| 1316 Dualism can indeed be a gnostic trait, 1317 but it also occurs in earlier Hellenism, Zoroastrianism, and the ancient Near East. 1318 More importantly, it pervades Jewish thought, most clearly at Qumran, and ethical dualism is prominent in the Jewish wisdom tradition. 1319 (The Qumran scrolls share the same sort of ethical dualism that pervades the Fourth Gospel, except that the law is the dividing line of humanity for the Scrolls, whereas Jesus performs this function in the Gospe1.) 1320 Not only apocalyptic writing, where it is dominant, 1321 but even rabbinic haggadah 1322 employs the language of vertical dualism for moral dualism similar to John " s. In view of the moral dualism of the Scrolls and the vertical dualism of apocalyptic traditions, dualism can hardly be used as a certain indicator of Gnosticism. Such dualistic images naturally existed, sometimes in eschatological contexts, in Diaspora Christianity as in early Judaism (e.g., 2Cor 5:2 ; Gal 4:26 ; Jas 1:17; 3:17; Luke 1:78); the contrast is pervasive in Revelation (e.g., Rev 3:12; 5:13; 12:8–9), 1323 which we with many other scholars attribute to the Johannine community. The Gospel " s dualism, such as the contrast between «below» and «above,» the equivalent of «of this world» and «not of this world» (8:23), communicate a peculiarly Johannine message. In the language of twentieth-century theology, John " s God is «wholly other»; though he invades the world in Jesus Christ (3:17), the world is not like him (10:36), and those who are sanctified to be like him (17:17) are also not of the world (17:16–18). All people are born from and bear the nature of either God or the devil (1:13; 3:3–5; 8:44). John could adapt dualistic language widespread in his culture, but the use to which he puts it serves his critique of his opponents» religion: only religion born from the Spirit, deriving from God himself, can please God (3:5–6; 4:23–24; 6:63). 1324 Further, even if John were addressing docetic thought, this would not allow us to assume that he addresses what developed into second-century gnosticism. |
| 567 counting time periods is often termed “inclusive reckoning.” The best example is the period of Jesus’ death, from Friday afternoon to his resurrection on Sunday morning. Although, chronologically, this period was a little more than two nights and one day, Bible writers refer to it as “three days” (Matt. 27:63 Mark 10:34 The Watch Tower Society correctly applies it to mean “a portion of each of three days.” (Insight on the Scriptures, Vol. 1, p. 593) Another example is the period of the siege of Samaria, stated at 2 Kings 18:9 ninth year of Hoshea; yet the siege is said to have lasted for “three years.” For additional examples, see Edwin R. Thiele, The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings, new revised edition (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1983), p. 52, ftn. 12. 568 Prophecy of Daniel (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1949), pp. 5556; cf. pp. 26770. 570 Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings. New revised edition (Grand Rapids, Michigan: The Zondervan Corporation, 1983), pp. 205206. 571 of Chaldean Kings (London: The Trustees of the British Museum, 1961; first published in 1956), pp. 6367. See also Hayim Tadmor’s article “Chronology of the Last Kings of Judah” in Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Vol. XV (1956), p. 228. 572 EgyptianBabylonian Maelstrom” in Supplements to Vetus Testamentum, Vol. XXVIII (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1975), p. 125, ftn. 5. 574 Shall Know that I Am Jehovah’–How? (Brooklyn, N.Y.: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1971), pp. 285287, argues for a siege of eighteen months. 576 Dubberstein’s Babylonian Chronology, 1956), p. 13. The tablet is listed as No. 1054 in J. N. Strassmaier, Inschriften von Nabonidus, Konig von Babylon (Leipzig, 1889). 583 and Predictions of Eclipse Times by Early Astronomers (DordrechtBostonLondon: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2000), p. 98. C. B. F. Walker refers, for example, to the inaccurate magnitude reported for one the two eclipses in the text, “but,” he adds, “the Cambyses text is now understood to contain a series of predictions rather than observations.” – Walker in John Curtis (ed.), Mesopotamia in the Persian Period (London: The Trustees of the British Museum, 1997), p. 18. |
| 916 For inscriptional evidence, cf., e.g., Inscriptions, ed. Carmon, 84, §183; 85, §§184–85. The literary evidence is, of course, pervasive. On the Qumran scriptorium and an evaluation of scholarly discussion on the Qumran «school,» see Culpepper, School, 156–68. 921 Meeks, Prophet-King, 144, cites Justin Dial 52.3 and Josephus Ant. 4.218. Cf. Acts 3:24; and the late reference Lev. Rah. 10cited in Bowman, «Prophets,» 208. 922 E.g., CD 8.20–21 (Baruch, Jeremiahs scribe, is promoted by analogy to Elishás Gehazi); Mek. Pisha 1:150–153; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 16:4; cf. Sipre Num. 93.1.3 (Moses sharing the Spirit). 923 Cf. the early Christian prophetic groups suggested in Aune, Prophecy, 195–98, 207; Hill, Prophecy, 88, although the evidence offered for them (especially in Revelation) is tenuous. 924 Culpepper, School, 188. Kugel and Greer, Interpretation, 53, suggest instead a broader similarity of school-like settings for OT prophet- and wisdom-guilds, which is more probable. 926 Pseudepigraphic devices like unreliable narrators were much less common in antiquity than today (Kurz, Reading Luke-Acts, 169–70). 928 Culpepper, Anatomy, 47. Aristotle praised Homer for his restraint in generally narrating or speaking as others without speaking in his own person (Aristotle Poet. 24.13–14, 1460a). Aristotle probably would have objected to some of Johns asides! 933 Manson, Paul and John, 86, finds them mainly in 1:1–34, 3:22–4:42, 5:1–47, 6:22–71, 7:14–10:39, and 12:20–18:40; Bruce, Documents, 54, however, cites Driver as noting that Burney " s most cogent examples for Aramaic in the Fourth Gospel are in Jesus» speeches. 939 Aune, Environment, 34, 47. For a broader literary structure, cf., e.g., Tolmie, Farewell, 183 (much more convincingly than Westermann, John, 7,63–64). 940 See Tenney, John, 40–41 for a structure based on this recognition. Bruce, Message, 106, outlines the Fourth Gospel according to clues in the prologue, but this use of the prologue is questionable. For suspense in ancient rhetoric, see, e.g., Cicero Verr. 2.5.5.10–11. |
| 7239 L.A.B. 23:12; 30:5; 1 En. 89:16–24; 4Q266 18 5.13; Sipre Deut. 15.1.1; Exod Rab. 24:3; Pesiq. Rab. 9:2; 26:1/2. ( Sir 18:13 ; Philo Agriculture 50–53; and p. Ber. 2:7, §2 appear to be exceptions.) Early Christians applied the image to the church (Minear, Images, 84–87; Ladd, Theology 108); on the shepherd image in early Christianity, see Keener, «Shepherd,» 1091–93. 7240 Robinson, Studies, 71. It is doubtful that the image is one of replacement (as apparently in Pancaro, Law, 301)–rather, one of the faithful covenant remnant (cf. Barrett, John, 369). 7244 E.g., Ps 77:20 ; Isa 63:11; 1 En. 89:35; L.A.B. 19:3, 10; Sipre Deut. 305.3.1; p. Sanh. 10:1, §9; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 2:8; Exod. Rab. 2:2; Tg. Ps.-J. on Gen 40 (Moses, Aaron, and Miriam); possibly 1Q34 and 1Q34 bis, 3 2.8 (Wise, Scrolls, 186; fragmentary); see further Meeks, Prophet-King, 311–12 (esp. on Mek. Pisha 1 on Exod 12:1); Glasson, Moses, 95–96; Odeberg, Gospel, 315–17. R. Nehemiah understood Isa 63to mean that all Israelites became shepherds as Moses was (p. Sotah 5:4, §1). Moses» title may relate to his occupation (Exod 3:1), but it is hard to suppose (with Enz, «Exodus,» 213) that the good shepherd of John 10 recalls Exod 3:1. 7250 E.g., the Teacher of Righteousness at Qumran (Painter, John, 42). Derrett, «Shepherd,» 26–28, argues that John uses «shepherd» as teacher; God is their owner, he claims, not their shepherd. 7258 T. B. Qam. 7:2; b. B. Qam. 114b; Gen. Rab. 54:3; Derrett, «Shepherd,» 41; also Rhet. Alex. 11, 1430b. 16–19. The robbers (ληστα, Lat. latrones) generally lived off the countryside and traveled in bands (MacMullen, Enemies, 255). 7261 Thieves and wolves summarized the greatest collective dangers to flocks (Tibullus 1.1.33–34). 7263 Ibid., 123; cf. Ruth 3:7. Cf. the allegedly Jewish robbers (ληισ[ται]) in the Ptolemaic vineyard in CPJ 1:157–58, §21. 7266 Aulus Gellius 11.18; death in Xenophon Mem. 1.2.62 and Hamm. 21; those in collusion with them should receive the same penalty (Lysias Or. 29.11, §182). Even former thieves were permanently barred from speaking to public meetings (Seneca Controv. 10.6.intr.). |
| 4643 Goodman, State, 57–59. They could make profit by changing buying and selling rates (m. Seqa1. 4:2). 4644 Goodman, State, 57. For their necessity in view of the broader Mediterranean variety of coinage, see Finley, Economy, 167. 4647 See Engle, «Amphorisk,» 120. Others also think the aristocracy profited (cf. Reicke, Era, 168). 4649 This would continue in the eschatological temple (Zech 14:21; 4Q174,3.2–4). Similarly, because of their periodic impurities, women were always excluded from the court of Israel, though allowed past the outer court when they were not impure (Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.104). 4650 Falk, Jesus, 152–53, thinks the Shammaites controlled the temple and were reluctant to accept Gentiles» offerings. But though the Shammaites may have been the dominant school of Pharisaism in Jesus» day, they hardly controlled the temple! 4652 E.g., MacGregor, Pacifism, 19; Glasson, Advent, 149–50; in Mark, Matera, Kingship, 147. Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 67–68, doubts that concern for Gentiles was central enough in Jesus» ministry for this to be persuasive. 4653 For evidence, see Keener, Matthew, 500–501. Jesus» act recalled Jeremiah " s activity in the temple (Winkle, «Model»; cf. Aune, Prophecy, 136). 4655 On 2 Thess 2 see, e.g., my comments in Matthew, 565–66,574–76. That the later church would have grown more eschatologically oriented than Jesus is inherently unlikely, and that they would have invented 2 Thess 2:3–4 after 70, when the temple was already destroyed, is even less likely. 4656 E.g., Josephus War 6.300–309. See also T. Mos. 6:8–9, which is very likely pre-70, because only part of the temple is burned and the final tribulation follows almost immediately (7). The envisioned invasion may be 6 C.E. but probably stems from when more of Herod " s sons still held some power (6:7). See other examples in Keener, Matthew, 561–62. 4657 See Hill, Prophecy, 62–63; Aune, Prophecy, 174–75; further documentation in Keener, Matthew, 560–63. The tradition about a rabbi in Jesus» day fasting to prevent the templés destruction (Brown, John, 1:122) is probably too late and apocryphal to provide independent evidence. |
| 24 The biography of Gregory Palamas is known to us primarily through an Encomion composed by his friend and disciple, Philotheos Kokkinos, Patriarch of Constantinople, text in Migne, PG 151, cols. 551–656. For a complete account, see J. Meyendorff, A Study of Gregory Palamas (London and New York: Faith Press and St. Vladimir " s Seminary Press, 2nd ed., 1974), pp. 28113. 25 On this episode, the most recent study is A. Philippidis-Brat, «La captivité de Palamas chez les Turcs: dossier et commentaire», Travaux et mémoires, Centre de recherche d " histoire et civilisation byzantines 7 (Paris, 1979), pp. 109–221. 26 Cf. an attempt to date the death of Palamas as early as 1357 in H. V. Beyer, «Eine Chronologie der Lebensgeschichte des Nikophoros Gregoras», Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik 27 (Band, Wien, 1978) pp. 150–153. However, the argument for 1359 based on the very precise data given by the Encomion of Philotheos (Palamas died at 63 after twelve and a half years as bishop) carries more weight. 27 Ed. J. Meyendorff, Grégoire Palamas. Défense des saints hesychastes. Introduction, Texte critique, traduction et notes (Louvain, 2nd ed., 1973), I, pp. I-L; cf. also the series of my earlier studies reprinted in Byzantine Hesychasm: Historical, Theological and Social Problems (London: Variorum Reprints, 1974) and an updated chronology in R. E. Sinkewicz «A new interpretation for the first episode in the controversy between Barlaam the Calabrian and Gregory Palamas,» The Journal of Theological Studies, xxxi, 2, 1980, 489–500. 28 The complete edition of the theological writings of Palamas is in the process of completion by P. Chrestou (cf. Palama Syngrammata, Thessaloniki, vol. 1, 1962; vol. 2, 1966; vol. 3, 1970). In references below, the title of this edition is abbrieviated as P.S. 29 There is abundant recent publication on this subject by authors adopting different and sometimes contradictory points of view; see, for example, I. P. Medvedev, Vizantiisky Gumanizm 14–15, 20 (Leningrad, 1976); G. Podskalsky, Theologie und |
| 109 For criteria for genre, see Gospels, 109–27; for pre-Christian Greco-Roman biographies, 128–53; for later ones, 154–90. 112 Burridge, Gospels, 149–52,185–88. For the divergence, see further Barr and Wentling, «Conventions,» 81–88, although I would not regard all their examples as biographies. 113 For substantial overlap between the biography and history (as well as other) genres in antiquity, see Burridge, Gospels, 63–67. 118 Cf., e.g., the accidental repetition in Plutarch Alex. 37.4; 56.1. This contrasts with the more chronological practice of historians (e.g., Thucydides 2.1.1; 5.26.1), although even most historians tended to follow events to their conclusion and not simply strict chronology (Dionysius of Halicarnassus Thucyd. 9; Letter to Gnaeus Pompeius 3). 119 For examples, see Aune, Environment, 34,63–64 (e.g., the lives of Aesop, Homer, Secundus, and Herakles); cf. ibid., 82. 120 Aune, Environment, 31–32. Disordered chronology was not problematic to ancient readers; thus the writer of 4 Maccabees is aware that the mother " s speech should occur at a certain point in his narrative, and says so (12:7; cf. 2Macc 7), but chooses to recount it later. Cf. the four categories of ancient biography in Ferguson, Backgrounds, 307. 121 Stanton argues that our only actual example of a purely Peripateic biography is not chronological (Stanton, Jesus, 119–21). He contends that, of extant biographies, only Tacitus " s Agricola is genuinely chronologica1. Topical arrangement suited episodic narratives about a person (Hemer, Acts, 74). Although historical writing and thus biography (Suetonius, Plutarch, Life of Aesop, etc.) involved some chronology, it was not the most significant feature of any kind of ancient biography. 123 An aged person might recall many events provided he were permitted to recite them randomly rather than in order (Seneca Controv. 1.pref.4). 124 Stanton, Jesus, 125; idem, Gospel Truth, 139; Burridge, Gospels, 205, 208; in John, see Burridge, Gospels, 229–30. Characterization is in fact central in ancient biographies (Fornara, Nature of History, 185). |
| Interestingly, while some moralists of Jesus» day opined that it was good to allow some of one day " s provision to remain over for another day, 6015 manna was not supposed to be left over for the next day (Exod 16:19–20), because God would continue his miraculous supply as long as Israel remained in the wilderness. As in the Synoptics, Jesus offers this sign on a special occasion of need rather than desiring disciples to depend on it continually (6:26)– just as the manna stopped once natural means of providing food became available (Exod 16:35; Josh 5:12). 6016 Thus Jesus instructs the disciples to gather the food that remains, to be used later (6:12). Although miserliness was regularly condemned, 6017 ancient moralists regularly exhorted against waste and squandering, preferring frugality; this was both a Jewish view 6018 and a broader Mediterranean one. 6019 The ideal was frugality coupled with generosity toward others. 6020 Jewish teachers even instructed passersby to pick up food lying beside the roadside, which could be given to Gentiles for whom it would not prove unclean. 6021 One could argue that the bread symbolizes God " s people, on the basis of the number twelve, the term «lost» (6:12; cf. 6:27, 39 in the ensuing discourse), or other terms here like «gathering.» 6022 But the following discourse plainly applies the symbol of bread to Christ alone (6:32–35, 41, 48, 50–51, 58). That the disciples filled twelve baskets (6:13) simply underlines afresh the abundance of the miracle; there is no need to allegorize the baskets. 6023 Twelve is the maximum number that these disciples could reasonably carry. Guests who slipped out with leftover food in their baskets could be thought to be greedy, stealing the host " s food, or at best ill-mannered; remains belonged to the host. 6024 4. The Prophet-King (6:14–15) The narrative proper includes a christological climax (6:14–15), but the inadequacy of the confession will pave the way for the contrast between the Spirit and mere flesh in 6:63. Jesus» identity did include being a prophet (1:21, 25; 4:19,44; 7:40; 9:17) and a king (1:49; 12:13–15; 18:33,37), but such titles necessarily proved inadequate for him. Those who defined his prophetic and royal identity by the eschatological beliefs of their contemporaries sought a political or military leader (see introduction on Christology)–a fleshly role rather than one from the Spirit (6:63). In John " s day the emperor cult demanded earthly worship (see introduction); Jesus was a higher sort of king (cf. Rev 5:13). But in contrast to the response to Jesus in Judea, the Galilean response, which affirms him to be a prophet and a king, is at least partly correct (cf. Mark 8:29–33 ). 6025 In Galilee he is not altogether a «prophet without honor» (4:44). |
| 3285 Griffiths, «Predicate,» 315. For the more complex situation in Josephus, cf. Shutt, «Concept.» 3287 E.g., Dreams 1.65–66 (recognizing both as «god»); 1.239–240 (the Logos is to God what the parhelion is to the sun). MacGregor, John, xxxvi, acknowledges that Philo personalized the Logos, but thinks it functioned as a divine agent only figuratively. 3288 Dreams 1.228–230, in Hengel, Son, 80; Bury, Logos-Doctrine, 27; Haenchen, John, 1:109; cf. Borgen, «Agent,» 146. 3289 Cf. the practical divinity of Torah–experienced as God " s presence by Israel–in Sandmel, Judaism, 184. Justin likewise distinguishes the Logos from God while calling him God (e.g., 1 Apo1. 63, in Osborn, Justin, 30–31). 3290 Like Michaels, John, 7, we are inclined to accept both reasons for the lack of definite article, without determining which was decisive. 3291 Stuart, «Examination,» 41. Cf. similarly Bernard, John, 1:2; Ellis, John, 21; Brown, Christology, 187–88; perhaps this is also what Painter, John, 57, intends. 3292 Hoskyns, Gospel, 141, contends that John means more than «divine» because the Word is personal; while John " s usage elsewhere indicates a stronger sense of «divine» than many uses (e.g., Philós for Moses), Hoskyns " s argument need not follow logically, especially given Philós Logos. 3293 MacGregor, John, 4. Kenney, John 1:1 , argues that a trinitarian perspective makes more sense of the text than a unitarian one. For Jesus to be fully deity without all deity being identified with Jesus, geometric logic would represent Jesus as a member of the set «God.» 3294 See, e.g., Miller, " Logos»; Bultmann, John, 33; Fennema, «Only Son»; Harner, «Nouns,» 86–87; Griffiths, «Predicate,» 315; Harris, Jesus as God, 51–71,293. 3296 NEB; Bruce, Books, 247. An explanatory note may be needed on whichever side of caution one wishes to err; Harris, Jesus as God, 70, prefers to retain «the Word was God» but to explain that this means the same nature, not the same person. 3297 Irenaeus Haer. 1.1–3. On creation through angelic powers in gnosticism, see «The Apocryphon of John,» NHL 104–16; «On the Origin of the World,» NHL 161–79; Jonas, Religion, 132–36; cf. «The Gospel of the Egyptians,» NHL 195–205. Perhaps the emphasis on God " s creation of evil in Gk. Apoc. Ezra 2:9 may be antignostic. |
| 1004 By contrast, the Odyssey, which cannot imply an omniscient narrator since the narrator is Odysseus, must supply other knowledge to Odysseus through conversations with the gods to remain plausible (e.g., Homer Od. 12.389–390). 1005 Hillman, «Statements.» For historians» asides (e.g., Polybius 1.35.1–10; Diodorus Siculus 31.10.2; Dionysius of Halicarnassus RA. 7.65.2), see the discussion of Greco-Roman biography and history under the discussion of genre in ch. 1 of the introduction. 1007 The phenomenon spans many cultures; Nagy, «Prologue,» xxxiii-xxxiv, cites a ninth-century Irish epic supposedly recounted to the poet by the deceased hero Fergus. 1008 Isaacs, «Spirit» 406; Boring, Sayings, 85–86. Even ecstatic prophecy could be didactic, of course (Aune, Prophecy, 63, following Nock on didactic oracles). 1010 Käsemann, Testament, 46, is correct that the Spirit is bound to Jesus» word in John. This might suggest that the Paraclete sayings already have in view the schismatics which appear in 1 John. The Spirit-Paraclete may have authenticated the leadership of the Johannine community (Smith, Johannine Christianity, 185); he certainly authenticated their message (1 John 4). 1018 E.g., Johnston, Spirit-Paraclete, 75–78, thinks that the writer of the Gospel may have drawn on 1 John while composing the Gospe1. Russell " s proposal of 1 John as an introduction to the Johannine literature («Mysteries,» 343) is based on a fanciful parallel with initiation into the Mysteries. More reasonably, Schnelle, Christology, 228, dates John later because he thinks its antidocetic polemic more developed. 1020 E.g., Segovia, Relationships, 21 (citing also Georg Richter and Hartwig Thyen; Jürgen Becker, and R. Schnackenburg). 1023 Ibid., 122, citing John 1:29 . John does not, however, stress Jesus» baptism as a point of revelation, as Brown suggests (p. 119); John omits any reference to Jesus» baptism (1:32–33), probably purposely (cf. Theon Progymn. 5.52–56 on the propriety of narrating more concisely or adding details as necessary). |
|
|
