| 4499 Cf. Epictetus Diatr. 2.19.16; 20.11 (τ γρ σο και μν); Martial Epigr. 1.76.11–12; cf. Olsson, Structure, 36. 4503 Cf. Whitacre, Polemic, 84–85, who rightly regards Jesus» response here as a cryptic saying that tests his mother, fitting the misunderstanding motif of this Gospe1. Ancients could follow the story line: Coriolanus acceded to his mother " s request, knowing full well it would cost him his life (Plutarch Cor. 34.2; 36.4). 4504 «Beginning» may also suggest a new creation (cf. 1:1–2; 8:44; Gen 1:1 ; Wis 14:13; cf. the differently worded predestinarian concept in Tob 6:17), but the language is natural enough for the beginning of a particular period in question (e.g., Gen 10:10 ; Sir 51:20 ; £ Ab. 15:14A; 4:13B). That period may also be salvifically significant, referring to the beginning of God " s work among his people (Pss. So1. 8:31–32; 17:30). 4505 Malina and Rohrbaugh, John, 68, following Giblin, «Suggestion,» citing 2:1–14; 4:46–5:1,18; 7:2–10; 11:1–8 (though the conflict does not stem from the compliance in every instance). 4506 On the last, cf. Matthew " s manner of describing healings taking place «that very hour» (Matt 8:13; 9:22; 15:28; 17:18; cf. Luke 7:21; Acts 16:18; 22:13); no less frequent chronological markers in comparable works may suggest that John " s are intended primarily literally rather than symbolically. 4508 Brown, John, 1:99, on the basis of John " s uses of οπω. Salvoni, «Hour,» 240, reads οπω as «nevertheless.» 4509 Cullmann, Time, 44; Salvoni, «Hour,» 237–38; Braun, Jean, 17; Feuillet, Studies, 31 (some including his subsequent exaltation). Holwerda, Spirit, 7 n. 16, does not think Jesus» death is in view in this use of «hour»; Derrett, Law, 242–43, thinks that the «appropriate» time, i.e., when guests are too drunk to notice the miracle, is what is meant. 4513 Cf. Judas Maccabeus in 1Macc 9:10, «if our time (καιρς) has come, let us also die in a manly way for the sake of our brothers» (my trans.) 4514 E.g., Homer/. 15.612–614; 16.441; Xenophon Mem. 4.8.6; Appian C.W. 2.16.116; Silius Italicus 3.134–135. This includes the specific language of «time» (Virgil Aen. 10.503; 11.470; Seneca Ep. Luci1. 69.6) and «day» (Euripides Ale. 24–27, 105, 147; Virgil Aen. 12.150; Phaedrus 4.11.8; Appian C.W. 2.21.149; Apol1. Κ. Tyre 29). It also could apply to the «hour» of marriage in a marital context (Catullus 62.30); could its application to time of a miracle (Eunapius Lives 549, in Boring et a1., Commentary, 250; cf. also Philostratus Hrk. 3.2, 5 in Maclean and Aitken, Heroikos, xxvii-xxix) derive from the present story? |
| 4379 Koester, Symbolism, 81. On the prominence of Dionysus in Ephesus, see Tilborg, Ephesus, 95–98. 4380 B. Ber. 5b; cf. Haenchen, John, 1:174, who rightly rejects Billerbeck " s parallel from Num. Rab. 16 (merchants showing poorer goods first). Bowman, Gospel, 208, connects this miracle with the Jewish prayers for fertility leading up to the feast. In some Jewish stories God still miraculously created food to help his servants (e.g., b. Ta c an. 24b-25a in Boring et a1., Commentary, 98). 4381 Cf. b. Šabb. 53b, where an Amora argues that while miracles often happen, the miracle of creation of food is rare. 4382 See Glasson, Moses, 26; Smith, «Typology,» 334–35; cf. Exod 7:19; Jub. 48:5; Rev 8:8; Job " s festal wine turned to blood in Tg. Job 2:11; a Stoic mentions a similar portent in Cicero Div. 1.43.98; cf. Virgil Aen. 4.453–463; Valerius Maximus 1.6.ext.l; Liv. Pro. 4.20 (ed.Schermann, §27); cf. esp. the contrast in Josephus Ant. 3.17, 38. John " s transformation of Exodus " s blood into wine need not imply a sacramental reading, but it may provide a clue that John at least could accept the interchange of blood and wine on a symbolic leve1. 4383 If the relatively isolated Philonic connection between ecstatic inspiration and intoxication (cf. Keener, Spirit, 24–25; Philo Creation 69–71; Drunkenness 146) may be read in here (cf. Acts 2:13; Eph 5:18 ), the Spirit of prophecy may also lie in the background; but there is no explicit indication that such is in view in our text. 4385 See Brown, John, 1:98; Derrett, Law, 235 n. 2; Mackowski, «Qanah,» 282–83; Riesner, «Fragen.» 4387 Mackowski, «Qanah,» 282. Although Roman and Byzantine pottery also appear at Kefar-Kenna, these do not seem to include remains from the first Roman period (Loffreda, «Scavi»). 4390 Weddings were normally seven days; cf. Tob 11:19; Jos. Asen. 21(OTP 2:236)/21(Greek); Sipra Behuq. pq. 5.266.1.7; b. Ketub. 8b; p. Meg. 4:4, §3; Ketub. 1:1, §6 (one pericope attributing the tradition to Moses!); probably Judg 14:17 ; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 28(a seven-day feast for the king " s son, to parallel Sukkoth); Lam. Rab. 1:7, §34. The fourteen days of Tob 8:19–20 was apparendy exceptional, a celebration due to Sarás deliverance. Cf. analogously seven days of mourning for the dead ( Sir 22:12 ). |
| Началник . Taken from Faber, Dominica 2 Post Pascha, No. 1 «De Officio Magistrate et subditorum erga se muto». The poem summarises the entire sermon, as follows: 11. 1–4 cf Thema: «Iuxta Evangelicam doctrinam, ego illam approbavero rempublicam, in qua Magistrates est velut pastor, cives velut oves.» 11. 5–10 cf sect. 1 «Subditi honorent et ament Magistratum; Magistratus non contemnat subditos»: «Oves venienti pastori de via cedunt: sic subditi debent honorare et amare Magistratum suum. Primo, scriptum enim est Exod. Honora patrem tuum.» 11. 11–12 cf Faber, ibid.: «Secundo, quia personam Dei repraesentant.» 11. 13–20 cf Faber, ibid.: «Vicissim pastor ovem perditam non contemnit, sed quaerit et ponit super humeros suos ac reportât ad caulam: sic Magistratus memores esse humilitatis debent, nec contemnere subditos suos aut quasi canes habere.» 11. 21–32 cf Faber, sect. 2 «Subditi Magistratum timeant; Magistratus gerat se, ut timeatur»: «Oves unicum pastoris sui sibilum aut baculum timent: sic subditi Magistratum timeant; scriptum enim est ad Rom. 13 Si malum feceris, time: non enim sine causa gladium рогтат (Magistratus) Dei enim minister est: vindex in iram ei, qui male agit. ... Vicissim pastor baculum in manu gerit ad coercendas oves, et quandoque in ipsum gregem iacit. Sic Magistratus gerat se ut timeatur. ... Debet tarnen magis inclinatus esse ad clementiam, quam ad severitatem, ideoque gladio uti sicut eques virgula, magis ad terrendum, quam ad feriendum.» 11. 33–40 cf sect. 3 «Subditi obediant suis Superioribus; Magistratus ita praesit, ut audiatur»: «Oves pastoris vocem audiunt, et sequuntur eum. Ita subditi obediant suis superioribus. Sic enim scribit Apostolus ad Rom. 13 Omnis anima potestatibus sublimioribus subdita sit.» 11. 41–48 cf Faber, ibid.: «Vicissim etiam pastor ante oves vadit. Sic Magistratus ita praesit, ut populus incitetur ad prompte obediendum.» 11. 49–56 cf sect. 4 «Subditi sint grati Superioribus; Magistratus vigilet pro subditis»: «Oves praebent pastori suo lac. Pari modo subditi debent esse grati erga superiores suos. ... Vicissim vero paastor pro ovibus vigilat, earum curam agit, etc. Similiter praepositi vigilare pro gregibus debent eosque defendere, quo modo David dum pascebat oves, apprehendebat mentum leonis et ursi, et eruebat oves ex ore ipsorum. 1. Reg. 17.[ 1Sam. 17.34–35 ].» 11. 57–64 cf sect. 5 «Subditi sublevent Magistratum; Magistratus moderetur exactiones»: «Oves praebent lanam pastori, in anno semel aut bis. Sic debent etiam subditi suis facultatifs iuvare Magistratum, onerum gestatione, tributi pensione, etc. ... Vicissim pastor, etsi tondet oves, non excoriât tarnen aut deglubit. Huius igitur exemplo meminerit Magistratus moderari exactiones.» Published in PLDR. |
| 3469 Ibid., 20–47, esp. 35–47 on witness for God in Isa 40–55 (cf. also Cothenet, «Témoignage»). On other Jewish texts, see 48–65 (Philo bridges the gap between the OT and Hellenistic use); in rabbinic literature, see 231–39. John " s usage is probably closest to that of Isaiah LXX (cf. Trites, Witness, 112; Caird, Revelation, 18; Boice, Witness, 16). 3470 Cf. Aune, Environment, 81, citing Herodotus Hist. 2.99; Polybius 12.27.1–6; 20.12.8; Lucian Hist. 47 (on autopsia, eyewitness knowledge). 3472 Casey, «Μρτυς,» 35; Franck, Revelation, 52 (on 15:26, though earlier he acknowledges a forensic context for παρκλητος). 3473 Meeks, Prophet-King, 65 (pointing to the parallel between μαρτυρα and κρσις in 8:14, 16); cf. Caird, Revelation, 18. Perhaps as early as Revelation, μρτυς began to take on a meaning it came to acquire more often in patristic literature: martyr (Morrice, «John,» 44; perhaps Abel who μαρτρησας in T. Ab. 11:2B). 3474 E.g., Trites, Witness, 78–127 (79–90 address John " s juridical character; 90–113 address the lawsuit of Jesus» ministry; 113–22 address the postresurrection lawsuit of John 13–17 ; on the Johannine Epistles, see 124–27; Trites " s conclusions are sound). Cf. Burge, Community, 204–5; Harvey, Tria1. John contrasts witness with faithless betrayal (cf. 5:15; 11:46,57; 12:4); the purpose of witness is to reveal the content of the testimony (2:25). 3477 See esp. 2Macc 3:36 (εξεμαρτρει… πσιν); Chariton 4.7.5 (πασιν ανθρπους; though cf. 7:6, where whole cities did come to meet her). 3478 The sense " from God» fits the genitive (cf. παρ θεν in Musonius Rufus 3, p. 38.27; παρ του θεο in Menander Rhetor 2.1–2,370.21–26=εκ θεν in 370.29–371.2) as well as the sending. 3482 See on 1:4–5, above. T. Levi 14declares that God gave the law to «enlighten every person»; the parallel is close, but could depend on John, given the heavy Christian redaction of T. Levi (Bernard, John, 1:13; Brown, John, 1:523; Longenecker, Christology, 12,146). 3485 The «genuine» light of 1contrasts them explicitly; cf. the application of «genuine» to God in the apologetic of Hellenistic Judaism (Best, Thessalonians, 82, cites LXX Exod 34:6; 2 Chr 15:3; Ps 86:15 ; Isa 65and mentions other sources). |
| Taken from Meffreth, Dominica in Coena Domini. II. 1–6 cf Meffreth: «Christus multipliciter est traditus. Primo, a Patre ex feruentissim a dilectione. Iuxta illud Apostoli ad Roman. 8. Proprio filio suo non pepercit Deus, sed pro nobis omnibus tradidit ilium.» II. 7–8 cf Meffreth: «Secundo tradidit seraetipsura ex humilitate obedientiae.» II. 9–10 cf Meffreth: «Tertio, tradidit eum ludas ex cupiditate auaritiae suae.» II. 11–12 cf Meffreth: «Quarto, tradiderunt eum ludaei ex iniquitatis inuidia.» II. 13–14 cf Meffreth: «Quinto, tradidit eum Pilatus ex peruersitate iustitiae.» II. 15–22 cf Meffreth: «Sexto, vt dicit Origenes, tradidit eum diabolus ex timoré, timens amittere genus humanum, propter eius doctrinam si amplius viueret: non aduertens, quod magis erat eripiendum genus humanum ab ipso, propter mortem eius, quam propter doctrinam» (Pars hyera., p. 365). Прелесть . Taken from Faber, Dominica 4 Post Pascha, No. 6 «Qua ratione diabolus doceat oranem falsitatera», sect. 5 «Docet rem fucare». II. 1–4 cf Faber: «Didicit hanc artera Cain satis terapestive, qui ut fratrera neci daret, evocavit ad deambulationem quasi am ice cum fratre locuturus.» II. 5–8 cf Faber: «Hue pertinet Ioab qui dura Amasara osculatur et salutat amicum: Salve mi frater, interim pugionera lateri eius infixit, 2. Reg. 20.[ 2Sam. 20.9–10 ].» II. 11–12 cf Faber: «ludas osculo tradens Christum.» The reference to Jael and Sisera (II. 9–10) is Simeon " s own addition. Прелесть 2 . Taken from Faber, ibid., sect. 7 «Docet simulare»: «Sic A bsalon ut populum ad novarum rerum Studium incitaret, et in legitim um suum Dominum concitaret, mane consurgens, stabat iuxta introitum portae, et отпет virum, qui habebat negotium ut veniret ad regis iudicium, vocabat ad se et dicebat: Videntur mihi sermones tui boni et iusti, sed non est qui te audiat constitutus a rege, etc. Sed et cum accederet ad eum homo, ut salutaret ilium, extendebat manum suam, apprehendens osculabatur eum, 2. Reg. 15.[ 2Sam. 15.2–5 ].» Прелесть 3 . |
| 1704 T. Šabb. 13:5; " Abot R. Nat. 16 A; b. Git. 45b; Šabb. 116a (purportedly Tannaitic); cf. t. Β. Mes?a 2:33; Herford, Christianity 173–80; Schiffmann, «Crossroads,» 144–46. 1708 Christ " s significance in this way provided a strong deterrent to apostasy both in the Fourth Gospel and in Hebrews (Painter, «Israel,» 112). Matsunaga, ««Theos,»» thinks that faith in Jesus» Deity gave them reason to withstand persecution; Herford, Christianity, 383–84, that their high Christology is what made them minim. Fuller, ««Jews,»» 35–36, also sees Christology as centra1. The view of Fortna, «Christology,» may thus be contested. 1709 A motif in Revelation (Rev 5:8–14; 7:9–10; 22:3; cf. 1 En. 48:5–6 in the Similitudes); also the pagan perception of Christianity: Pliny Ep. 10.96; cf. Lucian Peregr. 11. 1710 Justin claimed that rabbis conceded the Messiah " s deity in some sense (Dia1. 68:9), but this is plainly false (see Higgins, «Belief,» 305); the Fourth Gospel itself criticizes existing Jewish views as inadequate (cf. Jonge, «Expectations,» 266). 1713 Cf. McGrath, Apologetic Christology, who argues that Johannine Christology developed in conflict with the synagogue, but much of the Christology was pre-Johannine. 1716 Note the charge of deicide, e.g., in Melitós Paschal Homily, 96 (in Hawthorne, «Translation,» 172). 1717 M. Sanh. 4:5; Sipre Deut. 329.1.1; b. Sanh. 38ab (mainly third century but with some second-century tradition); Pesiq. Rab. 21:6; 3 En. 16(but cf. 12:5); cf. b. Menah. 110a (purportedly Tannaitic); Justin Dia1. 55, 63; Klausner, Jesus, 34–35. Akibás famous error with the two thrones in Daniel almost certainly addresses this charge (b. Sanh. 38b; Hag. 14a). Exod. Rab. 29accepts the late Christian equation of God and «Son of God» but rejects the possibility of God having a son. Cf. Irsai, ««ny mkzb hw.»» Some evidence in the Palestinian Targumim, however, calls into question whether the «ditheists» were always Christians; gnostic dualists are sometimes possible (cf. Bassler, «Cain»). |
| 1380 Cf. Safrai, «Education,» 960; Scholem, Trends, 42. Contrast the metaphoric use of the chariot in Gen. Rab. 47:6; 69:3; 82(Resh Lakish, early Amoraic). 1382 Abelson, Immanence, 340–56; cf. Scholem, Trends, 11–12, who argues that the mystics were near rabbinic Judaism " s center, not its fringes. 1383 Jewish mystical texts vary in the degree to which they emphasize the mystic " s responsibility to his community; see Chernus, «Individua1.» 1385 Halperin, «Midrash»; Goodenough, Symbols, 1:221, 8:17; cf. 12:198.4QS140 maybe significant here; cf. Patte, Hermeneutic, 290; Gaster, Scriptures, 285–88; Vermes, Scrolls, 210–11; Dupont-Sommer, Writings, 333–34; Alexander, «3 Enoch,» 235. Cf. the chariot in 1.A.E. 25.2–3; 28:4; cf. Apoc. Mos. 22:3; 33:2; similar language is used of Job " s throne in T. Job 33 (cf. 33:9). 1386 Alexander, «3 Enoch,» 232; Scholem, Trends, 8; on the development, cf. Neusner, «Development»; idem, Legend, 5–6. 1388 Yamauchi, Gnosticism, 149–51. Gaster, Studies, l:369ff., more accurately finds gnosticism in the Zohar. 1391 E.g., Conzelmann, Theology, 11; Jonas, Religion, 32–33; Bousset, Kyrios Christos, 187, 245. For a survey of the view " s development, see Yamauchi, Gnosticism, 21–24; Ridderbos, Paul, 27–28. 1394 Compare gnosticism with descriptions of neoplatonists in Dillon, Platonists, 7, 385; cf. Plotinus Enn. 2:9. 1395 Koester, Introduction, 1:194; Jonas, Religion, 38; Bultmann, Christianity, 161; but contrast Hengel, Son, 28. 1397 For gnosticism " s debt to earlier Christianity, see Wilson, Gnostic Problem, 68,256; Yamauchi. Gnosticism, 20; Burkitt, Gnosis, viii; Grant, Gnosticism, 13–14. 1398 See Albright, Stone Age, 282, 306; Munck, «Gnosticism,» 236; Yamauchi, Gnosticism, 16–18; Smalley, John, 51; Wilson, Gnosis and NT, 30, 142; idem, Gnostic Problem, 97; Arrington, Theology, 186; Ladd, Criticism, 204–5. 1401 Robinson, «Trajectory,» 263; Schnackenburg, John, 1:543–57, allows for some assimilation to this myth but places John " s roots instead in Wisdom speculation (556). |
| 2703 P. Git. 1:1, §1. For discussion of how a sender could nullify an agent " s task, see p. Git. 4:1, §1; the stricter rule required speaking to the agent (see m. Git. 4:1). 2704 E.g., Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 6.88.2; Diodorus Siculus 40.1.1; Josephus Life 65, 72–73, 196–198; 2Macc 1:20. Cf. Zenós dispatch of two fellow scholars in his place in Diogenes Laertius 7.1.9. 2705 Diodorus Siculus 4.10.3–4; Josephus Ant. 8.220–221. 2706 Cf. Euripides Herac1. 272; Xenophon Anab. 5.7.18–19, 34; Apollodorus Epitome 3.28–29: Polybius 15.2; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 8.43.4; Diodorus Siculus 36.15.1–2; Dio Cassius 19.61; Appian R.H. 3.6.1–2; 3.7.2–3; 4.11; 8.8.53; Valerius Maximus 6.6.3–4. This was important, since receivers of news sometimes responded positively or negatively to messengers depending on the news they received (e.g., Homer Il. 17.694–696; 18.15–21; Euripides Medea 1125–1129; Appian R.H. 12.12.84; Arrian Ind. 34.4; 35.1; 2Sam 1:15; 18:20, 22 ; Ps.-Callisthenes Alex. 1.35, 37). 2707 Homer Il. 1.334; 7.274–282; 8.517; Aeschines Timarchus 21; Cicero Phi1. 13.21.47; Herodian 6.4.6. Ambassadors who risked their lives merited special honor ( Phil 2:25–30 ; Cicero Phi1. 9.1.2). 2708 M. Demai 4:5; t. Demai 2:20; cf. also Aeschines Timarchus 21. 2709 B. B. Qam. 102ab. 2710 Wenham, Bible, 114–15. In the broader Mediterranean culture, cf., e.g., Demosthenes Or the Embassy 4–5. 2711 E.g., Appian R.H. 9.9.3 (196 B.C.E.). 2712 E.g., the ideal herald Aethalides in Apollonius of Rhodes 1.640–648. 2713 Cf. Euripides Herac1. 292–293. 2714 The sense of a cognate noun and verb need not agree, but given the noun " s absence in the LXX and the verb s prominence there in a manner analogous to early Christian usage, it seems likelv that the noun here reflects a Christian usage coined to match the cognate LXX verb (albeit in less technical use in secular vocabulary). 2715 Joshua by Moses (Josh 14:7; cf. Josh 11:15); Barak by Deborah ( Judg 4:6 ); Saul " s messenger? ( 1Sam 19:20 ); David (allegedly) by Saul ( 1Sam 21:2 ); angels from God (e.g., Judg 13:8 ; Tob 12cf. Gen 24:7 ); cf. messengers in 1 Kgs 18:10; 19:2;2Kgs 1:2,6,9,11,13; etc. A disciple may be " sent» as his master " s representative (the false but believable claim in 2 Kgs 5:22; cf. 2 Kgs 9:1–4). |
| 1073 Cf., e.g., ] Enoch, 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, passim; in Greek oracles, see Aune, Prophecy, 51–52. Some philosophers also strove to make their teachings enigmatic to outsiders (Culpepper, School, 50, cf. 92). 1074 See Lake and Cadbury, Commentary, 239; Haenchen, Acts, 559 n. 2; Yamauchi, Archaeology, 99–100; cf. Ramsay, Cities, 229–30. On public lectures in philosophical schools, cf., e.g., Aulus Gellius Attic Nights 1.26 (Stowers, «Diatribe,» 74); Malherbe, «Life» 35; Latourette, Expansion, 1:16. Early Christian congregations naturally appeared to many outsiders as philosophical schools or associations (Wilken, «Collegia,» 277; idem, «Christians,» 107–10; cf. idem, «Social Interpretation,» 444–48), and Paul may have been fulfilling this function even if the hall he was renting from Tyrannus was a guild hall (Malherbe, Aspects, 89–90). Some have seen even in Romans evidence of the teaching style he employed with students (Stowers, Diatribe, 183). 1075 Even in rhetorical schools, different disciples of a single teacher might exhibit widely diverging styles (Cicero Brutus 56.204). 1076 That authors adapted style to genre is commonly noted; e.g., Stowers, Diatribe, 69; cf. Cicero Yam. 9.21.1. 1077 Compare, e.g., Diogenes Laertius 3.8; Ps-Melissa Ep. (Letter to Kleareta in Malherbe, Exhortation, 82). 1078 This is an argument by analogy, not implying that later Christian perspectives should be read back into the NT documents (though this happens, as Brown, Community, 163, for instance notes, when the inclusion of John [Kysar " s «maverick gospel " ] in the same canon with the Synoptics provides interpretive boundaries for both). But the DSS indicate major variations of genre and perspective within the same community and perhaps from the same ultimate author (e.g., the community " s rules and hymns), which were not viewed as in conflict with one another (cf. Keck, «Ethos,» 448–49; cf. also the compatibility of rabbinic and apocalyptic piety in Sanders, Judaism, 8). 1081 Cf. also καθστημι in Acts 7:10; 17:15; perhaps λαμπρν in Luke 23:11; Acts 10:30. Similarly, ομοθυμαδν is common (ten times) in Acts, but never appears in Luke (and only once elsewhere in the NT). |
| 3298 Cf. Irenaeus Haer. 1.26.1, on Cerinthus; Hippolytus Haer. 6.28–29, on Valentinians. Although the gnostic view of creation reflected Platonic ideas (e.g., Marcus " s creation after an invisible image, Irenaeus Haer. 1.17), the neoplatonist Plotinus found it severely wanting (Plotinus Enn. 2.9.8) 3299 See Cohn-Sherbok, «Mandaeans,» who cites t. Sanh. 8:7; Gen. Rab. 8:10. This may suggest a proto-Mandaic idea later incorporated into Mandaism; but its evidence may derive from a gnostic source, which may have been influenced by the Christian doctrine of the second Adam as well as rabbinic Adam speculation. Further, the polemic against minim in t. Sanh. 8may not address Adam at all; rabbis did polemicize against dual powers in creation (Gen. Rab. 1:7), but this could oppose Christians or the male-female dyad principle of some pagan (e.g., Varro L.L. 5.10.58; cf. Gen. Rab. 8:9; Pesiq. Rab. 20:2) as well as gnostic (Irenaeus Haer. 1.1.1) thought, and a polemic against gnostic or Philonic angelic mediation (cf. Urbach, Sages, 205) need not involve proto-Mandaism in particular. 3301 Confusion 171, 179; Flight 69; cf. also Papias frg. 7 (from Andreas Caesariensis, ca. 500 C.E., in Ante-Nicene Fathers, 1:155). God created through assistants so that if his creation went astray, the assistants would be blamed (Creation 75). 3302 Despite disagreement on when angels were created, later rabbis agreed that God did not create them on the first day (contrast the earlier claim in Jub. 2:2), lest schismatics claim that angels aided in creation (Gen. Rab. 1:3; Justin Dia1. 62; cf. Gen. Rab. 8:8; Tg. Ps.-J. on Gen 1:26 ; Williams, Justin, 129; Barnard, «Judaism,» 404; Urbach, Sages, 1:203–4; for other traditions on days of creation, cf. t. Ber. 5:31; houses dispute in p. Hag. 2:1, §17; cf. Gen. Rab. 1:15), although God did consult with them (b. Sanh. 38b; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 23:1; Gen. Rab. 8:3–4,8; 17:4; Lev. Rab. 29:1; Num. Rab. 19:3; see Urbach, Sages, 1:205–7). This clearly represents polemic against an existing interpretation of the plural in Gen. 1 (contrast Jub. 2:3, second century b.C.E.; the plurals of Gen. 1and 11include angels–Jub. 10:22–23; cf. 14:20); polemicists before the rabbis may have also objected to the Jubilees chronology (cf. L.A.B. 60:3; 2 En. 29A; 29:3–5 J). |
|
|
