| Maximus of Tyre Or. Maximus of Tyre Oration Megillah Me c i1. Me c ilah Mekilta (ed. Lauterbach) c Amalek Bahodeš Bešallah Neziqin Šabbata Štrata Vayassá Menah. Menahot 2 Cited first by OTP reference, then by the enumeration in Schermann " s Greek text. Mid. Middot Midr. Pss. Midrash on Psalms (Tehillim) MiqwáOT Móed Qat. Móed Qatan some manuscripts Masoretic Text Murat. Canon Muratorian Canon note(s) New American Standard Bible New English Bible Nedarim Nega c im Nehemiah Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece, Nestle-Aland Neziqin The Nag Hammadi Library in English. Edited by James M. Robinson. San Francisco, 1977 Niddah NIDNTT New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. Edited by C. Brown. 4 vols. Grand Rapids, 1975–1985 Nin. Rom. The Ninus Romance (see Longus in bibliography) New International Version Novum Testamentum New Revised Standard Version New Series New Testament New Testament Studies Numbers Num. Rab. Numbers Rabbah Odes So1. Odes of Solomon Orientis graeci inscriptiones selectae " Oha1. " Ohalot Oration Origen Against Celsus Comm. Jo. Commentary on John Comm. Matt. Commentary on Matthew Hom. Exod. Homilies on Exodus Old Testament Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Edited by J. H. Charlesworth. 2 vols. Garden City, N.Y., 1983–1985 Heroides Metam. Metamorphoses Palestinian (Jerusalem) Talmud parallel, paragraph(s) Parthenius Love Romance Paul and Thecla Acts of Paul and Thecla Pausanias Pausanias Description of Greece P.Beatty Chester Beatty Papyri P.Bour. Papyrus Bouriant P.Cair.Masp. Catalogue des antiquités égyptiennes du Musée du Caire: Papyrus grecs d " époque byzantine, vols. 1–3. Edited by J. Maspero P.Cair.Zen. Catalogue des antiquités égyptiennes du Musée du Caire: Zenon Papyri, vols. 1–4. Edited by C. C. Edgar P.Co1. Papyrus Columbia Papyri demoticae magicae. Demotic texts in PGM corpus as collated in The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation, Including Demotic Spells. Edited by H. D Betz. Chicago, 1996 P.Eleph. Elephantine Papyri P.Enteux. |
| 3219 E.g., b. Ned. 39b, bar.; Pesah. 54a, bar.; Gen. Rab. 1:4; Lev. Rab. 14(his spirit); Pesiq. Rab. 33:6; Midr. Pss. 72:17; cf. similarly Vermes, Jesus the Jew, 138; Schoeps, Paul, 150; Urbach, Sages, 1:684. Montefiore and Loewe, Anthology, 586, suggest that the preexistent-messiah tradition may appropriate Christian theology. In Mek. Pisha 1.54–56, all Israel was «fit for the kingship» until David was chosen, which would argue against a préexistent messiah in this stream of Tannaitic tradition (i.e., it may have fallen only to Akibás heirs). 3220 E.g., " Abot R. Nat. 37, §95 B; Gen. Rab. 1:4. Moses appears as preexistent or premeditated in T. Mos. 1and in very late Samaritan tradition (MacDonald, Samaritans, 162–79; cf. 423–24 on the date); cf. Moses» divinity in Philo Sacrifices 9; Exod. Rab. 8:1; Num. Rab. 15:13; based on Exod 7:1. Cf. 2 Clem. 14.1 for the preexistence of the church (2 Clement reflects many Jewish motifs). 3221 We are assuming here that the Similitudes might not be pre-Christian; see 1 En. 48:3,6 (OTP 1cites 1 En. 46:1–2; 48:3; 62:7; 4 Ezra 12:32; 13:26, on 2 Bar. 30:1; the last reference may not imply a préexistent messiah). 3223 Pesiq. Rab Kah. 12:24; Gen. Rab. 8:2; Lev. Rab. 19(«before the Beginning»); Pesiq. Rab. 46:1; Midr. Pss. 90:3; Tg. Neof. 1 on Gen. 3:24 . Ibn Ezra (twelfth century C.E.) concurred with this opinion but did not regard it as literal, observing that one could not calculate years without days nor days before creation (Jacobs, Exegesis, 14–15). 3224 " Abot R. Nat. 31 A (R. Eliezer b. R. Yose the Galilean); b. Šabb. 88b (R. Joshua bar Levi, third century). 3226 Cf. Loewe in Montefiore and Loewe, Anthology, 171: «The pre-existence of the Torah is very often merely tantamount to an expression that God Himself is bound by His own Laws.» Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.154–156 uses the law " s antiquity (albeit not its metaphysical préexistence) apologetically (cf. Ag. Ap. 1.1–29, 196, 215–218, 227; 2.1, 144, 279, 288). 3229 Jub. 2:30; 3:8,10; 6:2,18–19; 7:3; 14:24; 16:21; 22:1–9; 44:4. See Schultz, «Patriarchs,» passim, who contrasts Genesis " s Noahides with Jubilees» (and some later Jewish sources») law keepers; cf. Endres, Interpretation, 3–4 (though Sinai apparently began a new era in Israel " s history; cf. Wintermute in OTP 2:39, following Testuz [if the latter is correct]). |
| 2550 See Evans, «Son»; idem, «Prayer of Enosh» (including 4Q458); Abegg, «Introduction to 4Q369,» 329. 2551 Collins, «Son of God»; Evans, «4Q246» (noting also the close parallels with Luke 1:33–35). Fitzmyer, «4Q246,» applies it positively to a coming ruler, but not in a messianic sense. 2552 Fabry, «Texte»; Cook, «4Q246.» 2553 Cf. Bons, «Psaume 2.» Pss. So1. 17uses Ps 2in a messianic passage, although «son» (2:7) is not mentioned. Gero, «Messiah,» finds «son of God» in 4 Ezra (cf. also 13:37, 52); more scholars think the Greek behind the passage reads «servant» (Jeremias, Parables, 73 n. 86); the Ethiopie, an Arabic version, and the Armenian omit «Son» (OTP 1:537, note e). 2554 Longenecker, Christology, 93. 2555 See Hengel, Son, 63. 2556 Jeremias, Prayers, 57 (followed by, e.g., Martin, Worship, 34–35; Bruce, Books, 56; cf. Hunter, Predecessors, 50) has overstated the case for the titlés uniqueness, but his detractors on the issue have focused on exceptions rather than the preponderance of evidence (e.g., Vermes, Jesus the Jew, 210–13; a rare analogy hardly constitutes proof of vocative appellation). 2557 Kingsbury, Structure, 40–83, sees «Son of God» as Matthew " s primary christological title; Hill, «Son,» challenges this centrality of the title. 2558 The rabbis opposed any idea that the messiah was deity; see Bonsirven, Judaism, 190 (citing esp. b. Sanh. 38b; Justin Dia1. 49:1; 50:1); cf. the late Midr. Pss. 21, §2. 2559 Vermes, Jesus and Judaism, 72. 2560 Cf. Coppens, «Logia.» 2561 John infuses the expression with greater significance than it previously held (Howton, «Son,» 237). 2562 By the time of R. Abbahu in third-century Palestine (or the later editor of the document), the Christian identification of «God " s son» with deity had become widespread enough to warrant a response (Exod. Rab. 29:5). 2563 Cf. later Irenaeus Haer. 1.1.3; 2.6, for Valentinian gnostics who call Jesus «savior» but not «lord.» 2564 Bousset, Kyrios Christos, 128; Conzelmann, Theology, 82–84. |
| 10131 E.g., Juvenal Sat. 1.71; Phaedrus 4.16.5–6; Plutarch R.Q. 40, Mor. 274A; Diogenes Laertius 2.73; but contrast Plato Rep. 5.452C; Dio Chrysostom Or. 13.24. 10134 Often recognized even in gospels where the psalm is not cited (e.g., Cope, Scribe, 103). Dodd, Tradition, 122, thinks John found the testimonium in a non-Markan stream of tradition. There is probably no symbolic allusion to the custom of a wearer rending garments for mourning (Plutarch Cicero 31.1; 1Macc 2:14; 4:39–40; 5:14; Keener, Matthew, 651–52). 10140 Edersheim, Life, 608, citing Ya1. Isa. 60; cf. also Pesiq. Rab. 36:2; 37:1. Whether this interpretation existed before the time of Jesus is unclear (Longenecker, Exegesis, 156, notes its use five times in 1QH to suggest that it may be messianic, but this is not absolutely clear), and certainly other interpretations existed (e.g., Midr. Pss. 22applies to Esther–Bowman, Gospel, 136); in any case, though many parallels with Ps 22 in the Passion Narrative are noteworthy, they also correspond with what we genuinely know of crucifixion. 10141 With Dibelius, Tradition, 188; Sherwin-White, Society, 46; also recognized in b. Sanh. 48b, bar. This practice stemmed from the custom of plundering the slain on the battlefield (cf., e.g., 1Sam 31:8 ; Joel 3:2–3 ; 2Macc 8:27; Virgil Aen. 11.193–194; Polybius 9.26; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 3.40.3; 3.56.4; 6.29.4–5; Livy 41.11.8; Appian R.H. 4.2; Philostratus Hrk. 35.3; and throughout ancient literature). 10142 Brown, Death, 955, notes that the law itself exempts the clothing the condemned is wearing, but acknowledges that such rules may not have been followed in the first century. We would add doubts that anyone would have restrained provincial soldiers from such seizure (especially given the abuses of requisitioning from persons not condemned). 10145 Cf. Cary and Haarhoff, Life, 149. On the use of dice, see, e.g., Martial Epigr. 4.14; 14.15–16; cf. 11.6.2; for knucklebones, see Martial Epigr. 14.14; Diogenes Laertius 9.1.3; see further the comment on 19:2–3. |
| 1602 See, e.g., Incant. text 17.1–2; 19.2; 34.1; 47.1; Rahmani, «Amulet» (second or third century C.E.). Cf. also, e.g., 1 En. 15:9; 69:12; Jub. 10:1–14; 1QM 13.11–12; T. Jud. 23:1. 1603 Though both demons (m. " Abot 5:6) and protection from them (Sipre Num. 40.1.5; cf. b. c Abod. Zar. 12b, bar.) do appear at times. 1604 E.g., b. Ber. 6a; B. Mesi c a 86a; Qidd. 29b; Pesah. 110a-12b; Sanh. 101a, bar.; Gen. Rab. 36:1; 56:6;Num. Rab. 12:3; Deut. Rab. 4:4; SongRab. 3:7, §5; Midr. Pss. 17:8; Pesiq. Rab.5:10; 15:3.Admit-tedly, such practices became most dominant in the Amoraic period. 1605 This is not to deny, of course, that some rabbis grew up among the sages, such as Simeon b. Gamaliel, whose father was one (m. " Abot 1:17). 1606 Neusner, Traditions, 1:7, argues that the divergent details in the secondary account are not original, a generally but not universally valid deduction. 1609 See many of the parallels on Joshua b. Perahiah and Nittai the Atbelite, Judah b. Tabbai and Simeon b. Shetah (ibid., 1:82–141). Other accounts of Hillel seem to expand little on the Tosefta version (cf. ibid., 1:292). 1616 So Brown, Community, 17 (even if he reconstructs hypothetical redaction history in too much detail). 1617 Martyn " s «two-level» hypothesis fits ancient Hellenistic biographic and historiographie conventions (Aune, Environment, 62; against Kümmel, Introduction, 231); since it was normal procedure for educated readers to read a forensic speech in light of the context in which it was originally delivered (Quintilian 10.1.20–22), but all the original recipients of such a speech would unconsciously be able to read it in the right context without having to reconstruct it, we may appeal to situational context in interpretation even on the level of authorial intent. 1618 Carson, Moo, and Morris, Introduction, 171; Carson, John, 8,87–95; Milne, Message, 24–25; cf. Glaze, «Emphases.» 1620 E.g., Koester, «Brown and Martyn»; Dunn, «John,» 302–4; Perkins, Reading, 249–50; Tuni, «Teologia»; ÓDay, «John,» 658; Hasitschka, «Anmerkungen»; Lindars, John, 16; Rensberger, Faith, 26; Kysar, «Gospel,» 918; Tolmie, Farewell, 3; Quast, «Community.» |
| 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. |
| 3711 Often «truth» vs. «opinion» (e.g., Diogenes Laertius 9.22, Parmenides, ca. 500 B.C.E.); for Stoics, truth especially involved propositions (Mates, Logic, 33–36). For Plato, truth is perceived with the soul, not with the eyes (Rep. 7.527E). 3712 Plutarch Isis 2, Mor. 351E; for Justin Martyr and the Gospel of Truth, see Story, Truth, 220–23. 3713 Marcus Aurelius 9.1.2. Cf. Irenaeus Haer. 1.1.1, where gnosticism " s first aeon emanated nous and alëtheia. 3714 E.g., 1 Esd 4:38–39; T. Jud. 14:1. Pagan thought also could connect truth and virtue (e.g., Marcus Aurelius 3.11.2), though mainly portraying deceit against reality itself as the impiety (e.g., Marcus Aurelius 9.1.2); the different sources of truth reflect the different concepts of morality. 3715 E.g., Ps 119:160 ; 2 Bar. 44:14; T. Ash. 6:1, 3; cf. Philo Alleg. Interp. 3.45 (on the Logos); later rabbinic sources like b. Abod. Zar. 4b; Exod. Rab. 30(purportedly Tannaitic, but probably later); Num. Rab. 12(third-century attribution); Dodd, «Background,» 335, cites Midr. Pss. 25:10, which may also illustrate the principle of exposition grounded in more explicit texts such as Ps 119:160 ; Prov 23:23 . Cf. perhaps even Philo in Knight, «Aletheiá» Some writers, including Painter, John, 46; Longenecker, Christology, 40, suggest a contrast between Jewish views of Torah and the view of Jesus in John 14:6 . 3716 So, e.g., Dodd, Bible, 67–75; Manson, Paul and John, 94; Boice, Witness, 62; Ladd, Theology, 264. Thus lying to save another " s life (often in the OT) could be viewed as an act of truth; Epictetus Diatr. 4.6.33 also allowed lying in some cases (LCL 2n. 1, cites also Stobaeus Ee1. 2.7,11). 3717 1QS 11.4; cf. 1QM 13.9–10. In later rabbinic texts, actually becomes a surrogate name for God (p. Sanh. 1:1, §4; Marmorstein, Names, 73,179–81; Urbach, Sages, 1:181). 3719 Cf. Kuyper, «Grace,» 15–19; Ladd, Theology, 264–69; van der Waal, «Gospel,» 28–33; Boice, Witness, 62; Lindsay, «Truth.» Cf. Schnackenburg, John, 2(in Excursus 10, «The Johannine Concept of Truth,» 225–37); Albright, «Discoveries,» 169, on Qumran contacts. |
| 4121 The arguments for this position are summarized in Marshall, «Son or Servant,» 327; Marshall argues (pp. 327–32) that υις is origina1. 4124 On Acts 13:32–33 (interpreting the psalm concerning Jesus» resurrection/enthronement), cf. Dahl, «Abraham,» 148; Goulder, Acts, 53; Hengel, Son, 23. Cf. Midr. Pss. 2, §9 (messianic, after the woes). 4125 See, e.g., Longenecker, Exegesis, 177. The emphasis of Lindars, Apologetic, 211, on the metaphysical as over against the resurrection interpretation of Heb 1:5, appears to me mistaken. Ps 2:7–8 and 110are also linked in 1 Clem. 36.3–5 (ANF 1:15), but Clement is probably dependent on Hebrews here, citing Heb 1:3–4 and also Ps 104 (Heb 1:7). 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). 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). 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). 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. |
| 6741 T. Mos. 3:14. 6742 E.g., Sipre Deut. 305.2.1; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 2(Tannaitic tradition); 12:25; 15:5. Cf. traditions on the four kingdoms ( Dan 2; 2 Bar. 39:7; 5/7?. Or. 8.6–11; Midr. Pss. 40, §4; cf. Lucas, «Origin»). 6743 Philo Rewards 137; Good Person 36. One enslaved might be said to have lost half onés worth (Homer Od. 17.322–323), and the impoverished free, as much as aristocrats, resented treatment as slaves (Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 19.9.4; Livy 4.3.7; Dio Cassius 8.36.3; Chariton 1.11.3). Although high-status slaves existed (e.g., Herodian 1.12.3; see our comment on 1:27), a slavés position was otherwise socially low (e.g., Cicero Acad. 2.47.144; Num. Rab. 6:1). 6744 Homer Od. 17.320–321; Sir 33:24–30 ; b. Qidd. 49b. 6745 Lucian [Asin.] 5. 6746 Terence Self-Tormentor 668–678; Lady of Andros 495; Chariton 2.10.7; Apuleius Metam. 10.7,10; cf. MacMullen, Relations, 116. 6747 Plato Ale. 1.135C; Achilles Tatius 7.10.5; Chariton 6.5.5; Josephus Ant. 4.219; m. Sotah 1:6; b. Menah. 43b-44a, bar.; Syr. Men. 154–67. 6748 Homer Od. 24.252–253; Chariton 1.10.7; 2.1.5; T. Jos. 11:2–3. 6749 Homer Od. 4.63–64; Arrian Alex. 5.19.1; Apuleius Metam. 4.23. 6750 E.g., Aeschines Timarchus 42. For manual labor, see, e.g., Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 9.25.2; further Finley, Economy, 40–41; Luwel, «Begrip.» Manual laborers themselves were probably more pleased with their status (Martin, Slavery, 44–46,123–24; Lenski, «Crystallization»). 6751 E.g., Demosthenes Against Leptines 132; Epictetus Diatr. 1.6.30; 1.9.20; 1.12.24; 1.13.3; 1.24.17; 1.29.16; 2.7.13; 2.13.18; 3.24.74; Diogenes Laertius 6.2.33; 6.2.43; probably Plutarch Virt. 2, Mor. 100E. Also Jeremias, Jerusalem, 351, citing a baratta in b. Qidd. 28a. To call one a «son of a slave» was to imply one s illegitimate birth (Josephus Ant. 13.292)–a charge one polemical document, probably from the early first century, levels against the Jerusalem priesthood (T. Mos. 5:5). 6752 M. B. Qam. 8:6; see further development of this idea in texts in Bonsirven, Judaism, 61. Some suggest that even Roman Jewish freedmen omitted mention of their manumission because Judaism acknowledged only God as master (cf. Fuks, «Freedmen»), but this probably assumes too monolithic a view of Roman Judaism. |
| 7915 1QM 17.5–6; Perkins, «John,» 972, cites 1QM 1.1, 5, 13; 4.2; 11.8; 1QS 1.18; 2.19; 3.20–21. Brown, John, 1:468, rightly compares John and the Scrolls here. Cf. repeatedly «Prince Mastema» ! .]ub. 17:16; 18:9, 12; 48:2,9,12, 15; though elsewhere sometimes simply «Mastema,» e.g., 49:2); the «Prince of Darkness» (Pesiq. Rab. 20:2; 53:2). 7918 E.g., Lucan C.W. 6.742–743; Segal, «Ruler,» 248–49; the Demiurge in Irenaeus Haer. 1.5.4. Pagans did not scruple to speak of even a chthonic deity as «ruler of the earth» (Smith, Magician, 52, citing Lucian Pharsalia 6.697). See demonic «world-rulers» in Eph 6:12 ; T. So1. 8:2–7 (third century C.E.); in the magical papyri, see Arnold, Ephesians, 65; later astrological powers in MacGregor, «Principalities»; Lee, «Powers,» 60. 7919 Ovid Metam. 15.758–759,859–860; cf. other rulers in p. c Abod. Zar. 3:1, §3; Exod. Rab. 5:14. One might think of a coalescence of imperial and antichrist images if John " s emphasis lay here. 7924 T.Roš Haš. 1:18; " Abot R. Nat. 2A; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 5:13; 23:4; p. Roš Haš 1:3, §28; cf. m. Roš Haš. 3:1; p. Roš Haš. 3:1, §17. When earthly courts could not execute a requisite death sentence, the heavenly court would do so (t. Sanh. 14:16; Sanh. Mak. 5:16; " Abot R. Nat. 25A; p. Ketub. 3:1, §8; Deut. Rab. 5:5; Midr. Pss. 72, §3). 7925 Cf. similar language for the expulsion of Cronus by Zeus at the fall of the Titans (e.g., Cornutus 7.p.7, 20, in Van der Horst, «Cornutus,» 171). 7926 John derives the terms «glorified» and «lifted up» from Isa 52LXX (e.g., Lightfoot, Gospel, 252; see comment on 3:14). The potentially relevant Targum Isaiah, to which some would like to appeal, however, does not predate the NT (Chilton, «John xii34»). 7930 Cicero Verr. 2.4.10.24 (sustulit). Despite allegorizing some other matters, ancient commentators typically understood that 12refers in context to the cross (Augustine Tr. Ev. Jo. 52.11.3). 7931 Callisthenes Alex. 2.21.7–11 (Boring et a1., Commentary, 260–61). Because crucifixion involved «exaltation,» a dream about it signified good for a poor man (Artemidorus Om " r. 2.53; Malina and Rohrbaugh, John, 212–13). |
|
|
