AJBI Vol. XLVII, (2022), 5–36

Jesus as the Messiah
in the Dialogue with John (Q 7:18–23):
An Aspect of Q’s Christology
in Light of the Messianic Apocalypse (4Q521)

Shohei CHIGASAKI
Rikkyo University
paul@rikkyo.ac.jp

Abstract
Jesus’ answer to John the Baptist’s question about the Coming One(Q 7:22b) whose arrival John expected (3:16) has often been rec­ognized as an authentic saying of his because of its originality.
However, the striking parallelism with the Messianic Apocalypse(4Q521) suggests that a messianic tradition existed which asso­
ciated miracles with eschatological salvation. Therefore, Q 7:22b
cannot be ascribed to Jesus himself, and the whole dialogue (Q7:18–23) seems to be created in the Q Group after Jesus’ deathwith the aid of the common tradition at the time. Q 7:18–23 prob­
ably intends to proclaim to both John’s disciples and other Jews in
contact with the Q Group that Jesus is the messianic figure surpass­ing the Coming One.

5

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVII 2022

1. Introduction
1.1. Purpose of This Study
The astonishing parallelism of the dialogue between John the Baptist andJesus (Q 7:18–231) and the Messianic Apocalypse (4Q521) has led some scholars
to infer a common tradition behind them:2
The blind have sight […], and the dead are raised and the poor have goodnews proclaimed to them.

(Q 7:22b)(The Lord, …) opening (the eyes of) the blind, (…) will make the deadalive, proclaim good news to the poor (…)(4Q521 2 II, 8; 12)

Since the pioneering works of Martin Dibelius and Rudolf Bultmann in theearly twentieth century, Q 7:22b has been generally ascribed to the historicalJesus.3 Yet, the historical context of the formation of this verse and the whole
pericope has not been fully investigated. Gaye Strathearn, attempting to examine
1

Passages in Document Q are stated according to Luke’s chapters and verses: e.g., “Q
7:22b” for Matt 11:5 // Luke 7:22b.

2

J. J. Collins, The Scepter and the Star: Messianism in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls(2nd ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010), 140; M. Konradt, “Stellt der Vollmachts­
anspruch des historischen Jesus eine Gestalt ‘vorösterlicher Christologie’ dar?,” ZTK
107 (2010, 139–166), 150; H.-W. Kuhn, “Jesus im Licht der Qumrangemeinde,”in Handbook for the Study of the Historical Jesus, ed. T. Holmén and S. E. Porter(Leiden: Brill, 2011, 2:1245–1285), 1272; J. Zimmermann, Messianische Texte aus
Qumran: Königliche, priesterliche und prophetische Messiasvorstellungen in den
Schriftfunden von Qumran, WUNT 2/104 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998), 389.

3

M. Dibelius, Die urchristliche Überlieferung von Johannes dem Täufer, FRLANT
15 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1911), 35; R. Bultmann, Die Geschichte
der synoptischen Tradition, FRLANT NS 12 (10th ed.; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &Ruprecht, 1995), 135.
6

S. CHIGASAKI: Jesus as the Messiah in the Dialogue with John (Q 7:18–23)

the context through the comparison with 4Q521, concludes that Q reinterprets
the title “the Coming One” in light of the Christian faith. She asserts that Q de­
scribes Jesus’ mission using the Qumran document with redaction, to proclaim“to the Baptist loyalists that Jesus was indeed the Coming One.”4 Nevertheless,she does not sufﬁciently consider the possibility that Q might be independent of
the fragment, nor does she provide a reason why the intended recipients should
be limited to John’s disciples. Thus, to understand the formative milieu of Q
7:18–23 more deeply, a fresh and comprehensive analysis of the passage withcomparison to 4Q521 is in order, which takes the utilization of the common tradi­tion into account. This paper therefore, through exegesis of Q 7:18–23, aims first,
to examine the historicity of the dialogue and the authenticity of Jesus’ words inv. 22b, and second, to elucidate the Sitz im Leben of the pericope. Whether wecan be sure that Q independently used the common tradition or directly depended
on 4Q521 will also be discussed.
1.2. Method
The following procedure has been adopted to clarify the historical back­ground of the Q tradition: (1) tracing the tradition history of the passage; (2) ana­lyzing lines in 4Q521 parallel to Q 7:22b; (3) comparing the two texts minutely.

2. Tradition-Historical Analysis of Q 7:18–23
2.1. Reconstructing the Original Tradition
Two points show that Q 7:18–23 constitutes a frame together with John’s
two sermons (Q 3:7–9, 16–17). First, three traditions concerning the Baptist in

4

G. Strathearn, “4Q521 and What It Might Mean for Q 3–7,” in Bountiful Harvest:
Essays in Honor of S. Kent Brown, ed. A. C. Skinner et al. (Provo: Maxwell Institute,2011, 395–424), 419.
7

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVII 2022

Q 7:18–35 seem to have been arranged in the same order already in the Sayings
Source, just as in the Gospels.5 Hence, they are a collection of pericopes on John.
Second, Q 3 and 7 form an inclusio about ὁ ἐρχόμενος structured by Q redaction
surrounding a sermon (6:20–49) and a miracle (7:1–10).6 Therefore, Q 3:7–9,
16–17 and 7:18–23 can be logically identified as a redactional frame.
Looking into details, ὁ ἐρχόμενος in John’s question (Q 7:19) refers to theeschatological judge whom he mentions in Q 3:16.7 It appears that ὁ ἐρχόμενος,
a title in absolute usage, was used in the original Q 3:16 as in Matt 3:11 (cf.
Mark 1:7 and Luke 3:16). Since the attributes of ὁ ἐρχόμενος (Q 3:9, 17) areinappropriate for Jesus’ activities, Matthew probably did not recognize it as atitle and intermingled ὁ ἐρχόμενος (Q 3:16) with ὁ ἰσχυρότερός μου ὀπίσω μου(Mark 1:7). Luke, on the other hand, seems to have adopted Mark 1:7 to avoid
the interpretational crux, i.e., ὁ ἐρχόμενος. It remains an enigma why Matthew
should have related Q 7:18–23 (which de facto identifies Jesus with ὁ ἐρχόμενος)
to Q 3:7–9, 16–17, where ὁ ἐρχόμενος is defined as a judge with fire. So, it ishard to imagine that Matthew would have inserted ὁ ἐρχόμενος into Q text tocreate the frame-like structure. Having compared the Synoptics, the original Q
3:16 can be reconstructed as follows: […] ὁ δὲ ἐρχόμενος οὗ οὐκ εἰμὶ ἱκανὸς[…]. Consequently, Q 7:19 corresponds to 3:16 with the common expression of“the Coming One.”For the discussion below, it seems that Q 7:18–23 had existed in Docu­ment Q already before the condemnation against Israel was added to the Sayings
Source. John S. Kloppenborg regards that elements which are formative in Q
are sapiential speeches, and apophthegms and prophetic statements proclaiming
5

J. Gnilka, Das Matthäusevangelium: Kommentar zu Kapitel 1,1–13,58, HThKNT 1/1

6

J. M. Robinson, The Sayings Gospel Q: Collected Essays, BETL 179 (Leuven: Leuven(Freiburg: Herder, 2000), 405.
University Press, 2005), 607–608.
7

T. W. Manson, The Sayings of Jesus (London: SCM, 1949), 67.
8

S. CHIGASAKI: Jesus as the Messiah in the Dialogue with John (Q 7:18–23)

judgment are redactionally secondary insertions.8 Indeed, Q 3, 7, 11–12 and 17
appear prima facie to be warnings against the unrepentant Israel; however, tak­ing a closer look at individual pericopes, especially 7:18–23, judgment is not
the chief theme. While v. 23 possibly constitutes a warning to those who do notjoin the Jesus movement, it is principally an invitatory saying with a missionary
function. Meanwhile, Migaku Sato assumes that there are three redactional lay­ers: first, the Johannes-Komplex (Q 3:2–7:28) and the Aussendungskomplex (Q
9:57–10:24), and finally a later layer which covers both of the previous two andshows Israel’s condemnation.9 Further, Sato states that since Q 7:19 concerns
3:16, Q 7:18–23 was formed when this John-related part was redacted.10 On theredaction history, the section where Jesus rates John highly (Q 7:24–26, 28a) isthought to be the oldest within Q 7:18–35.11 There appears to be room for thesalvation of Israel in Q 7:18–23,12 so it is likely that Q 7:18–23 is older than
7:31–35, since this censures disbelief, and had become a part of Q before the Q
Group gave up the mission within Judaism. They would scarcely have written
down a tradition proclaiming Jesus after they started to condemn Israel. Thus,
we conclude that Q adopted the Jesus–John dialogue in a relatively early layer.
From the tradition-historical point of view, v. 22b can be regarded as theoldest part within Q 7:18–23. Our inference is confirmed by the following six
observations:

8J. S. Kloppenborg, The Formation of Q: Trajectories in Ancient Wisdom Collections(Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 244.

9

M. Sato, Q und Prophetie: Studien zur Gattungs- und Traditionsgeschichte der Quelle
Q, WUNT 2/29 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1988), 18–19, 44–45.

10

Sato, Q und Prophetie, 141.

11

H. Klein, Das Lukasevangelium, KEK 1/3 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,
2006), 279.

12

U. Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus (Mt 8–17), EKKNT 1/2 (Zürich: Benziger,
1990), 170.
9

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVII 2022

First, although Matthew and Luke inherited some Q expressions, i.e.,Ἰωάννης, οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ and πέμπειν, both evangelists extended Q 7:18,
adapting to each context. The phrases τὰ ἔργα τοῦ Χριστοῦ (which summariz­
es Matt 8–9) and ἐν τῷ δεσμωτηρίῳ derive from Matthew,13 while κύριος and
ἀπαγγέλλειν are considered Lukan.14
Second, v. 19 also comes from Q. To take a closer look at the verse, ἕτερος
seems the original and Luke may have replaced it with ἄλλος that is more suit­able to the context.15 The phrase πρὸς τὸν κύριον is also Lukan as Luke willingly
uses κύριος in narration (Luke 10:1, 41; 11:39). Introducing a statement withλέγων (‫ )לֵאמ ֹר‬following a verb related to sending seems to be an example of
Septuagintism (e.g., Judg 9:31).
Third, vv. 20–21 are an addition by Luke16 to bring the apophthegm closer
to a narrative form. V. 21 provides evidence for v. 2217 so that the questioners canexperience actual miracles. In Matthew’s case, because of Matt 8–9, he does notneed to make John’s disciples experience miracles: he cares more about Jesus’
disciples or his readers than he does about the historical situation.18
Fourth, v. 22a goes back to Q. Here Matthew seems to only insert ὁ Ἰησοῦς
missing in Luke.
Fifth, v. 22b can be regarded as being derived from the Q source and as dat­
ing back beyond apophthegmatization, for two reasons. First, François Bovon
13

Gnilka, Das Matthäusevangelium, 405.

14

H. Schürmann, Das Lukasevangelium: Kommentar zu Kapitel 1,1–9,50, HThKNT
3/1 (Freiburg: Herder, 2000), 408 n. 7.

15

F. Bovon, L’évangile selon saint Luc (1,1–9,50), CNT 3/a (2nd ed.; Genève: Labor
et Fides, 2007), 361 n. 5. On the two adjectives, see H. W. Smyth, Greek Grammar(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1956), 311 (§1271): “ἄλλος strictly meansother (of several), ἕτερος other (of two).”16

Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus, 164.

17

See Manson, The Sayings of Jesus, 66.

18Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus, 168.
10

S. CHIGASAKI: Jesus as the Messiah in the Dialogue with John (Q 7:18–23)

supposes, “Il est impossible d’isoler la question du Baptiste ou la réponse deJésus”;19 nevertheless, v. 22b reaches the climax at πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται,20 andso it was presumably later put in the frame of vv. 18–22a, 23.21 Second, v. 22b de­scribes miracles occurring in reality and is perfectly understandable even without
setting the scene (vv. 18–19). Concerning the number and position of καί, thosein Matthew appear to be original, since Matthew’s use is closer to that of similar
poetry in Early Judaism.22
Sixth, v. 23, on which the two evangelists completely agree, originates inDocument Q. The verse appears to have come into existence at the formationof the apophthegm.23 It seems impossible that v. 23, which corresponds to thequestion (v. 19), existed independently. That is, Q 7:22b had existed before it wasapophthegmatized, vv. 18–19, 22a, 23 being added to it at that point.
On the basis of the analysis above, the original text of Q 7:18–23 can bereconstructed as follows:
18 ὁ Ἰωάννης πέμψας διὰ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ 19 εἶπεν αὐτῷ·σὺ εἶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος ἢ ἕτερον προσδοκῶμεν;
19

Bovon, L’évangile selon saint Luc, 162.

20

Sato, Q und Prophetie, 141. This sentence is reminiscent of the introductory sermon(Q 6:20b–49), especially its beginning, μακάριοι οἱ πτωχοί (v. 20b) (Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus, 164). The fact that this short line was a part of 7:18–23 may
have motivated the Q redactor to place the sermon between the two John-related
blocks (Q 3:7–9, 16–17; 7:18–35).

21

See Klein, Das Lukasevangelium, 280.

22

Structurally 4Q521 2 II, 12–13 reads as “A and B, C and D, E and F” (see 3.3. (c); forthe text and translation, see 3.2.). Matthew is logical and grammatically normative:“A and B, C and D, and E and F” while Luke avoids frequent use of the coordinate
conjunctions for fluency: “A, B, C, and D, E, F.”

23

Sato, Q und Prophetie, 141. Pace Bultmann, Die Geschichte der synoptischen Tradition, 115: he asserts v. 22b was handed down with v. 23 together because the former
is without “rechte Pointe” by itself.
11

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVII 2022

22a καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς·πορευθέντες ἀπαγγείλατε Ἰωάννῃ ἃ ἀκούετε καὶ βλέπετε·22b τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν καὶ χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν,

λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται καὶ κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν,καὶ νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται καὶ πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται·23 καὶ μακάριός ἐστιν ὃς ἐὰν μὴ σκανδαλισθῇ ἐν ἐμοί.

The author’s translation will read as below:
18 John, sending (word) by his disciples, 19 said to him (= Jesus):“Are you the Coming One or should we wait for the other?”
22a And answering he said to them:“Go (and) tell John what you hear and see:
22b the blind have sight and the lame walk,the lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear,
and the dead are raised and the poor have good news proclaimed
to them.
23 And blessed is he who shall not be made to stumble in me.”The only difference between The Critical Edition of Q 24 and our recon­
struction is ἀκούσας περὶ πάντων τούτων (v. 18), which the former puts in dou­
ble brackets denoting “reconstructions that are probable but uncertain.”25 Thisphrase, a conflation of ἀκούσας in Matthew and περὶ πάντων τούτων in Luke,should be eliminated because πάντα ταῦτα sounds meaningless in the context of

24

J. M. Robinson et al., eds., The Critical Edition of Q: Synopsis Including the Gospelsof Matthew and Luke, Mark and Thomas with English, German, and French Translations of Q and Thomas, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000), 118–127.

25

Robinson, The Critical Edition of Q, lxxxii.
12

S. CHIGASAKI: Jesus as the Messiah in the Dialogue with John (Q 7:18–23)

Q and is rather suitable for that of the Third Gospel with several miracles (seeLuke 4–6).26
More precisely, this pericope (vv. 18–19, 22–23) is classified as an apo­
phthegm27 or a chreia because Jesus’ word (vv. 22–23) is central to the entirety
and has only a brief setting (vv. 18–19). As to the content, in the beginning, theBaptist sends his disciples to Jesus (v. 18) and asks him, “Are you the Coming
One …” (v. 19). Then, Jesus cites five examples of his miracles and his missionof evangelism to the poor (v. 22). He concludes his answer with “Blessed is he
who …” (v. 23). V. 22b itself is a Heilsschilderung and a poetic tradition.28
2.2. Comparison with OT Texts
Each of the six parts of Q 7:22b implies various parts of OT texts, especiallythe Book of Isaiah. To start with, τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν is probably derived fromIsa 35:5 and 61:1, and particularly in Isa 35:5, this theme occurs in combination
with healing of the deaf:29
Isa 35:5‫ָאז ּתִ ָּפ ַק ְחנָה עֵינֵי ִעו ְִרים וְָאזְנֵי ח ְֵרׁשִים ּתִ ּפָתַ ְחנָה׃‬τότε ἀνοιχθήσονται ὀφθαλμοὶ τυφλῶν, καὶ ὦτα κωφῶν ἀκούσονται.
In wording, however, τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν resembles Isa 61:1 LXX. The jux­
taposition of this motif with the evangelization of the poor is also found there:

26

However, as both evangelists commonly imply John’s knowledge of Jesus’ activities
here (Matt 11:2 // Luke 7:18), the Q text may have included some words expressing
them.

27

Bovon, L’évangile selon saint Luc, 362.

28

Sato, Q und Prophetie, 141–142.

29

See Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus, 169.
13

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVII 2022

Isa 61:1‫ׁשּב ְֵרי־לֵב‬ְ ִ‫ׁש ָל ַחנִי ַלחֲב ֹׁש ְלנ‬ְ ‫רּו ַח אֲדֹנָי י ְהוִה ָעלָי יַעַן ָמׁשַח י ְהוָה א ֹתִ י ְל ַבּׂשֵר ֲענָוִים‬‫סּורים ְּפקַח־קֹוחַ׃‬ִ ֲ‫ִלקְר ֹא ִלׁשְבּוי ִם ּדְ רֹור וְלַא‬Πνεῦμα κυρίου ἐπ᾽ ἐμέ, οὗ εἵνεκεν ἔχρισέ με· εὐαγγελίσασθαιπτωχοῖς ἀπέσταλκέ με, ἰάσασθαι τοὺς συντετριμμένους τῇ καρδίᾳ,κηρύξαι αἰχμαλώτοις ἄφεσιν καὶ τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν,On the difficult phrase ‫ֲסּורים ְּפקַח־קֹו ַח‬ִ ‫ ַלא‬, it is said that ‫ ְּפקַח־קֹו ַח‬signifies the open­
ing of eyes,30 and what matters is that prisoners in darkness gain sight as they gooutside.31 If so, we can surmise LXX freely translated this ‫ֲסּורים‬ִ ‫ ַלא‬as τυφλοῖς,interpreting the verb ‫ פקח‬from eye-opening as in Isa 42:7.32 Hence, the opinion
that LXX introduced the healing of the blind33 fails to persuade. Next, fromχωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν, only the single word χωλός is comparable to Isa 35:6;
λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται relates to Naaman’s healing by Elisha (2Kings 5:1–27):34
LXX uses the cognates λέπρα and καθαρίζειν there. As in the case of the blind,κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν also seems to be derived from Isa 35:5.35 The fifth part, νεκροὶ30

BDB, s.v. ‫ ְּפקַח־קֹו ַח‬. It may be a dittography of ‫( ּפְק ַֹח‬GKC §84b.n). Themes similar to
opening of eyes are also found in Ps 146:8 and Isa 29:18; 42:7, 18, but the three Isaian
examples are metaphorical (see Gnilka, Das Matthäusevangelium, 408).

31

J. L. Koole, Isaiah III: Isaiah 56–66, HCOT (Leuven: Peeters, 2001), 273.

32

J. Ziegler, Untersuchungen zur Septuaginta des Buches Isaias, ATA 12/3 (Münster:
Verlag der Aschendorffschen Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1934), 171. By the way, Sym­
machus (τοῖς δεδεμένοις ἀπόλυσιν), Theodotion (τοῖς δεδεμένοις διάνοιξιν) and the
Vulgate (clausis apertionem) are closer to MT.

33

M. Karrer and W. Kraus, eds., Septuaginta Deutsch: Erläuterungen und Kommentare zum griechischen Alten Testament (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2011),
2:2683.

34

See Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus, 169.

35

See Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus, 169. See also allegorical usages in 29:18;
42:18.
14

S. CHIGASAKI: Jesus as the Messiah in the Dialogue with John (Q 7:18–23)

ἐγείρονται, bears a surprisingly strong resemblance to the beginning of Isa
26:19:36
Isa 26:19‫ָָארץ ְר ָפאִים‬ֶ ‫יִחְיּו מֵתֶ יָך נְ ֵבלָתִ י יְקּומּון ָהקִיצּו ו ְַרּנְנּו ׁש ֹ ְכנֵי ָעפָר ּכִי טַל אֹור ֹת ַטּלֶָך ו‬‫ּתַ ּפִיל׃‬ἀναστήσονται οἱ νεκροί, καὶ ἐγερθήσονται οἱ ἐν τοῖς μνημείοις,καὶ εὐφρανθήσονται οἱ ἐν τῇ γῇ· ἡ γὰρ δρόσος ἡ παρὰ σοῦ ἴαμααὐτοῖς ἐστιν, ἡ δὲ γῆ τῶν ἀσεβῶν πεσεῖται.
Whereas the two sentences at the beginning form a chiasm in MT, they show
synonymous parallelism in LXX. Here MT and LXX do not literally agree (e.g.,
the latter omits the pronominal suffixes). This may show that LXX paraphrased
the enigmatic MT. In the LXX text, νεκροί and ἐγείρονται appear in different
sentences respectively. In addition, raising the dead is also comparable to thedeeds of Elijah and Elisha (1Kings 17:17–24; 2Kings 4:18–37).37 Finally, though
the voice is changed to passive, πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται is obviously based on
Isa 61:1.38 In this way, Q 7:22b, reminiscent of some parts of Isaiah as well asother OT passages, describes occurrences related to eschatological salvation in
the present tense.
2.3. Title ὁ ἐρχόμενος
The concept of ὁ ἐρχόμενος appears to date back to John the Baptist and his
disciples. Since ὁ ἐρχόμενος is considered a title on account of its absolute use,36

See Gnilka, Das Matthäusevangelium, 408.

37Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus, 169.

38

Gnilka, Das Matthäusevangelium, 408.
15Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVII 2022

we must accordingly translate it as “the Coming One.”39 Specifically, ὁ ἐρχόμενος
is frequently followed by ἐν ὀνόματι κυρίου (Q 13:35; Mark 11:9 parr.; John
12:13; see also Ps 117:26 LXX); but chronologically, before Q 3:16 and 7:19, ὁἐρχόμενος is nowhere used absolutely. Postponement of the eschaton is not treat­
ed in Q 7:19, and so the title does not depend on ἐρχόμενος ἥξει καὶ οὐ χρονίσῃ(Hab 2:3 LXX).40 Looking for other examples, Theodotion translates ‫ָאתֵ ה ֲהוָה‬(Dan 7:13) as ἐρχόμενος (LXX: ἔρχετο), which is the predicate of ὡς υἱὸς ἀν­θρώπου. In Rev 1:4, 8; 4:8, ὁ ἐρχόμενος is used as an expression for the eternity of God coming again at the end.41 Heinz Schürmann suggests ἐρχόμενος is“keine geläufige jüdische oder urchristliche Messiasbezeichnung”42 and Joachim
Gnilka regards it as the Baptist’s wording to mention the judge of spirit and fire.43
That being the case, the first usages of ὁ ἐρχόμενος in this sense are Q 3:16 and
7:19, which are related to John or his disciples, or to both. Therefore, we inferthat John devised the notion of ὁ ἐρχόμενος and his followers handed it on.
2.4. Originality of Q 7:22b?
So far, it has been widely accepted among scholars that v. 22b, a ‘mosaic’of biblical verses, is both unique and authentic. For instance, Bultmann, arguingthat vv. 22b–23 are a primary tradition, stated, “Aus ihnen spricht das prophe­
tische Selbstbewußtsein Jesu.”44 Dibelius also attributed v. 22b to Jesus.45 More­over, Douglas R. A. Hare affirmed: “nobody in first century Judaism expected
39

Just as in J. Nolland, The Gospel of Matthew, NIGTC 1 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
2005), 448.

40

Gnilka, Das Matthäusevangelium, 407.

41

See A. Satake, Die Offenbarung des Johannes, KEK 16 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &Ruprecht, 2008), 129.

42

Schürmann, Das Lukasevangelium, 408.

43

Gnilka, Das Matthäusevangelium, 407.

44

Bultmann, Die Geschichte der synoptischen Tradition, 163.

45

Dibelius, Johannes, 35.
16

S. CHIGASAKI: Jesus as the Messiah in the Dialogue with John (Q 7:18–23)

the Messiah to appear as a healer.”46 Each element in the verse seems to dependon Isaiah or other OT books, but one could insist that parallels of these compo­
nents had not appeared in combination before Q within the contemporary litera­ture besides the Bible.

3. On Parallels in 4Q521 with Q 7:22b3.1. Introductory Notes on 4Q521
Now we will make some preliminary remarks on the formation of the Messianic Apocalypse47 (4Q521), one of the Qumran texts, before discussing it inrelation to our exegesis of Q 7:22b.
For the following reasons, it seems that the content of 4Q521 was createdin the former half of the first century BC or the previous half-century.48 First,
the fragmentary manuscript with distinct Hasmonean writing is paleographically
dated to the first quarter of the first century BC.49 In addition, radiocarbon datingsuggests the range from 93 BC to AD 80 at approximately 95 percent of probabil­
ity.50 However, the composition of the content may have been prior to the copy­
ing of 4Q521. The content appears to have come into existence after the texts of
the Prophets and of the Psalms were fixed since, as will be treated later, it relies
on Ps 146:7–8, Isa 61:1 and Mal 3:24. Johannes Zimmermann dates the text tothe latter half of the second century BC or later because of the commonality with46

D. R. A. Hare, Matthew, IBC (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1993), 121.

47

Because 4Q521 is not strictly an apocalypse, we would better name it differently: e.g.,
Miracles in the Messianic Age.

48

In this connection, the use of Hebrew language and the lack of proper nouns connot­
ing the diaspora may indicate that 4Q521 was composed in Palestine.

49

É. Puech, Qumrân Grotte 4, XVIII: Textes hébreux (4Q521–4Q528, 4Q576–4Q579),
DJD 25 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1998), 3, 36.

50

A. J. T. Jull et al., “Radiocarbon Dating of Scrolls and Linen Fragments from the
Judean Desert,” Radiocarbon 37 (1995, 11–19), 14.
17

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVII 2022

the Psalms of Solomon,51 while Émile Puech supports the latter half of the cen­tury, considering the similarity with 1QHa in terms of vocabulary.52
So, who is the author of 4Q521? On the one hand, Puech emphasizes theaffinity in vocabulary with 1QHa and considers the author an Essene.53 On theother hand, indicating that the points of contact between 4Q521 and other
Qumran works are sparse, Årstein Justnes asserts, “4Q521 is earlier than the
sectarian scrolls or at least stems from another milieu.”54 On closer examination,
the sectarian literature does not mention resurrection at all and refers rarely to theeschatological prophet.55 Contrarily, 4Q521 refers to resurrection and the escha­tological messiah. Furthermore, 4Q521 lacks dualism,56 one of the characteristic
views of the Qumran community (1QS III, 20–21; 1QM I, 1). Hence, 4Q521
cannot be definitely identified as a Qumran composition.57 ‫קדושים‬I(2 II, 2), ‫חסידים‬ׄ ‫העושים‬I(7ׄI(2 II, 5; 7) and ‫את הטוב לפני אדנ֯ [י‬4) may be construed as designating thesectarians but also as being common nouns denoting pious Jews in general. It isthus likely that an eschatologically oriented Jew, whether a Qumranian or not,composed the work.
What is the genre of this text? On the whole, 4Q521 2 II surely depicts sal­vation; however, it also praises the majesty of the saving God as the source of51

Zimmermann, Messianische Texte aus Qumran, 388.

52

Puech, Qumrân Grotte 4, 36–37.

53

Puech, Qumrân Grotte 4, 36–38.

54

Å. Justnes, The Time of Salvation: An Analysis of 4QApocryphon of Daniel ar (4Q246),
4QMessianic Apocalypse (4Q521 2), and 4QTime of Righteousness (4Q215a), EHS.T
893 (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2009), 276–277.

55

Collins, The Scepter and the Star, 139.

56

Zimmermann, Messianische Texte aus Qumran, 388.

57

One scholar is of the opinion that 4Q521 expresses “the piety of the ḥăsîdîm of thePalestinian synagogue” because it bears similarity to the Eighteen Benedictions (S.
Hultgren, “4Q521, the Second Benediction of the Tefilla, the ḥăsîdîm, and the Devel­
opment of Royal Messianism,” RevQ 23 [2008, 313–340], 336).
18

S. CHIGASAKI: Jesus as the Messiah in the Dialogue with John (Q 7:18–23)

this salvation, which bears resemblance to Pss 145–147. Among others, ll. 1–2
parallel to Ps 146:6 in vocabulary, and l. 8 depends on vv. 7–8.58 This column
describes “what Jews of Palestine expected God would accomplish when His
expected Messiah would arrive on the scene.”59 Zimmermann explains that it
contains “einen stichisch aufgebauten eschatologischen Psalm bzw. Hymnus, derdas mit dem Anbruch der ‫ מלכות יהוה‬erwartete heilvolle Handeln Gottes an den‘Frommen’ schildert.”60 Therefore, 4Q521 can be categorized as a sort of psalm
in a broad sense, setting down hopes for eschatological salvation in the messianicage.
3.2. Text and Translation
According to Puech’s recension, the text of 4Q521 2 II + 4 reads as below:61

58
59

ׄ
‫הש]מים והארץ ישמעו למשיחו‬‫כי‬1‫[וכל א]שר בם לוא יסוג ממצות קדושים‬2vacat ‫התאמצו מבקשי אדני בעבדתו‬3‫הלוא בזאת תמצאו את אדני כל המיחלים בלבם‬4‫כי אדני חסידים יבקר וצדיקים בשם יקרא‬5‫ועל ענוים רוחו תרחף ואמונים יחליף בכחו‬6‫֯כי֯ יכבד את חסידים על כסא מלכות עד‬7]‫כפ[ופים‬֯ ‫מתיר אסורים פוקח עורים זוקף‬8

Justnes, The Time of Salvation, 265–267.
J. A. Fitzmyer, The Dead Sea Scrolls and Christian Origins (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
2000), 37.

60

Zimmermann, Messianische Texte aus Qumran, 388.

61

Puech, Qumrân Grotte 4, 10. Boldface: words deeply related to Q 7:22b. Opinions
differ particularly as to the reading of ll. 9–10, 13–14, but since researchers have gen­erally reached an agreement on the reading of ll. 1, 8, 12, which are directly involved
with our exegesis here, restoration of the entire text is beyond the scope of this paper.
19

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVII 2022ׄ] [‫אדבק [במ]י֯ חלים ובחסדו ׄי‬‫ׄול[ע]לם‬9

ׄ‫מעש]ה ֯טו֯ ׄב לאיש לוא יתאחר‬֯‫ופר[י‬10‫ב‬]‫ונכדות שלוא היו יעשה אדני כאשר ׄד[בר‬11‫֯כיׄ ירפא חללים ומתים יחיה ענוים יבשר‬12ׄ ׄ ‫[דלי]ם‬ׄׄ‫יעשר‬‫ישב[יע ]נ֯ ׄתושים ינהל ורעבי֯ ם‬
֯‫ו‬

13

ׄ
)?( ‫ונב[ונים‬

14

[‫וא‬

15

]? ‫קד[ושים‬֯ ‫]○ וכלם ֯כ‬

What follows is the author’s translation:
1[For the hea]vens and the earth will listen to his messiah.

2[And all w]ho are in them will not separate from the commandmentsof holy ones.

3

Those who seek the Lord, continue in his service!

4

Will you not find the Lord in this, all who hope in their heart?

5

For the Lord will attend to the pious and call the righteous by name.

6

And his spirit will move in on the poor and renew the faithful by his
power.

7

For he will glorify the pious on the throne of an eternal kingdom,

8

freeing prisoners, opening (the eyes of) the blind, strengthening thebe[nt.]

9And I will abide [with those who h]ope for [e]ver and by his mercy[….]

10 And the frui[t] of good [wor]k of man will not be late.
11 And the Lord will do glorious things which have not (ever) occurredjust as he s[aid.]
12 For he will heal the pierced and make the dead alive, proclaim
good news to the poor
13 and sati[sfy] [the helple]ss, lead the uprooted and enrich the hungry.
20

S. CHIGASAKI: Jesus as the Messiah in the Dialogue with John (Q 7:18–23)

14 And the sens[ible (?) …] and they all as ho[ly ones ?]15 And [….]
3.3. Notes to the Text(a) Line 1
Here, we will discuss the meaning of ‫ משיחו‬at the end of the line from threepoints of view, dealing with its grammatical problems.
First, this ‫ משיח‬seems to be singular in high probability. As the third person
singular masculine pronominal suffix for plural nouns, ‫ ָ◌ו‬is possible as well as‫◌יו‬,
ָand so ‫ למשיחו‬can be grammatically read both as ‫( ִל ְמׁשִיחֹו‬sg.) and as ‫ִל ְמׁשִיחָו‬(pl. in defective spelling).63 Since the Qumran community was expecting twoor three messiahs,64 the ‘plural theory’ sounds favorable for those who believe
4Q521 to be a sectarian document. However, our instance can also be regarded
as singular because plural nouns in frg. 2 are all written in full spelling.65 In ad­
dition, 4Q521 8 9 offers an example of a plural form with a suffix in full spelling(‫)משיחיה‬. It can be thus assumed that the author would have written ‫ משיחיו‬when
wishing to express “his anointed ones.”
Second, the messiah in this case is primarily an eschatological prophet. Con­sidering the following lines, ‫ משיח‬denotes not only a consecrated person but also

62

GKC §91k (see also Paradigm A).

63

M. Becker, “Die ‘messianische Apokalypse’ 4Q521 und der Interpretationsrahmen
der Taten Jesu,” in Apokalyptik und Qumran, ed. J. Frey and M. Becker (Paderborn:
Bonifatius, 2007, 237–303), 248. One may regard it as plural, asserting that obedience to one messiah is odd in Judaism (H. Stegemann, Die Essener, Qumran,Johannes der Täufer und Jesus: Ein Sachbuch [2nd ed.; Freiburg: Herder, 1993],
50–51).

64

M. Mansoor, The Dead Sea Scrolls: A College Textbook and a Study Guide (Leiden:
Brill, 1964), 157.

65

Justnes, The Time of Salvation, 201.
21

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVII 2022a ‘messiah’ in a narrow sense.66 Each of ‫( כסא מלכות עד‬l. 7) and ‫( עבדה‬l. 3) indeed
alludes to royal or sacerdotal affairs, but we find no explicit reference to kingly
and priestly functions of ‫ משיח‬in the fragment. It is worthwhile to note that ll. 1,
6, 8, 12 are profoundly influenced by Isa 61:1, which mentions a messenger
anointed by the Lord’s Spirit. Furthermore, 4Q521 2 III, 2 has connection with
Elijah redivivus (Mal 3:24; see also Sir 48:10):67
Mal 3:24‫ָָארץ ח ֵֶרם׃‬ֶ ‫ְו ֵהׁשִיב לֵב־ָאבֹות עַל־ ָּבנִים ְולֵב ָּבנִים עַל־אֲבֹותָ ם ּפֶן־ָאבֹוא ְו ִהּכֵיתִ י אֶת־ה‬4Q521 III, 2ׄ ‫נכו֯ ןׄ ׄבאים‬)?(‫אבות על בנים ֯א[שרי‬]It is certain fathers come to sons. B[lessed is ….]
On top of that, obedience or listening is associated with prophets’ message in
OT.68 Considering all the evidence discussed above, we conclude that ‫ משיח‬in
4Q521 2 II, 1 denotes a prophetic messiah.69
Third, the pronominal suffix ‫ו‬- (his) probably refers to ‫( אדני‬the Lord), which
occurs in ll. 3, 4, 5, 11 and seemingly existed in the previous lost column.
Zimmermann suggests that “ ‘sein Gesalbter’ der Gesalbte Gottes ist”70 for thefollowing grounds: (1) ‫ משיח‬with a pronominal suffix always refers to God in the
Bible and the Qumran documents; (2) l. 3 mentions God and there is no otherantecedent.

66

Puech, Qumrân Grotte 4, 12.

67

Puech, Qumrân Grotte 4, 1.

68

Zimmermann, Messianische Texte aus Qumran, 382.

69

Collins, The Scepter and the Star, 139.

70

Zimmermann, Messianische Texte aus Qumran, 349.
22

S. CHIGASAKI: Jesus as the Messiah in the Dialogue with John (Q 7:18–23)(b) Line 8
L. 8 almost verbally cites some parts of Ps 146:7–8, eliminating ‫ יהוה‬andrewriting two of the three participles in full spelling:71
Ps 146:7–8‫סּורים׃‬ִ ֲ‫ׁשּפָט ָלעֲׁשּוקִים נ ֹתֵ ן ֶלחֶם ל ְָר ֵעבִים י ְהוָה מַּתִ יר א‬ְ ‫ עֹׂשֶה ִמ‬7‫ י ְהוָה ּפ ֹ ֵק ַח ִעו ְִרים י ְהוָה זֹקֵף ּכְפּופִים י ְהוָה אֹהֵב צַּדִ יקִים׃‬8
4Q521 2 II, 8]‫כפ[ופים‬֯ ‫מתיר אסורים פוקח עורים זוקף‬(c) Lines 12–13
Ignoring the line break and paying attention to the position of the con­junction ‫ו‬, it becomes clear that ll. 12–13 are composed of three groups of two
sentences:72
12

For A and B, C

13

and D, E and F.

Even though the second and third sentences are not citations, they strongly
imply Isa 26:19 and 61:1 respectively. Boldface indicates closely resemblingparts:Isa 26:19‫ָָארץ ְר ָפאִים‬ֶ ‫יִחְיּו מֵתֶ יָך נְ ֵבלָתִ י י ְקּומּון ָהקִיצּו ו ְַרּנְנּו ׁש ֹ ְכנֵי ָעפָר ּכִי טַל אֹור ֹת ַטּלֶָך ו‬‫ּתַ ּפִיל׃‬71

Zimmermann, Messianische Texte aus Qumran, 359. Here, however, the subject isclearly ‫( ינדא‬l. 5).

72

See Puech, Qumrân Grotte 4, 17–18.
23

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVII 2022

Isa 61:1‫ׁשּב ְֵרי־לֵב‬ְ ִ‫ׁש ָל ַחנִי ַלחֲב ֹׁש ְלנ‬ְ ‫רּו ַח אֲדֹנָי י ְהוִה ָעלָי יַעַן ָמׁשַח י ְהוָה א ֹתִ י לְבַּׂשֵ ר ֲענָוִים‬‫ֲסּורים ְּפקַח־קֹוחַ׃‬ִ ‫ִלקְר ֹא ִלׁשְבּוי ִם ּדְ רֹור ְו ַלא‬4Q521 2 II, 12‫֯כי ׄ ירפא חללים ומתים יחיה ענוים יבשר‬The combination of the resurrection and the evangelization of the poor (Isa
26:19; 61:1) is not attested in other extant Jewish literature.73 Whereas ‫( רפא‬heal)and pi‛el of ‫( חיה‬make … alive) occur together in Deut 32:39b and in Hos 6:1–2,
healing of ‫ חללים‬is not found in OT.74 The roots ‫ מות‬and ‫ חלל‬co-occur in 4Q396
IV, 3, Num 19:16, 18 and Ps 88:6, and the first two sentences of l. 12 are chias­
tic.75 Further, the resurrection of the dead is given also in 4Q521 7 6; frg. 2 seems
to interpret the object of the resurrection more broadly than frg. 7, for ‫ מתים‬in theformer accompanies no modifier:4Q521 7 6
)vacat( ‫יקי]ם המחיה את מתי עמו‬He who makes alive will [rais]e the dead of his people.
The phenomena enumerated in l. 12 do not appear to be used as metaphors,
but as God’s actual salvific deeds in the future. Justnes construes them as “meta­phors denoting God’s restoration and renewal of his people.”76 Needless to say,73

S. J. Joseph, Jesus, Q, and the Dead Sea Scrolls: A Judaic Approach to Q, WUNT
2/333 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2012), 183.

74

Zimmermann, Messianische Texte aus Qumran, 362.

75

Justnes, The Time of Salvation, 237–238.

76

Justnes, The Time of Salvation, 273.
24

S. CHIGASAKI: Jesus as the Messiah in the Dialogue with John (Q 7:18–23)

Elijah, implied by the context (esp. 2 II, 12; 2 III, 2), connotes the restoration of
Israel (cf. Mark 9:12 par.), but it seems possible to interpret the passage accord­
ing to its natural sense. After all, Isa 26:19 does not use metaphor as Ezek 37
does, but rather discusses the resurrection of the dead literally, as in Dan 12:2.
Further, words with negative implications as ‫ חללים‬or ‫ מתים‬can hardly appear tosymbolize Israel. Additionally, ‫ נכבדות‬and ‫( כאשר דבר‬l. 11) hint at the concrete
realization of what is promised through the prophets. Hence, ll. 8, 12 must beread literally as God’s salvific actions in the eschatological future.
The subject of ll. 12–13 is grammatically ‫( אדני‬l. 11), but he presumably
performs the miracles by means of the messiah. To explain, because ‫( נכבדות‬l. 11)
refer to the miracles in ll. 12–1377 and l. 12 can be regarded as continuation of theprevious line, the subject does not change here. Mentioning the role of the
anointed one in Isa 61:1–2, John J. Collins claims that in l. 12 “God acts throughthe agency of a herald or a prophet.”78 Another reason for assuming a proxy isthat no biblical passages describe God himself as proclaimer of good news to thepoor:79 he acts through human beings, countries or angels. One might interpret ll.
8, 12–13 in the same way.
4Q521 is a distinctive early Jewish writing, collating the healing of theblind, the resurrection of the dead and the evangelization of the poor as God’ssaving works in the messianic age. The grammatical subject cannot be the mes­siah since the deeds, which owe their origins to various biblical verses, are as­cribed to ‫אדני‬. In this respect, including 4Q521, it is true that “in der frühjüdischen

77

Zimmermann, Messianische Texte aus Qumran, 362.

78

Collins, The Scepter and the Star, 132–133.

79

L. Novakovic, “4Q521: The Works of the Messiah or the Signs of the Messianic
Time?,” in Qumran Studies: New Approaches, New Questions, ed. M. T. Davis and B.
A. Strawn (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007, 208–231), 213.
25

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVII 2022

Literatur kein heilender Messias bezeugt sei.”80 Yet, whether interpreting themessiah here as God’s representative or not, the miracles (ll. 8, 12) are insepara­
bly connected with the messiah himself in that they are events in his era. Support
for this is found in later texts: for instance, 2Bar 30:1–2 tells that all who sleep inhope of the messiah will rise at the appearance of the messiah, and the Jerusalem
Talmud refers to the resurrection of the dead in the messianic age (y. Ketub. 66b).
However, within the limits of our investigation, any sources in the Second Tem­ple period which relate miracles, such as the resurrection, to the messiah are as
yet unknown except for 4Q521. Accordingly, 4Q521 testifies to the existenceof an idea which brought the three works concerning eschatological salvationin close relation to the messiah prior to Jesus’ age, within the milieu of Early
Judaism.

4. Exegesis of Q 7:18–23 in Comparison with 4Q521
In this section, based on the above-stated facts known from 4Q521 and the
tradition-historical analysis in 2.1., we will revert to the exegesis of the dialogue(Q 7:18–23).
4.1. Common Tradition
4Q521 2 II, 8; 12 and Q 7:22b share remarkable resemblances in terms ofstructure, phraseology, and progression of thought,81 as shown below (Fig. 1).
In the context related to the messiah or the Coming One, both 4Q521 andQ 7:22b interweave Isaian and other OT passages independently of the original
connection. Here we will point out four major similarities:

80

Konradt, “Der Vollmachtsanspruch des historischen Jesus,” 150.

81

Justnes, The Time of Salvation, 277.
26

S. CHIGASAKI: Jesus as the Messiah in the Dialogue with John (Q 7:18–23)

MT

4Q521

Ps 146:8

2 II, 8Q 7:22b‫ פוקח עורים י ְהוָה ּפ ֹ ֵק ַח ִעו ְִרים‬τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσινIsa 61:1

καὶ τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν
Ps 145:8 (Ps 146:8 MT)‫ֲסּורים ְּפקַח־קֹו ַח‬ִ ‫ְו ַלא‬Isa 26:19

LXX
Isa 61:1[…]κύριος σοφοῖ τυφλούς

2 II, 12Isa 26:19‫ ומתים יחיה יִחְיּו מֵתֶ יָך‬καὶ νεκροὶ ἐγείρονται‫נְ ֵבלָתִ י י ְקּומּון‬Isa 61:1ἀναστήσονται οἱ νεκροί,καὶ ἐγερθήσονταιοἱ ἐν τοῖς μνημείοις
Isa 61:1‫ ענוים יבשר ְל ַבּׂשֵר ֲענָוִים‬καὶ πτωχοὶ εὐαγγελίζονται εὐαγγελίσασθαι πτωχοῖς
Fig. 1: Synopsis: 4Q521 and Q 7:22b with Related OT Texts(1) Three elements, (a) the healing of the blind (Isa 35:5; 61:1 LXX;
Ps 146:8), (b) the resurrection of the dead (Isa 26:19), and (c) theevangelization of the poor (61:1), occur in the very same order.82(2) Nouns in both texts do not take definite articles, and (b) and (c)in both sources reverse the word order in Isaiah, i.e., verb–noun tonoun–verb.
(3) Since the intransitive and passivum divinum in Q 7:22 probably im­
ply God as the latent subject, both texts may hold God as the com­
mon subject of the miracles.83(4) Both documents have a few features suggesting Elijah or Elisha: al­lusion to Mal 3:24 in 4Q521 2 III, 2; λεπροὶ καθαρίζονται in Q 7:22;
resurrection in both.

82

See Zimmermann, Messianische Texte aus Qumran, 363.

83

T. Onuki, Jesus’ Time: The Image Network of the Historical Jesus (Blandford Forum:
Deo Publishing, 2009), 48.
27

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVII 2022

There are also three differences:(1) The eschatological figure mentioned in each source differs from one
another: 4Q521 adopts the term ‘messiah’ (2 II, 1) while Q touches
upon the Coming One (v. 19).
(2) Whereas the former uses imperfect (l. 12) or participle connected toimperfect (l. 8), the latter employs present tense (v. 22b).
(3) The vocabulary does not completely agree between them: ‫פוקח עורים‬(l. 8) resembles Ps 146:8, but τυφλοὶ ἀναβλέπουσιν is closer to Isa
61:1 LXX;84 pi‛el of ‫( חיה‬l. 12) is not equal to ἐγείρειν, but toζῳοποιεῖν.85
Despite these small dissimilarities, which express the individuality of each text,
4Q521 and Q 7:22b have several astonishing common features shown above.
Because of this striking
parallelism between the twocompositions, they must have

Common Tradition(depicting miracles in the messianic age)used a common tradition deal­
ing with eschatological salva­

4Q521 2 IIQ 7:22btion related to the messiah (Fig.
2).86 One may assert here that

Matt 11:5

Q referred to 4Q521 directly,

87

but direct literary dependence

Fig. 2: Genealogy of the Tradition

between the two texts in either
84

Justnes, The Time of Salvation, 279.

85

Justnes, The Time of Salvation, 241.

86

See n. 2.

87

Luke 7:22b

Collins, The Scepter and the Star, 140: “It is quite possible that the author of the Say­
ings Source knew 4Q521; at the least he drew on a common tradition.”28

S. CHIGASAKI: Jesus as the Messiah in the Dialogue with John (Q 7:18–23)

direction is hardly imaginable since the rest of the components almost do notagree. Nevertheless, it can be safely assumed that there existed at least a pre-Jesus
Jewish tradition announcing that resurrection and healing miracles would occur
in the messianic age. The fact that Jesus in Document Q does not perform any of
the five miracles enumerated in Q 7:22b also corroborates Q’s dependence on acommon tradition.88 What follows is the reconstruction of a part of the tradition
based on our hypothesis:
The Lord will open (the eyes of) the blind, (…) make the dead alive, andproclaim good news to the poor.
Disagreement in the text after the part describing the cure of the blind might beinterpreted as evidence to show that the tradition was orally transmitted; yet, theco-occurrence of the resurrection and the evangelization in the same word orderin the two sources, despite the interval of more than a century, demonstrates thatthe tradition was a written one. The existence of such eschatological collectionsof biblical passages is attested too by the Florilegium (4Q174) and the Testimonia (4Q175). It is postulated that the tradition, originally in Hebrew, was latertranslated into Greek. Remarkably, more than three decades before the discoveryof the Dead Sea Scrolls, Dibelius hypothesized as follows:
So möchte ich vermuten, daß Jesus seine Antwort auch in eine traditio­
nelle Form gekleidet hat, daß also die Worte [von Q 7:22b] etwa einem
Spruch oder L i ed von der m es s i ani s chen Ze it entstammen.89

88

Joseph, Jesus, 181. As to κωφοὶ ἀκούουσιν, see Q 11:14 (healing of a dumb person).

89

Dibelius, Johannes, 35.
29

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVII 2022

His hypothesis that there was a messianic tradition behind Q 7:22b is confirmed
when one understands “a proverb or song about the messianic age” as the com­
mon tradition and not as 4Q521 itself.90
Considering other characteristics of the content of the tradition, Document
Q appears to have deleted the word “messiah,” since it does not mention theterm. As stated above, the two sources differ from one another in subject andtense; however, 4Q521, which spells out hope for God’s future salvific deeds,
is probably closer to the original form. The tradition seems to have been alsocolored with an Elijah-related motif. Because of their locational correspondence(between the healing of the blind and the resurrection) and semantic similarity,
an expression equivalent to ‫כפ[ופים]י‬֯ ‫ זוקף‬I(4Q521 2 II, 8) or χωλοὶ περιπατοῦσιν(Q 7:22b) would have been located in the same place of the tradition.
To summarize the discussion above, the common tradition on which 4Q521
and Q 7:22b are based seems to include at least three features in the following
order: (1) the healing of the blind; (2) the resurrection; (3) the evangelization of
the poor.
This common tradition appears to go back to messianism in the intertesta­
mental period. To deliver from poverty and physical disabilities signifies the res­toration of integrity of the creation.91 The tradition is noteworthy in connecting
salvation in this sense with messianism.92 Those who expected the salvation of
the socially disadvantaged rather than the liberation from the foreign authorities
90

Contrarily, Bultmann’s opinion that “das Unmittelbare des eschatologischen Bewußt­
seins so stark zum Ausdruck [kommt], daß hier keine jüdische Tradition vorliegenkann” (Bultmann, Die Geschichte der synoptischen Tradition, 133) must be refuted.

91

Behind 4Q521 2 II, 6 is the image of new creation (cf. Gen 1:2) (Zimmermann, Messianische Texte aus Qumran, 356).

92

Incidentally, 11Q13, which centers upon Melchizedek the heavenly deliverer in thetenth Jubilee with reference to the year of grace (Isa 61:2), interprets the messenger
in Isa 52:7 as the anointed of the spirit as well as the anointed prince in Dan 9:25 (II,7–9; 15–18).
30

S. CHIGASAKI: Jesus as the Messiah in the Dialogue with John (Q 7:18–23)

by a Davidic messiah could have formed it in the Hasmonean age with the aid of
Isaian passages. If so, the common tradition partly bears witness to the diversityof messianism in Early Jewish theology.
4.2. Authenticity
Taking the setting and content into account, the event described in Q 7:18–
23 appears to bear little historical authenticity, primarily because it is so unlikelythat the imprisoned John the Baptist saw his disciples. He was reportedly re­garded as dangerous, imprisoned in Machaerus and then beheaded (Josephus,
A.J. 18.116–119). Though one researcher suggests that it is hardly possible forthe primitive church to devise a query calling Jesus’ messiahship into question,93
nonetheless, if we consider the adversity between John’s disciples and the socalled Primitive Christianity, the question (Q 7:19) sounds eminently practicaland could be a later invention.
Q 7:22b itself also cannot be attributed to Jesus, and seems to be formed
after the crucifixion. Even after the publication of 4Q521, Hultgren argues, “forhis answer Jesus drew on messianic expectations such as we find in 4Q521.” 94
However, v. 22b actually agrees with the message of Primitive Christianity that
Jesus is the messiah (cf. Mark 14:61–62; Acts 9:22). If Jesus uttered the words
in an environment where messianic tradition was commonly related to the resur­
rection or healing, he would have virtually represented himself as the fulfiller ofthe messianic expectation. Meanwhile, Takashi Onuki supports the authentic­
ity of vv. 22–23 for the intransitive and passivum divinum there, asserting that
Jesus “strongly rejects becoming an object of discussion about the Messiah.”95

93

H. Stettler, “Die Bedeutung der Täuferanfrage in Matthäus 11,2–6 par Lk 7,18–23 fürdie Christologie,” Bib 89 (2008, 173–200), 188.

94

Hultgren, “4Q521,” 340.

95

Onuki, Jesus’ Time, 49.
31

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVII 2022

Never­theless, the content appears to be Christological enough to infer a later dateof composition, in which Jesus is presumed to be the divine agent. Under thecircumstances in which Jesus’ surely authentic sayings which identify himself as
the messiah are unknown to us, it is more logical to see v. 22b as ungenuine. As
opposed to the view to see the answer as authentic,96 it is relatively reasonable toascribe it to Q in light of Q’s theology emphasizing Jesus’ title of the Son of Man,
who will come again at the end of the world. Q probably did not directly declare
Jesus to be the Coming One because of the theological differences between the
two titles. Besides, the existence of a parallel in 4Q521 will negate the originality
of Q 7:22b. Then, it appears impossible that this saying, which adapted merely
a messianic tradition at that time for mission with slight modifications, had beenorally handed down as Jesus’ until it was adopted into Document Q.
4.3. Sitz im Leben
If both the setting of the scene and Jesus’ saying in Q 7:18–23 were second­ary inventions founded upon the common tradition in circulation, why was it
written? The dialogue uses a subsidiary title for the Q Group, ὁ ἐρχόμενος, so
it seems intended primarily for mission to outsiders. Jesus’ answer to them (vv.
22–23) is affirmative and he practically says, “Yes, I am the Coming One.”97
With the macarism (v. 23), he not merely avoids denying but also urges accept­
ing himself as the expected figure. In other words, this pericope persuasively
demonstrates the affirmative answer to the question (v. 23) with reference to themessianic tradition in those days (v. 22b) as the basis. The compiler of Q 7:18–23
asserts that Jesus is the Coming One although he disappoints John’s expectationof the fiery judge (Q 3:16–17) by preaching and performing miracles expected of

96

The observation that Q’s expression in v. 22b does not literally affirm Jesus as theComing One (cf. Mark 14:61–62) might indicate the authenticity.

97

See Kloppenborg, The Formation of Q, 108.
32

S. CHIGASAKI: Jesus as the Messiah in the Dialogue with John (Q 7:18–23)

the age of salvation. Namely, the Q editor reinterprets ὁ ἐρχόμενος “in terms ofhis healing and preaching activities,”98 and recommends overcoming puzzlement
over an apparent difference between Jesus and the Coming One to whom the
Baptist looked forward. The Q Group perchance indirectly knew Jesus’ miracle
stories (cf. Q 7:1–10; 11:14) and expanded the common tradition in accordancewith Jesus’ activities just as the cleansing of the lepers.99 In contrast, exorcism (Q11:14) is never added here possibly because it has an intimate association withpopular miracle workers than with messianism. To conclude, while Q 7:18–23
acknowledges Jesus as the expected eschatological figure, regarding ὁ ἐρχόμενος
as insufficient or inappropriate to represent the quality of Jesus, it sublates thedesignation and declares Jesus to be the messianic figure superior to the mere
Coming One.
For the following three reasons, the pericope seems to take the sect ofJohn’s followers as its main target for mission. First, Jesus in the dialogue speaks
to John’s disciples, symbolizing the latter’s posthumous school. As stated by
Kloppenborg, the purpose of composition is “to attract Baptist disciples into theChristian fold.”100 Second, with very limited qualitative connections between
Jesus the wonder-working preacher and the Coming One, Sato assumes that theapophthegm is designed for John’s second-generation disciples in AD 50s.101
Specifically, the remote dialogue appears to have been composed after most peo­ple had become unfamiliar with the way in which John was executed. Appealing
to the common messianic tradition at the time, Q 7:18–23 attempts to prove that
Jesus is the expected figure and to show that John’s prediction did not come true.
Third, after John’s execution his followers undoubtedly continued to exist as a
98

Strathearn, “4Q521,” 419.

99

However, the group itself seems not so much interested in Jesus’ miracles on earth asin his words and parousia as the Son of Man (Q 12:40; 13:35).

100 Kloppenborg, The Formation of Q, 107.
101 Sato, Q und Prophetie, 141.
33

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVII 2022

substantial counterforce to the Christian communities for a while (John 3:22–30;
Acts 19:1–7).
Moreover, the compiler of this pericope probably took into consideration
the Jews surrounding the Q Group who expected messianic salvation. Accord­
ing to Onuki, “already in the Judaism of Jesus’ time, to cite together Isa 35:5–6
and 61:1 as well as Isa 26:19, which speaks of the resurrection of the dead, wascommon to a certain extent in the broad context of messianology.”102 Likewise,
Matthias Konradt suggests that 4Q521 testifies to “eine Traditionsspur der mes­
sianischen Heilserwartung Israels, an die die christlogische Interpretation desWirkens Jesu in der nachösterlichen Jesusbewegung anknüpfen konnte.”103 It
would have been evident to those who were familiar with such a tradition that Q
7:18–23 meant to present Jesus as the messiah, even if they did not know what
the Coming One meant. Generally, ὁ ἐρχόμενος (Q 3:16; 7:19) conforms to themessiah in a broad sense, in that the title signifies a figure coming at the end oftime. Provided the common tradition reconstructed in comparison with 4Q521
was somewhat widespread, members of the Q Group must have been able to em­
ploy Q 7:18–23 on various missionary occasions. While v. 23 warns John’s dis­
ciples against rejecting Jesus,104 it is spoken in the third person105 and thus can be
regarded as encouraging all people to believe in Jesus.106 The pericope portrays
Jesus, who preached and practiced healing in Galilee in fulfillment of a messian­ic tradition contemporaneous with him, as the exact, real messianic figure. Thisannouncement would have given an agreeable impression for those waiting forthe messiah as a miracle worker healing illnesses, rather than as a mighty king.
102 Onuki, Jesus’ Time, 48.
103 M. Konradt, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus, NTD 1 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &Ruprecht, 2015), 179.
104 Kloppenborg, The Formation of Q, 108.
105 Luz, Das Evangelium nach Matthäus, 170.
106 See Schürmann, Das Lukasevangelium, 407.
34

S. CHIGASAKI: Jesus as the Messiah in the Dialogue with John (Q 7:18–23)

Schürmann holds that the Sitz im Leben of the pericope is the mission to groupsof people who were open to John but had not yet been led to Christian faith,assigning the origin to the time of early Palestinian mission.107 The Q Groupappears to have designed Q 7:18–23, aiming to attract widely those acquainted
with the common tradition before the group started to say words of judgment to­ward their brotherhood; then, the pericope seems to have been later adopted into
the Sayings Source to constitute a frame with the Baptist’s sermons (Q 3:7–9,
16–17). It may also have functioned as a confirmation of faith in Jesus within thegroup. Therefore, Q 7:18–23 can be understood as a tradition envisaging mission
not alone to John’s disciples but also to other Jews expecting the messiah.

5. Conclusion
The oldest part of the dialogue between John the Baptist and Jesus (Q
7:18–23) is v. 22b, the originality and authenticity of which have often beenemphasized. 4Q521, a messianic document in the Dead Sea Scrolls composed
approximately between the second half of the second century and the first halfof the first century BC, refers to the recovery of the sight of the blind, the resur­
rection of the dead, and the evangelization of the poor. Hence, the ascriptionof miracles to the messiah already existed in Early Judaism. This resemblance
will demonstrate that a common messianic tradition must surely have existed
behind Q 7:22b and 4Q521. If so, Q 7:22b proves to be tinged with messianic
connotations, and consequently, it cannot be attributed solely to the historicalJesus. Furthermore, Q 7:18–23 as a whole seems to have been formed in the Q
Group with the aid of the tradition.108 Therefore, it appears that Q 7:18–23, while
107 Schürmann, Das Lukasevangelium, 413.
108 Detailed discussions on such subjects as the role of the dialogue in Q’s redaction or
the influence of the common tradition on the origin of Christian faith are left for futurestudies.
35

Annual of the Japanese Biblical Institute XLVII 2022

conceding Jesus to be the Coming One despite the disagreement with John’s
expectations, intends to announce to John’s disciples that Jesus is the messianic
figure surpassing the Coming One. Simultaneously, it strives to proclaim to otherJews cherishing the messianic hope that Jesus is truly the messiah.

36