| (Whether or not it is an editorial seam, the final author allowed the words to stand because they suited his overall point; ancient writers did not have as much opportunity as moderns to make word-processing errors that would interpolate lines at the wrong point.) In this case, Jesus is saying, «I am going to the Father, and I am the way for you to go to the Father» (14:3–6, 28, 31); thus, «Rise, let us go there» (14:31). 8824 He then informs the disciples that they cannot do anything unless they participate in him; in life or in death, their life depends on his life (15:1–7; cf. 14:19). In obedience to his Father (14:31; cf. 10:18; 12:49–50), Jesus is going to his death (8:21; 13:3,33; 14:2–3, 12; 16:5, 7, 10,15, 28; esp. in context 14:28), 8825 and as the plural subjunctive implies, the disciples are to follow (although at this point they will ultimately prove unprepared to do so, 13:36–38). John " s informed reader may already be equipped to understand the point here; in 11Jesus goes to expose himself to death that Lazarus may live; in 11the disciples are to accompany him. Jesus» obedience in all matters (14:31, emphasized by καθς and οτως; cf. 8:29) would be praiseworthy; 8826 contrary to the accusations of the opponents of John " s audience, it is not Jesus but his opponents who undermine obedience to God. 8357 For «disturbed,» see, e.g., Tob 12:16; Diogenes Laertius 10.85; 10.144.17; see more fully the comment on 11:33. 8366 Mek. Bes. 7.124–130 on Exod 14emphasizes a qal vaomer here; how much more they believed in the Lord whose servant Moses was (see Smith, Parallels, 154). This link also became part of the Samaritan liturgy (MacDonald, Samaritans, 51, 180–81). 8369 As in Berg, «Pneumatology,» 113, who rightly doubts polemic against the unbelieving synagogue (Segovia) and especially against future eschatology (Becker). 8370 For «letters of consolation,» see, e.g., Plutarch Conso1. passim, Mor. 608B-612B; Apoll, passim, Mor. 101F-122A; Theon Progymn. 8.53; 1 Thess 4:13–18; P.Oxy. |
| How is it that these four Gospels came to be known so widely from such an early time? There was certainly no great council of Christian churches before 150 which laid down the law on which Gospels to use. No single bishop, not even the bishop of Rome, should he ever have made such a proclamation (and there is no reason to think he did), had the clout to make it stick. If there was any authoritative figure who endorsed the four Gospels, the most viable option would have to be, as a tradition known to Origen and possibly Papias’ elder said, the aged apostle John. Such a story is a long, long way from historical verification, though that fact in itself does not make it impossible. But if we set aside that story as likely to be legendary, our search appears to have reached a dead-end. We cannot find who chose the Gospels. It looks like nobody did. They almost seem to have chosen themselves through some sort of‘natural selection’. And this at least concurs with the conclusion of Bruce Metzger, one of the last generation’s premier scholars of the New Testament canon, who wrote, ‘neither individuals nor councils created the canon; instead they came to recognize and acknowledge the self-authenticating quality of these writings, which imposed themselves as canonical upon the church’. 300 Wherefore Four? The mystery resulting from our faltering quest to find the original chooser of the four Gospels (unless he be the apostle John) combines with another big question. Why four? Other options existed. Marcion took one of the existing Gospels, edited it down to what he alleged was its original form, and made it his only Gospel. The authors of the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel of the Ebionites, the Gospel represented by P.Oxy.840, and perhaps others borrowed the overall structure and many details from the existing Gospels, added in some interpretative traditions and some new materials of various kinds, and wove them into a new narrative. The more scholarly Tatian painstakingly combined all four of the church’s Gospels into one continuous and harmonized narrative. Any of these three options – a single remodelled Gospel, a single new Gospel, or a single, unified Gospel Harmony – would have made life less complicated for the church. Each offered simplicity, greater convenience, and an easier defence against critics like Celsus who saw the existence of four authoritative Gospels as a concession of weakness and sought to expose the differences between them. Why, then, didn’t the church take any of these options? Why did it persist in holding before insiders and outsiders four separate Gospels, four Gospels which in their commonalities could seem repetitious, and in their peculiarities always held the seeds of conflict for opponents to exploit? |
| 10669 Freyne, Galilee, 195. He attributes the lack of early Roman persecution of Jesus» followers to Galilean-Judean differences (p. 196), but is it not possible that they simply did not view Jesus» disciples as a threat (18:36–38)? 10670 Safrai, «Home,» 734; cf. Aristophanes Wasps 154–155. 10671 Cf. different views on the nature of the resurrection body in early Judaism (Ferguson, Backgrounds, 439–40). 10672 Cook, «Exegesis,» 4. 10673 E.g., Homer Od. 4.795–803, 838–839; Boring et a1., Commentary, 306, cites Hom. Hymn, Hymn to Hermes 145–146. Laurin, John, 258, speculates on «molecular displacement,» an image not likely to have crossed the minds of John " s audience. 10674 Cf. Tholuck, John, 452–53. 10675 Witherington, Wisdom, 342. 10676 Cook, «Exegesis,» 4. 10677 E.g., Jub. 12:29; 18:16; 19:29; 21:25; Gen. Rab. 100:7. It appears commonly in tomb inscriptions as well (Goodenough, Symbols, 2:108). 10678 For situation-appropriate words of «peace,» see, e.g., Tob 12(at an angelophany). On the efficacy of such words, cf. 1QS 2.9 10679 Mbiti, Religions, 85. 10680 So also others, e.g., Lightfoot, Gospel, 335; Haenchen, John, 2:210; Cook, «Exegesis,» 5. 10681 Also Cicero Verr. 2.5.1.3; Seneca Controv. 1.4.2. Likewise, wounds could be displayed in corpses to stir indignation (Ovid Fasti 2.849; Plutarch Caesar 68.1). 10682 E.g., Ovid Metam. 13.262–267; Fasti 2.696–699 (in this case deceptively); Plutarch Alex. 50.6; Arrian Alex. 7.10.1–3; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 7.62.3; Livy 45.39.17; Valerius Maximus 7.7.1; cf. Sallust Letter of Gnaeus Pompeius 1–2; Caesar C.W. 1.72; Silius Italicus 9.350–351; Valerius Maximus 3.2.24; or citing dangers one had faced, e.g., Aeschines False Embassy 168–169; Cicero Cat. 4.1.2; 1Cor 15:30 . Cf. also bruises as marks of athletic exertion (Maximus of Tyre Or. 3.4). 10683 E.g., Homer Od. 19.467–473; P.Ry1. 174.6–7; P.Lond. 334.6; P.Oxy. 494.31; Philostratus Hrk. 12.4. 10684 E.g., 2 Bar. 50:2–4; Gen. Rab. 95:1; Ecc1. Rab. 1:4, §2; for very literalistic understandings of the resurrection, Osborne, «Resurrection,» 933, cites 2Macc 7:10–11; 14:46; Sib. Or. 4.176–82. This idea probably is assumed in Matt 5but appears less probable in 1Cor 15:35–44, 50 . |
| A second aspect of the papyrus fragments which has not received enough attention is their original size. Exacting work has been done by some scholars to determine the original page-sizes of the ancient codices, including early Christian codices, and to compare and categorize them. 44 Why does this matter? Hurtado writes, ‘the physical dimensions of a manuscript constitute important data that may... suggest the intended usage of the manuscript’. 45 Some of the early codices produced for Christian readers were executed in what is now called ‘miniature’ format, smaller-than-normal writing on smaller-than-normal pages. These miniatures would have been cheaper, more portable editions, making it easier for individuals (as opposed to churches) to own them, and easier to carry them about or store them in personal libraries. It is clear that these copies were intended for private reading by those who commissioned them, and not for public reading. 46 Illustration 1.2 PItH (P.Oxy. 4404), the earliest-known fragment of the Gospel according to Matthew. A papyrus codex. Late second century. Courtesy of the Egypt Exploration Society. There are examples of New Testament, Old Testament, and apocryphal documents written in miniature format. The small size of the copy did not mean the document could not have been considered Scripture, it just meant the scribe or the commissioner of the volume most probably intended it for private reading. By contrast, however, other copies of texts, including texts of the canonical Gospels, have been found which would have been more suitable for public reading in church. They are somewhat larger or much larger, executed with great care, usually with comfortable margins around the writing space, written with a more formal or regular script, and often with certain ‘reader’s aids’, like punctuation, paragraph markings, breathing marks, and so on, evidently designed to help the person reading the text aloud to a congregation. Some scholars have referred to a few of these as ‘pulpit editions’. |
| 3982 B. Ketub. 96a, cited by various commentators (many following Billerbeck), cf. Davies, Sermon, 135; Morris, John, 141. 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). 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. 3994 This is especially the case if John writes to a Diaspora audience, even one with Palestinian roots. The exception would be if John presumes a perspective from east of the Jordan (Byron, «Bethany»), in which case this Bethany anticipates the later events at Bethany (12:1–3); but this Bethany is too far from baptismal water (11:18), and geographical digressions were commonplace (Polybius 1.41.6; cf. 1.42.1–7). |
| 10854 Twins were typically closer in affection than other brothers (Cicero Quint, fratr. 1.3.3); one could apply the term figuratively to those who shared the same character (Cicero Phi1. 11.1.2); Seneca Benef. 7.1.3 doubts that one can fathom the reasons for twins» existence. «Thomas» bears the same sense («twin») and may be a nickname (Williams, «Personal Names,» 103); for «Didymus» or «Didymas,» see, e.g., «Arius Didymus»; P.Oxy. 115. 10855 The connection between Nathanael and Cana is nowhere stated earlier in the Gospel and seems a curious piece of information to simply be invented by a later redactor. 10857 It is the fourth revelation, but the third «to the disciples» (21:14), not including the appearance to Mary alone (Smith, John, 389). There is no reason to associate it specifically with Peter " s three denials (13:38), though both may express a preference for narrative triplets in the passion tradition (cf. 21:15–17). 10858 Cf., e.g., Calvin, John, 2:287, who claims seven appearances but argues that this is the third distinct day (so harmonizing them). 10859 In defense of the authenticity of this tradition, see Davies and Allison, Matthew, 2:393–94; Witherington, Christology, 129–30. 10860 E.g., Seneca Controv. 1.pref.24; LCL 1n. 4 cites Quintilian 1.2.24 as an example of competition in Roman schools. 10861 He compensates for the other " s prowess in 20:4. Ephesus, like other cities of the Greek East, demonstrated their appreciation for physical strength by providing gymnasia (on gymnasia, see Harrill, «Asia Minor,» 131), though gymnasia also served nonathletic functions. 10862 In Alciphron Fishermen 15 (Nausibius to Prymnaeus), 1.12, par. 2–3, they normally reclined on bare wooden decks, whereas a rich passenger might need shade (par. 2; but they were pleased that he paid cash, par. 5). 10865 Brown, John, 2:1069; MacGregor, John, 370; Milne, Message, 310; Talbert, John, 259. Carson, John, 670, acknowledges this but also appeals to Johannine symbolism as at 13:30. |
| 3762 L.A.B. 11:14; cf. Sipra VDDen. pq. 2.2.3.3; some believed Moses ascended to heaven to receive Torah and there beheld God (Martyn, History, 103; cf. comment on 3:13). For Philo, Moses saw because he went beyond mortal vision (Names 8) and because he sought a revelation of God (Spec. Laws 1.41; cf. John 14:8 ). One could see God in some sense yet remain alive ( Gen 32:30 ; Ascen. Isa. 3:8–10), or in some traditions be spared temporarily by God " s mercy (Gen. Rab. 65:10; cf. Callimachus Hymns 6.59). Hanson, «Midrash,» thinks that Paul expounded as if Moses saw the preexistent Christ. 3763 Sipre Deut. 357.19.1; b. Ber. 7a; Meg. 19b. The rabbis may have had reason to polemicize here as well if some Diaspora Jews implied that Moses» vision of God divinized him (cf. Van der Horst, «Vision»), as in some Greek traditions of visionary divinization (see on divinization, above; wrongly viewed as better background for 1 John 3by Bousset as reported in Howard, Gospel, 163; Boman, «Thought-Forms,» 22). 3764 Ascen. Isa. 3:8–10. Knibb and many others think this part is pre-Christian, which is possible; the revelations of Isaiah (ch. 6) and Ezekiel were also appropriated by Jewish visionaries in revelations of God " s throne; later rabbis seem to have polemicized against this Isaiah tradition (b. Yebam. 49b). 3765 Cf. 1 En. 90:35; " Abot R. Nat. 1A; Sifra Behuq. pq. 3.263.1.5. The righteous deceased could also see God " s face ( , CIJ 1:452, §634, an inscription from Italy; [Ε]ικ[ων] ενορ[ντος] θεου, CIJ 1:509, §696, from Thessaly; Sipra VDDen. pq. 2.2.3.2; Sipre Deut. 357.19.1). 3768 For the double meaning «guide» and «narrate,» see Robert, «Mot»; idem, «Précédent,» citing Plato Rep. 474BC for the same double sense. 3769 The term probably alludes to Sir 43:31 : «Who has seen (τις ερακεν) him [i.e. God] and can fully make him known (εκδιηγσεται)?» (Epp, «Wisdom,» 138). Cf. Epictetus Diatr. 1.6.19, where humanity not only observes God and his acts but must be an εξηγητς of them. The εξηγητς was a Roman provincial administrative office (e.g., P.Ry1. 119.1; P.Oxy. 1025.3) referring to an «explicator» or «adviser» (Lewis, Life, 186). |
| 4472 So nicknamed for his refusal to step outside a circle until God sent rain; such circle-drawing implied forceful demands (e.g., Livy 45.12.5). 4473 Young, Theologian, 171–80, associates rabbinic chutzpah with the Gospel tradition in further detai1. Independently, I thought «chutzpah» the most apt description of this boldness (Keener, «Pneumatology,» 138–39; idem, Background Commentary, 154). 4476 Dixon, Mother, 179; Simon, «Women» (on Valerius Maximus 8.3); cf. Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 8.44.1–8.54.1; Tacitus Ann. 16.10; Plutarch Cor. 34.1–2; Alex. 12.3; 21.1–3. Cf. also appeals to prefects with special concern for women " s powerlesness (e.g., P.Sakaon 36 in Horsley, Documents, 4:132–33; Lysias Or. 32.11–18, §§506–511). 4477 Plutarch Alex. 39.7. For ancient expectations of honoring and obeying parents and for stereotypical images of parents, see Keener, «Family,» 354–58. 4478 Diogenes Laertius 9.7.42 (the differentiation from κρη does not make it any less standard for general usage); Achilles Tatius 4.15.2; Jdt 11(Holofernes to Judith); cf. 4 Macc 15:17; 16:14; p. Nid. 1:4, §2. 4479 E.g., Haenchen, John, 1:173; Beck, Paradigm, 55. In earlier custom, it could apply affectionately to onés wife (Homer Od. 4.266; 8.424; 23.350; cf. perhaps Homer Od. 19.555, though Odysseus here acts as a beggar) but could also be curt (Sophocles Ajax 293). Colwell and Titus, Spirit, 113, wrongly suppose that she is no longer Jesus» mother because of his adoption by God in ch. 1, but this makes little sense of our passagés preference for her relational title over her name. 4480 Maccini, Testimony, 101 notes that Jesus never uses this of a woman he knows except his mother; but the data pool is small, since the only remaining use in this Gospel is the Samaritan. 4481 E.g., Sei. Pap. 1:318–19, lines 2, 21. For onés sister (probably wife), see P.Oxy. 528.2; P.S.I. 209.1. 4486 Feuillet, Studies, 35; Brodie, Gospel, 174–75. Culpepper, Anatomy, 134, regards this as possible but uncertain. Bury, Logos-Doctrine, 32, thinks the woman is an allegorical symbol for sensation, as in Philo (Creation 59; Alleg. Interp. 2.12)! |
| 10113 Cullmann, State, 42–43; Blinzler, Trial, 251; Winter, Trial, 109; Reicke, Era, 186; Brown, Death, 963, cite Suetonius Calig. 32.2; Dom. 10.1; Dio Cassius 54.3.7; 54.8; Tertullian Apo1. 2.20; Eusebius Hist. ecc1. 5.1.44; cf. the herald in b. Sanh. 43a. The posting of the accusation on the cross is not well attested, either because those describing crucifixion had already mentioned it being carried (Bammel, «Titulus,» 353) or because the practice was not in fact standard although, given the variations among executions, in no way improbable (Harvey, History, 13); wearing tablets around the neck was not unusual in the broader culture (students in Philostratus Vit. soph. 2.1.557). Blinzler, Trial, 254, thinks the tablets included «black or red letters on a white ground.» 10119 Epigraphic data suggest that Aramaic probably predominated in Galilee (Horsley, Galilee, 247–49) despite Hebrew " s use as a holy language and the ideal of its use (pace Safrai, «Literary Languages»; idem, «Spoken Languages»; Let. Aris. 11, 30, 38; Sipre Deut. 46.1.2). 10122 E.g., Jub. 12:25–27; p. Meg. 1:9, §1; hence its use in the Mishnah, many DSS, and the Bar Kokhba materials (cf. Carmon, Inscriptions, 73). 10123 Brown, Death, 965; he also cites the five languages (Greek, Latin, Persian, Hebrew, and Egyptian) at Gordian Ill " s tomb. Talbert, John, 243, cites these plus the Greek and Latin warnings in the temple (losephus War 5.194). 10125 Tob 1:20; Sallust Cati1. 51.43; 52.14; CPJ 2:251–52, §445; 2:255–57, §448; BGU 5.16.51–5.17.52; P.Oxy. 513; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 4.5.3; 4.15.6; Appian C.W. 4.5.31; Cornelius Nepos 7 (Alcibiades), 4.5; Herodian 7.3.2; Josephus Life 370–371; Heb 10:34. 10126 E.g., Polybius 11.30.1–2; also in illegal lynchings (e.g., Herodian 8.8.6); also in beatings (Longus 2.14); see comment on scourging, above. 10127 Artemidorus Onir. 2.61; Brown, Death, 870, adds Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 7.69.2; Valerius Maximus 1.7.4; Josephus Ant. 19.270. 10129 Brown, Death, 870, thinks the Gospels might «reflect a local concession,» noting that Josephus War 2.246 and Ant. 20.136 do not mention Celer " s disrobing; but this would be an argument from silence. (Brown, citing Melito of Sardis On the Pasch 97 in favor of nakedness and Acts of Pilate 10.1 in favor of a loincloth, ultimately doubts that we can know either way [p. 953].) Nakedness was probably the rule of thumb (in public Roman punishments, e.g., Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 7.69.2; in non-Roman executions, e.g., Josephus Ag. Ap. 1.191; 2.53). |
| Персидские монахи, как указывает католикос Тимофей (780–823), носили белые одежды подобно языческим священникам. Такой странный обычай вызвал его недовольство 339 . Связано это с древней традицией, когда христианские священники одевались в белое, но такому же обычаю следовали также иудейские и языческие священники. На Западе в раннем монашестве ношение белой (льняной) одежды, за исключением нижней, засвидетельствовано очень редко. Напротив, белые шерстяные платья, а тем более из шерсти естественного цвета, были достаточно распространены. В древнем шотландском монастыре Киль-Рос монахи во время работы надевали в дополнение к белым одеждам из шкур нижние из белой шерсти 340 . На рубеже шестого и седьмого веков, когда в Англию пришли бенедиктинцы из окружения св. Августина, ирландские монахи носили белую одежду 341 . У бенедиктинских монахов св. Фара из Мо белое платье носилось уже в девятом столетии. Точно так же члены монастырского братства в Лире в Нормандии носили белые вещи, а в Савиньи – серые 342 . Белые одежды были особенно привычны в Египте 343 . Например, папирус Oxy III 471 344 сообщает о белом платье, которое надевали при посещении театра. О других свидетельствах мы говорили выше, в главе о льняной одежде. Б. Черная и темная одежда Иероним в своем письме со словами утешения после кончины Павлы наставляет Пахомия 345 : «то, что ты среди первых, и первый из рода патрициев, принял монашество, должно быть для тебя поводом не для превознесения, но для уничижения. Ты же знаешь, что Сын Божий стал Сыном Человеческим. Сколь бы ты сам ни уничижался, смиреннее Христа ты не станешь. Может быть так, что ты идешь пешком, одетый в темную (fusca) тунику, а тебя считают бедняком… Но твои Евстахий и Павла превосходят тебя». Аселле Иероним жалуется 346 : «мы не носим шелковых одеяний, поэтому и называемся монахами; если наша туника не белая, то тут же отовсюду слышится: это обманщик, это грек!» То есть в Риме греческие философы узнавались по их черной накидке. Именно поэтому первые монахи также насмешливо назывались «Graeculi». |
|
|
