| A festival was also the one sort of occasion when one could gather more of the Sanhedrin if members came from outside Jerusalem (Reicke, Era, 145); but as we argued above, the Sanhedrin was largely drawn from the municipal aristocracy; and the point is moot, in any case, in the Fourth Gospel " s account. 9684 Commentators (e.g., Dalman, Jesus-Jeshua, 98; Lane, Mark, 529–30; Stauffer, Jesus, 209) cite m. Sanh. 11:4; t. Sanh. 11:7. This differs from the Roman practice (Cicero Cae1. 1.1; Seneca Controv. 5.4; Suetonius Tib. 61; cf. Acts 12:3–4). 9690 Ferguson, Backgrounds, 51; cf. the penalty in Seneca Controv. 5.4, if genuine. So also reportedly Egyptian custom (Diodorus Siculus 1.77.2). Diodorus Siculus 12.12.2 thus considers particularly merciful a law that merely shames false witnesses so much that they flee a city. 9691 E.g., Sus48–62; m. 1:9; Sanh. 5:1–4; t. Sanh. 6:3,6; Sipre Deut. 93.2.1; 149.1.1–2; 189.1.3. 9692 Brown, Death, 458; Stanton, Gospel Truth, 180–83. Greek rhetoric often preferred arguments from probability and internal consistency (which were frequent, e.g., Demosthenes On the Embassy 120; Against Pantaenetus 23; Aristotle Rhet. 1.15.17,1376a; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 3.35.5–6; 11.34.1–6; Josephus Ag. Ap. 1.219–220, 267, 286; 2.8–27, 82, 148; Life 342, 350; Acts 26:8) to witnesses (see Kennedy, Classical Rhetoric, 20–21), but the effective testimony of witnesses was nevertheless adequate to convict (Dionysius of Halicarnassus -R.A. 8.78.3). Any proofs were, however, better than mere assertions (Josephus Ant. 17.131). 9694 Those of rank, such as Joseph, would often have had friends aware of plots even if they themselves were not present (cf., e.g., Cornelius Nepos 4 [Pausanias], 5.1; 14 [Datâmes], 5.3). Even the Roman senatés inner secrets often leaked out, in contrast to the earliest times (Valerius Maximus 2.2.1a). 9695 Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 286. Rabbinic attestation of a religious trial of Jesus (Stauffer, Jesus, 225; cf. Herford, Christianity, 78–83) is late and probably derivative, and hence we do not admit it as independent evidence; but a Jewish hearing is essentia1. Even Winter, who emphasizes an arrest and agenda set by Romans (Trial, 30, 147), recognizes that Pilate would have expected the high priest " s aides to prepare the case (p. 29). |
| 10146 See Jeffers, World, 43–44; Watkins, John, 388. John leaves unstated the irony of a soldier afterward wearing (or perhaps selling) the very tunic Jesus had worn. 10153 Schnackenburg, John, 3:274; Beasley-Murray, John, 347. An allegorical application of νωθεν as a play on the tradition ( Mark 15:38 ) or more likely on John " s vertical dualism (3:3, 7, 31; 19:11) is plausible but difficult to make sense of. 10157 E.g., Homer Od. 11.432–434, 436–439 (even though Clytemnestra also slew Cassandra in 11.422); Euripides Orest. 1153–1154. (The subtext of the Iliad was that male warriors were fighting because of women, such as Helen and Briseis; cf. esp. I1. 9.339–342.) 10159 Pace Barrett, John, 551. Women relatives were typically allowed, e.g, to visit a man in prison (e.g., Lysias Or. 13.39–40, §133). 10162 See, e.g., Josephus Ant. 4.320 (Israelite society); Homer I1. 18.30–31, 50–51; 19.284–285; Sophocles Ajax 580; Euripides Here. fur. 536; Thucydides 2.34.4; Cicero Fam. 5.16.6; Diodorus Siculus 17.37.3; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 7.67.2; 8.39.1; Livy 26.9.7; Valerius Maximus 2.6.13; Pomeroy, Women, 44; Dupont, Life, 115. Ancients did, however, expect both parents of a crucified person to mourn (Sipre Deut. 308.2.1). 10163 Cf., e.g., Valerius Maximus 5.4.7 (cited in Rapske, Custody, 247); 9.2.1; Polybius 5.56.15 (mob action); Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.267 (on Athenian execution of women); Ovid Metam. 13.497 (among captives; cf. Polybius 5.111.6, in a camp). 10168 Ilan, Women, 53, following Hallett, Fathers, 77–81. «Mary» (and variations) was «easily the most popular woman " s name in lst-century Palestine» (Williams, «Personal Names,» 90–91, 107). If one sister had two names, perhaps she came to use the shared name after marriage removed her from her original home? 10169 One could argue that one Mary in Mark 15is Jesus» mother ( Mark 6:3 ; cf. Matt 13:55; 27:56), but if Jesus was the eldest (or even if he was not), one would expect «mother of Jesus» there unless the passion had somehow terminated that relationship (certainly not Lukés view, Luke 24:10: Acts 1:14). |
| 10013 With Blinzler, Trial, 231. See, e.g., Homer Od. 17.484–487; Ovid Metam. 5.451–461; 8.618–724. 10015 See most usefully Zeller, «Philosophen.» Boring et a1., Commentary, 304, cite Maximus of Tyre Lectures 3; Philostratus Vit. Apol1. 8.2; for Socrates, see also Xenophon Mem. 4.8.4. 10020 Some philosophers were even known to end their own lives, sometimes following an Indian tradition (Cicero Div. 1.23.47; Arrian Alex. 7.3.1–6; Lucian Dialogues of the Dead 416–417; Peregr. 36–38; Greek Anth. 7.123). 10022 Brown, Death, 841. Neyrey, «Shame of Cross,» 128–29, argues that Jesus» silence challenges Pilatés honor, but Jesus in 19acknowledges the honor of Pilatés office, securing more of his favor (19:12). 10023 Pilate held legal authority to both condemn and acquit (Justinian Digest 50.17.37; Whitacre, John, 451). 10027 E.g., Jub. 49:2–4; 3 En. 26:12; 30:2; Sipre Deut. 315.2.1. Cf. further references in Keener, Paul, 41,64–65. 10028 Most commentators recognize God as the source of Pilatés authority here, e.g., Johnston, Spirit-Paraclete, 15; Pancaro, Law, 323. 10029 Cf. accounts of Socrates» martyrdom (e.g., Maximus of Tyre Or. 3.2) and Jewish martyr stories. 10036 See Jones, History, 192–95, citing Pliny Ep. 2.11 (on executions of innocent people, especially Roman citizens). This may also help explain Pilatés reluctance to prosecute Jesus if he thought the prosecution might yield complaints. 10041 This is pointed out by Brown (Death, 843), but he warns that the connection with Sejanus is here uncertain (p. 844). 10045 E.g., Thompson, Archaeology, 278; Yamauchi, Stones, 108, following Albright. Cf. Josephus War 2.328–231. 10048 See Wilkinson, Jerusalem, 141; Brown, Death, 705–10; Strachan, Gospel, 212; Blinzler, Trial, 173–76; Reicke, Era, 140; Benoit, Jesus, 1:167–88; Benoit, «Reconstitution.» 10049 E.g., tentatively, MacRae, Invitation, 210. Manns, «Encore,» thinks he seated him «toward» (ες) the «pavement» of the old temple; but cf. comment on «pavement» above. 10055 |
| 6324 Slaughter by relatives, as in Mark 13:12 ; Matt 10:21, indicated an especially awful time (Diodorus Siculus 17.13.6; see n. 21). Those converted to radical philosophies such as Cynicism (Alciphron Farmers 38 [Euthydicus to Philiscus], 3.40, par. 1) or Essenism (4Q477 2 2.8, if its sense resembles that in 2.6) might reject earthly families; even Stoics and Pythagoreans recognized a higher allegiance (Musonius Rufus 16, p. 102.14–16, 21–31; Iamblichus V.P. 35.257). But some pagans criticized Jesus» stance toward his family (Apocrit. 2.7–12). 6325 For appointing relatives, see, e.g., Xenophon Hel1. 3.4.29; 1 Chr 2:16; 27(though cf. 1 Chr 11:6); Neh 7:2. 6326 Safrai, «Education,» 965. 6327 E.g., Sophocles E1. 1493–1494; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 8.78.3; Livy 3.36.2; see comment on 3:2. Although rabbis treated some subjects as esoteric, Smith, Parallels, 155, cites Sipre Deut. 13:7: heretics speak secretly, but the Law is taught openly. 6328 E.g., Musonius Rums frg. 9 in Meeks, Moral World, 49; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 9.32.2; Diogenes Laertius 6.2.69; Publilius Syrus 10; Plutarch Praising 6, Mor. 54ID; Menander Rhetor 2.3, 386.9; 2.10, 416.24–25; Philodemus Frank Criticism frg. 1; among Cynics, see Vaage, «Barking.» 6329 Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 11.9.1; Plutarch Aemilius Paulus 11.3; Flatterer 1–37, Mor. 48E-74E; Philodemus Frank Criticism Tab. 1.2. Historians (Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 1.6.5), philosophers (Epictetus Diarr. 1.9.20; 1.12; 4.6.33; 4.7.24; Diogenes Laertius 6.1.4; 6.2.51; 6.5.92; Marcus Aurelius 1.16.4), and moralists (Isocrates Demon. 30; Cicero Amtc. 25.94–26.99; Off. 1.26.91; Horace Ep. 1.16.25–39; Juvenal Sat. 3.86–87; 4.65–72; Babrius 77; Phaedrus 1.13.1–2; 3.16.16–18; 4.13; Athenaeus Deipn. 6.236e), including Jewish writers (Wis 14:17; Josephus Life 367; Ps.-Phoc. 91; 1 Thess 2:5) regularly warned against flattery. 6330 Plutarch Profit by Enemies 6, Mor. 89B; Flatterer 17–37, Mor. 59A-74E; cf. Rhet. ad Herenn. 4.36.48. 6331 Lysander 5 in Plutarch S.K., Mor. 190F; cf. Prov 27:6 . |
| 6430 According to tradition, in the late first century B.C.E. many people disagreed with Hillel " s view that Passover overrides the Sabbath (t. Pisha 4:13). Even an Amora could articulate a minority position, though his disciples might try to harmonize his teaching with the mainstream (p. Besah 5:2, §9, that betrothal takes precedence over the Sabbath). 6431 E.g., Brown, John, 1:313; Longenecker, Exegesis, 69. 6432 E.g., t. Ber. 4:16–17; 6:19; B. Qam. 7:6; c Ed. 3:4; Ki1. 5:6; Ma c ai. 2:2; Šabb. 15:16; Péah 3:8; Ter. 6:4. 6433 E.g., Mek. Pisha 1.38; 2.36–37; 7.48; 7.61; 9.45; 13.105; 16.119, 126; Bes. 1.54; 2.73; 7.128; Bah. 5.90; 11.64, 109; Nez. 1.101; 2.17; 3.43, 69, 128; 10.47, 67; 12.5; 16.92; 18.79, 80, 83, 97; Kaspa 2.26; 5.51, 80, 103; Šabb. 1.14; 2.41. 6434 Sipra VDDen.par. 2.3.4.3; par. 3.5.3.2; par. 5.10.1.1; VDDeho.pq. 12.53.1.3; Savpq. 8.80.1.2; par. 9.90.1.3, 8; pq. 17.96.1.1; Sav M.D. par. 98.8.5, 7; 98.9.5; Sh. M.D. 99.3.9; Sh. par. 1.100.3.1; pq. 3.104.1.3; pq. 4.105.2.2; pq. 105.3.2; pq. 6.99.3.7–8; pq. 9.115.7–8; Neg. pq. 1.127.2.1; 127.3.11; par. 3.131.1.1; pq. 8.139.1.1; Mes. par. 2.150.1.2, 5,10; Zabim par. 1.160.2.1; par. 2.163.1.1; pq. 3.164.2.2; par. 3.166.2.1; Qed. pq. 11.209.1.7; Emor par. 1.211.1.8; par. 12.236.1.2; Behuq. par. 1.260.1.1; pq. 2.262.1.9; pq. 12.276.3.13. 6435 E.g., Sipre Num. 1.4.1; 1.6.3; 8.1.1; 15.1.1; 15.2.2; 16.3.1; 18.1.1; 23.1.1; 25.7.1; 26.6.1; 28.2.2; 29.1.1; 30.1.1; 30.2.1; 31.3.1–2; 31.4.1; 35.1.2; 42.1.1; 42.2.3; 78.1.1; 78.4.1; 92.4.1; 99.2.2; 103.1.1; 104.1.1; 105.1.1; 107.3.2–3; 111.5.3; 112.2.3; 115.3.2. 6436 E.g., Sipre Deut. 1.8.2–3; 18.2.2; 26.1.1; 27.2.1; 32.5.1, 4; 34.2.1; 35.1.2; 37.1.2, 5; 37.2.1; 38.1.4; 38.2.3; 47.3.1–2. 6437 Cf., e.g., t. Sanh. 7:11; Beraita R. Ishmael pq. 1.8 (in Sipra, ed. Neusner, 1:63); " Abot R. Nat. 37A. 6438 Cf., e.g., Aristotle Rhet. 2.23.4–5, 1397b; Kennedy, Classical Rhetoric, 71; Lieberman, Hellenism, 47–82. It appears in the earliest rabbinic traditions (e.g., m. " Abot 1:5). |
| 6850 Plutarch Cicero 26.6; Philostratus Vit. soph. 2.19.599. 6851 Meier, Marginal Jew, 1:228, thinks it unlikely because Jesus challenges their spiritual legitimacy. It is not, however, clear that they understand Jesus spiritually. 6852 See Keener, Matthew, 83–86, though cf. our comment on John 9:29 . 6853 One might compare here the myth that the serpent impregnated Eve in the guise of her husband (for various strands of the story, cf., e.g., 2 En. 31J; t. Sotah 4:17–18; " Abot R. Nat. 1A; Gen. Rab. 20:4; 24:6; perhaps 4 Macc 18:8; 2Cor 11:3, 14 ), or fallen angels or demons impregnated women in Gen 6 (CD 2.18; 4Q180; Jub. 4:22; 5:1; 7:21; 1 En. 69:5; 106:13–14; 2 En. 18:5; 2 Bar. 56:10–15; T. Reu. 5:6; T. So1. 6:3; 1Pet 3:19 ; Justin 1 Apo1. 5; cf. T. So1. 4; Incant. Text 1:12–13). But such comparisons miss Jesus» point: like many people in this Gospel, Jesus» interlocutors here take him literally, whereas he refers to spiritual descendants. 6854 Sanders, John, 230, combining this suggestion with polemic against Jesus» birth. 6855 Carson, John, 352, suggests an allusion to Jewish and Samaritan questions about one another " s origins; but this would make more sense after 8:48. 6856 Jesus» claim that he κω from God (8:42) appears in Hellenistic inscriptions for the epiphany of a deity (Brown, John, 1:357). Just as the patronage system produced informal urban networks of friendship and enmity, so love for one member of a household might produce love also for others (e.g., Cicero Fam. 16.4.4). 6857 Sibling murder was a horrendous crime (Cicero Off. 3.10.41; Horace Epodes 7.17–20; Apuleius Metam. 10.8), though other public reports of its occurrence existed (Diodorus Siculus 16.65.5–6; Livy 1.7.2; Herodian 4.5.2; Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.57–58). 6858 On the sense of «hear» here, see comment on 3:8. 6859 See Whitacre, Polemic, 75. 6860 Thus, e.g., Edomites could not relinquish murder because they inherited this character from Esau (Sipre Deut. 343.4.1). Many ancients regarded character as inborn, not changing (Pindar O1. 13.12; also 11.19–20; but see our comment on John 3:19–20 ). |
| 4448 B. Ta c an. 24a, a later story concerning a contemporary of R. Judah ha-Nasi. It was understood that cultural rules on how to drink wine varied regionally (Esth. Rab. 2:13). 4449 As the prototype of all who were from above, Jesus is perhaps the first «born from above,» i.e., from God (see comment on 3:3); but John in no way tones down the reality of Jesus» physical incarnation (1:14) through a human mother (also 2:12; 19:26). (Zumstein, «Croix,» in fact, thinks the mention of Jesus» mother emphasizes Jesus» incarnation; Augustine Tract. Ev. Jo. 8.6.2–8.9.4 argued this against the Manichaeans.) 4450 See Martin, «Epithet.» Beck, Paradigm, 17–26, argues that Greco-Roman literature rarely leaves important characters anonymous; but in Hebrew texts, see the women of 1 Kgs 17:9–24; 2 Kgs 4. 4451 See Beck, Paradigm, 132–36, though we would not accept all examples (e.g., the man in John 5 ; further, we accept some named characters, such as John the Baptist, as positive models). Beck, Paradigm, 53, sees the two most important characters in 2:1–4as women. 4452 Cf., e.g., Luke 14:12; Martial Epigr. 3.27; 3.37; 5.47; Chariton 2.7.4; probably Ps.-Phoc. 152 (see note i in OTP 2:579); dining invitations indicated status (e.g., Martial Epigr. 5.47; Ecc1. Rab. 1:3, §1), and social obligations could easily become overly demanding (e.g., Seneca Dia1. 10.14.3). Cf. Judge, Rank, 26; Stambaugh and Balch, Environment, 63–64; esp. Derrett, Audience, 43. 4454 Cf. Derrett, Law, 237–38. On the importance of wedding gifts, see, e.g., Pindar Pyth. 3.94–95; Theophrastus Char. 30.18–19. 4457 The wedding in Tob 9:19–20 was thrown by the bridés father because Tobias was far from home; but their marital dwelling then became patriloca1. The groom " s family was normally responsible (Safrai, «Home,» 760, citing m. Ker. 3:7; Sipre Deut. 107). 4458 At any rate, Seneca regards as self-evident that social tact includes giving someone a gift when that person needs it (Benef. 1.12.3), and some others may have shared his view. |
| 4752 Robinson, Trust, 88, suggests most of the Gospel took place in dialogue with Greek-speaking Jerusalemites before its transplantation to Asia Minor. 4753 Some estimate that two-thirds of Jewish inscriptions in Palestine are in Greek (Van der Horst, «Inscriptions»); the current count may be lower, but Greek would be most current among the hellenized urban elite. 4756 The location of the phrase may be emphatic (Westcott, John, 48), but Gaster, Scriptures, 14, reaches too far in comparing John " s phrase with Qumran " s supreme teacher. 4758 The repetition is often noted, e.g., Brown, John, 1:130; in Johannine idiom more generally (in questions, e.g., 5:44; 6:52,60; 9:16; cf. 4:9; in statements, e.g., 6:44,65; 7:34; 8), e.g., Bernard, John, 1:103. Πς δναται is the sort of question one expects of the uninitiated in apocalyptic texts (T. Ab. 11:5B). 4759 Bowman, Gospel, 32; Bauckham, «Gurion Family»; Blomberg, Reliability, 91–92. Barrett, John, 204 acknowledges the possibility. 4760 Sipre Deut. 305.2.1; " Abot R. Nat. 6A; 13, §31; b. Ketub. 66b, bar.; Lam. Rab. 1:5, §31. He is undoubtedly the same Nicodemus who is father of one «Gorion» as in Josephus War 2.451 (just as names alternated from father to son between «Simon» and «Gamaliel» in another prominent Jerusalem household; the Nicodemus of Josephus Ant. 14.37 may be an ancestor). 4761 Abot R. Nat. 6A; b. c Abod. Zar. 25a, bar; Ta c an. 19b-20a. Some Amoraim opined that he practiced much charity but should have offered more (b. Ketub. 66b-67a). 4762 CI J 1:295, §380. As a common Greek name, see, e.g., Isaeus Estate of Pyrrhus 4,25,36–37,39,77; Aeschines Timarchus 172; for related names for Jewish people, see Williams, «Personal Names,» 110. 4764 Interestingly, some statements that follow disciples» (4:31; 9:2; 11:8) or others» (6:25) use of «Rabbi» for Jesus invite his correction; but significant exceptions (1:38,49; cf. 20:16) call into question the possible pattern. 4765 E.g., 1QS 6.6–7; t. Šabb. 1:13; b. c Abod. Zar. 3b; Ber. 43b, bar.; z Erub. 18b; 65a; Tamid 32b; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 7:4; Exod. Rab. 47:5; Lev. Rab. 19:1; Num. Rab. 15:16; Safrai, «Home,» 745; Schnackenburg, John, 1:366. Some Gentile intellectuals studied at night (Plutarch Demosthenes 8.4; 12.5–6; Cicero Att. 7.7; 13.26, 38), though Philostratus Vit. soph. 1.21.518 seems to view it as unusual (and one worked by night so that he could study by day [Valerius Maximus 8.7.ext.l 1]). |
| 6007 B. Ber. 34b; p. Ter. 1:6; Safrai, «Religion,» 802; cf. Bonsirven, Judaism, 128; Tröster, «Quest»; esp., Finkelstein, Making, 333–84. Amoraim debated the later blessings under some circumstances (b. Ber. 41b). 6009 Some consider the feeding of the four thousand a doublet (e.g., Burkill, Light, 48–70), which is, not surprisingly, missing in John " s independent tradition. But this interpretation is disputable (Knackstedt, «Brotvermekrungen»; cf. Travis, «Criticism,» 160; English, «Miracle»). 6011 Longenecker, «Messiah,» thinks the lack of brokenness prefigures 19:33, 36; but such a connection demands much of the reader unless the omission appears very jarring. 6018 E.g., Ps.-Phoc. 138; Sipre Deut. 11.1.2; Luke 15:13. Johnston, «Version,» 154, cites b. Hu1. 105b and other texts. 6019 E.g., Sallust Cati1. 5.8; 52.7; Jug. 6.1; 16.4; Cato Dist. 3.21; Horace Sat. 1.1.101–107; 1.2.62; Ep. 1.15.26–27; Epodes 1.34; Cicero Sest. 52.111; Cat. 2.4.7; 2.5.10; Valerius Maximus 9.1.2; Musonius Rufus 19, p. 122.12–32; Aeschines Timarchus 30, 42, 53, 170; Lysias Or. 14.27, §142; 19.10, §152; Alciphron Farmers 32 (Gnathon to Callicomides), 3.34, par. 1; Plutarch Ale. 16.1; Philostratus Vit. soph. 2.25.610; Athenaeus Deipn. 8.344b; Lucan C.W. 2.352–391; Juvenal Sat. 1.58–60; Musonius Rufus frg. 8 («That Kings Also Should Study Philosophy,» in Malherbe, Exhortation, 31); Diodorus Siculus 17.108.4; Arrian Alex. 7.28.3; Cornelius Nepos 7 (Alcibiades) 1.4. There were some philosophical exceptions (Publilius Syrus 223), but indulgence was more characteristic of aristocrats like Tigellinus or Petronius. 6022 The view that the gathering of fragments symbolizes the gathering of God " s scattered children (11:52; Meeks, Prophet-King, 94, 98) is probably fanciful, as is Daubés proposed allusion to rabbinic traditions surrounding Ruth (Daube, «Gospels,» 342; see Ruth 2:17–18). 6027 For Moses as prophet, see Meeks, Prophet-King, 125–29, 137–38, 147–50, 173, 198–200, 220–26. Probably the Mosaic prophet is assumed in 1QS 9.11. 1Macc 4does not refer explicitly to a Mosaic eschatological prophet but could refer generically to the rising of any adequate prophet. |
| 5842 Though ργον is a common term (over 130 occurrences in the LXX of the Pentateuch alone) it is significant here that it can apply to God " s act of creation ( Gen 2:2–3 LXX; Wis 13:1; Sib. Or. 1.22; cf. the verb in Philostratus Hrk. 25.8). Less likely is the proposal of Manns, «Oeuvres,» that Jesus carries out Jewish tradition " s «works of mercy.» 5843 For a probable implicit traditional link between Gen 2and Ezek 37 , see comment on John 20:22 . 5844 E.g., L.A.E. 51:1–2; 2 En. 33:1–2 J; Barn. 15.8; possibly T. Ab. 19:7A; 7:16B; see further the comment on John 5:25–30 . 5845 It may be associated with the feast in 7and perhaps identified as the (partly realized) eschatological «day» in John 8:56; 9:4; 11:9; 14:20; 16:23,26 ), perhaps partly associated with the cross (12:7; 19:31) and/or resurrection (the first day, 20:1,19). 5846 John 6does not count because «make» is properly attached to «sit down.» 5847 Elsewhere God «made» the human mouth, a synecdoche for God making people in various physical conditions (Exod 4:11). 5848 Such a relationship often invited reciprocity: Israel must love God ( ; Josh 22:5; 23:11; Neh 1:5; Dan 9:4 ). 5849 Possibly Ign. Magn. 7.1 (δι» εαυτο) alludes to John here (even in the shorter recension), especially in view of Ignatius " s νευ του πατρς οδν εποησεν. 5850 Meeks, «Agent,» 55. On the activity of the agent, see «agency» under Christology in our introduction, pp. 310–17. 5851 E.g., Epictetus Diatr. 1.9.32, εξ εμαυτο (John consistently prefers π, as in, e.g., Aelius Aristides Defense of Oratory 396, §135D). In John 10it indicates Jesus» independence from those who want him dead, but explicitly not independence from the Father; cf. 18:34. 5852 Sipre Deut. 5.1.1; 19.1.1; 25.5.1. 5853 Talbert, John, 125–26, takes the language of honor here as cultic (citing Josephus Ant. 1.156; 6.21; 1Tim 1:17; 6:16 ; Rev 4:9, 11; 5:12). On the early Christian understanding of Jesus receiving worship within the identity of the one God, see Bauckham, God Crucified, 34–35. |
|
|
