| 6262 Using φλεια and cognates, see, e.g., Musonius Rufus 18B, p. 118.34; Epictetus Diatr. 1.6.6, 33; 2.8.1; 3.21.15; 4.8.17; Marcus Aurelius 9.1.1; Sextus Empiricus Eth. 2.22; similar ideas in other terms, e.g., Plato Ale. 1.115–127 (e.g., 114E; 118A); Aristotle Rhet. 1.7.1, 1363b; Theon Progymn. 8.45; Seneca Benef. 4.21.6; Dia1. 7.8.2; Epictetus Diatr. 1.2.5–7; 1.22.1; 4.7.9; Diogenes Laertius 7.1.98–99; 10.150.31; 10.151.36; 10.152.37; Marcus Aurelius 6.27; Sir 37:28; 2 Bar. 14:3 ; see Lodge, Theory 62–63. 6263 For this figure in ancient rhetoric, see Anderson, Glossary 23; Rowe, «Style,» 128; cf. the technically distinct though related term πθετον in Anderson, Glossary, 52–53 (cf. Rhet. ad Herenn. 4.31.42; in the NT, e.g., Phil 2:25 ; Porter, «Paul and Letters,» 580). 6264 Cf. Aesop " s familiar tale of the fox and sour grapes in Babrius 19; Phaedrus 4.3. Sophists could turn logic both ways (Aulus Gellius 5.3.7; 5.10; Nâdor, «Sophismus»; cf. imperial propaganda in Appian R.H. pref.7) but would not have risked such circular reasoning among hearers who could challenge it, for even the appearance of inconsistency laid one open to rhetorical challenge (e.g., Phaedrus 4.7.21–24). 6265 So also many pagan prophecies (Sophocles Oed. tyr. 439); see further the comment on 3:4. Teachers also sometimes answered outsiders one way but explained matters privately to disciples or genuinely interested inquirers (Aulus Gellius 19.1.7–21; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 4:7; Gen. Rab. 8:9; Num. Rab. 9:48; 19:8; Pesiq. Rab. 21:2/3). 6266 See Eunapius Lives 481; Mark 13:1–2 ; Aune, Prophecy, 186; Robbins, Jesus, 171, 178, citing Varro De re rustica 1.21 and others. This applied especially (though not excusively) to the Peripatetics, the Aristotelian school, so named for Aristotlés ambulatory pedagogic method. 6268 This in spite of their emphatic «we» in 6:69, vs. the «many» of 6:60,66 (Ellis, Genius, 130; see also Shank, Life, 182). 6269 T. c Abod. Zar. 6:18. Any disciple who leaves the way of Torah proves evil (m. Hag. 1:7); rabbis especially told stories of their primary example of a rabbinic apostate, Elisha ben Abuya, who became especially evil in Amoraic texts (e.g., p. Hag. 2:1, §8). |
| 10172 4 Macc 15:30; Aristotle Po1. 3.2.10, 1277b; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 4.82.3; 6.92.6; Diodorus Siculus 5.32.2; 10.24.2; Livy 2.13.6; 28.19.13; Appian R.H. 2.5.3; 7.5.29; Iamblichus V.P. 31.194. Some philosophers held that women were capable of courage (Musonius Rufus 4, p. 48.8 and that philosophy improved women " s courage (3, p. 40.33–35). 10173 2Macc 7:21; 4 Macc 15:23; 16:14; Diodorus Siculus 17.77.1; 32.10.9; Apuleius Metam. 5.22. «Courage» is literally «manliness» (e.g., 1Macc 2:64; Aristotle E.E. 3.1.2–4, 1228ab; Dio Cassius 58.4.6; Diodorus Siculus 17.45.6; 40.3.6; Theon Progymn. 9.22; Crates Ep. 19; Chariton 7.1.8). 10174 E.g., Homer I1. 7.96; 8.163; 11.389; 16.7–8; Virgil Aen. 9.617; 12.52–53; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 9.7.2; 10.28.3; Diodorus Siculus 12.16.1; 34/35.2.22; Aulus Gellius 17.21.33; Ps.-Callisthenes Alex. 1.46; cf. an unarmed man in Homer I1. 22.124–125; an effeminate man in Aristophanes Lys. 98. 10176 Mothers (Homer I1. 22.79–90,405–407; Euripides Supp1. 1114–1164) mourned sons; see especially a mother " s mourning the death of the son who would have solaced her in old age (e.g., Virgil Aen. 9.481–484; Luke 7:12–13). 10177 It may support an identification with the disciple of 18:15–16. The disciple perhaps departs in 19:27, «to his own» (Michaels, John, 319). 10178 Hoskyns, «Genesis,» 211–13; Ellis, Genius, 271; cf. Peretto, «Maria.» The specific meaning in Rev 12 is clearer, but even there the mariological reading is unclear unless one resorts to subsequent tradition; cf., e.g., Keener, Revelation, 313–14, 325–27. 10180 Cf. Moloney, «Mary.» Boguslawski, «Mother,» sees this new «eschatological family» confirmed by the coming of the Spirit in 19:30. 10183 Witherington, Women, 95. Cf. Jesus» mother as an example of discipleship also in Seckel, «Mère.» 10184 For care of parents in their old age, see P.Enteux. 26 (220 B.C.E.); Hierocles Parents 4.25.53; Diogenes Laertius 1.37; Quintilian 7.6.5; Sir 3:16 ; Gen. Rab. 100:2. Some texts view such care as «repayment» of parents (Homer Ii. 4.477–478; 17.302; 1Tim 5:4 ; possibly Christian interpolation in Sib. Or. 2.273–275). More generally on honor of parents, see comment on 2:4. |
| 7645 E.g., Appian R.H. 8.19.132; on Alexander of Macedon, Diodorus Siculus 17.69.4 (it was meant to praise him; cf. 17.69.9); Arrian Alex. 7.11.5; 7.12.3. 7647 Seneca Dia1. 11.4.1; Ep. Luci1. 116.1; Socratics Ep. 21; Plutarch Apol1. 33, Mor. 118E; Iamblichus V.P. 32.226; 33.234; Let. Aris. 268; T. Zeh. 10:1–2. Virtue supposedly protected from this malady (Epictetus Dmfr. 1.9.7; Let. Aris. 232). More reasonably, on limits, cf. Plutarch Conso1. 2, Mor. 608C; 4, Mor. 608F-609A; Pliny Ep. 2.1.10–11; 3.21.1–6; Syr. Men. 463–469; perhaps 1 Thess 4:13. 7649 On stereotypes in condolence letters, see, e.g., Theon Progymn. 8.53; Dio Chrysostom Or. 30, On Charidemus passim; Lewis, Life, 89–81; Stowers, Letter Writing, 142–46. Funerary inscriptions and rhetoric contain stereotypical expressions of mourning (Demosthenes Or. 60, Funeral Speech 1–37; Greek Anth. 7.339–340, 389); time is sorrow " s best healer in Diodorus Siculus 34/35.17.1. 7650 Apollonius of Rhodes 1.292–305; Acts 21:13; cf. also the Roman attachment to duty (Ovid Fasti 4.845–848, though cf. 849–852; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 5.8.6; Appian R.H. 8.12.81–82,86). 7651 Likewise of the archangel Michael, provoked by Abraham " s tears (T. Ab. 3:9–10A; 3:9–10B); and of Abraham, provoked by Isaac " s tears over his impending death (T. Ab. 5:9–10A); tears were apparently contagious (Josephus Ant. 7.202–203; Josephus himself is moved by others» tears in Life 205–210). Not weeping over a matter not requiring mourning (cf. 11:25–26) differs from mourning only when others are looking, hence seeking praise but meriting ridicule (Martial Epigr. 1.33). 7653 Brown, John, 1:426; Barrett, John, 401. For more detail on tombs of this period, see Meyers and Strange, Archeology, 94–103. 7655 Meyers and Strange, Archaeology, 97–98; for spices at funerals, see, e.g., Josephus Ant. 17.199; War 1.673; m. Ber. 8:6; Herodian 4.2.8. 7656 Many felt the soul departed after three days and decomposition started (m. Yebam. 16:3); the fourth day thus underlines the miracle (Barkhuizen, «Lazarus»; cf. Whitacre, John, 283–84). |
| 8237 Brown, John, 2:574; Whitacre, John, 335. Jesus» two closest associates would normally be on either side [b. Ber. 46b; Blomberg, Reliability, 192–93). 8238 Fritsch, Community, 123, following K. G. Kuhn; Malina and Rohrbaugh, John, 226. Others suggest that John simply emphasizes the beloved disciplés paradigmatic discipleship function against Peter " s pastoral one (cf. Hartin, «Peter»). 8240 Cicero Div. Caec. 12.37; Brutus 93.321–322; in rhetoric, cf. Demosthenes On the Embassy 174; Anderson, Glossary, 110–11 and πεξαρεσι,ς («removal» of another " s claims), p. 121. 8241 E.g., Cicero Verr. 2.4.54.121; Phi1. 3.6.15; Rhet. Alex. 3, 1426a.27–32; Valerius Maximus 5.2; sometimes using oneself, e.g., Cicero Pis. 22.51; also noted by Marshall, Enmity, 52–55, 348–53. On comparing characters, see Theon Progymn. 10.3–4; cf. Aphthonius 42.31R comment on the Spirit as «successor» in John 14:16 . 8242 Explicit in Menander Rhetor 2.1–2, 376.31–377.2; 2.3, 378.18–26; 2.3, 380.30–31; 2.6, 402.26–29; 2.6, 403.26–32; 2.6, 404.5–8 (402–404 concern praise of bride and groom); 2.10, 417.5–17; Philostratus Hrk. 27.4; 37.2; 38.1. One could even contrast a single writer " s best and worst passages (Dionysius of Halicarnassus Thucyd. 35, end). For synkrisisin biography, see Shuler, Genre, 50; Stanton, New People, 77–80, 83. 8243 E.g., Philostratus Hrk. 13.3–4; 27.4. Some philosophers did wish to minimize competition among friends, while conceding that in practice this might be possible only toward social superiors Iamblichus V.P. 22.101; 33.230). 8246 E.g., Plutarch Comparison of Aristides with Marcus Cato 5.1, 3–4; 6.1. Plutarch Comparison of Alcibiades and Coriohnus could still include contrasts (e.g., 3.1; cf. likewise Comparison of Lysander and Sulla 5.5), and Plutarch also told distinctive stories about each (in Plutarch Alc. passim, and Cor. passim). After his respective biographies of Aristides and Marcus Cato, he provides Comparison of Aristides with Marcus Cato; likewise, Comparison of Lucullus and Cimon; and so forth. |
| 5441 Pace Haenchen, John, 1:221, and (less dogmatically) Moloney, Belief, 148 n. 67, who critique a 1962 article by Bligh for this position. 5442 Sanders, John, 144. Καλς and ειπον occur together again in 8:48, where his adversaries accuse Jesus of being a Samaritan. The former is a Johannine term (8:48; 13:13; 18:23) but not peculiarly so ( Mark 7:6, 9, 37; 12:28, 32 ; Luke 20:39; Acts 10:33; 25:10; 28:25). Philostratus Hrk. 4.4 has «You have said truly» (αληθ); and 7.12, «You say well» (καλς). 5446 Unless with Wessel, «Männer,» one allegorizes the five husbands as five books of Torah, which is improbable but would make more sense of Samaritan customs than the «five gods» interpretation. Origen Comm. Jo. 13.43–51 takes the current man as the law and the five husbands as the five senses (hence the sensory knowledge derogated in some philosophy–Plato Phaedo 83A); most people, however, recognized value in the senses (Aristotle Soul 3.1,424b; Seneca Dia1. 5.36.1; 7.8.4; see comment on John 8:14–15 ). 5447 See m. Yebam. 6:6; permitted but not mandatory with Greeks and Romans, Rawson, «Family,» 32; Gardner, Women, 81; Appian C.W. 2.14.99; Aulus Gellius 4.3.2; Keener, Marries, 75; idem, «Marriage,» 681–82; cf. idem, «Family,» 358–59. 5450 Samaritans, like Jews and Egyptians, would not have experienced the Greek shortage of women due to child abandonment (on abandonment, see, e.g., Pausanias 2.26.4; Diodorus Siculus 4.64.1; 8.4.1; 19.2.3–5; Appian R.H. 1.1.2; Longus 1.2, 5; 4.24; for girls specifically, P.Oxy. 744; Ovid Metam. 9.675–684, 704–713). Ancient texts highly prize beauty, which could be a factor in the Samaritan woman " s previous desirability (e.g., Aristotle Po1. 3.7.3, 1282b; Rhet. 1.6.10, 1362b; Theon Progymn. 9.20; Ovid Metam. 13.789; Longus 1.16; 2.23; Athenaeus Deipn. 13.608F; cf. Jdt 8:7; t. Ber. 6:4). Conversely, husbands might wish to divorce her for lack of beauty (Cicero Pro Scauro 5.8; though cf. the ideal in Plutarch Bride 25, Mor. 141D; Prov 11:22 ), but finding so many subsequent husbands would have been difficult under those circumstances. |
| 500 Diogenes Laertius 10.1.12, on Epicurus, according to Diocles; on followers of Pythagoras, cf. Culpepper, School 50. 501 Quintilian 1.3.1; Plutarch Educ. 13, Mor. 9E; Musonius Rufus frg. 51, p. 144.3–7; Diogenes Laertius 6.2.31; Koester, Introduction, 1:93; Ferguson, Backgrounds, 84; Heath, Hermogenes, 11; Watson, «Education,» 310, 312; examples were also memorized (Theon Progymn. 2.5–8). The youngest learned by pure memorization (Quintilian 2.4.15; Jeffers, World, 256), and higher education (after about age sixteen) included memorizing many speeches and passages useful for speeches (Jeffers, World, 256). But the ultimate goal was both understanding and remembering (Isocrates Demon. 18, Or. 1). Ancient theories on how memory worked varied (see Aristotle Mem.; Plato Meno 8ICD; Philostratus Vit. soph. 1.22.523). 503 Culpepper, School 177. The effectiveness of long-term memorization by a certain amount of repetition (beyond a certain point it is unnecessary) has been studied, e.g., by Thompson, Wenger, and Bartling, «Recall,» 210 (this source was supplied to me by M. Bradley, then a student at Duke University); for memorization by repetition, see Iamblichus V.P. 31.188. 504 Diodorus Siculus 10.5.1; Iamblichus V.P. 29.165; on their memories, see further ibid., 20.94; 29.164; 35.256. On memorization techniques, cf. Rhet. ad Herenn. 3.22.35. See further Kennedy, Classical Rhetoric, 98. 505 Some mnemonic claims from much earlier periods (Valerius Maximus 8.7.ext.l6: Cyrus " s knowledge of all his troops» names, or Mithridates» of the twenty-two languages of his subjects) are less credible. 506 See, e.g., Philostratus Vit. Apol1. 5.21; Liefeld, «Preacher,» 223; Robbins, Jesus, 64. Some writers emphasized that an internal inclination to virtue was superior to imitation (Philo Abraham 6, 38). 507 Amoraim underlined this principle with stories of rabbis who imitated even their masters» toilet habits and home life (b. Ber. 62a). Rabbis» behavior later established legal precedent (t. Piska 2:15–16; Sipre Deut. 221.1.1; p. B. Mesi c a 2:11, §1; Demai Nid. 1:4, §2; Sanh. 7:2, §4; Yebam. 4:11, §8). |
| (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. |
| 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). |
| 6457 E.g., Homer I1. 15.612–614; 16.441; see further the discussion on John 2:4 . 6458 E.g., Homer Il. 6.487–488. 6459 Excepting his military victories (Pss. So1. 17:21–25); Martyn, Theology, 96. But on new-Moses signs of some of the «signs prophets,» see our introduction, pp. 270–72. 6460 Martyn, Theology, 93. 6461 Tilborg, Ephesus, 101–7, suggests that John " s audience will read «high priests» through the lens of those in Ephesus; but even uninformed Ephesian readers would know of Jewish high priests (cf. Acts 19:14), and believers might know them from the gospel tradition preserved in the Synoptics. Still less likely is Derrett " s association of «rulers» in 7with cosmic powers («ρχοντες»); though this association appears in some passages (see Keener, Paul, 64–65), «rulers» were normally human (e.g., Rom 13:1 ). 6462 Despite the same Greek term as in Luke 4(and CIJ l:xcix; 1:124, §172; Leon, Jews, 190), these bear no relationship with the hazzan of the synagogue (cf. Stambaugh and Balch, Environment, 49); the term had a broader usage ( Prov 14:35 ; Isa 32:5; Dan 3LXX; Wis 6:4; John 18:3,12, 18,22,36; 19:6 ; Matt 5:25; Mark 14:54,65 ; Luke 1:2; Acts 5:22,26; 13:5; 26:16; 1Cor 4:1 ). John 7:32, 45–46 refers to the templés Levite police (Jeremias, Jerusalem, 210); see also comment on 18:3. 6463 Cf. here also Von Wahlde, «Terms,» 233. Probably by the end of the second century, the head of the rabbinic movement could dispatch troops, authorizing arrests of wayward rabbis (p. Hor. 3:1, §2; Sanh. 2:1, §3, though probably fictitious). 6464 See Keener, Matthew, 351–53, 538–40. 6465 Thus Pharisees and chief priests are linked especially by Matthew (Matt 21:45; 27:62) and, writing after those who saw themselves as Pharisaism " s heirs had gained greater power (led by the Pharisaic leader Gamaliel II), John (7:32,45; 11:47,57; 18:3). See further comment on our introduction to 1:19–28. 6466 John probably recycles his material in various contexts, which was acceptable rhetorical technique (Theon Progymn. 4.73–79; 5.388–441); cf. Brown, John, 1(citing 8:21–22). |
| 8687 Plutarch Theseus 1.2. The essay Greek and Roman Parallel Stories (Mor. 305A-316B), may not be genuinely from Plutarch " s hand but at least demonstrates that attention was given to his method. 8688 Theon Progymn. 2.86–88, remarking on this in Demosthenes (cf., e.g., Plato Sophist 221D); on comparison (σγκρισις) of characters, Theon Progymn. 10.3–4; subjects, because they can compare characters on the basis of their deeds, can be compared in the same way (10.4–7). See further comment on 13:23. 8689 E.g., Quintilian 10.1.85, comparing the Greek Homer with the Roman Virgil; Appian C.W. 2.21.149, comparing Julius Caesar with Alexander. 8690 Jacobson, «Visions,» though contrasting Greek historiography. Examples abound in the biblical tradition, e.g., Daniel " s use of Joseph motifs, and the parallel of Jeremiah " s reticence at his call to Moses». 8691 Boring, Sayings, 85–86, suggests that the lack of enthusiastic frenzy may characterize Johannine prophetism; cf. also Isaacs, «Spirit,» 406. Berg, «Pneumatology,» 142, could be right that this is mainly a modern distinction, but Herrn. Mand. 11.2–9 (in Boring, Sayings, 85–86) suggests that it was at least considered in the early second century, and the Montanists (Aune, Prophecy, 313) were certainly ready to lay claim to the Fourth Gospe1. 8697 Betz, Paraklet, 128–30, argues for the Spirit " s function as prophet in John and early Judaism (as the teacher, 130–33; the witness, 133–34; and protector of righteousness, 134–36); see also Bornkamm, «Paraklet,» 18–20; Hill, Prophecy, 150; Boring, «Prophecy»; Isaacs, «Spirit,» 392–99; Vawter, «Ezekiel,» 455–58. Prophets» intercessory role in early Judaism (Glatzer, «Prophecy,» 133–35) may also fit the Paracletés activity. 8698 Comparing Jesus» and the Spirit " s prophetic functions in John, see Isaacs, «Spirit,» 399–402; cf. Vawter, «Ezekiel,» 455–58. Compare even the hostility toward Jesus in John 7:20 ; 8with Josephus War 6.303. 8704 For Rev 13, see, e.g., Kraybill, Cult, 161–65; Bauckham, Climax, 423–31; Keener, Revelation, 337–39, 355–56,409–10; for Rev 11, see ibid., 290–93. |
|
|
