In the two best manuscripts of Shem-Tob's Hebrew Matthew (those that Professor George Howard designated as "Brit. Lib." and "C," the entire Parable of the Wicked Husbandmen (or the Wicked Tenants), Mt. 21:33-46, is missing, though it is present in various forms in the other seven mss, known to have been brought more into line with the canonical text. This, I think, is highly significant.
First of all, we have already shown, through translation variants, that the kernel of the canonical, Greek text was translated from a Semitic language, most probably Hebrew. We have also shown that Shem-Tob's Hebrew Matthew is closely related to the text from which the Greek translation was made, but appears to be even older. Why, then, is the above-mentioned parable not present in the best, purest representatives of the Shem-Tob type of text? There seem to be only two possibilities: either the parable is a relatively late addition to the Matthaean text, or it has been suppressed for polemical reasons. The latter possibility seems to me to be unlikely: in their debates with Christians, medieval Jews would not have gotten away with the suppression of thirteen or fourteen verses from their proof text.
Looking at the parable on its own merits, we notice several things about it. The point of it seems to be to suggest a parallel between the owner's son and Jesus. It further characterizes those to whom the owner originally entrusted his vineyard as dishonest, evil, and murderous, an anti-Semitic characterization.
Verse 42 quotes verses 22-23 of Psalm 118, which is a victory Psalm, as anyone can see who takes the trouble to read it. To take these verses of the Psalm out of context and apply them to Jesus is something, it seems to me, that Rabbi Yeshua, an honest and righteous teacher, would never have done. This taking out of context and misapplication of the verses of Psalm 118 seems clumsy, juvenile, and inauthentic.
Then, in Verse 43, we have an anti-Semitic slur against the Jews, saying "the kingdom of God will be torn from you, and given to a nation producing fruit. But there are three clues to the authenticity or otherwise of this slur: 1) It is not supported by either Luke or Mark; 2) the phrase "kingdom of God," as appears in the canonical, Greek text is not typical of Matthew, who preferred the euphemism "kingdom of heaven," since Jews do not use the divine name lightly, and 3) even the best Greek texts (e.g. Vaticanus, Sinaiticus et al.) do not include the slur.
Verse 44, which threatens destruction to anyone who falls on "this stone" or on whom it falls, is actually Lk. 20:18, where it immediately follows the quote from Psalm 118. It is a harmonistic reading included in the "Received Text," the Vulgate, and syr-c (the later of the two surviving mss of Old Syriac textual type), but is omitted by D, 33, the Itala or Old Latin, and syr-s, the older Old Syriac. It was also unknown to Irenaeus (2nd cent.) and Origen (d. 254). Clearly, its inclusion in Matthew is an innovation. By implication, it threatens destruction to anyone who does not accept Jesus--hardly appropriate for Rabbi Yeshua, the wise teacher of righteousness. The verse does belong to the text of Luke, though, which was written for the Gentiles. Its threatening implication may also be considered to be anti-Semitic.
Clearly, the seeds of ethnic division and hatred were sown very early, and they have been fostered in some quarters ever since.
It is important to remember that neither this parable nor its additions appear in the best manuscripts of Shem-Tob's Hebrew Matthew.
Text © 2020 by Donald C. Traxler aka Donald Jacobson Traxler.
