| 2855 See, e.g., the pattern in Sanders, Hymns, 24–25; Hunter, Paul, 37–38; Hengel, Jesus and Paul, 78–96; Porter, «Creeds and Hymns.» 2857 Teeple, Origin, 135–36, sees an original non-Christian Jewish poem in 1:1, 3–5, 11; cf. Painter, «Christology,» 52 (who adds that Hellenistic Christians before John added 1:16–18); Martens, «Prologue.» Contrast Hamerton-Kelly, Pre-existence, 200. 2858 Harris, «Origin»; idem, «Athena»; idem, Prologue. Despite the tenuousness of his reconstruction («Origin,» 425–26), his detailed parallels are invaluable. 2860 Koester, Introduction, 2:188, also suggesting 1:17. Painter, «Christology,» thinks that the Baptist material constitutes Johannine additions (p. 51) to the earlier prologue (47). 2861 Cf., e.g., the more detailed analysis of Brown, lohn, 1:18–23, which Barrett, lohn and Judaism, 33, critiques as unconvincing because of the irregularity of the strophes and the presentation of 1:17–18 as prose. 2867 Ibid., 227. Cf. Falconer, «Prologue,» 227, who divides the text into 1:1–4 (préexistent Son); 1:5–13 (Messiah); and 1:14–18 (incarnation). 2868 Coloe, «Structure»; unlike some other proposals, this one has an objective background behind it. 2869 Rissi, «Word,» 395. Rissi derives both hymns from Jewish-Christian circles, with John " s comments in 1:6–9,12c, 13, 15, and 18 («Logoslieder»). 2870 Boismard, Prologue, 76–77. The confessions of Jesus» deity framing the Gospel (minus the epilogue) in 1and 20likewise constitute an inclusio (see Cullmann, Christology, 308). 2871 Boismard, Prologue, 80; cf. similarly Culpepper, «Pivot»; Vellanickal, Sonship, 132–33. Talbert, John, 66 is better despite the asymmetry. 2880 For a comparison of various views, see Brown, John, 1:122; Haenchen, John, 1:122. Other structures employ strophes of widely divergent–hence unusually assymetrical–lengths (e.g., Pollard, «Poems,» 109–10). 2882 Miller, Salvation-History, 7. He does, however, think that 1:1–5 contains hymnic material (pp. 7–10). 2885 Michaels, John, 2–3. Cf. Burrows, «Prologue,» 62, 68–69, who finds the whole prologue metrical as reconstructed in Aramaic. |
| 10495 See Boring et a1., Commentary, 162–63; Robbins, Jesus, 192. 10496 Vermes, Jesus the Jew, 41. 10497 Many scholars think that tomb robberies were common enough to warrant the fear (Kysar, John, 296; Beasley-Murray, John, 371); cf. Iamblichus Bab. St. 7 (Photius Bibliotheca 94.75a). Many tomb inscriptions threatened curses on tomb violators (Jeffers, World, 45); Cyrus " s tomb reportedly bore the warning not to rob it, for it held little wealth (Plutarch Alex. 69.2). For the sanctity of tombs, see, e.g., Seneca Controv. 4.4 excerpts, introduction; Diodorus Siculus 17.17.3; Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 8.24.6; 11.10.1; Appian R.H. 8.12.89; Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.58. 10498 Cf. also Xenophon Eph. 3.8–9; perhaps Apol1. Κ. Tyre 32 (though cf. 44). 10499 Stauffer, Jesus, 144–45, who suspects the question also stands behind John 20 (where it is not clear), points out that the theory continued to circulate in later times (Justin Dia1. 108; Tertullian Spec. 30). 10500 Lewis, Life, 96. 10501 E.g., Apollonius of Rhodes 4.51–53; Lucan C.W. 6.538–568, 626; Ovid Her. 6.90; see especially the tale of Telephron in Apuleius Metam. 2.30; in other cultures, e.g., Mbiti, Religions, 261. 10502 PGM 1.248–249; 2.49–50; 4.342–343, 1390–1395, 1402–1403, 2211–2217; 57.5–6; 58.5–9; 67.21; 101.1–3; these ghosts were more malevolent (Plutarch Cimon 1.6; 6.5–6). If Jesus» enemies considered him a magician (Matt 12:24), some Jewish leaders may have even anticipated the theft of the body as in Matt 27:64. In less severe cases, tombs generally settled for divine threats against robbers (e.g., IG 3.1417, in Grant, Religions, 9). Both tying rope from a cross (Pliny Nat. 28.11.46) and iron pounded through the hands (Lucan C.W. 6.547) were used in witchcraft (as a superstitious cure in m. Šabb. 6:10; p. Šabb. 6:9, §2). 10503 Grave robbing was not only impious (e.g., Plutarch Mor. 173B) but a capital offense (e.g., SEG 8.13, in Sherk, Empire, 52, §27). 10504 Vermes, Jesus the Jew, 40. On Matthew " s guards, see Keener, Matthew, 696–97, 713–15. |
| 5885 Sib. Or. frg. 7. 5886 Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.167. 5887 Alexander son of Numenius Rhetores graeci 3.4–6 (Grant, Religions, 166); PGM 13.843; Iamblichus Myst. 7.2. The highest good had to be self-sufficient (Aristotle N.E. 1.7,1097B). 5888 E.g., Aristotle Heav. 1.9, 279a.l l-b.3; Pyth. Sent. 25; Marcus Aurelius 7.16; Plutarch Isis 75, Mor. 381B; Maximus of Tyre Or. 38.6; in Jewish sources, Let. Aris. 211; 3Macc 2:9; Josephus Ant. 8.111; Ag. Ap. 2.190; Philo Creation 100; Acts 17:25. On sources of Philós portrait of God " s transcendence, see Dillon, «Transcendence.» 5889 E.g., 2 Bar. 21:10; Pesiq. Rab. 1:2; «who lives forever» (e.g., Tob 13:1, ζν …); for the " liv-ing God,» cf., e.g., Marmorstein, Names, 72; Rev 7:2; also Deut 5:26 ; Josh 3:10; 1Sam 17:26,36; 2 Kgs 19:4, 16; Ps 42:2; 84:2 ; Isa 37:4,17; Jer 10:10; 23:36 ; Dan 6:20, 26 ; Hos 1:10 ; Matt 16:16; 26:63; Acts 14:15; Rom 9:26 ; 2Cor 3:3; 6:16; 1 Thess 1:9; 1Tim 3:15; 4:10 ; Heb 3:12; 9:14; 10:31; 12:22. 5890 Tob 13:1,6; 1Tim 1:17 ; 1 En. 5:1; 25:3,5; Sib. Or. 1.45,50,53,56,73,122,152,167,232; 3.10, 276, 278, 302, 328, 582, 593, 600–601, 604, 617, 628, 631, 698, 717; 8.428; Josephus Ag. Ap. 2.167; Philo Creation 100; Good Person 20; Ps.-Phoc. 17; T. Ab. 15:15A; 2Bar. 21:10; CI] 1:489, §677; cf. Plutarch Isis 1, Mor. 351E; PGM 13.843. 5891 Sib. Or. 3.15–16; cf. Plutarch Ε at Delphi 17, Mor. 392A. 5892 PGM 4.640–645 (Betz, Papyri, 50). 5893 To others God commits temporary, limited political authority (19:11) or the authority to become his children (1:12), but only to Jesus does God entrust authority over all humanity (17:2). 5894 For refutation, see Brown, John, 1:215, whom we follow here. 5895 For the admonition not to marvel along with provision of evidence, cf. 3:7–8; probably 6:61–62; for the principle, see Mark 2:9–11 . 5896 E.g., Apocr. Ezek. introduction. 5897 Also, e.g., Hanson, Gospel 52. 5898 Bailey, Poet, 62, sees a chiastic structure, but if one is present, it is highly asymmetrica1. |
| 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. |
| 205 Mary Ann Donovan, One Right Reading? A Guide to Irenaeus (Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 1997), 14. 207 Justin was no doubt aware of the martyrdom of Poly carp which had recently taken place in Smyrna. The ancient account of Justin’s trial before the prefect Q. Junius Rusticus may be read in Herbert Musurillo, The Acts of the Christian Martyrs, Oxford Early Christian Texts (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972), 43 – 7 (Recension A). 208 Robert Grant, Greek Apologists of the Second Century (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1988), 138. 209 Including Martin Hengel, Die johanneische Frage. Ein Losungsversuch, with a contribution on the Apocalypse by Jorg Frey, WUNT 67 (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1993), 28, n. 48. 210 See the translation ofH. Chadwick, Origen: Contra Celsum (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965), ‘some believers... alter the original text of the gospel three or four or several times over, and they change its character to enable them to deny difficulties in face of criticism’. 211 Bendey Layton, The Gnostic Scriptures: A New Translation with Annotations and Introductions (New York: Doubleday, 1987), 250. 212 Harold W. Attridge, ‘The Gospel of Truth as an Exoteric Text’, in C. W. Hedrick and R. Hodgson, jun. (eds.), Nag Hammadi, Gnosticism, and Early Christianity (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1986), 229 – 55, at 239 – 40. 213 The seminal study is W. C. van Unnik, ‘The “Gospel of Truth” and the New Testament’, in F. L. Cross (ed.), The Jung Codex (London: A. R. Mowbray, 1955), 79 – 129. Writing thirty years later, Attridge, ‘Exoteric’, 242, agrees. He finds evidence of the author’s knowledge of Matt. 5.48 at Gospel of Truth 1.3.27, 24 – 5; Matt. 11.25 at 19.25; Mark 14.24 at 20.15 – 16; Luke 2.46 – 9 at 19.19 – 20; John 3.19 at 3.24 – 5; John 10.3 – 4 at 21.33 – 4, 22.21 – 2; John 11.37 at 30.15 – 16. It also seems to know some letters of Paul, Hebrews, 1 John, and Revelation. 214 See Jacquelin A. Williams, Biblical Interpretation in the Gnostic Gospel of Truth from Nag Hammadi, SBL Dissertation Series 79 (Adanta, Ga.: Scholars Press, 1988), 177 – 8. |
| 5738 Jeremias, Sayings, 55. 5739 Perkins, «John,» 959, also noting that, despite its original purpose as a «Sheep Pool,» the pool had been developed elaborately, «probably by Herod the Great.» 5740 E.g., Diogenes Laertius 6.2.40; Martial Epigr. 2.42; 12.82; Pausanias 2.3.5; Apuleius Metam. 2.2; Menander Rhetor 1.3, 365.20–21. Although mixed bathing was common in many parts of the empire (see Ward, «Women») and known in early Judaism (though it constituted grounds for divorcing a wife; t. Ketub. 7:6; Num. Rab. 9:12; cf. revelry in Lev. Rab. 5:3), most Jerusalemites probably avoided it (for gender-specific bathhouses, cf. t. Nid. 6:15; for Jewish nudity there, t. B. Qam. 9:12; for preference for those where Jews were clothed, t. Ber. 2:20). Though most accepted bathhouses (Lev. Rab. 34:3), later tradition apparently associated demons with bathhouses (b. Qidd. 39b-40a; Ecc1. Rab. 2:8, §1; Song Rab. 3:7, §5; probably t. Ber. 6:25; as with toilets, b. Ber. 62a; Shab. 67a) and felt them an inappropriate place to discuss Torah (b. c Abod. Zar. 44b; Deut. Rab. 8:6). 5741 Cary and Haarhoff, Life, 105. On such porches (στοα), see also 10:23. 5742 E.g., Acts 3:2; perhaps Josephus Ag. Ap. 1.305. 5743 So, e.g., a later portico from Ephesus to the temple of Artemis in Philostratus Vit. soph. 2.23.605. 5744 For Aesculapia, see, e.g., Aristophanes Plutus 410–411, 620–621; Pausanias 2.10.2; 2.26.1; 2.27.6; Herodian 4.8.3; Koester, Introduction, 1:174; Yamauchi, Archaeology, 45–49; cf. Asclepius associated with a pool in Lucian Hippias/The Bath 5. On healings in the Asclepius cult, see, e.g., Kee, «Self-Definition,» 129–33. 5745 Ferguson, Backgrounds, 175. Koester, Symbolism, 172–73, and Boring et a1., Commentary, 266, cite Vitruvius Arch. 1.2.7; Aelius Aristides Or. 39.6,14–15; such cult centers were widespread (Frankfurter, Religion in Egypt, 271; cf. 46–52). Water also appears in other temples (e.g., Polybius 34.9.5). 5746 Cf., e.g., Hammat Tiberias in, e.g., Josephus War 2.614; 4.11; Life 85; Pliny Nat. 5.15.71; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 11:16; Ecc1. Rab. 10:8, §1; Hammat Gader in Josephus War 1.657; Pliny Nat. 2.95.208; 5.15.72; Hirschfeld and Solar, «Baths.» Elsewhere, e.g., Eunapius Lives 459; Keener, Matthew, 158. |
| 62 E.g., Phaedrus 4.pro1.l7–19. The wealthy might also have their own readers (Cicero Fam. 7.1.3). 63 On public literacy, see, e.g., Lewis, Life, 61–62, 81–82. It is usually estimated around 10 percent (Meeks, Moral World, " 62; Botha, «Literacy»), but for a higher estimate (especially relevant for urban settings), see Curchin, «Literacy.» 67 Cornelius Nepos 15 (Epamindondas), 4.6, claims that he had to stop his account of Epaminondas " s integrity to provide enough space for his other biographies. 69 Burridge, Gospels, 118,199. John falls in the center of this range, the approximate length of Cato Minor (ibid., 225–26). 72 Shuler, Genre, 15–20; cf. Talbert, Gospel, 12–13. A proposal of aretalogical biographies (Wills, Quest) would be more reasonable. 73 Burridge, Gospels, 18–19. Talbert, Gospel, 43, cites biographies of immortals (mainly from the second and third centuries), but, as he admits, the religious or mythical dimension does not affect genre (cf. Shuler, Genre, 21); his evidence for specific cultic biographies (Gospel, 91–113) is mainly inferential (Aune, «Problem,» 37–42). 75 Although writers like Apuleius and Achilles Tatius are a century or more after our period, the nineteenth-century view of Greek novels as late (fifth or sixth centuries) is no longer tenable (Aune, Environment, 150). Thus elements in Chariton Chaereas and Callirhoe, (Pseudo-) Plutarch Love Stories (Mor. 771E-775E, five brief stories; the heroine of 774E-775B is named Callirhoë, but apart from the suitors the story bears little resemblance to Chariton " s work), Petronius Satyricon, Joseph and Aseneth, Judith, and other works suggest that the general genre was already established in the NT period. 76 Cf., e.g., Lindenberger, «Ahiqar.» Yet even historical novels from the Hellenistic era often exhibited some measure of historical accuracy (cf. Anderson, «3Maccabees»; Miller, «Introduction,» viii), though it varied considerably (e.g., Tobit exhibits anachronisms, but none as serious as Jdt 4:3). Even a pure novel like Apuleius " s Metamorphoses may include some autobiographical hints (e.g., 11.30). |
| 6454 Their very failure to recognize Jesus» agency testified that they did not know God (see introduction on knowledge and agency, chs. 6–7). 6455 Although they should have been «seeking» Jesus (1:38; 20:15) and seeking him with appropriate motives (cf. 6:24, 26; 7:34; 8:21; 11:56), they «sought» to seize him (7:30; cf. 5:18; 7:1, 19–20, 25; 8:37, 40; 10:39; 11:8; 18:4–8). 6456 But God remains sovereign in this Gospel, and they remain unable to capture him (8:59; 10:39) until the appropriate time, as Jesus himself knows (2:4; 7:6). Exactly the same idea recurs in 8:20. That onés appointed time of death was established was a common ancient Mediterranean idea; 6457 occasionally associated with this was the concept that no one could kill a person until his fated time arrived. 6458 Jewish tradition did not emphasize miracles confirming the Messiah " s identity, 6459 but signs demonstrate Jesus» messiahship to those open to hear them (7:31; 20:30–31). 6460 Many therefore believed in him (7:31); yet, as on previous and later occasions, such initial signs-faith was no guarantee of perseverance (2:23–25; 8:30–31). 4. Jesus» Unknown Destination (7:32–36) The prominence of chief priests in the passage has been explained in various ways, 6461 but fits accurately what we know of Jerusalem " s ruling class before 70 C.E. That the Pharisees and chief priests would join one another in sending officers 6462 (7:32, 45; cf. 18:3), however, attributes to the Pharisees more political power than they were known to have in Jesus» day. It probably reflects John " s own historical situation, in which Pharisees had achieved greater dominance among the Judean religious elite. At the same time, Josephus is clear that many Pharisees were influential on account of their wealth as well as respected by the people, and the chief priests did work with the more influential Pharisees as joint members of Jerusalem " s municipal aristocracy (e.g., Josephus Life 21, 190–192, 196, 216). 6463 That Jesus encountered some Pharisaic opposition is difficult to doubt, 6464 but Gospel writers after 70 C.E. |
| 5864 Dan 7:22 ; Wis 3:7–8; 1 En. 95:3; 98:12; lQpHab 5.3–4, misinterpreting Hab 1:12–13; 1QM 14.7; 16.1. In Dan 7 , the «saints» must represent God " s people (Di Leila, «Holy Ones»; Poythress, «Holy Ones»; Hasel, «Saints»), not angels (pace Dequeker, «Saints»). 5865 See, e.g., m. " Abot 4(God " s prerogative alone); Deut. Rab. 1:10; 2 Bar. 19:3; Urbach, Sages, 1:123; more broadly, Sib. Or. 4.183–184; 1 En. 9:4; 60:2; 62:2; 47with 46:2; T. Ab. 14:6A. This point is often noted by commentators (e.g., Schnackenburg, John, 2:107; Morris, John, 319). 5866 E.g., 3 En. 31:1; p. Sanh. 1:1, §4; Pesiq. Rab. 10:9. 5867 E.g., with reference to the new year; t. Roš Haš. 1:13; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 2:4; 23:1. 5868 Cf. Carson, John, 254. 5869 E.g., Philo Sacrifices 9; Num. Rab. 15:13. 5870 Mek. Pisha 1.88ff. Some later rabbis even interpreted Isa 42:8, which reserves God " s glory for himself, to claim that God would not share glory with another besides Israel (Pesiq. Rab Kah. 21:2). 5871 Vespasian, linking himself with Augustus, Tiberius, and Claudius, in CIL 6.930; ILS 244 (Sherk, Empire, 124–25). 5872 Realized and future eschatologies are hardly incompatible and need not suggest later redaction. Qumran " s collection includes various eschatological schemes (cf. Mattila, «Eschatologies,» on 4Q246 and 1QM). 5873 Cf., e.g., Dio Cassius 45.47.5; Lucretius Nat. 3.1046; Macrobius Comm. 1.11.2 (Van der Horst, «Macrobius,» 224); Epictetus Diatr. 1.5.4; Heraclitus Ep. 5; Sir 22:11–12 ; Eph 2:1 ; Gen. Rab. 39:7; Exod. Rab. 5:4; Ecc1. Rab. 9:5, §1; Gen 2as understood in Philo Alleg. Interp. 1.106; perhaps 4 Ezra 7:92; cf. spiritual resurrection in Jos. Asen. 8:9/11. 5874 So the Targumim (Abrahams, Studies, 2:44; McNamara, Targum, 123). The twofold death in some MSS of Gen. Rab. 96simply refers to the pain of a Diaspora burial, as the «second death» of Phaedrus 1.21.11 refers to ridicule at death. For more on «life,» see comment on 1:4–5. 5875 E.g., Josephus Ant. 8.220–221; Dio Cassius R.H. 19.61; Diodorus Siculus 4.10.3–4; Moses in Josephus Ant. 3.85–87; 4.329; see further in introduction, pp. 310–17. |
| 7468 E.g., 2Sam 11:1 ; Polybius 10.40; Diodorus Siculus 14.17.12; 15.73.4; 20.113.3; 29.2.1; Livy 5.2.1; 21.58.1–2; 22.22.21; 23.18.9–10; 25.11.20; 32.4.7; 32.32.1; 37.39.2; 38.27.9; 38.32.2; 43.7.11; 43.9.3; 44.16.2; 45.8.8; 45.9.1; Sallust Jug. 61.2; 97.3; Cornelius Nepos 14 (Datâmes), 6.1; 17 (Agesilaus), 3.4; 18 (Eumenes), 5.7; 8.1,4; Appian R.H. 7.7.43; 11.3.16; 12.15.101; Arrian Alex. 3.6.1; Lucan C.W. 2.648; Herodian 5.5.3; BGU 696.3; Josephus War 4.442; Ant. 18.262; Dio Cassius 55.24.2. There were many exceptions (e.g., Dionysius of Halicarnassus R.A. 9.25.1; Livy 43.18.1; 44.1.1; Arrian Alex. 4.21.10), but some proved disastrous (Herodian 6.6.3). 7469 E.g., Longus 2.19, 21; Achilles Tatius 8.19.3; Apuleius Metam. 11.5; Dionysius of Halicarnassus RA. 7.2.1; Livy 38.41.15; Herodian 5.5.3; Josephus War 1.279–280; 2.203; 4.499; Ecc1. Rab. 3:2, §2; Acts 27:9; 2Tim 4:21 . See Rapske, «Travel,» 4–6,22–29, on exceptions; Virgil Aen. 4.309. 7471 It does not appear to be used of suspense in pre-Christian texts, except in the sense of prayers of anticipation in LXX Ps 24 (25): 1; 85(86)(Michaels, John, 175). Malina and Rohrbaugh, John, 184–85, suggest the meaning «provoke,» fitting the context " s «honor challenge»; but their evidence is modern Greek, which risks anachronism (though lack of alternatives may invite the risk). 7474 Guilding, Worship, thinks that Ezek 34 was used in the lection for both Sukkoth (10:1–21) and Hanukkah (followed by others, e.g., Ellis, Genius, 173). It is difficult to know how early this reading is for either festival, but as we have argued in the introduction to 10:22–39, the proximity and similarity of the festivals invited John " s audience to understand the latter in light of the former. 7477 Thus the neuter rather than the masculine term for «one,» and perhaps the plural verb (Whitacre, John, 271, challenging the Sabellian or modalist interpretation, citing various church fathers). Calvin, John, 1(on John 10:30 ) and 2(on John 17:21 ), warns that the Fathers, opposing the Arians, interpreted all references to Christ " s oneness with the Father in terms of his essence, but this was not Jesus» point. |
|
|
