| Because diverse types of miracle workers existed in antiquity, scholars grappling with the evidence have produced diverse typologies to categorize them, and disputed even more the question of which category or categories Jesus best fits. One of the more popular views is that Jesus was, or was portrayed by Mark or Mark " s opponents as, a θεος νρ, a «divine man.» 4A. The Divine Man Hypothesis Many scholars have interpreted the NT accounts of Jesus» miracles in light of a Hellenistic category they call the «divine man.» 2316 (Some have also linked this divine man with Jesus» title, «son of God,» a title we explore briefly under the heading of Christology.) Yet, as Kingsbury points out, structural similarities between Christian and pagan telling of miracles hardly make the Gospel accounts «bearers of a non-eschatological theology of glory and divine-man christology.» 2317 This is true for two reasons. First, the applicability of the very category of «divine men» to first-century miracle workers is in serious question. Second, Judaism already had a miracle-working tradition in the Elijah-Elisha cycle which it did not unduly accentuate for Hellenistic apologetic; this diminishes the likelihood that the Gospels, which are less hellenized than some of our other Jewish sources, would have done so. In the past, many scholars have argued that the divine man was a composite type in antiquity with spécifie characteristics, 2318 but many scholars now recognize that the various characteristics derive from so many diverse sources and have been unified in a single type only by the creativity of modern scholarship. 2319 The ancient use of the phrase is too broad to delineate a specific type; it can refer to a «divine man,» an «inspired man,» a man somehow related to deity, and an «extraordinary man.» 2320 The sense in which such a phrase appears in the third-century Life of Apollonius did not yet exist in the first century. 2321 Thus Howard Clark Kee, for example, harshly criticizes Bultmann, H. D. Betz, and other advocates of the divine man type, arguing that this type is nonexistent. 2322 |
| Eller, Disciple Eller, Vernard. The Beloved Disciple–His Name, His Story, His Thought: Two Studies from the Gospel of John. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987. Ellis, «Authenticity» Ellis, Peter F. «The Authenticity of lohn 21.» St. Vladimir " s Theological Quarterly 36 (1992): 17–25. Ellis, «Christ and Spirit» Ellis, E. Earle. «Christ and Spirit in 1Corinthians.» Pages 269–77 in Christ and Spirit in the New Testament: Studies in Honor of C. F. D. Moule. Edited by Barnabas Lindars and Stephen S. Smalley. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973. Ellis, «Christology» Ellis, E. Earle. «Background and Christology of John " s Gospe1.» Pages 1–25 in Perspectives on John: Method and Interpretation in the Fourth Gospe1. National Association of the Baptist Professors of Religion Special Studies Series 11. Edited by Robert B. Sloan and Mikeal C. Parsons. Lewiston, N.Y: Mellen, 1993. Ellis, «Composition» Ellis, E. Earle. «The Composition of Luke 9 and the Sources of Its Christology.» Pages 121–127 in Current Issues in Biblical and Patristic Interpretation: Studies in Honor of Merrill C. Tenney Presented by His Former Students. Edited by Gerald F. Hawthorne. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975. Ellis, «Criticism» Ellis, E. Earle. «Gospels Criticism: A Perspective on the State of the Art.» Pages 26–52 in The Gospel and the Gospels. Edited by Peter Stuhlmacher. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991. Ellis, Genius Ellis, Peter F. The Genius of John: A Composition-Critical Commentary on the Fourth Gospe1. Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 1984. Ellis, «Inclusion, Chiasm» Ellis, Peter F. «Inclusion, Chiasm, and the Division of the Fourth Gospe1.» St. Vladimir " s Theological Quarterly 42, nos. 3–4 (1999): 269–338. Ellis, Matthew Ellis, Peter F. Matthew: His Mind and His Message. Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 1974. Ellis, Paul Ellis, E. Earle. Paul and His Recent Interpreters. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1961. Ellis, «Uses» Ellis, E. Earle. «How the New Testament Uses the Old.» Pages 199–219 in New Testament Interpretation: Essays on Principles and Methods. Edited by I. Howard Marshal1. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977. |
| 1653 Hickling, «Attitudes,» 352; P. F. Ellis, John, 5. Thus John restates and reapplies traditions in targumic style; see Howard, Gospel, 229; Goppelt, Theology, 1:15. 1654 Hickling, «Attitudes,» 352, although we disagree with Hickling " s emphasis on discontinuity; cf. also Ellis, Genius, 5. 1655 Herford, Christianity, 365–81, esp. 371–72, shows that they were not always gnostics, although they may have been more often than Herford allows. R. Jose ben Halaftás retort to the «matrona» need not be antignostic (against Agus, «Gnosticism»; Gershenzon and Slomovic, «Debate»), though it could have been, and the creation mysticism has pregnostic roots and need not be initially antignostic (against Thoma, «Reaktionen»). Threats from Christian gnosticism or its Jewish equivalent may well have been real, and mixed with the Jewish-Christian challenge (cf. Basser, «Practices»). 1657 E.g., b. Ber. 29a [of John Hyrcanus!]; Moore, «Canon,» 106–8; Urbach, «Self-Isolation,» 290; Pritz, Nazarene Christianity, 103); nevertheless, identifying groups like Essenes in the rabbinic literature (as Lieberman, «Scrolls,» seeks to do) is still more problematic. 1659 In earlier texts they were probably always Jewish (Jocz, People, 52; Abrahams, Studies, 2:63), although some passages could imply otherwise (b. c Abod. Zar. 4a; Sank. 97a [purportedly Tannaitic]; 99a; Song Rab. 2:13, §4 [purportedly Tannaitic]; cf. in Herford, Christianity, 207–10): references to the Roman Empire converting to minuth are necessarily from the later period, after Christians had begun to achieve power in the West. 1660 See Schiffman, «Crossroads,» 149; Kimelman, «Birkath,» 232; Bowman, Gospel, 2; Pritz, Christianity, 103; Abrahams, Studies, 2:63; Herford, Christianity, 365–81; Dalman, Jesus, 36–37; Carroll, «Exclusion,» 22. For archaeological evidence from the late first to mid-second century, cf. Smith, «Sarcophagus.» 1661 See Herford, Christianity, 137–45, 388; Moore, Judaism, 2:250; Dalman, Jesus, 36–37. Falk, Jesus, 70–82, is too speculative here. |
| Vay. l:74ff.; Bah. 5(allegorizing OT on water); Sipre Deut. 48.2.7; 306.19.1; 306.22–25; »Abot R. Nat. 18 A; cf. b. Ta c an. 7a; B. Qam. 17a, 82a; Gen. Rab. 41:9; 54:1; 69:5; 70:8–9; 84:16; 97:3; Exod. Rab. 47(and bread); Song Rab. 1:2, §3; Origen Comm. Jo., 13.26–29. 3901 R. Akiba in Sipre Deut. 48.2.7; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 24:9; Tg. Neof. on Num 21:18–20 ; cf. Belleville, «Born,» 130, arguing that the rabbis used a well as a symbol of Torah more than they used water in general, to bolster her argument that the water of John 3is not Torah. 3902 M. эАвот 1(attributed to Abtalion, first century B.C.E.); Sipre Deut. 48.2.5. 3903 E.g., Gen. Rab. 71:8; see further Montefiore and Loewe, Anthology, 163ff. Nevertheless, Jesus the Word never appears as «water» in the Fourth Gospel, but only as its source (so also Culpepper, Anatomy, 196; cf. Lee, Thought, 218). 3904 Abrahams, Studies, 1:43; Freed, Quotations, 29; McNamara, Targum, 110. 3905 E.g., Smalley, «Relationship,» 97, although he sees it as less developed than Paul " s. Brown, John, l:cxi, cites Cullmann, Vawter, Hoskyns, Lightfoot, and Barrett as tending toward the sacramental view. 3906 Brown, John, l:cxi, cites Bornkamm, Bultmann, Lohse, and Schweizer as holding a non-sacramental or antisacramental understanding of John. For a summary of the major views before 1945, see esp. Howard, Gospel, 206–14. 3907 Kysar, Evangelist, 256. Brown, Essays, 97, also doubts that 1is distinctly sacramenta1. 3908 MacGregor, «Eucharist,» 118. Ottós parallel with pagan magical sacramentalism depends on Western sources geographically removed from Christian baptism " s origins in the Baptist (see Kraeling, John, 120). 3909 Lake, «Spirit,» 104. 3910 Besides the references in his commentary, see Bultmann, Tradition, 165–66. Mowry, «Scrolls,» 92, suggests an anti-Essene polemic; this is answered by Belleville, «Born,» 126. 3911 Käsemann, Testament, 32. 3912 Matsunaga, «Anti-sacramenta1.» Cf. Paul " s similar argument in his midrash in 1Cor 10:1–12 . |
| Krieger, «Problematik» Krieger, Klaus-Stefan. «Die Problematik chronologischer Rekonstruktionen zur Amtszeit des Pilatus.» BN 61 (1992): 27–32. Krieger, «Verwandter» Krieger, Klaus-Stefan. «War Flavius Josephus ein Verwandter des hasmo-näischen Königshauses?» BN 73 (1994): 58–65. Kruijf, «Glory» Kruijf, T. C. de. «The Glory of the Only Son (John i 14).» Pages 111–23 in Studies in John: Presented to Professor Dr. J. N. Sevenster on the Occasion of His Seventieth Birthday. Edited by W. C. van Unnik. NovTSup 24. Leiden: Brill, 1970. Kruijf, «Hundredweight» Kruijf, T. C. de. « " More than Half a Hundredweight» of Spices ( John 19,39 NEB): Abundance and Symbolism in the Gospel of John.» Bijdragen 43 (1982): 234–39. Kugel and Greer, Interpretation Kugel, James L ., and Rowan A. Greer. Early Biblical Interpretation. LEC 3. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986. Kugelman, «Pentecost» Kugelman, Richard. «The Gospel for Pentecost ( Jn. 14:23–31 ).» CBQ 6 (1944): 259–75. Kügler, «König» Kügler, Joachim. «Der andere König: Religionsgeschichtliche Anmerkungen zum Jesusbild des Johannesevangeliums.» ZNW88 (1997): 223–41. Kügler, «Sohn» Kügler, Joachim. «Der Sohn im Schoss des Vaters: Eine motivgeschichtliche Notiz zu Jon 1,18.» Biblische Notizen 89 (1997): 76–87. Kuhn, «Gekreuzigten» Kuhn, Heinz W. «Zum Gekreuzigten von Giv c at ha-Mivtar: Korrektur eines Versehens in der Erstveröffentlichung.» ZNW 69 (1978): 118–22. Kuhn, «John vii.37–8» Kuhn, Κ. H. «St. John vii.37–8.» NTS 4 (1957–1958): 63–65. Kuhn, «Messias» Kuhn, Heinz-Wolfgang. «Die beiden Messias in den Qumrantexten und die Messiasvorstellung in der rabbinischen Literatur.» ZAW 70 (1958): 200–208. Kümmel, Introduction Kümmel, Werner Georg. Introduction to the New Testament. Rev. ed. Translated by Howard C. Kee. Nashville: Abingdon, 1975. Kümmel, Promise Kümmel, Werner Georg. Promise and Fulfilment: The Eschatological Message of Jesus. SBT 23. Naperville, 111.: Allenson, 1957. Kümmel, Theology Kümmel, Werner Georg. The Theology of the New Testament according to Its Major Witnesses–Jesus, Paul, John. Translated by John E. Steely. Nashville: Abingdon, 1973. |
| Bruns, «Time» Bruns, J. Edgar. «The Use of Time in the Fourth Gospe1.» NTS 13 (1966–1967): 285–290. Bryan, «Hallel» Bryan, Christopher. «Shall We Sing Hallel in the Days of the Messiah? A Glance at John 2:1–3:21 .» Saint Lukés Journal of Theology 29 (1985): 25–36. Buchanan, «Age» Buchanan, George Wesley. «The Age of Jesus.» NTS 41 (1995): 297. Buchanan, Consequences Buchanan, George Wesley. The Consequences of the Covenant. NovTSup 20. Leiden: Brill, 1970. Buchanan, Hebrews Buchanan, George Wesley. To the Hebrews. AB 36. Garden City, N.Y.: Double-day, 1972. Buchanan, «Samaritan Origin» Buchanan, George Wesley. «The Samaritan Origin of the Gospel of John.» Pages 149–75 in Religions in Antiquity: Essays in Memory of Erwin Ramsdell Good-enough. Edited by Jacob Neusner. Studies in the History of Religions, Supplements to Numen 14. Leiden: Brill, 1968. Buchanan, «Teacher» Buchanan, George Wesley. «The Office of Teacher of Righteousness.» RevQ 9 (1977–1978): 241–43. Buchanan, «Use» Buchanan, George Wesley. «The Use of Rabbinic Literature for New Testament Research.» Biblical Theology Bulletin 7 (1977): 110–22. Büchler, Conditions Büchler, Adolf. The Economic Conditions of Judaea after the Destruction of the Second Temple. London: Jews» College, 1912. Büchsei, Geist Büchsei, D. Friedrich. Der Geist Gottes im Neuen Testament. Gütersloh: Bertlesmann, 1926. Buckland, Slavery Buckland, W. W. The Roman Law of Slavery: The Condition of the Slave in Private Law from Augustus to Justinian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1908. Buckwalter, «Saviour» Buckwalter, H. Douglas. «The Divine Saviour.» Pages 107–24 in Witness to the Gospel: The Theology of Acts. Edited by I. Howard Marshall and David Peterson. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998. Buetubela, «L " Esprit» Buetubela, B. « Jn 3,8: L " Esprit-Saint ou le vent naturel?» Revue africaine de théologie 4 (1980): 55–64. Bull, «Context» Bull, Robert J. «An Archaeological Context for Understanding John 4:20 .» BA 38 (1975): 54–59. |
| 4901 Howard, Gospel, 206, mentions as a possibility that «water» here uses proselyte baptism as an illustration. 4903 See the references in White, Initiation, 66. This is not a novel view; in the early twentieth century Mayor, James, 201, cites earlier sources to this effect. 4906 As noted above, we believe that «baptism in the Spirit» can refer to the whole sphere of the Spirit " s eschatological work among believers and that some early Christian writers applied the phrase to conversion (as here) whereas others (like Luke) could apply it to a subsequent empowerment or empowerments (on a popular level, see Keener, Questions, 17–78; idem, Giver, 52–66,157–68). 4907 We assume that the Gospel as a literary work was meant to be read and heard on multiple occasions, hence not merely interpreted from the vantage point of the first-time reader. 4908 E.g., m. «Abot 1:4; 2:8; Mek. Vay. l:74ff. (ed. Lauterbach, 2:89–90); Bah. 5(237); Sipre Deut. 48.2.7; 306.19.1; 306.22–25; »Abot R. Nat. 18 A. 4909 Michaels, John, 43, thinks the grammar suggests a single entity, but the same construction in 1 John 5points to two, so the matter cannot be decided merely on grammatical grounds. Porsch, Wort, 128–30, objects to the epexegetical reading of the και, noting that this is not the most normal way to read the text because it introduces another complication. The construction may not be decisive, but Johannine usage warrants the reading here. 4910 Bürge, Community, 166; Dunn, Baptism, 192; Bates, «Born,» 235; Snodgrass, «ΠΝΕΥΜΑ,» 192–93; cf. Morris, John, 218. (Ancient rhetoricians apparently did not use this term, which appeared later; see Rowe, «Style,» 143.) Although it is not his own view, Robinson, «Baptism,» 19–20, regards a hendiadys here as clearly possible and notes that it was maintained by Origen, the English Reformers, the Lollards, Calvin, and others. For other possible hendiadys in John, see, e.g., 4:23–24; cf. 12:49; in other early Christian texts, see Blass, Debrunner, and Funk, Grammar, 228, §442.16. |
| 589 B. Sanh. 39a (the emperor and late first-century R. Gamaliel II); Bek. 8b (emperor Hadrian and second-century rabbi); p. Meg. 1:11, §3 (concerning a second-century Tanna); 3:2, §3 (ditto); Pesiq. Rab Kah. 1(R. Gamaliel); 4(concerning a Tanna, Johanan ben Zakkai, who then gives the correct answer privately to his disciples); Num. Rab. 4(Johanan ben Zakkai); 9(R. Eliezer, late first/early second century); Fed. Rab. 2.8, §2 (Hadrian and second-century rabbi). By observing that these reports concern Tannaim, we do not thereby claim their authenticity; many (such as debates with emperors) are demonstrably untrue. 590 T. c Abod. Zar. 6:7 (in Rome); b. c Abod. Zar. 54b, bar. (Rome); Bek. 8b-9a (Athens); cf. b. Sanh. 39a (Zoroastrian magus). 591 T. Sanh. 13:5; p. Sanh. 10:1, §7; cf. m. " Abot 2(R. Eleazar ben Arach, disciple of Johanan ben Zakkai), expounded in b. Sanh. 38b. 592 Cf. Geiger, « " pyqwrws.» Malherbe, Exhortation, 12, points out that other philosophers stereotypically accused Epicureans (and different competing schools) of «atheism, hedonism, and hatred of humanity» (some of which charges were also applied to Jews and Christians). 595 B. Sanh. 38b, 39a; Hu1. 84a; perhaps b. Yoma 56b-57a (if the Soncino note is correct concerning the possible corruption of min to Sadducee here); Herford, Christianity, 226–27, also lists Ecc1. Rab. 30:9,53cd; b. Hu1. 87a (sic?); Šabb. 152b; Sukkah 48b; cf. Bagatti, Church, 98ff. The baraita in b. Sanh. 43a is based on fanciful wordplays. 597 Vermes, Jesus and Judaism, 31, follows many form critics» skepticism here, possibly to maintain his role for Jesus as a charismatic teacher rather than a proto-rabbinic halakist or debater; but in this period the two need not have been mutually exclusive. 598 Howard, Gospel, 229; Taylor, Formation, 116. Chilton, «Transmission»; idem, «Synoptic Development,» suggests that many Gospel traditions were transmitted and developed in ways similar to targumic traditions. 601 Although much has been written, a few references will suffice: Marcus, «Names»; Albright, Stone Age, 256–75; Lieberman, Hellenism; Tcherikover, Civilization; Hengel, Judaism; Avi-Yonah, Hellenism; cf. Goldstein, «Acceptance»; Simon, «Synkretismus»; Davies, «Aboth,» 138–51. Although some scholars above may have overdrawn their case–some regions were more hellenized than others (cf. Feldman, «Hellenism»; Vermes, Jesus and Judaism, 26), most scholars today concur that substantial hellenization had occurred in Jewish Palestine. |
| Friedländer, Life Friedländer, Ludwig. Roman Life and Manners under the Early Empire. Translated from the 7th rev. ed. by Leonard A. Magnus, J. H. Freese, and A. B. Gough. 4 vols. Vols. 1 and 4: New York: Barnes & Noble, 1907, 1965. Vols. 2 and 3: New York: Dutton, 1908–1913. Friedman, «Features» Friedman, Theodore. «Some Unexplained Features of Ancient Synagogues.» Conservative Judaism 36, no. 3 (spring 1983): 35–42. Friend, «Agency» Friend, Howard S. «Like Father, Like Son: A Discussion of the Concept of Agency in Halakah and John.» Ashland Theological Journal 21 (1990): 18–28. Frier, «Annuities» Frier, Bruce W. «Subsistence Annuities and per Capita Income in the Early Roman Empire.» Classical Philology 88 (1993): 222–30. Fritsch, «Angelos» Fritsch, I. «» ... videbitis ... angelos Dei ascendentes et descendentes super Filium hominis [Ιο. 1,51].» Verbum Domini 37 (1959): 3–11. Fritsch, Community Fritsch, Charles T. The Qumran Community: Its History and Scrolls. New York: Macmillan, 1956. Fritz, «Midrash» Fritz, Maureena. «A Midrash: The Self-Limitation of God.» Journal of Ecumenical Studies 22 (1985): 703–14. Fry et a1., Religions Fry, C. George, James R. King, Eugene R. Swanger, and Herbert C. Wolf. Great Asian Religions. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984. Frymer-Kensky, «Relationships» Frymer-Kensky, Tikva. «Patriarchal Family Relationships and Near Eastern Law.» BA 44 (1981): 209–14. Fujita, «Plant» Fujita, S. «The Metaphor of Plant in Jewish Literature of the Intertestamental Period.» JSJ7 (1976): 30–45. Fuks, «Freedmen» Fuks, Gideon. «Where Have All the Freedmen Gone? On an Anomaly in the Jewish Grave-Inscriptions from Rome.» JJS 36 (1985): 25–32. Fuller, Formation Fuller, Reginald H. The Formation of the Resurrection Narratives. New York: Macmillan, 1971. Fuller, Gospel Fuller, Daniel P. Gospel and Law: Contrast or Continuum? Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980. Fuller, « " Jews»» Fuller, Reginald H. «The " lews» in the Fourth Gospe1.» Dialog 16 (1977): 31–37. |
| Catchpole, «Tradition History» Catchpole, David R. «Tradition History.» Pages 165–180 in New Testament Interpretation: Essays in Principles and Methods. Edited by I. Howard Marshal1. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977. Catchpole, Trial Catchpole, David R. The Trial of Jesus: A Study in the Gospels and Jewish Historiography from 1770 to the Present Day. StPB 18. Leiden: Brill, 1971. Cavigneaux, «Sources» Cavigneaux, A. «Aux sources du Midrash: L " herméneutique babylonienne.» Aula orientalis 5 (1987): 243–55. Cerfaux, Paul Cerfaux, L. The Church in the Theology of St. Pau1. Translated by Geoffrey Webb and Adrian Walker. New York: Herder & Herder, 1959. Chadwick, Church Chadwick, Henry. The Early Church. New York: Penguin, 1967. Chadwick, «Defence» Chadwick, Henry. «Justin Martyr " s Defence of Christianity.» Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 47 (1964): 275–97. Chadwick, Reformation Chadwick, Owen. The Reformation. Pelican History of the Church 3. Baltimore: Penguin, 1964. Chamberlain, «Functions» Chamberlain, John V . «The Functions of God as Messianic Titles in the Complete Qumran Isaiah Scrol1.» VT5 (1955): 366–72. Chance, «Fiction» Chance, J. Bradley. «Fiction in Ancient Biography: An Approach to a Sensitive Issue in Gospel Interpretation.» Perspectives in Religious Studies 18, no. 2 (1991): 125–42. Charles, Jubilees Charles, R. H. The Book of Jubilees or The Little Genesis. London: A&C Black, 1902. Charles, Pseudepigrapha Charles, R. H., ed. The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon, 1913. Charles, «Witness» Charles, J. Dary1. « «Will the Court Please Call in the Prime Witness?» John 1:29–34 and the »Witness«-Motif.» Trinity JournalNS 10 (1989): 71–83. Charlesworth, James H. Introduction to «Odes of Solomon.» OTP 2:725–34. Charlesworth, James H., ed. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. 2 vols. Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday, 1983–1985. Charlesworth, «Comparison» Charlesworth, James H. «A Critical Comparison of the Dualism in IQS III,13-IV,26 and the »Dualism» Contained in the Fourth Gospe1.» NTS 15 (1968–1969): 389–418. |
|
|
