| 4430 Apollonius of Rhodes 1.473; Diogenes Laertius 7.7.184; 10.1.15; Apuleius Metam. 7.12; Plutarch Poetry 1, Mor. 15E; T.T. 1.4.3, Mor. 62ICD; Diodorus Siculus 4.4.6; Philostratus Vit. soph. 2.10.588; Athenaeus Deipn. 10.427AB, 432A; cf. Wasson, Hofmann, Ruck, Eleusis, 90. Though one might devote undiluted wine to Dionysus, one might dilute wine dedicated to Zeus (as in Diodorus Siculus 4.3.4). 4431 Plutarch Alex. 70.1; 75.3–4; less disastrously, Alciphron Farmers 30 (Scopiades to Cotion), 3.32; cf. Isa 5:22. 4437 P Ha1. 1.193–195; Apollonius of Rhodes 1.473; Menander maxims 2, 5 in Sei. Pap. 3:260–61; Demosthenes Against Conon 7; Seneca Ep. Luci1. 83.19–20; Plutarch Isis 6, Mor. 353C; Statecraft 3, Mor. 799B; T.T. 3, introduction, Mor. 645A; Sextus Empiricus Pyr. 1.109; Anacharsis Ep. 3.1–3; Crates Ep. 10; Chariton 4.3.8; Phaedrus 4.16; cf. L.A.B. 43:6. For further references, see Keener, Paul, 261–63. 4438 See, e.g., Euripides Cyc1. 488–494,678; Isocrates Demon. 32; Horace Sat. 1.3.90–91; Polybius II. 3; Livy 33.28.2; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 7.11.3; Diodorus Siculus 15.74.2; Athenaeus Deipn. 1.10e; cf. 1 Esd 3:17–24; Jdt 13:15; Josephus Life 225, 338. 4440 Alciphron Farmers 15 (Eustachys to Pithacnion), 3.18, par. 2, also emphasizing that they would sing and dance a lot. Cf. Athenaeus Deipn. 9.377AB. 4441 On varieties of wine (including some made without vines), see Pliny Nat. 14.6.53–14.22.118. Egyptian social clubs employed plenty of wine (P.Tebt. 118). 4444 E.g., t. Ber. 3:8; b. B. Qam. 69b (R. Meir); Pesah. 102a, bar.; Šabb. 23b; cf. perhaps Jub. 2:21. For regular blessings of wine at meals, cf. b. Ber. 33a; 51a; in much earlier Qumran texts, cf. firstfruits in 1QS 6.4–5. 4445 In general, see Safrai, «Home,» 747; Let. Arts. 274; among Greeks, see Menander Rhetor 2.7, 408.32–409.1. 4446 Homer Od. 18.304–305; Euripides Herac1. 892–893; Babrius 80.1–2; L.A.B. 51:7; p. Hag. 2:1, §9; Ecc1. Rab. 10:19, §1; Luke 15:25. In religious celebrations, see the discussion of dancing at Sukkoth under John 8:12–20 . |
| 2565 Charlesworth, Pseudepigrapha and NT, 82. 2566 E.g., T. Mos. 4:2. Cf. also Plutarch Isis 2, Mor. 352A, who applies this title to the universal God. 2567 Sipre Deut. 26.5.1; Gen. Rab. 12:15; 33:3; 73:3; Exod. Rab. 3:7; 6:1, 3; Num. Rab. 9:18. 2568 See Schweizer, Jesus, 72. 2569 Applied even to a relative of higher rank, e.g., P.Oxy. 1231,26; Select Papyri 1:338–39, lines 1, 24; P.Giess. bib1. 21.11. 2570 Vermes, Jesus the Jew, 114–15; he notes evidence for the title applied to teachers on 114–20. For the vocative, see also Γ. Job 3:5; for the title of a legal guardian (or perhaps a freedwoman " s patron), CP/2:20–22, §148 (Egypt, 10 b.C.e.). 2571 Fee, Corinthians, 839. 2572 Ladd, Theology, 416–17. See further Longenecker, Christology, 136. 2573 Dibelius, Tradition, 96, emphasizes the gradual «disappearance of the boundaries between God and the God-sent man» in Hellenistic religious history in genera1. Arguing against this, Croy, «Neo-Pythagoreanism,» 741, thinks that hellenized Judaism resisted the blending of human and divine; yet this too may overstate the case (see below). 2574 By the second century Jesus» deity was widely affirmed by Christians (see Ign. Rom. 3; Eph. 7; Justin Dia1. 68:9; Athenagoras 24; perhaps 1 En. 48:5; etc.). Contrast «Ebionites,» Irenaeus Haer. 3.19; 5.1.3; cf. Kaye, Apology, 54; Chadwick, «Defence,» 287. 2575 E.g., Heracles (Cicero Tusc. 1.12.28; 2.7.17; cf. Nat. d. 2.24.62; 3.15.39); Apollonius (probably third- or fourth-century inscription; see Jones, «Epigram»; a demigod in Eunapius Lives 454). This also applied to divine lawgivers like Lycurgus (Herodotus Hist. 1.65–66; Plutarch Lycurgus 5.3) and occasional other mortals (Pausanias 8.9.6–8; 9.22.7). On the deification of heroes, cf. Nock, Paul, 96 (Heracles, the Dioscurai, Dionysus, and Asclepius); Hadas and Smith, Heroes. One may compare esp. the popular Asclepius, a former mortal who now cures diseases (cf. Pausanias 6 [Elis 2].l 1.9). 2576 E.g., Democritus (Diogenes Laertius 9.7.39); Pythagoras (Diogenes Laertius 8.1.11); «the divine Plato» (Cicero Opt. gen. 6.17; Leg. 3.1.1; Nat. d. 2.12.32; Plutarch Profit by Enemies 8, Mor. 90C; Apol1. 36, Mor. 120D; Philostostratus Epistulae 73, §13; cf. patristic sources in Grant, Gods, 63–64); Theodorus (Diogenes Laertius 2.100). People could be divinized by philosophy (Seneca Ep. Luci1. 48.11; Marcus Aurelius 4.16); philosophy " s goal, virtue (Seneca Dia1. 1.1.5; Epictetus Diatr. 2.19.26–28; Philostratus Vit. Apol1. 3.18,29; 8.5; Plotinus On Virtues 1.2.7; cf. also Koester, Introduction, 1:353); proper knowledge of onés humanity (Plutarch Pompey 27.3); faithfulness (Sent. Sext. 7ab, a Hellenistic Christian source); or, in some systems, death (Cicero Leg. 2.9.22; 2.22.55). See Alexander, «Ipse dixit,» 109–10. |
| 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). |
| 8790 Epictetus Diatr. 3.13.9–11; probably Let. Arts. 273; cf. Epictetus Diatr. 2.2.3; Seneca Dia1. 7.8.6. 8792 Tob 13:14; 1 En. 1:6–8; 5:7–10; 71:17; 105(contrast 98:11, 15; 99:13; 101:3; 103for the wicked); Jub. 1:15; 23:29–30; 31:20; 1QM 1.9; 12.3 (after the battle); Sib. Or. 2.29; 3.367–380,751–755, 780–782; 5.384–385; T. Jud. 22:2; Lev. Rab. 9:9, bar.; Christian material in Γ. Dan 5:11. Ford, «Shalom,» compares the quietistic pacifism/Divine Warrior picture of Revelation with the Gospel " s picture of Jesus submitting to suffering, in defining Johannine «peace» (cf. 16:33; 20:19,21,26). 8793 This wing of Pharisaism was probably a minority in the first century; see, e.g., Sanders, Jesus to Mishnah, 86, 324. 8794 Cf. the standard rabbinic «Great is peace, for ...» (Sipre Num. 42.2.3; Sipre Deut. 199.3.1; Gen. Rab. 38(Tannaitic attribution); 48:18; 100:8 (Tannaitic attribution); cf. Sipra Behuq. pq. 1.261.1.14). It is associated with keeping the commandments (Sipra VDDen. pq. 16.28.1.1,3) and is a fruit of righteousness (m. Abot 2:7, attributed to Hillel). Cf. AbotR. Nat. 48, §134B; Num. Rab. 21:1. 8796 This joy likewise characterizes the harvest of new believers (4:36; cf. Luke 15:6–7, 9–10, 23–24); cf. the realized eschatology in Abraham " s foretaste of Jesus» day (8:56). In context, 15includes love toward one another. 8799 Many philosophers regarded perfection as superlative (e.g., Seneca Ep. Luci1. 66.8–12) and hence would have to regard Jesus» character, if true deity, as nonsubordinate; but perfection of identity can be easily confused with identity of all that is perfect. For some historic interpretations of 14:28, see, e.g., Whitacre, John, 366–68. For more ontological rankings among pagan philosophers, cf., e.g., Porphyry Marc. 16.269–270 (only God is greater than virtue) 8802 Pagans also regarded fulfilments as confirmations, though they were sometimes deceptive (e.g., Ps.-Callisthenes Alex. 1.9, depending on magic). 8803 This princés «coming» (14:30) may also contrast with his own «coming» back to them after the resurrection (14:3, 28); the antichrist figure of Revelation often parodies God " s Messiah (Rev 13:3–4, 18; 17:8). |
| 1734 Josephus lists numerous local decrees which probably functioned as precedents by which Diaspora Jews sought to defend their status; he also reports the desire of Alexandrian Jews to be equal citizens with the Greeks who dominated the city " s cultural elite; see Rabello, «Condition»; Rajak, «Charter.» 1737 Dodd, Tradition, 120, suggests that it must be pre-70, but the decades shortly after 70 would function just as wel1. The period following 135, after the demise of the Bar Kokhba revolt, witnessed a consolidation of rabbinic antipathy toward inadequately substantiated messianic claims. 1739 Egyptian («The Instruction for King Meri-Ka-Re,» ANET 416; cf. also enthronement oracles, e.g., «The Divine Nomination of Thut-Mose III» and «The Divine Nomination of an Ethiopian King,» ANET 446–48; Wilson, «Prophecy,» 3–16, 10); Ugaritic (Craigie, Ugarit, 35); Mari Moran, «Prophecy,» 17; Craghan, «Mari, " 48, and Paul, «Prophets,» 1160, citing ARM.T 13.23,114); Akkadian («Assyrian Oracles,» ANET 449–50); Assyrian («Babylonian and Assyrian Historical Texts,» ANET274–77,281,286,292); classical Greece (Nilsson, Cults, 123–42). Cf. Ross, «Prophecy,» 17; Hayes, «Oracles,» 81–85. 1741 Collins, Oracles, 4–5 for Mithridates; 9–12 for Persia; 12–19 for Egypt. In general, cf. Aune, Prophecy, 73–77. 1742 Collins, Oracles, 117. Not surprisingly, Tiberius banished all Sibylline oracles considered spurious (Dio Cassius 57.18.5). 1743 This was true not only under Domitian; cf. Tacitus Ann. 14.22; Suetonius Nero 36; MacMullen, Enemies, 133; Kee, Origins, 71. Some philosophers also suffered at Domitian " s hands; cf. lones, Dio Chrysostom, 45; Aulus Gellius 15.11.3–5; Philostratus Vit. Apoll, books 7–8. 1744 Suetonius Dom. 12; Williams, «Domitian»; though cf. Ramsay, Church, 268; Reicke, Era, 286; Josephus Life 429 (Josephus found a patron in the Flavians). The disdain was evidently reciprocated; cf. Sib. Or. 5.39–46 (toward Rome in general, among the early sources, cf., e.g., 4 Ezra 6:9; 11–12; m. " Abot 1:10; 2:3; Sipre Deut. 317.4.2; 320.2.3; Mendels, «Empires»). |
| 5 See Jerome, Ep. 133.3 (ed. J.Labourt, VIII, [Paris, 1963], 53). 6 To use the usual English equivalents, which are not always quite appropriate: the Greek terms are gastrimargia, porneia, philarguria, lype, orgi, akidia, kenodoxia, hyperiphania. 7 Evagrius, Logos Praktikos 81 (Guillaumont et al. 1971 , 670). 8 Idem, ibid. 64 (Guillaumont et al. 1971 , 648). 9 Evagrius, On Prayer 53 (cf. Palmer 1979 , 62). 10 See Garrigues (1976), esp. 176–99; and Heinzer (1980), 181–98. 11 On the vexed question of Greek and Latin words for love, Oliver O’Donovan’s comment is pertinent: ‘It may be convenient for modern thinkers to label certain motifs by the Latin or Greek words which they think incapsulate them, but they should not then suppose they have discovered a lexicographical statute to which ancient writers can be held’ (O’Donovan 1980 , 10–11). On the language of love in Plato and the Fathers, see most recently Osborne (1994). 12 CC II.8, and cf. his doctrine in Ep. 2 (397BCD). 13 Cf. also CC I.55, II.14, III.56, IV.21.60f. 14 Cf. Ep. 2:405A. 15 See, for instance, CC II.16 (definition of passion) and II.17 (definition of vice). 16 Diadochus of Photike, Century on Spiritual Knowledge 17, cf. 72 (des Places 1966 , 94, 131). 17 For ‘sabbath’, cf. Isa. 66:23; for ‘sabbaths’, cf. Exod. 31:13; for ‘sabbaths of sabbaths’, cf. Lev. 16:31 (LXX). 18 For a more detailed analysis of the bulk of this Difficulty, see chapter 5 of the Introduction, below. 19 Makarios, Hom. 15.38 (ed. H.Dorries, E.Klostermann and M.Kroeger, Patristische Texte und Studien, 4, Berlin, 1964, pp. 149f.). 4 THE DOCTRINE OF THE PERSON OF CHRIST 1 See Opusc. 20: PG 91:237CD, 244C-245A; 28:328C-329B. 2 Translation from Tanner (1990), 86–7 (slightly modified). 3 For an account of the historical development of the logos/tropos distinction and its use by Maximus, see Sherwood (1955a), 155–66; and Heinzer (1980), 29–58. 4 Gregory Nazianzen, Sermon 39.13 [PG 36:348D]. Gregory’s sermon is for the Feast of Lights, i.e., the Theophany (or the Epiphany). |
| 2249 Part of the question turns on onés definition of «magic» (cf. Aune, «Magic,» 1557; Blomberg, «Reflections,» 449), but to the extent that «religion» and «magic» are distinguished, the normal criteria readily distinguish Jesus from magic (Kee, Miracle, 214–15; Meier, Marginal Jew, 2:537–52; Twelftree, Exorcist, 190–207; Goergen, Mission, 173–75; Vermes, Religion, 6). 2250 Drane, «Background,» 122–23; cf. similarly Theissen, Stories, 296. Borg, Vision, 16, thus defines «charismatic» too broadly to be helpful here. Neusner, in «Foreword,» xxvii and idem, New Testament, 5,173, offers the harshest critique of Smith " s thesis. 2258 Harvey, Jesus, 100; followed also by Blomberg, «Reflections,» 450–51. See, e.g., m. Ta c an. 3:8; " Abot R. Nat. 6; b. Ta c an. 8a; 23ab; 24a-26a; p. Ta c an. 1:4, §1; 3:9, §§6–8; 3:11, §4; cf. Josephus Ant. 8.343–346; 14.22; Empedocles in Diogenes Laertius 8.2.59–60. For the link with corporate piety, see 1 En. 101:2; Pss. So1. 17:18; Gen. Rab. 13:14; Lev. Rab. 34:14; 35:10; Num. Rab. 3:12; cf. b. Ta c an. 19b; on the miraculousness of rain (included in the benediction of the resurrection), cf. b. Ber. 29a; 33a; Ta c an. 2b; 7a; p. Ta c an. 1:1, §2; Gen. Rab. 13:6; Deut. Rab. 7:6. Rainmakers are prominent in many cultures (e.g., Mbiti, Religions, 89, 234–37). 2259 Cf. Herford, Christianity, 50–51, 54–56, 211–15; Bagatti, Church, 95–96, 106–7; Manns, «Jacob.» P. Šabb. 14:4, §3, may provide another example, but is uncertain. 2260 Vermes, Jesus the Jew, 65; cf. Cangh, «Miracles»; Harvey, Jesus, 100 n. 10, following Smith, Parallels, 81–84 against R Fiebig. But this may have been less frequent than is often supposed; cf. Bourgeois, «Spittle,» 32–33. 2261 Harvey, Jesus, 115; in pagan accounts, see Blackburn, «ΑΝΔΡΕΣ,» 192. Contrast Isa 35:5–6, treated below. 2262 Concurring with Taylor, Formation, 128; against Bousset, Kyrios Christos, 101–3; Jeremias, Theology, 88–92. Jeremiase use of parallels to dismiss the authenticity of these miracles or to attribute them to psychosomatic activity (88–92) simply rests on his presupposition that modernity rejects the miraculous (89). |
| 4092 Bürge, Community, 55,71–110 (esp. 81–87); Lampe, Seal, 35; Turner, Spirit, 59. They appeal especially to Isa 11(which the rabbis took messianically; Bonsirven, Judaism, 218); Jeremias, Theology, 54–55, appeals to Isa 42(as in Matt 12:18). For the association of the Spirit and Messiah in Qumran texts, see Chevallier, VEsprit, 134–43, though he wrongly attributes this to gnostic influence on the relevant texts; he treats Γ. Levi 18:2–14; T. Jud. 24 but correctly warns, «Ces hymnes sont … une prophétie ex eventu de la venue, de Jésus-Messie accomplissant les Ecritures» (125–33). 4093 Cf. in Isaacs, Spirit, 47, citing Philo Flight 132; Moses 1.175 for Moses being the Spirit " s «recipient par excellence» and Giants 47 for the Spirit abiding with him longer than with others. 4095 See, e.g., Mattill, Last Things, 4; Robinson, Studies, 161; Dunn, Baptism, 42; cf. Minear, Kingdom, 135. Tannehill, Sword, 145; idem, Luke, 1:251, connects with the context of division. For authenticity, see Hill, Prophecy, 67. 4098 Chaff did not burn eternally (Ladd, Theology, 37, cites Isa 1:31; 66:24; Jer 7:20 ); that Q " s fire is unquenchable suggests a particular Jewish image of judgment as eternal (the worst sinners in 4 Macc 9:9; 12:12; t. Sanh. 13:5; probably 1 En. 108:5–6; L.A.B. 38:4; Ascen. Isa. 1:2; 3 En. 44:3; p. Hag. 2:2, §5; Sanh. 6:6, §2; Plutarch D. V. 31, Mor. 567DE). There was no unanimous Jewish view; see the probably first-century dispute in " Abot R. Nat. 41 A; cf. also 36 A. Matthew " s view is more obviously Jewish than Lukés (cf. Milikowsky, «Gehenna»; Goulder, Matthew, 63), though Lukés Hellenistic contextualization does not abandon future eschatology (Acts 17:31–32; 23:6; 24:15; contrast to some extent, e.g., Josephus Ant. 18.14, 18; War 2.163; Philo Sacrifices 5, 8). 4099 In the most common rabbinic view, most sinners endure it temporarily till destruction (cf. 1QS 4.13–14; Gen. Rab. 6:6; most sinners in t. Sanh. 13:4; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 10:4; Pesiq. Rab. 11:5) or release (Num. Rab. 18:20; other texts are unclear, e.g., Sir 7:16 ; Sipre Num. 40.1.9; Sipre Deut. 311.3.1; 357.6.7; " Abot R. Nat. 16 A; 32, §69 B; 37, §95 B). Many Jewish storytellers conflated Gehenna with the Greek Tartarus (e.g., Sib. Or. 1.10, 101–103, 119; 4.186; 5.178; 11.138; cf. Gk. Apoc. Ezra 4:22; b. Git. 56b-57a; p. Hag. 2:2, §5; Sanh. 6:6, §2; Apoc. Pet. 5–12; on the relationship between Jewish and Greek concepts, cf. also Serrano, «Sheol»). |
| 3561 Sipre Deut. 43.8.1; b. Šabb. 31a; Yoma 76a; Exod. Rab. 15:30; Lev. Rab. 10:3; Num. Rab. 16:7; Deut. Rab. 2:24; 10:4; Lam. Rab. proem 2; Lam. Rab. 1:17, §52; SongRab. 2:16, §1; Pesiq. Rab. 15(often in parables); cf. Gen. Rab. 86(modeled after Exod 4:22, but the tradition is attested early in Jub. 19:29). 3562 E.g., " Abot R. Nat. 35, §77; 44, §124 B; Sipra Behuq.pq. 2.262.1.9; Sipre Deut. 43.16.1; 45.1.2; 352.7.1; b. Šabb. 31a, 128a; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 9:5; 14:5; Exod. Rab. 46:4–5; Num. Rab. 5:3; 10:2; Deut. Rab. 1:6; 3:15; Lam. Rab. proem 23; Lam. Rab. 3:20, §7. 3563 Sipre Deut. 96.4.1; cf. similarly Sipre Deut. 308.1.2. The discussion continues in later texts: Israel are God " s children when they obey him (Deut. Rab. 7:9); God begot Israel as an only child, but will treat them as slaves if they disobey (Pesiq. Rab. 27:3; cf. John 8:35 ); Bonsirven, Judaism, 48–49, cites some other revelant texts (including Sipre Num. on 15:41). 3564 E.g., b. Ber. 7a (apocryphal bat qol to R. Ishmael), 19a (Honi the Circle-Drawer, but the antiquity of the tradition is difficult to date); cf. Sukkah 45b (R. Simeon ben Yohai). See especially Vermes on charismatic rabbis, discussed on pp. 270–72 (Vermes, Jesus the Jew, 210–11, citing b. Ta c an. 23b; followed by Borg, Vision, 45; tentatively by Charlesworth, Pseudepigrapha and NT, 82). 3565 See on «the Jews» in the introduction, above; cf. similarly Ellis, Genius, 24. Early Jewish readers, both Christian and non-Christian, probably assumed the idea of future inheritance in sonship language; see Hester, Inheritance, 42. 3566 E.g., m. Sotah 9:15; t. B. Qam. 7:6; Hag. 2:1; Péah 4:21; Sipra Behuq. pq. 8.269.2.15; Sipre Deut. 352.1.2; b. Ber. 30a, bar.; p. Sanh. 10:2, §8; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 24:9; Lev. Rab. 1:3; 7:1; 35:10; see further texts in Marmorstein, Names, 56–58; cf. 3Macc 5:7; 7:6; personal prayer in Jos. Asen. 12:14. Outside 3Macc 6:8, the title appears regularly in prayers, especially in rabbinic texts (Moore, Judaism, 2:202–10; cf. McNamara, Targum, 116ff.), but these probably reflect some early and widespread prayer language (e.g., the Kaddish, adapted no later than Q in the Palestinian Jesus tradition; see Moore, Judaism, 2:213; Smith, Parallels, 136; Jeremias, Theology, 21; Jeremias, Prayers, 98); see esp. Vermes, Jesus and Judaism, 40. «My father» may have sounded strange (Jeremias, Message, 17; idem, Prayers, 57; Israel as a whole applies it in Sipra Qed. pq. 9.207.2.13), but «our Father» certainly did not. For OT usage, see Jeremias, Prayers, 12; for «intertestamental» literature, see ibid., 15–16; nor is the title unique to Judaism and its religious descendants (Mbiti, Religions, 63, 83). |
| 2934 Diogenes Laertius 7.1.134. Anaxagoras (500–428 B.C.E.) reportedly made «Mind» (νους) the moving principle of matter (Diogenes Laertius 2.8; Hippolytus Haer. 1.7). 2935 Cicero Nat. d. 2.6–8.18–20; cf. further 2.8.21–13.32; Iamblichus Myst. 1.15; cf. Long, Philosophy, 108; Murray, Stages, 167 (citing Chrysippus frg. 913 in Arnim); Bultmann, Christianity, 142. Seneca Nat. 1.pref.14 contends that the human soul is divine, but God is entirely soul and «reason.» 2937 Plutarch Isis 75, Mor. 381B (LCL 5:172–175). Bousset, Kyrios Christos, 189, notes the identification of Osiris with the Logos in a source of Plutarch but wrongly locates a source of the Logos doctrine in the Mysteries (p. 229). For cosmic imagery applied to deities in Greek thought in the second century C.E. and later, see Grant, Gods, 114–23; Col 1:15–20 may anticipate such popular yearnings. 2938 Plutarch Uned. R. 3, Mor. 780C; cf. Stoic Cont. I, Mor. 1033B, where «Philosophy " s Logos,» or doctrine, is a law by which people will choose to live. 2939 Dillon, Platonists, 80–83, citing Antiochus of Ascalon; cf. Dodd, «Background,» 337, on Plotinus and for the suggestion that the process of assimilation may have begun as early as Posidonius. Gamble, «Philosophy,» 50–59, esp. 56–58, found the background of the Gospel especially in Platonism. 2941 Gaius Inst. 1.1 (tr., 19–20). In the Hellenistic period, Rhet. Alex. pref. 1420a.26–28 defined law as reason (λγος) specified by common agreement, a sort of social contract. 2943 Cf. Cicero Nat. d. 2.7.19–20 (cf. 2.8.21–14.39). Epicureans ridiculed this position (see Cicero Nat. d. 1.10.24; cf. 1.13.34) 2945 Shedd, «Meanings,» 253. The incarnation also provides a ground for distinction (Smalley, John, 44), but this does not fit any view contemporary with John. 2946 Manson, Paul and John, 139; cf. also Miller, «Updating,» 176. Manson " s other major objection, that Stoics employed Logos as just another name for God, bears less force because of the prominence of the Logos in Stoicism and the lack of its prominence in the Fourth Gospel beyond the prologue. |
|
|
