^{Page 39 note 1} Cf. Dibelius, M., The Sermon on the Mount (1940), p. 15.Google Scholar For form-critical discussion of the saying ‘Love your enemies’ see also Bultmann, R., History of the Synoptic Tradition, pp. 79, 91, 96.Google Scholar

^{Page 39 note 2} So RSV, but NEB ‘he climbed the hill’.

^{Page 39 note 3} Thus Box, G. H., in The Century Bible: St. Matthew, p. 106,Google Scholar ‘The Christian righteousness that fulfils the Law is proclaimed from another Sinai’ cf. Johnson, S. E., in The Interpreter's Bible, VII (1951), 279Google Scholar, ‘He went up on the mountain…as Moses did to receive the law’.

^{Page 40 note 1} Cf. Mark iii. 8 where the same crowd ‘from Galilee…Judea and Jerusalem…’ are described in these terms: πλ⋯θος πολύ, άκούοντες όσα ποιεī, ήλθον πρòς αύτόν, which in Luke vi. 17 is altered to read οί ήλθον άκο⋯σαι αύτόν.

^{Page 41 note 1} Cf. Acts iii. 22f. where the words of Moses in Deut. xviii. 15, 19 are applied to Jesus. However, in Matt. xvii. 5 the words άκούετε αύτοũ are taken directly from Mark ix. 7; that the story of the transfiguration shows reminiscences of Exod. xix-xx is of no consequence to the subject of this paper.

^{Page 42 note 1} In Matt. v. 21, 27, the order of the two prohibitions conforms to that of the Hebrew text against LXX, suggesting Palestinian rather than Hellenistic church tradition.

^{Page 42 note 2} Cf. Matt. vii. 21; Lk. vi. 46; Rom. ii. 13; Jas. i. 22ff.

^{Page 42 note 3} So likewise, Lev. xix. 33 f.; Deut. x. 18 f.; see below.

^{Page 43 note 1} See below, on Exod. xxiii. 4–5.

^{Page 43 note 2} The words ‘pursue peace’ allude to Ps. xxxiv. 15. Literally ‘the creatures’ could refer to others besides human kind, but the final clause makes the intention clear; to bring men near to the Torah may mean to make proselytes; see below on Deut. x. 19 (LXX). Thus the motive for seeking the conversion of the foreigner is love for him as a creature of God. For the Greek κτĺσις in similar context, see Mark xvi. 15; Col. i. 23.

^{Page 43 note 3} Since ‘evil eye’, denotes ‘envy’, the thought is parallel to Sirach XXX. 24, ‘Jealousy and anger shorten life’.

^{Page 44 note 1} Examples in which ‘enemies’ standsparallel to ‘those who hate’ are too numerous for a complete catalogue; see 2 Sam. xxii. 18, 41; Ps. xviii. 17; xxi. 9; lxix. 4; cvi. 10. Since by definition ‘your enemies’ are ‘those who hate you’, retaliation with like hostility could be supported from the principle laid down in Exod. xxi. 24; Lev. xxiv. 20; Deut. xix. 21; cf. Matt. v. 38 f.

^{Page 45 note 1} Similarly, Paul writes in Rom. xii. 14, ‘Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them’, and likewise refers to Lev. xix. 18, in ch. xiii. 8–10.

^{Page 46 note 1} Perhaps their motive, the avoidance of ritual uncleanness through contact with a supposed corpse, is correctly appraised by Leaney, A. R. C., in The Rule of Qumran and its Meaning (1966), p. 194Google Scholar; but see also my critical review of this in ATR, XLVIII (1966), 424–5.Google Scholar

^{Page 47 note 1} Antiquities, XI, iv. 3.Google Scholar

^{Page 47 note 2} Ibid. XIII, IX. 1; X. 2.

^{Page 47 note 3} Josephus, , War, II, xii. 3–7.Google Scholar

^{Page 47 note 4} Luke IX. 51–5; however, D. Daube has shown that John iv. 9 refers to the alleged ritual uncleanness of Samaritan women, JBL, LXIX, 137–47.Google Scholar

^{Page 47 note 5} The expression ποι⋯σαι τό έλεος corresponds to LXX for in Zech. vii. 9, where the object of compassionate action is ‘your brother’, i.e. fellow-countryman; verse 10 forbids oppressing ‘the stranger’, i.e. proselyte (, LXX προσήλυτος); see below on Lev. xix. 34; Deut. x. 19.

^{Page 48 note 1} Cf. Didache i. 3, ‘Love those who hate you, and you will have no enemy’. For typical rabbinic exegesis of Prov. xxv. 21 f., see Bereshith R. LIV. 1, and Sukkah 52a, where ‘your enemy’ is allegorically understood to refer to the evil inclination. In Megillah R. 15 b the text is curiously applied to the banquet to which Esther invited her enemy, Haman, leading directly to his execution on his own gallows (Esth. v. 4–vii. 10).

^{Page 48 note 2} Thus LXX in Lev. xix. 33 f.; Deut. x. 18 f. renders as προσήλυτος.

^{Page 48 note 3} Hence the later rabbinic expression which may be translated ‘foreign-born son of the covenant’.

^{Page 48 note 4} So LXX, which does not conform exactly to the Hebrew. In the Talmud these verses are discussed in Pesahim 113b, where the question is debated whether the ‘enemy’ referred to is a Gentile or an Israelite. If the latter were intended, Lev. xix. 17 would not permit one to hate him; nevertheless, if there were witnesses that he had done wrong, it is permitted; it may even be obligatory to hate him, citing Prov. viii. 13, ‘The fear of the Lord is hatred of evil’. Here no distinction is made between the evil which is done and the man who does it. For a different rabbinic midrash on the text, in Sifre, see Abrahams, I., Studies in Pharisaism and the Gospels, 2nd series, p. 207.Google Scholar

^{Page 49 note 1} Op. cit. II. viii. 7, μισήσειν δ' άεί τούς άδίκους καί συναγωνιεīσθαι τοīς δικαίοις.

^{Page 49 note 2} Quod Omnis Probus Liber Sit, XII (78),Google Scholar ‘You would find among them no one who was a maker of darts, javelins, daggers, or of helmet, breastplate or shield, nor on the whole a maker of weapons or engines of war, or anyone practising the arts of warfare’. However, it should be noted that in the sequel Philo adds that the Essenes were not involved in any form of business enterprise, even of a peaceful nature.

^{Page 49 note 3} War, II. viii. 6Google Scholar είρήνης ύπουργοί.

^{Page 50 note 1} IQS i. 9. For the reference to God's vengeance, cf. Ps. xciv. 1; Num. xxxi. 3; Jer. l. 15, 28; and see also Deut. xxxii. 35, 41 if.; Isa. xxxv. 4; Micah v. 14–15; Nahum i. 2. Earlier in the Manual, lines 3–4, the same obligation is expressed in more impersonal terms, ‘to love all that God has chosen and to hate all that he has rejected’; cf. Amos v. 55, ‘Hate evil and love good’.

^{Page 50 note 2} See Burrows, M., The Dead Sea Scrolls (1955), ch. viGoogle Scholar; More Light on the Dead Sea Scrolls (1958), ch. xvii; Dupont-Sommer, A., The Essene Writings from Qumran (1961), pp. 166f., 259, 262Google Scholar; Cross, F. M. Jr, The Ancient Library of Qumran (1958), pp. 92f.Google Scholar; Ploeg, J. van der, The Excavations at Qumran (1958), pp. 61, 166Google Scholar; Y. Yadin, The Scroll of the War of the Sons of Light, passim.

^{Page 50 note 3} See above, part 3, on Pss. v. 5; xxvi. 5; cvi. 41 ff.; cxix. 113 ff.; cxxxix. 19 ff.

^{Page 50 note 4} War, II. xx. 4Google Scholar; III. ii. 1–2 (άεί διά μίσους 'lουδαίοις γεγενημένη).

^{Page 50 note 5} IQM i. 3; cf. 1QS viii. 12–14.

^{Page 51 note 1} Acts v. 37; cf. Luke ii. 1 f.; Josephus, , Antiquities, XVII. X. 5Google Scholar; XVIII. i. 1–6; cf. War, II. viii. 1.

^{Page 51 note 2} See Manson, T. W., in The Mission and Message of Jesus (1938,Google Scholar with H. D. A. Major and C.J. Wright), p. 453, suggesting that the original form of the antithesis was simply: ‘The Law says, Thou shalt love thy neighbour. I say, Love your enemies’; cf. Bundy, W. E., Jesus and the First Three Gospels (1955), pp. 107 f.Google Scholar

^{Page 52 note 1} See Burney, C. F., The Poetry of Our Lord (1925),Google Scholarpassim. R. Bultmann, op. cit. p. 79, considers this Lukan version more likely to be the original form; cf. also Manson, T. W., The Teaching of Jesus (2nd edn. 1935), p. 52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{Page 52 note 2} Such an understanding may be further supported by the words in Matt. v. 41, όοτις σε άγγαρεύσει μίλιον έν, which evidently refer to the authority of Roman legionaries to commandeer and impress a man into service, such as carrying baggage or other burdens; so Mark xv. 21; Matt. xxvii. 32; cf. Josephus, , Antiquities, XIII. II. 3.Google Scholar

^{Page 53 note 1} For similar reference to ‘enemies’ who are objects of God's love, see also Rom. v. 8, 10, where έχροι is given more universal application to all sinful men.

^{Page 54 note 1} Although no reference has been made to Derrett, J. D. M., ‘Law in the New Testament: Fresh Light on the Parable of the Good Samaritan’, NTS, XI (1964), 22 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar, there seems to be no conflict between his views and those stated here. Davies, W. D., The Setting of the Sermon on the Mount (1964)Google Scholar, was unfortunately not accessible to me at the time of writing; subsequent examination of his discussion of Matt. v. 43 ff., pp. 211–13, and particularly in relation to the Dead Sea sect, pp. 245–8, 427, seems to indicate substantial agreement between us.