| 4287 For an example of the question demeaning one, cf. perhaps the later p. Pesah. 6(involving Hillel, and where he is vindicated). 4289 Meyers and Strange, Archaeology, 56, suggest 1600–2000 inhabitants, based on the tombs; cf. p. 27. More recent estimates suggest below 500 (Stanton, Gospel Truth, 112; Horsley, Galilee, 193); perhaps those who lived in the nearby countryside would count themselves inhabitants in a more general way. Although some opined that coming from a famous city was necessary for happiness (Plutarch Demosthenes 1.1), Plutarch thinks life in a famous city necessary only if one needed exposure (Demosthenes 2.1; cf. John 7:3–4 ). 4290 Cf. Finkelstein, Pharisees, 1:41. See Harvey, History, 3, for a summary of the initial archaeological discoveries concerning early Roman Nazareth (for an early defense of Jesus» Nazarene connection " s authenticity, see Moore, «Nazarene»; more speculatively on earlier excavations of Joseph " s legendary home, cf. de Nazareth, «Maison»). 4291 Horsley, Galilee, 193. Cf. the more concrete data in Egyptian tax records in Lewis, Life, 67–68. 4293 The theater seated 4000–5000 (Freyne, Galilee, 138; cf. further Boatwright, «Theaters»). For a summary of archaeological and literary evidence on the city, see Meyers, Netzer, and Meyers, «Sepphoris»; cf. Boelter, «Sepphoris»; for the Dionysus mosaic, Weiss and Netzer, «Sty»; for its wealth, Meyers, Netzer and Meyers, «Byt-mydwt.» 4294 Later rabbis told of individual minim there (t. Hu1. 2:24) but do not provide details for an entire Jewish-Christian community (Miller, " Minim»). 4295 See Avi-Yonah, «Geography,» 105, citing especially Josephus Ant. 18.37; Life 67; and aniconic coins after 67 C.E.; Freyne, Galilee, 138; for Tiberias, see Josephus Life 275, 279. Cf. Pesiq. Rab Kah. 18:5; later rabbinic Judaism found a welcome home there (see Meyers, «Judaism and Christianity,» 76). This is not to say that it was entirely orthodox by Pharisaic standards (cf., e.g., Cornfeld, Josephus, 216); more Gentiles may have also moved there, at least after 135 (see Horsley, Galilee, 104). For Christians coming there, cf., e.g., b. c Abod. Zar. 17a; Herford, Christianity, 115; Crocker, «Sepphoris.» |
| 3694 Wis 7:22 (μονογενς). Rabbinic texts often identify God as the «unique» or «only» one of the world (e.g., Sipra Sh. M.D. 99.2.3; b. Pesah. 118a–as Abraham was; p. Meg. 1:9, §1; Roš Haš. 1:3, §42; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 4:1; Gen. Rab. 98:13; Num. Rab. 10:5; Song Rab. 1:9, §2, with a second-century attribution, if reliable). 3695 See Harris, Jesus as God, 84–87, also noting that the issue is not Jesus being «begotten» but being the only one of his kind. 3696 E.g., martyrs» hope «full of immortality» (Wis 3:4). In John, cf. fulness of joy (3:29; 15:11; 16:24; 17:13) or of physical bread (6:12; cf. 6:13,26) or water (cf. 2:7, different term). 3697 Emphasizing «a unified cosmos» (Lincoln, Ephesians, 73; cf. Long, Philosophy, 157); cf. the Cynic Diogenes in Diogenes Laertius 6.2.38. Some suspect popular Stoic influence on the use of the term in Pauline epistles, e.g., Benoit, « " Pleromá»; Lyonnet, «Adversaries,» 147–48. 3698 Bury " s references to the Logos being «full» of divine graces (Logos Doctrine, 28–29; cf. Philo Alleg. Interp. 3.77–78; Planting 87–89; Confusion 123) may be relevant as a parallel usage to John 1:14 , though not as a source for it. In Hellenistic Judaism, the omnipresent God (Let. Aris. 131–132; Philo Alleg. Interp. 1.44; 3.4; Confusion 135–136; Names 27; cf. 2 En. 39:5; Cicero Resp. 6.17.17; cf. references in Knox, Gentiles, 163; Moore, Judaism, 1:370–72), the Spirit, and Wisdom fill the cosmos (Wis 1:7; Sir 24:25 ; cf. Sib. Or. 3.701; cf. Bogdasavich, " Pleroma»), but «fulness» does not always appear in a technical sense (e.g., Sir 1:16 ). 3699 E.g., Irenaeus Haer. 1.1.1; Prayer of the Apostle Paul (trans. Dieter Mueller, NHL 28); Gospel of Truth (trans. George W. MacRae, NHL 37). Sandmel, Judaism, 474 n. 5, is among those who dismiss the gnostic sense in John here. It is unlikely elsewhere in the NT as well; cf., e.g., Overfield, «Pleroma»; Arnold, Ephesians, 83–84; Baggott, Approach, 70; Lincoln, Paradise, 146; Hamerton-Kelly, Pre-existence, 183; Yamauchi, Gnosticism, 46; contrast, e.g., Hanson, Unity, 117. |
| Taken from Meffreth, Dominica 3 Post Pascha, No. 2. 1. 1–4 cf Meffreth: «O si peccator animaduerteret mala, quae per peccatum incurrit, fleret vtique in praesenti, ne haberet materiam flendi in futuro.» 11. 5–12 cf Meffreth: «Nam per peccatum homo Deum offendit, consortium angelorum & sanctorum amittit, & suffragia Ecclesiae perdit, animam per peccatum interficit, diabolo se subijcit, & in infemum se submergit.» 11. 13–18 cf Meffreth: «Quis ergo peccator habet adeo durum cor, quod possit se continere a fletu, qui aduertit haec mala, quae peccatum adducunt? Circumspice vndique ex omni parte inuenies damna.» 11. 19–24 cf Meffreth: «Si respicis sursum inuenies tibi Deum offensum, & coelum clausum.» 11. 25–28 cf Meffreth: «Si deorsum, infemum apertum.» 11. 29–30 cf Meffreth: «A dextris, consortium bonorum perditum.» 11. 31–32 cf Meffreth: «A sinistris, consortium malorum afflictiuum.» 11. 33–34 cf Meffreth: «Ante te mortem, quia si tu mortuus fueris in peccatis damnaberis.» 11. 35–36 cf Meffreth: «Post te damnum, quia suffragia ecclesiae & sanctorum nunquam tibi prodesse possunt. Haec Iordanus in suis postill.» (Pars aestiv., p. 86). Злонравие. Taken from Faber, In Festo S. Nicolai, No. 4 «Quid debeant parentes Liberis», sect. 2 «Morum honestas»: «S. Chrysost. horn. 9. in 1. Epist. ad Tim. ait... Dedecus est parentum, si liberi eorum incedant sordidi, laceri, nudi; quanto magis si male morati.» Злонравие 2. Taken from Faber, In Festo S. Stephani Protomartyris, No. 2 «Modi ulciscendi se Christiane», sect. 1 «Bonus esto». 11. 1–8 cf Faber: «Idem docet Cardinalis Bellarmin. cone. 26. ’Si quis forte avarus, inquit, vel intemperans vel irreligiosus appelletur, mox cum stomacho respondebit: Non est ita, mentiris: hoc ferro ostendam me virum probum atque integrum esse. Videte hominis dementiam.... Quid habet gladius cum probitate? ... Optimum igitur et saluberrimum ultionis genus hoc est: Avarum te appellavit: exhibe te erga ilium ipsum liberalem, obrue ilium beneficiis. Intemperantem te esse dixit? sobrie vivito, ieiuniis operam dato...» Sic ille.» 11. |
| Similarly, the Gospel naturally stresses signs of grace whereas the Apocalypse stresses signs of judgment; but it may be more than coincidence that the first of John " s seven signs, turning water to wine (2:9), reflects the first of Moses» signs in Exodus, turning water to blood (Exod 7:20; cf. Jub. 48:5), 1071 a prominent source of judgment imagery in two of Revelation " s three sets of seven plagues (8:8–11,16:3–4). John does not mention the marriage supper (Rev 19), but this concept provides part of the eschatological backdrop for John 6 and perhaps also chs. 2 and 21. The new Jerusalem naturally occurs only in Revelation (3:12, ch. 21), but the idea complements well the Fourth Gospel " s emphasis on the genuine Jewishness of the true people of God, as well as his negative portrayal of the earthly Jerusalem. The new Jerusalem " s dimensions probably simply represent the presence of God (a cube, like the holy of holies, 21:16); 1072 its gates (Rev 21:12–13) are part of the imagery of the renewed city (Isa 60:18; Ezek 48:30–34 ), and are thus not incompatible with (though neither are they identical to) the sheepfold image of Jesus as the way and door ( John 10:7, 9; 14:6 ). John " s «dwelling» motif, expressed by his characteristic menö, is replaced by katoicheö and the motif of the heavenly temple (e.g., Rev 21:3); but this fits the contrasting eschatological perspectives of the two books. Revelation " s temple imagery (e.g., 3:12, 4:6, 5:8, 8:3, 15:2) is apocalyptic, but fits well theologically with John " s portrayal of Jesus» replacement of the temple (2:21, 8:35,14:2); they function in a roughly equivalent manner on the theological level (Rev 21:22; cf. the tabernacle in 7:15,13:6,15:5; John 1:14 ). Only Revelation includes the common Jewish image of the book of life (Rev 3:5, 20:12), but an apocalyptic image is hardly mandatory for a gospel; John, unlike the Synoptics, does stress eternal life as a possession in the present. White robes (Rev 3:4–5; 4:4; 6:11; 7:9; but cf. John 19:40; 20:12 ), the «new name» (Rev 2:17; 3:12; 7:3; 14:1; 22:4; cf. 17:5; 19:16; cf. John 1:42; 10:3 ), the crown imagery (Rev 2:11; 4:4; 12:1; 14:14; 19:12), angels (Rev passim; cf. John 20:12 ), the morning star (Rev 2:28; 22:16), the «nations» (Rev 2:26; 11:18; 12:5; 15:4; 19:15; 21:24; 22:2; but cf. John " s kosmos), thunder (Rev 4:5; 8:5; 11:19; 16[Exod 19:16; Ezek 1:4,13 ]; cf. John 12:29 ), a cry for vengeance (Rev 6[reflecting the OT; cf. 4 Ezra 4:33–37]), darkness (Rev 6:12–14; John omits the Synoptic tradition " s darkness at the cross), trumpets (1:10; 4:1; 8:2), locusts (9:3–11 [ Joel 2:4–5 ]), and antichrist imagery (Rev 13; though cf. 1 John 2and possibly John 5:43; 10:1 ), are examples of apocalyptic motifs that play little or no part in the Fourth Gospe1. But this should simply be expected on the basis of different genres. |
| 1280 Scott, «Attitudes.» Apparently only the Greeks who traveled to the East knew much about Indian religion, however (Delaygue, «Grecs»). 1281 Pyrrho (ca. 360–270 b.C.E.; Diogenes Laertius 9.11.61); Apollonius of Tyana (Philostratus Vit. Apoll, books 2 and 3 [LCL 1:117–229,2:231–345]); cf. Finegan, Religions, 149, on archaeological confirmations of such reports. 1282 Cicero Tusc. 5.27.78; Strabo Geog. 15.1.11–13ff. (LCL 7:14–19ff.); Xenophon Cyr. 2.4.1–8; Valerius Maximus 2.6.14; 3.3.ext.6; cf. Horace Ep. 1.6.6; Carm. 1.12.56; 1.31.6; 3.24.1–2; 4.14.42; Jub. 8:21. Some of the information was clearly speculative (e.g., Achilles Tatius 4.5.1). See more fully Avi-Yonah, Hellenism, 164–66; Nock, Conversion, 46–47. 1283 Petronius Sat. 38; Poem 18; Martial Epigr. 4.28.4; Pausanias 3.12.4; Xenophon Eph. 4.1; cf. Sib. Or. 11.299; Wheeler, Beyond Frontiers, 115–71; Casson, Travel, 124; Koester, Introduction, 1:86. Cf. Ceylon [modern Sri Lanka]-Rome ties in Pliny Nat. 6.84–85 (in Sherk, Empire, 32); cf. «The Sea Route to India and Ceylon,» ch. 4, 57–73 in Charlesworth, Routes. 1284 Juvenal Sat. 6.585. The Indian emperor Asoka reportedly sent representatives of Buddhism to Egypt in the third century b.C.E. (Finegan, Records, 67). 1287 For China, see Casson, Travel, 124–26; cf. «The Overland Route to China and India,» ch. 6, 97–111 in Charlesworth, Routes; Wheeler, Beyond Frontiers, 172–75. 1292 E.g., Bull, «Medallion»; Lease, «Mithraeum»; Flusser, «Paganism,» 1099; see fuller documentation in our comment on the resurrection narratives. 1307 Barrett, «Vocabulary,» 223; but cf. Wilcox, «Dualism,» 88; Pearson, Terminology, 2–3; Giblet, «Développements,» 72. Stendahl, Paul, 76, calls it «gnostic» «with a small gl» 1308 Bultmann, John, 8–9,487; cf. idem, Theology, 2:17; Wilson, Gnosis, 46; cf. Dodd, Interpretation, 97–114; Schnelle, Christology, 228–29 (emphasizing John " s antidocetic Christology). 1309 In detail, see Thompson, Humanity; cf. also Morris, «Jesus.» Schnelle, Christology, passim (e.g., 229) regards the Gospel " s Christology as a reaction against docetism, but this goes too far. |
| 3573 Contrast the language of some rabbis (e.g., " Abot R. Nat. 12 A; 26, §54 B; Sipre Deut. 32.2.1; Song Rab. 1:3, §3), although the language is essentially hyperbolic (cf. similar language in b. Sanh. 99b); the rabbis would have attributed the conversion to God as wel1. 3574 Cf. 1QH 9.14–16; Lev. Rab. 14:5; in Greco-Roman antiquity in general, cf. Keener, Marries, 80, esp. nn. 155–56 on 187. The contrast between human and divine will (also 3:8) reflects the Johannine emphasis on God " s will (4:34; 5:30, 40; 6:38, 39; 7:17; 9:31; cf. 5:6) vs. the world " s rebellion, and God " s will to give life (6:40; cf. 5:21). Cf. Plutarch T.T. 8.1.3, Mor. 718A: God created the cosmos but not δια σπρματος. 3575 Many considered passion virtually irresistible (e.g., Sophocles Track. 441–448; Publilius Syrus 15, 22; Plutarch Oracles at Delphi 20, Mor. 403F-404A; see further Keener, Matthew, 186, on Matt 5:28). Some later rabbis attributed to the yetzer hara the positive function of incentive for procreation (Gen. Rab. 9:7; Ecc1. Rab. 3:11, §3). 3576 See Keener, Marries, 74, esp. nn. 76–77 on 179–80; on paternal authority, see ibid., 98 and nn. 110–119 on 197–98. 3578 Virgil Aen. 2.74. Rarer uses, such as «blood» meaning courage (Aeschines Ctesiphon 160), make much less sense here. 3580 See Gardner, Women, 53, citing Aristotle Gen. Anim. 773a, 30ff.; cf. Pliny Nat. 7.49. In Greek myth a mother could bear twins, one for her husband and the other due to divine impregnation (Pindar Ryth. 9.84–86). 3581 Boismard, Prologue, 44. Cf. Lightfoot, Talmud, 3:241, who associates «bloods» here with a passage in Exod. Rah. that reads Ezek 16:6 " s plural for bloods as a reference to circumcision and Passover; he thus applies it to the means of conversion for proselytes. 3582 Bernard, John, 18; cf. Boismard, Prologue, 44 (though Boismard suggests that this may represent a textual error). 3585 That the point is simply «not by natural intercourse» is usually agreed; e.g., Michaels, John, 8. 3586 Cf. Talbert, John, 77, 98 (on 1:18; 3:6), for the ancient Mediterranean epistemological premise that only like recognizes like, hence necessitating the incarnation for sufficient revelation. |
| 10426 Wagner, Baptism, 219,229; for the typical story, see Vermaseren, Cybele, 91. 10427 Cf. Otto, Dionysus, 79–80,103–19. 10428 E.g., Homer I1. 5.339–342, 382–404, 855–859, 870; on the death of Pan in Plutarch Mor. 419.17, see Borgeaud, «Death.» 10429 Fragments of dithyrambic poetry (ca. 1 B.C.E.) in Sei. Pap. 3:390–93. 10430 E.g., Apollodorus 1.5.3; cf. Guthrie, Orpheus, 31. 10431 See documentation in Gasparro, Soteriology, 30 n. 16. 10432 E.g., Conzelmann, Theology, 11; cf. Case, Origins, 111; Bultmann, Christianity, 158–59; Ridderbos, Paul, 22–29. 10433 Burkert, Cults, 100. 10434 E.g., Apuleius, whom Dunand, «Mystères,» 58, interprets thus. 10435 In Grant, Religions, 146. 10436 E.g., Davies, Paul, 91. 10437 Wagner, Baptism, 87. Thus Heracles sought initiation so he could capture Cerberus in Hades (Apollodorus 2.5.12). 10438 Gasparro, Soteriology, 82. 10439 Bousset, Kyrios Christos, 57. 10440 For the vegetative association see, e.g., Ovid Metam. 5.564–571; Gasparro, Soteriology, 29, 43–49; Ruck, «Mystery,» 44–45; Guthrie, Orpheus, 55–56. 10441 Cf. Metzger, «Consideration,» 19–20; Ring, «Resurrection,» 228. 10442 Boussefs Hellenistic parallels (Kyrios Christos, 58) are unconvincing (cf. Nock, Christianity, 105–6; Jeremias, Theology, 304; Fuller, Formation, 25). Many think that the LXX is a more likely source ( Hos 6:2 ; Jonah 1:17; cf. 1Cor 15:4 ; Nock, Christianity, 108), though it is unlikely that the early Christians would have noticed elements favoring it had the «third day» not been their initial experience. (Rabbis associated Hos 6with the resurrection of the dead; see p. Sanh. 11:6, §1; cf. McArthur, «Day,» 83–84.) 10443 Cf. Thucydides 2.34.2 for honoring Athenian war dead. 10444 Some later traditions suggest the retention of the soul for three days after death (until the soul sees the body begin to decompose; Gen. Rab. 100:7; Lev. Rab. 18:1; though cf. Dola, «Interpretacja») or required three days of purgatory before preparation to appear before God (3 En. 28:10; cf. Apoc. Zeph. 4:7) or that one confirm the actuality of the person " s death within three days (Safrai, «Home,» 784–85). This might possibly fit a broader idea expressed in three days of mourning (Apollonius of Rhodes 2.837). |
| 4245 Cf., e.g., CIJ 1:291, §375; 2:112, §880; 2:117, §890; 2:126, §905; 2:128, §911; 2:137, §932; 2:171, §986; 2:312, §1367; 2:391, §1468; 2:445, §1538. 4248 E.g., CIJ 1:117, §165; 2:117, §890; 2:126, §905; CPJ 1:29; 3:191–192; see further Williams, «Personal Names,» 93. 4249 Cf., e.g., Hachlili and Killebrew, «Saga»; idem, «Byt glyt»; Samuel the Small in p. Sotah 9:13, §2; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 7.2.4; Cornelius Nepos 3 (Aristides), 1.2; Philostratus Hrk. 14.4. 4250 E.g., m. Yad. 4:4; Sipre Deut. 253.2.2; h. Ber. 28a; Bamberger, Proselytism, 234; cf. Dominus Flevit ossuary 31 in Meyers and Strange, Archaeology, 68, Finegan, Archeology, 247–48, and Bagatti, Church, 237. That these instances represent Jewish «proselytes» to Christianity is unlikely, since Jewish Christians thought in terms of fulfillment more than conversion; cf. Avi-Yonah, «Sources,» 47–48. Name change was sometimes used elsewhere to connote conversion; see Horsley, «Change»; on initiation rites, cf. Mbiti, Religions, 165,228; Bietenhard, «νομα,» 243. It could also be associated with a promise or new hope and identity; cf. Gen 17:5 ; Rev 2:17; 3:12; cf. perhaps Ford, Revelation, 399. 4251 Cf. R. Johanan ben Zakkaís praise of each of his five disciples (m. " Abot 2:8, redactionally balanced). 4252 E.g., John Chrysostom Hom. Jo. 19. Reitzenstein, Religions, 40,320–32, finds parallels to the Christian concept of a divine call in the Mysteries, but the concept is pervasive in the Hebrew Bible and appears in Diaspora Judaism (e.g., God calls Abraham in death in T. Ab. 4:9B). 4253 Cf., e.g., Danker, Age, 17; Harrelson, Cult, 39; names might fit circumstances of birth (Cambridge Geniza Text 3.13–16). On the Roman custom of naming boys on the ninth and girls on the eighth day, cf. Plutarch R.Q. 102, Mor. 288BC; Luke 1:59–60; 2and the late Pirqe R. E1. 48 suggest that the custom may have also affected Palestinian Jewry (Safrai, «Sources,» 5; idem, «Home,» 767). 4255 See Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 146–47. This precise name (in contrast to some similar forms) is not attested in the pre-Christian era (Gnilka, Jesus, 186–87), so would not be a name from his parents. |
| Итак, само основание критики серьезно пошатнулось. Конечно, и сегодня есть ученые, которые считают, что евангелист зависит от синоптиков. Однако в этом случае, необходимо сразу указывать на то, что это уже маргинальная точка зрения, имеющая в своей основе не конкретную работу с текстом, а только собственные доктринальные представления. Естественно, сразу после того, как в кругах библеистики начала меняться научная парадигма относительно зависимости текста Иоанна от синоптиков, появились работы, в которых отстаивалась контекстуальная зависимость. Но тут, в чисто научном плане, исследователям приходится становиться на гораздо более зыбкую почву. И попытки провести контекстуальную зависимость особого распространения не получили, по той простой причине, что особо таковую обнаружить так же не удалось. Везде евангелист Иоанн обращается с деталями как власть имеющий. Напр. (1) ( John 1.40–42 ; cf. Mark 3.16 ; Matt. 16.18) (2) (John é.30–32; cf. Mark 8.1 if.) (3) ( John 6.67, 70 ; cf. Mark 3.16 ) (4) ( John 13.2, 27 ; cf. Luke 22.3) (5) ( John 9 .6L; cf. Mark 8.22–26 ) (6) ( John 4.44 ; cf. Mark 6.4 ) (7) ( John 12 .39L; cf. Mark 4.12 ) (8) ( John 12.25 ; cf. Mark 8.35 ) (9) ( John 13.20 ; cf. Matt. 10.40, Mark 9.37 ) (10) ( John 13.16 ; cf. Luke 6.40). И ладно было бы, ecdiv smyleлu автора можно было поймать на простой фальсификации, так нет, совсем наоборот, к тем сведеньям, которые отличны от сведений синоптиков, сегодня относятся более чем серьезно. То, что за Евангелием стоит солидная историческая традиция сегодня не станет отрицать НИКТО. Как подытожил этот вопрос Реймонд Браун: “И поныне находятся авторы, которые утверждают, что четвертое Евангелие нельзя рассматривать как серьезное свидетельство об историческом Иисусе, однако они представляют собой тип некритических традиционалистов, время от времени воскресающий даже в инославии”. Но, как не парадоксально, в этом случае автор (с большей или меньшей неизбежностью) становится очевидцем событий не имеющим нужды в каких-то текстах для того, что бы говорить о произошедших событиях. И что самое интересное, – в таких, на первый взгляд, противоречивых сообщениях, как напр. о дне празднования Пасхи (а я говорил уже в другой теме, что нет особой нужды видеть тут противоречие) большинство современных библеистов склоняются к хронологии четвертого Евангелия. В частности, даже данные астрономии (учитывая соотношение между лунным и солнечным календарями) говорят о том, что 14 нисана приходилось на пятницу в 30 и 33 годах (две самые принимаемые даты распятия Христа), в то время как на четверг только в 26 и 37. Впрочем, об этом, думаю, мы поговорим как-нибудь отдельно. |
| 4499 Cf. Epictetus Diatr. 2.19.16; 20.11 (τ γρ σο και μν); Martial Epigr. 1.76.11–12; cf. Olsson, Structure, 36. 4503 Cf. Whitacre, Polemic, 84–85, who rightly regards Jesus» response here as a cryptic saying that tests his mother, fitting the misunderstanding motif of this Gospe1. Ancients could follow the story line: Coriolanus acceded to his mother " s request, knowing full well it would cost him his life (Plutarch Cor. 34.2; 36.4). 4504 «Beginning» may also suggest a new creation (cf. 1:1–2; 8:44; Gen 1:1 ; Wis 14:13; cf. the differently worded predestinarian concept in Tob 6:17), but the language is natural enough for the beginning of a particular period in question (e.g., Gen 10:10 ; Sir 51:20 ; £ Ab. 15:14A; 4:13B). That period may also be salvifically significant, referring to the beginning of God " s work among his people (Pss. So1. 8:31–32; 17:30). 4505 Malina and Rohrbaugh, John, 68, following Giblin, «Suggestion,» citing 2:1–14; 4:46–5:1,18; 7:2–10; 11:1–8 (though the conflict does not stem from the compliance in every instance). 4506 On the last, cf. Matthew " s manner of describing healings taking place «that very hour» (Matt 8:13; 9:22; 15:28; 17:18; cf. Luke 7:21; Acts 16:18; 22:13); no less frequent chronological markers in comparable works may suggest that John " s are intended primarily literally rather than symbolically. 4508 Brown, John, 1:99, on the basis of John " s uses of οπω. Salvoni, «Hour,» 240, reads οπω as «nevertheless.» 4509 Cullmann, Time, 44; Salvoni, «Hour,» 237–38; Braun, Jean, 17; Feuillet, Studies, 31 (some including his subsequent exaltation). Holwerda, Spirit, 7 n. 16, does not think Jesus» death is in view in this use of «hour»; Derrett, Law, 242–43, thinks that the «appropriate» time, i.e., when guests are too drunk to notice the miracle, is what is meant. 4513 Cf. Judas Maccabeus in 1Macc 9:10, «if our time (καιρς) has come, let us also die in a manly way for the sake of our brothers» (my trans.) 4514 E.g., Homer/. 15.612–614; 16.441; Xenophon Mem. 4.8.6; Appian C.W. 2.16.116; Silius Italicus 3.134–135. This includes the specific language of «time» (Virgil Aen. 10.503; 11.470; Seneca Ep. Luci1. 69.6) and «day» (Euripides Ale. 24–27, 105, 147; Virgil Aen. 12.150; Phaedrus 4.11.8; Appian C.W. 2.21.149; Apol1. Κ. Tyre 29). It also could apply to the «hour» of marriage in a marital context (Catullus 62.30); could its application to time of a miracle (Eunapius Lives 549, in Boring et a1., Commentary, 250; cf. also Philostratus Hrk. 3.2, 5 in Maclean and Aitken, Heroikos, xxvii-xxix) derive from the present story? |
|
|
