passion traditions reinterpreted Because the lifting or moving of the lintel of the temple is especially
connected by Greek commentators to the temple’s future destruction, it
is probable that the reference to the breaking of the lintel was already
in the Greek version of Matthew from which the Nazarenes’ Aramaic
translation was prepared.^49 While the renting of the veil is open to several
interpretations,^50 thebrokenlintelismoreclearlyasignofthefuture
destruction of the temple.
The Nazarenes themselves were pro-Pauline and had nothing against
the mission to the gentiles.^51 Nevertheless, they were extremely critical of
early rabbis. In their exposition of Isaiah, they indicated that the Savior
had become to them a “destruction and shame.” (Jerome,Comm. Isa.
,–). Thus, the interpretation which takes the broken lintel as a sign
of the future destruction of the temple suits their thinking very well,
although they probably were not responsible for the original phrasing
in Matthew.
The surviving fragments do not reveal much about how the Nazarenes
interpreted Jesus’ death. Because they admired Paul as the missionary of
the gospel of Christ (see above, Chapter .., the Nazarenes’ interpreta-
tion of Isa :), it is probable that they also understood Jesus’ passion and
death roughly the same way as Paul did.
The only relatively certain thing we know about their interpretation of
Jesus’ death is that they went even further than Matthew when putting
blame for Jesus’ death on the people of Israel. While Matthew said that
the “people as a whole” (Matt :) were ready to take Jesus’ blood
on them and their children, the Nazarenes also claimed that this was
because the people wanted to have “the son of their rabbi” released.
Although it is regrettable on the viewpoint of modern research that we
have only some fragments of early Jewish-Christian gospels available, in
this case it is perhaps better that the Nazarenes’ interpretation and anti-
rabbinic collection did not get wider publicity. The effective history of the
Matthean version is sad enough.
(^49) Notably, the interpretation of the name Barrabban in the Nazarenes’ version of
Matthew (see above) also seems to presuppose the Greek accusative form (*αρα**;ν)
which has inspired the twisted Aramaic reinterpretation of the name as “Son of our
Master.” Thus, there are traces in both fragments of an earlier Greek version from which
the Nazarenes’ gospel was translated.
(^50) For different possibilities, see Luz , –.
(^51) This becomes clear from the Nazarenes’ exposition of Isaiah that Jerome quotes in
his own Commentary on Isaiah (Comm. Isa.,).