ate aD) in the original is very pointed, the reason being the desire to emphasise the name of Jahwe as the God of Israel (note the omission of the article before Κύριος) ; it sounded a particularistic note. The elimination of Κύριος in the verse:
446
a κ αχ Όοτ.χ. ποιεῖς " καὶ τὰ “ δαιμόνια " πιστεύουσιν καὶ φρίσσουσιν.
20.
1
20. θέλεις
r Matt. viii. δὲ γνῶναι, ὦ ἄνθρωπε "κενέ, ὅτι ἡ πίστις ᾿ χωρὶς τῶν ἔργων ἀργή 1
28, 29;
k. v.2 —7; Luke iv. 33, 34; Acts xvi. 16, 17, xix. 15. Matt. v. 22. t Rom, 111. 28.
Ίγεκρα SAC2KLP, Vulg., Pesh., Syrhk,
before us, and the emphatic position of 6 Θεός,, is most likely intentional, and points to a universalistic tendency, such as is known to have been a distinctive characteristic of Hellenistic Judaism. To Jews of all kinds belief in the unity of God formed the basis of faith; this unity is expressed in what is called the Shema‘ (Deut. vi. 4 ff.), {.ε., “Hear,” from the opening word of the passage referred to; strictly speaking, it includes Deut. vi. 4-9, xi. 13-21; Num. xv. 37-41, though originally it consisted of the one verse, Deut. vi. 4. From the timeof the Exile, according to Berachoth, i. 1, the recita- tion of the Shema‘ every morning and evening became the solemn duty of all true Jews. To the present day it is the confession of faith which every Jew breathes upon his death-bed. It is said of Rabbi Akiba, who suffered the martyr’s death, that he breathed out at the last the word ‘ One” belief in the Unity of God as contained in the Shema‘ (Ber., 61b). A few in- stances may be given from Jewish litera- ture in order to show the great import- ance of and honour attaching to the Shema‘: ‘‘ They cool the flames of Gehin- nom for him who reads the Shema‘”’ (Ber., 156); ‘‘ Whoever reads the Shema‘ upon his couch is as one that defends himself with a two-edged sword” (Meg., 3a); it is said in Ber., i. § 2, that to him who goes on reading the Shema‘ after the prescribed time no harm will come; in Suk., 42a, it is commanded that a father must teach his son to read the Shema‘ as soon as he begins to speak. The very parchment on which the Shema‘ is written is efficacious in keeping demons at a distance.—The single personality of God is frequently insisted upon in the O.T., Targums, and later Jewish literature; in the latter this fundamental article was sometimes believed to be impugned by Christian teaching concerning God, and we therefore find passages in which this latter is combated (see, on this, Oesterley and Box, op. cit., p. 155); inthe Targums all anthropomorphisms are avoided, since they were considered derogatory to the Divine Personality. We must suppose that it was owing to this intense jealousy
in reference to the-
5 Judg. ix. 4 (Sept.); 1 Cor. xv. 36; cf.
Copt., Arm., Aeth., Oec., rec.; vacua ff-
wherewith the doctrine of the Unity of God was guarded that in the passage before us there are no qualifying words regarding the Godhead of Christ; when St. Paul (1 Cor. viii. 6) enunciates the same doctrine, ἀλλ᾽ ἡμῖν els θεὸς ὁ πατήρ, he is careful to add, καὶ εἷς Κύριος ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστός. Such an addi- tion might well have been expected in the verse before us; its omission must perhaps be accounted for owing to the very pronounced Judaistic character of the writer.—kaA@s ποιεῖς : it is im- possible to believe that there is anything ironical about these words; as far as it went this belief was absolutely right; the context, which is sometimes interpreted as showing the irony of these words, only emphasises the inadequacy of the belief by itselfi—ra δαιμόνια πισ- τεύουσιν καὶ φρίσσουσιν : one is, of course, reminded of the passage, Luke viii. 26 ff. (= Matt. viii. 28 ft.), already alluded to above: δέομαί σου, μή pe βασανίσῃς, or, more graphically, in the parallel passage, ἔκραξαν λέγον- τες; τί ἡμῖν καὶ σοί, υἱὲ τοῦ Θεοῦ ; ἦλθες ὧδε πρὸ καιροῦ βασανίσαι ἡμᾶς; cf. Acts xix. 15; 1 Thess. ii. 18. On demons see the writer’s article in Hastings’ D.C.G.. i. 438 ff—Mayor gives some in- teresting reminiscences of these words in other early Christian writings, e.g., Justin, Trypho, 49, εἴο--φρίσσουσιν: an. λέγ. in the N.T.; literally ‘to bristle,” cf. Job iv. 35; the very materialistic ideas concerning evil spirits which is so characteristic of Jewish Demonology would account for an expression which is not, strictly speaking, applicable to im- material beings. One of the classes