| 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). |
| 3533 1 En. 6(if Semyaza means «he sees the Name»); cf. Bonsirven, Judaism, 7 (citing 1 Chr 13LXX; m. Ber. 4:4; Yoma 3:8); Bowman, Gospel, 69–98, esp. 69–77. «The Name» appears as a title for Christ in Jewish Christian theology (Daniélou, Theology, 147–63; on 150 he finds this even as early as the NT: John 12with 17:5; Jas 2:7; 5:14). 3535 Isa 29:23; Ezek 39:7 ; 1 En. 9:4; Sipra Emor par. 11.234.2.3; b. Pesah. 53b; Šabb. 89b; p. Sanh. 3:5, §2; Num. Rab. 15:12; prayer on Samaritan bill of divorce (Bowman, Documents, 328); cf. Moore, Judaism, 2:101–5; the «sacred letters» in Let. Aris. 98; cf. b. Šabb. 115b, bar.; Pesiq. Rab. 22:7; engraved on Israel " s weapons, Song Rab. 5:7, §1; 8:5, §1. One may also compare Matt. 6and its sources in the Kaddish and the third benediction of the Amidah (the latter is called «the sanctification of the name,» m. Roš Haš. 4:5); eschatological sanctification of the Name in Ezek 28:22; 36:23; 38:23; 39:7 ; and see comment on John 17:6, 17, 19 , below. 3536 E.g., Sir 23:9 ; Josephus Ant. 2.276; Sib. Or. 3.17–19 (probably pre-Christian); 1QS 6.27–7.1; m. Sanh. 7:5; t. Ber. 6:23; Ecc1. Rab. 3:11, §3; cf. Lev. 24:11,16 ; b. Sanh. 60a, bar.; Bietenhard, «νομα,» 268–69 (for alleged exceptions in the temple service, see m. Sotah 7:6; Sipre Num. 39.5.1–2; Marmorstein, Names, 39; Urbach, Sages, 1:127; cf. Lemaire, «Scepter»); among the Samaritans, see Jeremias, Theology, 10 n. 1. The Qumran sectarians often wrote the Tetragrammaton in Paleo-Hebrew letters (probably to show it special honor, but cf. Siegal, «Characters,» comparing the rabbinic teaching), as did early Greek OT manuscripts (see Howard, «Tetragram»). 3538 E.g., Pr. Jos. 9–12; Lad. Jac. 2:18; Incant. Text 20.11–12 (Isbell, Bowls, 65); 69:6–7 (Isbell, Bowls, 150); CIJ 1:485, §673; 1:486, §674; 1:490, §679; 1:517, §717; 1:523, §724; 2:62–65, §819; 2:90–91, §849; 2:92, §851; 2:217, §1168; T. So1. 18:15–16 (the Solomonic tradition recurs in b. Git. 68a; Num. Rab. 11:3); Smith, Magician, 69; cf. Apoc. Zeph. 6:7; Apoc. Ab. 17:8, 13; examples in Deissmann, Studies, 321–36; Nock, Conversion, 62–63; MacMullen, Enemies, 103; Knox, Gentiles, 41–42. Cf. the namés power in Pesiq. Rab. 21:7; Urbach, Sages, 1:124–34; Bietenhard, «νομα,» 269; in Jewish mystical experience, see Scholem, Gnosticism, 32–33. Name invocation was common practice (e.g., Apuleius Metam. 2.28; 3.29; Twelftree, «ΕΚΒΑΛΛΩ,» 376; Koester, Introduction, 1:380). |
| 4034 One may read Gen 22:9–13 as a type of the Passover, the redemption of the first-born; note that the ram functions as a «lamb» (22:7–8; cf. Tg. Ps.-J. on Lev 22:27 ; p. Ned. 1:3, §1, early third century, comparing the sacrificial lamb with Abraham " s ram; cf. the unrelated later tradition of the patriarchs as unblemished lambs in Pesiq. Rab. 48:3). Some see Isaac typology in John 1as well; cf. Braun, «Sacrifice»; Grigsby, «Cross,» 51–80; Swetnam, Isaac, 84; Bruce, Time, 48–49. 4035 Koester, Symbolism, 199. 4036 Cf. Turner, «Atonement»; Watt, «Lam.» 4037 See comments of Selwyn, Peter, 146. 4038 Probably the Passover lamb (Minear, Images, 102–3), with possible additional allusions to Isa 53(Taylor, Atonement, 36; Hillyer, «Lamb»). Cf. 1Cor 5:7 ; also Philo, who interpreted Passover allegorically as deliverance from passions to virtue (Sacrifices 63). 4039 Exod 29:12; Lev 4:7,18, 25, 30, 34; 5:9; 8:15; 9:9 . Cf. Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 135; Ladd, Last Things, 39. For martyrs as sacrifices, see also 4 Macc 9:24. 4040 Some who argue that the Baptist meant it otherwise concede this sense in the Gospel, e.g., Barrett, «Lamb,» 218. 4041 Kraeling, John, 127, noting the Fourth Gospel " s «anti-Baptist polemic,» which must subordinate the Baptist because of the Gospel " s high Christology (p. 128). 4042 Probably uttered before his recognition of Jesus. Kraeling thinks that this is an angel-like heavenly figure from Dan 7 , not the earthly Jesus (Kraeling, John, 57); given the variety of combinations in early Jewish eschatological speculation, however, the Baptist need not have viewed a heavenly Son of Man and an earthly prince as mutually exclusive. «The mighty one» functions as a title for God in Isa 1:24; 10:21, 34; 49:26; 60:16; Jer 32:18 ; 2 Bar. 25:4; 32:1, 6; 34but is not necessarily implied in the Baptist " s language (even less is Harnack " s allusion to the morning star, Ramsay, Luke, 232). 4043 One may read Mark 1and Matt 3(following Mark) as if the Spirit " s descent on Jesus was only his personal vision (contrast Luke 3:21–22), but the voice from heaven is public in all four gospels ( Mark 1:11 ; Matt 3:17; Luke 3:22), suggesting that we take the vision the same way. |
| 3976 John " s initial failure to recognize him (1:31) may underline the fact that he is known only by revelation (1:33; Smith, John 70), by the Spirit " s witness (15:26; 16:7–11). 3977 See Malina, World, 78. 3978 The two Greek words for knowledge used here function interchangeably in the Fourth Gospel; see on «Knowledge and Sight» in the introduction, ch. 6, above. 3979 See comment on 13:5. 3980 E.g., Diogenes Laertius 6.2.44; b. B. Bat. 53b (though both sources ridicule treating slaves in such a demeaning manner); Aeschylus Agamemnon 944–945; see Daubés and Urbachs citations below. Other commentators have noted that this is the work of a slave (Westcott, John, 19; Hunter, John, 23). 3981 Exod 24:13; 33:11; Josh 1:1; 1 Kgs 19:21; 2 Kgs 5:20; 6:15; 8:4; Zeno in Diogenes Laertius 7.1.12; Cleanthes in Diogenes Laertius 7.5.170; t. B. Mesfa 2:30; cf. «Abot R. Nat. 27, §56B; p. Sotah 5:5, §4; perhaps more like fatherly counsel in Xenophon Anab. 3.1.5–7. Lachs, Commentary, 45, and Daube, Judaism, 266, cite also b. Ketub. 96a. Cf. Joshua as Moses» disciple and other «disciples of the prophets» (CD 8.20–21; Mek. Pisha 1:150–153; »Abot R. Nat. 11, §28 B). 3982 B. Ketub. 96a, cited by various commentators (many following Billerbeck), cf. Davies, Sermon, 135; Morris, John, 141. 3983 E.g., 2 Kgs 9:7,36; 10:10; 14:25; 17:13,23; 21:10; 24:2; Ezra 9:11; Isa 20:3; Jer 7:25; 25:4; 26:5; 29:19; 35:15; 44:4 ; Dan 3:28; 6:20; 9:6, 10 ; Amos 3:7; Zech 1:6; cf. " Abot R. Nat. 37, §95 B; Martin, Slavery, 55–56; Sanday and Headlam, Romans, 3; Käsemann, Romans, 5. 3984 E.g., 2Sam 3:18; 7:5,8,19–21,25–29; 1 Kgs 3:6; 8:24–26,66; 11:13,32,34,36,38; 14:8; 2 Kgs 8:19; 19:34; 20:6; 1 Chr 17:4, 7, 17–19, 23–27; 2 Chr 6:15–21, 42; Ps 78:70; 89:3, 20; 132:10; 144:10 ; Isa 37:35; Jer 33:21–22,26 ; Ezek 34:23–24; 37:24–25 ; cf. " Abot R. Nat. 43, §121 B. 3985 E.g., Exod 14:31; Num 12:7–8 ; Deut 34:5 ; Josh 1:1–2, 7,13,15; 8:31,33; 9:24; 11:12,15; 12:6; 13:8; 14:7; 18:7; 22:2,4–5; 1 Kgs 8:53,56; 2 Kgs 18:12; 21:8; 1 Chr 6:49; 2 Chr 1:3; 24:6,9; Neh 1:7–8; 9:14; 10:29; Ps 105:26 ; Dan 9:11 ; Mai 4:4; cf. 4Q378 frg. 22, line 2; L.A.B. 30:2, famulum; " Abot R. Nat. 43, §121 B. |
| 4126 E.g., Marshall, «Son or Servant,» 332–33; but this is also the view of nearly all the commentators below. 4127 See Bright, History, 225–26; Harrelson, Cult, 86–87; cf. De Vaux, Israel, 109, for comparison with ancient coronations. Later Judaism generally regarded the psalm as specifically messianic (e.g., b. Sukkah 52a; Longenecker, Christology, 113). 4128 See Kim, «Mark,» 92. 4129 Kingsbury, Christology, 66. 4130 Marshall, «Son or Servant,» 335; Jeremias, Theology, 53–54; Kingsbury, Christology, 40, 65; Bruce, History, 168; Hurtado, Mark, 6; Schweizer, Matthew, 37; Robinson, Studies, 162; Taylor, Mark, 162 (with Isa 44:2); Bürge, Community, 61. We do not here contest the possibility of influence by the language («echoes»; Robinson, Taylor), but doubt that the phrasing here is intended to evoke the picture of the Servant (in contrast to Matthew). 4131 Hooker, Servant, 72; cf. Anderson, Mark, 79–80. 4132 Hooker, Servant, 72–73. 4133 Schweizer, Matthew, 38. 4134 Ibid., 38. 4135 Ibid., 37–38. 4136 Cf., e.g., Prabhu, Quotations. 4137 Pace Rodd, «Spirit.» Matthew changes the more Semitic «finger» to fit his own context, perhaps as midrash on Isa 42 just cited; Luke includes the Spirit whenever he can, suggesting it was there missing from his source (cf. also Schweizer, Matthew, 287; Gundry, Matthew, 235). 4138 Best, Mark, 81. Others admit it as probable (e.g., Marshall, «Son or Servant,» 335; Kingsbury, Christology, 65) or find echoes (Taylor, Mark, 162). 4139 Cf. Marshall, «Son or Servant,» 328. 4140 Dodd, Parables, 130 n. 1; Ladd, Theology, 164; Schweizer, Mark, 41. 4141 Matthew and Luke seem to have followed the standard biographical procedure of following one primary (Mark) and another secondary source (presumably Q) before weaving in material around it, whereas John goes his own way. See introduction. 4142 An almost certainly historical tradition; see Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 98–101. Variations in the lists of names support this, indicating that the number existed before the lists were standardized (Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 101). The names may have varied because people often had multiple names (Acts 1:23; CIJ 1:24, §30; 1:279, §279; 2:111, §879; CP J 2:140, 143, 146–147, §§261, 269–270,274–276; 2:151,153–154,156, §§298,304,311,321; 3:9, §453; see Leon, Jews, 107,111–12); cf. also OT examples, which, regardless of their origins, were by the early Christian period regarded as from one source (e.g., Horeb as Sinai, Exod 3:1; 19:11; 24:13; Jethro as Reuel, Exod 2:18; 4:18; 18:1–12; Num 10:29 ). On nicknames, see below; nor is twelve an exorbitant number for disciples (e.g., Diogenes Laertius 8.1.39). |
| 8583 Scott, Spirit, 199–200; Riesenfeld, «Paraclete,» 273. Cf. the occasional use of «Comforter» for the Messiah in Amoraic texts (Num. Rab. 13:5; Lam. Rab. 1:16, §51), probably related to the restorationist comfort language of Second Isaiah (Isa 40:1; 51:3; 61:2; 66:13; cf. Isa 12:1; 22:4; similarly Luke 2:25). 8588 Barrett, «Spirit in Gospel,» 14. Franck, Revelation, 30–36, argues for this as a part of the sense; 8589 Johnston, Spirit-Paraclete, 136. All of this would support the contention of Schnackenburg, «Gemeinde,» that the Gospel " s final form advocates a function of the Spirit fitting the whole framework of early Christianity, not a theologically marginal ecstatic experience. 8591 Shafaat, «Geber,» 263–69, on 1QH 3:8–10; 1QS 4:20–23. One may note how this interpretation would sound in an Islamic context (Shafaat authored this article from Saudi Arabia). 8593 Grayston, «ΠΑΡΑΚΛΗΤΟΣ,» argues that the term only means «sponsor» or «patron» and that this was sometimes used in legal contexts; cf. Johnston, Spirit-Paraclete, 120, who advocates the translation «representative» because of its semantic breadth. Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon, 618, also says that the technical meaning of «lawyer» or «attorney» is much rarer than «mediator, intercessor, or helper»; but this may simply mean that a legal image was naturally applied to other forms of intercession. Patristic literature often uses the term for the Holy Spirit, but also simply as «advocate, intercessor, spokesman on someonés behalf» (Lampe, Lexicon, 1018–19). Liddell and Scott, Lexicon, 1313, gives for the classical period first the forensic and then the intercessory sense. But the line between the two senses is not easily drawn once one allows metaphorical extensions, and Holwerda, Spirit, 27, naturally says that Paraclete nearly «always bears the forensic meaning of advocate or intercessor»; cf. similarly Quispel, «Qumran,» 146; Hunt, «Paraclete,» 25, 29; Le Déaut, «L " intercession,» 48–49. 8594 With, e.g., Wotherspoon, «Paraclete»; Sanders, John, 327; Strachan, Gospel, 185; Swete, Discourse, 38; MacGregor, John, 293; Hunter, John, 145–46; Ladd, Theology, 293–94; Carson, Discourse, 51; Potterie, «Paraklet,» 85; Trites, Witness, 117; cf. Kobelski, «Melchizedek,» 184–211; Bacon, «Comforter,» 275; Hunt, «Paraclete,» 25, 29. In the papyri, e.g., a second-century mime in Deissmann, Light, 336 n. 5; in Philo, Joseph 239; cf. other, often nonforensic uses by Philo in Bernard, John, 2:496; Hoskyns, Gospel, 466; for the Logos as Paraclete in Philo, see Philo Heir 205; Howard, Gospel, 161 (with no reference); Hadidian, «Philonism,» 219 n. 9. |
| 5065 The subject in 3could be the Father; Jesus» gift contrasts with that of Jacob in 4:5,12 and with that of Moses in 6:31–32 (cf. 1:17; 7:19, 22). 5066 1:22; 9:24; 11:57; 12:5; 13:29; 19:9. The world «gives» Jesus only blows (18:22; 19:3). 13may extend the divine predestinarian use of «give» (e.g., 10:29) to Jesus (cf. 21:13), but this is less than absolutely clear. 5067 ; 28LXX; 28:8,11, 52,53; 30LXX; 30:20; 31:7; 31LXX; 32:49; 34:4; cf. 2:5,9,19. This represents a majority of the occurrences of δδωμι in Deuteronomy (also frequent in Exodus, e.g., 6:4, 8; 12:25; 13:5; 33:1; and elsewhere). 5068 E.g., Josephus Ant. 4.318; notably among the rabbis, who emphasized Torah (Sipre Deut. 32.5.10; b. Ber. 5a; Ned. 38a; p. Hag. 3:5, §1; Exod. Rab. 1:1; Lev. Rab. 35:8; Num. Rab. 19:33). 5069 Strikingly, moralists could recommend being discriminating in choosing to whom to give gifts; they should not be given randomly to anyone (Seneca Benef. 1.1.2). 5071 E.g., Burkert, Religion, 74–75; Ferguson, Backgrounds, 118,147–48. Traditional African religions rarely speak of God " s love; but as in African relations, love is more something to demonstrate than to speak about (Mbiti, Religions, 49). 5072 E.g., Homer Il. 1.86; 5.61; 22.216. Occasionally this is explicitly tied to their sacrifices (Homer Il. 24.66–68). 5074 Goodenough, Church, 10. For Isis, cf. P.Oxy. 1380.109–110 in Griffiths, «Isis»; for Thoeris, see P.Oxy. 3.528.5–6 (also cited by Grant, Paul, 110). 5075 E.g., CD 8.17; " Abot R. Nat. 36, §94B; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 9(attributed to R. Ishmael); Gen. Rab. 80(third century); Exod. Rab. 18:5; 38(attributed to an early Tanna); 51:4; Song Rab. 8:7, §1; cf. Goshen Gottstein, «Love.» 5076 Cohen, «Shekhinta»; cf. Pesiq. Rab. 8:5; Bonsirven, Judaism, 5, 18. See also Ayali, «Gottes,» though Hadrianic repression is a better catalyst for its emergence in the early period than Christian polemic; immutability was long a Greek doctrine, and polemic against Origen in Pesiq. Rab Kah. 15 (so Manns, «Polémique») is unlikely. Cf. Judg 10:16 ; Isa 63:9; Hos 11:8 . |
| 2886 Aristotle Rhet. 3.8.1, 1408b; Cicero Or. Brut. 50.168–69.231; cf. Rowe, «Style,» 154; balanced clauses in Anderson, Glossary, 90–91. Mythical language would fit poetry (Menander Rhetor 1.1, 333.31–334.5; cf., e.g., Isa 51:9) but does not require it (cf., e.g., Rev 12:1–9). 2888 See Cicero Or. Brut. 20.67 (though complaining that poetry can emphasize euphony over intelligible content, 20.68). 2890 Even very careful syllabic structures may represent prose rhetoric rather than poetry per se; e.g., the parallelism characteristic of isocolon and homoeoteleuton; see Rhet. Alex. 27.1435b.39–40; 1436a.1–4; Rowe, «Style,» 137 (citing Isocrates Paneg. 4.39; Cicero Mur. 9; Gorgias He1. 7); Porter, «Paul and Letters,» 580; Anderson, Glossary, 90–91 (citing, e.g., Rhet. ad Herenn. 4.27–28; Demetrius 25). 2894 Dionysius of Halicarnassus Lysias 24. Rhetorical handbooks already insisted that the introduction should summarize the arguments the speech would use (Dionysius of Halicarnassus Thucyd. 19; LCL 1:512–513 n. 1 cites Rhet. Alex. 29), though there were some exceptions in spoken rhetoric (Seneca Dial, 1.pref.21). 2896 Quintilian 4.1.5; cf. Dionysius of Halicarnassus Lysias 17; Cicero Or. Brut. 40.137; also Heath, «Invention,» 103. 2897 Artemidorus Onir. 1.pref.; 2Macc 2(at the end of a long prologue). This is not to deny the possibility of long introductory sections after various sorts of prologues (e.g., Polybius 1–2; cf. 2.71.7; Luke 1:5–4:30; Matt 1:18–2:23; probably John 1:1–51 ). 2899 E.g., Xenophon Agesilaus 1.2; Plutarch Themistocles 1.1; Cornelius Nepos 7 (Alcibiades), 1.2; but this was not necessary (Philostratus Vit. soph, pref.480). Noble ancestry (especially from deities) helped define a person " s heroic power (Homer II. 20.215–241); it did not, however, guarantee positive outcome in the end (Sallust Cati1. 5.1). 2902 Käsemann, Questions, 164; cf. comments on the Logos " s mythical language in Kümmel, Theology, 282. 2904 An inclusio surrounding a proem appears in a widely read Greek classic, Homer Od. 1.1–10, where 1.1–2 and 1.10 invoke the Muse to tell the story while 1.2–9 summarizes the whole book " s plot, inclusio is frequent (e.g., Catullus 52.1,4; 57.1,10). Cf. also repetition of a refrain in narratives ( Judg 17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25 ); or especially poetry: the wedding invocation to Hymen in Catullus 61.4–5, 39–40, 49–50, 59–60; 62.4–5, 10, 19, 25,31,38, 48,66 (with to added, 61.117–118, 137–138, 142–143, 147–148, 152–153, 157–158, 162–163, 167–168, 172–173, 177–178, 182–183); the bridal summons (Catullus 61.96,106,113); invocation to the Fates (Catullus 64.327, in briefer form thereafter in 333, 337, 342, 347, 352, 356, 361, 365, 371, 375, 381); or a summons to love (Perv. Ven. 1, 8, 27, 36, 48, 57–58, 68, 75, 80, 93). |
| 6408 Duke, Irony, 73. 6409 Sophocles Ajax 185; Ant. 955–965; similarly being detained by a deity, P.Lond. 23.5–35; 42.9–13; Nilsson, Piety, 172. Cross-cultural anthropological studies indicate hyperarousal and changes in brain activity during possession trances (Goodman, Demons, 20, 126; cf. further examples in Goodman, Henney and Pressel, Trance). 6410 E.g., Homer Od. 18.15,406; 19.71; much less seriously, cf. 23.166,174,264. Crowds were not always as respectful as teachers would like (e.g., Eunapius Lives 460; Acts 2:13); here some are degrading though not yet fully hostile. 6411 Aune, Environment, 56. Boring et a1., Commentary, 283, cites Porphyry De abstinentia 2.42, although this may betray the influence of Christian ideas. 6412 E.g., PGM 1.80–81, 88–90, 164–166, 181–185, 252–253; 2.52–54; 1 En. 65:6; LA.B. 34:2–3; Ascen. Isa. 2:5; b. Sanh. 67b; cf. CD 12.2–3 (false prophets); T. Jud. 23:1; Irenaeus Haer. 1.13.3–4; Aune, Prophecy, 45. Some pagans felt that particular deities enabled magic (cf. Graf, «Initiation»); the use of angels became dominant in medieval Jewish «good» magic (Fass, «Angels»). 6413 See PGM 5.107–109; 13.345; Gager, «Magician»; idem, Moses, 134–61; on God as magician in some late Jewish sources, see Hayman, «Magician.» 6414 Much Jewish teaching condemned magic, e.g., Exod 22:18; Deut 18:10, 14 ; Wis 17:7; Jub. 48:9; 1 En. 65:6; L.A.B. 34; Ps.-Phoc. 149; Ascen. Isa. 2:5; 2 Bar. 60:2; 66:2; m. Sanh. 7:11; Sipra Qed. pq. 6.203.2.2; b. Sanh. 65b-66a, bar.; 67b; Sebu. 15b; p. Hag. 2:2, §5; Roš Haš 3:8, §1. 6415 E.g., Apuleius Metam. 2.5; Smith, Magician, 75–76; Theissen, Stories, 239–42 (though some regard them as charlatans, e.g., Plato Rep. 2.364BC; Plutarch Bride 48, Mor. 145C). 6416 Nevertheless, in late antiquity many Jews increasingly practiced magic or used amulets to defuse it (e.g., PGM 4.1222, 3040–3041; 13.815–818; CIJ 2:62–65, §819; 2:90f, §849; for more detail, see Jacobson, «Vision»; Isbell, «Story»; Kotansky, «Amulet»; Schäfer, «Magic Literature»; Goodenough, Symbols, 2:153–295; 12:58–63; in the rabbis, cf. " Abot R. Nat. 25A; b. Sanh. 65b; Goldin, «Magic»), as did many Christians in a later period (Gitler, «Amulets»). Pagans also incorporated Jewish elements (e.g., PGM 1.298–305; 4.2355–2356; Deissmann, Studies, 321–36). |
| 3206 Cf. Rev 3:14, where «beginning» is actually a divine title signifying the originator of creation (see 1:8,17; 2:8; 21:6; 22:13; Isa 44:6; 48:11–12; Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.190; Ant. 8.280). 3207 As is often recognized, e.g., Kennedy, Theology, 156; May, «Logos,» 446; Moule, Birth, 167; Bandstra, «Errorists,» 332; Johnston, Ephesians, 58; Longenecker, Christology, 145; Glasson, «Colossians I 18, 15,» 154–56. 3208 «First» could mean «greatest» in rank, power, or privilege (πρτος, Chariton 2.5.4), as could «firstborn» ( Gen 49:3–4 ; " Abot R. Nat. 24, §49 B; Midr. Pss. 5, §4; cf. Pesiq. Rab. 49:7; Gibbs, Creation and Redemption, 103; Beasley-Murray, «Colossians 1:15–20,» 171; πρωττοκος in 1 Chr 5LXX translates Heb. ); «firstborn» could thus function as a title of Zeus (Protogonus in Damascius De principiis 123 bis, sixth century C.E., in Grant, Religions, 107), other pagan deities («Hymn to Amon-Re,» ANET, 365; PGM 1.198–199, 342–343; 13.188; Isis as prima caelitum in Apuleius Metam. 11.4; Guthrie, Orpheus, 96–97), the true God (Isa 41:4; Gen. Rab. 63:8; Pesiq. Rab. 51:3; Marmorstein, Names, 97–98). More significantly, however, «firstborn» also was Wisdom language (Philo Quest. Gen. 4.97) or Logos language (Philo Confusion 63, 146; Agric. 51; Dreams 1.215; all from Lohse, Colossians, 48; cf. Lightfoot, Colossians, 146; for Justin, see 1 Apo1. 21; Osborn, Justin, 28–29) and could be applied to Torah (Davies, Paul, 151). 3210 Aune, Environment, 48, citing Polybius 1.5.1; 5.31.1–2; Tacitus Hist. 1.1.1; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 1.8.4. It also can represent the «beginning» of tradition (Luke 1:1) or narration (Apollonius of Rhodes 1.1). 3213 L.A.B. 32(tr., OTP2:346); cf. 1QH 1.19–20. Contrast idols, which were not really «from the beginning,» π» ρχς (Wis 14:13). 3214 Sipre Deut. 37.1.3 (but some others contend for the sanctuary or the land of Israel). 3217 Gen. Rab. 1:4. Hamerton-Kelly suggests that the préexistence of all was actual in the baraita in b. Ned. 39b; Pesah. 54a. The later Platonic distinction between actual and ideal préexistence being limited to where it is explicitly stated (Gen. Rab. 1:4; Pre-existence, 20), some Platonic speculation may have affected conceptualizations earlier; cf. " Abot R. Nat. 37, §95 B, which lists the Ten Commandments as among ten things that preexisted in God " s plan. Further, God " s tabernacle «prepared from the beginning,» π» ρχς (Wis 9:8), may refer to the ideal tabernacle, the heavenly prototype. |
|
|
