| 9228 Jub. 48:15–16. For other accusing angels, see 3 En. 28:8–9; t. c Abod. Zar. 1:18; Sabb. 17:3; Gen. Rab. 55:4; angels of nations in 3 En. 26:12; Lev. Rab. 21:4; Song Rab. 2:1, §3; 8:8, §1; cf. accusations from good angels in p. Sanh. 10:2, §7; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 24:11. 9230 E.g., Lam. Rab. proem 24 (the twenty-two letters of the alphabet, used in the law). Cf. also God " s angel «Conviction» (λεγχος), the priest (Philo Unchangeable 135,182–183). 9231 Schnackenburg, John, 3:143. Cf. also Johnston, Spirit-Paraclete, 144. For this lawsuit as merely the culmination of the Johannine trial motif, see Dahl, «History,» 139. Such reversal provided irony (cf. Aeschines Timarchus 117–118; Xenophon Mem. 4.8.9–10; Seneca Controv. 6.5; also Keener, Background Commentary, 342–43, on Acts 7:54–56, 58, 60). 9237 As Kennedy, Classical Rhetoric, 124, does. Aune, Prophecy, 97, recognizes the Israelite judicial speech. 9238 See, e.g., Blenkinsopp, «Reproach»; Boyle, «Lawsuit»; Gemser, «Controversy-Pattern»; Wein-feld, «Patterns,» 187–88 (comparing ancient Near Eastern legal practice and treaty language); Ramsey, «Speech-Forms» (probable on secular use, although I do not believe he has established the cultic use). 9239 Cross, Myth, 188–89; cf. Rabe, «Prophecy,» 127. Derrett, «Advocacy,» finds a background in Daniel " s defense of Susanna and in Isa 11:4–5; a Jewish audience might have recalled such passages as part of the larger forensic background (cf. Isa 11:1–2). 9240 CD 1.1–2 (). In Pauline thought, see Barth, Justification, 15–21,26, who sees the OT covenant lawsuit language as part of the background for Pauline justification. 9241 Shea, «Form,» correctly observes parallels to Israelite and ancient Near Eastern covenant formulas (cf. Aune, Environment, 159, 242, for the thesis, probably also correct, of parallels with «ancient royal and imperial edicts»); but although most of these letters include praise as well as blame (Stowers, Letter Writing, 80–81, noting that this was standard; cf. p. 173), the judgment oracles in this covenant context may well be reminiscent of the rib controversy speech of earlier prophets. The listings of cities and nations in oracles of judgment had been standard since biblical times and continues in many of the (Diaspora Jewish) Sibylline Oracles. |
| Gempf, «Speaking» Gempf, Conrad. «Public Speaking and Published Accounts.» Pages 259–303 in The Book of Acts in Its Ancient Literary Setting. Edited by Bruce W. Winter and Andrew D. Clarke. Vo1. 1 of The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting. Edited by Bruce W. Winter. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993. Gemser, «Controversy-Pattern» Gemser, Β. «The Rib- or Controversy-Pattern in Hebrew Mentality.» Pages 120–37 in Wisdom in Israel and in the Ancient Near East: Presented to Professor Harold Henry Rowley for His 65th Birthday. Edited by Martin Noth and D. Winton Thomas. Vetus Testamentum Supplements 3. Leiden: Brill, 1960. Gemünden, «Palmensymbolik» Gemünden, P. von. «Palmensymbolik in Joh 12,13.» Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins 114 (1998): 39–70. Georgi, Opponents Georgi, Dieter. The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986. Georgi, «Reasons» Georgi, Dieter. «Socioeconomic Reasons for the " Divine Man» as a Propagan-distic Pattern.» Pages 27–42 in Aspects of Religious Propaganda in Judaism and Early Christianity. Edited by Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza. University of Notre Dame Center for the Study of Judaism and Christianity in Antiquity 2. Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press, 1976. Gerhardsson, Memory Gerhardsson, Birger. Memory and Manuscript: Oral Tradition and Written Transmission in Rabbinic Judaism and Early Christianity. Acta seminarii neotestamentici upsaliensis 22. Uppsala: Gleerup, 1961. Reprinted as Memory and Manuscript: Oral Tradition and Written Transmission in Rabbinic Judaism and Early Christianity (1961) with Tradition and Transmission in Early Christianity (1964). Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998. Gerhardsson, Origins Gerhardsson, Birger. The Origins of the Gospel Traditions. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979. Gerhardsson, «Path» Gerhardsson, Birger. «The Path of the Gospel Tradition.» Pages 75–96 in The Gospel and the Gospels. Edited by Peter Stuhlmacher. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991. Gericke, «Logos-Philosophy» Gericke, J. D. «Dimensions of the Logos: From Logos-Philosophy to Logos-Theology.» Acta patristica et byzantina 11 (2000): 93–116. |
| It remains always outside the created world, transcending it. The world is created according to the idea, in accordance with the pattern – it is the realization of the pattern – but this pattern is not the subject of becoming. The pattern is a norm and a goal established in God. This distinction and distance is never abolished, and therefore the eternity of the pattern, which is fixed and is never involved in temporal change, is compatible with temporal beginning, with the entering-into-being of the bearers of the external decrees. «Things before their becoming are as though non-existent,» said Augustine, utiquae non erant. And he explains himself: they both were and were not before they originated; «they were in God’s knowledge: but were not in their own nature» – erant in Dei scientia, non erant in sua natura. 48 According to St. Maximus, created beings «are images and similes of the Divine ideas, " 49 in which they are «participants.» 50 In creation, the Creator realizes, «makes substantial» and «discloses» His knowledge, pre-existent everlastingly in Himself. 51 In creation there is projected from out of nothing a new reality which becomes the bearer of the Divine idea, and must realize this idea in its own becoming. In this context the pantheistic tendency of Platonic ideology and of the Stoic theory of «seminal reasons» [σπερματικο λγοι] is altogether overcome and avoided. For Platonism the identification of the «essence» of each thing with its Divine idea is characteristic, the endowment of substances with absolute and eternal (beginningless) properties and predicates, as well as the introduction of the «idea» into real things. On the contrary, the created nucleus of things must be rigorously distinguished from the Divine idea about things. Only in this way is even the most sequacious logical realism freed from a pantheistic flavor; the reality of the whole will nevertheless be but a created reality. Together with this, pan-logism is also overcome: The thought of a thing and the Divine thought-design concerning a thing are not its «essence» or nucleus, even though the essence itself is characterized by λγος [λογικς]. |
| On the other hand, there was an astronomical pattern of periodical recurrence, of circular motion of heavens and stars, a pattern of «revolutions» and cycles. Indeed, both patterns belonged together, since the cycles of the earth were predetermined and controlled by the circles of the heavens. Ultimately, the course of history was but an aspect of the inclusive cosmic course, controlled by certain inviolable laws. These laws were implied in the structure of the universe. Hence the whole vision was essentially fatalistic. The ultimate principle was tyche or heimarmene, the cosmic «destiny» or fatum. Man’s destiny was implied and comprehended in that astronomical «necessity.» The Cosmos itself was conceived as an «eternal» and «immortal,» but periodical and recurrent, being. There was an infinite and continuous reiteration of the same permanent pattern, a periodical renewal of situations and sequences. Consequently, there was no room for any progress, but only for «re-volutions», re-circulation, cyclophoria and anacyclosis. Nothing «new» could be added to the closed perfection of this periodical system. Accordingly, there was no reason, and no motive, to look forward, into the future, as the future could but disclose that which was already preformed in the past, or rather in the very nature of things (physis).The permanent pattern could be better discerned in the past, which has been «completed» or «perfected» (perfectum), than in the uncertainty of the present and future. It was in the past that historians and politicians were looking for «patterns» and «examples.» It was especially in the later philosophical systems of the Hellenistic age that these features of «permanence» and «recurrence» were rigidly emphasized – by the Stoics, the Neopythagoreans, the Platonics, the Epicureans alike. Eadem sunt omnia semper nec magis est neque erit mox quam fuit ante. 35 But the same conviction was already dominant in the classical age. Professor Werner Jaeger admirably summarizes the main convictions of Aristotle: |
| A man, as a «type» or a «character,» seems to be predestined to behave in his «typical» manner. There seems to be a typical pattern of development for each kind of human society. It is but natural that in our time the mirage of «historical inevitability» had to be exposed and disavowed, as a distorting factor of our historical interpretation. 31 There is indeed an inherent determinism in all these typical and categorical images. But they are no more than a useful shorthand for the «dust of facts.» The actual history is fluid and flexible and ultimately unpredictable. The tendency toward determinism is somehow implied in the method of retrospection itself. In retrospect we seem to perceive the logic of the events, which unfold themselves in a regular order, according to a recognizable pattern, with an alleged inner necessity, so that we get the impression that it really could not have happened otherwise. The ultimate contingency of the process is concealed in the rational schemes, and sometimes it is deliberately eliminated. Thus, events are losing their eventuality, and appear to be rather inevitable stages of development or decay, of rise and fall, according to a fixed ideal pattern. In fact, there is less consistency in actual history than appears in our interpretative schemes. History is not an evolution, and the actual course of events does not follow evolutionary schemes and patterns. Historical events are more than happenings; they are actions, or complexes of actions. History is a field of action, and behind the events stand agents, even when these agents forfeit their freedom and follow a pattern or routine, or are overtaken by blind passions. Man remains a free agent even in bonds. If we may use another biological term, we may describe history rather as epigenesis than as «evolution,» since evolution always implies a certain kind of «pre-formation,» and «development» is no more than a disclosure of «structure.» 32 There is always some danger that we may mistake our conceptual visions for empirical realities and speak of them as if they were themselves factors and agents, whereas, in fact, they are but rational abbreviations for a multiplicity of real personal agents. Thus we venture to describe the evolution of «feudalism» or of «capitalistic society,» forgetting that these terms only summarize a complex of diverse phenomena, visualized as a whole for the sake of intelligibility. «Societies,» «categories,» and «types» are not organisms, which only can «evolve» or «develop,» but are complexes of co-ordinated individuals, and this co-ordination is always dynamic, flexible, and unstable. |
| Lietzmann, «Prozess» Lietzmann, Heinrich. «Der Prozess Jesu.» Sitzenberichte der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, phi1.-hist. Klasse 1931,14 (1934): 310–22. Lifshitz, «Sympathisants» Lifshitz, B. «Du nouveau sur les «sympathisants.»» JSJ 1 (1970): 77–84. Lightfoot, Colossians Lightfoot, J. B. Saint Paul " s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, n.p.: Macmillan, 1879. Repr., Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1959. Lightfoot, Galatians Lightfoot, J. B. St Paul " s Epistle to the Galatians. 3d ed. London: Macmillan, 1869. Lightfoot, Gospel Lightfoot, R. H. St. John " s Gospel: A Commentary. Edited by C. F. Evans. London: Oxford University Press, 1960. Lightfoot, Notes Lightfoot, J. B. Notes on the Epistles of St Paul (I and II Thess, I Cor 1–7 , Rom 1–7 , Eph 1:1–14 ). Winona Lake, Ind.: Alpha Publications, n.d. Lightfoot, Talmud Lightfoot, John. A Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica, 4 vols, n.p.: Oxford, 1959. Repr., Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979. Lim, «Alteration Lim, Timothy H. «Eschatological Orientation and the Alteration of Scripture in the Habakkuk Pesher.» Journal of Near Eastern Studies 49 (1990): 185–94. Limbeck, Ordnung Limbeck, M. Die Ordnung des Heils: Untersuchungen zum Gesetzesversändnis des Frühjudentums. Kommentare und Beiträge zum Alten und Neuen Testament. Düsseldorf: Patmos, 1971. Lincoln, Ephesians Lincoln, Andrew T. Ephesians. WBC 42. Dallas: Word, 1990. Lincoln, Lawsuit Motif Lincoln, Andrew T. Truth on Trial: The Lawsuit Motif in the Fourth Gospe1. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2000. Lincoln, Paradise Lincoln, Andrew T. Paradise Now and Not Yet: Studies in the Role of the Heavenly Dimension in Paul " s Thought with Special Reference to His Eschatology. SNTSMS 43. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. Lindars, Apologetic Lindars, Barnabas. New Testament Apologetic. London: SCM, 1961. Lindars, Behind Lindars, Barnabas. Behind the Fourth Gospel: Studies in Creative Criticism. London: Talbot, 1971. |
| 3469 Ibid., 20–47, esp. 35–47 on witness for God in Isa 40–55 (cf. also Cothenet, «Témoignage»). On other Jewish texts, see 48–65 (Philo bridges the gap between the OT and Hellenistic use); in rabbinic literature, see 231–39. John " s usage is probably closest to that of Isaiah LXX (cf. Trites, Witness, 112; Caird, Revelation, 18; Boice, Witness, 16). 3470 Cf. Aune, Environment, 81, citing Herodotus Hist. 2.99; Polybius 12.27.1–6; 20.12.8; Lucian Hist. 47 (on autopsia, eyewitness knowledge). 3472 Casey, «Μρτυς,» 35; Franck, Revelation, 52 (on 15:26, though earlier he acknowledges a forensic context for παρκλητος). 3473 Meeks, Prophet-King, 65 (pointing to the parallel between μαρτυρα and κρσις in 8:14, 16); cf. Caird, Revelation, 18. Perhaps as early as Revelation, μρτυς began to take on a meaning it came to acquire more often in patristic literature: martyr (Morrice, «John,» 44; perhaps Abel who μαρτρησας in T. Ab. 11:2B). 3474 E.g., Trites, Witness, 78–127 (79–90 address John " s juridical character; 90–113 address the lawsuit of Jesus» ministry; 113–22 address the postresurrection lawsuit of John 13–17 ; on the Johannine Epistles, see 124–27; Trites " s conclusions are sound). Cf. Burge, Community, 204–5; Harvey, Tria1. John contrasts witness with faithless betrayal (cf. 5:15; 11:46,57; 12:4); the purpose of witness is to reveal the content of the testimony (2:25). 3477 See esp. 2Macc 3:36 (εξεμαρτρει… πσιν); Chariton 4.7.5 (πασιν ανθρπους; though cf. 7:6, where whole cities did come to meet her). 3478 The sense " from God» fits the genitive (cf. παρ θεν in Musonius Rufus 3, p. 38.27; παρ του θεο in Menander Rhetor 2.1–2,370.21–26=εκ θεν in 370.29–371.2) as well as the sending. 3482 See on 1:4–5, above. T. Levi 14declares that God gave the law to «enlighten every person»; the parallel is close, but could depend on John, given the heavy Christian redaction of T. Levi (Bernard, John, 1:13; Brown, John, 1:523; Longenecker, Christology, 12,146). 3485 The «genuine» light of 1contrasts them explicitly; cf. the application of «genuine» to God in the apologetic of Hellenistic Judaism (Best, Thessalonians, 82, cites LXX Exod 34:6; 2 Chr 15:3; Ps 86:15 ; Isa 65and mentions other sources). |
| Bowman, «Studies» Bowman, John. «Samaritan Studies.» Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 40 (1957–1958): 298–327. Bowman, «Thought-Forms» Bowman, Thorleif. «Hebraic and Greek Thought-Forms in the New Testament.» Pages 1–22 in Current Issues in New Testament Interpretation: Essays in Honor of Otto A. Piper. Edited by William Klassen and Graydon F. Snyder. New York: Harper & Row, 1962. Box, «Intermediation» Box, G. H. «The Idea of Intermediation in Jewish Theology.» JQR 23 (1932–1933): 103–19. Boyarin, «Binitarianism» Boyarin, Danie1. «The Gospel of the Memra: Jewish Binitarianism and the Prologue to John.» HTR 94, no. 3 (2001): 243–84. Boyd, «Ascension» Boyd, W. J. Peter. «Ascension according to St John: Chapters 14–17 Not Prepassion but Post-resurrection.» Theology 70 (1967): 207–11. Boyd, Sage Boyd, Gregory A. Cynic Sage or Son of God? Wheaton, 111.: BridgePoint, 1995. Boyer, «Étude» Boyer, C. «Une étude sur le texte de Pépître aux Philippiens 2,6–11.» Doctor Communis!! (1979): 5–14. Boyle, «Discourse» Boyle, John L . «The Last Discourse ( Jn 13,31–16,33 ) and Prayer ( Jn 17 ): Some Observations on Their Unity and Development.» Biblica 56 (1975): 210–22. Boyle, «Lawsuit» Boyle, Marjorie ÓRourke. «The Covenant Lawsuit of the Prophet Amos: III 1-IV 13.» VT21 (1971): 338–62. Braine, «Jewishness» Braine, David D. C. «The Inner Jewishness of St. John " s Gospel as the Clue to the Inner Jewishness of Jesus.» Studien zum Neuen Testament und seiner Umwelt 13 (1988): 101–55. Brakke, «Plain Speech» Brakke, David. «Parables and Piain Speech in the Fourth Gospel and the Apocryphon of James» Journal of Early Christian Studies 7 (1999): 187–218. Brandie, «Vida» Brandie, Francisco. «La fe que se hace vida: La fe en el evangelio du Juan y la experiencîa del mistico.» Revista de Espiritualidad 54/217 (1995): 523–43. Branham, «Humor» Branham, R. Bracht. «Authorizing Humor: Lucian " s Demonax and Cynic Rhetoric.» Semeia 64 (1993): 33–48. Brant, «Husband Hunting» Brant, Jo-Ann A. «Husband Hunting: Characterization and Narrative Art in the Gospel of John.» Biblical Interpretation 4 (1996): 205–23. |
| However it does not follow from this that the diptych order has to reflect their national affiliation. This goes against the nature of the Church. Firstly, because ethnic division in faith has been alien to Christianity, which was expressed by the “apostle of pagans”: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal 3:28). Secondly, as we saw above, it is Archbishop Chrysostomos II who denies superiority of nation over faith. Besides, this concept was condemned as the phyletist heresy by the See of Constantinople in 1872. Thirdly, Greek-speaking Churches are not the only ones in the world; there are others too such as Slavic churches...the Japanese Orthodox Church exists, saving people, though not recognised by the Ecumenical Patriarch. What is to be done with these churches? Take their due honour away from them and review the ranks of many Churches, all in an effort to move the Church of Cyprus up to fifth position? In sum, a clear ecclesiastical and political reason for the “Cypriot desire” is to be seen: The history of Ancient Orthodox Patriarchates and the Church of Cyprus suggests that there has been constant support and close connections among these Churches. This kind of Pentarchy of Churches solidified by the single Greek nationality of their members, their location in the Mediterranean region and shared cultural, economic and social problems does not amount to something matching the Byzantine concept of Pentarchy referring to five Patriarchates at different corners of the empire which supported, witnessed and symbolized the unifying politics of Justinian. The Justinianic Pentarchy, closely linked to the symbolism of the five senses, prevented more Patriarchates from emerging. The Pentarchy came to be the only pattern for ecclesiastical rule in Byzantium. This pattern is hardly feasible nowadays; however, the new Pentarchy seems to seek to follow it. The sense of superiority shared by the Ancient Patriarchates and the Church of Cyprus is a proof; the sense is expressed in their communalism, excluding the other Local Churches from their problem-solving domain as well as in the pattern of close-knit interaction these churches follow in s olving inter-church problems. |
| The following sermon is a rabbinic debate. 6121 In the early 1960s Peder Borgen observed that the biblical quotation in 6is repeatedly paraphrased in midrashic manner throughout 6:32–58. 6122 He argued that the discourse interprets the text in 6:31, following the homiletical form later known to us in midrashim. Because the broad pattern in Philo and the NT resembles the later rabbinic pattern, the pattern probably was common in early Judaism. 6123 Borgen also builds on the early Jewish interpretation of manna as Torah. 6124 So convincingly did Borgen array various sources that the shifts in methodology since that time have not undercut his basic argument, which has continued to retain support 6125 despite continued nuancing on details. 6126 In John the bread from heaven has been given the life-giving functions of Torah and wisdom. The presence of the bread is pictured with features from the theophany at Sinai and the invitation to eat and drink extended by wisdom. He who shares in the (preparatory) revelation at Sinai accepts the invitation and «comes to» wisdom/Jesus ( John 6,45 ). The midrashic formula of «I am» receives in this context the force of the self predication of wisdom with overtones from Gods theophanic presentation of Himself. By combining ideas about the Torah, the theophany at Sinai and the wisdom, John 6,31–58 follows the lines suggested by the prologue (1,1–18) where the same combination has been made. 6127 In 6the crowds quote from the Bible, but Jesus interprets the text quite differently (6:32): the one who gives the bread from heaven is not Moses, but God himself (cf. Exod 16:4; Ps 78:19–20 ; Neh 9:15), as Moses himself openly acknowledged (Exod 16:4, 6–8, 15, 29, 32). Such a form of correction became a common enough exegetical method. 6128 The subject of Ps 78in the context is God. (For that matter, most early Jewish interpreters, even those who claimed that Moses» virtue merited the gift, would have sided with Jesus in declaring God the giver of manna.) 6129 Thus the real giver of bread from heaven is God, and what they should seek is not a wilderness prophet like Moses but the gift of God which is greater than the earthly manna in the wilderness. |
|
|
