From: Steven Craig Miller (scmiller@www.plantnet.com)
Date: Fri Dec 24 1999 - 09:04:16 EST
<x-flowed>To: George Goolde,
<< The passage *at least* means that "before Abraham was, I am" >>
I personally think it should be translated as "before Abraham was, I am he"
SCM: << One could just as easily interpret this passage to mean (something
like): "before Abraham was, I was appointed to this task" ... >>
GG: << But the context is not discussing "this task." The context is
discussing the relative age of Abraham and Jesus. This is explicit in verse
57. It seems to me that to change this thrust requires reading into the
text. To supply an implied predicate requires that the predicate has been
previously introduced in the context. No such predicate appears in this
context, only the discussion of the time. >>
You seem to be suggesting that the conflict between Jesus and his opponents
in John is no longer about Jesus' religious mission, but rather the
conflict is merely a discussion about his age. One can almost hear them
saying: "Well, Jesus, you sure do look fit for someone over two thousand
years of age. How do you keep yourself looking so young?"
GG: << Of course, as I said before, our interpretations at this point are
undoubtedly influenced by theological presuppositions, but looking at the
Greek text alone I think Carl hit the nail on the head when he pointed out
that there is a certain paradoxical sense that is being clearly portrayed
here. The translation "My existence antedates the birth of Abraham" seems
to be the simple, and dare I say the obvious, point of the passage. >>
How could "my existence antedates the birth of Abraham" be the obvious
understanding of this passage? Why, they could just look at Jesus and see
that he wasn't that old, yes? (To echo your own words: "This is explicit in
verse 57. It seems to me that to change this thrust requires reading into
the text.")
When I read scripture I try to visualize the situation of the story. What
we have here is a Galilean preacher, a religious leader with disciples, and
he is confronted by a hostile religious opposition. They claim that Jesus
is a "Samaritan" and demon possessed (Jn 8:48). Jesus denies that he is
demon possessed, and claims (like the "Blues Brothers") that he is on a
mission from God and that whoever "keeps his word" will not die. And then
they ask Jesus: "Are you greater than our father Abraham, who died? The
prophets also died. Who do you claim to be?" (Jn 8:53 NRSV). Jesus goes on
to claim (a claim which no doubt appeared to them as a boast) that "Abraham
rejoiced that he would see my day; he saw it and was glad" (Jn 8:56 NRSV).
Jesus' opponents retort: (I paraphrase) "You don't even look fifty years
old, how do you know what Abraham thought?" And this is when the Johannine
Jesus utters this famous line: AMHN AMHN LEGW hUMIN, PRIN ABRAAM GENESQAE
EGW EIMI "Amen amen, I say to you, before Abraham was, I was he" (Jn 8:58 MOT).
My suggestion here is that the whole debate is about Jesus' religious
mission. Now you seem to want to suggest that the whole debate is about
nothing more than his age.
<< Theology aside, I have difficulty finding such an "equal weight" in this
passage. I would personally estimate that to set aside what appears to be a
"heavy weight on one side" of the Greek text would require a theological
imposition. >>
I would totally agree with that, perhaps not with the conclusion you had in
mind, but nonetheless I feel the same way. If one tries to look at this
Greek text without importing one's theological presuppositions (as much as
possible) and tries to understand the Greek grammar of this text within the
context of the story which John is telling, it seems to me that the most
obvious interpretation of this passage is that Jesus is claiming "I am he,"
that is, that Jesus was appointed for this task even before Abraham was born.
You appear to suggest that these words "EGW EIMI" would imply that Jesus
was over two thousand years of age. And yet the context of the story
clearly shows that Jesus didn't look to be fifty years old. Put yourself in
the sandals of Jesus' opponents for a moment. They are hearing these words
for the first time. It seems to me that the most natural interpretation is
that these words merely claim that Jesus had been appointed for this
religious task.
Of course, a historical visualization of this story might be further
complicated by the fact that the historical Jesus most likely spoke in
Aramaic and not Greek, so that if one assumes historicity, these words EGW
EIMI might be merely a translation from what Jesus was thought to have
said. But no matter how one looks at it, surely the author of this
Johannine gospel is trying to tell us something about Jesus. (I would
assume that at least that much we both would agree to be correct.) Then the
question is: What is John trying to tell us about Jesus? Your suggestion
seems to be that this author wanted us to believe that Jesus was over 2,000
years old (although he didn't look even 50 years old). If this is so, why
is the tense of EIMI present tense? Surely that is not the most natural way
in Greek to express such an idea.
From my point of view, there is only one natural interpretation of the
Greek grammar of this passage. The phrase EGW EIMI is a common Greek
phrase, in both classical Greek (for example one can find it in Plato's
dialogues) and in the NT (as well as the LXX) as simply meaning "I am he"
(assuming a male speaker, or "I am she" for a female speaker, or one could
translate it as "I am the one"). Given this fundamental grammatical fact,
this Greek passage should be translated as: "before Abraham was, I am he."
And the most natural interpretation of this passage IMO is that the
Johannine Jesus was simply claiming that before Abraham was, Jesus had been
appointed to his religious task and thus (Jesus says) "I am he"!
After Jesus says these words, the Johannine gospels tells us that his
opponents wanted to kill Jesus. Why? Could they want to kill Jesus merely
because Jesus thought he was over 2,000 years old? I think not, if anything
that would probably make them fall down laughing. But that Jesus thought
that he was on a mission from God, that Jesus was claiming that he had been
appointed for this task even before Abraham, that Jesus was claiming to
usurp their own authority, that might have motivated them to want to kill
Jesus, because religious authority was an important issue in 1st century
Judaism. That Jesus was merely claiming to be over twice as old as
Methuselah is hardly an issue worth fighting over.
-Steven Craig Miller
Alton, Illinois (USA)
scmiller@www.plantnet.com
Disclaimer: "I'm just a simple house-husband (with no post-grad degree),
what do I know?"
--- B-Greek home page: http://sunsite.unc.edu/bgreek You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu] To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-329W@franklin.oit.unc.edu To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu</x-flowed>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:51 EDT