| One may dispute whether the «other sheep» are Diaspora Jews, like much of John " s probable audience, 7435 or Gentiles, 7436 which John " s audience would have to know had joined Christian groups in large numbers. Some might adduce in favor of Diaspora Jews «Gods scattered children» in 11:52, since the high priest would have meant Diaspora Jews rather than Gentiles in 11:50; the high priest does prophesy that Jesus will die on others» «behalf» (11:50). But the high priests own intention is irrelevant to the deeper sense the narrator intends for his audience; clearly the high priest intends Jesus» vicarious death differently from how John intends his audience to hear it (11:51). Moreover, «scattered children of God» is the narrator " s interpretation rather than the high priest " s phrase in any case (11:52), and in this Gospel the term must refer to believers in Jesus (1:12). Also possibly in favor of Diaspora Jews are the texts in the biblical prophets from which the image is drawn ( Jer 23:1–8; 31:1–10 ; Ezek 34:5–6; 37:21–28 ). 7437 But if John views Gentiles as spiritual proselytes to Israel (cf. 3:5) and challenges the sufficiency of ethnic descent from Abraham (8:34, 39), he might apply these same biblical images for the people of God to include Gentile converts. (In contrast to later Gentile Christian teachings about a new Israel replacing the old, however, John would think in terms of Gentiles being grafted into the covenant community through conversion to biblical Judaism; cf. Rom 11:16–24 .) John " s emphasis on a mission to the «world» broader than «the Jews» (1:10; 4:42; 12:32) probably also implies the inclusion of Gentile believers. 7438 Most importantly, John implies the Gentile mission in 7and 12(see comment there). If «other sheep» at least includes Gentile Christians, it is significant that they become part of the «flock,» which in the Hebrew Scriptures was the people of God (cf. Eph 2:15–19 ). 7439 But it was already understood that when Gentiles converted to Judaism they became part of the Jewish people (e.g., Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.210). Jesus» death (10:15) is the prerequisite for the ingathering of Gentiles (10:16), which fits Johannine theology (12:20–24) 7440 and might also serve an apologetic function, if it is necessary to explain why the Jesus tradition includes so little outreach to Gentiles. As in Jewish tradition about God and Israel, the «oneness» of the people in this Gospel (10:16; 11:52) mirrors (10:30, 38; 5:44; 17:3) and derives from (17:11, 21–23) the oneness of God and Jesus. 7441 The Samaritans recognized that Jesus was «savior of the world» (4:42), which would have to include Gentiles. 7442 |
| 5118 E.g., T. Ab. 11:1, 3B (Enoch is the heavenly prosecutor, ελγξων τς αμαρτας); 2 Bar. 19(the law as light). The sense of «prosecute» would fit the «judgment» of 3:18–19 (cf. 16:8–11) 5120 E.g., Tobit went in the ways of αληθεας and righteousness (Tob 1:3); Israel is summoned to ποισαι … λθειαν (Tob 13:6). Usually in the LXX «do the truth» means «to act loyally,» «to keep faith» (Brown, John, 1:135), though some later texts may apply it to specific practices (Grayston, Epistles, 49). Westcott, John, 57, remarks that «doing the truth» appears in rabbinic texts. As many early observers of the Scrolls noted (e.g., Albright, «Discoveries,» 169; Sanders, John, 131), it is also familiar in Essene-type circles (e.g., Jub. 36:3), especially from Qumran (e.g., 1QS 1.5– ; cf. also 5.3; 8.2; 9.17). 5121 lQpHab. 7.10–11; cf. 12.4–5. God will punish evildoers, distinguishing them from those who do good (4Q417 frg. 2,1.7–8,17–18, with 4Q418, in Wise, Scrolls, 381). 5124 E.g., Isocrates Demon. 17, 48, Or. 1; Demosthenes 3 Olynthiac 14; 2 Philippic 1; Diogenes Laertius 6.2.28; 6.2.64; Quintilian 1.pref.14; Epictetus Diatr. 1.25.11; 2.9.13; Seneca Ep. Luci1. 20.2; Dia1. 4.28.6–8; Juvenal Sat. 2.9–10,20–21; 14.38–40; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 7.33.3; 9.10.3; 9.47.4; 11.1.4; 11.58.3; Diodorus Siculus 9.9.1; Cornelius Nepos frg. 3.1; Aulus Gellius 17.19; Herodian 1.2.4; Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.169, 292. 5125 Cf. Smith, John (1999), 108. The passage recapitulates some themes from 1:19–36 (Quast, Reading, 26). Source criticism on 3:22–36, as on the rest of the Gospel, seems unlikely to yield any consensus; but for one suggestion, see Klaiber, «Zeuge.» 5126 So, e.g., White, Initiation, 250; Longenecker, Ministry, 70. See esp. Rensberger, Faith, 52–61; and comment on 1:6–8. 5127 Pace Ellis, World, 62, the «Jew» of 3:25, and not the disciples of John, represents common Judean Judaism. 5129 See Talbert, John, 105, who suggests the chiastic frame for 3:22–4in Jesus» relation to Judea (3:22a; 4:3); Jesus baptizing (3:22b; 4:2) and the partial competition between John " s disciples and those of Jesus (3:26; 4). |
| 5885 Sib. Or. frg. 7. 5886 Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.167. 5887 Alexander son of Numenius Rhetores graeci 3.4–6 (Grant, Religions, 166); PGM 13.843; Iamblichus Myst. 7.2. The highest good had to be self-sufficient (Aristotle N.E. 1.7,1097B). 5888 E.g., Aristotle Heav. 1.9, 279a.l l-b.3; Pyth. Sent. 25; Marcus Aurelius 7.16; Plutarch Isis 75, Mor. 381B; Maximus of Tyre Or. 38.6; in Jewish sources, Let. Aris. 211; 3Macc 2:9; Josephus Ant. 8.111; Ag. Ap. 2.190; Philo Creation 100; Acts 17:25. On sources of Philós portrait of God " s transcendence, see Dillon, «Transcendence.» 5889 E.g., 2 Bar. 21:10; Pesiq. Rab. 1:2; «who lives forever» (e.g., Tob 13:1, ζν …); for the " liv-ing God,» cf., e.g., Marmorstein, Names, 72; Rev 7:2; also Deut 5:26 ; Josh 3:10; 1Sam 17:26,36; 2 Kgs 19:4, 16; Ps 42:2; 84:2 ; Isa 37:4,17; Jer 10:10; 23:36 ; Dan 6:20, 26 ; Hos 1:10 ; Matt 16:16; 26:63; Acts 14:15; Rom 9:26 ; 2Cor 3:3; 6:16; 1 Thess 1:9; 1Tim 3:15; 4:10 ; Heb 3:12; 9:14; 10:31; 12:22. 5890 Tob 13:1,6; 1Tim 1:17 ; 1 En. 5:1; 25:3,5; Sib. Or. 1.45,50,53,56,73,122,152,167,232; 3.10, 276, 278, 302, 328, 582, 593, 600–601, 604, 617, 628, 631, 698, 717; 8.428; Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.167; Philo Creation 100; Good Person 20; Ps.-Phoc. 17; T. Ab. 15:15A; 2Bar. 21:10; CI] 1:489, §677; cf. Plutarch Isis 1, Mor. 351E; PGM 13.843. 5891 Sib. Or. 3.15–16; cf. Plutarch Ε at Delphi 17, Mor. 392A. 5892 PGM 4.640–645 (Betz, Papyri, 50). 5893 To others God commits temporary, limited political authority (19:11) or the authority to become his children (1:12), but only to Jesus does God entrust authority over all humanity (17:2). 5894 For refutation, see Brown, John, 1:215, whom we follow here. 5895 For the admonition not to marvel along with provision of evidence, cf. 3:7–8; probably 6:61–62; for the principle, see Mark 2:9–11 . 5896 E.g., Apocr. Ezek. introduction. 5897 Also, e.g., Hanson, Gospel 52. 5898 Bailey, Poet, 62, sees a chiastic structure, but if one is present, it is highly asymmetrica1. |
| 4926 The conjoining of antonyms resembles some forms of rhetorical antithesis (on which see Rhet. Alex. 26,1435b.25–39; Rowe, «Style,» 142; Anderson, Glossary, 21–22). 4927 Bürge, Community, 157,170. Baptism without the Spirit is worthless (White, Initiation, 254, 262; Culpepper, Anatomy, 193; cf. Ellis, World, 64; Ladd, Theology, 285). 4931 E.g., Sent. Sext. 139a-139b. Contrast the evil of matter in some forms of gnostic and later Hellenistic philosophic systems (Plotinus Enn. 1.8), and in tamer systems the worthlessness (Plotinus Enn. 2.4; cf. Marcus Aurelius 2.2) or lesser reality (Plotinus Enn. 3.6) of matter; cf. Flusser, Judaism, 62. 4933 Gentiles could relate the body to passions (Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 9.52.6; Seneca Dia1. 2.16.1; Plutarch Reply to Colotes 27, Mor. 1122D), or contrast flesh with soul (e.g., Plutarch Isis 78, Mor. 382F; Pleas. L. 14, Mor. 1096E), or note its weakness (Plutarch Pleas. L. 6, Mor. 1090EF). 4934 For the body and passions, see, e.g., T. Jud. 14:3; for contrast with the soul, see, e.g., Philo Giants 29–31; for the earthly body vs. the heavenly soul, e.g., Sipre Deut. 306.28.2. Cf. later rabbinic comments on bodily members and the evil impulse (Pesiq. Rab Kah. Sup. 3:2). 4935 E.g., Aristotle N.E. 1.12.6,1102a; Lucretius Nat. 3.370–395; Marcus Aurelius 5.13; 6.32; Diogenes Laertius 3.63; Heraclitus Ep. 9; Diogenes Ep. 39; Plutarch Plat. Q. 3.1, Mor. 1002B; Sextus Empiricus Pyr. 1.79; Greek Anth. 7.109. Some allowed the distinction only for humans (Sallust Cati1. 1.2, 7), others also for animals (Aristotle Po1. 1.2.10, 1254a; Diogenes Laertius 8.1.28). 4936 Plato Laws 8.828D; Phaedo 64CE; Phaedrus 245C; Rep. 10.611BC; Aristotle Soul 1.4, 408b; Herodotus Hist. 2.123; Cicero Sen. 20.78; Tusc. 1.14.31; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 8.62.1; Seneca Dia1. 12.11.7; Ep. Luci1. 57.9; Plutarch D.V. 17, Mor. 560B; Diogenes Laertius 8.5.83; Plotinus Enn. 4.7–8; Philo Virtues 67. 4937 Most notably, Epicureans viewed the soul as mortal (Lucretius Nat. 3.417–829; Diogenes Laertius 10.124–125); Stoics also came to accommodate their view of the soul to their view of the cosmic conflaguration (Seneca Dia1. 6.26.7). Popular thought drew also from the «shades» of earlier myth (Homer Od. 11.204–224, 487–491). |
| 4766 Safrai, «Education,» 964–65. As a ruler (3:1), Nicodemus would not have to work during the day. 4767 E.g., Judg 6:27 ; 1Sam 28:8; 2 Kgs 25:4; Sophocles Ajax 47; Ant. 494; E1. 1493–1494; Euripides E1. 90; Iph. taur. 1025–1026; Livy 27.5.18; Ovid Metam. 7.192; Lucian Phalaris 1; Hermogenes Issues 50.14–16; Maximus of Tyre Or. 19.4; Gen. Rab. 74:7; Pesiq. Rab. 8:2. Even the Scrolls could use «night» and «darkness» literally at times (4Q299 frg. 5, lines 1–4). 4769 So also John Chrysostom Hom. Jo. 24 (on 2:23–3:4), though noting that Nicodemus acts more courageously in 7and 19:39. 4770 As often noted, e.g., Hoskyns, Gospel, 211; Ellis, World, 63; Barrett, John, 204–5; Ellis, Genius, 52–53; Brown, John, 1:130; Morris, John, 211. The symbolic use of «night» appears elsewhere in the Jesus tradition (Luke 22:53), but John " s light/darkness dualism draws from a broader base of imagery. 4772 Schnackenburg, John, 1:366, suggests that Nicodemus " s agenda behind his question is the desire for eternal life «which preoccupied all Jews.» Others did ask the question (e.g., b. Ber. 28b, bar.; cf. Luke 3:10; Acts 2:37; 16:30), but Schnackenburg overstates the case here. 4775 See Rhet. ad Herenn. 4.21.29–4.22.32; Quintilian 8.3.11–12; 9.3.66–67; Rowe, «Style,» 132; Anderson, Glossary, 93, 127; idem, Rhetorical Theory, 283–85; cf. Blass, Debrunner, and Funk, Grammar, §488. For clarifying word meanings normally, see Rhet. Alex. 25, 1435b. 19–22; for deliberate ambiguity and homonymy, see Anderson, Glossary, 81–82; for discussion of homonyms (words sharing the same name but a different «essence»), see, e.g., Porphyry Ar. Cat. 61.10–68.3. Cf. also συζυγα (Anderson, Glossary, 111) and ντανκλασις (ibid., 20). For an example, see τρυφν and τρφειν in Musonius Rufus 9, p. 70.28–31; or κρακας and κλακας in Diogenes Laertius 6.1.4. 4777 E.g., Book of the Dead spells 145–146; Plutarch Isis 78, Mor. 382F-383A; Heraclitus Ep. 5; Frankfurter, Religion in Egypt, 261–62. The soul returns to its place of heavenly origin (e.g., Maximus of Tyre Or. 41.5; Menander Rhetor 2.9,414.21–23); this can be portrayed as divinization (2.9, 414.25–27). Some philosophers, including later Platonists, prepared for such ascents by «ascending» out of bodily attention into contemplation of the divine (e.g., Porphyry Marc. 6.103–108; 7.131–134; 10.180–183; 16.267–268; 26.415–416; cf. Col 3:1–2). |
| 5486 This claim is a parenthesis (on this rhetorical form, see, e.g., Rowe, «Style,» 147; Anderson, Glossary, 89–90), not an interpolation or redaction (see Van Belle, «Salvation Is from Jews,» noting that this observation must qualify charges that John is anti-Judaic). 5487 Sikes, «Anti-Semitism,» 29; Morris, «Jesus,» 41–42. On «we» vs. «you» plural for the corporate nature of the dialogue, cf. Hyldahl, «Kvinde.» 5488 Jesus» response in Matt 8is probably a question; see, e.g., Jeremias, Promise, 30; Martin, «Servant,» 15. 5491 Ashton, «loudaioi,» 52, also speculating (not necessarily as reliably) that the Samaritan mission originated in Judea. We also regard «Judea» as Jesus» place of origin in this Gospel only in the more general use of the term, encompassing all of Jewish Palestine. 5493 See ANET 326; Clifford, «Tent,» 223; Gordon, Civilizations, 48, 232–33; Kaiser, «Pantheon,» 29–30, 181; De Vaux, Israel, 279–80; Dahood, Psalms, 11; Maximus of Tyre Or. 2.1. R. Simeon b. Yohai reportedly claimed that no mountain proved suitable for Torah but Sinai (Lev. Rab. 13:2). 5494 Cf. Kalimi and Purvis, «Hiding»; Collins, «Vessels»; MacDonald, Samaritans, 365. For a parallel Jewish hope, cf. 2Macc 2:4–7; 2 Bar. 6:7–9; 4 Bar. 3:10–11,19; 4:4; m. Seqa1. 6:1–2; contrast Jer 3:16 . 5495 We extrapolate here on the basis of Jewish hopes; see comments on 2:16, 19. Later Samaritan texts also attest the hope that the tabernacle of Moses» day had been hidden on that mountain and would be restored in the eschatological time (Olsson, Structure, 190). 5499 See Bull, «Report XII» 41; Finegan, Archaeology, 35; Kee, «Tell-Er-Ras»; Garner, «Temples»; Schwank, «Berg»; cf. Bull and Wright, «Temples.» The first new temple built on it was the pagan, Hadrianic one (early second century C.E.). 5500 Anderson, «Temple,» doubts its existence; for more likely recent evidence, see McRay, «Archaeology,» 96. 5503 E.g., Sipra A.M. par. 6.187.1.1. God gave Israel the temple (and other gifts) as a reward for worship (Gen. Rab. 56:2). |
| 7001 Given the narrative genre, the most likely direct allusion is to the book of Jeremiah, where God hid Jeremiah in the temple and so protected him from harm ( Jer 36:26 ); 7002 here, however, Jesus as God " s agent hides himself. Yet because Jesus is the «I am» (8:58), on a theological level, Jesus withdrawing from the temple may also evoke a state of Ichabod–God " s glory withdrawing from a polluted and rebellious sanctuary ( Ezek 5:11; 8:4; 9:3; 10:4, 18 ). 7003 Jewish teachers spoke of the withdrawal of God " s presence from the earth or from among groups of people (3 En. 5.14) 7004 and particularly from the temple (2 Bar. 8:1–2; 64:6) 7005 because of peoplés sins. 7006 Jewish people prayed for the return of God " s presence to Zion. 7007 One recalls accounts of divine Wisdom rejected on the earth, hence wandering and departing ( Sir 24:6–22 ; cf. comment on John 1:10–11 ). 7008 6302 Cf. Attridge, «Development,» on 7:1–36. 6303 Meeks, Prophet-King, 59, follows Dodd (Interpretation, 345–54) in arguing that the discourses of chs. 7–8 in John «form one cycle whose central theme is Jesus» open manifestation»; cf. Pancaro, Law, 57. 6304 Stauffer, Jesus, 174, connects the revelation of Jesus in the narrative with God " s manifestation of himself during the biblical feasts. 6305 See Meeks, Prophet-King, 42–43. Rochais, «Scénario,» argues that 7:1–52 is a unity with the sort of divided scenes and dialogues one expects in a Greek drama. 6306 E.g., Menander Rhetor 1.3, 365.27–29; for festivals as subjects of these speeches, 1.3, 365.30–366.10, 22–28. 6307 E.g., m. Ker. 1:7; " Abot R. Nat. 38A; 41, §114B. Greeks and Romans often taught outside temples (see Watson, «Education,» 310; cf. Iamblichus V.P. 9.50; 21.96), but the location did not constitute these lectures a distinctive genre (Siegert, «Homily,» 421 n. 1). 6308 Michaels, «Discourse.» 6309 M. Sukkah 5:1; see further the comment on 7:37–39. 6310 Later rabbis also emphasized (and probably exaggerated) the dutiful attendance (e.g., Ecc1. Rab. 1:7, §8); Diaspora pilgrims certainly could not attend all the pilgrimage festivals (Safrai, «Relations,» 191). In biblical times, see Josephus Ant. 8.225. 6311 Deissmann, Light, 115–16, noting the pagan association of the Jewish festival with Dionysus. |
| 8237 Brown, John, 2:574; Whitacre, John, 335. Jesus» two closest associates would normally be on either side [b. Ber. 46b; Blomberg, Reliability, 192–93). 8238 Fritsch, Community, 123, following K. G. Kuhn; Malina and Rohrbaugh, John, 226. Others suggest that John simply emphasizes the beloved disciplés paradigmatic discipleship function against Peter " s pastoral one (cf. Hartin, «Peter»). 8240 Cicero Div. Caec. 12.37; Brutus 93.321–322; in rhetoric, cf. Demosthenes On the Embassy 174; Anderson, Glossary, 110–11 and πεξαρεσι,ς («removal» of another " s claims), p. 121. 8241 E.g., Cicero Verr. 2.4.54.121; Phi1. 3.6.15; Rhet. Alex. 3, 1426a.27–32; Valerius Maximus 5.2; sometimes using oneself, e.g., Cicero Pis. 22.51; also noted by Marshall, Enmity, 52–55, 348–53. On comparing characters, see Theon Progymn. 10.3–4; cf. Aphthonius 42.31R comment on the Spirit as «successor» in John 14:16 . 8242 Explicit in Menander Rhetor 2.1–2, 376.31–377.2; 2.3, 378.18–26; 2.3, 380.30–31; 2.6, 402.26–29; 2.6, 403.26–32; 2.6, 404.5–8 (402–404 concern praise of bride and groom); 2.10, 417.5–17; Philostratus Hrk. 27.4; 37.2; 38.1. One could even contrast a single writer " s best and worst passages (Dionysius of Halicarnassus Thucyd. 35, end). For synkrisisin biography, see Shuler, Genre, 50; Stanton, New People, 77–80, 83. 8243 E.g., Philostratus Hrk. 13.3–4; 27.4. Some philosophers did wish to minimize competition among friends, while conceding that in practice this might be possible only toward social superiors Iamblichus V.P. 22.101; 33.230). 8246 E.g., Plutarch Comparison of Aristides with Marcus Cato 5.1, 3–4; 6.1. Plutarch Comparison of Alcibiades and Coriohnus could still include contrasts (e.g., 3.1; cf. likewise Comparison of Lysander and Sulla 5.5), and Plutarch also told distinctive stories about each (in Plutarch Alc. passim, and Cor. passim). After his respective biographies of Aristides and Marcus Cato, he provides Comparison of Aristides with Marcus Cato; likewise, Comparison of Lucullus and Cimon; and so forth. |
| 4857 Matt 18may suggest genuine historical tradition here (Witherington, End, 64; Pryor, «Relation»). 4858 See more fully Fenton, John, 53; Culpepper, Anatomy, 155; Aune, Environment, 56; Becker, Evangelium, 1:135–47; Reynolds, «Misunderstanding.» 4860 On the use of surprise and incongruity for humor among radical Greek sages, including Cynics, see Branham, «Humor»; this was also a method of biblical prophets (e.g., wordplays in Jer 1:11–12 ; Amos 8:1–2; Mic 1:10–15 ; cf. 2 Chr 25:16–17). Riddles were common (Virgil Ecl 3.104–107; Phaedrus 3.1.7; Plutarch Cicero 14.4–5), and Greek oracles often functioned thus (Sophocles Oed. tyr. 439; Virgil Aen. 6.98–101; Ps.-Callisthenes Alex. 1.35; cf. Homer Od. 2.181–182). 4862 On the Fourth Gospels riddles (the answers known to the informed audience), see Thatcher, «Riddles in Gospel»; idem, Riddles in John; cf. Doh, «Paroimiai.» 4864 Colwell and Titus, Spirit, 117, though they take this too far with their adoptionist Christology. Nicodemus " s allusion to of his age in 3may also imply a claim to honor (see Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.206; Ant. 3.47; Keener, Matthew, 543) though in the context of his coming to Jesus probably simply reinforces the reality of his perplexity. 4868 E.g., Aristophanes Ach. 751–752. Duke, Irony 53, suggests that the Johannine Jesus is more Socratic than in the Synoptics, with more humor. 4870 E.g., Ellis, Genius, 1. See, e.g., the guest in Philostratus Hrk. passim, who offers «little except to ask leading questions … (not unlike many of Socrates» interlocutors)» (Maclean and Aitken, Heroikos, xli). 4873 Painter, John, 9, compares John " s misunderstanding motif with Mark " s Messianic Secret; cf. Wrede, Secret, 143–45. 4879 Spriggs, «Water»; Pamment, «Water and Spirit»; Witherington, «Waters»; idem, Wisdom, 97; Lee, Narratives, 45. 4881 Another possible image would be washing in water immediately after birth (e.g., Hom. Hymn 3, to Delian Apollo, line 120, δατι). 4882 So Odeberg, Gospel, 49–52, though he also emphasizes the celestial waters of Jewish throne-visions (51–53). |
| κατατεχνω kunstvoll darstellen (einkleiden): τ νημα PaelGreg 62,18.– LS -νω. κατατζιλω bekacken: PhilogD 243 v.l. (κατετζλλησε) pro κατετλησεν.– Vgl. τσιλ Stam. καττηξις, Aufreibung, Kasteiung: ThStudEp 358,9. ThStudCatM 78 (p.547); 89 (p. 52 MCL). JoMaurBar 42b. VGregSin 6,13.– L. κατατηρω (auf)lauern: Hesych ε 2854. warten auf: νκτα συνοδικν JoScyl 32,35.– Dem. κατατιθασσεω zähmen: SevMet 38 n.I. κατατθεμαι (med.) beistimmen, Übereinkommen, vereinbaren: Mansi XII 987A.1038A (a.787); XVI 396B.444A (a.869/870). Glykas 600,15. beisetzen, bestatten: SynaxCpl 146,25; 920.2 (pass.). HalkΙnHag 40,20 (pass.).– LS, LSSup, L, Tgl, TLG, RBLG, MenasGlos, Stam. κατατιθω niederlegen: -τιθσι DelLeg 182. id. Sym III 896B. κατατιμωρω streng bestrafen: (pass.) ThStudCatM 79 (p.13 MCL). id. ChronMur 345A. – LS, KumN. κατατινσσω schütteln: τν κδρον PselMB V 260.– L. κατατμδην abschnittweise: TzetzBa 747,7; 827,32. καττμημα, τ Abschnitt: TzetzOd VIII 69; X 75. καττοιχος an der Wand: γραφ ThStudEp 380,208 v.l.– Vgl. -τοιχογραφω LS. κατατοκισμς, ( < κατατοκζω) Wucher: MiChonKat 20,17.– Vgl. τοκισμς LS. κατατομες, Zerteiler, Spalter (von Arius): τριδος ConcCP II 808,13; 810,8. θετητος Mansi ΧII 1139A (a.787), id. StichBer 65,75. δξης Χριστο PhotJo II 100. Niederstrecker: πειθν AHG X 304,577. κατατομ, Abschnitt, Parzelle: SchilMet 50,25; 80,16. DöBeitr 115,4.11; 116,22; cf.124. EustIl 1 199,33.– LSSup, Kr, AndrArch, (LS, L, Somav, Stam). κατατομητον man muß zerschneiden (zerkleinern): Miller: cod. Par. 2229,64v (Theoph. Chrysobal., cf. Sonderkamp 163). κατατονω ganz schwächen: τ κατητονημvov Simoc III 4,8.– Vgl. τονω LS. κατατοξζομαι schießen (zielen) auf, niederschießen: HalkHag 179,19. EustIl III 466, 31. EustPind 7,12. SevMet 201 с.11,9; cf.38. Miller: -ζω cod. Coisl. 278,216г (Germ.II).– Vgl. -ξεω LS, Tgl, Duc. κατατοπζω vermuten: τ μλλον PachF II 661,23.– Vgl. ποτοπ. LS. κατατπιον, τ Platz, Stellung, Posten: LeoTact I 293 app.; II 46 app. MilTreat 248, 09. NicPhoc I 25; X 107. PraecMil 52,10. MM III 11 (a.1192). Niederlassung: Attal 201,22; 202,12.– Tgl, TLG, Somav, Kr (-πι), Dem, Stam. |
|
|
