[1] I take the liberty of translating υίός είρήνης as child of Peace for I believe it renders the sense of the phrase as Jesus used it.

[2] Heinrich, Gross, Die Idee des ewigen und allgemeinen Weltfriedens im alten Orient und im Alten Testament (Trier, 1956).Google Scholar

[3] Hans, Heinrich Schmidt, Shalom: ‘Frieden’ im Alten Orient und im Alten Testament (Stuttgart: Katholischer Bibelwerk Verlag, 1971).Google Scholar See also Eisenbeis, W., Die Wurzel Shalom im alten Testament, Beihefte zum alten Testament 113 (1969),Google Scholar basic for all OT treatments. A longer version is his ‘The Root “Shalom” in the Old Testament’, Dissertation written for University of Chicago, 1960, made available to me through the courtesy of Mennonite Seminaries Library, Elkhart, Indiana.Google ScholarRost, L., ‘Erwägungen zum Begriff Šalom’, in Schalom: Studien zum Glauben und Geschichte Israels, ed. Karl-Heinz, Bernhardt (Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1971), pp. 41–4.Google ScholarSteck, O. H., Friedensvorstellungen im alten Israel (Zürich, 1972).Google Scholar See also Pedersen, J., Israel (London, 1926), 1-II, pp. 263–331.Google Scholar

[4] Wallace, E. Caldwell, Hellenic Conceptions of Peace (New York: Columbia University Press, 1919).Google Scholar This book is misnamed for it deals with certain attempts to prevent war in Greek history until the 4th century B.C. These attempts, the author believes, failed in part because ‘religion was not strong enough to compass the end of such wars’ (p. 138). They also failed because the states were not willing to give up their claims. ‘Whenever a settlement was near, some element of jealousy or of hatred, some fear of undue influence or interference, some unwillingness to yield the least jot, lest pride and prestige be injured, came up to wreck all hopes of lasting peace’ (p. 139). Zampaglione, G., The Idea of Peace in Antiquity, transl. by Richard, Dunn (Notre Dame, Ind., and London: Notre Dame Press, 1973) which was originally published in Italy in 1967 is too general for our purposes.Google Scholar

[5] See the bibliographies in the Interpreters' Dictionary of the Bible, vol. 4, under ‘War, Ideas of’, pp. 796–801; ‘War, Methods of’, pp. 801–5, and ‘Weapons and Implements of War’, pp. 820–5. In addition, the Supplementary Volume has an article on ‘War, Holy’, pp. 942–4. By contrast the article on ‘peace’ for both Old and New Testaments runs to exactly two pages!Google Scholar

[6] On Musonius the basic work is by Cora, Lutz, ‘Musonius Rufus, “The Roman Socrates”’, Yale Classical Studies 10 (1947).Google Scholar Her translation will be cited throughout this article. In addition, see van der Horst, P. W., ‘Musonius Rufus and the New Testament’, Novum Testamentum 16 (1974), 306–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Careful study is accorded Musonius by Heinrich, Greeven, Das Hauptproblem der Sozialethik in der neueren Stoa und im Urchristentum (Gütersloh, 1934).Google Scholar See also the present writer's “Humanitas” as seen by Epictetus and Musonius Rufus’, in Studi Storico Religiosi (Rome, 1977), I, 1, pp. 63–82.Google Scholar

[7] I have followed the translation of W. Oldfather in the Loeb Series. For special studies on Epictetus the work of Bonhoeffer, A. has not been surpassed: Epiktet und das Neue Testament (Giessen, 1911; reprinted in 1964).Google Scholar See also his Epictet und die Stoa (Stuttgart, 1890)Google Scholar and Die Ethik des Stoikers Epictet (Stuttgart, 1894).Google Scholar See also Herbert, Braun, ‘Die Indifferenz gegenueber der Welt bei Paulus und bei Epiktet’, in Gesammelte Studien (Tübingen, 1962), 159–67.Google Scholar

[8] That this was not true at the beginning of this century can be seen in the summary provided by Bonhoeffer in the 1911 book cited above. Nor is it true of the work of, among others, Greeven. Although still intent upon proving the superiority of Christianity, Greeven at least gives both Musonius and Epictetus a sympathetic reading.

[9] In particular one thinks of the profound effect his Women of Troy or Medea continue to have upon North American audiences, especially the former during the American war against Vietnam. So effective was The Peace by Aristophanes that soon after its production in 421 B.C. the fifty year long peace of Nicias dawned upon the Greek world.

[10] Morton, Smith comments: ‘In the 260 years from Alexander's death to the conquest of Jerusalem by the Roman general Pompey, there were at least 200 campaigns fought in or across Palestine’, Palestinian Parties and Politics which Shaped the Old Testament (New York: Columbia University Press, 1971), p. 64.Google Scholar

[11] Histories III, 81.Google Scholar

[12] Ep. LXV, 18, 19.Google Scholar (See comments by Lutz, , p. 15, footnote 53.)Google Scholar

[13] One of the pre-Socratics, Democritus, said: ‘Whoever does an injustice is worse than he who endures one’, Diels, H., Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, rev. Franz, W., 1952,Google Scholar fragment 45. See Klassen, , ‘Humanitas…’ p. 81.Google Scholar

[14] The tangled thread of tradition regarding the marital state of Socrates is pursued by Dörrie, H. in Pauly-Wissowa-Kroll, Realenzyklopädie 2. Reihe, vol. 18 (1967), cols. 1335–1345.Google Scholar

[15] Discourses III, xxiv. 15 ff. with an appeal to Hercules. The most detailed statement is found in III, xxii, 67–82, where the question is raised whether the Cynic will find marriage a distraction. The answer given is one which Epictetus also endorsed.Google Scholar

[16] He also lauds it as the most necessary and most pleasant association available to people (XIV).

[17] The word used here and translated by Oldfather as ‘peace’ means literally a ‘smooth flow’. The phrase euroia bïou is generally translated ‘happy life’ and appears in Zeno, Stoic, 1. 46 Cleanthes, ibid., 126, and in Chrysippus, ib., 3, 4 al.

[18] I cannot agree with Bonhoeffer (NT. 65) that this passage indicates Epictetus' hostility towards a humble attitude towards God. On the contrary, the thrust of the whole appeal is that humans are to be bold enough to confront God and to be prepared to bow to his orders. Fundamentally, this is what Christian humility is all about.

[19] See the article by Anton, Fridrichsen, ‘Eine unbeachtete Parallele zum Heilandsruf’, Synoptische Studien Wikenhauser gewidmet (1953), pp. 83–5.Google Scholar

[20] See the preface to the edition by Thomas, W. Higginson published by the Liberal Arts Press, New York, 1948, and also the preface to Max Pohlenz, Die Stoa.Google Scholar

[21] See Greeven, , op. cit., p. 153.Google Scholar

[22] The best treatment in terms of discussing all usages in the New Testament and in the LXX is van Leeuwen, W. S., Eirene in Het Nieuwe Testament, Een Semasiologische, exegetische Bijdrage op Grond van de Septuaginta en de joodsche Literatuur, Wageningen, 1940.Google Scholar The best theological treatment of the theme is Joseph, Comblin, Theologie des Friedens (Vienna, 1963).Google Scholar Encyclopedia articles are by Foerster in Kittel-Friedrich and by C. L. Mitton in the Interpreters' Dictionary of the Bible, who lists no bibliography and treats the topic in a very superficial way. Erich Dinkler has tried to demonstrate the thesis that the idea of peace in the primitive church was formed by the Hebrew concept of shalom. Old Testament citations in which shalom had been translated with eirene were used to explain the crucifixion of Jesus. In addition, the Old Testament conception of a Messiah who brings a period of Messianic peace was carried over to Jesus. See his Eirene, Der urchristliche Friedensgedanke (Heidelberg, 1973). I am grateful to Michael Lattke for making this study available to me.Google Scholar

[23] Cf. the excellent summary in Johannes, Weiss, I Korintherbrief (1910), p. 5.Google Scholar

[24] To describe it as a ‘Hebraism’ is not only unenlightening but also misleading. For Frederick, Danker (‘The uios phrases in the NT’, NTS 7 (1960–61), 94),Google Scholar has shown that the idiom is also found in Greek literature. One should not, however, conclude that the phrase ‘son of peace’ occurs even though the first part, ‘son of…’ may be found. Thus Marshall seems to have overlooked the novelty of the formula (Commentary on Luke (Grand Rapids, 1978), pp. 419–42),Google Scholar and Dinkler, (op. cit.) sees nothing in the formula worthy of comment (p. 36).Google Scholar Both Schweizer, E. (TWNT 8, 366, 393)Google Scholar and Foerster, (TWNT 2, 398–418) ignore it without special comment.Google Scholar

[25] The English translations vary from ‘bosom friend’ (RSV); ‘my closest and most trusted friend’ (Jerusalem), to ‘the friend whom I trusted’ (NEB). Cf., also Jer., 20. 10; 38. 22; Ps., 55. 21; 2 Sam. 20. 19; Ps. 7. 5 where similar expressions occur.Google Scholar

[26] Paul, Hofmann, Studien zur Theologie der Logienquelle (Münster, 1972), pp. 309 ff.Google ScholarCf., also Klassen, W., ‘The Novel Element in the Love Command of Jesus’, in Klassen, W. (ed.), The New Way of Jesus (Newton, Kans., 1980), pp. 100–14.Google Scholar

[27] Best expressed in the words of Friedrich: [The term peacemaker] ‘refers to those who oblivious to personal risk, placing themselves in the midst of the fires of two warring parties seek to establish peace. Consequently God calls them his children, for they bear his nature’ (TWNT II, 418).Google Scholar

[28] NEB: True justice is the harvest reaped by peacemakers from seeds sown in a spirit of peace. NIV: Peacemakers who sow in peace raise a harvest of righteousness. RSV: And the harvest of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace. Weymouth: And righteousness is the fruit of the seed that is sown in peace by the peacemakers. Jerusalem: Peacemakers, when they work for peace, sow the seeds which will bear fruit in holiness.

[29] Here Paul does take the same position as the T Benjamin: ‘As the sun is not defiled by shining on dung and mire (but rather drieth up both and driveth away the evil smell); so also the pure mind, though encompassed by the defilements of earth, rather cleanseth them and is not itself defiled’ Charles, , Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, 1913 2, p. 358. By contrast, III Baruch 8: 4, 5 betraying Gnostic influences(?), insists that the sun's rays have been defiled.Google Scholar

[30] The tradition at least does not attribute the statement to Jesus that he has come to set husband over against wife and there would appear to be only one instance where, not the spouse as such, but the institution of marriage attenuates the call to discipleship (Luke, 12. 49–53 cf. Luke 14. 20).Google Scholar The sharp expression ‘hate’ in Luke, 14. 26 must be compared with Deuteronomy 13. 7 f.Google Scholar

[31] So Brandon, S. G. F., Jesus and the Zealots (Manchester: University Press, 1967), pp. 320 ff.Google Scholar How important this verse is to Brandon can be deduced from the fact that it also stands on the title page. Many have taken critical exception to his thesis. See the present writer's ‘Jesus and the Zealot Option’, Canadian Journal of Theology (1970), 12–21.Google Scholar

[32] The NEB translation, ‘I hereby grant him my covenant of security of tenure' is surely influenced by professors with their concern for tenure!

[33] Against Dinkler, (op. cit. p. 40–1),Google Scholar who states that the historical Jesus made no special use of the Old Testament concept of peace even though he most likely used the Shalom greeting. ‘It is notable that at no place in the Synoptic tradition is the idea of peace united to the message of the imminence of the Divine rule. This only happens after Easter and that in Paul's letter to the Romans (14, 17).’ (p. 41). To adjudicate the question whether Jesus made ‘einen besonderen Gebrauch’ of the OT shalom concept we must surely ask what his Jewish contemporaries were doing with it. Although space does not permit us to explore that subject here, it would seem clear that there is missing in Jesus the litanies ‘Great is peace…’so widespread in Judaism (on which see Moore, G. F., Judaism 2, pp. 188 ff.Google Scholar; Billerbeck, , I, pp. 215–18;Google ScholarLazarus, Ethik des Judentums (Frankfurt, 1911), II, pp. 154–61)Google Scholar as well as the approach of Hillel to make peace one of the fundamental objects of pursuit: Be a disciple of Aaron: love peace, pursue peace. love mankind, bring them near to the Torah (Aboth I, 12). At the same time that there was such concern with peace among Jewish teachers that the follower of Hillel Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel asserted that ‘Upon three things the world stands, on Truth, on Judgment and on Peace’Google Scholar (Aboth I, 18),Google Scholar Jesus as a Jewish teacher spoke little about peace in the abstract but when he met people who were frightened and isolated by reason of their illness or sin he freed them to go forth in peace (, Mk. 5. 34, Lk. 7. 50; 8. 48).Google Scholar

[34] I am following here the excellent treatment of shalom provided by Johannes Pedersen (see above footnote 3).

[35] On the use of Isaiah 53 in the early church much has been written. See for example, Wolff, H. W., Jesaja 53 im Urchristentum (Berlin, 1942, 2nd ed. 1950).Google Scholar Much stress has been laid on the vicarious dimension of the work of the suffering servant. Bertram, (TWNT 5, 606) recognizes the importance of this particular reference to peace. He translates: ‘The punishment which creates peace for us lay upon him and through his stripes we were healed.’ Like many others, however, he makes no reference to the fact that according to Jewish theology we have here a peacemaking role which is diametrically opposed to the usual means. Traditionally peace is brought about by the punishment of the enemy, here peace is brought about by the absorption of pain and punishment.Google Scholar

[36] The lamb/wolf contrast or variations thereof is standard throughout the ancient world. Diogenes Laertius (VI, 91 ff.) attributes to Zeno the statement that those who live with flatterers are as defenseless as calves in the midst of wolves. Strato the Epigrammatist (2nd cent.) describing the seduction of the adult lover of his young boy uses the same analogy: ‘I, the wolf, found there a lamb standing before the door’ (Anthologia Graeca xii. 250). Plato's line: ‘As wolves love lambs, so lovers love their loves’ (Phaedrus 241D) finds its original locus in the context of the molestation of boys as well. The reference in Jesus is built instead on Isaiah 11. 6 and 53. 7. Epictetus is also fond of the contrast and assumes that the wise man will not be like a wolf but will himself respond like a sheep to attack.Google Scholar

[37] There are no references to a future universal peace. Missing entirely in Jesus is the concern with peace in the future age (see Paul, Volz, Die Eschatologie der Jüdischen Gemeinde (1934), pp. 381–5). Most striking by comparison is the absence of the idea of ‘eternal’ peace found in Qumran (I QSb, III. 5; 21; I QS II, 4) in all of the New Testament as well as the revisions of the Aaronic blessing which at Qumran include the prayer: ‘May God lift up his countenance of wrath for vengeance against you and may no one, who adheres to the Fathers, speak peace or share it with you’ (I QS II. 9).Google Scholar

[38] ‘Bibel und Friedensgedanke’ (Berlin: Union Verlag, 1954), cited here from Von den Mysterien zur Kirche (Leipzig, 1961), pp. 303–33, esp. 315.Google Scholar

[39] It is notable that while the word eirene appears only three times in Matthew and only once in Mark it appears a total of 13 times in Luke.

[40] Pe'a 1, 1 cited in Billerbeck, , I, p. 586.Google Scholar