| 451 Asyndeton also characterizes John " s style (Stamps, «Johannine Writings,» 620, lists 1:40,42, 45; 2:17; 4:6, 7; 5:12, 15; 7:32; 8:27; 9:13; 10:21, 22; 11:35, 44; 20:18); on this style, see Rhet. ad Herenn. 4.30.41; Quintilian 9.3.50; Rowe, «Style,» 136 (including Augustine Serm. 191.19.5); Lee, «Translations of OT,» 779–80 (LXX Job 3:17; 5:10 ; Isa 1:23); Anderson, Glossary, 33–34; also in Rhet. Alex. 36.1442a.l 1–14. 452 In a more technical sense, κακοφανα is «ill-sounding word order» (Anderson, Rhetorical Theory 187). 453 E.g., Kreitzer, John, 5. Other Platonists, however, might find «myth» the best vehicle for allegorical truth (see Maximus of Tyre Or. 4.5–6). 459 MacRae, Invitation, 16, says that whether or not John used the Synoptics, no one doubts that John reinterprets the Jesus tradition. 461 Lindars, John,31. Brodie, Quest, 153–55, emphasizes John " s move from his historical sources to interpretation. 467 Appian R.H. 11.7.41 is skeptical of Platós accuracy (but paradoxically takes the Iliad more seriously, R.H. 12.1.1). Cf. also the quite different portrayal of Musonius Rufus in the collections of Lucius and Pollio (Lutz, «Musonius,» 12–13). 469 Deuteronomy was one of the most popular books, perhaps the most popular book, among early Jewish interpreters, if incidence at Qumran supplies a clue (Cross, Library, 43). Westermann, John, 22–23,67, likewise compares the contrast between the interpretive speeches of Deuteronomy and Joshua, on the one hand, with Exodus and Numbers, on the other; Stuhlmacher, «Theme,» 15, compares John " s use of Jesus tradition with Jubilees or 11QT «updating» the Pentateuch. 470 As rewritings of Deuteronomy, Ashton, Understanding, 472, mentions Jub. 1; L.A.B. 19; 1Q22; Testament of Moses. 11QTemple may function as an eschatological Deuteronomy (Wise, «Vision»); at least 1 lQTemple 51.11–66.11 adapts and often paraphrases Deut (Schiffman, «Paraphrase»). 471 For Moses parallels, see, e.g., Teeple, Prophet; Glasson, Moses; Herlong, «Covenant»; Lacomara, «Deuteronomy»; Ashton, Understanding, 472–76. In this Gospel, however, it is Jesus» disciples who are most analogous with Moses, and Jesus as God " s glory (1:14). |
| 3:8 - Hudaýy Ogly — Köne Ähtde bu at patyalar üçin ulanylýardy. Täze Ähtde bolsa bu at Hudaý tarapyndan saýlanyp-seçilen diýmegi aladýar. Sözlüge seret. 5:8 - Käbir golýazmalarda 7-nji we 8-nji aýatlar eýle görnüde gelýär: 7 eýle, Gökde güwälik berýän üçdür: Ata, Söz we Mukaddes Ruh. Bulary üçüsi hem birdir. 8 Ýerde güwälik berýän üçdür: Ruh, suw we gan. Bulary üçüsi hem birdir . 5:18 - Hudaýy Ogly olary goraýandyr — bu jümle käbir golýazmalarda Hudaýy perzendi özüni saklaýandyr diýip du gelýär. 5:21 - Käbir golýazmalarda Omyn diýen söz hem bar. 1:13 - Käbir golýazmalarda Omyn diýen söz hem bar. 1:1 - Söýlüp — käbir golýazmalarda päklenip . 1:3 - Hudaýy Ogly — Köne Ähtde bu at patyalar üçin ulanylýardy. Täze Ähtde bolsa bu at Hudaý tarapyndan saýlanyp-seçilen diýmegi aladýar. Sözlüge seret. 1:29 - Käbir golýazmalarda zynadan diýen söz hem bar. 8:1 - Käbir golýazmalarda ynsan tebigatyna görä däl-de, Mukaddes Ruha görä ýaaýanlar diýen jümle hem bar. 8:15 - Abba — arameýçe bu söz Atam diýmegi aladýar. 9:28 - Käbir golýazmalarda 28-nji aýat eýle görnüde gelýär: Reb Öz çykaran hökümini tizara we gutarnykly dogrulyk bilen ýerine ýetirer, çünki Ol iini ýer ýüzünde tiz amala ayrar. 11:6 - Käbir golýazmalarda Eger ynsan ilerine görä saýlanan bolsadylar, onda bu eýýäm merhemet-de däldir, ýogsa i eýýäm i bolmazdy diýen jümle hem bar. 13:9 - Käbir golýazmalarda ýalan aýatlyk etme diýen jümle hem bar. 14:10 - Hudaýy — käbir golýazmalarda Mesihi. 14:23 - Käbir golýazmalary u babynda 24-nji aýatdan 26-njy aýada çenli hem bar. Beýleki golýazmalarda olar 16-njy bap 25-nji aýatdan 27-nji aýatlara çenli du gelýär. 16:3 - Priska — bu Priskillany beýleki ady. 16:23 - Käbir golýazmalarda 24-nji aýat du gelýär: Rebbimiz Isa Mesihi merhemeti sizi ähliize ýar bolsun! Omyn!. 16:27 - 25 — 27-nji aýatlar käbir golýazmalarda ýok. Olar beýleki golýazmalarda 14-nji bap 23-nji aýatdan so gelýär. 1:12 - Petrus — grekçe Kepas , bu Petrusy beýleki ady. 2:13 - Biz ruhy hakykaty ruhy sözler bilen düündirýäris — ýa-da Biz ruhy zatlary Ruha eýerýän adamlara düündirýäris . |
| 11:7 - Goýun söwdagärlerini hatyrasyna — bu jümle käbir golýazmalarda esasanam, jebir gören sürä diýip du gelýär. 2:15 - Tutu kalby… isleýär? — ýa-da Onda ajaýyp ruh bolsun diýip, ony bir edip ýaratmanmydy? Näme üçin bir edip? . 2:16 - Men aýrylyan… salaryn — ýa-da Aýrylyyp, zulum edýäni ýigrenýärin . 4:4 - Horep dagy — bu Sinaý dagyny beýleki ady. 1:16 - Mesih — ýewreýler bu sözi Hudaý tarapyndan wada berlen Patya babatynda ulanýarlar. Sözlüge seret. 1:21 - Isa — bu söz Reb halas edýär diýmegi aladýar. 1:25 - Ogluny — käbir golýazmalarda nowbahar ogluny . 2:11 - Mür — atyr ýasamakda we merhumy jaýlamakda ulanylan ýakymly ysly ösümlik. Sözlüge seret. 4:3 - Hudaýy Ogly — Köne Ähtde bu at patyalar üçin ulanylýardy. Täze Ähtde bolsa bu at Hudaý tarapyndan saýlanyp-seçilen diýmegi aladýar. Sözlüge seret. 4:25 - Dekapolis — Samariýa bilen Jeliläni gündogarynda ýerleen on äheri umumy ady. Sözlüge seret. 5:22 - Gaharlanan — käbir golýazmalarda hiç bir sebäpsiz gaharlanan . 5:22 - Raka — arameýçe bu söz bo kelle diýmegi aladýar. 5:44 - Käbir golýazmalarda Özüize gargaýanlar üçin ýagylyk dilä, özüizi ýigrenýänlere ýagylyk edi, özüizi ynjadýanlar, yzarlaýanlar üçin Hudaýa doga oka diýen jümle hem bar. 6:4 - Sizi sylagyyzy berer — käbir golýazmalarda sizi sylagyyzy aç-açan berer. 6-njy aýatda hem eýle. 6:13 - Käbir golýazmalarda Çünki patyalyk, gudrat we öhrat ebedilik Senikidir. Omyn! diýen jümle hem bar. 8:28 - Gadaralylar — käbir golýazmalarda gerasalylar. Seret: Luk 8:26; Mar 5:1. 9:8 - Gorky gaplap aldy — käbir golýazmalarda haýran galdy . 10:2-4 - Käbir golýazmalarda Taddeý lakamly Lewi. 10:25 - Beýelzebul — eýtany baga ady. Sözlüge seret. 11:2 - ägirtlerini — käbir golýazmalarda ägirtlerini ikisini . 11:23 - Eý, Kapernaum! Sen ara göterilerin öýdýärsimi? — bu jümle käbir golýazmalarda Eý, ara göterilen Kapernaum! diýip du gelýär. 15:5-6 - Käbir golýazmalarda atasyna ýa-da enesine . 16:18 - Petrus — bu söz gaýa diýmegi aladýar. 17:20 - Käbir golýazmalarda 21-nji aýat du gelýär: eýle arwah-jynlary agyz bekläp, Hudaýa doga-dileg etmekden baga hiç zat bilen çykaryp bolýan däldir. |
| 5182 Greek religion associated joy especially with Dionysus (Otto, Dionysus, 113,148), suggesting the importance of wine. 5183 Among philosophers, wisdom and virtue rather than bodily pleasure yielded happiness (Cicero Parad. 16–19; Leg. 1.23.60; Tusc. 5.7.19–20; Musonius Rufus 7, p. 58.13; 17 p. 108.7; Iamblichus V.P. 31.196; Seneca Ep. Luci1. 23; 27.3–4; 59.10; Benef. 7.2.3; Dia1. 7; Arius Didymus 6E; also Meeks, Moral World, 46–47; Lutz, «Musonius,» 28; Engberg-Pedersen, Paul and Stoics, 73). Self-knowledge also yielded full joy (Cicero Tusc. 5.25.70). 5184 Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.189; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 27:2; p. Pesah. 10:1. Joy also is associated with living according to wisdom (Wis 8:16); with prayer (Tob 13:1); with worship (Jub. 36:6; Jos. Asen. 3:4); and with living rightly (Let. Aris. 261). The Spirit appears with joy in p. Sukkah 5, cited in Montefiore and Loewe, Anthology, 203. See further comment under John 15:11 . 5185 It is not clear, but at least possible, that this alludes to a motif of eschatological joy (1QM 17.7; Tob 13:10, 13–14; Jub. 23:30; 1 En. 5:7; 25:6; 47:4; 103:3; Pss. So1. 11:3; Sib. Or. 3.619; 2 Bar. 14:13; cf. CIJ 1:472, §656; Sipra Sh. M.D. 99.2.2; cf. t. Sotah 15:10–15 in Anderson, «Joy»); the connection is explicitly with resurrection in T. Jud. 25:4, where it is also contrasted with sorrow (cf. John 16:20 ). But recognizing that Jesus was alive and had provided resurrection life in the present would undoubtedly have gratified the disciples with or without eschatological contemplations! 5187 Loader, «Structure,» thinks it contains the central structure of the Gospel " s Christology. The proposed allusions to Isa 26:12–21 (Hanson, Gospel, 50–54) do not appear persuasive to me. 5188 Michaels, John, 49, comparing 3:13–21 as a reflection on 3:1–12; cf. Smith, John (1999), 102. 3:31–36 may summarize John " s message in the way 12:44–50 does Jesus». 5189 Cf. Ridderbos, John, 148–49, for a list of contacts between this passage and the Nicodemus story. The theological exposition of 3:31–36 parallels that of 3:16–21 (Smith, John 106, thinks both are the evangelist " s comments). |
| 10505 The term κεται was common for lying in a tomb; to merely sample some Roman Jewish inscriptions, see, e.g., CIJ 1:8, §4; 1:12, §§6–7; 1:14, §§10–11; 1:15, §§12–13; 1:16, §§14–15; 1:17, §17; 1:19, §20; 1:21, §23; 1:23, §28; 1:24, §30; 1:26, §35; 1:30, §42; 1:31, §45; 1:32, §§46–47; 1:35, §§51–52; 1:36, §53; 1:37, §§55–56; 1:38, §58; 1:39, §§62–63; 1:49, §78; 1:52, §79; 1:56, §81; 1:60, §86; 1:62, §88; 1:66, §93; 1:69, §97; 1:70, §§99–100; 1:74, §105. 10506 Winandy, «Vestiges,» suggests this connection helps explain the beloved disciplés faith (20:8). 10507 Marsh, John, 634; Beasley-Murray, John, 372; cf. Osborne, «Napkin,» who suggests that Lazarus was still subject to death (cf. the «veil» of Isa 25in light of 25and later rabbinic tradition) but Jesus was not. 10508 Hunter, John, 184, arguing (undoubtedly correctly–cf. 20:19–but for the wrong reason) that Jesus» transformed body passed through his grave clothes (cf. also Salvoni, «Proof»). 10509 Hunter, John, 184. Sanders, John, 420, argues that the point is that they are «laid out in an orderly manner,» not that Jesus» body passed directly through the clothes. 10510 E.g., Gen. Rah. 100(though R. Judah disagrees). Cf. 1Cor 15:35–38, 53–54 . 10511 Schneiders, «Veil,» 96. Robert, «Suaire,» makes a similar argument from the Aramaic Targumim; but such an argument could at most address John " s traditions, not his present Greek text. 10512 Σουδριον is not specifically technical, appearing among «toilet articles» listed in a dowry (Deissmann, Studies, 223), but appears nowhere in the LXX. 10513 Whitacre, John, 473. For a description of the tomb in the early Middle Ages by a pilgrim reported in Bede Homilies on the Gospels 2.10, see comment on 19:38–42. 10514 Sloyan, John, 222. 10515 Cf. Koester, Symbolism, 36; Ellis, Genius, 8. 10516 The plural in her claim in 20may reflect a plural in John " s source (Kysar, John, 296, comparing Mark 16:1 ). 10517 Beasley-Murray, John, 372. 10518 Bruce, John, 385. 10519 Historians often reconstructed what was most probable on the basis of information they did have, including a person " s characteristic behavior. But it is noteworthy that the later apocryphal gospels usually fit the Synoptic tradition less wel1. |
| 3986 Cf. Gen 26:24 ; Exod 32:13; Deut 9:27 ; Ps 105:6 ; 2Macc 1:2; Jub. 31:25; 45:3; T. Ab. 9:4A; 2 Bar. 4:4; " Abot R. Nat. 43, §121 B. 3987 Lev 25:42, 55 ; Deut 32:43 ; Isa 41:8–9; 42:1,19; 43:10; 44:1–2,21; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3; Jer 30:10; 46:27–28 ; Ezek 28:25; 37:25; 2 Bar. 44:4; t. B. Qam. 7:5; " Abot R. Nat. 43, §121 B; Gen. Rab. 96 NV; p. Qidd. 1:2, §24; cf. Tob 4MSS. 3988 Inscription in Grant, Religion, 122; Martin, Slavery, xiv-xvi (citing Sophocles Oed. tyr. 410; Plato Phaedo 85B; Apuleius Metam. 11.15; inscriptions), 46,49 (against, e.g., Beare, Philippians, 50); cf. Rom 1 (cf. Minear, Images, 156). Slaves of rulers exercised high status (e.g., Epictetus Diatr. 1.19.19; 4.7.23; inscriptions in Sherk, Empire, 89–90; Deissmann, Light, 325ff., passim; P.Oxy. 3312.99–100 in Horsley, Documents, 3:7–9; Suetonius Gramm. 21 [in Dixon, Mother, 19]; cf. Chariton 5.2.2). 3989 E.g., Anderson, Mark, 72–73; Taylor, Mark, 157. 3990 Kraeling, John, 53–54 points to «the thong of whose sandals I am not fit to loose» as the most primitive form (enumerating variations therefrom on p. 198 n. 13). Matthew " s form probably reflects his penchant for abridgement (Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary, 106; Manson, Sayings, 40, instead suggests «a single Aramaic verb» behind both). 3991 Daube, Judaism, 266, citing Mek. on Exod 21:2; Sipre Num 15:41; b. Qidd. 22b; see also Urbach, Sages, 1(citing Sipre Šelah §115 and comparing Sipre Zuta 190). 3992 On Mark " s editorial subordination of the Baptist, see Trocmé, Formation, 55 (although Mark " s condensation of Q material attested in Matt 3 and Luke 3 probably reflects standard abridgement for an introduction). 3993 Against Kraeling, John, 130 (cf. 159), who doubts Matt 11:2–6 par. (to which we would respond, if this material were anti-Baptist polemic, why would Q include Matt 11:7–15 par.?). Conversely, Mason, Josephus and NT, 159, thinks Matt 11:2–6/Luke 7:18–23, «read by itself… implies the beginning of Johns interest» rather than doubting a previous position; but any datum read «by itself» may contradict other data in an account. Both accounts reflect Q material, and the Baptist " s christological testimony may be multiply attested. |
| 2216 Gager, Anti-Semitism, 107–10; Arnold, Ephesians, 31–32; Goodenough, Symbols, 12:58–63; Hengel, Judaism, 1:241; Gaster, Studies, 1:356–60; even Moses came to be associated with magic (Apuleius Apologia in Stern, Authors, 2:201–5; Gager, Moses, 134–61). Jewish magic influenced Greco-Roman magic (cf. Deissmann, Studies, 277–300,321–36; Knox, Gentiles, 208–11; Koester, Introduction, 1:380–81). Among modern Yemenite Jews, cf. Hes, «Mon,» passim. 2217 Cf., e.g., Text 20.11–12 (Isbell, Bowls, 65); 69.6–7 (150); Pr. Jos. 9–12; T. Sol 18:15–16; b. Git. 68a; Num. Rab. 16:24; Isbell, «Story,» 13; Nock, Conversion, 62–63; MacMullen, Enemies, 103; Tiede, Figure, 170. The name of Israel " s God (in various permutations) outnumbers any other deity in the papyri «by more than three to one» (Smith, Magician, 69); cf. also, e.g., CIJ 1:485, §673; 1:490, §679; 1:517, §717; 1:523, §724; 2:62–65, §819; 2:90–91, §849; 2:92, §851; 2:217, §1168. 2218 On name invocation in general (some references including secret names), see Apuleius Metam. 2.28; Theissen, Stories, 64 (citing Lucian Menippus 9; Philops. 12; Plin. Nat. 28.4.6; PGM 4.1609–1611; 8.20–21); Twelftree, «ΕΚΒΑΛΛΩ,» 376. 2219 M. Sanh. 7:11; p. Hag. 2:2, §5; Roš Haš. 3:8, §1; Sanh. 7:13, §2; Urbach, Sages, 1:97–100, 572: Bietenhard, «νομα,» 270. Note also Wis 17:7; Ps.-Phoc. 149; 1 En. 65(Sim.); Asc. Isa. 2:5; 2 Βαr. 60:2; 66:2; T. Reu. 4:9; cf. Sib. Or. 1.96. The rabbis recognized that not all sorcery was genuine (m. Sanh. 7:11; Sipra Qed. pq. 6.203.2.2; b. Sanh. 67b), although Amoraim stressed the dangers more (e.g., b. Hor. 10a; Sanh. 67b; Šabb. 66b; p. Ketub. 1:1, §2; cf. the amulets and charms in Goodenough. Symbols, 2:153–295), but even when genuine, rabbis stressed its limits (e.g., Gen. Rab. 11:5; Pesiq. Rab. 23:8; 43:6). 2220 See Goldin, «Magic»; Neusner, Sat, 80–81; b. Sanh. 65b; 67b; cf. " Abot R. Nat. 25 A (on R. Eliezer ben Hyrcanus); Basser, «Interpretations.» Such syncretism was not intentional; apparently even Jacob employed pagan fertility rituals in Gen. 30:37–42 , though he trusted that God was the one working through them (31:8–9, 12; cf. 28:15). Cf. also some Jewish polemic in b. Git. 56b-57a which may be rooted in earlier magical tradition (Gero, «Polemic»). Many societies believe that magic can be used either for good or for evil (e.g., Mbiti, Religions, 258–59). |
| 4778 E.g., PGM 4.930–1114; 12.325–334; 77.1–5; Lucian Icaromenippus 1–2 (satirically); Lincoln, Paradise, 83; cf. shamanic journeys in other cultures, e.g., Rasmussen, «Journey.» 4779 One might argue that the lack of early attestation reflects the secret character of transmission (Séd, «Traditions secrètes,» following t. Hag. 2:2), but this only means we cannot verify their antiquity either way. Dimant and Strugnell, «Vision,» contend for early Merkabah revelations on the basis of 4Q385.4. 4781 Some argue that Jewish merkabah mysticism provided the framework for Paul " s experience (Bowker, «Visions»; cf. Kim, Origin, 252–53; contrast Schäfer, «Journey»); for a Jewish context including such rabbinic and apocalyptic sources, see Young, «Motif.» 4783 See particularly Meeks, Prophet-King, 298–99. Grese, «Born Again,» argues that John adapts the «heavenly journey» motif to entering the kingdom through Jesus. 4785 E.g., Epictetus Diatr. 1.30.1 (νωθεν); for vertical dualism, see, e.g., Epictetus Diatr. 1.9; Plutarch R.Q. 78, Mor. 282F. Sanders, John, 123, thinks John " s «from above» reflects a Hellenistic vertical dualism; but apocalyptic texts are full of vertical dualism (below); for that matter, the image is not foreign to unrelated cultures (e.g., Mbiti, Religions, 237). 4786 E.g., T. Ab. 7:7A; m. Roš Haš. 3:8. Using the term νωθεν in this sense, see, e.g., Sib. Or. 3.307; Philo Heir 64; Flight 137–138; Names 259–260. Many texts associate God with heaven (1 Esd 4:58; Tob 10:13; Jdt 6:19; 1Macc 3:18, 50,60; 4:24; 3Macc 7:6; 1 En. 83:9; 91:7; T. Ab. 2:3A; Philo Creation 82; Sib. Or. 1.158,165; 3.247, 286; 4.51). 4787 E.g., Ascen. Isa. 9:9; T. lud. 21:3; Gen. Rab. 38:6; Pesiq. Rab. 25:2. See especially in apocalyptic texts, most thoroughly in Lincoln, Paradise. 4788 E.g., 3 En. 28:9; b. Pesah. 54a; Gen. Rab. 51:3; Ecc1. Rab. 10:11, §1; Marmorstein, Names, 91. For «heaven» as a title for God, see Dan 4:26 ; Luke 15:18,21; Rom 1:18 ; 1 En. 6:2; 13:8; 1QM 12.5; 3Macc 4:21; m. «Abot 1:3,11; 2:2,12; t.B. Qam. 7:5; Sipra Behuq. pq. 6.267.2.1; Sipre Deut. 79.1.1; 96.2.2; »Abot R. Nat. 29 A; b. c Abod. Zar. 18a, bar.; Nid. 45a, bar.; Num. Rab. 7:5; 8:4; cf. probably Diodorus Siculus 40.3.4. On periphrasis, see Rhet. ad Herenn. 4.32.43; Rowe, «Style,» 127; Anderson, Glossary, 23,102. |
| Probably part of the ancient purpose of the water-drawing ritual was to secure rain; 6490 the feast after all directly precedes the rainy season. 6491 Rain was essential, 6492 and later Jewish tradition probably reports more widespread sentiment in expressing dependence on the divine miracle of rain. 6493 The covenant had promised rains if Israel obeyed it ( Lev 26:4 ; Deut 28:12 ), 6494 just as sin would produce drought ( Deut 28:48 ). 6495 Some Jewish teachers also regarded as particularly pious those who could persuade God to send rain. 6496 But some traditions made rain dependent on the temple service, 6497 and some connected rain specifically with the Feast of Tabernacles. 6498 Prayer for rain was an important tradition during this festival, 6499 and according to later tradition God made his decisions concerning rain during this festiva1. 6500 Some came to believe that the water libations at this feast brought on the rains. 6501 1B. The Meaning of the Water Wisdom offers herself as food and drink ( Sir 24:21 ), 6502 and offers to pour out her spirit on those who prove receptive ( Prov 1:23 ), 6503 which for early Christians might midrashically evoke also the promise of Joel 2:28–29 (Acts 2:17–18,33; 10:45; Rom 5:5 ; Tit 3:5–6 ). Later rabbis naturally identified Torah with water. 6504 Because the Spirit would continue the presence (14:17–18, 23) of the Word who became flesh (1:14–18), it is not surprising that John would portray the Spirit as water. 6505 But this portrayal actually has more precedent in the biblical prophets than does the later rabbinic emphasis on the Torah as water (see Isa 44:3; Ezek 36:25–27 ; Joel 2:28 ). 6506 Later Jewish sources also suggest that Jesus» image during this festival could have been intelligible, though ultimately those in the story world did not share the reader " s advantage of an explicit explanation (7:39). The water drawing at this festival was also identified with the Spirit of God, 6507 as commentators often note; 6508 the tradition is not later than the early third century C.E. 6509 Some could also attach the water drawing and Spirit connection with traditions about Jacob " s well based on Gen 29 (cf. John 4:12–14 ). 6510 These accounts are considerably later than John " s day, but what they help us affirm more confidently is that John " s point would have been adequately intelligible in an early Jewish milieu; they may also reflect earlier tradition. |
| The first person plural could refer to the world; certainly his tabernacling «among us» could be construed in that manner (1:10–11; cf. 12:35), though it is noteworthy that Jesus allows specifically disciples to begin to «dwell» with him (1:38–39; 14:23). Thus believers come to share the same intimacy the Word had with the Father (1:1–2). But «we» in «we beheld» (θεασμεθα), though not emphatic, probably signifies this intimacy only by analogy and points in the first case to a more specific, historical referent. «Behold» and its synonyms 3639 can apply both to seeing physically, which representatives of the world did (6:36; 15:24), and to seeing with eyes of faith (11:45; 14:7, 9; cf. 1 John 3:6; 3 John 11 ); but the latter is more likely here. Because Jesus revealed his glory in ways obscure to the elite but evident to the eyes of disciples (2:11; a continuing paradigm: 14:21–23), those who actually beheld his glory were those who came to believe him (11:40). The Johannine tradition also interprets the language with reference to the eyewitness of disciples (1 John 1:1–3), which fits the rest of this Gospel (19:35). Thus the most natural construal of the first person plural, if all source theories are held in suspension, is that John includes himself among the eyewitnesses. 3640 The eyewitnesses of the Words glory do not evoke the initiates of Hellenistic Mysteries, 3641 but Moses, who beheld God " s glory on Mount Sinai. 3642 (Greco-Roman myth reflects the notion that if the chief deity revealed his glory, a mortal who saw it would be consumed, 3643 and some ancient Israelite traditions reflect a similar conception. 3644 But Moses saw and was transformed, not consumed.) 3645 In other words, Jesus» eyewitnesses, including John, are mediators of a revelation greater than that of Moses but in a manner analogous to Moses; Paul depicts his own ministry in a similar manner in 2Cor. 3 ; 3646 the transfiguration in the Synoptics likewise alludes to this revelation, though as a single event. 3647 Although a connection between «light» and «glory» may not have been obvious to all ancient readers, it is quite possible that John alludes to his portrayal of Jesus as «light» (l:4–9). 3648 Those who could approach the prologue having heard the entire Gospel at least once would also think of others who saw the same glory Moses did, such as Isaiah in his vision in the temple (12:41; Isa 6:1–4). 3649 In this context, at any rate, «glory» especially alludes to the revelation of God to Moses in Exod 33–34, which could also be pictured as shining (cf. Exod 34:29). Whereas many commentators (such as Glasson and Teeple) compare Jesus in the Fourth Gospel with Moses, 3650 it is actually particularly his disciples who represent Moses, while Jesus parallels the glory that Moses witnessed on the mountain. 1D. The μονογενς Son (1:14,18) |
|
|
