| 1:15 Срок исполнился – идея срока, который должен исполниться, чтобы сделать возможным явление откровения, артикулируется в ряде ветхозаветных текстов, например, в Кн. Даниила: «запечатай книгу сию до последнего времени» (12:4), «сокрыты и запечатаны слова сии до последнего времени» (12:9). Ср. ниже Мк 13:20 и 33. 1:16 Галилейского моря. «Галилейским морем» или просто «морем» (θλασσα) у Мк (и Мт) называется то обширное озеро, которое у Ио именуется по имени самого большого города в его округе «Тивериадским морем», а у Лк – «Генисаретским озером» (λμνη Γεννησαρτ, ср. употребительное в Септуагинте и таргумах название γεννησαρ соответственно ); его наименование в ВЗ и в современном иврите – «море Киннерет» ( , – [йам киннэрет, йам киннэрот]). «Киннерот», «Киннерет», «Геннисар» и «Геннисарет» – исторические варианты одного и того же топонима. 1:17 Вы станете ловцами людей. Мк, как и Мт 4:19 , употребляет лексему λιες «рыболовы», содержащую намек на профессиональное занятие призываемых; Лк 5:10 дает для обозначения будущего занятия Симона Петра причастную форму ζωγρν от глагола, означающего ловлю зверей. Эта метафора находится в сложных, но очевидных отношениях с одним пророчеством Иеремии, в котором суровое обещание кар и возмездий, но одновременно светлая перспектива возврата Израиля в землю обетованную выражены в сходных образах: «...Возвращу их в землю их, которую Я дал отцам их. Вот, Я пошлю множество рыболовов, говорит Господь, и будут ловить их; а потом пошлю множество охотников, и они погонят их со всякой горы, и со всякого холма, и из ущелий скал» ( Иер 16:15–16 ). Более однозначно негативны метафорические употребления образа «уловления» людей в Прит 6:26 и 2Тим 2:26 . Человек обычно не любит ощутить себя «уловленным» (стоит вспомнить, как легко в недавние дни выражение «ловец человеков» становилось бранным, будучи, скажем, прилагаемо к Вяч. Иванову в контексте антисимволистского дискурса). Поэтому есть все основания видеть в словах Христа определенную степень парадоксальности, уловимую в целом ряде евангельских выражений и притч (скажем, в Л к 16:1–9 и 18:1–8, когда хитрость недобросовестного управителя выступает как пример для дел милосердия, а надоедливое упрямство иска вдовы – как урок неотступной молитвы) и являющуюся общей характеристикой Христова учительства. С другой стороны, ветхозаветным основанием для метафоры может быть эсхатологически осмысленный образ удачной рыбной ловли Иез47:9–10 . В кумранском тексте 1QH 7–8 т. н. Учитель Праведности говорит о себе: «И Ты водворил меня в месте изгнания, между многими рыбаками, простирающими сети на лицо вод, и ловцами, посланными против сынов растления». Ср. О. Betz, Donnersuhne, Menschenfischer und der Davidische Messias, «Revue de Qumran» 3, 1961, S. 53–61. |
| Siegal, «Scribes» Siegal, Jonathan P. «The Scribes of Qumran: Studies in the Early History of Jewish Scribal Customs, with Special Reference to the Qumran Biblical Scrolls and to the Tannaitic Traditions of Massekheth Soferim.» Ph.D. Diss., Brandeis University, 1971. Siegel, «Israel» Siegel, Seymour. «The Meaning of Israel in Jewish Thought.» Pages 98–118 in Evangelicals and Jews in Conversation on Scripture, Theology, and History. Edited by Marc H. Tanenbaum, Marvin R. Wilson, and James A. Rudin. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978. Siegert, «Gottesfürchtige» Siegert, Folker. «Gottesfürchtige und Sympathisanten.» JSJ 4 (1973): 109–64. Siegert, «Homily» Siegert, Folker. «Homily and Panegyrical Sermon.» Pages 421–43 in Handbook of Classical Rhetoric in the Hellenistic Period, 330 B.C.-A.D. 400. Edited by Stanley E. Porter. Leiden: Brill, 1997. Sievers, «Shekhinah» Sievers, Joseph. ««Where Two or Three ...»: The Rabbinic Concept of Shekhinah and Matthew 18:20.» Sidic 17 (1984): 4–10. Sigal, Halakah Sigal, Phillip. The Halakah of Jesus of Nazareth according to the Gospel of Matthew. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1986. Sikes, «Anti-Semitism» Sikes, Walter W. «The Anti-Semitism of the Fourth Gospe1.» Journal of Religion 21 (1941): 23–30. Silberman, «Language» Silberman, Lou H. «Language and Structure in the Hodayot (1QH 3).» JBL 75 (1956): 96–106. Silberman, «Messiahs» Silberman, Lou H. «The Two »Messiahs» of the Manual of Discipline.» VT5 (1955): 77–82. Silberman, «Ossuary» Silberman, Neil Asher. «Ossuary: A Box for Bones.» BAR 17, no. 3 (May/June 1991): 73–74. Silberman, «Use» Silberman, Lou H. «Anent the Use of Rabbinic Materia1.» NTS 24 (1977–1978): 415–17. Silva Santos, «Autoria» Silva Santos, Bento. «A autoria do quarto evangelho.» Revista biblica brasileira 5, no. 4 (1988): 157–81. Silver, «Moses» Silver, Daniel J. «Moses and the Hungry Birds.» JQR 64 (1973–1974): 123–53. Simenel, «Jean 20» Simenel, Philippe. «Les 2 anges de Jean 20/11–12.» Études théologiques et religieuses 67 (1992): 71–76. |
| Although it sometimes occurred, 8204 people in ancient Mediterranean society considered betrayal by a friend (13:18) far more heinous than any insult by an enemy. 8205 The deeper the level of intimacy, the more that trust was a duty, and the more terrible its betraya1. 8206 Breach of covenant such as treaties was regarded as terrible; 8207 Judas " s discipleship and its longstanding implicit covenant of friendship make his betrayal a heinous act of treachery, 8208 but the meal context makes the betrayal even more heinous. For many, sharing food and drink represented the most important bond of kindness. 8209 Although relatives were the most trustworthy of all, those who ate together shared a common bond and were normally assumed to be trustworthy. 8210 Hospitality established friendly ties even with strangers and was mandatory in the ancient Mediterranean. 8211 Guest friendships were politically binding, 8212 and could effect reconciliation between political partisans at enmity. 8213 Injuring or slaying those who had eaten at onés table was a terrible offense from which all but the most wicked would normally shrink; 8214 » such behavior was held to incur divine wrath. 8215 Those who eat together at a table should not even betray friendship by slandering one another. 8216 Though rarer due to the normal distribution of power, betraying or slaying onés host, as here, was equally terrible 8217 –especially a host who had set aside his own honor to perform the most menial act of service for his guests (see comments on hospitality and foot washing above). Just as the loyalty of onés adherents proved a matter for praise (e.g., Josephus Life 84), their disloyalty would prove a matter of a teacher " s shame. 8218 Earlier Jesus had announced himself the bread of life after many had eaten with him, but warned even then that one would betray him (6:64). Yet Jesus made no mistake in choosing Judas (6:70); he was chosen precisely because his character would lead him to fulfill the role of betrayer prophesied in Scripture ( Ps 41 8219 The language of Scripture could provide meaning for the shame of betrayal; Qumran " s Teacher of Righteousness apparently alluded to this same text from Psalms to complain of his own suffering (1QH 5.22–24). 8220 |
| 3206 Cf. Rev 3:14, where «beginning» is actually a divine title signifying the originator of creation (see 1:8,17; 2:8; 21:6; 22:13; Isa 44:6; 48:11–12; Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.190; Ant. 8.280). 3207 As is often recognized, e.g., Kennedy, Theology, 156; May, «Logos,» 446; Moule, Birth, 167; Bandstra, «Errorists,» 332; Johnston, Ephesians, 58; Longenecker, Christology, 145; Glasson, «Colossians I 18, 15,» 154–56. 3208 «First» could mean «greatest» in rank, power, or privilege (πρτος, Chariton 2.5.4), as could «firstborn» ( Gen 49:3–4 ; " Abot R. Nat. 24, §49 B; Midr. Pss. 5, §4; cf. Pesiq. Rab. 49:7; Gibbs, Creation and Redemption, 103; Beasley-Murray, «Colossians 1:15–20,» 171; πρωττοκος in 1 Chr 5LXX translates Heb. ); «firstborn» could thus function as a title of Zeus (Protogonus in Damascius De principiis 123 bis, sixth century C.E., in Grant, Religions, 107), other pagan deities («Hymn to Amon-Re,» ANET, 365; PGM 1.198–199, 342–343; 13.188; Isis as prima caelitum in Apuleius Metam. 11.4; Guthrie, Orpheus, 96–97), the true God (Isa 41:4; Gen. Rab. 63:8; Pesiq. Rab. 51:3; Marmorstein, Names, 97–98). More significantly, however, «firstborn» also was Wisdom language (Philo Quest. Gen. 4.97) or Logos language (Philo Confusion 63, 146; Agric. 51; Dreams 1.215; all from Lohse, Colossians, 48; cf. Lightfoot, Colossians, 146; for Justin, see 1 Apo1. 21; Osborn, Justin, 28–29) and could be applied to Torah (Davies, Paul, 151). 3210 Aune, Environment, 48, citing Polybius 1.5.1; 5.31.1–2; Tacitus Hist. 1.1.1; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 1.8.4. It also can represent the «beginning» of tradition (Luke 1:1) or narration (Apollonius of Rhodes 1.1). 3213 L.A.B. 32(tr., OTP2:346); cf. 1QH 1.19–20. Contrast idols, which were not really «from the beginning,» π» ρχς (Wis 14:13). 3214 Sipre Deut. 37.1.3 (but some others contend for the sanctuary or the land of Israel). 3217 Gen. Rab. 1:4. Hamerton-Kelly suggests that the préexistence of all was actual in the baraita in b. Ned. 39b; Pesah. 54a. The later Platonic distinction between actual and ideal préexistence being limited to where it is explicitly stated (Gen. Rab. 1:4; Pre-existence, 20), some Platonic speculation may have affected conceptualizations earlier; cf. " Abot R. Nat. 37, §95 B, which lists the Ten Commandments as among ten things that preexisted in God " s plan. Further, God " s tabernacle «prepared from the beginning,» π» ρχς (Wis 9:8), may refer to the ideal tabernacle, the heavenly prototype. |
| 8721 Forestell, «Paraclete,» 157, doubts that the Paraclete saying is an interpolation, but believes that 14:12–17 as a whole interrupts the context. 8722 Metzger, Commentary, 245; Berg, «Pneumatology,» 131; Morgan-Wynne, «Note.» Michaels, John, 253, and Hunter, John, 146, take the second verb as present but read both verbs in a future sense. 8725 This is acknowledged even by most who emphasize futurist eschatology in the Gospel (e.g., Holwerda, Spirit, 65, 76). 8726 Cicero Fam. 12.30.4 speaks of the Senate «bereft of relatives» (orbus) by the loss of its consuls (whom Cicero would have regarded as «fathers» to the state); murdering onés benefactor could be seen as parricide (Valerius Maximus 1.5.7; 1.6.13; 1.7.2; 1.8.8). 8727 E.g., Isa 47LXX; 1 Thess 2:17; perhaps Pss. So1. 4:10; cf. Bernard, John, 2:546. Achilles» mere absence from his (living) parents is described as ρφανιζομνω in Pindar Pyth. 6.22–23. No one else could fully replace a deceased father (Homer I1. 22.490–505); nevertheless, the Kjv " s «comfortless» is untenable (Bernard, John, 2:547). 8729 R. Akiba for R. Eliezer in " Abot R. Nat. 25A. Commentators frequently follow Billerbeck, Kommentar, 2here (e.g., Holwerda, Spirit, 41–42; ÓDay, «John,» 748); Brown, John, 2also cites Plato Phaedo 116A. 8732 Holwerda, Spirit, 38–45. In later tradition «orphan» could be mildly derogatory (b. Hu1. 111b), perhaps alluding to a father " s death as punishment (e.g., allegedly Ben Azzai in p. Meg. 1:9, §19), but it was not necessarily a figure of shame (Tob 1:8). As children they remained legally defenseless (p. Ketub. 3:1, §4), although only as minors (p. Ter. 1:1). 8733 On the connection between the impartation of the Spirit and the resurrection, see also Schlier, «Begriff,» 265. 8736 Also noted in DeSilva, «Wisdom of Solomon,» 1275. On «keeping the word» in the Fourth Gospel, see Pancaro, Law, 403–30. 8737 Dionysius of Halicarnassus Lit. Comp. 25; cf. Wis 2:22; 1QH 2.13–14; 9.23–24; see Keener, Matthew, 378–79. Gnostics may have developed their «secret tradition» to explain their lack of earlier attestation; but some authentic traditions actually were probably initially «secret.» |
| 10829 On the coherency of 20:30–21:25 if one wishes to read the Gospel as a whole, see Segovia, «Farewel1.» 10831 Talbert, John, 63–64, points out that we have this chapter in the final, canonical form of the text, which is the available object for literary inquiry. 10832 Sandmel, Judaism, 389. Philostratus " s third-century C.E. Heroikos distributes Protesilaos " s appearances over a wide geographic range (Hrk. 11.7–8; Maclean and Aitken, Heroikos, xxvi-xxvii), but this may be too late and peripheral to prove relevant. 10835 Meier, Marginal Jew, 2:896–904; Quast, Reading, 141; cf. Fuller, Formation, 151. Perhaps less likely is the view that Luke uses a resurrection appearance account in a pre-Easter context (Fuller, Formation, 160–61), making John more helpful for historical reconstruction here (Brown, Essays, 269–70). 10836 Blomberg, «Miracles as Parables,» 345. Many who find a parallel doubt «a direct literary relationship» (see Smith, John 390–91). 10839 Later, CD 4.15–17; 1QH 5.7–8; L.A.B. 3:11; Matt 13:47; Strauss, «Quellen.» For proposals on this background, see Jeremias, Theology, 132–33; Fenton, Matthew, 73; Gundry, Matthew, 62; Lane, Mark, 67–68; MacLaurin, «Fishermen.» 10843 A bilingual milieu may also help explain Jesus» use of the figure, since «catch» (Heb. tzud, Aram, tzade) could apply to both physical catching and to winning others by deception or debate (Lachs, Commentary, 58–59); that image also appears in Greek (Boring et a1., Commentary, 55). 10844 See Keener, Matthew, 148–49; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 393–94; Witherington, Christology, 129–30. 10846 Safrai, «Home,» 747. Cf. fishing implements found in Bethsaida (Arav, «Bethsaida») and the Galilean fishing boat that was uncovered (Stone, «Boat»). Cf. also the abundance of small boats available for crossing the sea from one town to another (Josephus Life 163–164). 10847 Pliny Nat. 22.68.138; Horsley, Documents, 5:99; Lewis, Life, 68. Among the poor, smoked fish could rank «the most popular item» in a general market " s sales for a day (P.Oxy. |
| 1096 Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 106–7, surveys contemporary Jewish texts in which repentance and eschatology occur together (cf. 92 for John the Baptist); cf. also 1 En. 50:3–5 (in the Similitudes, of uncertain date); Pss. So1. 9:7; T. Ab. 10:14A; 11:10B; m. «Abot 2:10; Yoma 8:8; t. Kip. 4:7; »Abot R. Nat. 39A-40; 15,29, §62B; b. Šabb. 153a; Roš Haš. 16b; Pesiq. Rab Kah. Sup. 3:2, and often in rabbinic literature (where repentance makes one right before the Judge). 1097 Philosophers could describe such a change by other means (Cicero Tusc. 3.27.58), while using this specific term rarely (e.g., Marcus Aurelius 8.10). John " s regeneration language ( John 1:12, 3:3–5 ) indicates the radical transformation of conversion. 1098 See also the conclusions of Hengel, «Throngemeinschaft,» who compares Revelation " s Christology with that of the Gospel and 1 John. 1099 Some commentators think that the emperor was worshiped as Apollo, son of Zeus, in Thyatira (Fiorenza, Revelation, 193); others associate the two (Caird, Revelation, 43, based on numismatic evidence). 1100 The association with a paschal lamb is clear, since his blood delivers his people (7:3) from participation in the plagues. 1101 This was associated with Torah (Sipre Deut. 47.3.2; b. " Abot 6:7; Lev. Rab. 9:3, 25:1, 35:6; Num. Rab. 13:12; Ecc1. Rab. 1.4, §4; also Targumim according to McNamara, Targum, 121) because of its identification with Wisdom in Prov 3:18 . The imagery can be explained without recourse to Torah associations, however (e.g., Prov 11:30; 13:12; 15:4; 4 Macc 18:16; Pss. So1. 14:3–4; in Rev 22:2, Gen 2is explicitly in view), where the end time includes a restored beginning-time paradise, as in some other apocalyptic texts (4 Ezra 8:52; Gk. Apoc. Ezra 2:11; 5:21). 1102 The light in Revelation is probably eschatological, cf. Isa 58:8–10, 60:1–3; Wis 3:7–8, 5:6; 1QM 1.8; 1QH 18.28–29; 1 En. 1:8; 39:7; 50:1; 51:5; 58:2–6; 91:16; 96:3; 108:11–15; 2 En. 65:10; 65A; 3 En. 5:3; 4 Ezra 7:39–44,97; 2 Bar. 10:12; Sib. Or. 2.329 (probably Christian redaction); 4.190–192; in rabbinic literature, cf. Sipre Deut. 47.2.1–2; b. Sank. 100a; and Ya1. Ps. 72 in Abelson, Immanence, 89. On different applications of light imagery, see our commentary on John 1:4–5 , below. |
| 675 In both, the Isaiah text indicates that Jesus» word hardens the stubborn. On the text in Mark, cf. Evans, «Note.» 676 For esoteric teachings, cf., e.g., 4 Ezra 14:45–47; t. Hag. 2:1; b. Hag. 13a-14b; Pesah. 119a; Šabb. 80b; p. Hag. 2:1, §§3–4; for other private teachings or those understood only within wisdom circles, cf., e.g., Ps.-Phoc. 89–90; various Qumran texts (lQpHab 7.4–5; 1QH 2.13–14; 9.23–24; 11.9–10, 16–17; 12.11–13; 13.13–14; 1QS 8.12; 9.17–19; cf. 1QS 8.1–2; 11.5; 1QM 17.9); Gen. Rab. 8:9; Num. Rab. 9:48; 19(purportedly from ben Zakkai); Pesiq. Rab. 21:2/3; 22:2; perhaps Wis 2:21–22; 7:21; 2 Bar. 48:3; b. Sukkah 49b. In Pythagoreanism, cf. Diogenes Laertius 8.1.15; perhaps Plato in Diogenes Laertius 3.63; others in Eunapius Lives 456. Cf. also the passing on of esoteric books from Moses to Joshua in Γ. Mos. 1(possibly early first century C.E.). 677 Bruce, Documents, 57. Cf. Stein, Method, 27–32. By itself this would not demand authenticity. Goulder, Midrash, 89–92, thinks that Jesus gave some teaching in poetry but Matthew created it in many additional sayings. 678 «Amen» normally confirmed prayers, oaths, curses, or blessings. The Gospel usage in confirming Jesus» words as he speaks them is rare (against Jeremias, Theology, 35,79, it is not unique; see Aune, Prophecy, 165; Hill, Prophecy, 64–66); it is almost certainly authentic (with Aune; Hill; Burkitt, Sources, 18). (Boring, Sayings, 132–33, thinks it continued in early Christian prophetic usage, but even Rev 2–3 avoids it). Cf. Gen 18:13 . 679 Bruce, Documents, 57–58. The introductory «amen» appears about 30 times in Matthew, 13 in Mark, 6 in Luke, and 50 in John (Smith, Parallels, 6). The double form appears rarely, e.g., in the current text of L.A.B. 22:6 (the answer of the people to Joshuás words); 26(response to Kenaz " s curse invocation); PGM 22b.21, 25 (closing an invocation); and as an oath formula in p. Qidd. 1:5, §8. Culpepper, «Sayings,» argues that the double amen sayings in John frequently (though not always) reflect historical material, often «core sayings that generate the dialogue or discourse material that follows» (100). |
| 3507 See the references below. The Noahide law tradition in its completed rabbinic form may not be prerabbinic, but Pseudo-Phocylides contains allusions to it (see P. W. Van der Horst in OTP 2:569), the idea appears as early as Jubilees, and Philo and Josephus attest the tradition (see Schultz, «Patriarchs,» 48–49). Not only does Noah " s covenant prefigure Israel " s covenant in Jub. 6:4–10 (with 6:15–16, this passage provides an inclusio around 6:11–14); 7:20–25 portrays the Noahide laws more plainly (although Finkelstein, Pharisaism, 223–27, overstates his conclusions from this evidence; see Schultz, «Patriarchs,» 44–45). 3508 1QH 6.2–14; 1QM 12.14 (in both texts, the nations» conversion " s function is to exalt Israel " s eschatological glory); Sib. Or. 3.710–726 (second century B.C.E.; perhaps also 1.129); T. Zeb. 9(tex-tually uncertain); t. Ber. 6:2; Num. Rab. 1:3. In Pss. So1. 17Gentiles survive under Messiah " s yoke. 3509 Cf. Josephus Ant. 20.34–36; Ag. Αρ. 2.210; m. " Abot 1(if include Gentiles); b. Šabb. 31a (purportedly Tannaitic); Sank 99b; Gen. Rab. 39:14; 47:10; 48:8; 84:8; 98:5; Num. Rab. 8:4; Ecc1. Rab. 7:8, §1; Pesiq. Rab Kah. Sup. 1:6; Pesiq. Rab. 14:2; 43:6. For further discussion, see Bamberger, Proselytism, 13–19 (OT period), 19–24 (intertestamental period), 222–25 (early rabbis), 225–28 (the royal house of Adiabene), 267–73 (on Matt 23:15); Urbach, Sages, 1:549–54, passim; Flusser, «Pagan-ism,» 1097; cf. the information in Georgi, Opponents, 83–164, although his conclusions may go too far. 3510 See, e.g., Hoenig, «Conversion,» 49; Lake, «Proselytes,» 75; Sevenster, Anti-Semitism, 203. Active proselytizing may have followed Hellenistic models (see Goodenough, Church, 9; Culpepper, School, 117), but the wars with Rome may have stifled it (Applebaum, Cyrene, 343; Gager, Kingdom, 137; for more detailed history, see Cohen, «Conversion»). 3511 E.g., Orestes in Sophocles Electra; Euripides E1. 202–206,234–236. Cf. also the unpersuasive but accurate mantic (Apollodorus 3.12.5). |
| 3573 Contrast the language of some rabbis (e.g., " Abot R. Nat. 12 A; 26, §54 B; Sipre Deut. 32.2.1; Song Rab. 1:3, §3), although the language is essentially hyperbolic (cf. similar language in b. Sanh. 99b); the rabbis would have attributed the conversion to God as wel1. 3574 Cf. 1QH 9.14–16; Lev. Rab. 14:5; in Greco-Roman antiquity in general, cf. Keener, Marries, 80, esp. nn. 155–56 on 187. The contrast between human and divine will (also 3:8) reflects the Johannine emphasis on God " s will (4:34; 5:30, 40; 6:38, 39; 7:17; 9:31; cf. 5:6) vs. the world " s rebellion, and God " s will to give life (6:40; cf. 5:21). Cf. Plutarch T.T. 8.1.3, Mor. 718A: God created the cosmos but not δια σπρματος. 3575 Many considered passion virtually irresistible (e.g., Sophocles Track. 441–448; Publilius Syrus 15, 22; Plutarch Oracles at Delphi 20, Mor. 403F-404A; see further Keener, Matthew, 186, on Matt 5:28). Some later rabbis attributed to the yetzer hara the positive function of incentive for procreation (Gen. Rab. 9:7; Ecc1. Rab. 3:11, §3). 3576 See Keener, Marries, 74, esp. nn. 76–77 on 179–80; on paternal authority, see ibid., 98 and nn. 110–119 on 197–98. 3578 Virgil Aen. 2.74. Rarer uses, such as «blood» meaning courage (Aeschines Ctesiphon 160), make much less sense here. 3580 See Gardner, Women, 53, citing Aristotle Gen. Anim. 773a, 30ff.; cf. Pliny Nat. 7.49. In Greek myth a mother could bear twins, one for her husband and the other due to divine impregnation (Pindar Ryth. 9.84–86). 3581 Boismard, Prologue, 44. Cf. Lightfoot, Talmud, 3:241, who associates «bloods» here with a passage in Exod. Rah. that reads Ezek 16:6 " s plural for bloods as a reference to circumcision and Passover; he thus applies it to the means of conversion for proselytes. 3582 Bernard, John, 18; cf. Boismard, Prologue, 44 (though Boismard suggests that this may represent a textual error). 3585 That the point is simply «not by natural intercourse» is usually agreed; e.g., Michaels, John, 8. 3586 Cf. Talbert, John, 77, 98 (on 1:18; 3:6), for the ancient Mediterranean epistemological premise that only like recognizes like, hence necessitating the incarnation for sufficient revelation. |
|
|
