| 7638 Tears often moved authorities to action (e.g., Lysias Or. 32.10, §505; Cicero Sest. 11.26; Caesar Gallic W. 1.20). On male authorities being particularly moved by women " s pleas in the ancient Mediterranean world, see Luke 18:2–5; 2Sam 14:1–21; 20:16–22; 1 Kgs 1:11–16; 2:17; Matt 20:20; P.Sakaon 36; Lysias Or. 32.11–18, §§506–511; perhaps Valerius Maximus 8.3; comment on 2:4. 7640 «Come and see» is a familiar invitation formula (see comment on 1:39) but, apart from Johannine style, probably bears no other relation to 1:39, 46 and 4:29. 7642 Jesus presumably weeps in 11because he «shares the sadness of his friends and their neighbors» (Smith, John 225). By ancient Mediterranean standards, mere tears were hardly wildly demonstrative (Virgil Aen. 11.148–150; cf. especially women, e.g., Homer Il. 18.30–31; Aeschylus Cho. 22–31, 423–428). Jewish mourners did not, however, participate in the more masochistic mourning rites of their pagan neighbors (e.g., Deut 14:1 ). 7643 Malina, Windows, 24–25, citing Plutarch Caesar 5.2; 11.3; 41.1; 48.2; Cicero 47.2; Acts 20:37; Lightfoot, Gospel, 229, cites Juvenal Sat. 15.132–133. Cf. also 2 Kgs 8:11–12; Homer I1. 1.348–349, 413; Od. 4.113–119; 16.190–191; 23.231–232; Sophocles Ajax 819–820; Philostratus Hrk. 45.6. Note amplification in Josephus " s hellenized accounts: Moses» prayer with tears for God " s vindication against Korah (Josephus Ant. 4.51); David " s prayers with tears during Absalom " s revolt (Josephus Ant. 7.203; 2Sam 15:23, 30 ). 7644 E.g., Livy 1.26.12; 23.8.4; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 9.10.1; for rhetoric, see, e.g., Lysias Or. 32.10, §505; Cicero Mi1. 38.105; Rosc. Amer. 9.24; Rab.post. 17.47; Gae1. 24.60; Sest. 11.26; Seneca Controv. 4.pref.6; Menander Rhetor 2.13, 423.30; Philostratus Vit. soph. 1.19.512; 2.1.561; 2.5.574; 2.9.582; 2.10.586; Acts 20:19. Narrators used tears to stir pathos (e.g., Xenophon Eph. 1.11); Polybius 2.56.7 complains about historians who sensationalize with tragic scenes of women " s tears invented to arouse pathos; John may deliberately evoke pathos here. |
| Similarly, that Matthew often abridges Markan accounts was no more problematic than the process of abridgement is today, and may have been welcomed. Greco-Roman writers and rhetoricians appreciated conciseness in a narrative, provided that it did not impair clarity or plausibility. 182 Expansion was sometimes due to the passage of time and consequent growth of tradition; 183 in other cases, long stories were sometimes continually abbreviated over time. 184 Both poets and prose writers sometimes added clauses nonessential to the meaning or removed essential ones simply to make the arrangement sound better (Dionysius of Halicarnassus Lit. Comp. 9). Inserting sayings from sayings-collections into narrative, or adding narratives to sayings, was considered a matter of arrangement, not a matter of fabrication. 185 One thing reminding the narrator of another was a common rhetorical technique for transition. 186 It seems to have been understood that sayings in collections were redacted, rather than recited verbatim. 187 Thus Phaedrus feels free to adapt Aesop for aesthetic reasons, meanwhile seeking to keep to the spirit of Aesop (Phaed. 2.pro1.8). And paraphrase of sayings– attempts to rephrase them without changing their meaning–was standard rhetorical practice, as evidenced by the school exercises in which it features prominently. 188 Such paraphrase provided a degree of rhetorical freedom, and in the case of familiar lines would prove more aesthetically appealing than verbatim repetition. 189 Thus even writers intending to write accurate history could «spice up» or «enhance» their narratives for literary, moralistic, and political purposes. 190 This is not to say that good historians fabricated events; but they did often alter or add explanatory details to events. 191 Authors differed among themselves as to how much variation in detail they permitted, but some writers who wanted to guard the historical enterprise from distortion had strong feelings about those who permitted too much. 192 Thus the second-century rhetorician Lucian objected to those historical writers who amplified and omitted merely for literary or encomiastic purposes (i.e., to make the character look better). 193 The earlier historian Polybius reports graphic bloodshed (15.33), but claims that, unlike some other writers, he avoids amplifying it for sensationalism (15.34); indeed, he savages another writer for sensationalism and excess accommodation of tragic conventions (2.56.1–11; with examples, 2.57.1–2.63.6). Diogenes Laertius often cites his sources, and does not fabricate material to produce symmetry in his accounts (for instance, while he cites letters from some ancient philosophers, he apparently has none to cite for others like Socrates, in contrast with some pseudonymous Cynic epistles attributed to Socrates). Often later biographers simply repeat what earlier biographers said (e.g., Dionysius of Halicarnassus Lysias 1). |
| 9006 Diodorus Siculus 17.31.6; 17.39.2; 17.100.1. For friends of Cassander, see Diodorus Siculus 18.55.1. 9008 Epictetus Diatr. 4.1.45–50; Martial Epigr. 5.19.15–16; Herodian 4.3.5; inscriptions in Deissmann, Light, 378; cf. Friedländer, Life, 1:70–82, 4:58–74. Of Jewish tetrarchs and rulers, only King Agrippa I adopted this title in his coins; see Meyshan, «Coins.» The probably late and fabricated evidence of CPJ2:71–72, § 156a, and 2:76, §156b, nevertheless reflect earlier custom. 9009 1Macc 10:20; 15:28, 32; 2Macc 7:24; Let. Aris. 40–41, 44, 190,208, 225, 228, 318; Josephus Ant. 12.366 (though cf. 12.391); 13.146, 225; Life 131; Cornelius Nepos 9 (Conon), 2.2; 18 (Eumenes), 1.6; Chariton 8.8.10; cf. Sipre Deut. 53.1.3; Gen. Rab. 34:9. Cf. perhaps Sib. Or. 3.756 (probably second-century B.C.E. Alexandria); Deissmann, Studies, 167–68. The Roman title «Friends of the People» reflects an office advocating for the people but of less rank than being a leader in the Senate (Cicero Sest. 49.105; Prov. cons. 16.38). 9011 See Sherwin-White, Society, 47; also many commentators (Brown, John, 2:879; Barrett, John, 543; Michaels, John, 309; Stauffer, Jesus, 133). By contrast, Westcott, John, 271, thinks that in 19the phrase is «used in a general and not in a technical sense.» 9012 Cf. Strachan, Fourth Gospel, 179. That a contrast between closeness to Caesar and closeness to God " s agent could be intended is not impossible; cf. Epictetus Diatr. 1.9.7. 9015 E.g., Lysias Or. 2.2, §192; Aeschines False Embassy 30, 39; Demosthenes On the Navy-Boards 5; On the Embassy 62; Ep. 3.27; Strabo Geog. 8.5.5; Josephus Ag. Ap. 1.109 (but cf. similar interests in 1.111); 2.83; cf. Rhet. ad Herenn. 3.3.4 (societates atque amicitias); Maximus of Tyre Or. 35.7–8; Philostratus Hrk. 35.4 (for individuals). 9016 E.g., Xenophon Cyr. 3.2.23; Arrian Alex. 1.28.1; 4.15.2, 5; 4.21.8; 7.15.4; Plutarch Comparison of Lycurgus and Numa 4.6; Plutarch Pelopidas 5.1, 29.4; Epameinondas 17 in Plutarch S.K., Mor. 193DE; Cornelius Nepos 7 (Alcibiades), 4.7; 5.3; 7.5; 14 (Datames), 8.5; 23 (Hannibal), 10.2; Josephus Life 30, 124. |
| 187 Cf., e.g., the redactional structure of m. " Abot 2:9, where Johanan ben Zakkai asks five disciples a question in positive form, commending the answer of the fifth; when he repeats the question in negative form, he receives mainly the same answers in negative form, and again commends the fifth. 188 Theon Progymn. 1.93–171; cf., e.g., Epictetus Diatr. 1.9.23–25 with Oldfather " s note referring to Plato Apo1. 29C, 28E (LCL 1:70–71). 189 Contrast tedious repetition in some earlier literature, e.g., Homer Il. 8.402–408, 416–422 (except the change from first to third person). 190 See esp. Lyons, Autobiography 29–32. Lyons advises reading such texts critically, not completely rejecting their historical value (p. 66). Vividness was important for rhetorical style (Cicero De or. 2.45.189; Dionysius of Halicarnassus Lysias 7), and some writers might add details to augment dramatic effect (Plutarch Alex. 70.3). 191 Aune, Environment, 82. Shuler, Genre, 50, cites Aristotle Rhet. 1.9.5 to the effect that it is appropriate to bestow praise on a man who has not actually done a given work, if his character is such that he would have done it. But this may imply praise for character or for already reported deeds consistent with that character rather than intentional fabrication of events. 192 Thus, for instance, Polybius criticized «tragic historians,» who «improperly combined fictional drama with factual history» (Aune, Environment, 84). Yet tragic elements, praised in poetry (Quintilian 10.1.64), were not out of place in even the strictest of historians. Without fabricating events, Tacitus certainly stamped many of them with tragic coloring (e.g., Ann. 5.9). 193 Shuler, Genre, 11–12; cf. Bowersock, Fiction as History, 1–27. See esp. Lucian Hist. 7–13; in A True Story 1.4 he complains that novelizers failed to recognize how obvious their «lies» were. Herodian (1.1.1–2) shares this criticism despite his own rhetorical adjustments (cf. Whittaker, «Introduction» xxxviii-xxxix)! The complaint also appears in mythography (cf. Philostratus Hrk. 24.1–2). |
| 8312 A Greek proverb also regarded a friend as a second self (Diodorus Siculus 17.37.6; cf. Cicero Fam. 13.1.5; Fin. 1.20.70; Seneca Ep. Luci1. 95.63). Bultmann, Word, 115–16, following Kierkegaard, emphasizes that such love ultimately overpowers self-love. 8313 Lacomara, «Deuteronomy,» 75. John consolidates love for God and neighbor in 15:10–17 (see Grayston, Epistles, 67). 8314 Hoskyns, Gospel, 451. Segovia, Relationships, 124–25, rightly notes that love is christo-logically conditioned in 13:34–35 and 15:1–17, but probably reads too much into the situation when he finds antidocetic polemic here. 8316 E.g., Aeschines False Embassy 75; Lysias Or. 2.61, §196; Theophrastus Char, proem 3; Cicero Sesf. 48.102; 68.143; see also examples in our introduction concerning the moral functions of biographical genre; Kurz, «Models,» 176–85 on narrative models in antiquity (especially history and biography, pp. 177–83). 8318 Lacomara, «Deuteronomy,» 76–77, citing texts about «walking» in God " s «ways» ( Deut 8:6; 10:12; 11:22; 19:9; 26:17; 28:9; 30:16 ). For the imitation of God, see further Cicero Tusc. 5.25.70; Seneca Dia1. 1.1.5; Epictetus Diatr. 2.14.12–13; Heraclitus Ep. 5; Plutarch Borr. 7, Mor. 830B; Let. Aris. 188, 190, 192, 208–210, 254, 281; Philo Creation 139; Eph 5:1 ; T. Ash. 4:3; Met Sir. 3.43–44; Sipra Qed. par. 1.195.1.3; Sent. Sext. 44–45; Keener, Matthew, 205; Rutenber, «Imitation,» chs. 2–3. 8319 E.g., tradition attributed to R. Akiba (e.g., Sipra Qed. pq. 4.200.3.7; Gen. Rab. 24:7); cf. the emphasis on love of neighbor in m. 1:12, attributed to Hillel; Jub. 36:4,8. 8320 E.g., among the great diversity of views among early Jewish teachers, many felt that honoring parents was the greatest commandment (Let. Aris. 228; Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.206; Ps.-Phoc. 8; Moore, Judaism, 2:132); by contrast, early Christians were more united around a single primary teacher and his views. See Keener, Matthew, 530–31; cf. 248–49. 8322 Cf 4 Ezra 3:7: God gave Adam one commandment, through the violation of which Adam incurred death. |
| 5899 E.g., 2 Bar. 51:1–2; cf. t. Ber. 6:6. For distinction after death, see 1 En. 22:9–11; cf. sources in Keener, Matthew, 129, on Gehinnom, and 710–11, on the resurrection of the dead. 5900 It appears in most streams of NT tradition and is denied in none: Acts 24:15; 2Cor 5:10 ; Rev 20:4–6; Matt 25:46; cf. Matt 5:29–30; 10:28; Luke 11:32; Bernard, John, 1:245. 5901 1QS 4.13–14; Gen. Rab. 6:6; most sinners in t. Sanh. 13:3,4; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 10:4; Pesiq. Rab. 11:5; cf. 2Macc 12:43–45. By contrast, the souls of the wicked will remain in hell on the day of judgment in 1 En. 22:13; 61:5; 108:6; 4 Macc 9:9; 12:12; t. Sanh. 13:5; probably L.A.B. 38:4; Ascen. Isa. 1:2; 3 En. 44:3; t. Ber. 5:31. 5902 Ps 62:12 ; Prov 24:12 ; Sir 16:12,14 ; Matt 16:27; Rom 2:6 ; 2Cor 11:15 ; Rev 22:12; Pesiq. Rab. 8:2; cf. Rhet. ad Herenn. 3.2.3. 5903 It continued in widespread use (Josephus Life 256; Ant. 4.219; b. Sanh. 37b, bar.; p. Git. 4:1, §2; cf. m. Roš Haš. 1:7; 2:6); see further the comment under 8:13. Early Christians also employed this rule; see 2Cor 13:1 ; 1Tim 5:19 ; Matt 18:16. 5904 Boring et al, Commentary, 270–71, cites Cicero Rose. Amer. 36.103. Witnesses confirmed a matter (Dionysius of Halicarnassus Lysias 26), and a claim offered without them might be scathingly contested (Lysias Or. 7.19–23, §110; 7.34–40, §111). 5905 E.g., Lysias Or. 4.5–6, §101; 7.12–18, §§109–110; 12.27–28, §122; 19.24, §154; 29.7, §182; Cicero Quinct. 24.76. Establishing a credible motive was standard procedure for the prosecution (Cicero Rose. Amer. 22.61–62). 5906 E.g., Isaeus Estate of Cleonymus 31–32, §37; Estate of Hagnias 6; Lysias Or. 7.19–23, §110; 7.34–40, §111; 7.43, §112. Cf. the preference for multiple and diverse testimonies, e.g., in Aelius Aristides Defense of Oratory 61, §19D; for challenging the credibility of opposing witnesses, see, e.g., Hermogenes Issues 45.5–10. 5907 Cicero Quinct. 23.75. 5908 The witness of one person was inadequate in many kinds of cases (Boice, Witness, 47, cites m. Ketub. 2:9; Roè Haï. 3:1); self-accusation, by contrast, could invite condemnation (Achilles Tatius 7.11.1; though in early Judaism cf. Cohn, Trial, 98). In some matters, however, onés self-testimony was held reliable (e.g., m. Ketub. 2:10), even against two witnesses (m. Tehar. 5:9). |
| 6812 The contrasting tenses in the two lines of 8allow the interpretation that Jesus «saw» (perfect) the Father in «a préexistent vision» (Brown, John, 1:356); but cf. the present tense in 5:19–20. Bernard, John, 2:310, and Michaels, John, 143, take ποιετε as imperative, hence a challenge to kill him (contrasted with the alternative imperative for true children of Abraham in 8:39). 6813 M. " Abot 5:19; Dibelius, James, 168–74. He even became the model Pharisee (p. Sotah 5:5, §2). 6814 For more detail, see further DeSilva, Honor, 202–6. 6815 See ibid., 194 (citing esp. 4 Macc 13:24–26 and texts in Philo). 6816 Cf., e.g., the «children of the prophets» in 1 Kgs 20:35; 2 Kgs 2:3, 5, 7, 15; 4:1, 38; 5:22; 6:1; 9:1. See more fully under John 13:33 . 6817 4 Macc 9:21 (βραμιαος νεανας). 6818 4 Macc 15(OTP2:560). 6819 Ps.-Phoc. 178; t. Sanh. 8:6; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 11:6; Lev. Rab. 23:12; probably Wis 4:6; cf. Aristotle Po1. 2.1.13,1262a. Children were said to bear the images of their parents ( Gen 5:3; 4 Macc 15:4; LA.B. 50:7; Chariton 2.11.2, 3.8.7; Philostratus Hrk. 52.2; P.Oxy. 37). 6820 Homer Il. 16.33–35. 6821 Lysias Or. 13.65–66, §135 (noting that the defendant " s brothers had all been executed for crimes); cf. Rhet. Alex. 35, 1440b.5–13; in nonlegal contexts, Theophrastus Char. 28.2. Malina and Rohrbaugh, John, 161, rightly note that ancients could infer ancestry from behavior or the reverse. 6822 A rhetorical attack used, when possible, before classical Athenian juries (Aeschines False Embassy 78; Ctesiphon 172). 6823 Lysias Or. 30.1–2, §183; for honorable background, e.g., Aeschines False Embassy 148–150. For honorable birth as a matter of praise, e.g., Xenophon Agesilaus 1.2. 6824 Lysias Or. 10.2, §116; Plutarch Cicero 26.6. 6825 Phaedrus 6. Aristocrats assumed that thieves usually had some dishonest lineage on one side or the other (Sophocles Searchers 280–283). 6826 Philostratus Vit. soph. 2.25.611; cf. Acts 23:6. Pindar praises a victor who is also son of a victor (Ryth. 10.12). |
| 6880 Cicero Cae1. 29.69. 6881 Aeschines Timarchus 1–3; cf. Musonius Rufus frg. 32, p. 132 (applying the principle to moral exhortation). 6882 E.g., Acts John 94. 6883 Von Wahlde, «Apocalyptic Polemic» (comparing esp. 1QS 3.13–4.26 on pp. 426–29; Γ. 12 Patr. on pp. 430–34). 6884 Cf. Motyer, «Anti-Semitic»; Bondi, «Abraham.» 6885 Falk, Jesus, 118, even thinks Hillelites could speak thus about Shammaites (b. Yebam. 16a); but given the need for Pharisaic schools to work together in the first century, one wonders if the evidence is not anachronistic. 6886 E.g., CD 4.15–17; Perkins, «John,» 966, cites the Scrolls» pervasive contrast between children of God (or light) and children of the devil (Belial), 1QS 1.18, 23–24; 2.19; 3.20–21; 1QM 13.11–12 (for Satan in ancient Judaism, see Elgvin, «Devil»). Charges of being «from the devil» also become part of intra-Christian polemic (1 John 3:8; Po1. Phi1. 7.1) 6887 For this sort of rhetorical question, compare the note on 8:43. 6888 E.g., Lysias Or. 24.24, §170; 27.12–13, §178–179; 29.5, §181; Isaeus Estate of Cleonymus 41, §27; 49, §37; Estate of Nicostratus 9; Cicero Rose. Amer. 29.79; Pro Flacco 15.34; Mur. 6.13; Dionysius of Halicarnassus Lit. Comp. 3; Aelius Aristides Defense of Oratory 242, §75D; Hermogenes Issues 45.1–2; 45.21–46.8; Acts 24:13. 6889 Cicero Rose. Amer. 23.64–65. 6890 Aulus Gellius 12.12.1; Xenophon Hel1. 1.7.16–17; 5.11.32; Acts 24:14. One could also gain pardon by confessing (Phaedrus 3, Epi1. 22). 6891 Cicero Sest. 69.145; cf. Epaminondas in Appian R.H. 11.7.41. 6892 Appian R.H. 11.7.40–41. 6893 Aeschines Timarchus 49; Xenophon Mem. 4.8.4; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 7.58.2; Acts 6:3; 24:16; 1Tim 3:2, 7 ; Tit 1:6; 2:8 ; cf. sources in Keener, Marries, 86–87. 6894 E.g., Aeschines Timarchus 44–45, 55–56,65, 77–78,80, 89; False Embassy 14; Isaeus Estate of Pyrrhus 40; Acts 26:5. 6895 Lysias Or. 25.14, §172, picking a crime he obviously did not commit but related to the charges. Pleading that one had been wronged might create juror sympathy (Dionysius of Halicarnassus Lysias 24). |
| After Paul, the origin of the citizenship of Claudius Lysias, the military tribune, who acquired it for a great price, is easy, though some have managed to muddle the matter. From the gentile name Claudius and the dramatic date of the incident, it is not in dispute that this man secured the citizenship from the emperor Claudius. But there can be no question of his being an imperial freedman, as Cadbury in one place surmises. 569 He holds an equestrian commission in the Roman auxiliary army, stationed in Palestine and Syria. Equestrian status could be acquired by freedmen only in the most exceptional circumstances. Only for the personal favourites of an emperor were the numerous barriers sometimes set aside, which prevented the ex-slave from securing the coveted status of a Roman knight. There was a noted scandal in Roman society when the great Pallas, manager of the imperial accounts under Claudius, secured equestrian status and a series of equestrian appointments for his brother Felix, including the procuratorship of Judaea. 570 The ‘great sum’ which Lysias paid was not the price of freedom. It was the bribe given to the intermediaries in the imperial secretariat or the provincial administration who put his name on the list of candidates for enfranchisement. The well-known passage in Cassius Dio about the sale of citizenship under Claudius is not to be taken too literally. Agents of the government made what they could, on the side, out of the growing demand for Roman privileges. A Roman senator and courtier was still trafficking in honours and appointments in the time of Nero, who was extremely angry at the discovery. 571 It is possible that Claudius Lysias was by origin a promoted common soldier. The Principate of Clauduis is precisely the time when the organization of the officer system in the auxiliary army was being standardized. Previously the prefects and tribunes commanding auxiliary regiments of the provincial armies had been either promoted centurions, not holding equestrian status, or men of equestrian standing who had not served in the ranks. 572 From Claudius onwards the promoted centurions ceased to become auxiliary officers in the ordinary course, but were commissioned henceforth in the various corps – Pretorian Guard, urban cohorts, &c. – that served at Rome. The recent investigations of Dr. Birley into the history of equestrian officers have shown that most of them, in the final system, were not young men recruited in their early twenties. Commonly they were men of substance who had held political office in their municipalities, and entered the Roman army as officers in their middle thirties. 573 But from the date of Lysias’ carreer it is possible that he had worked his way up through the ranks and the centurionate of the auxiliary army of Syria, and bought his way into the citizenship – and equestrian status and a military tribunate too – with his personal savings. |
| Nationalism is a form of collective individualism. In times such as ours, when this collective individualism is strong, we, Christians, should weaken it and incite, instead, feelings of humanity, of ecumenicity, of catholicity. What a pity it is that we, the Orthodox, cannot succeed in convoking an ecumenical council. Our Church, permeated by paganism and phyletism, has failed yet to create its own “Lambeth Conference.” 11 Moreover, we will not create such a conference given our fragmentation. We have not even succeeded in convoking a pan-Orthodox synod.’ – Panagiotis Bratsiotis, 1936 12 PEACE I.1.a. Freedom from, or cessation of, war or hostilities; that condition of a nation or community in which it is not at war with another. b. A ratification or treaty of peace between two powers previously at war. Also a temporary cessation of hostilities, a truce. Often defined by or with the name of the place at which it was ratified. 2 . Freedom from civil commotion and disorder; public order and security. 3 .a. Freedom from disturbance or perturbation; quiet, tranquility, undisturbed state. b. In and after Biblical use, in various expressions of well-wishing or salutation. Following Latin pax and Greek eirini ‘peace’ often represents Hebrew Shalom, properly safety, welfare, prosperity. 4 .a. Freedom from quarrels or dissension between individuals; a state of friendliness; concord, amity. 5 . Freedom from mental or spiritual disturbance or conflict arising from passion, sense of guilt, etc.; calmness; peace of mind, soul, or conscience. 15 .a. To make peace: to bring about a state of peace, in various senses: (a) to effect a reconciliation between persons or parties at variance; to conclude peace with a nation at the close of a war; (b) to enter into friendly relations with a person, as by a league of amity, or by submission; (c) to enforce public order; (d) to enforce silence. b. To make one’s, or a person’s, peace: to effect reconciliation for oneself or for someone else; to come, or bring someone, into friendly relations (with another). |
|
|
