Revisiting Μακάριος in the Sermon on the Mount
Introduction
The Five Discourses of Matthew, the first among them, contain Jesus’ moral-ethical teachings in the Sermon on the Mount (5-7). Luke has the setting of a similar discourse on the plain (6:20-49). There are some significant differences between Matthean and Lukan content in terms of their organization of the materials. Matthew has the same four beatitudes as in Luke with positive blessings followed by five other couplets of makarios [Grk: μακάριος] (Blessed are those…) statements. Unlike Lukan records of the other four balancing negatives, that is to say, Jesus’ pronouncement of judgment—”Woes to those…”—on the religious leaders of his day, he reserves a separate section for “woe” statements (see Matt. 23). The meaning of μακάριος and its etymological root or stem and its lexical form have changed and been used differently over the ages in the Hellenistic and Ancient Near East; the term in the Sermon on the Mount needs some serious analysis to decipher the meaning of μακάριος beyond “blessed,” as only finding the authorial intended meaning in the Sermon can help the readers know their own state of μακάριος.
Μακάριος: Understanding It Right
The interpretive issues surrounding the pronouncement of μακάριος as “Blessed” requires an exegetical observation. Understanding its usage in ancient Greek, the Old Testament, the adaptation in the LXX, and the New Testament, as well as how the authorial audiences in the Matthean community would have understood it, will help us grasp the depth of its meaning. McKnight underlines the significance of the word for the correct understanding of Jesus’ teachings in the Sermon on the Mount. He observes that “this one word, the entire passage stands, and from this one word, the whole list hangs. Get this word right, and the rest falls into place; get it wrong, and the whole thing falls apart. We need to drill down to get it right.”[1] With the constraint of space, we will not look at the entire scope of the term but focus mainly on its use in the context of the Sermon on the Mount.
Μακάριος: Ancient Greek
Hauck and Bertram trace the ancient Greek writings to unearth their usage and meaning. They record that μακάριος is a poetic word first found in the writings of a Greek poet, Pindar (circa 522-ca. 438 B.C.), later making its way into common speech. The ancient Greeks used it predominantly for talking about the “transcendental happiness of a life beyond care, labour and death.”[2] Tracing the ancient Greek literature leads us to the emergence of the term that is principally reserved for the gods in the heavenly abode. Pindar uses the secondary form of μάκαρ while discussing cosmology as Οὐρανὸν… μακάρεσσι θεουῖς ἓδος άσφαλὲς αἰεί (“Heaven, … abode, secure forever, for all the blessed gods”).[3] Later, the poet employs the term μακάρων, associated with the mortal human. A line in the Pythian 3 poem captures this idea of the divine allotment of suffering and happiness to humans: Humans “must be happy with what good the blessed gods allot him” (χρὴ πρὸς μακάρων τυγχάνοντ᾽εὖ πασχέμεν, 103-104).[4] It is a special blessing from gods; they grant it to humans as they see fit. Humans must receive whatever falls in their lot with humility and contentment, acknowledging that it is from gods.
The term μακάριος started to appear in other ancient Greek literature. In his Works and Days, Hesiod cautions his readers on maintaining purity and applies the term to gods.[5] The meaning related to μάκαρ and μακάριος evolved as well. In Homer’s Odyssey 5.7, it described “the state of godlike blessedness hereafter in the isles of the blessed” (μάκαρες θνητοί; μακάρων νῆσοι).[6] The μακάριος, mostly sanctioned for divine happiness or prosperity or blessedness, morphs into denoting the dead “whom the whole state counts worthy of the rewards of virtue.”[7] The term underwent an evolutionary process, using it for the divine blessing to the dead and to the wealthy as “blessed.” The affluent people were considered virtuous compared to the impoverished. Once the μάκαρ, μακάριος, became the symbol of social stratification in the ancient Greek world, especially during the time of Aristotle, the term lost its importance. Consequently, poets and orators dropped it from their writings.[8] However, μακάριος did retain the view of blessedness in the later writings, which had the same overtone of fortune or happiness.
The ancient Greeks developed the form and style of beatitudes with a specific purpose. The brief philological study of μακάριος shows that then people used it first for blessing gods. The later development of the term adjusted its meaning to exalt humans for reviving divine favor or fortune from the immortal, blessed ones. In a careful reading of those strophes emerges a certain pattern of formulas extolling statements on the virtues and fortunes of a person. Some start with μακάριος, ὅς (τις); others with ὄλβιος ὅς (τις). These two are the most common forms. In the oracle of Pythia on Hesiod, he warned him of the coming endangerment of his life in the thicket of Neman Zeus:
Ὂλβιος οὗτος ἀνὴρ ὃς ἐμὸν δόμον ἀμφιπολεύει,
Ἡσίοδος Μούσῃ τετιμένος ἀθανάτῃσιν.
Fortunate/happy/blessed is this man who attends my house.
Hesiod, who having been honored by the immortal Muses;[9]
Hesiod’s oracle is one of the examples that start with the ὄλβιος ὅς (τις) formula and exhibit the stylistic form of beatitude. The hymns, poetry, and oracles reveal that the beatitudes were in use in Homeric and Hesiodic periods in “mystery rites, for initiates were called particularly blessed because of their distinctive and direct experience of God.”[10] The contents of the antiquated literature in the formulaic stylistic form give the clue that the beatitudes were well developed and received in the early Greek tradition.
Μακάριος: The Septuagint And Judaism
The Septuagint (LXX) adopts μακάριος for the Hebraic parallel word אַשְׁרֵי (ʾašrê) instead of שָׁלוֹם (šālôm) or בָּרַךְ (bĕrākâ) that corresponds with the Greek word εὐλογέω (eulogeō) to convey human flourishing or the state of being blessed. The LXX frequently uses this word, μακάριος, “blessed” or “happy” (e.g., Pss 1:1; 2:12; 105:3; 11:1; Isa 30:18), to match its Hebrew counterpart without the copula.[11] The root of the Hebrew abstract noun אַשְׁרֵי always appears in the formulaic construct plural form to express blessings, of which, in total forty-five occurrences, twenty-six times occur in the Psalter, eight in Proverbs, and eleven in several other canonical books in the Old Testament.[12] The lexicographical information reveals the convention of the beatitudes or blessings in the Old Testament with these two keywords: אַשְׁרֵי and בָּרַךְ. Davies and Alison differentiate the former from the latter as the LXX retained אַשְׁרֵי only and translated it into μακάριος to apply it to blessed humans.[13]
A brief observation of Psalm 1:1 shows this formulaic construction with reference to human flourishing. In his survey of the word אַשְׁרֵי, Pennington presents Psalm 1:1 and 2:12b as good examples where אַשְׁרֵי is used with the formulaic statement: אַ֥שְֽׁרֵי־הָאִ֗ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֤ר׀ לֹ֥א הָלַךְ֮ (Hebraica): Blessed/Happy/Flourishing (ʾašrê) is/are the man/men who does/do….[14] Apart from Psalters and Proverbs, the Pentateuch or prophetic literature, except Isaiah (30:18; 32:20), rarely used אַשְׁרֵי. In all those occurrences, the word is mainly referring to authentic human happiness or thriving “within the gracious covenant of God he has given.”[15] That being the case, the understanding of אַשְׁרֵי and its influence in first-century Judaism and rabbinical literature, as Pennington claims, “will prove to be very important as the background to the Beatitudes.”[16] He echoes McKnight’s statement about how important it is for the readers to understand the technical term loaded with the Hellenistic and Jewish philosophical backgrounds in order to get to the heart of the Beatitudes in the Sermon on the Mount. True happiness or prosperity is the outcome of staying in a faithful relationship with God. Psalm 33:12 speaks of this happiness God produced in his people or nation under his rulership and lordship (cf. see Pss 1:1-3; Prov 3:13; 8:32, 34; 14:21; 29:18). In other words, God is the sole agent of blessings on humans; humans are merely the recipients.
Μακάριος: The New Testament
The most popular English Bible translations have opted for “blessed” for μακάριος. We do not find ὄλβιος or εὐδαίμων, which were used in the Hellenistic beatitudes for “blessed” in the New Testament. There is a continuity of the word μακάριος from the LXX and exclusively using the term by retaining the meaning of “blessed” from God in the gospels. Furthermore, the term signifies a person’s accumulation of particular joy from “his share in the salvation of the kingdom of God.”[17] The language of μακάριος then implies the particularity of the kingdom of God and also recognizes and separates the blessed one from the others.
As discussed earlier, μακάριος, “Blessed,” or “Happy,” or “Fortunate” has its roots in the Old Testament; some find “Happy” to be worldly or even offensive to some who are totally immersed in the church’s religious language. People can debate whether “Happy” is the proper translation of μακάριος. Hagner succinctly describes the following:
Μακάριος [happy, blessed] is nearly incomprehensible happiness of those who participate in the kingdom announced by Jesus. Rather than happiness in its mundane sense, It refers to the deep inner joy of those who have long awaited the salvation promised by God and who now begin to experience its fulfillment. The μακάριοι are the deeply or supremely happy.[18]
Many prefer the term “blessed” over “happy” when reading the beatitudes. The term “happiness” gives way to the cultural definition and understanding as if it depended on circumstantial factors. It is reduced to a momentary emotional state of a person. Yet, the word choice for the translation of μακάριος is not a hill to die on, as distinguishing the meaning behind the word in any given context, I believe, is more important in our interpretive approach. Although the word “blessed” in the beatitude has a religious savor and sounds sacred, “happy” does not diminish the intended meaning in the beatitudes. Word choice becomes a personal preference, after all. More importantly, one should not lose sight of the essence of μακάριος irrespective of what word they use to describe the message, so long as the messenger does not disregard its etymological roots, adulterate the meaning, and lose the message of μακάριος in the beatitudes.
Μακάριος in Honor/Shame Values
In his article, “How Honorable! How Shameful!: A Cultural Analysis,” Hanson approaches μακάριος from the perspective of Judaic honor and shame cultural values. He argues that the Hebrew terminologies אַשְׁרֵי and הוֹי and their Greek equivalent terms μακάριος and οὑαι for “honor” and “shame” belong to the domain of Jewish “honor and shame” codes.[19] Deducing from Hanson, it becomes clear that the terms “blessed, happy, fortunate, or favored” as previously translated for אַשְׁרֵי and μακάριος do not rightly typify the socio-cultural values of the Matthean community in its Sitz im Leben. Thus, these terminologies require a fresh rendition. Next, he moves away from the cultic language of “blessing” and “curse” and chooses the cultural language germane to the core cultural values in the Mediterranean region. His line of arguments for the favorable terms “honorable” and “shame” in his interpretation of μακάριος instead of “blessed” or “happy” aligns with Pennington’s ideas of “happy,” as human flourishing. He claims that אַשְׁרֵי and μακάριος neither “refer to a ritual blessing nor do they mean ‘happy'” and[20] thus has committed textual violence by grossly misinterpreting and misleading the readers.
It is well-documented that the socio-cultural history of Israel operated on an “honor” and “shame” paradigm. Janzen interjects his peculiar interpretive parameter around אַשְׁרֵי where he deems any translation incorrect by default unless they carry over the ʼašrê flavor. Janzen’s thesis of אַשְׁרֵי as “a word expressive of envious desire”[21] warrants a valid criticism. Hanson is critical of Janzen’s approach to translation and charges him with deliberately ignoring a Mediterranean point of view on the subject matter and failing to recognize μακάριος as “fundamentally affirmations…[that] are exclamations of honor and esteem, understandable only in terms of the Mediterranean competition for the honor.”[22] Even though Janzen is partly right that we can view envy as a positive characteristic. Nevertheless, his translation will muddle the message of the beatitudes and make meaning obscure when envy is applied to them. Hanson disproves “happy” or “blessed” and “envy” as even more inappropriate word choices. He has already overruled it as neither a ritual nor human happiness, viz., to reject any notion of human emotional expressiveness in the beatitudes.
By interpreting μακάριος as “How honored” or “O how honorable,”[23] Hanson attempts to demonstrate how previous other word choices are poorly used, thus insufficient and unsatisfactory. Janzen used the lexicographical data of אַשְׁרֵי within the canonical books, mainly the wisdom and prophetic literature, to support his thesis. His conclusion obviously came out as a result of basing his research on the limited sample. On the other hand, Hansen explored the broader literature outside the Masoretic Texts for his proposition. Two formal pronouncements of μακάριος from Ben Sira (Sir 25:7, 8, 9) and 4 Maccabees 7:15 support his interpretation. He backs up his claim with his own interpretation in both cases. Compare his interpretation (left) with NRSV (right), then substitute a stem or lexical form with Janzen’s peculiarly ʼašrê-flavor interpretation, envy. (Highlighted in italics by me).
| Nine considerations have I honored (ἐμακάρισα) in my heart, and the tenth I will utter with my tongue …O how honorable (ἐμακάρισα) is the one who lives with an understanding wife … O how honorable (μακάριος) is the one who has found prudence … (Sir 25:7, 8, 9).[24] O, one of honorable age (μακάρίου γήρως) and of venerable (σεμνῆς) gray hair and of law-abiding (νομίμου) life, whom the faithful seal of death has perfected. (4 Macc 7:15)[25] | 7I can think of nine whom I would call blessed, and a tenth my tongue proclaims: 8 Happy the man who lives with a sensible wife… Happy is the one who does not sin with the tongue.9 Happy is the one who finds a friend… (Sir 25:7–9). O man of blessed age and of venerable gray hair and of law-abiding life, whom the faithful seal of death has perfected! (4 Mac 7:15). |
Let’s substitute “envy” for “honored/honorable” and “blessed/happy” in both translations. The reading of the translation does not simply become a matter of preference now. The supplement of positive emotional content, as Janzen subscribes to, will not rescue the readers from misreading the verses, especially 8 and 9. The danger of misguidance and misdirection is present in the translation. It is even disrespectful toward the culture and the receivers of the texts to not take account of their Sitz im Leben and impose a term that does not do justice to the text or people behind the text.
Another observation of 4 Macc 7:15 will help bring clarity to the criticism of ʼašrê-flavor interpretation or envy for μακάριος. The whole chapter is an encomium on Eleazar. In this context, translating μακάριος in verse 15 as, “To be envied is the man…”/”Enviable is the situation of the man…”[26] will be indefensible. The text is talking about the honor of an old man who gracefully aged with gray hair and lived life faithfully under the law. Hanson has already forgone the use of the words “blessed” or “happy” for “honorable.” He is objectively showing us how envy does not make any sense in this context. “Honorable” will be the correct translation here for a man “deserving of the honor because of being an elder in the community.”[27] The translation is compatible with the understanding of the value judgment of honor and shame in the ancient Greek and Jewish cultural milieu.[28] A person is honored in public. His or her reputation is elevated or restored in the community. In this sense, being honored in the community would be tantamount to being “blessed” or rewarded for upholding religious duties, social values, and fulfilling expected norms with admirable behavior.
The concept of μακάριος then transmits a sense of accountability for conducting oneself with honorable behavior and, by the same token, that is worthy of public acknowledgment. Josephus’s account of Judah Maccabee’s speech can attest to the paradigm of honor/shame that Hanson and Neyrey espouse:
Since, therefore, you are in such circumstances at present, you must either recover that liberty, and so regain a happy (εὐδαίμονα) and blessed (μακάριον) way of living, which is that according to our laws, and the customs of our country, or to submit to the most opprobrious sufferings (αἴσχιστα); Fight therefore manfully; and suppose that you must die, though you do not fight; but believe that, besides such glorious rewards as those of the liberty of your country, of your laws, of your religion, you shall then obtain everlasting glory (εὔκλειαν). (Antiquities 12.7.3 [303-304])[29]
The speech reveals what a happy, blessed, and honorable life is like in antiquity. “Happy” is closely connected to “μακάριος,” which means “honorable” for those who do not face humiliation or shame. One’s dignity and honor lie in how the person conducts himself or herself. If someone maintains good behavior and acts accordingly, the community will recognize the person and honor them even after their death. Hanson calls it the “epitome of an honor/shame transaction.”[30]
Μακάριος: The Sermon on the Mount
In Matthew, the Sermon on the Mount begins with Jesus gathering his disciples around him. The narrator also describes that Jesus had the crowd around him that could be the same crowd following from 4:25. He ascended onto the mountain. The literal translation reads, “He [Jusus] went up into the mountain and sat down” (5:1). He sat down, as was the custom in ancient Israel, where the lawgiver would take a sitting posture. In his pronouncement of seven woes in chapter 23, Jesus reminds the crowd and his disciples that the ones with legal authority such as the scribes and Pharisees sat in Moses’ seat (23:2; cf. Luke 4:16, 20). Although we are not focusing on the Matthean typology of Jesus as New Moses, we cannot simply ignore certain similarities between Moses and Jesus. For example, Moses gave the Torah; Jesus preached the Sermon on the Mount.
The relevant question to the discussion is how we shall understand the pronouncements of μακάριος in the sermon. Let us recall that the term describes not the person but the state of their flourishing. Pennington asserts that “makarisms don’t generally describe actions but rather people who are in a certain state.”[31] The phrase “certain state” of a person needs further clarification. It seems to contradict the honor/shame paradigm since its proponents proposed to read μακάριος as “honorable.” The honor is merited to a person as a reward for moral-ethical behavior. However, that is not what Pennington is saying here. People’s ethical behavior brings honor to them. They are honored in public. In the process of honoring, the person received the anticipated reward for doing whatever is honorable. Now, the person is in the state of μακάριος—state aftermath being honored. This state is what the Bible translators called “Blessed” in the Sermon on the Mount.
There is a fundamental difference between an action and a state. Human flourishing is the state as a result of being “blessed” or “honored.” We need to be categorically aware that μακάριος is the language of “wisdom literature; blessings are covenantal language.”[32] That being said, we should read μακάριος in the sermon on Matthew (5-7) in the state of being human flourishing as a result of God’s pronouncement of μακάριος in our life. If we are reading it in a narrower sense of “divine favor,” that is to say, blessings from God as a reward, then we are losing, as Pennington bemoans, the sight of human flouring.[33] He succinctly describes the economy of μακάριος in relation to God:
[T]hus, while it is important to realize that ʾašrê/makarios casts a vision of human flourishing, it is equally important to see that this flourishing can never fully occur apart from a proper relationship with the creator God. All of the Bible’s vision of human flourishing both now and in the age to come either assumes or explicitly states this fact.[34]
“Blessed” is a loaded term. For this reason, we have subconsciously connected the term with blessings. That has created blind spots for many that we count our blessings. Meantime, we are not aware of our state—people have lost sight of who they are.
Synthesis
Comparing and contrasting Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount (5-7) and Luke’s Sermon on the Plain (6:20-49), we find a noticeable parallel in their recording of μακάριος that is primarily focused on persecution. Matthew’s ninth and Luke’s fourth beatitudes both highlight the theme of persecution, giving it “a singular and significant emphasis.”[35] The supplementary materials elaborate on Jesus as the very reason for this inevitable persecution of his disciples. The phrase “on my account” has a clearly Christological bearing. Even though rejoicing and feeling blessed in the face of persecution is oxymoronic, since persecution, whether physical or verbal, can decimate human flourishing, the Matthean ninth beatitude anticipates, without glorifying, the real possibility of persecution and rejection of the disciples. Jesus himself, along with the prophets in the Old Testament, endured opposition, rejection, and even death for the sake of righteousness and justice, serving as a paradigm for the disciples to embrace and experience suffering in order to fully enjoy the preceding eight μακάριος or to be in that state in the present kingdom of God while anticipating the eschatological kingdom.
The current scholarship on μακάριος should extend beyond, not be limited to, “blessed” to more exhaustive research on the etymology and lexicology. Due to space limitations, I did not address the issues regarding the existing different interpretations of the sermon, μακάριος’s role in shaping the debate in their hermeneutical process, and its formulaic pattern that is similar but also juxtaposed within the canonical writings. The topic needs further investigation and work in the Matthean concept of μακάριος in the beatitudes to help the church break away from the selective interpretive mode that chooses to look at μακάριος either in the context of kingdom ethic or the eschatological perspective.
Bibliography
Primary Sources
Josephus, Flavius, and William Whiston. The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1987.
The Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1989.
Secondary Sources
Boeke, Hanna. The Value of Victory in Pindar’s Odes: Gnomai, Cosmology, and the Role of the Poet. Boston: BRILL, 2007. Accessed March 9, 2022. ProQuest Ebook Central.
Davies, W. D., and Dale C. Allison Jr. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to Saint Matthew. Vol. 1. International Critical Commentary. London; New York: T&T Clark International, 2004.
Hesiod. “Works and Days.” Essay. In Works of Hesiod and the Homeric Hymns: Works and Days; Theogony; the Homeric Hymns; the Battle of the Frogs and the Mice, edited by Daryl Hine, 23–51. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2005.
Kivilo, Maarit. “The Story of Hesiod’s Death.” Essay. In Early Greek Poets’ Lives: The Shaping of the Tradition322, 322:25–36. Mnemosyne Supplements. Leiden: Brill, 2010.
McKnight, Scot. Sermon on the Mount. Edited by Tremper Longman III and Scot McKnight. The Story of God Bible Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2013.
Neyrey, Jerome H. Honor and Shame in the Gospel of Matthew. 1st ed. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1998.
Pennington, Jonathan T. The Sermon on the Mount and Human Flourishing: A Theological Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic: A Division of Baker Publishing Group, 2017.
Pindar. Pindar: The Complete Odes: A New Translation. Edited by Stephen Instone. Translated by Anthony Verity. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2007.
Plato. The Dialogues of Plato. Translated by B. Jowett. Third Edition, Revised and Corrected. Vol. 5. 5 vols. New York; London: Macmillan and Co., 1892.
Journals/Periodicals
Hanson, K. C. “How Honorable! How Shameful! A Cultural Analysis of Matthew’s Makarisms and Reproaches.” Edited by Victor H. Matthews and Don C. Benjamin. Semeia 68 (1995).
Janzen, Waldemar. “ʼAšrê in the Old Testament.” Harvard Theological Review 58, no. 2 (April 1965): 215–26. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1508618.
Footnotes
[1]Scot McKnight, Sermon on the Mount, ed. Tremper Longman III and Scot McKnight, The Story of God Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2013), 32.
[2]Friedrich Hauck and Georg Bertram, “Μακάριος, Μακαρίζω, Μακαρισμός,” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, and Gerhard Friedrich (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964–), 362. Hereafter will be abbreviated as TDNT.
[3]Hanna Boeke, The Value of Victory in Pindar’s Odes: Gnomai, Cosmology and the Role of the Poet (Boston: BRILL, 2007), 39. Hereafter will be abbreviated as Victory in Pindar’s Odes.
[4]Boeke, Victory of Pindar’s Odes, 63. Gradually, Pindar dedicates Pythian 5 to Arcesilas, son of Alexibias, the one favored by the gods. In his poem, he uses μακάριος to lavishly praise Arcesilas as a blessed victor who comes back from glorious Pythian games or battle unharmed and chariot intact while defeating rival charioteers. In his praise, he invokes the names of several Greek gods. Again, Pindar closely connected human flourishing with the divine blessings or μακάριος.
[5]Hesiod, “Works and Days.” Essay. In Works of Hesiod and the Homeric Hymns: Works and Days; Theogony; the Homeric Hymns; the Battle of the Frogs and the Mice, edited by Daryl Hine (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2005), 23–51. Hereafter will be abbreviated as Works of Hesiod. In Hesiod’s Works and Days, “blessed” is exclusively reserved for the immortals or immortal spirits. He does not deny godlike blessedness to mortal humans; rather, it is possible for mortals to receive it when the blessed immortals bestow it upon them. That is the source for the otherworldly happiness. He exhorts his countrymen to avoid incurring the wrath of the blessed immortals to keep their happiness intact. (For more on his discussion on blessedness, see Hesiod, Works and Days: 690—705, and Theogony.)
[6]Hauck and Bertram, TDNT, 362.
[7]Plato, The Dialogues of Plato, trans. B. Jowett, Third Edition, Revised and Corrected, vol. 5 (New York; London: Macmillan and Co., 1892), 335. Hereafter will be abbreviated as “Dialogue.”
[8]Hauck and Bertram, TDNT, 362. In their view, the form of μακάριος found in Aristotelian Rhetorica carries the same notion as beatitudes and was the first to use it in that sense. μακαρισμὸς δὲ καὶ εὐδαιμονισμὸς αὑτοῖς μὲν ταὐτά. Cf. Plut. Tranq. An., 11 (II, 471c): “ὦ μάκαρ Ἀτρείδη, μοιρηγενές, ὀλβιόδαιμον” ἔζωθεν οὗτος ὁ μακαρισμὸς ὅπλων καὶ ἵππων καὶ στρατιᾶς περικεχυμένης. Philo Som., II, 35; L. Schmidt, 133 ff.
[9]Maarit Kivilo, “The Story of Hesiod’s Death” in Early Greek Poets’ Lives: The Shaping of the Tradition 322, Mnemosyne Supplements (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 25–36.
[10]Hauck and Bertram, TDNT, 364.
[11]Donald A. Hagner, Matthew 1–13, Vol. 33A, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1993), 88. Hereafter will be abbreviated as “WBC.”
[12]Waldemar Janzen, “ʼAšrê in the Old Testament,” Harvard Theological Review 58, no. 2 (1965): 215, http://www.jstor.org/stable/1508618. Hereafter will be abbreviated as “ʼAšrê,” HTR.
[13]W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison Jr., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel according to Saint Matthew, vol. 1, International Critical Commentary (London; New York: T&T Clark International, 2004), 431–432. Hereafter will be abbreviated as ICC. Note: Apart from never applying the former and its Greek parallel to God, the rare occurrence in 1 Tim 1:11; 6:15 as “blessed God,” Davis and Allison argue that the term is used in a less sacred way when it appears in the Pauline context. It is debatable how they came to that conclusion, solely basing their reason on Philo (Works of Philo: Sacrifices 101) καὶ ἁγίου καὶ μόνου μακαρίου alone is hardly convincing. The term here applied to God suggests exaltation of Him for His mercy. For more, see Philo, “Philo: Greek Text,” The Loeb Classical Library (William Heinemann Ltd.; Harvard University Press, 1929–1962), 170.
[14]Jonathan T. Pennington, The Sermon on the Mount and Human Flourishing: A Theological Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic: A Division of Baker Publishing Group, 2017), 45. Hereafter will be abbreviated as “The Sermon.”
[15]Pennington, The Sermon, 45.
[16]Pennington, The Sermon, 43.
[17]Hauck and Bertram, TDNT, 367.
[18]Hagner, Matthew 1–13, WBC, 91.
[19]K. C. Hanson, “How Honorable! How Shameful! A Cultural Analysis of Matthew’s Makarisms and Reproaches,” ed. Victor H. Matthews and Don C. Benjamin, Semeia 68 (1995): 87. Hereafter will be abbreviated as “Makarisms and Reproaches.” (For more, see the lexicon entry on בָּרַוּד “honor” and בּשֶׁת “shame,” and τιμῆ “honor” and αἰσχύνη “shame.”).
[20]Hanson, “Makarisms and Reproaches,” Semeia 68 (1995): 89.
[21]Janzen, “ʼAšrê in the Old Testament,” HTR, 225. In the footnote, he acknowledges that the word “envy” or “to envy” carries a highly negative rather than positive emotional thrust. He recognizes that the word(s) do not lack positive quality in the English language either. His interpretation of envy/envious is analogous to אַשְׁרֵי because it is reserved for the recipient and expressed through positive feelings. So, he singles out his interpretation of the Hebrew term “to envy” as the only correct interpretation and does not give much room for other interpretations. Other than envy, reading will be an exposition inlaid with one’s emotional overtones over the actual translation of the term. An alternative interpretation of אַשְׁרֵי as “longing” or “desire,” and sometimes as “blessed,” is accepted with some concession, possibly due to modern readers’ familiarity with the word. The criterion for the interpretation strictly has to have what he calls “peculiar ‘ašrê flavor.”
[22]Hanson, “Makarisms and Reproaches,” Semeia 68 (1995): 89-90.
[23]Hanson, “Makarisms and Reproaches,” Semeia 68 (1995): 89.
[24]Hanson, “Makarisms and Reproaches,” Semeia 68 (1995): 90.
[25]Hanson, “Makarisms and Reproaches,” Semeia 68 (1995): 91.
[26]Janzen, “ʼAšrê in the Old Testament,” HTR, 225.
[27]Hanson, “Makarisms and Reproaches,” Semeia 68 (1995): 91.
[28]Jerome H. Neyrey, Honor and Shame in the Gospel of Matthew (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1998), 166. Hereafter will be abbreviated as Honor and Shame.
[29]Flavius Josephus and William Whiston, The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1987), 327.
[30]Hanson, “Makarisms and Reproaches,” Semeia 68 (1995): 93.
[31]Pennington, The Sermon, 49.
[32]Pennington, The Sermon, 49.
[33]Pennington, The Sermon, 50.
[34]Pennington, The Sermon, 53.
[35]Kenneth E. Bailey, Jesus through Middle Eastern Eyes: Cultural Studies in the Gospels (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2008), 66.
