Motif 14—Sending of
envoys. The data indicate that the sending of prophetic emissaries is not a
central part of the mythology to begin with. The emphasis is clearly on Wisdom’s
role in communicating knowledge, not sending people to do it on her behalf.
Even the three I have marked (as a concession to scholars that so often appeal
to them) are far from convincing (some include Sir. 24:32-34, though it
mentions nothing about intermediaries but explicitly sees Sophia as the one
teaching). Proverbs 9:3-6 (“She has seen out her servants [δουλους] to call
. . . ‘Come, eat of my bread’”) speaks of δουλοι who do not speak
Wisdom’s message but rather invite people to a meal, where apparently Wisdom
will do the talking. Wisdom 7:27 reads, “In every generation she passes into
holy souls and makes them friends of God, and prophets.” This is the locus
classicus for many scholars, but the emphasis here is not on how these “friends”/”prophets”
are sent to other people to proclaim a message, but rather on Wisdom’s
role in edifying them. Finally, some find the envoy motif in 2 Bar. 48:9
(“You give wisdom to the spheres so that they minister according to their
positions”), but finding traces of sending is terribly strained here,
and the passage deals with planetary bodies. In short, the evidence suggests “there
was no pre-Christian Jewish motif of the goodness Sophia sending her envoys
with revelation for man.” Rather, “in biblical-Jewish tradition it is God, not
Wisdom, who sends prophets” (Luz, Ulrich. 2005. Matthew 21-28. Hermeneia.
Minneapolis: Fortress, 159). Moreover, it is not clear that the speaker of
13:34b is even claiming to have sent the messengers in the first place, for
they are reported as “having been sent” (τους απεσταλμενους) (perhaps a divine passive).
Motif 15—Mother imagery. Many scholars argue
the feminine ορνις metaphor reflects the maternal aspect of Wisdom/Sophia. But is this
valid? While Wisdom/Sophia is undoubtedly expressed as a feminine personification
(grammatically and semantically), there is limited evidence for Wisdom/Sophia
specifically as a mother. Proverbs 8:32 and Sir. 4:11 speaks of Wisdom’s
“sons”; Wisdom is μητηρ (it continues, “like the wife of his youth
she will welcome him,” undermining the maternal sense [Similarly Wis.
8:2]) in Sir. 15:2-4 and γενετις (“parent”) in Wis. 7:12; and Luke 7:25
speaks of Wisdom’s τεκνων. However, there are numerous cases where maternal
references undermine identifying Wisdom/Sophia as a mother figure (Mack points
to Philo to support the notion of “Weisheit als Mutter” [Conf. 49; Rer.
53; Cher. 49; QC 4.97], but it is doubtful that hypostatic Wisdom
is in view here but rather knowledge in general or God’s possession of wisdom,
for which Philo employs numerous metaphors). In Sir. 1:14, Wisdom/Sophia is
present with the faithful in the womb of the mother and is not the mother herself.
The wisdom passage of Bar. 3:9-4:4 contains no maternal references; only in the
next oracle (4:5-5:5) does maternal imagery begin, but here Jerusalem—not
Wisdom—is cast as mother (Scribal annotations in BAQ make clear that the wisdom
portion ends at 4:4, as do modern commentators). In Wis. 7:1-7, the speaker
distinguishes between the mother who gave him birth and wisdom that he sought
and received after birth. The wisdom portion of 11Q5 21.11-17 (11Q5 here
does not actually use the word חכםה, but Sir. 51:13-20 does insert σοφια) speaks of a lover and a wet-nurse,
neither of which is one’s mother (Indeed, “I became ablaze for her, I would not
av[e]rt my face. I stirred my soul for her and on her heights I was not calm. ‘My
hand’ opened [. . . ] her nakedness” presumably does not refer to the
wisdom-seeker’s mother. Sirach 51:19-20 LXX downplays this language). In
multiple places in 4 Ezra 5.46-47, 50-51, a human mother is in view, but
never associated in any way with Wisdom. Finally, 2 Bar. 48:15-18
emphasizes that neither Wisdom/Sophia nor a mother (and the two are not
equated) truly beings one into existence, but rather God. The evidence that
GLuke’s ορνις necessarily reflects the maternity of Wisdom/Sophia is, upon
inspection, unconvincing. (Gregory R. Lanier, Old Testament Conceptual
Metaphors and the Christology of Luke’s Gospel [Library of New Testament
Studies 591; London: T&T Clark, 2020], 138-39)
