the general rule that it Is always omitted as superfluous in the presence of a defining appositional phrase with the article (Blass, p. 152; Moul- ton-Winer, 140-1). Perhaps even 28^ may be classed here. Blass (152) supposes the omission of the article at 28^ regular, on the ground that no anaphora is conceivable there. In 20^° the article seems want- ing because (present, ' passeth') the clause is a quotation from the popular mouth, and the use of ' Jesus ' does not range anaphorically with preceding instances; possibly 28^ may be so explained. In 121,25 certainly an article would be out of place. There remain 14I 21 ^'^^ 2651,75^ an explanation of which does not readily present itself. The use of the article with personal names seems to have been capricious in the Greek of all ages (cf. J. H. Moulton, Grammar, p. 83 ; Moulton's Winer, 140; Schmiedel-Winer, 153; Blass, 152).
3 " John the Baptist," says Holtzmann {Hand-Corn., 133), "was almost persuaded that Jesus could fulfil the Messianic purpose, that His works were therefore of the Messianic variety (I'^^a too XpiaToo)"
6o The Designations of Our Lord
tlon is, however, it scarcely seems to fit in with the connection. Jesus' exhibition of His works to the mes- sengers would hardly in these circumstances have been an answer to John's inquiry, so much as rather a refusal to give an answer. And the connection of the pronoun " Him " in verse 3 with its antecedent " Christ " of verse 2 appears to require us to take that term not as a general but as a particular one: John surely is not said to have sent to " the Messiah " and inquired of " Him " whether He was the Messiah. In other words if "the Christ" (o XptavoQ) can be taken as a proper name, designating Jesus, surely it must be so taken here. And that it can be so taken and is so taken by Matthew, its use in i^^ appears to show.
" The Christ " in i^'^ also has sometimes, to be
" The works which Jesus does," says Wellhausen in loc, " rouse doubts in John whether He is really the Christ; for he had expected from the Christ something wholly different. Just on this account Matthew calls them the works of the Christ ; . . , the Baptist turns, however, with his doubts to Jesus Himself and leaves the decision to Him." " Thf ivorkSj" comments J. A. Alexander, " i.e. the miracles (Lk 7^*) of Christ, not of Jesus as a private person, but of the Messiah, which He claimed to be, . . . The meaning then is that John heard in prison of miraculous performances appearing and purporting to be wrought by the Messiah." These commentators seem to suppose that Mt II- is to be rendered somewhat like this: "But John, because he heard in his prison through the medium of his disciples of [talk about] the works of the Messiah, sent through the medium of his disciples to ask Him, Art thou the Coming One, or are we to look for another?" The query arises, however, to whom John sent this inquiry? To "the Messiah"? Or to Jesus? What, then, is the antecedent of the auritj? As the auTui is Jesus, so its antecedent too Apiirrou is Jesus: and the concrete rather than the abstract seems more natural. Why not then translate: "Having heard of the works of Christ he sent and asked Him"? The solution seems to depend on whether c5 Xptffr6(;\s used always as a pure appellative in Mat., or sometimes as a nomen pro- prium, or at least as a quasi nomen proprium. But the answer to that is scarcely doubtful (e.g. i^'').
The Designations in Matthew 6 1
sure, been understood as the general term, " the Mes- siah."* But this throws it out of range not only with the other names in this simple summary, wherein the corresponding terms in the accounting are most simply given — Abraham, David, the Babylonian deportation; but also with the precedent phrase, ' Jesus, surnamed Christ,' of verse i6 to which it refers back and which it takes up and repeats. For that the ' Christ ' in this phrase Is a simple proper name is not only suggested by the absence of the article with it, but is Indicated by the currency of a similar mode of speech In the case of like Instances of double names.^ It appears then that the addition, " surnamed Christ," Is' Intended in this passage as a formal Identification of the par-
•* So, for example, Weiss, in his reworking of Meyer. He supposes that the summary here is not merely a mnemonic device, but rests on a deeply-laid symbolism. There were fourteen generations from Abra- ham to the establishment of the kingdom; and fourteen more from its establishment to its loss: should there not be just fourteen more from its destruction to its re-establishment in the Messiah ? " It is accord- ingly," he says, " also beyond dispute that we should translate — ' up to the Messiah.'" Similarly (he says) Kiibel and Nosgen. This carries with it the appellative sense in t.'^'^ and 2'j'^'^.