| соединенную с Логосом человеческую природу ( Orig. In Gen. hom. 8. 9; In Lev. 1. 4; In Rom. comm. VII 10). На Кресте, по мысли О., страдают плоть Христа и Его душа (Contr. Cels. VII 17); именно «душа Христа» сходит в ад и освобождает находящихся там праведников (Disp. Heracl. 7). IV. Воскресение Христа. О. признает, что особое значение в домостроительстве спасения имеет воскресение Христа (Contr. Cels. II 54-69; Studer. 1978). Именно с воскресения, по мнению О., начинается то дело посредничества между Богом и людьми, к-рое исполняет воплощенный Логос в Церкви и к-рое будет завершено в момент Второго пришествия ( Orig. In Lev. 7. 2; Contr. Cels. II 65; In Rom. comm. VII 3-5). В воскресении Христа О. выделяет 3 аспекта: сошествие в ад для освобождения праведников (In Exod. hom. 5. 2; In Ioan. comm. I 31. 220; X 37. 243-253; In Matth. comm. XVI 8; In Rom. comm. V 1; Contr. Cels. II 43); явление ученикам для утверждения их во всякой истине; прославление всей человеческой природы (In Lev. 9. 5; In Luc. hom. 14; In Ioan. comm. VI 55. 284 - 57. 296; X 10. 45). О. особо отмечает, что в воскресении был прославлен не Логос (Он и соединенная с Ним «душа Христа» обладали славой Отца еще до воплощения), а Сын Человеческий, т. е. воспринятая Логосом человеческая природа (In Ioan. comm. XXXII 322). Причем имеется в виду обожение человеческой природы не только в Иисусе, как это было в момент Преображения (In Matth. comm. XII 29-43), но во всех представителях человеческого рода (Contr. Cels. III 28). V. Очищение, просвещение, прославление Церкви. В сотериологии О. делает особый акцент на действии Логоса как учителя и просветителя твари (Ibid. VI 68; De princip. IV 1. 2; In Matth. comm. XI 4; XII 16; XV 7; см.: Harl. 1958. P. 307-314). Бог никогда не оставляет Своего творения, но желает восстановить его в первоначальное состояние ( Orig. In Ier. hom. 18. 9; In Ezech. hom. 6. 7). Для устранения последствий греха Бог не только призывает человека к покаянию и аскетическому усилию, но и Сам входит в человеческую историю, посылая в мир Своего Сына, как «доброго самаритянина», Который должен помочь падшему человечеству (In Luc. |
| 5876 L.A.E. 51:1–2; 2 En. 33:1–2 J; Mek. Šabb. 1.38ff.; cf. T. Ab. 19:7A; 7:16B; Barn. 15.8; Bacchiocchi, «Typologies»; Johnston, «Sabbath»; perhaps (but probably not) Jub. 50:9. Some commentators cite this tradition here (Hunter, John, 56; Pancaro, Law, 508). 5877 This need not narrow down John " s audience; not only Palestinian but much of Diaspora Judaism seems to have accepted future eschatology (e.g., in Rome, CIJ Lcxxxix). 5878 E.g., 1 En. 103:4; probably Pss. So1. 3:12; see further Osborne, «Resurrection,» 931–33. Later rabbis provided exegetical defenses (e.g., Sipre Deut. 329.2.1; b. Pesah. 68a; Sanh. 90b); 2 Bar. 30places the resurrection at the Messiah " s coming, but the wording may suggest Christian influence. Even Philo affirmed future eschatology in terms of Israel " s restoration (Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 86, cites Philo Rewards 162–172). 5879 See Michaels, John, 75; Smith, John (1999), 138; Ridderbos, John, 199 (rightly questioning the interpolation view that denies any futurist eschatology in John). 5880 Cf. Tg. Ps.-J. on Exod 20:15/18 for God " s dead-reviving thunder at Sinai, and the earlier references cited by the commentators there. In Deut 4:33; 5:24,26 , Israel «lived» even though it heard God " s voice–at the giving of Torah. It is not clear whether John merely reflects such language unconsciously or whether he might engage in an implicit midrash; but the voice of the Lord also raises the dead in 1 Thess 4:16, a passage heavily imbued with Jesus tradition (see Marshall, Thessalonians, 130). 5881 Cf. Sanders, John, 168–69; Fenton, John, 72. 5882 By itself the phrase could imply simply being alive (animals have «in themselves» the breath of «life " –Gen 1LXX), but this is hardly what is meant here. 5883 Sib. Or. 1.20; 3.12; cf. Apoc. Ab. 17(«self-originate,» OTP 1:697); Sib. Or. 3.33 («the existing God,» τν εντα θεν). Also the Christian material in Sib. Or. 8.428 (ατογενητος) and Sent. Sext. 26 (self-moving). 5884 E.g., PGM 1.342–343 calls Apollo (1.298) the «elder-born, self-generating god» (Betz, Papyri, 12); 13.62; Boring et a1., Commentary, 240, cites Iamblichus On the Mysteries 8.2. The «great god» brought himself into being (Book of the Dead spell 17a, part S-2; see further Currid, Ancient Egypt, 36, 99–100). Cf. God " s self-existence in some African traditional religions (Mbiti, Religions, 42–43). |
| 3469 Ibid., 20–47, esp. 35–47 on witness for God in Isa 40–55 (cf. also Cothenet, «Témoignage»). On other Jewish texts, see 48–65 (Philo bridges the gap between the OT and Hellenistic use); in rabbinic literature, see 231–39. John " s usage is probably closest to that of Isaiah LXX (cf. Trites, Witness, 112; Caird, Revelation, 18; Boice, Witness, 16). 3470 Cf. Aune, Environment, 81, citing Herodotus Hist. 2.99; Polybius 12.27.1–6; 20.12.8; Lucian Hist. 47 (on autopsia, eyewitness knowledge). 3472 Casey, «Μρτυς,» 35; Franck, Revelation, 52 (on 15:26, though earlier he acknowledges a forensic context for παρκλητος). 3473 Meeks, Prophet-King, 65 (pointing to the parallel between μαρτυρα and κρσις in 8:14, 16); cf. Caird, Revelation, 18. Perhaps as early as Revelation, μρτυς began to take on a meaning it came to acquire more often in patristic literature: martyr (Morrice, «John,» 44; perhaps Abel who μαρτρησας in T. Ab. 11:2B). 3474 E.g., Trites, Witness, 78–127 (79–90 address John " s juridical character; 90–113 address the lawsuit of Jesus» ministry; 113–22 address the postresurrection lawsuit of John 13–17 ; on the Johannine Epistles, see 124–27; Trites " s conclusions are sound). Cf. Burge, Community, 204–5; Harvey, Tria1. John contrasts witness with faithless betrayal (cf. 5:15; 11:46,57; 12:4); the purpose of witness is to reveal the content of the testimony (2:25). 3477 See esp. 2Macc 3:36 (εξεμαρτρει… πσιν); Chariton 4.7.5 (πασιν ανθρπους; though cf. 7:6, where whole cities did come to meet her). 3478 The sense " from God» fits the genitive (cf. παρ θεν in Musonius Rufus 3, p. 38.27; παρ του θεο in Menander Rhetor 2.1–2,370.21–26=εκ θεν in 370.29–371.2) as well as the sending. 3482 See on 1:4–5, above. T. Levi 14declares that God gave the law to «enlighten every person»; the parallel is close, but could depend on John, given the heavy Christian redaction of T. Levi (Bernard, John, 1:13; Brown, John, 1:523; Longenecker, Christology, 12,146). 3485 The «genuine» light of 1contrasts them explicitly; cf. the application of «genuine» to God in the apologetic of Hellenistic Judaism (Best, Thessalonians, 82, cites LXX Exod 34:6; 2 Chr 15:3; Ps 86:15 ; Isa 65and mentions other sources). |
| 701 Plutarch Demosthenes 11.1 regards Demetrius as a reliable source because he learned the information from Demosthenes himself in his old age. 703 Streeter, Gospels, 425–26, doubts that John was an eyewitness because John depends on Mark and Luke (a thesis often disputed; see our discussion of the relation between John and the Synoptics). 704 Xenophon Hel1. 3.1.2 cites an account of the Greek mercenaries» escape from Persia, but, though aware of this source, later composed his own account (Anabasis). 706 Especially, though not exclusively, among many conservative and moderate scholars (some allowing for degrees of subsequent redaction), e.g., Carson, John; Bruce, John; Ellis, «Christology,» 1–6; Blomberg, «Reliable,» 30–37; Milne, Message, 17–19; Munn, «Introduction»; Silva Santos, «Autoria»; Watkins, John, 8–18; Wenham, «View»; tentatively, Temple, Core, viii. 707 E.g., Braun, Jean, 301–30; Munoz Léon, «Discipulo.» Barrett, John, 133, attributes all the canonical Johannine literature to disciples of the apostle; Schnackenburg also suggests dependence on Johannine tradition, while allowing that the «spokesperson who transmitted» and interpreted the tradition need not have been the apostle himself (John, 1:102). 712 So Malatesta, Inferiority, 83; Ellis, World, 13–17; Köstenberger, John, 22–24; Blomberg, Reliability, 26–31; cf. Smalley, John, 77; Nunn, Authorship, 99ff. 716 Beasley-Murray, John, lxxiii. One wonders how immediately the author intended the Gospel to circulate outside the Johannine circle of churches, but this is irrelevant to our case. 717 Rigato, «Apostolo,» and Winandy, «Disciple» both even allowing that the priest of Acts 4may be in view. 718 Admittedly πταλον could bear a specifically priestly sense (in Exod 28:36; 29:6; 39:3, 30; Lev 8:9 , five of its seven LXX uses), but its usage was much broader in Greek and probably simply contributes to the metaphor. It is also not impossible, though it is very unlikely, that Zebedee was of levitic descent; similar names appear among Levites (Neh 11:17; 1 Chr 26:2; 2 Chr 17:8; Ezra 10:20), but were hardly limited to them (Josh 7:1, 17–18; 1 Chr 8:19; 27:27). |
| 9165 While this discourse probably does date from the circles that produced 1 John, the π» ρχς is of itself inadequate to suggest the connection (pace the suggestion in Berg, «Pneumatology,» 171 n. 26). 9166 «Stumbling» refers to apostasy (see comment on 6:61). It is most frequent in Matthew and Mark but rare in Luke and John (probably not because of his Judean focus, as Swete, Discourse, 109, thinks). 9167 Apart from the conflict implied in 15:26–27, it appears to fit its context loosely; see comments above on the Paraclete sayings fitting their context. 9172 Philo Spec. Laws 1.54–55 (the interpretation is debatable); t. Sank. 11(although R. Eleazar ben Zadok " s view was a minority position; see m. Sanh. 8:7); 3Macc 7. 9174 Amoraic traditions speak of executing Jesus» disciples (e.g., b. Sanh. 43a, in Herford, Christianity, 90–95), but this may reflect rabbinic wish rather than fact. Martyn, Theology, 80–81, suggests that Ben Stada, said to be executed in rabbinic literature, was a Jewish-Christian rabbi rather than Jesus; but his evidence does not seem compelling. 9178 See, e.g., the discussion in Setzer, Responses, 172, including Justin " s claim that other peoples carried out the synagogue curses (Dia1. 96.2). 9179 See ÓNeal, «Delation»; corrupt leaders cultivated abuse of informers (e.g., Herodian 7.3.2; 7.6.4). 9180 Pliny Ep. 10.96–97; cf. Hemer, Letters, 67. Johnson, " Delatorum» suspects political reasons for the accusations, rooted in intraurban factionalism and city rivalries. 9181 Setzer, Responses, 114, doubts the specific claims of Mart. Po1. 17.2; 18.1. But such claims at the least reflect some early Christians» expectations concerning some leaders in the synagogue community. 9184 On the heavenly court, see, e.g., Keener, «Court»; it became dominant in Amoraic texts ( " Abot R. Nat. 32A; b. c Abod. Zar. 36a; B. Mesi c a 75a; 85b; 86a; Git. 68a; Mat 13b; Pesah. 53b; Sabb. 129b; p. Sanh. 1:1, §4; 11:5, §1; Gen. Rab. 49:2; 64:4; Exod. Rab. 12:4; 30:18; Lev. Rab. 11:8; 24:2; 29:1, 4; Num. Rab.3:4; 18:4; 19:3; Ruth Rab. 4:3,5; Ecc1. Rab. 1:11, §1; 2:12, §1; 5:11, §5; Song Rab. 3:11, §2; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 23:4; 24:11; Pesiq. Rab. 15:19). |
| 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. |
| 13) Решение одной инстанции не могло быть перевершаемо другой такой же инстанцией, но только высшей. 14) Подсудность тому или другому местному суду, определялась самим местопребыванием лиц, искавших суда. 15) Государственная власть, говоря в своих постановлениях о действиях духовного суда только повторяет и раскрывает в них требования прав и законов самой церкви. 1 В истории греческой, по законам византийского законодательства, к этой подсудности относились тяжебные дела христиан, если обе спорящие стороны хотели судиться судом епископским, некоторые дела гражданского и государственного управления; дела защиты лиц угнетаемых и убежища их в церкви; дела об освобождении рабов на свободу и дела общественной благотворительности (см. Just lib. 1 tit. 4 de Episcope antanta). В русском государстве круг этой подсудимости был еще шире. Она обнимала преступления против веры и нравственности христианской, тяжебные дела людей церковных дела и преступления семейные (см. статью Неволина о пространстве церковного суда в России до Петра Великого в 6 гл. полного собрания его сочинений). 11 Orig. oper. t. 1 pag. 171. Edit. Maur. Paris. 1733 г. Bomil 2 in Exod ch Duret. Gratiani. 15. стр. 17. 12 Drey, None Untersuhungen über die Constitutionen und Kanones der Apostel. Tubingen. 1832 г. Bickell, Geschichte des Kirchenrehts. Giessen 1813 г. В. I. Y. 52 – Phillips, Kirchenrehts. S. 167. Правос. обзор. об Апостольских постановлениях. Багоразумова. 17 Апост. Пост. кн. 2. гл. 16. стр. 34. гл. 28 стр. 59–60. гл. 42 стр. 72 по русск. перев. Казань. 1864 г. 24 Евсефий церв. ист. кн. 7. Гл. 30. стр. 411. Под именем тайной комнаты – σηκρυτον – secretum, secretarium разумеется место, где судьи рассматривали жалобы и полагали решения. Molitor, Uber Kanonisches Geriehtsveriahren gegen Kleriker стр. 24 прим. 3. Mainz. 1856. 25 В суде над тем же Павлом Самосагским главным его обвинителем был пресвитер Малхион, Евсеф. кн. 7. гл. 29. стр. 447–448. 27 На основании этого правила и развился посредствующий суд епископа jus arbitri, который не преследовался со стороны языческого правительства и положительно утвержден законами правительства Христианского. Cod. Theod. lib. 16, tit. 2. cest. 2. Cod. Just. lib. 1. tit. 4. Const. 7. 8, ch. Argost. Confesse. 6. 3. de орег. monoch. cap. 37. |
| 4379 Koester, Symbolism, 81. On the prominence of Dionysus in Ephesus, see Tilborg, Ephesus, 95–98. 4380 B. Ber. 5b; cf. Haenchen, John, 1:174, who rightly rejects Billerbeck " s parallel from Num. Rab. 16 (merchants showing poorer goods first). Bowman, Gospel, 208, connects this miracle with the Jewish prayers for fertility leading up to the feast. In some Jewish stories God still miraculously created food to help his servants (e.g., b. Ta c an. 24b-25a in Boring et a1., Commentary, 98). 4381 Cf. b. Šabb. 53b, where an Amora argues that while miracles often happen, the miracle of creation of food is rare. 4382 See Glasson, Moses, 26; Smith, «Typology,» 334–35; cf. Exod 7:19; Jub. 48:5; Rev 8:8; Job " s festal wine turned to blood in Tg. Job 2:11; a Stoic mentions a similar portent in Cicero Div. 1.43.98; cf. Virgil Aen. 4.453–463; Valerius Maximus 1.6.ext.l; Liv. Pro. 4.20 (ed.Schermann, §27); cf. esp. the contrast in Josephus Ant. 3.17, 38. John " s transformation of Exodus " s blood into wine need not imply a sacramental reading, but it may provide a clue that John at least could accept the interchange of blood and wine on a symbolic leve1. 4383 If the relatively isolated Philonic connection between ecstatic inspiration and intoxication (cf. Keener, Spirit, 24–25; Philo Creation 69–71; Drunkenness 146) may be read in here (cf. Acts 2:13; Eph 5:18 ), the Spirit of prophecy may also lie in the background; but there is no explicit indication that such is in view in our text. 4385 See Brown, John, 1:98; Derrett, Law, 235 n. 2; Mackowski, «Qanah,» 282–83; Riesner, «Fragen.» 4387 Mackowski, «Qanah,» 282. Although Roman and Byzantine pottery also appear at Kefar-Kenna, these do not seem to include remains from the first Roman period (Loffreda, «Scavi»). 4390 Weddings were normally seven days; cf. Tob 11:19; Jos. Asen. 21(OTP 2:236)/21(Greek); Sipra Behuq. pq. 5.266.1.7; b. Ketub. 8b; p. Meg. 4:4, §3; Ketub. 1:1, §6 (one pericope attributing the tradition to Moses!); probably Judg 14:17 ; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 28(a seven-day feast for the king " s son, to parallel Sukkoth); Lam. Rab. 1:7, §34. The fourteen days of Tob 8:19–20 was apparendy exceptional, a celebration due to Sarás deliverance. Cf. analogously seven days of mourning for the dead ( Sir 22:12 ). |
| 4581 John frequently mentions signs (2:11,18, 23; 3:2; 4:48, 54; 6:2,14, 26, 30; 7:31; 9:16; 10:4,41; 11:47; 12:18, 37; 20:30), sometimes in connection with seeing and believing (2:11, 23; 4:48; 6:30; 7:31; 11:15,45,47; 12:37). 4582 When Israel saw how God destroyed the Egyptians, they «believed» both the Lord and his servant Moses (Exod 14:31); this text probably also informs John " s Christology of one greater than Moses ( John 14:1 ). As mentioned above (see comment on 2:9), the passage may also suggest implications for discipleship in John " s situation outside the narrative world. If the Judean elite and local synagogue authorities represent the Fourth Gospel " s primary opposition (see introduction, ch. 5), it may not be surprising that, apart from the disciples, only the servants knew the source of the wine (2:9). Only those without power genuinely recognized the value of the signs attesting Jesus. 4583 The Old and New Temples (2:12–22) By setting aside the ritual purpose for which the waterpots were designated (2:6), Jesus began a road of conflict that would lead to his final «hour» of death (2:4). The next pericope expounds those implications for the passion more fully: Jesus» body must be destroyed before his resurrection, a sign and an event that will supersede the old temple order. 4584 Both Scripture and Jesus» teaching (2:17, 22) confirmed this truth before it happened (13:19; 14:29); the Spirit would later cause the believers to understand Jesus» warning in retrospect (14:29). 4585 Unlike the Synoptic accounts of Jesus» act in the temple, John emphasizes the contrasting responses of Jesus» opponents and disciples. 4586 Jesus» dialogue with Nicodemus will articulate even more explicitly this theme of new life replacing the old ways. 1. Transition (2:12) Technically, 2is a transitional paragraph between 2:1–11 and 2:13–22. It allows a geographical 4587 and chronological transition and provides necessary historical information about Jesus of Nazareth " s residence in Capernaum, explaining why tradition strongly identified him with both communities (cf. |
| 3411 Bar 4:2 ; 4Q511 frg. 1, lines 7–8; frg. 18, lines 7–8; CI] 1:409, §554 (Hebrew on a bronze lamp in Italy); L.A.B. 9:8; 11:1–2; 15:6; 19:4, 6; 23:10; 33end (legis lumine; MSS: legis lumen); 51:3; 2 Bar. 17:4; 18:1–2; 59:2; Sipre Num. 41.1.2; p. B. Mesi c a 2:5, §2; Hor. 3:1, §2; Sukkah 5:1, §7; Gen. Rab. 26:7; Pesiq. Rab. 8:5; 46:3; cf. L.A.B. 37(the «truth» from the bush illuminabatMoses); Sipre Deut. 343.7.1; Gen. Rab. 3:5; Exod. Rab. 36:3; Num. Rab. 14:10; Deut. Rab. 4:4; 7:3; Ecc1. Rab. 11:7, §1; Pesiq. Rab. 17:7. Torah also appears as fire (m. «Abot2:10; Sipre Deut. 343.11.1; »Abot R. Nat. 43, §121 B– Deut 33:2 ; b. Besah 25b–school of R. Ishmael; Ta c an. 7a; Pesiq. Rab Kah. Sup. 3:2; Jer 23:29 ; Song Rab. 5:11, §6; the Ten Commandments as lightnings in Tg. Neof. on Exod 20:2–3; Tg. Ps.-]. on Exod 20:2–3; Tg. Neof. on Deut 5:6–7 ) or summons heavenly fire (p. Hag. 2:1, §9; Song Rab. 1:10, §2), and specific commandments, such as the Sabbath, appear as light (Pesiq. Rab. 8:4). 3413 The «glory» in Exod 33is described as a «cloud» (34:5), which is depicted elsewhere in the context (33:9,10) in terms similar to the pillar of fire (13:21–22; 14:24; 40:38). 3414 See introduction for a brief treatment of this motif. «Life» occurs 36 times in John, 17 times in Revelation, 14 times in Romans, and 13 times in 1 John (Morris, John, 82). 3415 Although Wheldon, Spirit, 18, is not wrong to associate life with the Spirit in John (cf. 6:63), it is first of all associated with Christ. 3416 E.g., Wis 8:13,17; Sir 4:12; 17:11 ; cf. 1 En. 98:10,14; 2 Bar. 38:2. Greek writers could associate philosophy with living properly (Crates Ep. 6, to students; Cyn. Ep. 56–57–ζην). See also the biblical references in Painter, John, 49. 3417 Bar 3:9; 4:1–2 ; Pss. So1. 14:1–2; L.A.B. 23:10; 2 Bar. 38:2; m. «Abot 2:7 (Hillel: the more Torah, the more life, ; and later in the same text, «he who gains for himself words of Torah, gains for himself the life of the world to come,» ; b. »Abot6:7, bar.; «Abot R. Nat. 34 A (among other things); »Abot R. Nat. 35 B; Sipre Deut. 306.22.1; 336.1.1; b. Hag. 3b; Roš Haš. 18a; p. Ber. 2:2, §9; Exod. Rab. 41:1; Lev. Rab. 29:5; Num. Rab. 5:8; 10:1; 16:24; Deut. Rab. 7:1,3,9; Tg. Ecc1. 6:12. Cf. the tradition of souls departing or being restored at Sinai (usually of Torah bringing Israel life but disobedient nations death), e.g., b. Šabb. 88b; Exod. Rab. 5:9; Lev. Rab. 1:11; Deut. Rab. 1:6; Song Rab. 5:16, §3. The exact sense of Odes So1. 3is slightly more difficult to determine, but may refer to God as the life (cf. Gen. Rab. 1:5; 43:3; Num. Rab. 10:1). |
|
|
