3–4 cf Faber: «Grave autem ас репе importabile erat primo ob legum multitudinem. Numerant enim Abulensis q. 1. super 26. cap. Deut. et q. 24. in 1. cap. Ruth, et Lyranus ibid, tredecim supra 600. praecepta Iudaeorum.» 11. 5–6 cf Faber: «Secundo: propter difficultatem ipsorum praeceptorum in cibo, tactu, sacrificiis, caeremoniis, iudiciis.» 11. 7–8 cf Faber: «Tertio, quia umbrae tantum legum et misteriorum novi testamenti erant, unde nec gratiam conferebant, nec vim iustificandi habebant.» 11. 9–10 cf Faber: «Quinto. Multa etiam peccata ex ignorantia invincibili commissa, debebant expiari sacrificio.» 11. 11–12 cf Faber: «Quarto. Gravissimae delinquentibus poenae erant statutae.» 11. 13–16 cf Faber: «Verbi gratia, praeceptum circumcisionis, Sabbathi tarn stricte servandi.» Иго Еллинское. Taken from Faber, ibid., sect. 2 «Iugum gentilium». 11. 9–10 cf Faber: «Iubebantur ... puellam Virginem mactare, ut Laodicenses et Chalcidenses ... Ammonitae pueros Idolo Moloch comburendos immolabant. 4. Reg. Kings 23.10].» 11. 19–20 cf Faber: «Nisi gravius esset Christianorum iugo, non diceret Apostolus: Nolite iugum ducere cum infidelibus, 2. Cor. Published in Bylinin. Иго мира . Taken from Faber, ibid., sect. 3 «Iugum mundi»: «Iugum mundi grave esse testatur Ecclesiasticus c. dicens: Occupatio magna creata est omnibus hominibus, et iugum grave super filios Adam .... Quae sane occupatio grave iugum est filiorum huius saeculi, nec dissimile iugo illi, quod imposuit Pharao Hebraeis, cum occupavit eos perpetuis luti et laterum laborious, nec non in paleis conquirendis, et penso laborum augendo, ne possent respirare, et de sacrificio ас servitio divino cogitare Exod. 5.» Иго греха. Taken from Faber, ibid., sect. 4 «Iugum peccati». 11. 11–42 cf Faber: «Primo comminiscitur eius imperio David fraudes, quibus tegat peccatum suum; vocat Uriam et iubet ire domum ad uxorem, ut sic foetus adulterinus, legitimus 576 Anthony Hippisley credatur quasi prognatus a patre. Deinde cum non iret Urias, inebriavit eum ut ab ebrio obtineret, quod non poterat a sobrio.

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/Simeon_Polocki...

3351         Sipre Deut. 330.1.1 (trans. Neusner, 2:376); cf. later texts in Gen. Rab. 3:2; 28:2; Deut. Rab. 5:13; p. Ber. 6:1, §6; Deut 33in Targum Onqelos (Memra; cited in Moore, «Intermediaries,» 46); cf. also 1 Clem. 27. Targum Neofiti on the creation narrative emphasizes the creativity of the word of the Lord even more; see Schwarz, «Gen.» 3352         E.g., Mek. Sir. 3.44–45,49–51; 8.88; 10.29–31; Mek. c Am. 3.154–155; Mek. Bah. 11.111–112; Mek. Nez. 18.67–68; t. B. Qam. 7:10; Sipre Num. 78.4.1; 102.4.1; 103.1.1; SipreDeut. 33.1.1; 38.1.3–4; 49.2.2; 343.8.1; " Abot R. Nat. 1, 27, 37 A. In later texts, cf. the translation «by whose word all things exist» in b. Ber. 12a, 36ab, 38b; 40b, bar.; 44b; Sanh. 19a (pre-Tannaitic attribution); p. Pesah 2:5; Gen. Rab. 4:4,6; 32:3; 55(all Tannaitic attributions); Lev. Rab. 3:7; Num. Rab. 15:11; Deut. Rab. 7:6; Ruth Rab. 5:4; Pesiq. Rab. 21:7; Tg. Neof. on Exod 3:14; cf. Urbach, Sages 1:184–213; Marmorstein, Names, 89 (comparing also a Sumerian psalm). 3357 M. «Abot 5:1; »Abot R. Nat. 31 A; 36, §91 B; 43, §119 B; Gen. Rab. 16:1; Montefiore and Loewe, Anthology, 399, §1092, also cite Pesiq. Rab. 108ab; cf. «The Samaritan Ten Words of Creation» in Bowman, Documents, 1–3. 3359         M. «Abot 3:l4; Sipre Deut. 48.7.1; »Abot R. Nat. 44, §124 B; Exod. Rab. 47:4; Pirqe R. E1. 11 (in Versteeg, Adam, 48); Tanhuma Beresit §l, f.6b (in Montefiore and Loewe, Anthology, 170–71, §454; Harvey, «Torah,» 1236); cf. Urbach, Sages, 1:196–201,287. Some later rabbis went so far as to attribute the world " s creation even to specific letters (e.g., p. Hag. 2:1, §16). 3360 Philo Planting 8–10; Heir 206. God is the bonder of creation in 2 En. 48:6; Marcus Aurelius 10.1; cf. Wis 11:25. For the connection between creating and sustaining, cf. John 5:17 . Lightfoot, Colossians, 156, helpfully cites Philo Flight 112 (word); PlantingS (divine law); Heir 188 (word). 3361 Col 1 (sustain; hold together) and commentaries (e.g., Lightfoot, Colossians, 156; Kennedy, Theology, 155; Lohse, Colossians, 52; Johnston, Ephesians, 59; Hanson, Unity, 112; Beasley-Murray, «Colossians,» 174); cf. Cicero Nat. d. 2.11.29 (a Stoic on reason); Wis 7(Wisdom " s movement does not contrast with Platós unchanging forms; Plato and others envisioned rapid motion in the pure heavens–see Winston, Wisdom, 182). Cf. 1 Clem. 27A; Sir 43.26 ; cf. Wolfson, Philo, 1:325.

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

He lists " Abot R. Nat. 31 (8b); Midr. Pss. 90, §12; Exod. Rab. 33 (94a); Lev. Rab. 20(120a); Sanh. 101a, bar. 3113 Cf. Sanders, Jesus to Mishnah, 127. One may compare the unconscious assumption of the biblical reliability of information gleaned from Scofield " s reference notes on the part of many earlyto mid-twentieth-century North American fundamentalists. 3114 Ibid., 126–27, especially on 11QT (though the DSS can warn against adding or subtracting measures regarding sacrifices, Oxford Geniza Text co1. D, lines 17–19). But Essenes frequently wrote their halakah, in contrast to that of the Pharisees (cf. Baumgarten, «Unwritten Law,» 7–29). 3126 P. Roš Haš 1:3, §24 (R. Eleazar; 57b); b. Ber. 7a; Pesiq. Rab. 14:6. Harvey, «Torah,» 1239, cites b. c Abod. Zar. 3b to show that God studies it daily, to which we may add Tg. Neof. 1 on Deum. 32:4 ; cf. Marmorstein, Anthropomorphism, 66–68. 3129         Pesiq. Rab Kah. 15:5; Lam. Rab. proem 2; cf. P. Hag. 1:7, §3. To those familiar with rabbinic literature, the language is obviously hyperbolic here, meant to underline the point; further, one must obey as well as study Torah (e.g., b. c Abod. Zar. 17b). Many may have literally agreed, however, with the Tannaitic tradition that a person would first give account in the judgment for Torah study (b. Sanh. 7a). The importance of Torah study appears in many other Amoraic texts (e.g., b. Menah. 110a; Roš Haš. 4a; Šabb. 83b; Exod. Rab. 41:7; see further references in Patte, Hermeneutic, 25–26). 3130 Sandmel, Genius, 47. Translations regularly speak of the «revelation» at Sinai (e.g., in Sipra Sav pq. 18.97.1.4; Sipra Taz. par. 1.121.1.6; b. Hag. 6a, in purported discussion of the Schools of Shammai and Hillel; Gen. Rab. 34:9; Exod. Rab. 28:5; Num. Rab. 7:1; Deut. Rab. 2:31; 7:8); see Ross, «Revelation,» 119. 3131         «Abot R. Nat. 15 A (reportedly of Shammai and Hillel); »Abot R. Nat. 29, §§61–62 B; Sipra Behuq. pq. 8.269.2.14 (citing also Akiba); Sipre Deut. 306.25.1; 351.1.2, 3 (the latter citing R. Gamaliel II); Pesiq. Rab Kah. 4:7; 10:5; 15:5; Num. Rab. 13:15–16; Song Rab. 1:2, §5; 1:3, §2; cf. " Abot R. Nat. 3 A; Sipra Behuq. par. 2.264.1.1; Sipre Deut. 115.1.1–2; 161.1.3; Pesiq. Rab. 3:1; probably also Sipre Deut. 335.1.1 (the «threads» probably represent what is actually written, and the «mountains» the meanings drawn from them by the sages); Boring et a1., Commentary, 102 cites Seder Eliahu Zuta 2. Thus not only later Scripture (e.g., Esther in p. Meg. 1:5, §3) was revealed on Sinai, but also the correct rabbinic interpretations implicit in Torah (b. Ber. 5a; Meg. 19b; cf. Urbach, Sages, 1:304). On oral Torah, cf., e.g., Ehrlich, «Tora.»

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

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. 4094 Whitacre, Polemic, 98; see the thesis of Keener, «Pneumatology,» passim. 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. 4096 Ps 1:4 ; Hos 13:3 ; Isa 17:13; cf. Exod 15:7; Jer 4:11–13; 13:24; 15:7 ; Isa 29:5; 33:11; 41:15–16; Zeph 2:2. Cf. Matt 9:38; 13:39; 21:34. Cf. the «threshing-floor» in 4 Ezra 4:30–32. 4097 Isa 26:11; 66:15–16,24; cf. 2 Thess 1:6–7 and many other early Christian sources; cf. Ps 97:3 ; Nah 1:6; Zeph 1(which readers could have taken eschatologically, although historic judgments stood in the foreground); or for noneschatological judgment, e.g., Пит 11:1 ; Jer 4:4; 15:14; 17:4; 21:12 ; Ezek 21:31; 22:20–21 . The Semitic expression «wrath burned» is common in the Hebrew Bible, and the cognate appears, e.g., in the Moabite Mesha inscription (ANET 320–21). 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»).

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

3666 Cf. Dionysius of Halicarnassus RA. 3.1.3 (μονογενς). Bernard, John, 1:23, Hoskyns, Gospel 149, and Roberts, «Only Begotten, " » 8, cite, e.g., Judg 11:34 ; Ps 35:17 ; Jer 6:26 ; Amos 8(cf. similarly Tob 3:15; 6:10, 14; 8:17; Luke 7:12; 8:42; 9:38; cf. Plato Tim. 31); technical exceptions include Heb 11:17; Josephus Ant. 20.19–22. They also cite non-Jewish examples in Plautus Captives 1.147,150; Aegeon Comedy of Errors 5.1.329; cf. similarly Du Plessis, ««Only Begotten,»» 30 n. 5 (on Plautus). 3667 Bernard, John, 1:23–24, and Roberts, «Only Begotten, " » 8, cite examples in Psalms (22:21; 25:16; 35:17). 3669 Sir 36:12 (πρωτγονος); Pss. So1. 18:4; 4 Ezra 6(also «only begotten,» OTP 1:536); cf. Jub. 19:29. Israel was beloved to God like an only child (Simeon ben Yohai in Exod. Rab. 52:5; Lev. Rab. 2:5; later rabbis, Song Rab. 5:16, §3; Israel as an only daughter, Song Rab. 2:14, §2; 3:11, §2). «Son» usually represents Israel in rabbinic parables (Johnston, Parables, 587). 3670 Ваг 3:36–37 (γαπημνω); Pss. So1. 9(λας, öv γπησας); Jub. 31:15, 20; 4 Ezra 5:27; Rom 11:28 ; " Abot R. Nat. 43, §121 B; Sipre Deut. 344.1.1; 344.3.1; 344.5.1; Song Rab. 2:1, §1; 2:1, §3; Tg. Isa. 1:4. Sipre Deut. 97.2 interprets Deut 14as declaring that «every individual Israelite is more beloved before [God] than all the nations of the world» (trans. Neusner, 1:255). Different rabbis applied the title «most beloved [of all things]» variously to Torah, the sanctuary, or Israel (Sipre Deut. 37.1.3); for some rabbis, God " s love for Israel was the heart of Torah (Goshen Gottstein, «Love»). 3671 E.g., R. Ishmael (3 En. 1:8); Esdram (Gk. Apoc. Ezra 1[ed. Wahl, 25] ); articular if the article for «holy prophet» includes this, the κα being epexegetical); Sedrach (Apoc. Sedr. 3[ed. Wahl, 39]). Early Christian texts naturally transfer the title to Jesus ( Магк 1:11; 9:7 ; Matt 3:17: 17:5; Luke 3:22; Ерн 1:6 ; Acts Paul 3:11Paul and Thecla 1; Gk. Apoc. Ezra 4[ed. Wahl, 30]). Ancients regarded being the «beloved of the gods» (θεοφιλς) a special privilege (Plutarch Lycurgus 5.3, LCL 1:216–17).

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

4817 Oddly, some have cited Hermetic language as the background for the NT language (e.g., Reitzenstein, Religions, 453–54; Barrett, John, 206–7; Houlden, Epistles, 89). 4818 E.g., Cleanthes Hymn to Zeus in Stobaeus Ec1. 1.1.12; Epictetus Diatr. 4.10.16; Plutarch Plat. Q. 2.1–2, Mor 1000E-1001C; T.T. 8.1.3, Mor. 718A; Marcus Aurelius 10.1; cf. Vellanickal, Sonship, 360; Kelly, Peter, 50. Plato Statesman 270DE records an ancient tale about the rebirth of the cosmos. 4819         Sib. Or. 3.604, 726; 5.284, 328, 360, 406, 498, 500 (probably second century B.C.E., possibly Egyptian Jewish). 4820 E.g., Philo Decalogue 53, 107; Spec. Laws 1.96, 209; cf. Spec. Laws 3.189. See further Lee, Thought, 47. For sonship language in Philo, see esp. Vellanickal, Sonship, 50–51. See the much fuller comment on 1:12; and documentation in Keener, Matthew, 217, on divine fatherhood. 4822 Philo Cherubim 114; cf. the analogy of death and a second birth in Seneca Ep. Luci1. 102.26; Maximus of Tyre Or. 41.5. Wolfson, Philo, 1:405, cites in this connection also QE 2.46, «second birth»; see further Burnett, «Immortality.» The language of the «regeneration» could suggest the Stoic idea of a cosmic conflagration (cf. Philo Eternity 85; Moses 2.65; cf. Matt 19:28), but writers could also use παλιγγενεσα simply with reference to the coming of spring. 4826 Lev. Rab. 29:12; see various citations in Moore, Judaism, 1:533. Re-creation applies to Moses» call in Exod. Rab. 3:15; other sources in Buchanan, Consequences, 210. 4828 E.g., «Abot R. Nat. 26, §54B; of Abraham and Sarah in Sipre Deut. 32.2.1; »Abot R. Nat. 12A; Song Rab. 1:2, §3; see other citations in Davies, Paul, 119. Amoraim also applied the principle to teaching young men (b. Sanh. 99b). 4830 Also 1QS 4.17–20, 23–26; 1 En. 5:8–9; 10:16; 91:8–11, 17; 92:3–5; 107:1; 108:3; Jub. 50:5; 4 Ezra 7:92; T. Zeb. 9:8, MSS; T. Mos. 10:1. 4831 E.g., Gen. Rab. 89:1; Deut. Rab. 3:11. Rabbinic traditions apply this principle specifically to the evil impulse (p. c Abod . Zar. 4:7, §2; Sukkah 5:2, §2; Pesiq. Rab Kah. Sup. 3:2; Exod. Rab. 30:17; 46:4; Ecc1. Rab. 2:1, §1; 12:1, §1), often in conjunction with Ezek 36 (b. Sukkah 52a; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 24:17; Exod. Rab. 41:7; Deut. Rab. 6:14; Song Rab. 6:11, §1); cf. postmortem elimination of the impulse in L.A.B. 33:3; Gen. Rab. 9:5. A number of commentators (Dodd, Preaching, 34; Schnackenburg, John, 1:370–71), allude to the Jewish doctrine of eschatological purification here.

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

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.

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

9517 See 4 Macc 6:27–30; 9:7, 24; 17:21–22; cf. 1Macc 2:50; 2Macc 7:9, 37; 1QS 8.3–4; T. Mos. 9; Mek Pisha 1.105–113; b. Ber. 62b; Gen. Rab. 44:5; Lev. Rab. 20:12; Song Rab. 1:15, §2; 4:1, §2. On vicarious atonement through other humans» judgment, e.g., Sipre Deut. 333.5.2; without human bloodshed, cf., e.g., Lev 1:4; 4:20, 26, 31, 35 , and passim; Mek. Bah. 7.18–22; Sipre Deut. 1.10.2; p. Hor. 2:7, §1; 3:2, §10; Sebu. 1:6, §6; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 24:17; Ecc1. Rab. 9:7, §1; without mention of any bloodshed, e.g., Prov 16:6 ; Sir 3:14–15 ; Pss. So1. 3:8–10; 1QS 9.4; b. Ber. 17a; Num. Rab. 14:10; Deut. Rab. 3:5. 9518 E.g., Homer 27. 3.69–70, 86–94, 253–255; 7.66–91, 244–273; Apollonius of Rhodes 2.20–21; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 3.12.3–4; Virgil Aen. 10.439–509; 11.115–118,217–221; 12.723–952; Livy 1.24.1–1.25.14; 7.9.8–7.10.14; Aulus Gellius 9.13.10; also in the Hebrew Bible ( 1Sam 17 ; 2Sam 2:14–16 ; cf. Gordon, Civilizations, 262). 9519 Cf., e.g., Jeremias, Theology, 292–93; Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:95–97; other references in Keener, Matthew, 487, on 20:28. 9523 Burridge, Gospels, 146–47, 179–80. The rest of the Gospels foreshadow this climax, and this is also the case in some contemporary biographies (p. 199). 9524 Ibid., 198, has 26 percent for Philostratus; Mons Graupius consumes 26 percent of Tacitus Agricola, and the Persian campaign 37 percent of Plutarch Agesilaus (p. 199). 9526 Mack, Myth, 249; for his arguments, see 249–68. For a critique of Crossan " s approach to the Passion Narrative (depending on the late Gospel of Peter), see Evans, «Passion,» especially analogies with Justin 1 Apo1. 16.9–13 and Магк 16:9–20 (pp. 163–65). 9527 Mack cites Jeremias (a «conservative» scholar, Myth, 254) only three times, and never Blinzler, Hengel, or other more conservative Continental scholars. 9528 Perry, Sources, published as early as 1920; cf. Lietzmann " s skepticism on some points in 1931 («Prozess»). 9529 Dibelius, Tradition, 178–217, thinks that «the Passion story is the only piece of Gospel tradition which in early times gave events in their larger connection.»

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

3512 Sotades of Maronea (third century B.C.E.) in Stobaeus Anthology 4.34.8 (Boring et al, Commentary, 244); see also on rejected wisdom below. 3514 Especially in apocalyptic circles, e.g., J En. 42:1–3 (Sim.); cf. similar images of the world " s depravity in pagan literature (Ovid Metam. 1.149–150; Fasti 1.247–250; Cicero Quinct. 1.5; perhaps Cicero Mi1. 37.101). Commentators note this theme in Wisdom literature (e.g., Schnackenburg, John, 1:228). 3515         Mek. Bah. 5 (in Urbach, Sages, 1:532); Sipre Deut. 343.4.1; b. c Abod. Zar. 2b; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 2:1; 12:10; Pesiq. Rab Kah. Sup. 1:15; Exod. Rab. 17:2; 30:9; Num. Rab. 14:10; Pesiq. Rab. 15:2; 21:2/3; 30:4; cf. Pesiq. Rab Kah. 2:7; 12:20; also Hengel, Judaism, 1:174–75; Harvey, «Torah,» 1239; Urbach, Sages, 1:327. One may also compare the tradition of the daily bat qol from Mount Horeb condemning the Gentiles for their neglect of Torah (b. " Abot 6:2, bar.; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 15:5; Lam. Rab. proem 2), and a different tradition in which the nations copy (plagiarize?) elements of Torah (p. Sotah 7:5, §1). While comments about Torah are most common in rabbinic literature, the similar idea of the testimonium in L.A.B. 11by which God would judge the world probably indicates that this tradition was not limited to rabbinic circles. 3518 E.g., Mek. Bah. 6.90ff; Sipre Deut. 343.4.1; b. c Abod. Zar. 2b, 64b, bar.; Sanh. 56ab, bar., 59a, bar. (including Tannaitic attribution), 74b; Yebam. 48b; Gen. Rab. 26(including Tannaitic attribution); 34:14; Exod. Rab. 30:9; Deut. Rab. 1:21; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 12:1; cf. Num. Rab. 1:8; Urbach, «Self-Affirmation,» 275–78; Moore, Judaism, 274–75. Proselytes and a few pious Gentile prophets also show that the Gentiles are without excuse (e.g., Lev. Rab. 2:9). 3519 «His own» (neuter) may refer to the land, and «his own» (masculine) to the people; see Brown, John, 1:10; cf. Westcott, John, 8. Although Galilee is Jesus» native land, his «own» land that rejects him is Judea (cf. 4:45; Meeks, Prophet-King, 40); in 10:3–4, 12, Jesus» «own» is redefined as his true flock. M. Smith, Parallels, 153, finds in «his own» an allusion to Jesus» deity because Israel is regularly God " s possession in the Hebrew Bible and Tannaitic literature.

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

3622         B. Šabb. 33a; Gen. Rab. 97 (NV); Exod. Rab. 2:2; for similar association of glory with the temple, see Pesiq. Rab. 1:2; 32:1. For the Spirit dwelling in God " s temple, see Isaacs, Spirit, 25 (citing Josephus Ant. 8.114 as a Spirit-parallel to rabbinic Judaism " s Shekinah). Sievers, «Shekhinah,» thinks that the Shekinah may have been more universalized after the templés destruction in 70. Naturally God " s glory was also portrayed as dwelling in heaven (1QS 10.3). 3624 Exod 13:21; 40:36–38; Neh 9:12; Ps 78:14 ; Mek. Šir. 3.67 ff.; Pesiq. Rab Kah. Sup. 5:1; cf. Ps 80:1 ; Isa 63:14; Urbach, Sages, 1(citing Sipre Num. 80, 84). Glory, of course, had always been associated with that event (e.g., 2Macc 2:7–8; Pss. So1. 11:2–6). From at least the second century, however, rabbinic tradition indicated that the Shekinah also participated in Israel " s captivity in Egypt and Babylonia (Mek. Pisha 14.87ff.; Mek. Bes. 3.82–83; Sipra Behuq. pq. 6.267.2.6; Sipre Num. 84.4.1; p. Ta c an. 1:1, §10, citing a Tanna; Exod. Rab. 15:16; Num. Rab. 7:10; Lam. Rab. 1:5, §32; cf. Cohen, «Shekhinta»; as late as the Zohar, cited in Siegal, «Israel,» 106). 3625 Abelson, Immanence, 380–82, notes that although kabod («glory») sometimes is identified with Shekinah, they are not always the same; but he feels that δξα in the NT covers the semantic range of both terms (380). Burney, Origin, 36, imports the Aramaic yekara («glory») alongside Shekinah (presence) here. 3627 See Coloe, Temple Symbolism, 11, and passim. Coloe also points to other Johannine passages pregnant with temple symbolism. 3628 E.g., Num. Rab. 20:10; see Kadushin, Mind, 223–26 (against medieval philosophers); cf. Abelson, Immanence, 98–134, followed also by Isaacs, Spirit, 25–26. In one late personification, the departing Shekinah kissed the walls of the temple (Lam. Rab. proem 25). 3629 Kadushin, Mind, 226–29; cf. Abelson, Immanence, on the Shekinah as the «immanent God» (pp. 117–34). 3632 E.g., " Abot R. Nat. 38 A; Sipra Qed. pq. 8.205.2.1; par. 4.206.2.6; Sipre Deut. 258.2.3; 320.2.1; b. Ber. 5b; Roš Haš. 31a; Šabb. 33a, 139a; Yebam. 64a, bar.; Yoma 21b;p. Sanh. 8:8, §1; Deut. Rab. 5:10; 6:14; Ruth Rab. 1:2; cf. Sipre Num. 1.10.3; Urbach, Sages, 1:286–87 (citing Mek. Pisha 5); pagan deities in Ovid Fasti 1.247–250; Plutarch Them. 10.1; so with Wisdom (Wis 1:4; 6:12–25, esp. 6:23; cf. Wis 7:25–26; Babrius 126). The Shekinah was progressively banished from, and then reinvited to, earth CAbotR. Nat. 34 A; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 1:1; Gen. Rab. 19:7; Song Rab. 5:1, §1); because of sin, his tabernacle or temple was necessary to bring his presence (Pesiq. Rab 7:4). For the Shekinah continuing with Israel even when they sin, see Abelson, Immanence, 135–42.

http://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-gosp...

  001     002    003    004    005    006    007    008    009    010