Blessed are the Peacemakers
- A continuation of the discussion on Jeffrey's article.
Two have commented that the single reference to EIRHNOPOIS could not be
central to Matthew's theme.
I do not doubt that the story was so well known, probably memorized in
toto by all of the earliest followers, that in Matthew's telling, the
introduction of a radical new description could be cental to Matthew.
[Note this word does not appear in Moulton and Milligan.] But does this
mean Mark, Luke and John reject this view. Are there any variant
readings of verses other than Matt 5:9 containing eirhnopois? It is one
thing to advocate non-violence and to be non-violent [certainly this
tradition is present in all the gospels] but to advocate being a
peacemaker is truly radical! How radical is illustrated by the naming
of the missile with the capacity to carry the most nuclear warheads the
Peacemaker! The best explanation for its absence in the other gospels is
to say that it was not so important when they were published [perhaps
pre-destruction of the Temple and the war with Rome to be a peacemaker
as it was post 70 C.E.] as when Matthew was published. Jeffrey, should
not the significance of only Matthew using this terminology be part of
the article, if in fact this is a central theme?
But does Matthew with his heightened polemics against the Jews agree
with the importance of being a peacemaker?
Richard H. Anderson