| Нрав. Taken from Faber, Dominica 12 Post Pentecosten, No. 2 «Quomodo oporteat proximum diligere sicut seipsum», sect. 2 «Afflicto auxilium ferendum»: «Verum heu videas homines canibus non absimiles! Hi videntes unum canem prostratum morderi ab aliis, etiam ipsi accurrunt et in iacentem saeviunt. Ita quidam afflictis etiam afflictionem addunt.» Published in Panenko and PLDR. Нрав 2. Taken from Faber, Dominica 15 Post Pentecosten, No. 7 «Emendationem vitae non esse differendam usque ad senectutem», sect. 3 «Quia communiter quales in iuventute tales sumus in senectute»: «Antisthenes dicebat apud Meliss. ser. 32. Veterem arborem transplantare difficile est. Facile transplantatur frutex: sed non ita arbor. Eamdem difficultatem experiuntur Confessarii, cum volunt inveteratos malorum et senes transplantare de horto daemonis in hortum Christi.» Published in Panenko and PLDR. Нрав 3. Taken from Faber, ibid., immediately preceding: «Quin etiam certum est, multo duriorem te futurum in senectute ad poenitentiam, quam in iuventute, siquidem nemo nescit, ramos multo facilius curvari teneros, quam inveteratos.» Published in Panenko and PLDR. Нрав 4. Probably taken from Faber, ibid.: «Et sicut homo semper est vegetus, quamdiu in ossibus medullam habet, quasi nutrimentum eorum, ita qui ab adolescentia vitiis assuevit, semper in iisdem viret ac robustus est, tametsi alioquin aetate confectus et exhaustus.» The image here is not quite the same as in Simeon. Published in Panenko and PLDR. Нуждно есть царствие небесное. Loosely based on Faber, In Festo Ascensionis Domini, No. 2 «Triumphus ascendentis Christi». The sermon depicts the Ascension in terms of the triumphal return to Rome of a victorious army, whereas Simeon is talking of the capture of an enemy city, basing his image on the words of Christ in Matt. 11.12: «And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.» Образ . Taken from Faber, In Festo Conceptionis B.M.V., No. 1 «Multiplex Liber homini propositus», sect. 3 «Christus». 11. 1–10 cf Faber: «Aspice, superbe, humilitatem et contemptum Magistri tui pendentis inter latrones, et fac secundum exemplar eius.» 11. 11–14 cf Faber: «Aspice, avare, nuditatem Domini tui.» 11. 15–18 cf Faber: «Aspice, libidinose, dolores.» 11. 19–22 cf Faber: «Aspice, iracunde, mansuetudinem, qua sicut agnus coram tondente se obmutuit [cf Isa. 53.7].» 11. 23–26 cf Faber: «Aspice, gulose, sitim, fel et acetum.» 11. 27–34 cf Faber: «Aspice, invide, charitatem, qua pro inimicis oravit et mortuus est.» 11. 35–42 cf Faber: «Aspice, piger, perseverantiam in cruce et fac secundum exemplar.» |
| 13 «Sobornost», 65, 67 (курсив оригинала). 14 В. Н. Лосский Очерк мистического богословия Восточной Церкви М, 1991, с 10. 15 Иже во св. Отца нашего аввы Исаака Сириянина Слова подвижнические М, 1993; репринт изд. Тр.-Серг. Лавры, 1911. Слово 15, с. 60. 16 А. С. Хомяков. Сочинения в 2-х томах. Т. 2. с. 271. 17 Эта статья была написана Романидисом во время его учебы у Афанасьева в парижском Православном Институте преп. Сергия (1954—55), но в печати появилась только через несколько лет См.: The Greek Orthodox Theological Review 7: 1—2 (1961—62), 53—77. Позже Романидис отошел от основных положений евхаристической экклезиологии. См.. Andrew J. Sopko, Prophet of Roman Orthodoxy: The Theology of John Romanides (Dewdney, BC, Canada. Synaxis Press, 1998), 150—53. 18 См.: N. Afanassief, «The Church, Which Presides in Love», in John Meyendorff and others, The Primacy Of Peter (London: Faith Press, 1962), 57—110 (new edition [Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir " " s Seminary Press, 1922], 91—143). Cf. Aidan Nochois, Theology in the Russian Diasporä Church, Father, Eucharist in Nikolai Afanas " ev (1893—1966) (Cambridge, England; Cambridge University Press, 1989). 19 См.: John D. Zizioulas, Being As Communion: Studies in Personhood andthe Church (Crestwood, NY: St Vladimir " " s Seminary Press, 1985). Cf. Paul McPartlan, The Eucharist Makes the Church: Henri du Lubac and John Zizioulas in Dialogue (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1993). 20 Послание к Филадельфийцам, 4//Мужи апостольские и апологеты. Антология. Брюссель, 1988, с. 129. 21 In Constantin G. Patelos, The Orthodox Church in the Ecumenical Movement. Documents and Statements 1902—1975 (Genevä World Council of Churches, 1978), 96. Я думаю, что в составлении этого превосходного документа большая доля принадлежит о. Георгию Флоровскому. Жаль, что православные участники последних съездов ВСЦ не высказываются так ясно! 22 По данным на 1960 г., приведенным в брошюре Parishes and Clergy of the Orthodox, and Other Eastern Churches in North and South America together with the Parishes and Clergy of the Polish National Catholic Church, 1960—61, под редакцией епископа Лористона Л. Скейфе (Lauriston L. Scaife), изданной Комиссией по сотрудничеству с восточными церквями Главного Совета протестантской Епископальной Церкви (the Joint Comission on Cooperation with the Eastern Churches of the General Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church). В эту цифру не включены нехалкидонские исповедания. Публикация снабжена превосходными фотографиями. |
| Лов духовный. Taken from Faber, Dominica 4 Post Pentecosten, No. 2 «Piscatio Evangelica quomodo fieri debeat». The poem is loosely based on the Gospel for the day, Luke 5.1–11 which describes the call of Peter, James and John, though Andrew is not mentioned in this passage. Simeon " s poem therefore corresponds more closely to the parallel account in Matt. 4.18–20 which does include Andrew. Лов духовный 2. Taken from Faber, ibid., sect. 1 «Mittant rete in dexteram». 11. 1–6 cf Gospel for the day, Luke 5.1–11. The reference to casting the net on the right side of the boat is taken from the post-Resurrection appearance of Christ recorded in John 21.1–6. 11. 11–18 cf Faber: «Piscatores ergo animarum mittant rete ad dextram navigii partem, uti monuit Dominus loan. 21. hoc est, habeant rectam intentionem cum fieri piscatores hominum volunt. Recta autem intentio est, collimare ad Dei gloriam et animarum salutem.» 11. 19–30 cf Faber: «Sinistra, collimare ad opes honores, gloriam vanam, quietem aliaque commoda: quae ducit ad sinistram iudicis futuri, seu ad sortem reproborum. Et sicut discipuli nihil ceperunt, quoad miserunt rete in dextram: ita frustra laborant, qui ob temporalia tantum commoda fiunt Sacerdotes et Concionatores.» Ловитва . Taken from Faber, In Festo S. Andreae, No. 2 «Homines comparantur piscibus», sect. 3 «Capiuntur variis astibus»: «Sicut pisces capiuntur hamo, sic capiuntur hom ines in tempore malo; ait Sapiens Eccles. Capiuntur [pisces] esca modica, sub qua latet hamus; similiter et homines, dum ad voluptatem tantum, licet modicam, attendunt, hamum vero latentem non vident, capiuntur a Diabolo. ... Ambulat Diabolus iuxta mare huius mundi, et capit heu innumeros, quia escam porrigit gustui placentem, sed quae mox hamum remorsus infîgat, et ad extremum mortem inferat.» Лож в духовных. Taken from Faber, Dominica 4 Post Pascha, No. 6 «Qua ratione diabolus doceat omnem falsitatem», sect. 1 «Docet mentiri»: «Nihilo magis licitum est mendacium iocosum; quia et ipsum turpe in omnium ore, magis tarnen in ore clerici aut religiosi; quod quidam vir saecularis ingeniöse notavit in religioso itineris comité. Cum enim hic repente saecularem compellans diceret: En illic volantem asinum. Suspexit alter praeproperis et nimium credulis oculis. Quern irridens ille: O te simplicem, inquit, qui credas asinum volare posse! Cui alter: Ignosce mihi qui tuis verbis deceptus sum, ne mireris velim quod suspexerim: facilius enim credebam asinum volare posse, quam mentiri religiosum. " |
| On the occasion of the anniversary of his enthronement, Patriarch Kirill and Met. Hilarion (Alfeyev) sent greetings to His Beatitude Patriarch John X of Antioch. Greeting from His Holiness Patriarch Kirill: Your Beatitude, beloved brother in the Lord and Concelebrant: I wholeheartedly congratulate you on the day of your enthronement. Standing at the helm of the holy Church of Antioch under difficult circumstances in a great trial of affliction (2 Cor. 8:2) you have been doing the courageous and selfless responsible work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ (Eph. 4:12). I assure you that the Russian Orthodox Church will always support people of the same faith in keeping with the Apostle’s words whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it (1 Cor. 12:26). I prayerfully wish Your Beatitude the inexhaustible God’s help in your primatial ministry, spiritual and physical health and many blessings from the Lord, holy and true (Rev. 6:10). With brotherly love in the Lord, + Kirill Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Greetings from His Beatitude Metropolian Hilarion of Volokalamsk: Your Beatitude: I respectfully greet you with the anniversary of your election to the see of primates of the Church of Antioch. Your are proclaiming the word of reconciliation (2 Cor. 5:19) and strengthening your flock in spirit during hard times of persecution carried out by the forces seeking to uproot the Christian faith in the ancient Biblical land of the Middle East. You are encouraging the people of God to rejoice in hope, be patient in tribulation, contine constant in prayer, rejoice with them that do rejoice, and weep with them that weep (cf. Rom. 12:12-15). This appeal finds a cordial response in the hearts of the faithful. I wholeheartedly wish Your Beatitude abundant mercies from Christ the Saviour, spiritual and physical fortitude in the Lord, and I wish a just and lasting peace and prosperity to your beloved flock. With respectful love in the Lord, + Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk Chairma of the Department for External Church Relations Moscow Patriarchate His Holiness Patriarch Kirill , Metropolitan Hilarion (Alfeyev) 13 февраля 2016 г. Рейтинг: 8.5 Голосов: 2 Оценка: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Смотри также Комментарии Новые материалы Выбор читателей Мы в соцсетях Подпишитесь на нашу рассылку |
| 17 James M. Robinson, A New Quest of the Historical Jesus, Studies in Biblical Theology, First Series, 25 (London: SCM, 1959), pp. 85–92; cf. pp. 9–22. 19 Основополагающий труд, написанный группой богословов, которых иногда называют «Кружком Панненберга»: Woifhart Pannenberg, ed., Revelation as History, transl. by David Granskou (London: Collier-Macmillan, 1968). 20 Там же, гл. IV; тж. см. Wolfhart Pannenberg,/?SW5 – God and Man, transl. by Lewis Wilkins and Duane Priebe (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1968), pp. 88–105. 21 Jurgen Moltmann, Theology of Hope: On the Ground and the Implications of a Christian Eschatology, transl. by James W. Leitch (New York: Harper and Row, 1967). 22 Это название, видимо, впервые использовали Стивен Нил и Том Райт: Stephen Neill and Tom Wright, The Interpretation of the New Testament: 1961–1986, Second Edition (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1988). Лучшее исследование и оценку см. в книге: Ben Witherington III, The Jesus Quest: The Third Search for the Jew of Nazareth (Downers Grove: Inter Varsity, 1995). Популярный обзор современных работ, посвященных Иисусу, см.: Tom Wright, «The New, Unimproved Jesus,» Christianity Today, vol. 37, no. 10, September 13, 1993, pp. 22–26. 23 Geza Vermes, Jesus the Jew: A Historian s Reading of the Gospels (New York: Macmillan, 1973); cp. Geza Vermes, The Religion of Jesus the Jew (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993). 26 Richard Horsley,/?s s and the Spiral of Violence: Popular Jewish Resistance in Roman Palestine (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1987). 27 В качестве примеров см. James Н. Charlesworth ms Within Judaism (Garden City: Doubleday, 1988); John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, Vol. 1 (Garden City: Doubleday, 1991); Mentor, Message, Miracle, Vol. 2 (Garden City: Doubleday, 1994). 28 Среди типичных текстов можно назвать: Robert W. Funk, Roy W. Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar, The Five Gospels: The Search for the Authentic Words of Jesus (New York: Macmillan, 1993); John Dominic Crossan, The HistoricalJe- |
| 150. But whenever one questions the Akindynists who say that the Light of the Godhead is the substance, and consequently the substance of God is visible, they are forced to reveal their deceit because they say that the Light is the substance, since through the Light the substance of God is made visible, for through creatures the substance of God is visible; and in turn these wretches maintain that the Light of the Lord " s Transfiguration is a created thing. But as it is seen through creatures, it is not the substance but the creative energy of God. Thus, in agreement with Eunomius, they heretically say that the substance of God is visible through creatures. So the harvest of their impiety is abundant. We should therefore flee them and their company as one would a soul-destroying, many-headed serpent, or the manifold corruption of orthodoxy. Текст на греческом см. в оригинале на сайте. 209 Cf. Basil, Hexaemeron 1.4, pg 29:12c (sc 26bis); Pseudo-Caesarius, Quaestiones et responsiones 1.72, pg 38:940 (σται μν τς κτσεως διλυσις, ο παντελς δ φανισμς, λλ πρς τ κρεττον μεταποησις) 212 According to Aristotle, Cael. 1.2 (296a2–28), earth and water have a natural downward motion and are stationary only when at rest. 215 On the elements as πλ σματα, see Aristotle, Cael. 1.2 (268b26–29), 3.1 (298a29–31), 3.8 (306b9–11). 216 The definition comes ultimately from Aristotle, De anima 2.1 (412a27–28 and 412b5–6), but note the omission of πρτη. This was the commonplace definition used from the early patristic through the Byzantine period. E.g., Hippolytus, Philosophoumena 7.19, ed. P. Wendland (gcs), p. 194.23; Simplicius, In Aristotelis De caelo commentaria 2.1 (284a14) in cag 7:381.5–6; John Philoponus, Dc opificio mundi 6.23, ed. G. Reichardt (Leipzig, 1897), p. 278.3–5; Nikephoros Gregoras, Salutiones quaestionum 6.1–4, ed. P. L. M. Leone, «Nicephori Gregorae " Antilogia» et ‘Solutiones quaestionum’,» Byzantion 4 (1970) 510. According to George Tornikes, Anna Komnena objected to the πρτη in Aristotle " s original definition on the grounds that it might suggest that the soul is inseparable from the body and thus subject to dissolution and mortality. She therefore proposed a double actuality (διπλ ντελχεια) for the soul (Éloge d " Anne Comnène, ed. J. Darrouzès, George et Démétrios Tornikès. Lettres et discours [Paris, 1970], p. 289. 13–19). |
| 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. |
| 3273 See Meeks, Prophet-King, 103–6. It is helpful here to compare the divinization of Plato and other teachers in Hellenistic tradition (e.g., Diogenes Laertius 2.100; 6.2.63; 6.9.104; 8.1.11; 9.7.39; Plutarch Profit by Enemies 8, Mor. 90C; Apol1. 36, Mor. 120D; cf. Cicero Leg. 3.1.1); cf. lawgivers in Musonius Rufus 15, p. 96.24. One may also think of hyperbolic comparisons employed in popular rhetoric; see, e.g., Cicero De or. 1.10.40; 1.38.172; Or. Brut. 19.62. 3274 E.g., Philo Sacrifices 9; cf. Runia, «God.» Cf. explanations of Exod 7in Exod. Rab. 8:1; Num. Rab. 15:13. Cf. Metatron (originally a personification) as a lesser YHWH in 3 En. 12(though he turns out to be Enoch in 3 En. 4:2; Tg. Ps.-J. on Gen 4:24 ; cf. further Scholem, Gnosticism, 43–46); the righteous Messiah, and Jerusalem called by the Lord " s name (b. B. Bat. 75b; cf. Jer 23:6 ; Ezek 48:35 ); and Israel as a god (Gen. Rab. 98:3, fourth-century Amoraim). Yet R. Simeon ben Yohai (late second century) taught that associating God " s name with other gods was worse than denying his existence (b. Sanh. 63a). 3276 Contrast Williamson, «Philo»; Chilton, Approaches, 200–201; their comparisons are nevertheless valuable. 3277 Cf. also Bultmann, John, 33 (rejecting especially Hellenistic and gnostic «polytheistic conceptions and emanationist theories» that neglect the text " s monotheistic sense); Stuart, «Examination,» 42. Greek scholars consistently deride the «a god» translation; cf., e.g., Metzger, «Translation,» 125; and esp. Bruce, Booh, 60 n. 4: those who translate «a god» here «prove nothing thereby save their ignorance of Greek grammar.» 3279 E.g., Josephus Ant. 10.180; cf. Stuart, «Examination,» 42; Bultmann, John, 33; Brown, John, 1:5; Harris, Jesus as God, 287. On Josephus " s general sense for τ θεv, cf. Shutt, «Concept.» 3282 Metzger, «Translation,» 125; cf. Clark, Logos, 21; Sanders, John, 70 (citing the predicate nominative of 1:4). It should be noted, of course, that a writer who wished to emphasize that a predicate noun was definite was free to insert the article (Harner, «Nouns,» 87); and the pattern does not always obtain even in the context ( John 1:8–9 ). |
| 9054 Mitchell, «Friends,» 259, citing Cicero Amic. 6.22. Masters also should avoid confiding in servants (Theophrastus Char. 4.2). 9057 Plutarch Flatterer 24, Mor. 65AB (LCL 1:344–45); cf. Flatterer 17, Mor. 59A; Educ. 17, Mor. 13B. Cf. Stowers, Letter Writing, 39. 9063 Aristotle N.E. 9.8.2, 1168b, cited in Stowers, Letter Writing, 58; Witherington, Acts, 205 (on Acts 4:32). Cf. Arius Didymus 11C. 9065 Martial Epigr. 2.43.1–16; Herodian 3.6.1–2; Cornelius Nepos 15 (Epaminondas), 3.4; Iambli-chus V.P. 19.92 (cf. 29.162; 30.167–168; 33.237–240); cf. 1Macc 12and perhaps Ps.-Phoc. 30; Euripides Andr. 585 (but cf. 632–635); Plutarch Bride 19, Mor. 140D; Longus 1.10; Martial Epigr. 8.18.9–10. 9066 E.g., Alciphron Farmers 27 (Ampelion to Euergus), 3.30, par. 3; 29 (Comarchides to Euchaetes), 3.73, par. 2; Fishermen 7 (Thlassus to Pontius), 1.7. 9069 Diogenes Laertius 7.1.125; Plutarch Cicero 25.4. On friendship between good men and the gods, cf., e.g., Seneca Dia1. 1.1.5; on all things belonging to them, Seneca Benef. 7.4.6, cf. Philo Cherubim 84. The maxim is especially cited in works on 1Corinthians (Willis, Meat, 169; Conzelmann, Corinthians, 80; cf. also Fitzgerald, Cracks, 200–201; Grant, Christianity, 102–3). 9070 E.g., people invoked divinities as φλοι, to help them in battle (Aeschylus Sept. 174); cf. a mortal as a «friend» who honors his patron demigod in Philostratus Hrk. 58.1 (the hero is also his friend in 10.2); cf. perhaps Iamblichus V.P. 10.53 (where the friendship is demonstrated by deities» past favors). 9071 This observation (in contrast to some other observations above) may run counter to the suggestion of Judge (Pattern, 38) that w. 13–15 of John 15 «reveal the peculiar combination of intimacy and subordination» characteristic of the patronal relationship. 9073 Maximus of Tyre Or. 19.4; Iamblichus V.P. 33.229. This might involve sharing the divine character (Iamblichus V.P. 33.240). 9074 Crates Ep. 26, to the Athenians (Gyn. Ep. 76–77); cf. likewise Diog. Ep. 10, to Metrocles (Cyn. Ep. 104–5). Cf. Plato Leg. 4.716D (cited in Mayor, James, cxxv); fellowship between mortals and deities in the golden age (Babrius pro1.13). |
| 1247 Sambursky, «Gematria»; Stambaugh and Balch, Environment, 103, citing Cicero Inv. 2.40.116; Hengel, Hellenism, l:80ff.; Lieberman, Hellenism, 47–82. Some may also reflect Babylonian sources (Cavigneaux, «Sources»). 1248 Judith 16:7; Josephus War 1.353; 2.155–158; Ag. Ap. 1.255; 2.263; Pesiq. Rab. 20(cf. Greek Phlegethon; cf. the Elysian plain and Acherusian lake in Sib. Or. 2.337–338, probably Christian redaction; Apoc. Mos. 37:3). 1249 E.g., Artapanus in Eusebius Praep. ev. 9.27.3; Sib. Or. 2.15 (Poseidon); 2.19 (Hephaistos); 3.22 (Tethys); 3.110–116, 121–155, 551–554, 588 (euhemeristic; cf. similarly Let. Aris. 136; Sib. Or. 3.723; 8.43–47); 5.334 (personification; cf. also 7.46; 11.104, 147, 187, 205, 219, 278; 12:53, 278; 14.56, 115); T. Job 1.3 (cornucopia); 51:1/2 (perhaps allusion to Nereus, also in Sib. Or. 1.232); cf. (not Greek) Ishtar as an evil spirit in Text 43:6–7, perhaps 53:12, Isbell, 103; cf. art (some of it in Palestinian synagogues) in Goodenough, Symbols, vols. 7–8 (and Dura Europos synagogue, vols. 9–11, and 12:158–183). 1250 The clear examples are few (even Egyptian use may have been more common; cf. «Biblés Psalm»), despite apologetic protestations to the contrary (e.g., Josephus Ag. Ap. 1.165; 2.257). 1252 E.g., Martin, Colossians, 18–19; Knox, Gentiles, 149; Wilson, Gnostic Problem, 259. Although an Egyptian provenance for the Testament of Solomon is possible, I would favor an Asian provenance, given its date (cf. also Artemis in 8:11, etc.), and stress the magical-mystical nature of some of Judaism in Asia. 1253 So Kennedy, Epistles, 14, 22; Robinson, Redating, 294. Palestine had its Pharisees and Essenes, but had even more Am Háarets. 1258 Cf. CD 5.6–8; lQpHab 9.6–7. Others also believed that profaning the temple could bring judgment, although not applying it to this time (Pss. So1. 1:8; 2:1–10; Josephus War 5.17–18; cf. the ambiguous evaluation of Tannaitic sources in Goldenberg, «Explanations»). 1263 Grant, Gods, 51; Stambaugh and Balch, Environment, 121–22; Conzelmann, «Areopagus,» 224; van de Bunt-van den Hoek, «Aristobulos»; cf. Renehan, «Quotations.» Jewish and early Christian texts often followed the Greek practice (instilled in school memorization exercises) of citing or alluding to Homer (e.g., Ps.-Phoc. 195–197; Syr. Men. 78–93; Josephus Ant. 1.222; Sib. Or. 3.401–432, passim; 3.814; 5.9; 2 Bar. 10:8; Tatian 8; cf. Rahmani, «Cameo») or other poets (Acts 17:28; 1Cor 15:33 ; Tit 1:12 ; Justin 1 Apo1. 39; Theophilus 2.37; Athenagoras 5–6; cf. Manns, «Source»), or proverbs originally based on them. |
|
|
