was used to define a horse trained for battle. Wild stallions were brought down from the mountains and broken for riding. Some were used to pull wagons, some were raced, and the best were trained for warfare. They retained their fierce spirit, courage, and power, but were disciplined to respond to the slightest nudge or pressure of the rider’s leg. They could gallop into battle at 35 miles per hour and come to a sliding stop at a word. They were not frightened by arrows, spears, or torches. Then they were said to be meeked.

To be meeked was to be taken from a state of wild rebellion and made completely loyal to, and dependent upon, one’s master. It is also to be taken from an atmosphere of fearfulness and made unflinching in the presence of danger. Some war horses dove from ravines into rivers in pursuit of their quarry. Some charged into the face of exploding cannons as Lord Tennyson expressed in his poem, “The Charge of the Light Brigade.”

 These stallions became submissive, but certainly not spineless. They embodied power under control, strength with forbearance. 

However, quoting the article by Mowczko, again:

From these passages, we can see that prau– words may be translated into English as “most gentle,” “soothing,” to calm down/ be calm,” “gentle,” “to tame,” “tame,” and “more reasonable/ more quietly.” 

I could not find any ancient source that mentions or alludes to implicit ideas of strength or fierceness in the word praus or a source that indicates an intrinsic, or original, military sense.

That a word can be applied to strong or powerful creatures does not imply that the word itself connotes strength or power. In the above example, the horses were strong and powerful before they were "meeked". But this does not mean that to be πραυς requires strength or power. A mouse could likewise be "meeked" if it was rendered docile, gentle, obedient, friendly, etc.

In short, we seem to have established the meaning of πραυς quite decisively from the foregoing examination of its usage in the New Testament, Septuagint, Second Temple Judaism, and the broader Greek context. We can now confidently call into question any substantially differing interpretation: we can identify them as having some addition of personal interpretation that does not derive from philology, but rather from some hermeneutical bent. That isn't to cast aspersions of a more theologically loaded reading, as meekness is clearly a central Christian virtue, and so can be expected to have collected some baggage over the millennia of interpretation. However, we can distinguish this from a strictly philological interpretation as laid out above by which we can interpret the first-century text of Matthew 5:5. We must also be sure not to read into it any technical usage, for example, its specific meaning in Aristotle's ethical system.

Biblical Commentaries

This might be a good point to look at some well-known commentaries on this verse. Notably, the website BibleHub.com offers a collection in an easily accessible, consolidated location. As this will be of some relevance later, they are worth quoting liberally:

Elliciott: "The meek.—The word so rendered was probably used by St. Matthew in its popular meaning, without any reference to the definition which ethical writers had given of it, but it may be worth while to recall Aristotle’s account of it (Eth. Nicom. v. 5) as the character of one who has the passion of resentment under control, and who is therefore tranquil and untroubled, as in part determining the popular use of the word, and in part also explaining the beatitude."

 Benson: "Blessed [or happy] are the meek — Persons of a mild, gentle, long-suffering, and forgiving disposition, who are slow to anger, and averse from wrath; not easily provoked, and if at any time at all provoked, soon pacified; who never resent an injury, nor return evil for evil; but make it their care to overcome evil with good; who by the sweetness, affability, courteousness, and kindness of their disposition, endeavour to reconcile such as may be offended, and to win them over to peace and love."

Matthew Henry: "...The meek are happy. The meek are those who quietly submit to God; who can bear insult; are silent, or return a soft answer; who, in their patience, keep possession of their own souls, when they can scarcely keep possession of anything else. These meek ones are happy, even in this world. Meekness promotes wealth, comfort, and safety, even in this world."

Barnes: "The meek - Meekness is patience in the reception of injuries. It is neither meanness nor a surrender of our rights, nor cowardice; but it is the opposite of sudden anger, of malice, of long-harbored vengeance. Christ insisted on his right when he said, "If I have done evil, bear witness of the evil; but if well, why smitest thou me?" John 18:23. Paul asserted his right when he said, "They have beaten us openly uncondemned, being Romans, and have cast us into prison; and now do they thrust us out privily? nay verily; but let them come themselves, and fetch us out," Acts 16:37. And yet Christ was the very model of meekness. It was one of his characteristics, "I am meek," Matthew 11:29. So of Paul. No man endured more wrong, or endured it more patiently than he. Yet the Saviour and the apostle were not passionate. They bore all patiently. They did not press their rights through thick and thin, or trample down the rights of others to secure their own. Meekness is the reception of injuries with a belief that God will vindicate us. "Vengeance is his; he will repay," Romans 12:19. It little becomes us to take his place, and to do what he has promised to do." Meekness produces peace. It is proof of true greatness of soul. It comes from a heart too great to be moved by little insults. It looks upon those who offer them with pity. He that is constantly ruffled; that suffers every little insult or injury to throw him off his guard and to raise a storm of passion within, is at the mercy of every mortal that chooses to disturb him. He is like "the troubled sea that cannot rest, whose waters cast up mire and dirt." 

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown: "Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth—This promise to the meek is but a repetition of Ps 37:11; only the word which our Evangelist renders "the meek," after the Septuagint, is the same which we have found so often translated "the poor," showing how closely allied these two features of character are. It is impossible, indeed, that "the poor in spirit" and "the mourners" in Zion should not at the same time be "meek"; that is to say, persons of a lowly and gentle carriage. How fitting, at least, it is that they should be so, may be seen by the following touching appeal: "Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work, to speak evil of no man, to be no brawlers, but gentle, showing all meekness unto all men: FOR WE OURSELVES WERE ONCE FOOLISH, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures … But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared: … according to His mercy He saved us," &c. (Tit 3:1-7). But He who had no such affecting reasons for manifesting this beautiful carriage, said, nevertheless, of Himself, "Take My yoke upon you, and learn of Me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls" (Mt 11:29); and the apostle besought one of the churches by "the meekness and gentleness of Christ" (2Co 10:1). In what esteem this is held by Him who seeth not as man seeth, we may learn from 1Pe 3:4, where the true adorning is said to be that of "a meek and quiet spirit, which in the sight of God is of great price." Towards men this disposition is the opposite of high-mindedness, and a quarrelsome and revengeful spirit; it "rather takes wrong, and suffers itself to be defrauded" (1Co 6:7); it "avenges not itself, but rather gives place unto wrath" (Ro 12:19); like the meek One, "when reviled, it reviles not again; when it suffers, it threatens not: but commits itself to Him that judgeth righteously" (1Pe 2:19-22)."

Matthew Poole: "Men count the hectors of the world happy, whom none can provoke but they must expect as good as they bring, an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: but I tell you these are not truly happy; they are tortured with their own passions; as their hand is against every one, so every man’s hand is against them; besides that there is a God, who will revenge the wrongs they do. But the meek, who can be angry, but restrain their wrath in obedience to the will of God, and will not be angry unless they can be angry and not sin; nor will easily be provoked by others, but rather use soft words to pacify wrath, and give place to the passions of others; these are the blessed men. For though others may by their sword and their bow conquer a great deal of the earth to their will and power, yet they will never quietly and comfortably inherit or possess it; they are possessors malae fidei, forcible possessors, and they will enjoy what they have, as rapacious birds enjoy theirs, loudly, every one hath his gun ready charged and cocked against them; but those who are of meek and quiet spirits, though they may not take so deep root in the earth as others more boisterous, yet they shall enjoy what God giveth them with more quiet and certainty; and God will provide for them, verily they shall be fed. 

Gill: "Blessed are the meek,.... Who are not easily provoked to anger; who patiently bear, and put up with injuries and affronts; carry themselves courteously, and affably to all; have the meanest thoughts of themselves, and the best of others; do not envy the gifts and graces of other men; are willing to be instructed and admonished, by the meanest of the saints; quietly submit to the will of God, in adverse dispensations of providence; and ascribe all they have, and are, to the grace of God. Meekness, or humility, is very valuable and commendable... Here meekness is to be considered, not as a moral virtue, but as a Christian grace, a fruit of the Spirit of God; which was eminently in Christ, and is very ornamental to believers; and of great advantage and use to them, in hearing and receiving the word; in giving an account of the reason of the hope that is in them; in instructing and restoring such, who have backslidden, either in principle or practice; and in the whole of their lives and conversations; and serves greatly to recommend religion to others: such who are possessed of it, and exercise it, are well pleasing to God; when disconsolate, he comforts them; when hungry, he satisfies them; when they want direction, he gives it to them; when wronged, he will do them right; he gives them more grace here, and glory hereafter."

Meyer: "The πραεῖς ... are the calm, meek sufferers relying on God’s help, who, without bitterness or revenge as the ταπεινοὶ κ. ἡσύχιοι (Isaiah 66:2), suffer the cruelties of their tyrants and oppressors."

 Cambridge: "... Thirdly, meekness, implying submission to the will of God, a characteristic of Jesus Himself, who says “I am meek and lowly in heart.”... Meekness is mentioned with very faint praise by the greatest of heathen moralists, Aristotle. He calls it “a mean inclining to a defect.” It is indeed essentially a Christian virtue. "

Bengel: " Οἱ πρᾳεῖς, the meek. Those are here named for the most part, whom the world tramples on.—πρᾷος is connected with the Latin pravus, which has frequently the meaning of segnis, slow, sluggish, etc... The meek are seen everywhere to yield to the importunity of the inhabitants of the earth; and yet they shall obtain possession of the earth, not by their own arm, but by inheritance, through the aid of the Father: cf. Revelation 5:10. In the mean time, even whilst the usurpation of the ungodly continues, all the produce of the earth is ordered for the comfort of the meek. In all these sentences, blessedness in heaven and blessedness on earth mutually imply each other. "

Pulpit: "Blessed are the meek...The meaning attributed by our Lord to the word meek is not clear. The ordinary use of the words πραυ'´ς, πραυ'´της, in the New Testament refers solely to the relation of men to men, and this is the sense in which οἱ πραεῖς is taken by most commentators here...Meekness is rather the attitude of the soul towards another when that other is in a state of activity towards it. It is the attitude of the disciple to the teacher when teaching; of the son to the father when exercising his paternal authority; of the servant to the master when giving him orders. It is therefore essentially as applicable to the relation of man to God as to that of man to man. It is for this reason that we find ענוה ענו very frequently used of man's relation to God, in fact, more often than of man's relation to man; and this common meaning of ענו must be specially remembered here, where the phrase is taken directly from the Old Testament. Weiss ('Matthaus-ev.') objects to Tholuck adducing the evidence of the Hebrew words, on the ground that the Greek terms are used solely of the relation to man, and that this usage is kept to throughout the New Testament. But the latter statement is hardly true. For, not to mention Matthew 11:29, in which the reference is doubtful, James 1:21 certainly refers to the meekness shown towards God in receiving his word. "The Scriptural πραότης," says Trench, loc. cit.," is not in a man's outward behaviour only; nor yet in his relations to his fellow-men; as little in his mere natural disposition. Rather is it an inwrought grace of the soul; and the exercises of it are first and chiefly towards God (Matthew 11:29; James 1:21). It is that temper of spirit in which we accept his dealings with us as good, and therefore without disputing or resisting; and it is closely linked with the ταπεωοφροσύνη, and follows directly upon it (Ephesians 4:2; Colossians 3:12; cf. Zephaniah 3:12), because it is only the humble heart which is also the meek; and which, as such, does not fight against God, and more or less struggle and contend with him." Yet, as this meekness must be felt towards God not only in his direct dealings with the soul, but also in his indirect dealings (i.e. by secondary means and agents), it must also be exhibited towards men. Meekness towards God necessarily issues in meekness towards men. Our Lord's concise teaching seizes, therefore, on this furthest expression of meekness. Thus it is not meekness in the relation of man to man barely staled, of which Christ here speaks, but meekness in the relation of man to man, with its prior and presupposed fact of meekness in the relation of man to God. Shall inherit the earth..."

Vincent: "The meek (οἱ πραεῖς). Another word which, though never used in a bad sense, Christianity has lifted to a higher plane, and made the symbol of a higher good. Its primary meaning is mild, gentle. It was applied to inanimate things, as light, wind, sound, sickness. It was used of a horse; gentle. As a human attribute, Aristotle defines it as the mean between stubborn anger and that negativeness of character which is inescapable of even righteous indignation: according to which it is tantamount to equanimity. Plato opposes it to fierceness or cruelty, and uses it of humanity to the condemned; but also of the conciliatory demeanor of a demagogue seeking popularity and power. Pindar applies it to a king, mild or kind to the citizens, and Herodotus uses it as opposed to anger. These pre-Christian meanings of the word exhibit two general characteristics. 1. They express outward conduct merely. 2. They contemplate relations to men only. The Christian word, on the contrary, describes an inward quality, and that as related primarily to God. The equanimity, mildness, kindness, represented by the classical word, are founded in self-control or in natural disposition. The Christian meekness is based on humility, which is not a natural quality but an outgrowth of a renewed nature. To the pagan the word often implied condescension, to the Christian it implies submission. The Christian quality, in its manifestation, reveals all that was best in the heathen virtue - mildness, gentleness, equanimity - but these manifestations toward men are emphasized as outgrowths of a spiritual relation to God. The mildness or kindness of Plato or Pindar imply no sense of inferiority in those who exhibit them; sometimes the contrary. Plato's demagogue is kindly from self-interest and as a means to tyranny. Pindar's king is condescendingly kind. The meekness of the Christian springs from a sense of the inferiority of the creature to the Creator, and especially of the sinful creature to the holy God. While, therefore, the pagan quality is redolent of self-assertion, the Christian quality carries the flavor of self-abasement. As toward God, therefore, meekness accepts his dealings without murmur or resistance as absolutely good and wise. As toward man, it accepts opposition, insult, and provocation, as God's permitted ministers of a chastening demanded by the infirmity and corruption of sin; while, under this sense of his own sinfulness, the meek bears patiently "the contradiction of sinners against himself," forgiving and restoring the erring in a spirit of meekness, considering himself, lest he also be tempted (see Galatians 6:1-5). The ideas of forgiveness and restoration nowhere attach to the classical word. They belong exclusively to Christian meekness, which thus shows itself allied to love. As ascribed by our Lord to himself, see Matthew 11:29. Wyc. renders "Blessed be mild men." "

Thayer's: mildness of disposition, gentleness of spirit, meekness. Meekness toward God is that disposition of spirit in which we accept His dealings with us as good, and therefore without disputing orresisting. In the OT, the meek are those wholly relying on God ratherthan their own strength to defend them against injustice. Thus,meekness toward evil people means knowing God is permitting theinjuries they inflict, that He is using them to purify His elect, and that He will deliver His elect in His time. (Is. 41:17, Lu. 18:1- 

The Catena Aurea, (commentaries on the four Gospels; collected out of the works of the [Church] Fathers) by St. Thomas Aquinas (pg. 148-149)  offers a number of interpretations from the Church Fathers:

Ambrose: When I have learned contentment in poverty, the next lesson is to govern my heart and temper. For what good is it to me to be without worldly things, unless I have besides a meek spirit? It suitably follows therefore, Blessed are the meek.[11]

Augustine: The meek are they who resist not wrongs, and give way to evil; but overcome evil of good.

Ambrose: Soften therefore your temper that you be not angry, at least that you be angry, and sin not. It is a noble thing to govern passion by reason; nor is it a less virtue to check anger, than to be entirely without anger, since one is esteemed the sign of a weak, the other of a strong, mind. [See Aristotle's account below]

Augustine: Let the unyielding then wrangle and quarrel about earthly and temporal things, the meek are blessed, for they shall inherit the earth, and not be rooted out of it; that earth of which it is said in the Psalms, Thy lot is in the land of the living, (Ps. 142:5.) meaning the fixedness of a perpetual inheritance, in which the soul that hath good dispositions rests as in its own place, as the body does in an earthly possession, it is fed by its own food, as the body by the earth; such is the rest and the life of the saints.

Pseudo-Chrysostom: This earth as some interpret, so long as it is in its present condition is the land of the dead, seeing it is subject to vanity; but when it is freed from corruption it becomes the land of the living, that the mortal may inherit an immortal country. I have read another exposition of it, as if the heaven in which the saints are to dwell is meant by the land of the living, because compared with the regions of death it is heaven, compared with the heaven above it is earth. Others again say, that this body as long as it is subject to death is the land of the dead, when it shall be made like unto Christ's glorious body, it will be the land of the living.

Hilary of Poitiers: Or, the Lord promises the inheritance of the earth to the meek, meaning of that Body, which Himself took on Him as His tabernacle; and as by the gentleness of our minds Christ dwells in us, we also shall be clothed with the glory of His renewed body.

Chrysostom: Otherwise; Christ here has mixed things sensible with things spiritual. Because it is commonly supposed that he who is meek loses all that he possesses, Christ here gives a contrary promise, that he who is not forward shall possess his own in security, but that he of a contrary disposition many times loses his soul and his paternal inheritance. But because the Prophet had said, The meek shall inherit the earth, (Ps. [37]:11.) He used these well-known words in conveying His meaning.

Glossa Ordinaria: The meek, who have possessed themselves, shall possess hereafter the inheritance of the Father; to possess is more than to have, for we have many things which we lose immediately.

The website preceptaustin.org, run by Bruce Hurt, offers a wealth of discussion on the scriptures, including Matthew 5:5 . It goes into depth on a particular elaborated theological perspective informed by 18th-20th century British and American theologians (and the 17th c. English Puritan Thomas Watson) such as Adam Clarke, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, William Barclay, Charles Spurgeon, William Edwyn Vine, John Charles Ryle, John Vernon McGeeRod Mattoon, R. Kent Hughes, and John MacArthur, as well as some already mentioned. Their interpretations largely agree with the foregoing, but some notable excerpts can be given:

William Barclay gives an extra "amplified" translation of this verse "O THE BLISS OF THE MAN WHO IS ALWAYS ANGRY AT THE RIGHT TIME AND NEVER ANGRY AT THE WRONG TIME, WHO HAS EVERY INSTINCT, AND IMPULSE, AND PASSION UNDER CONTROL BECAUSE HE HIMSELF IS GOD-CONTROLLED, WHO HAS THE HUMILITY TO REALISE HIS OWN IGNORANCE AND HIS OWN WEAKNESS, FOR SUCH A MAN IS A KING AMONG MEN! [Recall Aristotle's account above]

D Martyn Lloyd-Jones in his classic treatise on the Sermon on the Mount draws a parallel with much of the modern church movement asking "is there not a rather pathetic tendency to think in terms of fighting the world, and sin, and the things that are opposed to Christ, by means of great organizations? Am I wrong when I suggest that the controlling and prevailing thought of the Christian Church throughout the world seems to be the very opposite of what is indicated in this text? 'There', they say, 'is the powerful enemy set against us, and here is the divided Christian Church. We must all get together, we must have one huge organization to face that organized enemy. Then we shall make an impact, and then we shall conquer.' But 'Blessed are the meek', not those who trust to their own organizing, not those who trust to their own powers and abilities and their own institutions. Rather it is the very reverse of that. And this is true, not only here, but in the whole message of the Bible. You get it in that perfect story of Gideon where God went on reducing the numbers, not adding to them. That is the spiritual method, and here it is once more emphasized in this amazing statement in the Sermon on the Mount. 

MacArthur writes that "Meekness is the opposite of violence and vengeance. The meek person, for example, accepts joyfully the seizing of his property, knowing that he has infinitely better and more permanent possessions awaiting him in heaven (Heb. 10:34). The meek person has died to self, and he therefore does not worry about injury to himself, or about loss, insult, or abuse. The meek person does not defend himself, first of all because that is His Lord’s command and example, and second because he knows that he does not deserve defending. Being poor in spirit and having mourned over his great sinfulness, the gentle person stands humbly before God, knowing he has nothing to commend himself. 

F. B. Meyer: Even now the meek soul gets the best out of life. The world does not think so. It thinks that the meek must be worsted because they will not stand upon their rights, nor wield the sword in self-defence, nor meet men on their own terms. But, as ever, Christ's words stand the test of experience. The meek find more pleasure in simple joys than wrong-doers in all their wealth. Pure hearts find wells of peace and bliss in common sights and sounds. There is no twinge of conscience or bitter memory of wrong-doing to jar on the sweet consent of holy song ever arising in nature.

Both Eduard Schweitzer (The Good News According to Matthew) and John Nolland (The Gospel of Matthew: a commentary on the Greek text) give an interpretation of "powerless" for πραυς.

Summing up, we might state the consensus position of these commentators: The term πραυς is a virtue of mildness, gentleness, humility, suffering injury or insult patiently and without retaliation, foregoing revenge (or entrusting to God to exact due vengeance), submission to the will of God, restraining anger, and bearing wrongs patiently. Jesus himself is a prime exemplar, who underwent punishment and insult and even execution with patient endurance, not retaliating but rather willing to suffer wrongs (in the synoptic gospels, he does not defend himself at his own trial). Going with the principle of Imitatio Christi, we ought to do likewise. 

Strength And Weakness

What exactly does "meek" mean? Quoting from etymonline.com:

late 12c., mēk, "gentle or mild of temper; forbearing under injury or annoyance; humble, unassuming;" of a woman, "modest," from a Scandinavian source such as Old Norse mjukr "soft, pliant, gentle," from Proto-Germanic *meukaz (source also of Gothic muka-modei "humility," Dutch muik "soft"), a word of uncertain origin, perhaps from PIE *meug- "slippery, slimy." In the Bible, it translates Latin mansuetus [tame, mild, gentle, literally "accustomed to the hand"] from Vulgate (for which see mansuetude). Sense of "submissive, obedient, docile" is from c. 1300.

In commonly used dictionaries, we find such definitions as:

Showing patience and humility; gentle. Easily imposed upon; submissive. (American Heritage Dictionary)

Enduring injury with patience and without resentment: MILD. Deficient in spirit and courage : SUBMISSIVE. Not violent or strong : MODERATE. (Merriam Webster)

Quiet, gentle, and not willing to argue or express your opinions in a forceful way (Cambridge)

Having or showing a quiet and gentle nature : not wanting to fight or argue with other people. (Britannica)

These all seem broadly consistent with what we have discussed so far. Thus, "meek" as defined above is a reasonably fair and accurate translation of the Greek πραυς, though the connotations of "meek" don't perfectly align with those of πραυς laid out above.

Some people might think "meekness" connotes "weakness", perhaps because the two sound similar, but this is not the meaning of the word (though it can be a shade of meaning). In fact, nothing about physical capacities is necessarily implied by the word "meek". One can be weak/powerless and meek, or strong/powerful and meek, or anywhere in between. Nor does it imply cowardice: in fact, to sustain meekness often involves the courage to endure insult or injury without retaliation or losing one's temper. The word itself cannot be blamed for how some people tend to misinterpret it. As should be clear by this point, meekness (specifically πραυτης) is a quality of character and thus is available to everyone no matter how weak or strong they are. Aristotle's usage makes this evident: as a character virtue, and thus as a choice, one must make or a habit one must cultivate. If you can keep your anger, resentment, and violence in check, which anyone, no matter how strong they are, can do, then you can succeed in being πραυς. 

Perhaps an argument can be made that the quality of "strength, prowess, physical competence, power, ability to do harm" should also be cultivated in addition to meekness. That may or may not be the case, depending on one's sense of virtue, but those qualities are not themselves implied by πραυς, nor are they necessarily ruled out. Πραυς does not define what one can do, but how one chooses to be. It is defined more by what one chooses not to do (not to retaliate, vent rage, etc.) than by what one can or chooses to do.

Let us look at some notable New Testament verses about strength, weakness, and violence.

Matt 5:38-45: "You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you: Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also, and if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, give your coat as well, and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. Give to the one who asks of you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you. You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven, for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous."

Matt 26:52 " 'Put your sword back in its place,' Jesus said to him [Peter], 'for all who draw the sword will die by the sword.' "

Rom 12:14-21: "Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them. Rejoice with those who rejoice; weep with those who weep. Live in harmony with one another; do not be arrogant, but associate with the lowly; do not claim to be wiser than you are. Do not repay anyone evil for evil, but take thought for what is noble in the sight of all. If it is possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave room for the wrath of God, for it is written, 'Vengeance is mine; I will repay, says the Lord.'[Deut 32:35] Instead, 'if your enemies are hungry, feed them; if they are thirsty, give them something to drink, for by doing this you will heap burning coals on their heads.'[Prov 25:21-22] Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good."

Rom 15:1 "We who are strong ought to put up with the failings of the weak and not to please ourselves." 

1 Cor 1:25-29: "For God’s foolishness is wiser than human wisdom, and God’s weakness is stronger than human strength. Consider your own call, brothers and sisters: not many of you were wise by human standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, things that are not, to abolish things that are, so that no one might boast in the presence of God." 

2 Cor 12:5, 9-10: "On behalf of such a one I will boast, but on my own behalf I will not boast, except of my weaknesses... But he [Jesus] said to me, 'My grace is sufficient for you, for power is made perfect in weakness.' So I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may dwell in me. Therefore I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities for the sake of Christ, for whenever I am weak, then I am strong."

Phil 2:5-8 "Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus, who, though he existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, assuming human likeness. And being found in appearance as a human, he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death—even death on a cross."

All these support the plain meaning of Matthew 5:5 and the repudiation of any claim that the New Testament advocates strength, the capacity to harm, or worldly power. The early Church fathers understood this perfectly well, notably the anti-militaristic Tertullian. The development of "Christian warriors" (in any literal sense) as any sort of norm or ideal is a much later development and flies in the face of a fair and honest reading of the New Testament. A plain, straightforward reading of the New Testament would find an endorsement of pacifism over militarism.

Finally, let us also look at three problematic verses, sometimes offered against a pacifistic message, and offer a refutation for each:

1) Matt 10:34 "Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace but a sword."  

The suggestion is that Jesus is advocating for or at least may sometimes advocate for violence. But is this a fair reading, given all the foregoing? More context is revealing:

Matt: 10:32-39 “Everyone, therefore, who acknowledges me before others, I also will acknowledge before my Father in heaven, but whoever denies me before others, I also will deny before my Father in heaven. Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law, and one’s foes will be members of one’s own household. Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever does not take up the cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Those who find their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake will find it."

It's clear that the "sword" is not any literal sword but stands in contrast to "peace" as a metaphor for strife and division between those obedient to Christ and those not, proverbially, the sheep and the goats. But there is another possibility, also metaphorical: many other passages in the New Testament use "sword" as a metaphor for the word of God (Eph 6:17, Heb 4:12, Rev 1:16, 2:16, 19:15, 19:21). Thus, Jesus brings the word of God, a cause of division and a means of warring with spiritual evil. What Jesus, of course, did not mean was any sort of literal sword, especially given that he never does bring any sort of actual sword.

2) Luke 22:36 "[Jesus] said to them, 'But now, the one who has a purse must take it, and likewise a bag. And the one who has no sword must sell his cloak and buy one.' " 

Is Jesus advising his disciples, and his followers down through the ages, literally to go out and purchase weapons? Again, a bit of context makes this clear:

Luke 22:35-38: [Jesus] said to them, “When I sent you out without a purse, bag, or sandals [Luke 10:4], did you lack anything?” They [the 12 apostles] said, “No, not a thing.” He said to them, “But now, the one who has a purse must take it, and likewise a bag. And the one who has no sword must sell his cloak and buy one. For I tell you, this scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was counted among the lawless,’[Isaiah 53:12] and indeed what is written about me is being fulfilled.” They said, “Lord, look, here are two swords.” He replied, “It is enough.”

A few things to note:

  • Jesus' command was not even literally carried out by those he spoke it to, purchasing no swords and falling 10 swords short.
  • Jesus negates his previous teaching in Luke 10:4, so it would be impossible faithfully to follow both. Does this teaching supersede the former? 
  • They must do so in order to fulfill the prophecy, that Jesus will be "counted among the lawless." In buying a sword, they are becoming lawless, since they would be forming an armed uprising, carrying weapons where it would be illegal to do so, as it would be for would-be-revolutionary Jews under Roman law. Is Jesus instructing his followers to become "lawless"?
  • Jesus' laconic response is terse and dismissive, and the conversation ends: "That is enough [to fulfill the scripture]." He could even easily be saying, colloquially "That's enough [so don't bother further]", or "That's enough [out of you/on the matter]." 
  • The verse is not generalized to all his followers or even for all times. He is speaking only to his closest disciples and is giving them instruction for a specific time (now) and reason (to fulfill prophecy). There is no suggestion this is a general precept later Christians should follow.
The meaning is not terribly subtle, though it is worded in a less than direct way: Jesus knows he will be found to be a "lawless [one]" i.e. a criminal. He tells his disciples that they may as well go and buy swords since he will "be counted among the lawless" (found guilty and executed) and that would fulfill the scripture quite literally. When they produce two swords, he gives them an ambiguous dismissive answer and the conversation ends. This bit of dialogue is an element of the Passion story, not a maxim: there is no suggestion that later Christians ought to do this. Jesus does not endorse the arming of Christians, as a rule.

3) The Cleansing of the Temple (Matthew 21:12–17, Mark 11:15–19, Luke 19:45–48, John 2:13–16). Two versions--with sufficient context--will suffice:

Mark 11:15-19: On reaching Jerusalem, Jesus entered the temple courts and began driving out those who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves, and would not allow anyone to carry merchandise through the temple courts. And as he taught them, he said, “Is it not written: ‘My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations’[Isaiah 56:7]? But you have made it ‘a den of robbers.’[Jer. 7:11]”

John 2:13–25:  The Passover of the Jews was near, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. In the temple he found people selling cattle, sheep, and doves and the money changers seated at their tables. Making a whip of cords, he drove all of them out of the temple, with the sheep and the cattle. He also poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. He told those who were selling the doves, “Take these things out of here! Stop making my Father’s house a marketplace!” His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal for your house will consume me.” [Psalm 69:9] The Jews then said to him, “What sign can you show us for doing this?” Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” The Jews then said, “This temple has been under construction for forty-six years, and will you raise it up in three days?” But he was speaking of the temple of his body. After he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the scripture and the word that Jesus had spoken. When he was in Jerusalem during the Passover festival, many believed in his name because they saw the signs that he was doing. But Jesus on his part would not entrust himself to them, because he knew all people and needed no one to testify about anyone, for he himself knew what was in everyone.

These points all support a symbolic reading, specific to Jesus in particular at that specific time and place and point in history, with no suggestion at all that this is something Jesus would want his followers to emulate:

  • This event would have happened in the outermost court of the gentiles, which was massive: 36 acres of area. There is no way Jesus alone could have cleared and policed the entire space. Even with the help of his followers, unless there were hundreds, this would have been impossible, and even then it would take an hour or more. If this really did take place, it couldn't have taken place in the whole space, but only in one small corner. Unless it was symbolic, it would have been pointless.
  • Assuming the act is purely symbolic, its significance is hard to miss: Jesus is cleansing the temple of uncleanliness, stating that it is unsuitable for its purpose as a house of prayer (Synoptics), possibly from the noise and bustle of the market, or simply oughtn't to be a marketplace (John), and declaring that there are many "thieves", presumably the priests or those taking advantage of a captive market. Whether he succeeded is not relevant for establishing what Jesus's preferred ideal is, and thus what they ought to prefer as well.
  • In Mark, this takes place on Monday of Holy Week, on Sunday in Matthew and Luke. In either case, one week later, Jesus will have died and been resurrected, and initiated the destruction of death and Satan, prefiguring the cleansing of the world of evil at the eschaton. This also supports a symbolic reading: Jesus is symbolically cleansing the temple of evil, prefiguring his cleansing of death (evil) at his resurrection, prefiguring the general resurrection, and the general cleansing of evil at the Final Judgment. In John, this takes place near the beginning of his ministry, years from Holy Week, but at the Passover, on which day Jesus will be killed as a sacrifice, the paschal "lamb of God".
  • In John, the Jews ask him “What sign can you show us for doing this?”, and he replies “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” So the "sign for" whipping and driving out the money changers and others and overturning the tables and making his claim is, maybe, that the temple will be destroyed, and in or within three days Jesus will raise it up. The author explains: he was speaking of the temple of his body, thus, "destroy my body and in three days I will raise it up". Indeed, that is what the gospels say transpired at the crucifixion followed by the resurrection three days later. So what he did in the temple is like what will happen to his body. And Jesus himself knew what was in everyone, namely, evil, uncleanliness one needed to be cleansed of. Thus, he cleansed the Temple just as his body would be cleansed, through death and resurrection. Indeed, about 40 years later, as the author of the gospel of John clearly knows, the city and Temple of Jerusalem would be destroyed by the Roman general Titus. But the heavenly Jerusalem would be rebuilt from that destroyed body. There are clearly many layers of significance to this act if it is seen to be symbolic.
  • In the Synoptics, Jesus quotes an eschatological prophecy from Isaiah 56, describing all nations, morally perfected and having seen the truth of the Jewish faith, coming to the Jerusalem temple at the end of days. He also references an episode from Jeremiah 7-8, in which the prophet stands in the Jerusalem temple gate and exhorts all Judeans to "amend your ways and your doings" in ways both moral (interpersonal, social) and religious (heterolatry, idolatry, impiety, not heeding prophets), not merely in words, and if they do, YHWH "will dwell with you in this place, in the land that I gave to your ancestors forever and ever." Indeed, Jeremiah claims some of them "have built the high places of Topheth, which is in the valley of the son of Hinnom [Gehenna], to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire; which [YHWH] commanded not, neither came it into [His] mind." But if they do not, then "[YHWH's] anger and [YHWH's] fury shall be poured out upon this place, upon man, and upon beast, and upon the trees of the field, and upon the fruit of the land; and it shall burn, and shall not be quenched." The people will be bird-food and "the land will be desolate". Their bones will be unburied, "dung upon the face of the earth." Christians can obviously find the significance in Jer 8:4 "Thus saith [YHWH]: do men fall, and not rise up again? Doth one turn away, and not return?" The parallels between Jer 8:8-9 to 1 Cor 1:20-25 are striking. The temple would be destroyed as Jeremiah predicted, as described in Jeremiah 52, making this reference itself a prophecy of the destruction of the temple, which did take place 40 years later. The symbolic significance of the act is thus matched by a rich significance in the prophetic references he makes.
In conclusion, then, the cleansing of the temple clearly was a symbolic act that was relevant to Jesus and the Temple, at his specific time and place and point in Jewish/Christian history, and not in any way an example we ought to follow. Anyone who takes Imitatio Christi to the point of imitating him in this ought only to do so in the temple in Jerusalem, which doesn't exist, and only if they are the Messiah. 

HELPS 

If one navigates to the Biblehub.com page on the Greek word πραυς, immediately below the standard definition is a section titled "HELPS Word-studies", Copyright © 2021 by Discovery Bible. It gives:

This difficult-to-translate root (pra-) means more than "meek." Biblical meekness is not weakness but rather refers to exercising God's strength under His control – i.e. demonstrating power without undue harshness.

The English term "meek" often lacks this blend – i.e. of gentleness (reserve) and strength.

This source finds in the term πραυς a connotation of "...and strength", "exercising (God's) strength" and "demonstrating power without undue harshness" (thus, more simply: demonstrating power with due harshness). It even goes so far as to implicitly disparage other sources and translations for failing to include ("often lack") this crucial hidden meaning. None of the many translations and commentaries we have looked at have made any such claim. There is no reasoning given, no explanation as to how they came up with this connotation or why so many centuries of translators and commentators have failed to come up with it, or why "biblical meekness" should be so substantially different than non-biblical meekness. It is simply asserted here without any basis. One wonders where they are getting this sense of "strength" or "due harshness". 

It is worth pointing out that the reference given, the Discovery Bible, is a Bible study software endorsed by a handful of evangelical scholars from evangelical universities. It advertises itself with the slogan:

Read Your Bible And Instantly See What Is Lost In Translation… (Without Knowing Any Greek Or Hebrew!)

With this software, you can allegedly, without the trouble of learning Greek or Hebrew, get quickly to the underlying meaning of the Bible that is obscured or absent in other Bible translations. You, the ignorant monolingual layperson, can get access to the true meaning of the Bible those professional, elite Bible scholars and translators don't (or can't) put in the standard translations. The appeal to those ignorant of the original biblical languages serves many purposes: 1) it allows the sellers of the software to frame their perspective as both "deep" and "hidden", 2) it draws in those who don't know any better and pushes away those who think they do (e.g. those who bother to learn Hebrew or Greek), and 3) It ensures that any false claims won't be found out. The website says "No Greek Or Hebrew Experience Required" but it would be more accurate to say "Required: No Greek or Hebrew Experience." Otherwise, you might see through the interpretational bias. 

Looking at some of their promotional videos, we can see that many of their additions seem to be good-faith attempts to add value to Bible studies for those who are not expert, multilingual exegetes. Insights on word order and emphasis, verb forms, intertextuality, commentaries, and subtleties of translation are all perfectly acceptable, but there is also a clear ideological payload tucked inside the ostensible "insights". The example of πραυς is a case in point, reading into the term a masculine bent: meekness is, perhaps, perceived as uncomfortably feminine, gentle, soft, and yielding, as opposed to the strength, power, and even violence they would prefer to find in it. One imagines the thought process as something like this: " 'Blessed are the meek'? That can't be right. 'Meek' must not really mean 'meek'. " 

However, this reading is entirely without any justifiable philological basis and is a flagrant case of eisegesis. It is an abdication of the responsibilities of interpretation and translation, succumbing to the temptation to find in the text what one wishes were there, rather than the restraint to limit oneself to what the text itself can support. Indeed, if "biblical-X" can mean something substantially different than "non-biblical X", how can we possibly get at this meaning? At best we can look for other usages in the biblical corpus, as we have done, but even these must be informed by the usage of the word more generally. The original readers, before the compilation and canonization of the Bible, had no recourse but to take the word in something like its standard or typical usage, and we must follow suit if we want to get at the original, fundamental meaning that the original author meant to express. If inclusion between the covers of the Bible transforms the meaning of a word, this transformation has no constraints, there is no way to verify or falsify any such claim of meaning, and if two people disagree over this transformation, there is no way to determine which has the better claim. In short, it becomes a dogma deprived of any verifiable basis. However, any standard, ecumenical exegetical resource should not cater to such dogmatic infiltrations. BibleHub ought to remove this spurious claim from its website and limit itself to strictly philological hermeneutical resources. Or, if this Discovery Bible entry remains up, it ought to come with a disclaimer making its evangelical (masculinist) bias transparent, and expressly stating that this interpretation rests not on any close reading of the text but rather on a particular ideological agenda. 

One charitable interpretation of this variant interpretation is that so many years and layers of theology had been put on this little word πραυς that the meaning slowly evolved. This might derive from Aristotle's definition of the term, which has more of a sense of "self-restraint" or "self-mastery." Recall that he said: "we sometimes praise those who are harsh-tempered as manly, and fitted to command." The evangelical authors of this entry likely agree. But as we and other commentators have pointed out, this need not inform the biblical usage: Aristotle was prescriptively giving his definition of what is a technical term in his ethical system, rather than a descriptive definition of typical usage. It is a mistake to think that the word as Aristotle defined it must match how other users of the word meant it. But supposing Aristotle's meaning is involved, it's understandable how this meaning of "strength" or "due harshness" could creep in. Understandable but not excusable, however, as this is still ultimately an ideological insertion not supported by philological analysis. There are certainly plenty of more effusive commentators who take the liberty to add theological color to this word as they see or preach it, and there's nothing wrong with that for what it's worth. But that should always be separable from the meaning of the term before and absent any later ideological accretions.

As we shall see, this small inclusion has had some wide ripples in the broader culture, particularly through a certain Canadian psychology professor turned public intellectual/self-help guru and amateur Bible interpreter by the name of Jordan Peterson. 

Jordan Peterson

Jordan Peterson has offered comments on Matthew 5:5 on a number of occasions, leaning on the imagery of a "sheathed sword". Let's look at several to establish his view.