| The section heavily emphasizes love for Jesus and the association of love for him with keeping his commandments. Keeping the commandments (in the context, especially love–13:34–35) seems a prerequisite for acquiring or continuing in the activity of the Spirit. God " s blessings also were often conditional on keeping his commandments, as in 14:15 8551 (e.g., Exod 15:26). Early Judaism generally believed in the renewal rather than the abrogation of Torah in the end time. 8552 Faith and love, the central requirements of the covenant in Deuteronomy, also appear as the basic requirements here; 8553 in biblical covenant tradition, those who love God will keep his commandments (Exod 20:6; Deut 5:10; 7:9; 11:1,13; 30:16 ). 8554 Thus, for John as for the law, love is not mere sentiment but defined by specific content through God " s commandments. 8555 Does this imply that for John the Spirit can be earned? Evidence suggests that many Jewish people thought in terms of meriting the Spirit, 8556 prophecy, 8557 or (sometimes interchangeably in the accounts) the divine presence; 8558 Christian tradition could certainly speak of God giving the Spirit only to the people who obey him (Acts 5:32). 8559 Yet by contrast, early Christian tradition, which viewed the Spirit as more widely available than did most contemporaries, often viewed it simply as an eschatological gift ( Rom 5:5 ; Gal 3:2 ; cf. Ezek 36:24–27 ). Clearly for John the Spirit is not simply merited; apart from Jesus» presence, the disciples can do nothing (15:5), and the Spirit is received through faith (7:39). At the same time, the Spirit comes only to the disciples, to those committed to Jesus (14:17); those who obey (14:15) receive greater power for obedience (14:16–17), moving in a cycle of ever deeper spiritual maturation. For John, an initial «experience» without continuing perseverance is not ultimately salvific (15:6; 8:30–31); the Spirit comes to believers and forms them into stronger believers (on the inadequacy of initial signs-faith, see introduction) who in turn become more obedient to the life of the Spirit. God " s answers to Israel were conditional on obedience (e.g., Deut 7:12 ), but both promise and commandments were given only to a people already redeemed by God " s covenant mercy (Exod 20:2). 8560 |
| 5819 Pesiq. Rab Kah. 2:4; 23:8; b. Sanh. 22a; Gen. Rab. 68:4; Num. Rab. 3:6; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 2:4; Tg. Neof. 1 on Deut 32:4 ; cf. Lev. Rab. 8:1. 5820 Purportedly late-first- or early-second-century tradition in Exod. Rab. 30:9. 5821 Commentators (e.g., MacGregor, John, 173; Schnackenburg, John, 2:101; Barrett, John, 256) cite Philo Alleg. Interp. 1.5, 18; Cherubim 87. Since Greeks felt that true deities needed no rest (Maximus of Tyre Dissertations 15.16.2), emphasizing God " s continuing activity could serve an apologetic function for Diaspora Jews (Aristobulus frg. 5 in Eusebius Praep. ev. 13.12.11; Boring et a1., Commentary, 267). Cf. also the sun, which never «rests» (J En. 72:37). 5822 See the collection of numerous sources in Keener, Matthew, 217–18. 5823 Borgen, «Hellenism,» 107, citing Homer Il. 5.440–441; Philostratus Vit. Apol1. 8.5, 7. 5824 See further Stauffer, Jesus, 206. Blasphemy in the narrowest extant sense of the term required the uttering of God " s name (m. Sanh. 7:5), but it is unclear how widespread this view was in the first century, and the Greek term includes «reviling» (Keener, Matthew, 289–90,651; cf. Sanders, Jesus to Mishnah, 58–60, 64–67). 5825 Smith, Theology, 174. See our introduction on controversies with the minim over ditheism. 5826 Odeberg, Gospel, 203. Cf. the LXX of Deut 13 (13LXX), where one must love God more than a friend «equal to oneself» (in typical Greek language of friendship). 5827 E.g., m. Sanh. 4:5; b. Sanh. 38a, bar., reading with the earlier manuscripts; Sipre Deut. 329.1.1; Pesiq. Rab. 21:6; again, see our introduction on these conflicts. 5828 Kysar, Maverick Gospel, 46. 5829 Ashton, Understanding, 137–40, may be right to understand it in terms of the Johannine life-setting, but it still has a likely referent in the story world. 5830 Also others, e.g., Fenton, John, 71; Lee, Thought, 67; Martin, Carmen Christi, 148–49; cf. Barrett, John, 257 (equality but not independence); my treatment in Keener, «Subordination.» In the heat of the Arian controversy, Gregory of Nazianzus argued against the Son " s subordination here (Hall, Scripture, 78–80); while John does seem to affirm subordination here, it is not in an Arian sense–he denies equality of rank in redemptive activity in some sense but affirms equality of being in another sense (see 1:1,18; 8:58; 20:28; cf. Calvin, John, 1:198–99, on John 5:19 ). The Platonic idea that a perfect or superlative nature cannot be improved was already widespread outside Platonic circles (e.g., Seneca Ep. Lucil 66.8–12). |
| 7562 Interestingly, later rabbis also relate Jesus» execution to his miracle-working, there called magic (b. Sanh. 43a), as Stauffer, Jesus, 103, points out; but the tradition is late and may well be secondary on this point. 7564 Xenophon Cyr. 7.2.15 assumes his audiencés knowledge of the common story of Croesus and the Delphic oracle (cf. Herodotus 1.46–48; Xenophon does this elsewhere, cf. Brownson, «Introduction,» x); 2 Chr 32seems to assume knowledge of the story preserved in 2 Kgs 20:12–21. 7566 On a Jerusalem ossuary, see CJ/2:264, §1261; 2:265, §1263; 2:290, §1311. See also Sipre Deut. 281.1.2. 7569 E.g., CI] 2:139, §935; 2:140, §938. Lazarus also appears in Hebrew [CP] 3:183), but Λζαρος explicitly translates , Eleazar, in CIJ2:123, §899 (undated, from Joppa in Palestine). Vermes, Jesus the Jew, 190–91, argues that «Lazarus» is a Galilean form because Galileans typically dropped the open-ing gutteral in Aramaic. By this period, however, the form was probably more widely distributed. 7570 Yamauchi, Stones, 121; cf. Finegan, Archeology, 240. For a more contemporary excavation re-port of a Second Temple period tomb from Bethany, see Loffreda, «Tombe» (also including Byzantine data); the hospitium of Martha and Mary in Bethany is Byzantine (Taylor, «Cave»). 7571 Witherington, Women, 104; Haenchen, John, 2:57. There is no need to see the verse as a later addition to the text (cf. 1:40); it may point the reader forward to Jesus» passion (ODay, «John,» 685–86). 7572 Theissen, Stories, 49, cites, e.g., Acts 9:36; h. Ber. 34b; Lucian Philops. 11; Philostratus Vit. Apol1. 4.10. 7577 So Malina and Rohrbaugh, John, 195, noting that he also missed the funeral (though messengers would not have reached him in time to announce this). 7579 Burial on the day of death was the Jewish custom (Watkins, John, 259; cf. 11:17, 39; Acts 5:6–10). 7580 Barrett, John 391; Morris, «Jesus,» 42. The trip from the Jordan plain (10:40) to the hills around Bethany (11:1) would take longer than the downhill trip from Bethany to the plain; Bethany is nearly 2,700 feet above sea level, and the Jordan plain roughly 1,100 feet below it (LaSor, Knew, 51). |
| Because we lack other sources by which to test it, we can comment only briefly on the essential historicity of this narrative. 4750 Its recurrent symbolic significance indicates considerable Johannine interpretation and idiom, but cannot be used to dismiss the possibility of a historical nucleus any more than, say, the Johannine features in his account of the feeding of the five thousand in ch. 6. 4751 Certainly the wordplays indicate a Greek-speaking audience, 4752 but Jerusalems aristocracy probably spoke mainly Greek, 4753 and in any case no one argues for a verbatim transcription of the dialogue without a prior transposition into Johannine idiom. That Jesus historically spoke of a rebirth of some sort is likely. 4754 Jesus probably spoke of some sent «from heaven» (i.e., from God; Mark 11:30 ) and viewed his own role as unique (see introduction, ch. 7). Beyond asserting a basic historical nucleus, however, it is impossible on purely historical grounds to determine the degree to which the dominant Johannine idiom has shaped that nucleus. 1. Nicodemus Comes to Jesus (3:1–2) By appealing to what his community «knows» and broaching the matter of Christology (albeit from an inadequate starting point), Nicodemus " s assertion sets the stage for the rest of the discourse. 4755 Nicodemus suggests that Jesus is a teacher «from God,» 4756 a phrase which for John " s audience, familiar with Johannine idiom, would be equivalent to claiming that Jesus is «from above,» but which to Nicodemus within the story world undoubtedly would bear a less exclusive sense (cf. 1:6). The story includes a contrast between the «teacher of Israel» who fails to comprehend heavenly realities (3:10) and the teacher from God who reveals them (3:2). Although no one doubted that some men of God could still work signs, the general Pharisaic view that prophets were rare or vanished may have contributed to Nicodemus being impressed with the testimony of Jesus» signs (despite their limited halakic value in the same tradition). 4757 Nicodemus points out that «no one can» do signs like those Jesus has done (2:23) unless God is with him (3:2); Jesus develops Nicodemus " s δναται, which is repeated throughout the following narrative (3:3,4, 5, 9): what no one can do is enter the kingdom without rebirth–or, in more general terms, do anything of the Spirit by means of the flesh (cf. 15:5). 4758 1A. Nicodemus (3:1) |
| The comparison between their anguish and that of a birthing mother (16:21) is not incidenta1. 9335 Some considered any mother " s labor in birth as bringing her close to death. 9336 Even on the Sabbath, Jewish pietists expected midwives and others to proceed to whatever lengths possible to insure a mother " s comfort during childbirth. 9337 Nevertheless, ancient childbearing lacked the benefits of modern means to reduce pain, and a mother " s pain became proverbial for great travai1. 9338 Although joy following birth pangs was expected, 9339 this did not reduce the intensity of the pain involved; the epitome of ignorance, in fact, might be a fool who publicly asked his mother how her pangs were at his birth and then lectured her that nobody can have pleasure without having some pain mixed in as wel1. 9340 Some had compared the unspeakable grief of losing those close to oneself, 9341 or the experience of being violently repressed for onés piety, 9342 with birth pangs. Such birth pangs were said to strengthen the mother " s sympathy and love for her children (4 Macc 15:7). The common eschatological associations of this image are critical here, as commentators often recognize. 9343 The biblical prophets employed birth pangs as an image of extreme anguish. 9344 In Jewish literature, these birth pangs came to illustrate the period of intense suffering immediately preceding the end, 9345 as the final sufferings giving birth to a new world. 9346 Here, too, the birth pangs are eschatological, except that they relate to the realized eschatology inaugurated among believers through Jesus» resurrection. The image may most directly reflect Isa 26:16–21, which uses «little while,» labor pains, and resurrection. 9347 An equally valid or perhaps better candidate is Isa 66:8–14, in which Zion travails to bring forth the restored people of God (66:8), and when God " s people «see» (ψεσθε), they become «glad» (χαρσετοα, 66:14). 9348 Revelation (which we argued in the introduction, pp. 126–39, derives from a Johannine community) employs this same image to mark Jesus» glorification (Rev 12:2) at the time that the dragon is «cast out» (Rev 12:8–10; John 12:31 ; cf. 16:11) and the beginning of the interim period of suffering and divine provision for the rest of the woman " s seed (Rev 12:6,14–17). Revelation employs the image in a manner analogous with John; in contrast with the Synoptics, the messianic woes begin not after Jesus» death ( Mark 13:8 ) but in it ( John 16:20–22 ). 9349 Thus the woman experiences «tribulation» (16:21), which the disciples also must anticipate (16:33; Rev 1:9; 7:14). 9350 |
| 3561 Sipre Deut. 43.8.1; b. Šabb. 31a; Yoma 76a; Exod. Rab. 15:30; Lev. Rab. 10:3; Num. Rab. 16:7; Deut. Rab. 2:24; 10:4; Lam. Rab. proem 2; Lam. Rab. 1:17, §52; SongRab. 2:16, §1; Pesiq. Rab. 15(often in parables); cf. Gen. Rab. 86(modeled after Exod 4:22, but the tradition is attested early in Jub. 19:29). 3562 E.g., " Abot R. Nat. 35, §77; 44, §124 B; Sipra Behuq.pq. 2.262.1.9; Sipre Deut. 43.16.1; 45.1.2; 352.7.1; b. Šabb. 31a, 128a; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 9:5; 14:5; Exod. Rab. 46:4–5; Num. Rab. 5:3; 10:2; Deut. Rab. 1:6; 3:15; Lam. Rab. proem 23; Lam. Rab. 3:20, §7. 3563 Sipre Deut. 96.4.1; cf. similarly Sipre Deut. 308.1.2. The discussion continues in later texts: Israel are God " s children when they obey him (Deut. Rab. 7:9); God begot Israel as an only child, but will treat them as slaves if they disobey (Pesiq. Rab. 27:3; cf. John 8:35 ); Bonsirven, Judaism, 48–49, cites some other revelant texts (including Sipre Num. on 15:41). 3564 E.g., b. Ber. 7a (apocryphal bat qol to R. Ishmael), 19a (Honi the Circle-Drawer, but the antiquity of the tradition is difficult to date); cf. Sukkah 45b (R. Simeon ben Yohai). See especially Vermes on charismatic rabbis, discussed on pp. 270–72 (Vermes, Jesus the Jew, 210–11, citing b. Ta c an. 23b; followed by Borg, Vision, 45; tentatively by Charlesworth, Pseudepigrapha and NT, 82). 3565 See on «the Jews» in the introduction, above; cf. similarly Ellis, Genius, 24. Early Jewish readers, both Christian and non-Christian, probably assumed the idea of future inheritance in sonship language; see Hester, Inheritance, 42. 3566 E.g., m. Sotah 9:15; t. B. Qam. 7:6; Hag. 2:1; Péah 4:21; Sipra Behuq. pq. 8.269.2.15; Sipre Deut. 352.1.2; b. Ber. 30a, bar.; p. Sanh. 10:2, §8; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 24:9; Lev. Rab. 1:3; 7:1; 35:10; see further texts in Marmorstein, Names, 56–58; cf. 3Macc 5:7; 7:6; personal prayer in Jos. Asen. 12:14. Outside 3Macc 6:8, the title appears regularly in prayers, especially in rabbinic texts (Moore, Judaism, 2:202–10; cf. McNamara, Targum, 116ff.), but these probably reflect some early and widespread prayer language (e.g., the Kaddish, adapted no later than Q in the Palestinian Jesus tradition; see Moore, Judaism, 2:213; Smith, Parallels, 136; Jeremias, Theology, 21; Jeremias, Prayers, 98); see esp. Vermes, Jesus and Judaism, 40. «My father» may have sounded strange (Jeremias, Message, 17; idem, Prayers, 57; Israel as a whole applies it in Sipra Qed. pq. 9.207.2.13), but «our Father» certainly did not. For OT usage, see Jeremias, Prayers, 12; for «intertestamental» literature, see ibid., 15–16; nor is the title unique to Judaism and its religious descendants (Mbiti, Religions, 63, 83). |
| 2:9, §3; Pesiq. Rab. 15:10; Tg. Neof. on Exod 12:42; many of the eschatological wilderness prophets in Josephus were popularly susceptible to messianic interpretations (see Glasson, Moses, 18, citing Josephus Ant. 20.97–99; War 2.259,261; and our previous note that addresses wilderness prophets, n. 90). 3881 Many concede that the Baptist understood his mission in terms of a wilderness renewal (e.g., Koester, Introduction, 2:72). The wilderness was also a natural place for refugees (in general, not just Essenes) from hostile society; see, e.g., Heb 11:38; Rev 12:6; Pss. So1. 17:17; Song Rab. 2:13, §4). 3882 Kelber, Story, 17; Mauser, Wilderness, 90; that Mark depicted John in terms of Jesus is often noted (e.g., Marxsen, Mark, 33). 3883 Marxsen, Mark, 37; Bultmann, Tradition, 246; Anderson, Mark, 69. 3884 Cf. Josephus Ant. 18.118. Robinson, Problem, 73, who notes the allusion to Isa 40:3, concurs that the tradition itself is historical (citing Matt 11:7,18). 3885 See Josephus Ant. 18.117. Although the Qumran community would not have welcomed a maverick like John (see Pryke, «John»; Gaster, Scriptures, xii), he probably baptized near them (see evidence in Jeremias, Theology, 43), an area called the «wilderness» (see Mauser, Wilderness, 78). 3886 Theissen, Gospels, 39. 3887 That the Johannine community assumed this position is also supported by Rev 12:1–6, where the wilderness represents the course of the present age (cf., e.g., Rissi, Time, 38; Kassing, «Weib»). 3888 T. Ab. 14:13; 15:1; 20:13A; cf. Charlesworth, «Voice»; idem, Pseudepigrapha and NT, 128–30, citing also Apoc. Sedr. 2:5/2:2–4; Apoc. Ab. 9:1–4; Γ. Job 3:1–2; 2 Bar. 13:1; also Ellul, Apocalypse, 104, on Rev 1:12. 3889 Aune, Prophecy, 137, citing Josephus War 6.301 and the bat qo1. 3890 Pace Robbins, Teacher, 190. 3891 See Keener, Spirit, 136–62; Koester, Symbolism, 155–84. Origen Comm. Jo. 13.26–39 also suggests that John 4 reveals Jesus» water to be greater than that of the Scriptures. 3892 E.g., Chilton, Approaches, 31. |
| Many of the bystanders responded in faith (11:45; cf. 11:15,40); the language suggests that the majority did so. 7676 (On the significance of such signs-faith, see comment on 2and related texts.) That John calls the bystanders «the Jews» indicates his continuing confidence that even among those who constitute the primary opposition (see introduction on «the Jews»), faith remains possible. Although it is not part of his purpose to emphasize it, John may even share the earlier Christian optimism in an eschatological repentance of his Jewish people ( Rom 11:26 ). 7677 But the specter of rejection remains, for some of the bystanders took word to the authorities that Jesus was again in Judea and doing signs that were influencing others» opinions ( John 11:46 ). In an analogous setting in the Fourth Gospel, a report about Jesus» signs directed toward the elite is intended not as witness (as in 7:46; 9:30–33) but as betrayal (5:15–16); given the equally immediate hostile response, such is probably in view here. New Testament miracle stories frequently include rejection, but nearly all other ancient miracle stories lack this element, although its converse, acclamation, is common. 7678 The motif of rejection or persecution after miracles 7679 undoubtedly stems from the ministry of Jesus and/or the experience of his earliest followers. 2. The Elite Plot Jesus» Death (11:47–53) The plot of the leaders (11:47–53) fittingly follows the Lazarus narrative (11:1–44); Jesus is the resurrection and the life, but to give Lazarus life must set his own in danger (11:8, 16). In this epitome of Johannine irony, Jesus would die on behalf of others (11:50). 7680 2A. Historical Plausibility Mark also draws on a tradition in an earlier passion narrative in which leaders plot against Jesus ( Mark 14:1–2 ), very likely in response to his demonstration and teaching in the temple earlier that week ( Mark 11:15–18 ). In John, the demonstration in the temple opens Jesus» public ministry, framing it with the ethos of the passion week and the Jerusalem leaders» hostility. In John, the immediate precedent and provocation for the final plotting is Lazarus " s resuscitation. Because this was Jesus» climactic sign before the cross, it suggests a rejection of his whole public ministry (1:11). 7681 |
| 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). |
| 8755 Both expansion (cf., e.g., Theon Progym. 1.172–175; 2.115–123; 3.224–240) and abridgement (2Macc 2:24–28) were standard practices; see our comments on pp. 18–19, 27–28. Post-Easter embellishment becomes far more common in the apocryphal gospels than in the Synoptics (see Carmignac, «Pré-pascal»); Hill, Prophecy, 169, thus is right to observe that the Johannine discourses «may indeed be homilies composed around sayings of Jesus,» without being from Christian prophets. 8756 Many scholars emphasize the centrality of the Word and the Jesus tradition here; see Bürge, Community, 213; Dietzfelbinger, «Paraklet,» 395–402; for the reason for this emphasis, Dietzfel-binger, «Paraklet,» 402–8. Cf. the importance of authentic memory of the right Teacher in the Scrolls (Stuhlmacher, «Theme,» 13; cf. Roloff, «Lieblingsjünger,» whom he cites). 8762 Berg, «Pneumatology,» 149–50. This is likely however one interprets the phrase. On acting in onés name, see discussion at 14:13. 8764 Franck, Revelation, 44, points out that in Philo it is normally God or his Word or Moses who «teaches.» Wegenast, «Teach,» 760, observes that the term is normally used in the LXX for instruction in how to live the Torah, not for prophetic preaching. 8765 E.g., m. " Abot 3:8; Met Pisha 1:135–136; Sipre Deut. 4.2.1; 48.1.1,4; 306.19.1–3; p. Meg. 4:1, §4; cf. Let. Aris. 154 (Hadas, Aristeas, 161, also compares Philo Spec. Laws 4.106ff). See comments on memory in our introduction; cf. in pre-Christian sapiential testaments, such as Tob 4(perhaps Tob 1:11–12). 8766 Rhet. ad Herenn. 3.16.28; Plutarch Educ. 13, Mor. 9E; Diogenes Laertius 6.2.31; 10.1.12; Theon Progym. 2.5–8; Quintilian 1.3.1; 2.4.15; 11.2.1–51; probably Seneca Dia1. 7.10.3; Culpepper, School, 50, 106, 193; Anderson, Glossary, 126–27; Kennedy, Classical Rhetoric, 98; Gerhardsson, Memory, 124–25. Understanding and remembering profitable sayings were both vital (Isocrates Demon. 18, Or. 1), and reminder was common enough in moral exhortation (Isocrates Demon. 21, Or. 1; Epictetus Diatr. 4.4.29; Phil 3:1 ; 2Pet 1:12 ; cf. Cicero Amic. 22.85; Rom 15:15 ). Note taking was, of course, practiced; cf. Diogenes Laertius 2.48; Epictetus Diatr. 1.pref; Quintilian 1.pref.7–8; introduction to Plutarch Stoic Cont. 13:369–603, in LCL 398–99. |
|
|
