A few weeks back, there was some social media traction with sharing one’s four most influential theologians. Being ever behind on my writing and blogging, I jotted the idea down, but am only getting to this now. Now, obviously, there are a number of theologians who have influenced me, to say nothing of the countless pastors, teachers, and little-t theologians who’ve shaped who I am, how I think, and how I live through their examples and teaching. (Also, and this should probably go without saying, but I’m going to say it anyways, this list does not include biblical authors, lest we all answer with some combination of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, Paul, and James.) So this cannot be any sort of a complete list. Continue reading
Some more prayers for this morning:
“O God, who has been the refuge of my fathers through many generations, be my refuge today in every time and circumstance of need. Be my guide through all that is dark and doubtful. Be my guard against all that threatens my spirit’s welfare. Be my strength in time of testing. Gladden my heart with your peace, through Jesus Christ my Lord.”
–Originally by John Baillie
“Blessed Lord, who was tempted in all things as we are, have mercy upon our frailty. Out of weakness give us strength. Grant to us your fear, that we may only fear you. Support us in our time of temptation. Embolden us in the time of danger. Help us to do your work with good courage, and to continue as your faithful soldiers and servants until our life’s end. We ask all these things in the name of Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.”
–Originally by Bishop Brooke Foss Westcott
Another prayer from The Oxford Book of Prayer, this time from Fr. Gilbert Shaw:
Lord, give us grace to hold you
when all is weariness and fear
and sin abounds within, without
when love itself is tested by the doubt…
that love is false, or dead within the soul,
when every act brings new confusion, new distress,
new opportunities, new misunderstandings,
and every thought new accusation.
Lord, give us grace that we may know
that in the darkness pressing round
it is the mist of sin that hides your face,
that you are there
and you do know we love you still
and our dependence and endurance in your will
is still our gift of love.
I’m reading through the “deliverance” section of The Oxford Book of Prayer this week and came across this prayer by the Venerable Bede. Join Bede and I in praying this for our world:
O God that art the only hope of the world,
The only refuge for unhappy men,
Abiding in the faithfulness of heaven.
Give me strong succor in this testing place.
O King, project thy man from utter ruin
Lest the weak faith surrender to the tyranny,
Facing innumerable blow alone.
Remember I am dust, and wind, and shadow,
And life as fleeting as the flower of grass.
But may the enteral mercy which hath shone
From time of old
Rescue they servant from the jaws of the lion.
Thou who didst come from on high in the cloak of flesh,
Strike down the dragon with that two-edged sword,
Whereby our mortal flesh can war with the winds
And beat down strongholds, with our Captain God.
As more and more of our world is shutting down and embracing social distancing, some of us are wondering how we’re going to make it through the next several weeks with our sanity intact. I don’t have the answers, but I do have six suggestions that I hope are helpful.
1. Limit your time on social media. There’s only so much good that constantly scrolling your social media accounts is going to do you. More likely than not, what people are saying is going to make you depressed, anxious, angry, sad, or some combination of those emotions. Avoid that by limiting your time on social media. Relatedly… Continue reading
Our current church, Rooftop in St. Louis, is getting ready to hire a new pastor. Check out the job description below and learn more here!
Rooftop is an inter-denominational, energetic, growing, medium-sized, 20-year-old Christian church reaching a diversity of people in an inner suburb of St. Louis. More than your typical post-modern church, Rooftop maintains a commitment to big-tent Biblical orthodoxy while also embracing authenticity, humor and even a bit of irreverence for the sake of reaching all kinds of people with the love and truth of Jesus. After moving into a larger, renovated building in November 2016 and getting ready to successfully launch a daughter-church in the summer of 2020, we are ready to consider our next steps as a congregation. These next steps include hiring an associate-level pastor to lead our outreach efforts (which include building an online presence), oversee connections ministries, and also assist with the general teaching and pastoral responsibilities. (Check us out at http://www.rooftop.org.)
This post concludes the series examining the relationship between the Odes of Solomon and Gospel of John.
Adams, J.N., Mark Janse, and Simon Swain, Editors. Bilingualism in Ancient Society: Language Contact and the Written Word. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.
Attridge, Harold W. “Johannine Christianity.” Pages 125-143 in The Cambridge History of Christianity: Volume 1: Origins to Constantine. Edited by Margaret M. Mitchell and Frances M. Young. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Bernhard, J. H. The Odes of Solomon: Edited with Introduction and Notes. Texts and Studies: Contributions to Biblical and Patristic Literature 8, 3. Edited by J. Armitage Robinson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1912. Repr., Nendeln, Lischtenstein: Kraus Reprint Limited, 1967.
Brock, Sebastian. The Bible in the Syriac Tradition, Second Revised Edition. Piscataway, N.J.: Gorgias Press, 2006.
Brooke, George J. “Memory, Cultural Memory and Rewriting Scripture.” Pages 119-136 in Rewritten Bible After Fifty Years: Texts, Terms, or Techniques?: A Last Dialogue with Geza Vermes. Edited by Jozsef Zsengeller. Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 166. Lieden: Brill, 2014.
Brownson, James. “The Odes of Solomon and the Johannine Tradition.” Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 2 (1988): 49-69.
Carson, D. A. The Gospel According to John. Edited by D. A. Carson. The Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1991.
Charlesworth, James H. Critical Reflections on the Odes of Solomon: Volume One: Literary Setting, Textual Studies, Gnosticism, the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Gospel of John. Edited by James H. Charlesworth and Lester L. Grabbe. Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Supplement Series 22. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998.
–. “Odes of Solomon.” Pages 721-771 in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha: Volume 2: Expansions of the “Old Testament” and Legends, Wisdom and Philosophical Literature, Prayers, Psalms, and Odes, Fragments of Lost Judeo-Hellenistic Works. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. New York: Doubleday, 1985.
–. The Earliest Christian Hymnbook: The Odes of Solomon. Eugene, OR: Cascade Publishers, 2009.
–. The Odes of Solomon. Edited by Robert Kraft. Society of Biblical Literature: Texts and Translations 13 and Society of Biblical Literature Pseudapigrapha Series 7. Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1977.
–. The Odes of Solomon: Edited with Translation and Notes. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973.
Charlesworth, James H., and R. Alan Culpepper. “The Odes of Solomon and the Gospel of John.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 35, 3 (1973): 298-322.
Corwin, Virginia. St. Ignatius and Christianity in Antioch. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1960.
De Bruin, C. C., ed. Diatessaron Leodiense. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1970.
De Jonge, Henk Jan. “The Use of the Old Testament in Scripture Readings in Early Christian Assemblies.” Pages 377-392 in The Scriptures of Israel in Jewish and Christian Tradition: Essay in Honour of Maarten J.J. Menken. Edited by Bart J. Koet, Steve Moyise, and Jospeh Verheyden. Supplements to Novum Testamentum 148. Boston: Brill, 2013.
Drijvers, Hans J. W. “Apocryphal Literature in the Cultural Milieu of Osrhoene.” Apocrypha 1 (1990): 231-247.
–. East of Antioch: Studies in Early Syriac Christianity. London: Variorum Reprints, 1984.
–. “The 19th Ode of Solomon: Its Interpretation and Place in Syrian Christianity.” Journal of Theological Studies 31, 2 (1980): 337-355.
–. “The Peshitta of Sapientia Salomonis.” Pages 15-30 in History and Religion in Late Antique Syria. Brookfield, V.T.: Variorum, 1994.
Ehrman, Bart D. The Apostolic Fathers, Volume I. Edited by Jeffrey Henderson. The Leob Classical Library 24. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003.
English Standard Version Bible. New York: Crossway, 2010.
Emerton, J. A. “Notes on Some Passages in the Odes of Solomon.” Journal of Theological Studies 28 (1977): 507-519.
Frankenberg, Wilhelm. Das Verstandis der Oden Salomos. Zeitshrfit fur die alteestamentliche Wissenschaft 21. Gießen: Topelman, 1911.
Glover, Richard. “Patristic Quotations and Gospel Sources.” New Testament Studies 31 (1985): 235-51.
Grant, Robert M. “The Odes of Solomon and the Church of Antioch.” Journal of Biblical Literature 63, 4 (1944): 363-377.
Gregory, Andrew F. and Christopher Tuckett. “Reflections on Method: What constitutes the Use of the Writings that later formed the New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers?” Pages 61-82 in The Reception of the New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers. Edited by Andrew F. Gregory and Christopher M. Tuckett. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
Gonzalez, Justo L. The Changing Shape of Church History. Saint Louis: Chalice Press, 2002.
Harnack, Adolph and John Flemming. Ein Jüdisch-Christliches Psalmbuch aus dem ersten Jahrhundert. Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs, 1910.
Harris, J. Rendel. An Early Christian Psalter. London: James Nesbit, 2009.
Harvey, Susan Ashbrook. “Syria and Mesopotamia.” Pages 351-65 in The Cambridge History of Christianity: Volume 1: Origins to Constantine. Edited by Margaret M. Mitchell and Frances M. Young. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Hengel, Martin. “Qumran and Early Christianity.” Pages 523-31 in Earliest Christian History: History, Literature, and Theology: Essay from the Tyndale Fellowship in Honor of Martin Hengel. Edited by Michael F. Bird and Jason Maston. Translated by Lars Kierspel. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2012.
Hill, Charles E. “’In These Very Words’: Methods and Standards of Literary Borrowing in the Second Century.” Page 261-81 in The Early Text of the New Testament. Edited by Charles E. Hill and Michael J. Kruger. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.
Hill, J. Hamlyn. The Earliest Life of Christ Ever Compiled from the Four Gospels: Being the Diatessaron of Tatian: Literally Translated from the Arabic Version and containing the Four Gospels woven into One Story. Piscataway, N.J.: Gorgias Press, 2001.
Hughes, Julie. Scriptural Allusions and Exegesis in the Hodayot. Studies on the Texts of the Deserts of Judah, LIX. Edited by Florentino Garcia Martinez. Boston: Brill, 2006.
Kostenberger, Andreas J., and Michael J. Kruger. The Heresy of Orthodoxy: How Contemporary Culture’s Fascination with Diversity Has Reshaped Our Understanding of Early Christianity. Wheaton: Crossway Publishers, 2010.
Kugel, James L. Traditions of the Bible: A Guide to the Bible As It Was at the Start of the Common Era. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998.
Lattke, Michael. “Die Oden Salomos: Einleitungsfragen und Forschungsgeschichte.” Zeitschrift fur die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der Alteren Kirche 98 (2007): 277-307.
–. Oden Salomos. New York: Herder, 1995.
–. Odes of Solomon: A Commentary. Edited by Harold W. Attridge. Translated by Marianne Ehrhardt. Hermenia: A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2009.
–. “The Apocryphal Odes of Solomon and New Testament Writings.” Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der Älteren Kirche 73, 3 (1982): 294-301.
Massaux, Eduard. The Influence of the Gospel of Matthew on Christian Literature before Irenaeus. Translated by Neirynck. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1990.
Marttila, Marko, Juha Pakkala, and Hanne von Weissenberg (Editors). Changes in Scripture: Rewriting and Interpreting Authoritative Traditions in the Second Temple Period. Berlin: DeGruyter, 2011.
McNeil, Brian. “The Odes of Solomon and the Scriptures.” Oriens Christianus 67, 1 (1983): 104-122.
Metzger, Bruce M. The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997.
Murray, Robert. Symbols of Church and Kingdom: A Study in Early Syriac Tradition. Piscataway, N.J.: Gorgias Press, 2004
Newbold, William R. “Bardaisan and the Odes of Solomon.” Journal of Biblical Literature 30, 2 (1911): 161-204.
Novak, Michael Anthony. “The Odes of Solomon as Apocalyptic Literature.” Vigiliae Christianae 66, 5 (2012): 527-550.
Pierre, Marie-Joseph. Les Odes de Salomon: Traduction, Introduction et notes par. Belique: Brepols, 1994.
Prahlow, Jacob J. Discerning Witnesses: First and Second Century Textual Studies in Early Christian Authority. MA Thesis. Winston-Salem: Wake Forest University, 2014.
Robinson, J. A. The Odes of Solomon. Texts and Studies: Contributions to Biblical and Patristic Literature, Series 3. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1912. Repr. Nendeln, Liechtenstein: Kraus Reprint Limited, 1967.
Sanders, Jack T. “Nag Hammadi, Odes of Solomon, and NT Christological Hymns.” Pages 51-66 in Gnosticism and the Early Christian World: In Honor of James M. Robinson. Edited by James E. Goehring, et al. Sonoma, CA: Polebridge Press, 1990.
Schoedel, William R. Ignatius of Antioch: A Commentary on the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch. Edited by Helmut Koester. Hermenia: A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985
Stuhlhofer, Franz. “Der Ertrag von Bibelstellenregistern fur die Kanonsgeschichte.” Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche wissenschaft 100 (1988): 244-261.
Stroud, Robert C. “The Odes of Solomon: The Earliest in Collection of Christian Hymns.” The Hymn 31, 1 (1980): 269-275.
Trevett, Christine. “Approaching Matthew from the Second Century: The Under-Used Ignatius Correspondence.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament, 20 (1984): 59-67.
Wickes, Jeffrey. Hymns on Faith. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, forthcoming.
Williams, P.J. Early Syriac Translation Technique and the Textual Criticism of the Greek Gospels. Edited by D. C. Parker and D. G. K. Taylor. Texts and Studies: Contributions to Biblical and Patristic Literatures Third Series. Piscataway, N.J.: Gorgias Press, 2004.
This post is part of an ongoing series examining the relationship between the Odes of Solomon and Gospel of John.
This study has sought to recast the relationship between the Odes of Solomon and Gospel of John by calling for the application of contextualized methodological criteria in a comparison of these two texts. Such a methodology was argued to incorporate considerations of literary citation, genre, linguistic differences, geography, and purposes in writing as important aspects of understanding possible instances of literary connection between ancient texts. Instead of affirming a “common milieu” connecting the Odes and Fourth Gospel, the application of this contextual methodology illustrates that signs of literary dependence exist between the Odes and John’s Gospel, especially Ode 3’s apparent use of an exegetical motif derived from the Upper Room Discourses of John 14 and 15.
While this study is by no means comprehensive, such a conclusion does suggest that perspectives which fail to recognize the literary connection between the Odes and Gospel must be reevaluated. Methodological precision will only further clarify scholarship intending to understand early Christian literary culture. Another implication of this study indicates that greater care must be taken in attempting to recognize exegetical motifs at work in early Christian writings, especially those which are liturgical or poetic in nature. Further, the insights of this study suggest further cross-specializational analysis among scholars of early Christianity, as the methods of those studying the Apostolic Fathers have proved useful in this study of the Odes. In this regard, it is somewhat puzzling that the Odes are largely not studied along with other early Christian writings from a similar period and provenance. Such a project may prove insightful in the future.
Continued investigation of the Odes of Solomon remains a field ripe with opportunity, especially through the application of contextually informed methodological principles for discerning the use of scriptural themes and language in early Christian literature. It is my hope that this paper may provide some starting point for discovering more fully the manner in which worship, scripture, and interpretation functioned in the early Christian Church.
I’m currently praying through the Oxford Book of Prayer (edited by George Appleton) and came across this prayer for guidance this morning:
“In times of doubts and questionings, when our belief is perplexed by new learning, new teaching, new thought, when our faith is strained by creeds, by doctrines, by mysteries beyond our understanding, give us the faithfulness of learners and the courage of believers in you; give us boldness to examine and faith to trust all truth; patience and insight to master difficulties; stability to hold fast our tradition with enlightened interpretation to admit all fresh truth made known to us, and in times of trouble, to grasp new knowledge readily and to combine it loyally and honestly with the old; alike from stubborn rejection of new revelations, and from hasty assurance that we are wiser than our fathers. Save us and help us, we humbly ask you, O Lord.”
–Bishop George Ridding (1828-1904)
This post is part of an ongoing series examining the relationship between the Odes of Solomon and Gospel of John.
In Ode 3, the relationship between the Odes of Solomon and Gospel of John becomes even clearer, as this ode is quite clearly a reflection on theme of the Love of Christ found in John’s Upper Room Discourses. While the first lines of Ode 3 are missing, the eleven accessible verses claim no fewer than ten parallels with Johannine literature, six of which come from chapters 14 and 15 of the Gospel. In line with the paradigm of “common milieu”, however, none of these parallels constitutes a direct quotation in either direction. As is standard for the Odes, nowhere does Ode 3 present material from the Gospel of John using a formulaic introduction. However, this lack a formulaic quotation does not undermine the stronger verbal and thematic similarities between this Ode and the Fourth Gospel.
Consider the following connections: Ode 3.2 reads, “And his members are with him, /And I am dependent on them; and he loves me” (ܘܗܕܡܘܗܝ ܠܘܬܗ ܐܢܘܢ ܃ ܀ ܘܒܗܘܢ ܬܠܐ ܐܢܐ ܘܡܚܒ ܠܝ) and John 15:16 says, “You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you…” (Οὐχ ὑμεῖς με ἐξελέξασθε , ἀλλ’ ἐγὼ ἐξελεξάμην ὑμᾶς…). Both thus point toward the dependence of the believer on the love of God. Ode 3.3 seems to be reliant upon either 1 John 4:9-10 or John 14:21, as both underline how believers continuously love the Lord only through His love. Ode 3.5 parallels John 14.2-3, where believers are said to have a place in the Father’s house. Ode 3.8—“Indeed he who is joined to Him who is immortal, / Truly shall be immortal” (ܗܘ ܓܝܪ ܕܡܬܢܩܦ ܠܗܘ ܕܠܐ ܡܐܬ ܃ ܀ ܐܦ ܗܘ ܕܠܐ ܡܘܬܐ ܢܗܘܐ)— represents perhaps the clearest structural continuity between this Ode and Gospel, which reads, “Because I live, you also will live” (ὅτι ἐγὼ ζῶ , καὶ ὑμεῖς ζήσεσθε.). The language suggests some development, from the ἐγὼ ζῶ (I live, I will live) of John to the ܠܐ ܡܘܬܐ (lȃ mwtȃ: not dead, immortal) of the Odes. Yet the thought it similar, as even Charlesworth writes, “In both the Odes and John the Lord is the source of life, even eternal life, which is a present reality resulting from the indwelling of the believer in the Lord and also the Lord in the believer, [elsewhere in the Odes] symbolically represented by the drinking of life-giving water, and by the garland and vine with branches.” Ode 3.9 most clearly parallels John 11.25, especially in the Greek, though Lattke notes that the passage also bears striking resemblance to John 14.19. Ode 3.10, “This is the Spirit of the Lord, which is not false, / Which teaches the sons of men to know His ways.” (ܗܕܐ ܗܝ ܪܘܚܗ ܕܡܪܝܐ ܕܠܐ ܕܓܠܘܬܐ ܃ ܀ ܕܡܠܦܐ ܠܒܢܝܢܫܐ ܕܢܕܥܘܢ ܐܘܪܚܬܗ), also incorporates the language of John 14.17 and 26, “…even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you….But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.” (τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς ἀληθείας , ὃ ὁ κόσμος οὐ δύναται λαβεῖν , ὅτι οὐ θεωρεῖ αὐτό , οὐδὲ γινώσκει αὐτό. Ὑμεῖς δὲ γινώσκετε αὐτό , ὅτι παρ’ ὑμῖν μένει , καὶ ἐν ὑμῖν ἔσται ….Ὁ δὲ παράκλητος , τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον , ὃ πέμψει ὁ πατὴρ ἐν τῷ ὀνόματί μου , ἐκεῖνος ὑμᾶς διδάξει πάντα , καὶ ὑπομνήσει ὑμᾶς πάντα ἃ εἶπον ὑμῖν). This final instance adds yet another instance of parallelism demonstrating the thematic explication of the concept of Christ’s love.
While there are no instances of direct quotation, the numerous examples of verbal parallelism and continuous co-option of terminology from the Upper Room Discourses suggest the literary dependence of Ode 3 on the Gospel of John. Again noting the difference of genre and language between these two sources, it is not surprising to see considerable flexibility when translating the theme of Christ’s love from prose to poetry, and Greek to Syriac. The connection between the Odes and Antiochene literature has already been discussed, but it is more than mere possibility that a Syrian Odist would have known and been able to access to some form of John’s Gospel in early second century Antioch. The purposes of this Ode are both theological and liturgical, demonstrating reliance upon Johannine theology and recasting that theology for a liturgical setting. Not only do the Odes of Solomon display thematic connections or a similarity of milieu with John’s Gospel, but Ode 3 stands as an example of recapitulation by exegetical motif, a hymn reflecting on the love of Christ as displayed in John 14 and 15. Thus, much like the example from Ephrem, while there exists no clear quotation of John by the Odist, the evidence available suggests that the contents of Ode 3 demonstrate literary dependence on the Gospel of John.
 Charlesworth, Reflections, 234. See also Eduard Massaux, The Influence of the Gospel of Matthew on Christian Literature before Irenaeus (trans. Neirynck; Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1990), 210.
 McNeil, “odes,” 110-111.
 Charlesworth, The Odes of Solomon: Edited with Translation and Notes, 19. See also Charlesworth, Critical, 234.
 John 14:21 Ὁ ἔχων τὰς ἐντολάς μου καὶ τηρῶν αὐτάς , ἐκεῖνός ἐστιν ὁ ἀγαπῶν με · ὁ δὲ ἀγαπῶν με , ἀγαπηθήσεται ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρός μου · καὶ ἐγὼ ἀγαπήσω αὐτόν , καὶ ἐμφανίσω αὐτῷ ἐμαυτόν . “Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him.” ESV. ܠܐ ܓܝܪ ܝܕܥ ܗܘܝܬ ܠܡܪܗܡ ܠܡܪܝܐ ܃ ܀ ܐܠܘ ܗܘ ܠܐ ܪܚܡ ܗܘܐ ܠܝ ܂. “For I should not have known how to love the Lord, / If he had not continuously loved me.” Charlesworth, The Odes of Solomon: Edited with Translation and Notes, 19, 20 n4. See also Robinson, Odes, 28 and 47 n3. Lattke, Commentary, 37.
 John 14:2-3 Ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ τοῦ πατρός μου μοναὶ πολλαί εἰσιν · εἰ δὲ μή , εἶπον ἂν ὑμῖν · Πορεύομαι ἑτοιμάσαι τόπον ὑμῖν. Καὶ ἐὰν πορευθῶ καὶ ἑτοιμάσω ὑμῖν τόπον, πάλιν ἔρχομαι καὶ παραλήψομαι ὑμᾶς πρὸς ἐμαυτόν · ἵνα ὅπου εἰμὶ ἐγώ , καὶ ὑμεῖς ἦτε. “In my Father’s house are many rooms. If it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you? And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also.” ESV. ܘܘܘܘ ܡܚܒ ܐܢܐ ܠܪܚܝܡܐ ܘܪܚܡܐ ܠܗ ܢܦܫܝ ܃ ܀ ܘܐܝܟܐ ܕܢܝܚܗ ܐܦ ܐܢܐ ܐܝܬܝ. “I love the Beloved and I myself love Him, / And where His rest is, there also am I.” Charlesworth, The Odes of Solomon: Edited with Translation and Notes, 19, 20 n8. Pierre also notes that the discussion of “belonging” in Ode 3.6 parallels John 1.10 (Pierre, Las Odes, 62.).
 Charlesworth, The Odes of Solomon: Edited with Translation and Notes, 19.
 See Charlesworth, The Odes of Solomon: Edited with Translation and Notes, 20 n10.
 Charlesworth, Reflections, 235. Also noteworthy, Pierre suggests that the idea of union with God through the spirit found in Ode 3.8 parallels John 3. See Pierre, Las Odes, 63.
 ܘܗܘ ܡܨܛܒܐ ܃ ܀ ܚܝܐ ܢܗܘܐ. “And he who delights in the Life / Will become living.” Charlesworth, The Odes of Solomon: Edited with Translation and Notes, 19.
 John 11:25 Εἶπεν αὐτῇ ὁ Ἰησοῦς , Ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ἀνάστασις καὶ ἡ ζωή · ὁ πιστεύων εἰς ἐμέ , κἂν ἀποθάνῃ , ζήσεται. “Jesus said to her, ‘I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live…” ESV. Lattke, Oden Salomos, 95. Charlesworth, Syriac Texts, 20 n12. Lattke, Commentary, 44.
 Charlesworth, The Odes of Solomon: Edited with Translation and Notes, 19.
 John 14:17, 26. ESV.
 Lattke, Oden Salomos, 96. Charlesworth, The Odes of Solomon: Edited with Translation and Notes, 20 n13. See also the Qumranic notion of amt rvch, especially of IQS 3.13-4.26.