| 25 3 Kgd 19:9 ff. 26 Probably an echo of both the chariot in which Elijah ascends into heaven in 4 Kgd 2:11, and of the chariot of the soul in Plato’s Phaedrus (246A-C). 27 Cf. 4 Kgd 2:1ff. 28 Probably commenting on 4 Kgd 1:9–12, but alluding also to 4 Kgd 6:15–17. 29 Cf. 1 Kgd 1:9–20. 30 Cf. Lev. 14:33–42 . 31 Cf. 3 Kgd 17:8–24. 32 Cf. Matt. 17:1–8, Mark 9:2–8 , Luke 9:28–36. 33 Cf. Isa. 53:2. 34 Cf. Psa. 44:3. 35 Cf. John 1:1 . 36 Apophasis: Maximus introduces here the technical terms of apophatic and cataphatic theology. 37 Cf. John 1:14 . 38 This section develops the theme just introduced in the dual interpretation of the radiant garments of the Transfigured Christ as both Scriptures and creation. 39 The Evagrian triad of ascetic struggle (praktike), natural contemplation (physike), and theology was related by Origen to a very similar classification of the categories of philosophy in the prologue to his Commentary on the Song of Songs: see Louth (1981), 57–8. 40 Cf. Denys the Areopagite, Ep. 9.1 (1105D). 41 Literally: in a Greek way. It is in contrast with the later ‘in a Jewish way’: cf. St Paul’s contrast between Greeks/Gentiles and Jews, especially in Rom. 1–3 . 42 Cf. Phil. 3.19 . 43 A metaphor for the Incarnation used by Gregory Nazianzen in Sermon 38.2 (PG 36:313B). Maximus devotes a Difficulty to Gregory’s use of the term (suspected of Origenism?): Amb. 33:1285C-1288A, where the Word’s expressing itself in letters and words is one of the interpretations offered of the metaphor. 44 Cf. Gen. 39:11–12 . 45 This is an important section in which Maximus reworks a fundamental Evagrian theme. For Evagrius, the five modes of contemplation are: 1. contemplation of the adorable and holy Trinity, 2. and 3. contemplation of incorporeal and incorporeal beings, 4. and 5. contemplation of judgment and providence (Centuries on Spiritual Knowledge I.27, in Guillaumont 1958 ). Maximus’ understanding is quite different. See Thunberg (1965), 69–75 and Gersh (1978), 226–7. 46 I do not know where Maximus gets these five secret meanings (or hidden logoi) from. They recall Plato’s ‘five greatest kinds’ (being, rest, motion, sameness and difference: see Sophist 254D-255C), but are evidently not the same. |
| 1247 Sambursky, «Gematria»; Stambaugh and Balch, Environment, 103, citing Cicero Inv. 2.40.116; Hengel, Hellenism, l:80ff.; Lieberman, Hellenism, 47–82. Some may also reflect Babylonian sources (Cavigneaux, «Sources»). 1248 Judith 16:7; Josephus War 1.353; 2.155–158; Ag. Ap. 1.255; 2.263; Pesiq. Rab. 20(cf. Greek Phlegethon; cf. the Elysian plain and Acherusian lake in Sib. Or. 2.337–338, probably Christian redaction; Apoc. Mos. 37:3). 1249 E.g., Artapanus in Eusebius Praep. ev. 9.27.3; Sib. Or. 2.15 (Poseidon); 2.19 (Hephaistos); 3.22 (Tethys); 3.110–116, 121–155, 551–554, 588 (euhemeristic; cf. similarly Let. Aris. 136; Sib. Or. 3.723; 8.43–47); 5.334 (personification; cf. also 7.46; 11.104, 147, 187, 205, 219, 278; 12:53, 278; 14.56, 115); T. Job 1.3 (cornucopia); 51:1/2 (perhaps allusion to Nereus, also in Sib. Or. 1.232); cf. (not Greek) Ishtar as an evil spirit in Text 43:6–7, perhaps 53:12, Isbell, 103; cf. art (some of it in Palestinian synagogues) in Goodenough, Symbols, vols. 7–8 (and Dura Europos synagogue, vols. 9–11, and 12:158–183). 1250 The clear examples are few (even Egyptian use may have been more common; cf. «Biblés Psalm»), despite apologetic protestations to the contrary (e.g., Josephus Ag. Ap. 1.165; 2.257). 1252 E.g., Martin, Colossians, 18–19; Knox, Gentiles, 149; Wilson, Gnostic Problem, 259. Although an Egyptian provenance for the Testament of Solomon is possible, I would favor an Asian provenance, given its date (cf. also Artemis in 8:11, etc.), and stress the magical-mystical nature of some of Judaism in Asia. 1253 So Kennedy, Epistles, 14, 22; Robinson, Redating, 294. Palestine had its Pharisees and Essenes, but had even more Am Háarets. 1258 Cf. CD 5.6–8; lQpHab 9.6–7. Others also believed that profaning the temple could bring judgment, although not applying it to this time (Pss. So1. 1:8; 2:1–10; Josephus War 5.17–18; cf. the ambiguous evaluation of Tannaitic sources in Goldenberg, «Explanations»). 1263 Grant, Gods, 51; Stambaugh and Balch, Environment, 121–22; Conzelmann, «Areopagus,» 224; van de Bunt-van den Hoek, «Aristobulos»; cf. Renehan, «Quotations.» Jewish and early Christian texts often followed the Greek practice (instilled in school memorization exercises) of citing or alluding to Homer (e.g., Ps.-Phoc. 195–197; Syr. Men. 78–93; Josephus Ant. 1.222; Sib. Or. 3.401–432, passim; 3.814; 5.9; 2 Bar. 10:8; Tatian 8; cf. Rahmani, «Cameo») or other poets (Acts 17:28; 1Cor 15:33 ; Tit 1:12 ; Justin 1 Apo1. 39; Theophilus 2.37; Athenagoras 5–6; cf. Manns, «Source»), or proverbs originally based on them. |
| 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). |
| 6145 2 Bar 29:8; Mek. Vay. 3.42ff.; 5.63–65. Cf. the manna restored with the ark (2Macc 2:8; cf. 4 Bar. 3:11). 6146 Many commentators, often following Billerbeck, Kommentar, 2:481,4:890,954 (e.g., Dodd, Interpretation, 335; Cullmann, Worship, 96); see further Rev 2:17; probably also 4Q511 frg. 10.9. This image continued in Christian tradition (Sib. Or. 7.149), in which Christ was the holy manna-giver (γλε μαννοδτα, Sib. Or. 2.347). Cf. also the préexistent manna (b. Pesah. 54a; Hoskyns, Gospel, 294, cites Sipre Deut. 355). 6147 E.g., m. " Abot 3:16; 4:16; b. Ber. 34b; Sanh. 98b; see further Feuillet, Studies, 70–72, and our introductory comments on John 2:1–11 ; probably also lQSa (=lQ28a) 2.11–12, 19–21. Kuzenzama, «Préhistoire,» suggests that receiving Torah was the prerequisite. 6148 Lev. Rab. 27:4; Ruth Rab. 5:6; Ecc1. Rab. 3:15, §1; Pesiq. Rab. 31:10; 52:8. Israel would continue to celebrate the exodus in the messianic era but would celebrate the kingdom more (t. Ber. 1:10; b. Ber. 12b). 6150 See, e.g., Glasson, Moses, 15–19, on Isaiah. For exodus typology in the Hebrew Bible, see Daube, Pattern, passim. 6152 E.g., early Amoraic tradition in Pesiq. Rab Kah. 5:8; Num. Rab. 11:2; Ruth Rab. 5:6; Ecc1. Rab. 1:9, §1; in some cases (Exod. Rab. 2:6; Deut. Rab. 9:9) Moses himself would lead Israel in the end time. On the hidden Messiah tradition, see comment on John 8:59 . 6153 E.g., Edersheim, Life, 334; Billerbeck, Kommentar, ad loc; Dodd, Interpretation, 83; Hunter, lohn, 71. 6154 See b. Ta c an. 9a; Num. Rab. 1:2; 13:20; Song Rab. 4:5, §2; Tg. Jon. to Deut 10:6 ; though cf. also Abraham in Gen. Rab. 48:12. Tannaim might recount similar details without the names (Sipre Deut. 313.3.1; 355.6.1). Haggadah also commented on the adjustable flavors of manna (Sipre Deut. 87.2.1; Exod. Rab. 5:9; 25:3), that it fell sixty cubits deep (b. Yoma 76a), that more fell nearer the homes of the righteous (b. Yoma 75a), and that it was préexistent (b. Pesah. 54a). 6155 That the second line repeats the final «gives/gave bread from heaven» fits typical ancient Mediterranean speech forms (πιφορ, ντιστροφ; Anderson, Glossary, 23, 54; idem, Rhetorical Theory 163; Rowe, «Style,» 131; in the NT, see Porter, «Paul and Letters,» 579; Black, «Oration at Olivet,» 86; in the LXX, see Lee, «Translations of OT,» 779), thereby drawing further attention to the contrast. |
| 3273 See Meeks, Prophet-King, 103–6. It is helpful here to compare the divinization of Plato and other teachers in Hellenistic tradition (e.g., Diogenes Laertius 2.100; 6.2.63; 6.9.104; 8.1.11; 9.7.39; Plutarch Profit by Enemies 8, Mor. 90C; Apol1. 36, Mor. 120D; cf. Cicero Leg. 3.1.1); cf. lawgivers in Musonius Rufus 15, p. 96.24. One may also think of hyperbolic comparisons employed in popular rhetoric; see, e.g., Cicero De or. 1.10.40; 1.38.172; Or. Brut. 19.62. 3274 E.g., Philo Sacrifices 9; cf. Runia, «God.» Cf. explanations of Exod 7in Exod. Rab. 8:1; Num. Rab. 15:13. Cf. Metatron (originally a personification) as a lesser YHWH in 3 En. 12(though he turns out to be Enoch in 3 En. 4:2; Tg. Ps.-J. on Gen 4:24 ; cf. further Scholem, Gnosticism, 43–46); the righteous Messiah, and Jerusalem called by the Lord " s name (b. B. Bat. 75b; cf. Jer 23:6 ; Ezek 48:35 ); and Israel as a god (Gen. Rab. 98:3, fourth-century Amoraim). Yet R. Simeon ben Yohai (late second century) taught that associating God " s name with other gods was worse than denying his existence (b. Sanh. 63a). 3276 Contrast Williamson, «Philo»; Chilton, Approaches, 200–201; their comparisons are nevertheless valuable. 3277 Cf. also Bultmann, John, 33 (rejecting especially Hellenistic and gnostic «polytheistic conceptions and emanationist theories» that neglect the text " s monotheistic sense); Stuart, «Examination,» 42. Greek scholars consistently deride the «a god» translation; cf., e.g., Metzger, «Translation,» 125; and esp. Bruce, Booh, 60 n. 4: those who translate «a god» here «prove nothing thereby save their ignorance of Greek grammar.» 3279 E.g., Josephus Ant. 10.180; cf. Stuart, «Examination,» 42; Bultmann, John, 33; Brown, John, 1:5; Harris, Jesus as God, 287. On Josephus " s general sense for τ θεv, cf. Shutt, «Concept.» 3282 Metzger, «Translation,» 125; cf. Clark, Logos, 21; Sanders, John, 70 (citing the predicate nominative of 1:4). It should be noted, of course, that a writer who wished to emphasize that a predicate noun was definite was free to insert the article (Harner, «Nouns,» 87); and the pattern does not always obtain even in the context ( John 1:8–9 ). |
| 4245 Cf., e.g., CIJ 1:291, §375; 2:112, §880; 2:117, §890; 2:126, §905; 2:128, §911; 2:137, §932; 2:171, §986; 2:312, §1367; 2:391, §1468; 2:445, §1538. 4248 E.g., CIJ 1:117, §165; 2:117, §890; 2:126, §905; CPJ 1:29; 3:191–192; see further Williams, «Personal Names,» 93. 4249 Cf., e.g., Hachlili and Killebrew, «Saga»; idem, «Byt glyt»; Samuel the Small in p. Sotah 9:13, §2; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 7.2.4; Cornelius Nepos 3 (Aristides), 1.2; Philostratus Hrk. 14.4. 4250 E.g., m. Yad. 4:4; Sipre Deut. 253.2.2; h. Ber. 28a; Bamberger, Proselytism, 234; cf. Dominus Flevit ossuary 31 in Meyers and Strange, Archaeology, 68, Finegan, Archeology, 247–48, and Bagatti, Church, 237. That these instances represent Jewish «proselytes» to Christianity is unlikely, since Jewish Christians thought in terms of fulfillment more than conversion; cf. Avi-Yonah, «Sources,» 47–48. Name change was sometimes used elsewhere to connote conversion; see Horsley, «Change»; on initiation rites, cf. Mbiti, Religions, 165,228; Bietenhard, «νομα,» 243. It could also be associated with a promise or new hope and identity; cf. Gen 17:5 ; Rev 2:17; 3:12; cf. perhaps Ford, Revelation, 399. 4251 Cf. R. Johanan ben Zakkaís praise of each of his five disciples (m. " Abot 2:8, redactionally balanced). 4252 E.g., John Chrysostom Hom. Jo. 19. Reitzenstein, Religions, 40,320–32, finds parallels to the Christian concept of a divine call in the Mysteries, but the concept is pervasive in the Hebrew Bible and appears in Diaspora Judaism (e.g., God calls Abraham in death in T. Ab. 4:9B). 4253 Cf., e.g., Danker, Age, 17; Harrelson, Cult, 39; names might fit circumstances of birth (Cambridge Geniza Text 3.13–16). On the Roman custom of naming boys on the ninth and girls on the eighth day, cf. Plutarch R.Q. 102, Mor. 288BC; Luke 1:59–60; 2and the late Pirqe R. E1. 48 suggest that the custom may have also affected Palestinian Jewry (Safrai, «Sources,» 5; idem, «Home,» 767). 4255 See Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 146–47. This precise name (in contrast to some similar forms) is not attested in the pre-Christian era (Gnilka, Jesus, 186–87), so would not be a name from his parents. |
| 101 Евхаристиа 3. Taken from Faber, Dominica 2 Post Pentecosten, No. 1 «S. Eucharistia coena magna», sect. 3 «Ex epulis selectissimis». 11. 1–6 cf Faber: «Deinde cibus Eucharisticus mira arte confectus est. Nam primo per consecrationem uno verbo et in momento mutatur panis in Corpus Christi.» 11. 7–8 cf Faber: «Secundo, accidentia panis remanent sine subiecto.» 11. 9–14 cf Faber: «Tertio, Christus cum tota sua naturali quantitate est in parva hostia et in quavis eius parte, si frangatur.» Евхаристиа 4. Taken from Faber, ibid., sect. 6 «Ex maximo periculo». 11. 1–6 cf Faber: «Hinc canit Ecclesia: Mors est malis, vita bonis, vide paris sum ptionis quam sit dispar exitus.» 11. 7–14 cf Faber: «Sic mel nocet cholericis, prodest phlegmaticis. Sic eadem columna illuminavit Hebraeos, excoecavit Aegyptios. Exod. 14. ut habetur ex Chaldaeo. Sic ex eodem fonte Hebraei hauriebant aquam claram, Aegyptii vero sanguinem, ut scribit Iosephus. Sic ex eodem flore apis sugit mel, aranea venenum.» 11. 15–16 are not taken from Faber. Евхаристиа 5. Taken from Meffreth, In Festo Corporis Christi, No. 2. 11.1–10 cf Meffreth: «Multa mirabilia sunt in hoc Sacramento, vt dicit Thom: de Argen: in Compend: Theolog: verita: li. 6. Primum est quod ibi est corpus Christi in tanta quantitate, sicut fuit in cruce, & sicut iam est in coelo, nec tarnen excedit terminos illius formae.» 11. 11–14 cf Meffreth: «Secundum quod ibi sunt accidentia sine subiecto.» 11. 15–16 cf Meffreth: «Tertium quod conuertitur ibi panis in corpus Christi, nec etiam annihilatur.» 11. 17–22 cf Meffreth: «Quartum quod corpus non augetur ex multarum hostiarum consecratione, nec minuitur ex multarum hostiarum sumptione.» 11. 23–28 cf Meffreth: «Quintum quod idem corpus in numéro est in locis pluribus sub omnibus hostijs consecratis.» 11. 29–32 cf Meffreth: «Sextum quod quando diuiditur hostia non diuiditur corpus Christi, sed sub qualibet parte totus est Christus.» 11. 33–40 cf Meffreth: «Septimum quando tenetur hostia in manibus, & videtur oculis corpus Christi, nec tangitur nec videtur, sed haec tantum modo circa species sunt.» 11. |
| 6028 For Moses as king, see Josephus Ant. 4.327; L.A.B. 9:16; 20:5; Meeks, Prophet-King, 107–17, 147–50,177–79,181–96, 236. 6029 See Meeks, Prophet-King. Philo for one frequently links the titles, along with priest and lawgiver (Philo Moses 1.334; 2.2–7, 187, 292; Rewards 53; Tiede, Figure, 127). 6031 Sipre Deut. 83.1.1. He was the greatest of prophets (Deut. Rab. 2:4) except when he was not being counted (Deut. Rab. 7:8). On his role as prince of prophets, see, e.g., Sirat and Woog, «Maître.» 6032 Some texts suggest that he was God " s coregent (Sipre Deut. 3.1.1), though he denies it (Sipre Deut. 27.6.1). He was easily greater than Hadrian (Ecc1. Rab. 9:4, §1; Ruth Rab. 3:2). 6037 Diodorus Siculus 34/35.2.22. Eunus was, however, captured and then rotted in prison (34/35.2.22–23). 6038 Hoehner, Antipas, 206; Bammel, «Feeding»; cf. Barnett, «Prophets»; Witherington, Christology, 91, 100. Even among Roman politicians, free handouts of food produced political allegiance (see comment on 6:26). 6039 Theissen, Stories, 161. In its Johannine form, of course, 6has the form of a confession (see Jonge, Jesus, 57). 6041 See, e.g., Jeffers, World, 68–69; Goodman, State, 30–31; Freyne, Galilee, 153; Lewis, Life, 65, 67; MacMullen, Relations, 63, 68. 6043 Holy men might ascend to, and descend from, sacred mountains in pagan tradition (Iamblichus V.R 3.15, if this does not evoke 1 Kgs 18:42), but the biblical tradition is clearer here (see Exod 3:1–2; 19:3; 32:15; 1 Kgs 19:8; see Keener, Matthew, 164). 6044 Most scholars either reject the account in accordance with antisupernaturalistic presuppositions or (more frequently among scholars inclined to reject antisupernaturalistic assumptions) favor authenticity, but some wade between them: Derrett, «Walked,» explains how Jesus could have walked naturally on shallow points. But the setting of our story is a much deeper part of the lake (note the distance in 6:19), and fishermen who knew the lake would surely not have reported a miracle of one walking in shallow water! |
| 6557 Cf. Scott, «Horizons,» 498–99, citing especially Philo Embassy 281; Isa 1:26; 2LXX. 6558 Jub. 8:12; Sib. Or. 5:249–250 (probably late-first- to early-second-century C.E. Egypt); b. Yoma 54b; cf. Ezek 5:5; 38:12 ; Alexander, «Imago Mundi»; Davies, Land, 7. Let. Arts. 83 (cf. 115, μση for seaports also) places it in the midst of Judea, as does Josephus War 3.52. Curiously, 1 En. 18ignores the opportunity to identify where the cornerstone of the earth is located, but this does not mean the tradition was unknown in that period, against Jubilees; 1 En. 26may place the middle of the earth in Jerusalem (26:2–6). On the new Jerusalem image here, see, e.g., Allison, «Water.» 6559 Some of the references in the preceding note; Jub. 8:19; b. Sanh. 37a; Num. Rab. 1:4; Lam. Rab. 3:64, §9; Pesiq. Rab. 10:2; 12:10; cf. Hayman, «Observations»; Schäfer, «Schöpfung»; Goldenberg, «Axis.» For the site of the temple as the «pupil of God " s eye,» cf. b. Ber. 62b; for its elevation, e.g., b. Qidd. 69a; for its identification with the site of the Aqedath Isaac (Mount Moriah), see, e.g., Gen. Rab. 55:7. 6560 T. Kip. 2:14; Lev. Rab. 20:4; Num. Rab. 12:4; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 26:4; cf. Böhl, «Verhältnis.» For a «navel» within a city, see Pindar Dithyramb 4, frg. 75 (possibly on a prominent altar within Athens); cf. Pausanias 10.16.3. 6561 Besides clearer data above, cf. 3 En. 22B:7 (from God " s throne); Odes So1. 6:7–13 (to the temple). Let. Aris. 88–91 speaks of an underground water system beneath the temple, no doubt part of its Utopian idealization of the temple; cf. the possible allusion to the source of universal waters in Josephus Ant. 1.38–39 (perhaps even in Gen 2:10–14 ; cf. Diodorus Siculus 1.12.6; Pausanias 2.5.3). 6562 Gaston, Stone, 211; Hooke, «Spirit,» 377–78; cf. Freed, Quotations, 30; Coloe, Temple Symbolism, 132–33. Some naturally see baptismal associations here (Blenkinsopp, «Quenching,» 48; Cullmann, Worship, 82). 6563 Some commentators also note that κοιλα sometimes functions as the equivalent to καρδα in the LXX; elsewhere in John the term applies to the womb (3:4), which is also abdomina1. |
| 6397 Musonius Rufus opined that even the least educated could have virtue because valuing it is innate (2, p. 38.17–20). 6398 The partial repetition of sounds in τις θλη τ θλημα (7:17) evokes the love of various sorts of repetition in Greek rhetoric, such as anadiplosis (the second definition in Anderson, Glossary, 18), dilogia (idem, Rhetorical Theory, 228) and the most general sense of epanalepsis (Rowe, «Style,» 129–30), though none of these is exactly present here. 6399 Cf. also, e.g., R. Eleazar in b. Šabb. 88a. Rabbis also commonly acknowledged that Torah study instructed one how to carry out God " s will (e.g., " Abot R. Nat. 4 A; Num. Rab. 14:10). 6400 E.g.,Publilius Syrus 52. 6401 See m. «Abot 1:17; 3:9, 17; 5:14; Sipra Behuq. par. 2.264.1.4; Sipre Deut. 41.2.5–6; b. Qidd. 40b; p. Hag. 1:7, §4; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 12:10; Song Rab. 2:14, §5. According to one tradition, study of Torah equaled or exceeded the other commandments (see m. Péah 1:1; »Abot R. Nat. 40A; b. Qidd. 39b); some held that knowing without obeying led to judgment (Sipre Deut. 32.5.12; b. Sanh. 106b; Yoma 86a; Deut. Rab. 7:4; cf. Jas 1:22). 6402 The inseparability of learning and doing also appears in Greek sayings (Musonius Rufus frg. 16); cf. demands for appropriate behavior and the frequent combination of «word» and «deed» (cf. Wis 1:16; T. Ab. 9:4A; T. Gad 6:1; 1 John 3:18; Hom. Hymn 2, to Demeter, 65; Hesiod Op. 710; Apollonius of Rhodes 3.81; Pyth. Sent. 14; Isocrates Nic. 61, Or. 3.39; Seneca Ep. Luci1. 20.1–2; Diogenes Laertius 6.2.64; 6.3.82; Epictetus Diatr. 1.25.11; 2.9.13). 6403 In John 7 , see more fully Neyrey, «Trials and Tribulations.» 6404 «Not from Moses but from the ancestors» is parenthetical; for the rhetorical function of such constructions, see Rowe, «Style,» 147; Blass, Debrunner, and Funk, Grammar, §465; Black, «Oration at Olivet,» 87. 6405 Also Pancaro, Law, 138, citing 7:51. 6406 Meeks, Prophet-King, 47, citing Deut 18:18–22 ; cf. Deut 13 . 6407 It is historically likely; the pericope is attested from a Q as well as Markan source (see further comments in Keener, Matthew, 361–62). For ancient views of «demons,» see in more detail ibid., 283–86. |
|
|
