| 9017 E.g., Polybius 1.62.8; 14.1; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 3.28.7; 3.51.1; 5.26.4; 5.50.3; 6.21.2; 6.95.1; 8.9.3; 8.36.3; 15.7.2; Diodorus Siculus 14.30.4; 14.56.2; 17.39.1; 17.54.2; 19.66.6; 19.67.1; 21.12.6; 31.5.3; 32.16.1; 33.28b.4; 40.1.2; Livy 6.2.3; 27.4.6; 43.6.9; 45.12.6; Sallust Jug. 14.17; 102.6; Herodian 4.7.3; 4.15.8; 1Macc 12:1,3,8; 14:40; cf. 1 Kgs 5:1; 2Macc 11:14. For further discussion in Dionysius of Halicarnassus, see Balch, «Friendship.» 9018 Often in Plutarch (e.g., Agesilaus 23.6; Pompey 70.4; Statecraft 13, Mor. 806F-809B; Philosophers and Men in Power 1, Mor. 776AB; O.M.P.A. 6, Mor. 787B); but also elsewhere (e.g., Achilles Tatius 4.6.1–3). Contrast the older Stoic values of Chrysippus in Diogenes Laertius 7.7.189; but cf. Engberg-Pedersen, Paul and Stoics, 74. Even among Greeks, whereas Aristotle notes friendships based on goodness, pleasure, or utility (E.E. 7.2.9–13,1236a; 7.10.10,1242b; N.E. 8.13.1,1162ab), he assigns most to utility (E.E. 7.2.14, 1236a). 9020 Friedländer, Life, 1:225. Cf. Judge, Pattern, 33–34 (in the context of imperial friendships): «not simply a spontaneous relationship of mutual affection. It was a status of intimacy conferred on trusted companions.» 9021 Cf. Stowers, Letter Writing, 29: «It is doubtful that any but those with some wealth and leisure could attain either the Greek or the Roman ideal of friendship.» 9022 Also Cicero Verr. 1.7.18 (one must be careful what one says about friends of rank); on friendship in his letters, see Fiore, «Theory.» 9023 E.g., Dionysius of Halicarnassus Lit. Comp. 1; Valerius Maximus 7.8.7; Philostratus Hrk. 4.3; 10.2; Acts 19:31; cf. AE 1912.171 (in Sherk, Empire, 235). Iamblichus V.P. 22.101; 33.230, admonishes respect for benefactors in a friendship. 9024 Martial Epigr. 3.36.1–3; 3Macc 5:26; probably P.Oxy. 2861 (in Stowers, Letter Writing, 63); cf. Musonius Rufus 15, p. 98.5–6; DeSilva, Honor, 99. See also, e.g., a magician dependent on a spirit (PGM 1.172, 190–191). 9028 |
| 7.9; " Abot R. Nat. 8A; cf. Justinian Codex 9.20, 29). 5317 See, e.g., OGIS 674=IGRR I 1183; McGinn, «Taxation»; Lewis, Life, 141, 145, 171–72. Pay varied according to appearance and skill (e.g., CIL 4.1679). 5320 Cf. Diogenes Ep. 44; Diogenes Laertius 6.2.61, 66; Musonius Rufus frg. 12; Artemidorus Onir. 1.78; Sallust Cati1. 14.6; Livy 23.18.12; Aulus Gellius 9.5.8. Some philosophers did not regard it as an ethical matter (Diogenes Laertius 2.69, 74; Sextus Empiricus Pyr. 3.201). 5324 E.g., Plutarch Bride 42, 46, Mor. 144B, EF; Dio Cassius 77.16.5; Apuleius Metam. 6.22; Athenaeus Deipn. 4.167e. For the gender-based double standard, see, e.g., Euripides Pirithous frg. 1–13; Justinian Codex 9.1; but cf. also Isocrates Nic. 40, Or. 3.35; Diogenes Laertius 8.1.21. Only a few philosophers did not condemn all adultery (Diogenes Laertius 2.99). 5325 Probably with rhetorical overstatement, Seneca Benef. 1.9.4; 3.16.3; Dia1. 12.16.3; Juvenal Sat. 4.1–20. On actual conditions, see Richlin, «Adultery.» 5326 E.g., Euripides Hipp. 403–418; Horace Sat 1.2.38, 49, 64–100; Ep. 1.2.25–26; Carm. 1.15.19–20; Juvenal Sat. 6.231–241; Epictetus Diatr. 2.4; 2.10.18; 2.18.15; Alexander 3 in Plutarch S.K., Mor. 179E; Cornelius Nepos 15 (Epaminondas), 5.5. 5327 Artemidorus Onir. 3.11; Sib. Or. 1.178; 3.38,204; 5.430; Ps.-Phoc. 3; cf. Epictetus Diatr. 3.3.12. 5328 E.g., Sallust Cati1. 25.3–4; Ps.-Cicero Invective against Sallust 5.15–6.16; Appian R.H. 7.9.56; Martial Epigr. 2.47,49; 3.26.6; 6.45.4; 6.91; 9.2. 5330 Cf. Jos. Asen. 21:1, although definite cases of temporary premarital cohabitation are known (see Ilan, «Cohabitation»). 5333 Also Ps 154:14 ; m. «Abot 3:2; »Abot R. Nat. 26, 29A; 32, §68B; p. Hag. 2:1, §9; 2:2, §5; Ta c an. 3:11, §4. See especially the Essenes (cf., e.g., CD 11.4; Josephus War 2.128,132–133; Philo Good Person 76,81–82). 5334 Also Let. Aris. 130; m. «Abot 1:6–7; 2:9; Sipre Deut. 286.11.4; »Abot R. Nat. 16, §36B; Ps.-Phoc. 134; 1Cor 15:33 ). For the warning in Greco-Roman tradition, see, e.g., Gnomologium vaticanum 460 in Malherbe, Exhortation, 110; Crates Ep. |
| 2455 7: Reu. 6:8; T. Jud. 21:1–2; cf. T. Sim. 5with 1QM. On Melchizedek as eschatological priest, see Puech, «Manuscrit.» 2456 See Jub. 31:12–17 and 31:18–20; cf. similarly T. Iss. 5:7; T. Dan 5:4, 10; T. Naph. 5:3–5; 8:2. Schniedewind, «King,» roots the dual messianic expectation in the Chronicler " s ideal leadership pattern (esp. 1 Chr 17:14). 2458 See Charles, Jubilees, xiv (although we may date Jubilees somewhat earlier than he suggests on xiii). 2459 Higgins, «Priest,» 333; idem, «Messiah,» 215–19; Laurin, «Messiahs,» 52. LaSor, Scrolls, 152ff., argues that the Hebrew idiom supports one messiah, rabbinic scholars seeing two because of their Talmudic background; although there may be more than one «anointed one,» only one is eschatologica1. T. Benj. 11seems to support a figure from both Judah and Levi (perhaps reflecting a Jewish-Christian desire to derive one of Jesus» parents from Levi, cf. Luke 1:5,36). The DSS conflate various anointed figures (e.g.,4Q174 3.10–13; 4Q252 1 5.1,3; 11Q13 2.15–20). 2460 Aune, Prophecy, 123 (citing T. Reu. 6:5–12; T. Levi 18:2–9; 1QS 9.10–11; lQSa 12–17; cf. CD 19.10–11; 20.1); Villalon, «Sources,» 53–63, esp. 63; Burrows, More Light, 297–311 (or maybe three, 311); Joczwiak, «Mesjanizm» (or even three); Jonge, ««Anointed,»» 141–42; Brown, «Messianism,» 54–66. In «Theory,» 56, Brown still thought there were probably two messiahs, but noted that not all texts were clear or represented the same period. 2462 Longenecker, Christology, 114; Driver, Scrolls, 468–69; Priest, «Mebaqqer»; cf. Priest, «Messiah.» Wcela, «Messiah(s),» finds in the Damascus Document (CD 12.23–13.1; 14.19; 19.10–11; 20.1; cf. 7.17–21) one military messiah with a priest who could be an Aaronic messiah (342); 1QS 9.11 has two messiahs, but often a priestly companion to the messiah is in view, and the Damascus Document probably sees both as one individual (347). Smith, «Begetting,» 224, thinks both anointed ones may be «survivals of the same figure,» but is not certain that either is eschatological or messianic. |
| 2497 Cf., e.g., Epictetus Diatr. 1.9.6–11; 2.8.10–11; 2.19.26–28; Plutarch Pompey 27.3; Plotinus On Virtues, Enn. 1.2.7; Ovid Metam. 8.723–724; cf. Josephus Ag. Ap. 1.232. 2498 E.g., Euripides Andr. 1253–1258; Herodotus Hist. 1.65–66; Cicero Tusc. 1.12.28; 2.7.17; Nat. d. 2.24.62; 3.15.39; Virgil Aen. 7.210–211; Lucan C.W. 9.15–18, 564; Plutarch Lycurgus 5.3; Ovid Metam. 9.16–17. Greek veneration of departed heroes may have begun in the eighth century b.C.E. (Antonaccio, «Hero Cult»). 2499 E.g., Cicero Leg. 3.1.1; Plutarch Profit by Enemies 8, Mor. 90C; Apol1. 36, Mor. 120D; Longinus Subi 4.5; Diogenes Laertius 2.100; 6.2.63; 6.9.104; 8.1.11; 9.7.39. 2500 E.g., Homer II. 2.407; 7.47; 13.295, 802; Od. 3.110; 17.3, 54, 391; 19.456; 20.369; 21.244; cf. also Sophocles Oed. tyr. 298. 2502 E.g., Homer Il. 4.489; 16.49, 126, 707; Od. 10.456 (MSS), 488, 504; 11.60, 92, 405, 473, 617; 13.375; 14.486; 16.167; 18.312; 22.164; 23.305; 24.542. For divinity in this figurative sense, Aeschylus Supp1. 980–982. 2504 Homer I1. 17.34,238,685,702; 21.75; 23.581; 24.553,635,803; Od. 4.26,44,63,138,156,235, 291, 316, 391, 561; 5.378; 10.266,419; 15.64, 87,155, 167, 199; 24.122. The title was often bestowed cheaply (Od. 22.136), but sometimes applied to a deity (I1. 21.223). 2507 Smith, Magician, 101; Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 6,168–69. Smith " s thesis (which may reflect a particular theological bias, as Neusner [New Testament, 5, 173; «Foreword,» xxvii] suggests) would bear more weight were there not so many other uses of the term with significantly better claims. Cf. Diogenes Laertius 8.2.62: Empedocles» healing powers revealed that he was an immortal god. 2509 Epictetus Diatr. 1.9.6; cf. Diogenes Laertius 6.2.77, of Diogenes. Blackburn, «ΑΝΔΡΕΣ,» 189 provides a list of Greek men thought to be gods. 2510 E.g., Virgil Aen. 6.792; C7L 11.365; IGRR 3.137; ILS 84; 8781; OGIS 532; SEG 11.923; and other inscriptions in Sherk, Empire, 5, 7, 11, 13, 20, 31, 57–59; inscription in Deissmann, Light, 346–47. |
| 10669 Freyne, Galilee, 195. He attributes the lack of early Roman persecution of Jesus» followers to Galilean-Judean differences (p. 196), but is it not possible that they simply did not view Jesus» disciples as a threat (18:36–38)? 10670 Safrai, «Home,» 734; cf. Aristophanes Wasps 154–155. 10671 Cf. different views on the nature of the resurrection body in early Judaism (Ferguson, Backgrounds, 439–40). 10672 Cook, «Exegesis,» 4. 10673 E.g., Homer Od. 4.795–803, 838–839; Boring et a1., Commentary, 306, cites Hom. Hymn, Hymn to Hermes 145–146. Laurin, John, 258, speculates on «molecular displacement,» an image not likely to have crossed the minds of John " s audience. 10674 Cf. Tholuck, John, 452–53. 10675 Witherington, Wisdom, 342. 10676 Cook, «Exegesis,» 4. 10677 E.g., Jub. 12:29; 18:16; 19:29; 21:25; Gen. Rab. 100:7. It appears commonly in tomb inscriptions as well (Goodenough, Symbols, 2:108). 10678 For situation-appropriate words of «peace,» see, e.g., Tob 12(at an angelophany). On the efficacy of such words, cf. 1QS 2.9 10679 Mbiti, Religions, 85. 10680 So also others, e.g., Lightfoot, Gospel, 335; Haenchen, John, 2:210; Cook, «Exegesis,» 5. 10681 Also Cicero Verr. 2.5.1.3; Seneca Controv. 1.4.2. Likewise, wounds could be displayed in corpses to stir indignation (Ovid Fasti 2.849; Plutarch Caesar 68.1). 10682 E.g., Ovid Metam. 13.262–267; Fasti 2.696–699 (in this case deceptively); Plutarch Alex. 50.6; Arrian Alex. 7.10.1–3; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 7.62.3; Livy 45.39.17; Valerius Maximus 7.7.1; cf. Sallust Letter of Gnaeus Pompeius 1–2; Caesar C.W. 1.72; Silius Italicus 9.350–351; Valerius Maximus 3.2.24; or citing dangers one had faced, e.g., Aeschines False Embassy 168–169; Cicero Cat. 4.1.2; 1Cor 15:30 . Cf. also bruises as marks of athletic exertion (Maximus of Tyre Or. 3.4). 10683 E.g., Homer Od. 19.467–473; P.Ry1. 174.6–7; P.Lond. 334.6; P.Oxy. 494.31; Philostratus Hrk. 12.4. 10684 E.g., 2 Bar. 50:2–4; Gen. Rab. 95:1; Ecc1. Rab. 1:4, §2; for very literalistic understandings of the resurrection, Osborne, «Resurrection,» 933, cites 2Macc 7:10–11; 14:46; Sib. Or. 4.176–82. This idea probably is assumed in Matt 5but appears less probable in 1Cor 15:35–44, 50 . |
| 3366 2 Bar. 15:7; 21:24; Sipre Deut. 47.3.1–2; b. Ber. 6b, 61b (R. Hanina ben Dosa); Šabb. 30b; Sanh. 98b (David; Moses; Messiah); Pesiq. Rab Kah. Sup. 1(Abraham); Gen. Rab. 1(fifth century); Tg. Neof. on Num 22 (the patriarchs); Tg. 1 Chr. 4(the sages); thus some could say the world was created by the righteous (Ruth Rab. 2:3, late), e.g., the patriarchs (Lev. Rab. 36:4, fourth century). 3367 T. Mos. 1:12–13; 4 Ezra 6:59; 7:11; Sipre Deut. 47.3.1; b. Ber. 32b; Pesiq. Rab. 4:1, 3; 28:2; Targum Sheni to Esth 5:1; cf. b. Ber. 32a; even Torah was created for Israel ( Mark 2:27 ; Sipre Deut. 47.3.2; Ecc1. Rab. 1:4, §4, purportedly Tannaitic tradition); the prophets prophesy only for Israel (Mek. Pisha 1.166). Herrn. Vis. 2.4 transfers this image to the church (cf. James in Gos. Thorn. 12); in 2 Bar. 21:7, the world exists for God. For a survey of purposes for creation, see Moore, Judaism, 1:383. 3369 Cicero Nat. d. 2.62.154; Chrysippus in Cicero Fin. 3.20.67; Grant, Gods, 114; on Philós use of Stoic tradition here, see Jobling, «Dominion.» 3372 Also Herrn. Sim. 9.12.2. Stuart, «Examination,» 282, translates «by» him rather than «through» him, contending that δια is not always instrumental before a genitive (e.g., Xenophon Mem. 1.2.14). 3375 Miller, Salvation-History, 14, 76–89 (applying it to the incarnation); Cidrac, «Ponctuation.» Less plausibly, Burney, Origin, 29, suggests an Aramaic reconstruction meaning, " because in him was life.» But it is doubtful that John " s wording represents a mistake or mistranslation even on the unlikely thesis that John used a Semitic original for his prologue (cf. Schlatter, «Problem,» 55). 3378 Van Minnen, «Punctuation,» prefers «nothing came into being without him that exists in him; he was life»; Cohee, «1.3–4,» views ο γγονεν as a gloss. 3379 The importance of light imagery for John is rarely missed; cf., e.g., Bury, Logos-Doctrine, 27; Culpepper, Anatomy, 190–92; more fully, Koester, Symbolism, 123–54. «Darkness» (σκοτα) appears eight times in John, six times in 1 John, and twice elsewhere in the NT (although σκτος occurs often in the NT, it appears only once in John; Tenney, John, 306). Given the theological significance of these themes, the common ancient understanding of light from, rather than to, onés eyes (e.g., 1 En. 106:2; Jos. Asen. 6:6/3; Plutarch T.T. 1.8.4, Mor. 626C; cf. Sir 23:19 ; Allison, «Eye») should never be pressed in John (light was admitted rather than emitted in some texts like Pesiq. Rab Kah. 21:5; cf. Democritus in Diogenes Laertius 9.7.44). |
| 1061 Summons to «behold» in the Gospel (e.g., 1:29) may function pleonastically; for pleonasm in ancient rhetoric, see Quintilian 8.3.53–55; 9.3.46–47; Anderson, Glossary, 102; Black, «Oration at Olivet,» 88. 1062 Caird, Revelation, 5. Fiorenza, Revelation, 16, provides other evidence for the intentionality of Revelations Semitic style, which seems to imitate OT Hebraic patterns. In some conditions rhetoricians could value «radical departure from common idiom» (Anderson, Glossary, 48; cf. also λλοωσις, ibid., 16–17). 1065 Trites, Witness, 154–55, observes both similarities and differences between Revelation and John, allowing that the different emphasis may be due either to different authors or to different genre. 1066 See Hill, Prophecy, 85. Allusions to Jesus» parables also occur in other early Christian texts and interpolations; see Bauckham, «Parables.» 1067 Such chronological markers are admittedly not unique to Johannine literature (2 Bar. 22:1; Josephus Life 427; cf. 1 En. 41:1), and in Revelation they usually denote only the sequence of visions («saw,» 4:1; 7:1,9; 15:5; 18:1; «heard,» 19:1). 1068 Of course, Revelations «come» for revelation harks back to Exod 19:24; 24:12; 34:2, esp. in Rev 4:1. (Jewish texts continued to emphasize that Moses could not ascend until God summoned him, e.g., the Ethiopie title of Jubilees; Abot R. Nat. 2, §11 B; cf. L.A.B. 11:2; in later tradition, he ascended all the way to heaven, Pesiq. Rab. 20:4.) The language is imitated or paralleled in other apocalyptic passages (e.g., 1 En. 14:24–25, 15:1; 2 En. 21:3; 3 En. 41:1, 42:1, 43:1, 44:1, 47:1, 48A; b. Hag. 14b; Plutarch Divine Vengeance 33, Mor. 568A). 1069 On Rev 22:20, see Cullmann, Worship, 13; cf. idem, Christology, 201–10. The Aramaic formula appears in 1Cor. 16:22 ; see Fee, Corinthians, 838–39; Longenecker, Christology, 121; cf. Conzelmann, Corinthians, 300–301; Robinson, Studies, 154–57; idem, Coming, 26–27. 1070 The context probably suggests that love for other believers is in view (Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 75; cf. Robbins, «Apocalyptic,» 160), although love for God cannot be excluded. |
| 6686 For hostile spirits in the air realm, cf., e.g., Incant. Text 17.2; 43.6–7; T. So1. 2:3; 25:3; b. Git. 68b; Hag. 16a, bar.; Num. Rab. 12:3; Deut. Rab. 6:6; Eph 2:2 . Some expected magic spirits (PGM 1.179–182; 4.3043–3044; 12.67), «daemons» (Dillon, Platonists, 288), or deceased souls (Philo Dreams 1.135; Giants 9,12; Pythagoras in Diogenes Laertius 8.1.32; temporarily in Apoc. Zeph. 4:7) in the air realm. 6687 1 En. 10:4–5, 12; Jub. 5:6, 10; 10:7–9; Apoc. Zeph. 6:15. This was in Tartarus (Sib. Or. 1.101–103; L.A.B. 60:3; 2Pet 2:4 ; cf. T. So1. 6:3), probably after the analogy of the Titans (Hesiod Theog. 717–719; cf. Sib. Or. 1.307–323; 2.231). 6688 Cf. 2 En. 7; 1Pet 3:22 ; probably 1 En. 18:14–19:1. 6689 For antithesis in rhetoric, see Anderson, Glossary, 21–22; and our comments on the technique of comparison in John 13:23 . 6690 E.g., Freed, «Eg Eimi.» 6691 E.g., Lightfoot, Gospel, 134–35; Hunter, John, 89; Bell, I Am, 258. Cf. also Exod 3:14; Deut 32LXX. 6692 Stauffer, Jesus, 91, citing purportedly pre-Christian tradition in b. Sukkah 53a. 6693 Cf., e.g., Robert, «Malentendu.» 6694 Miller, «Christology.» 6695 Sanders, John, 224. Haenchen, John, 2suggests substituting «at all» for «beginning,» citing Ps.-Clem. Homilies 6.11. 6696 That «lifting up» includes the cross is nearly always recognized, although many also include the resurrection-ascension, as probably implied here (e.g., Holwerda, Spirit, 11). Pretending to dare onés hearers to act against the speaker " s counsel could be good rhetorical form (Rowe, «Style,» 147, on permissio or epitrope; Porter, «Paul and Letters,» 582), though this may function as a form of rhetorical παρρησα (see comment on 7:4). 6697 Bauckham, God Crucified, 64–65, thinks this passage combines Isaiah " s «lifting up» (52:13) with Isaiah " s «I am he» (41:4; 43:10, 13; 48:12). On Jesus» claim to deity here, see, e.g., Pancaro, Law, 59–63; Brown, John, 1:348. Bowman, Gospel, 267 finds here God on Ezekiel " s throne-chariot. |
| 10172 4 Macc 15:30; Aristotle Po1. 3.2.10, 1277b; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 4.82.3; 6.92.6; Diodorus Siculus 5.32.2; 10.24.2; Livy 2.13.6; 28.19.13; Appian R.H. 2.5.3; 7.5.29; Iamblichus V.P. 31.194. Some philosophers held that women were capable of courage (Musonius Rufus 4, p. 48.8 and that philosophy improved women " s courage (3, p. 40.33–35). 10173 2Macc 7:21; 4 Macc 15:23; 16:14; Diodorus Siculus 17.77.1; 32.10.9; Apuleius Metam. 5.22. «Courage» is literally «manliness» (e.g., 1Macc 2:64; Aristotle E.E. 3.1.2–4, 1228ab; Dio Cassius 58.4.6; Diodorus Siculus 17.45.6; 40.3.6; Theon Progymn. 9.22; Crates Ep. 19; Chariton 7.1.8). 10174 E.g., Homer I1. 7.96; 8.163; 11.389; 16.7–8; Virgil Aen. 9.617; 12.52–53; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 9.7.2; 10.28.3; Diodorus Siculus 12.16.1; 34/35.2.22; Aulus Gellius 17.21.33; Ps.-Callisthenes Alex. 1.46; cf. an unarmed man in Homer I1. 22.124–125; an effeminate man in Aristophanes Lys. 98. 10176 Mothers (Homer I1. 22.79–90,405–407; Euripides Supp1. 1114–1164) mourned sons; see especially a mother " s mourning the death of the son who would have solaced her in old age (e.g., Virgil Aen. 9.481–484; Luke 7:12–13). 10177 It may support an identification with the disciple of 18:15–16. The disciple perhaps departs in 19:27, «to his own» (Michaels, John, 319). 10178 Hoskyns, «Genesis,» 211–13; Ellis, Genius, 271; cf. Peretto, «Maria.» The specific meaning in Rev 12 is clearer, but even there the mariological reading is unclear unless one resorts to subsequent tradition; cf., e.g., Keener, Revelation, 313–14, 325–27. 10180 Cf. Moloney, «Mary.» Boguslawski, «Mother,» sees this new «eschatological family» confirmed by the coming of the Spirit in 19:30. 10183 Witherington, Women, 95. Cf. Jesus» mother as an example of discipleship also in Seckel, «Mère.» 10184 For care of parents in their old age, see P.Enteux. 26 (220 B.C.E.); Hierocles Parents 4.25.53; Diogenes Laertius 1.37; Quintilian 7.6.5; Sir 3:16 ; Gen. Rab. 100:2. Some texts view such care as «repayment» of parents (Homer Ii. 4.477–478; 17.302; 1Tim 5:4 ; possibly Christian interpolation in Sib. Or. 2.273–275). More generally on honor of parents, see comment on 2:4. |
| 7888 E.g., Homer ft 8.75–77, 133, 145–150, 167–171; 15.377, 379; 17.594–596; Valerius Maximus 1.6.12; Silius Italicus 12.623–625; cf. Pindar Nem. 9.25; armies facing lightning sometimes persuaded themselves, however, that it was not an omen (e.g., Silius Italicus 12.627–629; Plutarch Alex. 60.2). In Israel, see 1Sam 2:10; 7:10 ; Isa 29:6; perhaps Judg 5:20 ; cf. judgment in Sib. Or. 4.113; 5.302–303. 7889 E.g„ Homer Od. 20.101, 103; 21.413; Virgil Aen. 7.141–142; 8.523–526; 9.630–631; Pindar Pyth. 4.197–200; Silius Italicus 15.143–145; Ovid Fasti 3.369; Cicero Cat. 3.8.18; cf. Parthenius LR. 6.6; Catullus 64.202–206; in Jewish tradition, see Exod 19:19; 1Sam 12:17–18 ; Sir 46:16–17 ; cf. 1 Kgs 18:36–38,44. In heavenly visions, cf. ΙΕη. 14:8; 17:3; 69:23; 3 En. 29:2; PGM 4.694–696. 7894 E.g., Homer II. 3.276, 320, 350,365; 10.154; 11.56, 80,182,201, 544; 16.253; 17.46; Od. 14.440; 15.341; 16.260; 24.518; Hesiod Op. 169; Euripides Medea 1352; Aristophanes Clouds 1468–1469. 7895 Homer I1. 1.544; 4.68; 5.426; 8.49, 132; 12.445; 15.12, 47; 16.458; 20.56; 22.167; Od. 1.28; Hesiod Theog. 457, 468, 542; Scut. 27; Op. 59; Diodorus Siculus 1.12.1 (following Homer); Ovid Metam. 2.848; 14.807; Epictetus Diatr. 1.19.12; Phaedrus 3.17.10. 7898 E.g., Epictetus Diatr. 1.6.40; 1.9.4–7; 1.13.3–4; 3.22.82; Diogenes Laertius 7.147; Acts 17:28. 7899 Plutarch Plat. Q. 2.1, Mor. 1000E; Alexander 15 in Plutarch S.K., Mor. 180D; Γ.Τ. 8.1.3, Mor. 718A; Babrius 142.3; Orphic Hymns 15.7; PGM 22b.l-5 (Jewish); other deities in Martial Epigr. 10.28; Orphic Hymns 4.1; 12.6. «Adonai» is «Father of the World» in PGM 1.305 (apparently as Apollo, 1.298). For the common usage in Philo, see documentation in comment on John 1:12 . 7900 Virgil Aen. 1.60; 3.251; 4.25; 6.592; 7.141, 770; 8.398; 10.100; 12.178; Ovid Metam. 1.154; 2.304,401; 3.336; 9.271. 7901 Homer Il. 8.69,245,397; 14.352; 15.637; 16.250; 22.60,209; Od. 12.63; 13.51; Virgil Aen. 2.691; Georg. 1.121, 283, 328, 353; 2.325; Orphic Hymns 19.1. The deity is in a number of cases «father» as «creator» or progenitor (e.g., Sophocles Ajax 387; Epictetus Diatr. 1.3.1; Marcus Aurelius 10.1; see further documentation in comment on John 3:3 ); most of the Latin references above are to pater, but Jupiter is also called genitor, e.g., Virgil Aen. 12.843. No henotheism is in view; sometimes «father Zeus» is listed alongside Athene and Apollo (e.g., Homer Od. 4.340; 7.311; 17.132; 18.235; 24.376). |
|
|
