As is well known, Matthew and Luke agree with each other to varying degrees in the double tradition (the stuff shared by Matthew and Luke which is not to be found in Mark). One of the passages in which they agree the most exactly, nearly verbatim, is Matthew 3.7-10 = Luke 3.7-9 (I have boldfaced the differences in John's words, but not bothered to do so in the narration, which I have instead underlined):
Matthew 3.7-10 (Greek) | Luke 3.7-9 (Greek) |
| 7 Ἰδὼν δὲ πολλοὺς τῶν Φαρισαίων καὶ Σαδδουκαίων ἐρχομένους ἐπὶ τὸ βάπτισμα αὐτοῦ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς· | 7 Ἔλεγεν οὖν τοῖς ἐκπορευομένοις ὄχλοις βαπτισθῆναι ὑπ᾿ αὐτοῦ· |
| Γεννήματα ἐχιδνῶν, τίς ὑπέδειξεν ὑμῖν φυγεῖν ἀπὸ τῆς μελλούσης ὀργῆς; 8 ποιήσατε οὖν καρπὸν ἄξιον τῆς μετανοίας· 9 καὶ μὴ δόξητε λέγειν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς· Πατέρα ἔχομεν τὸν Ἀβραάμ, λέγω γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι δύναται ὁ θεὸς ἐκ τῶν λίθων τούτων ἐγεῖραι τέκνα τῷ Ἀβραάμ. 10 ἤδη δὲ ἡ ἀξίνη πρὸς τὴν ῥίζαν τῶν δένδρων κεῖται· πᾶν οὖν δένδρον μὴ ποιοῦν καρπὸν καλὸν ἐκκόπτεται καὶ εἰς πῦρ βάλλεται. | Γεννήματα ἐχιδνῶν, τίς ὑπέδειξεν ὑμῖν φυγεῖν ἀπὸ τῆς μελλούσης ὀργῆς; 8 ποιήσατε οὖν καρποὺς ἀξίους τῆς μετανοίας· καὶ μὴ ἄρξησθε λέγειν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς· Πατέρα ἔχομεν τὸν Ἀβραάμ, λέγω γὰρ ὑμῖν ὅτι δύναται ὁ θεὸς ἐκ τῶν λίθων τούτων ἐγεῖραι τέκνα τῷ Ἀβραάμ. 9 ἤδη δὲ καὶ ἡ ἀξίνη πρὸς τὴν ῥίζαν τῶν δένδρων κεῖται· πᾶν οὖν δένδρον μὴ ποιοῦν καρπὸν καλὸν ἐκκόπτεται καὶ εἰς πῦρ βάλλεται. |
Matthew 3.7-10 (English) | Luke 3.7-9 (English) |
| 7 And, having seen many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming for his baptism, he said to them, | 7 He said therefore to the crowds journeying out to be baptized by him, |
| "Generations of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? 8 Make fruit, therefore, worthy of repentance. 9 And do not think to say among yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father,' for I say to you that God is able to raise children for Abraham from these stones. 10 But already the axe is laid to the root of the trees. Every tree, therefore, not making good fruit is cut off and cast into the fire." | "Generations of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? 8 Make fruits, therefore, worthy of repentance. And do not begin to say among yourselves, 'We have Abraham as our father,' for I say to you that God is able to raise children for Abraham from these stones. 9 But already the axe is also laid to the root of the trees. Every tree, therefore, not making good fruit is cut off and cast into the fire." |
| Matthew 3.10 (SQE) Codex Sinaiticus Syriacus and minuscule 1506 omit καλὸν. | Luke 3.9 (LaParola) καρπὸν καλὸν] (see Matthew 3:10; Matthew 7:19) א A B C K L W X Δ Θ Π Ψ 0155 f1 f13 28 33 565 700 892 1009 1010 1071 1079 1195 1216 1230 1241 1242 1253 1344 1365 1546 1646 2148 2174 Byz Lect itb itc itd ite itf itl itq itr1 vgcl syrh copsa copbo goth arm eth geo Irenaeuslat(ms) Irenaeuslat ς (WH [καλὸν]) καρποὺς καλοὺς] D syrc syrs syrp syrpal καρπὸν] p4vid ita itaur itff2 itz vgww copbo(ms) Irenaeuslat Origen |
Notice the variants in Matthew 3.10 = Luke 3.9. Some Lucan manuscripts and a couple of Matthean manuscripts omit καλὸν, with the resulting meaning that trees which bear no fruit (at all, as opposed to bearing no good fruit) are the ones which are cut down and thrown to the fire. Notice also that this is exactly what we find elsewhere in Luke, as well:
Luke 13.6-9: 6 And He began telling this parable: "A man had a fig tree which had been planted in his vineyard; and he came looking for fruit on it and did not find any. 7 And he said to the vineyard-keeper, 'Behold, for three years I have come looking for fruit on this fig tree without finding any. Cut it down! Why does it even use up the ground?' 8 And he answered and said to him, 'Let it alone, sir, for this year too, until I dig around it and put in fertilizer; 9 and if it bears fruit next year [κἂν μὲν ποιήσῃ καρπὸν εἰς τὸ μέλλον], fine; but if not, cut it down [εἰ δὲ μή γε, ἐκκόψεις αὐτήν].'"
This is about fruit in general, not specifically good fruit. A tree bearing no fruit is to be cut down (nothing, however, is mentioned here about the fire).
The passage which I was reading in Irenaeus, which eventually led to this post, is the following:
Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3.9.1: 1 For Matthew the apostle... declares that John, when preparing the way for Christ, said to those who were boasting of their relationship [to Abraham] according to the flesh, but who had their mind tinged and stuffed with all manner of evil, preaching that repentance which should call them back from their evil doings, said, "O generation of vipers, who has shown you to flee from the wrath to come? Bring forth therefore fruit meet for repentance. And think not to say within yourselves, 'We have Abraham as father,' for I say unto you that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham." He preached to them, therefore, the repentance from wickedness, but he did not declare to them another God, besides Him who made the promise to Abraham; he, the forerunner of Christ, of whom Matthew again says, and Luke likewise [iterum ait Matthaeus, similiter autem et Lucas], "For this is he that was spoken of from the Lord by the prophet, 'The voice of one crying in the wilderness, "Prepare the way of the Lord; make straight the paths of our God. Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill brought low; and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough into smooth ways; and all flesh shall see the salvation of God [Isaiah 40.3-5b]."'"
The interesting thing here is that Irenaeus states that it is Matthew who puts the "generation of vipers" speech on John's' lips; he does not mention Luke, despite his incredibly close verbal agreement with Matthew here. This alone means literally nothing, since of course it is quite true that Matthew has this speech, and Irenaeus does not deny that Luke has it, as well. However, he does go on to give another Matthean passage (from Matthew 3.3), and this one he says that Luke also has; he also quotes it in its fuller Lucan form (Matthew has only Isaiah 40.3, whereas Luke has Isaiah 40.3-5b). So why specify that both Matthew and Luke have this passage in this case and not in the case of Matthew 3.7-10 = Luke 3.7-9? Could Ireneaus be working with a copy of Luke which lacks these verses? Could these verses have been scribally harmonized into Luke at some point?
Mark, too, gives this quotation from Isaiah, in Mark 1.3, but it is easy to see why Irenaeus fails to mention him in this context, for Mark actually gives a quotation from Malachi 3.1a before the quotation of Isaiah 40.3. Irenaeus is aware of this:
Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3.10.5: 5 Wherefore also Mark, the interpreter and follower of Peter, does thus commence his Gospel narrative: "The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; as it is written in the prophets, 'Behold, I send My messenger before Your face, which shall prepare Your way [Malachi 3.1a], the voice of one crying in the wilderness, "Prepare the way of the Lord; make the paths straight before our God [Isaiah 40.3]."'" ....
But the intervening quotation from Malachi (which both Matthew and Luke locate elsewhere, in Matthew 11.10 and Luke 7.27) is a good enough reason for Irenaeus to have omitted Mark from consideration at this present juncture. Not so Luke in the case of Matthew 3.7-10 = Luke 3.7-9, however, in which Matthew and Luke are very nearly verbatim.
Irenaeus may demonstrate an awareness of Luke 3.7-9 elsewhere:
Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5.10.2: 2 .... Then, again, as the wild olive, if it be not grafted in, remains useless to its lord because of its woody quality, and is cut down as a tree bearing no fruit [et quasi infructuosum lignum exciditur], and cast into the fire; so also man, if he does not receive through faith the engrafting of the Spirit, remains in his old condition, and being [mere] flesh and blood, he cannot inherit the kingdom of God. ....
The bit about bearing no fruit (at all) may reflect the textual variant (just plain fruit, not good fruit) in Luke 3.9. But it may instead reflect the equivalent (but admittedly less well attested) variant in Matthew 3.10; or it may reflect a crossover between John's "generation of vipers" speech and the parable of the fig tree in Luke 13.6-9 (given above), since Irenaeus is freewheeling here, not quoting from any single passage exactly. (The image of the wild olive tree, for example, probably comes from Romans 11.17.)
I have searched the Biblindex and e-Catena references to Luke 3.7-9, and the earliest clear reference seems to come from Origen, a good generation after Irenaeus. The rest of the examples seem either to be too vague or to quite possibly derive from Matthew, not Luke:
Ignatius to the Ephesians 11.1: 1 These are the end times. And so we should feel shame and stand in fear of God's patience, that it not turn into our judgment. For we should either fear the wrath to come [τήν μέλλονσαν όργήν] or love the gracious gift that is already here — one or the other, so long as we acquire true life by being found in Christ Jesus.
Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5.32.2: 2 .... For his seed is the Church, which receives the adoption to God through the Lord, as John the Baptist said: "For God is able from the stones to raise up children to Abraham." ....
Irenaeus, Demonstration 93: 93 And that this race was to become an holy people was declared in the Twelve Prophets by Hosea, thus, "I will call that which was not [my] people, my people; and her that was not beloved, beloved. It shall come to pass that in the place where it was called not my people, there shall they be called sons of the Living God." This also is that which was said by John the Baptist, that God is able of these stones to raise up sons to Abraham. For our hearts being withdrawn and taken away from the stony worship by means of faith behold God, and become sons of Abraham, who was justified by faith. And therefore God says by Ezekiel the prophet, "And I will give them another heart, and a new spirit will I give them: and I will withdraw and take away the stony heart from their flesh, and I will give them another heart of flesh: so that they shall walk in my precepts, and shall keep my ordinances and do them. And they shall be to me for a people, and I will be to them for a God."
Tertullian, Against Hermogenes 12.1-2: 1 Age nunc malam ac pessimam credamus esse materiam, utique natura, sicut deum bonum et optimum credimus, proinde natura. Porro naturam certam et fixam haberi oportebit, tam in malo perseuerantem apud materiam quam et in bono apud deum, inconuertibilem et indemutabilem scilicet, qu<i>a, si demutabitur natura in materia de malo in bonum, demutari poterit et in deo de bono [non] in malum. 2 Hoc loco dicet aliquis: «Ergo de lapidibus filii Abrahae non suscitabuntur et genimina uiperarum non facie<n>t paenitentiae fructum et filii irae non fient filii pacis, si natura mutabilis non erit?» Temere ad ista exempla respicies, o homo. Non enim competunt ad causam materiae, quae innata est, ea quae nata sunt, lapides et uiperae et homines; horum enim natura habendo institutionem habere poterit et cessationem. / 1 Come now, let us suppose matter to be evil, nay, very evil, by nature of course, just as we believe God to be good, even very good, in like manner by nature. Now nature must be regarded as sure and fixed, just as persistently fixed in evil in the case of matter, as immoveable and unchangeable in good in the case of God, because, as is evident, if nature admits of change from evil to good in matter, it can be changed from good to evil in God. 2 Here some man will say, "Then will children not be raised up to Abraham from the stones? Will generations of vipers not bring forth the fruit of repentance, and children of wrath fail to become sons of peace, if nature be unchangeable?" Your reference to such examples as these, my friend, is a thoughtless one. For things which owe their existence to birth, such as stones and vipers and human beings, are not apposite to the case of matter, which is unborn; since their nature, by possessing a beginning, may have also a termination.
Tertullian, Against Hermogenes 37.4: 4 Ut autem et argumentationem qua putasti te propositionem tuam confirmaturum retundam, oppono etiam illud: si bona fuisset materia semper, quare non desiderasset in melius reformari? Quod bonum, non desiderat aut non optat aut non capit profectum, ut fiat de bono melius? Aeque si mala natura fuisset, quare non potuerit a deo converti ut a potentiore, ut ab eo qui lapidum quoque naturam convertere valeat in filios Abrahae? / 4 With a view, however, to refute the argument whereby you thought you were going to clinch your proposition, I here contend: if matter had always been good, why should it not have still wanted a change for the better? Does that which is good never desire, never wish, never feel able to advance, so as to change its good for a better? And in like manner, if matter had been by nature evil, why might it not have been changed by God as the more powerful being, as able to convert the nature of stones into children of Abraham?
Tertullian, On the Soul 21: 4a De hoc plane relinquitur quaeri, an demutabile debeat credi, quod naturale dicatur. Idem enim convertibilem negant naturam, ut trinitatem suam in singulis proprietatibus figant, quia arbor bona malos non ferat fructus nec mala bonos, et nemo de spinis metat ficus et de tribulis uvas. Ergo si ita est, neque de lapidibus filios Abrahae suscitare poterit deus nec genimina viperarum facere paenitentiae fructus. / 4a They deny that nature is susceptible of any change, in order that they may be able to establish and settle their threefold theory or trinity in all its characteristics as to the several natures, because a good tree cannot produce evil fruit, nor a corrupt tree good fruit; and nobody gathers figs of thorns, nor grapes of brambles. If so, then God will not be able any longer to raise up from the stones children unto Abraham; nor to make a generation of vipers bring forth fruits of repentance.
Tertullian, On Modesty 10.5: 5 It is enough for me that even John, when strewing the Lord's ways, was the herald of repentance no less to such as were on military service and to publicans [Luke 3.12-14], than to the sons of Abraham. The Lord Himself presumed repentance on the part of the Sidonians and Tyrians if they had seen the evidences of His miracles.
Tertullian, On Modesty 20.10: 10 For, in coming to the High Priest of the Father — Christ — all impediments must first be taken away, in the space of a week, that the house which remains, the flesh and the soul, may be clean; and when the Word of God has entered it, and has found stains of red and green, forthwith must the deadly and sanguinary passions be extracted and cast away out of doors, for the Apocalypse withal has set death upon a green horse, but a warrior upon a red, and in their stead must be understrewn stones polished and apt for conjunction, and firm, such as are made into [sons] of Abraham, that thus the man may be fit for God.
Tertullian, On the Garland 13.2a: 2a There the blood of the Lord serves for your purple robe, and your broad stripe is His own cross; there the axe is already laid to the trunk of the tree; there is the branch out of the root of Jesse.
Tertullian, On Exhortation to Chastity 6.3a: 3a The reason why any one plants a wood and lets it grow, is that at his own time he may cut it. The wood was the old order, which is being pruned down by the new gospel, in which withal the axe has been laid at the roots.
Tertullian, On Repentance 4.3: 3 This will draw you forth when sunk in the waves of sins, and will bear you forward into the port of the divine clemency. Seize the opportunity of unexpected felicity, that you, who sometime were in God's sight nothing but a drop of a bucket and dust of the threshing floor, and a potter's vessel, may thenceforward become that tree which is sown beside the waters, is perennial in leaves, bears fruit at its own time, and shall see neither fire nor axe.
Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor 1.9.80.1: 1 Λοιδορία δέ ἐστι ψόγος ἐπιτεταμένος. Κέχρηται δὲ τῇ λοιδορίᾳ ἐν φαρμάκου μοίρᾳ διὰ Ἡσαΐου λέγων «οὐαὶ ἔθνος ἁμαρτωλόν, υἱοὶ ἄνομοι, λαὸς πλήρης ἁμαρτιῶν, σπέρμα πονηρόν» κἀν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ διὰ Ἰωάννου «ὄφεις» φησὶν «γεννήματα ἐχιδνῶν». / 1 Denunciation is vehement speech. And He employs denunciation as medicine, by Isaiah [1.4], saying, "Ah, sinful nation, lawless sons, people full of sins, wicked seed." And in the gospel by John He says, "Serpents, generations of vipers!" [This is something of an issue in its own right, since the gospel of John has no such line. Clement may simply be confused, working from memory, between either John and Matthew or John and Luke.]
Clement of Alexandria, Who Is the Rich Man Who Is Being Saved? 29.3: Τούτων δὲ τῶν τραυμάτων μόνος ἰατρὸς Ἰησοῦς, ἐκκόπτων ἄρδην τὰ πάθη πρόρριζα, οὐχ ὥσπερ ὁ νόμος ψιλὰ τὰ ἀποτελέσματα, τοὺς καρποὺς τῶν πονηρῶν φυτῶν, ἀλλὰ τὴν ἀξίνην τὴν ἑαυτοῦ πρὸς τὰς ῥίζας τῆς κακίας προσαγαγών. / Of these wounds the only physician is Jesus, who cuts out the passions thoroughly by the root, not as the law does the bare effects, the fruits of evil plants, but applies His axe to the roots of wickedness.
Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Heathen 1.4.2-3: 2 Μάρτυς ἡμῖν προφητικὴ παρίτω φωνή, συνῳδὸς ἀληθείας, τοὺς ἐν ἀγνοίᾳ καὶ ἀνοίᾳ κατατετριμμένους οἰκτείρουσα· «δυνατὸς γὰρ ὁ θεὸς ἐκ τῶν λίθων τούτων ἐγεῖραι τέκνα τῷ Ἀβραάμ». Ὃς κατελεήσας τὴν ἀμαθίαν τὴν πολλὴν καὶ τὴν σκληροκαρδίαν τῶν εἰς τὴν ἀλήθειαν λελιθωμένων ἤγειρεν θεοσεβείας σπέρμα ἀρετῆς αἰσθόμενον ἐκ λίθων ἐκείνων, τῶν λίθοις πεπιστευκότων ἐθνῶν. 3 Αὖθις οὖν ἰοβόλους τινὰς καὶ παλιμβόλους ὑποκριτὰς ἐφοδεύοντας δικαιοσύνῃ «γεννήματα ἐχιδνῶν» κέκληκέ που· ἀλλὰ καὶ τούτων εἴ τις τῶν ὄφεων μετανοήσαι ἑκών, ἑπόμενος δὴ τῷ λόγῳ «ἄνθρωπος» γίνεται «θεοῦ». «Λύκους» δὲ ἄλλους ἀλληγορεῖ προβάτων κῳδίοις ἠμφιεσμένους, τοὺς ἐν ἀνθρώπων μορφαῖς ἁρπακτικοὺς αἰνιττόμενος. Καὶ πάντα ἄρα ταῦτα ἀγριώτατα θηρία καὶ τοὺς τοιούτους λίθους ἡ οὐράνιος ᾠδὴ αὐτὴ μετεμόρφωσεν εἰς ἀνθρώπους ἡμέρους. / 2 As our witness, let us adduce the voice of prophecy accordant with truth, and bewailing those who are crushed in ignorance and folly, for God is able of these stones to raise up children to Abraham, and He, commiserating their great ignorance and hardness of heart who are petrified against the truth, has raised up a seed of piety, sensitive to virtue, of those stones — of the nations, that is, who trusted in stones. 3 Again, therefore, some venomous and false hypocrites, who plotted against righteousness, He once called generations of vipers. But if one of those serpents even is willing to repent, and follows the Word, he becomes a man of God. Others he figuratively calls wolves, clothed in sheep-skins, meaning thereby monsters of rapacity in human form. And so all such most savage beasts, and all such blocks of stone, the celestial song has transformed into tractable men.
Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 5.3: And this same (one) is styled also by the Phrygians unfruitful. For he is unfruitful when he is carnal, and causes the desire of the flesh. This, he says, is what is spoken: "Every tree not producing good fruit, is cut down and cast into the fire" [τοῦτο, φησίν, ἐστὶ τὸ εἰρημένον· «πᾶν δένδρον μὴ ποιοῦν καρπὸν καλὸν ἐκκόπτεται καὶ εἰς πῦρ βάλλεται»].
Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 6.11: If, however, a tree continues alone, not producing fruit fully formed, it is utterly destroyed. "For somewhere near," he says, "is the axe at the roots of the tree. Every tree," he says, "which does not produce good fruit is cut down and cast into fire" [«ἐγγὺς γάρ που», φησίν, «ἡ ἀξίνη παρὰ τὰς ῥίζας τοῦ δένδρου· πᾶν δένδρον», φησί, «μὴ ποιοῦν καρπὸν καλὸν ἐκκόπτεται καὶ εἰς πῦρ βάλλεται»].
Origen, Commentary on John 6.14: These observations are of use as showing how the evangelists are accustomed to abbreviate the sayings of the prophets. It has also to be observed that the speech, "Offspring of vipers," and son on, is said by Matthew to have been spoken to the Pharisees and Sadducees when coming to baptism, they being a different set of people from those who confessed their sins, and to whom no words of this kind were spoken. With Luke, on the contrary, these words were addressed to the multitudes who came out to be baptized by John, and there were not two divisions of those who were baptized, as we found in Matthew. But Matthew, as the careful observer will see, does not speak of the multitudes in the way of praise, and he probably means the Baptist's address, "Offspring of vipers," and so on, to be understood as addressed to them also. Another point is that he says to the Pharisees and Sadducees, "Bring forth a fruit," in the singular, "worthy of repentance," but to the multitudes he uses the plural, "Bring forth fruits worthy of repentance." Perhaps the Pharisees are required to yield the special fruit of repentance, which is no other than the Son and faith in Him, while the multitudes, who have not even a beginning of good things, are asked for all the fruits of repentance, and so the plural is used to them. Further, it is said to the Pharisees, "Think not to say within yourselves, 'We have Abraham for our father.'" For the multitudes now have a beginning, appearing as they do to be introduced into the divine Word, and to approach the truth; and thus they begin to say within themselves, "We have Abraham for our father." The Pharisees, on the contrary, are not beginning to this, but have long held it to be so. But both classes see John point to the stones aforesaid and declare that even from these children can be raised up to Abraham, rising up out of unconsciousness and deadness. And observe how it is said to the Pharisees [Matthew 3.7-10], according to the word of the prophet, "You have eaten false fruit" [Hosea 10.13], and they have false fruit. Every tree which brings not forth good fruit is cut down and cast into the fire, while to the multitudes [Luke 3.7-9] which do not bear fruit at all, "Every tree which brings not forth fruit is cut down" [Luke 3.9]. For that which has no fruit at all has not good fruit, and, therefore, it is worthy to be cut down. But that which bears fruit has by no means good fruit, whence it also calls for the axe to lay it low. But, if we look more closely into this about the fruit, we shall find that it is impossible that that which has just begun to be cultivated, even should it not prove fruitless, should bear the first good fruits.
Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5.32.2: 2 .... For his seed is the Church, which receives the adoption to God through the Lord, as John the Baptist said: "For God is able from the stones to raise up children to Abraham." ....
Irenaeus, Demonstration 93: 93 And that this race was to become an holy people was declared in the Twelve Prophets by Hosea, thus, "I will call that which was not [my] people, my people; and her that was not beloved, beloved. It shall come to pass that in the place where it was called not my people, there shall they be called sons of the Living God." This also is that which was said by John the Baptist, that God is able of these stones to raise up sons to Abraham. For our hearts being withdrawn and taken away from the stony worship by means of faith behold God, and become sons of Abraham, who was justified by faith. And therefore God says by Ezekiel the prophet, "And I will give them another heart, and a new spirit will I give them: and I will withdraw and take away the stony heart from their flesh, and I will give them another heart of flesh: so that they shall walk in my precepts, and shall keep my ordinances and do them. And they shall be to me for a people, and I will be to them for a God."
Tertullian, Against Hermogenes 12.1-2: 1 Age nunc malam ac pessimam credamus esse materiam, utique natura, sicut deum bonum et optimum credimus, proinde natura. Porro naturam certam et fixam haberi oportebit, tam in malo perseuerantem apud materiam quam et in bono apud deum, inconuertibilem et indemutabilem scilicet, qu<i>a, si demutabitur natura in materia de malo in bonum, demutari poterit et in deo de bono [non] in malum. 2 Hoc loco dicet aliquis: «Ergo de lapidibus filii Abrahae non suscitabuntur et genimina uiperarum non facie<n>t paenitentiae fructum et filii irae non fient filii pacis, si natura mutabilis non erit?» Temere ad ista exempla respicies, o homo. Non enim competunt ad causam materiae, quae innata est, ea quae nata sunt, lapides et uiperae et homines; horum enim natura habendo institutionem habere poterit et cessationem. / 1 Come now, let us suppose matter to be evil, nay, very evil, by nature of course, just as we believe God to be good, even very good, in like manner by nature. Now nature must be regarded as sure and fixed, just as persistently fixed in evil in the case of matter, as immoveable and unchangeable in good in the case of God, because, as is evident, if nature admits of change from evil to good in matter, it can be changed from good to evil in God. 2 Here some man will say, "Then will children not be raised up to Abraham from the stones? Will generations of vipers not bring forth the fruit of repentance, and children of wrath fail to become sons of peace, if nature be unchangeable?" Your reference to such examples as these, my friend, is a thoughtless one. For things which owe their existence to birth, such as stones and vipers and human beings, are not apposite to the case of matter, which is unborn; since their nature, by possessing a beginning, may have also a termination.
Tertullian, Against Hermogenes 37.4: 4 Ut autem et argumentationem qua putasti te propositionem tuam confirmaturum retundam, oppono etiam illud: si bona fuisset materia semper, quare non desiderasset in melius reformari? Quod bonum, non desiderat aut non optat aut non capit profectum, ut fiat de bono melius? Aeque si mala natura fuisset, quare non potuerit a deo converti ut a potentiore, ut ab eo qui lapidum quoque naturam convertere valeat in filios Abrahae? / 4 With a view, however, to refute the argument whereby you thought you were going to clinch your proposition, I here contend: if matter had always been good, why should it not have still wanted a change for the better? Does that which is good never desire, never wish, never feel able to advance, so as to change its good for a better? And in like manner, if matter had been by nature evil, why might it not have been changed by God as the more powerful being, as able to convert the nature of stones into children of Abraham?
Tertullian, On the Soul 21: 4a De hoc plane relinquitur quaeri, an demutabile debeat credi, quod naturale dicatur. Idem enim convertibilem negant naturam, ut trinitatem suam in singulis proprietatibus figant, quia arbor bona malos non ferat fructus nec mala bonos, et nemo de spinis metat ficus et de tribulis uvas. Ergo si ita est, neque de lapidibus filios Abrahae suscitare poterit deus nec genimina viperarum facere paenitentiae fructus. / 4a They deny that nature is susceptible of any change, in order that they may be able to establish and settle their threefold theory or trinity in all its characteristics as to the several natures, because a good tree cannot produce evil fruit, nor a corrupt tree good fruit; and nobody gathers figs of thorns, nor grapes of brambles. If so, then God will not be able any longer to raise up from the stones children unto Abraham; nor to make a generation of vipers bring forth fruits of repentance.
Tertullian, On Modesty 10.5: 5 It is enough for me that even John, when strewing the Lord's ways, was the herald of repentance no less to such as were on military service and to publicans [Luke 3.12-14], than to the sons of Abraham. The Lord Himself presumed repentance on the part of the Sidonians and Tyrians if they had seen the evidences of His miracles.
Tertullian, On Modesty 20.10: 10 For, in coming to the High Priest of the Father — Christ — all impediments must first be taken away, in the space of a week, that the house which remains, the flesh and the soul, may be clean; and when the Word of God has entered it, and has found stains of red and green, forthwith must the deadly and sanguinary passions be extracted and cast away out of doors, for the Apocalypse withal has set death upon a green horse, but a warrior upon a red, and in their stead must be understrewn stones polished and apt for conjunction, and firm, such as are made into [sons] of Abraham, that thus the man may be fit for God.
Tertullian, On the Garland 13.2a: 2a There the blood of the Lord serves for your purple robe, and your broad stripe is His own cross; there the axe is already laid to the trunk of the tree; there is the branch out of the root of Jesse.
Tertullian, On Exhortation to Chastity 6.3a: 3a The reason why any one plants a wood and lets it grow, is that at his own time he may cut it. The wood was the old order, which is being pruned down by the new gospel, in which withal the axe has been laid at the roots.
Tertullian, On Repentance 4.3: 3 This will draw you forth when sunk in the waves of sins, and will bear you forward into the port of the divine clemency. Seize the opportunity of unexpected felicity, that you, who sometime were in God's sight nothing but a drop of a bucket and dust of the threshing floor, and a potter's vessel, may thenceforward become that tree which is sown beside the waters, is perennial in leaves, bears fruit at its own time, and shall see neither fire nor axe.
Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor 1.9.80.1: 1 Λοιδορία δέ ἐστι ψόγος ἐπιτεταμένος. Κέχρηται δὲ τῇ λοιδορίᾳ ἐν φαρμάκου μοίρᾳ διὰ Ἡσαΐου λέγων «οὐαὶ ἔθνος ἁμαρτωλόν, υἱοὶ ἄνομοι, λαὸς πλήρης ἁμαρτιῶν, σπέρμα πονηρόν» κἀν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ διὰ Ἰωάννου «ὄφεις» φησὶν «γεννήματα ἐχιδνῶν». / 1 Denunciation is vehement speech. And He employs denunciation as medicine, by Isaiah [1.4], saying, "Ah, sinful nation, lawless sons, people full of sins, wicked seed." And in the gospel by John He says, "Serpents, generations of vipers!" [This is something of an issue in its own right, since the gospel of John has no such line. Clement may simply be confused, working from memory, between either John and Matthew or John and Luke.]
Clement of Alexandria, Who Is the Rich Man Who Is Being Saved? 29.3: Τούτων δὲ τῶν τραυμάτων μόνος ἰατρὸς Ἰησοῦς, ἐκκόπτων ἄρδην τὰ πάθη πρόρριζα, οὐχ ὥσπερ ὁ νόμος ψιλὰ τὰ ἀποτελέσματα, τοὺς καρποὺς τῶν πονηρῶν φυτῶν, ἀλλὰ τὴν ἀξίνην τὴν ἑαυτοῦ πρὸς τὰς ῥίζας τῆς κακίας προσαγαγών. / Of these wounds the only physician is Jesus, who cuts out the passions thoroughly by the root, not as the law does the bare effects, the fruits of evil plants, but applies His axe to the roots of wickedness.
Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Heathen 1.4.2-3: 2 Μάρτυς ἡμῖν προφητικὴ παρίτω φωνή, συνῳδὸς ἀληθείας, τοὺς ἐν ἀγνοίᾳ καὶ ἀνοίᾳ κατατετριμμένους οἰκτείρουσα· «δυνατὸς γὰρ ὁ θεὸς ἐκ τῶν λίθων τούτων ἐγεῖραι τέκνα τῷ Ἀβραάμ». Ὃς κατελεήσας τὴν ἀμαθίαν τὴν πολλὴν καὶ τὴν σκληροκαρδίαν τῶν εἰς τὴν ἀλήθειαν λελιθωμένων ἤγειρεν θεοσεβείας σπέρμα ἀρετῆς αἰσθόμενον ἐκ λίθων ἐκείνων, τῶν λίθοις πεπιστευκότων ἐθνῶν. 3 Αὖθις οὖν ἰοβόλους τινὰς καὶ παλιμβόλους ὑποκριτὰς ἐφοδεύοντας δικαιοσύνῃ «γεννήματα ἐχιδνῶν» κέκληκέ που· ἀλλὰ καὶ τούτων εἴ τις τῶν ὄφεων μετανοήσαι ἑκών, ἑπόμενος δὴ τῷ λόγῳ «ἄνθρωπος» γίνεται «θεοῦ». «Λύκους» δὲ ἄλλους ἀλληγορεῖ προβάτων κῳδίοις ἠμφιεσμένους, τοὺς ἐν ἀνθρώπων μορφαῖς ἁρπακτικοὺς αἰνιττόμενος. Καὶ πάντα ἄρα ταῦτα ἀγριώτατα θηρία καὶ τοὺς τοιούτους λίθους ἡ οὐράνιος ᾠδὴ αὐτὴ μετεμόρφωσεν εἰς ἀνθρώπους ἡμέρους. / 2 As our witness, let us adduce the voice of prophecy accordant with truth, and bewailing those who are crushed in ignorance and folly, for God is able of these stones to raise up children to Abraham, and He, commiserating their great ignorance and hardness of heart who are petrified against the truth, has raised up a seed of piety, sensitive to virtue, of those stones — of the nations, that is, who trusted in stones. 3 Again, therefore, some venomous and false hypocrites, who plotted against righteousness, He once called generations of vipers. But if one of those serpents even is willing to repent, and follows the Word, he becomes a man of God. Others he figuratively calls wolves, clothed in sheep-skins, meaning thereby monsters of rapacity in human form. And so all such most savage beasts, and all such blocks of stone, the celestial song has transformed into tractable men.
Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 5.3: And this same (one) is styled also by the Phrygians unfruitful. For he is unfruitful when he is carnal, and causes the desire of the flesh. This, he says, is what is spoken: "Every tree not producing good fruit, is cut down and cast into the fire" [τοῦτο, φησίν, ἐστὶ τὸ εἰρημένον· «πᾶν δένδρον μὴ ποιοῦν καρπὸν καλὸν ἐκκόπτεται καὶ εἰς πῦρ βάλλεται»].
Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 6.11: If, however, a tree continues alone, not producing fruit fully formed, it is utterly destroyed. "For somewhere near," he says, "is the axe at the roots of the tree. Every tree," he says, "which does not produce good fruit is cut down and cast into fire" [«ἐγγὺς γάρ που», φησίν, «ἡ ἀξίνη παρὰ τὰς ῥίζας τοῦ δένδρου· πᾶν δένδρον», φησί, «μὴ ποιοῦν καρπὸν καλὸν ἐκκόπτεται καὶ εἰς πῦρ βάλλεται»].
Origen, Commentary on John 6.14: These observations are of use as showing how the evangelists are accustomed to abbreviate the sayings of the prophets. It has also to be observed that the speech, "Offspring of vipers," and son on, is said by Matthew to have been spoken to the Pharisees and Sadducees when coming to baptism, they being a different set of people from those who confessed their sins, and to whom no words of this kind were spoken. With Luke, on the contrary, these words were addressed to the multitudes who came out to be baptized by John, and there were not two divisions of those who were baptized, as we found in Matthew. But Matthew, as the careful observer will see, does not speak of the multitudes in the way of praise, and he probably means the Baptist's address, "Offspring of vipers," and so on, to be understood as addressed to them also. Another point is that he says to the Pharisees and Sadducees, "Bring forth a fruit," in the singular, "worthy of repentance," but to the multitudes he uses the plural, "Bring forth fruits worthy of repentance." Perhaps the Pharisees are required to yield the special fruit of repentance, which is no other than the Son and faith in Him, while the multitudes, who have not even a beginning of good things, are asked for all the fruits of repentance, and so the plural is used to them. Further, it is said to the Pharisees, "Think not to say within yourselves, 'We have Abraham for our father.'" For the multitudes now have a beginning, appearing as they do to be introduced into the divine Word, and to approach the truth; and thus they begin to say within themselves, "We have Abraham for our father." The Pharisees, on the contrary, are not beginning to this, but have long held it to be so. But both classes see John point to the stones aforesaid and declare that even from these children can be raised up to Abraham, rising up out of unconsciousness and deadness. And observe how it is said to the Pharisees [Matthew 3.7-10], according to the word of the prophet, "You have eaten false fruit" [Hosea 10.13], and they have false fruit. Every tree which brings not forth good fruit is cut down and cast into the fire, while to the multitudes [Luke 3.7-9] which do not bear fruit at all, "Every tree which brings not forth fruit is cut down" [Luke 3.9]. For that which has no fruit at all has not good fruit, and, therefore, it is worthy to be cut down. But that which bears fruit has by no means good fruit, whence it also calls for the axe to lay it low. But, if we look more closely into this about the fruit, we shall find that it is impossible that that which has just begun to be cultivated, even should it not prove fruitless, should bear the first good fruits.
Origen, finally, gives us firm evidence that his copy of the gospel of Luke contained 3.7-9, and he accurately describes its differences from the gospel of Matthew. Origen's copy of Luke seems to have displayed the "no fruit" variant, as the apparatus above from LaParola suggests.
Am I missing anything, though? Is there other evidence that Luke 3.7-9 must have formed a part of the text from earlier than Irenaeus? Or is there further evidence, beyond the admittedly slender argument from Irenaeus' loaded silence, that these verses were missing?
Ben.
