Sunday Morning Greek Blog

June 6, 2011

“I Am the Bread of Life” (John 6:35)

Filed under: "I Am" Statements,Biblical Studies,Christology,John Gospel of,New Testament,Theology, Biblical — Scott Stocking @ 10:32 pm

As I was reflecting on the seven “I am” statements today on a round trip to Lincoln, Nebraska, to have lunch with my family, I recalled something from very early in my seminary days about another set of “sevens” in John. I was contemplating how I would put each of the “I am” statements in their respective contexts when I remembered that John also records seven specific miracles of Jesus throughout his Gospel. These are the things that make me go “Hmm,” and when something makes me say that, you can bet I will not sit still long hmming about it. Could all seven “I am” statements be tied to the seven signs? One cannot doubt, for example, that Jesus’ statement “I am the resurrection and the life” in John 11:25 ties in directly with Jesus’ last and greatest sign, raising Lazarus from the dead. However, not all of them fit in that nicely.

I did discern a distinct connection between the first sign (2:1–11, turning water into wine) and the final “I am” statement (15:1, “I am the true vine”). In biblical studies, when an idea, phrase, or word is found at the beginning and end of a section of Scripture (regardless of the length of the section), such a feature is called an inclusio. Inclusios usually reveal something important about the theme of a section or book and should not be ignored. I had really hoped to find a chiastic pattern (ABC… C′B′A′) of statements and signs, but it was not to be. However, I can safely say that John does seem to have some sort of scheme in mind, but I may not discern it fully until after I’ve done some leg work on these blog posts. (The connection between John 4:43–54 and John 14:6 may be simply that it is “an inclusio within an inclusio.”

With that in mind, I put together a short table of how I think the “I am” statements tie in with the signs. I find obvious connections with five pairs, but two of the connections are admittedly tentative, and I indicate as such with an asterisk (*) in front of the respective verses. I will use Table 1 as a starting point for placing the “I am” statements in their historical, cultural, and literary contexts. (2/13/2012: You can click the “I Am” statement to open the blog post on that statement.)

Table 1: Linking the “I Am” Statements with Jesus’ Miracles

“I Am” Statement

Sign/Miracle
John 6:35: I Am the Bread of Life John 6:1–15: Jesus Feeds the 5000+
John 8:12: I Am the Light of the World John 9:1–12: Jesus Heals a Man Born Blind
John 10:7: I Am the Door of the Sheep John 5:1–15: Healing of the Invalid at Bethesda [Sheep Gate]
*John 10:11: I Am the Good Shepherd John 6:16–24: Jesus Walks on Water
John 11:25: I Am the Resurrection and the Life John 11:38–44: Jesus Raises Lazarus from the Dead
*John 14:6: I Am the Way, the Truth, and the Life John 4:43–54: Healing of the Official’s Son
John 15:1: I Am the True Vine John 2:1–11: Water into Wine

Jesus’ first “I am” statement comes in the midst of his teaching that he himself is the bread of life (John 6:22–59). This comes at the end of the same chapter in which he has fed a crowd of 5000 men plus the women and children with five loaves of bread and two fish, and his teaching forms an inclusio with this fourth sign around Jesus’ fifth sign, walking on water.

I have written elsewhere on the feeding of the 5000, so I won’t go into all that again, except to say that John introduces the event (6:2) by saying the people had seen him do “signs” (σημεῖον sēmeion /say MAY on/ ‘miracle’, ‘sign’), most recently the healing of the man at the Sheep Gate (Bethesda/Bethzatha/Bethsaida) pool. At the end of the event (6:14), John calls the feeding of the 5000 a “sign” as well. None of the other Gospel authors call the miraculous feeding events “signs” in their accounts. However, after the accounts of the feeding of the 4000 (Matthew 15:32–39; Mark 8:1–10), the Gospel authors have the story of the Pharisees demanding a sign from Jesus. You have got to love those Pharisees; twice Jesus feeds some 20,000 people with a few loaves of bread and some fish, and they still want a sign!

Now let us fast-forward to 6:22–59, where we find the “I am” statements. Twice in that pericope, John uses the word σημεῖον (vv. 26, 30, so four times total in chapter 6). In v. 26, Jesus tells his followers that they’re not hanging around because he is a miracle worker, but because he met their physical needs. In v. 30, the crowd becomes the Pharisees of the Matthew and Mark accounts after the feeding of the 4000: they ask for another sign. Never mind that Jesus has already done five signs at this point: walking on water and turning water into wine just isn’t enough for them. Could it be that the crowd is saying (see v. 31): “Big deal. Moses and the Israelites ate manna every day. What’s feeding 5000 people once compared to that?” Jesus sets them straight, though, telling them that God was the one who provided the manna, and God will give the true bread from heaven.

Before I get to the first version of the “I am” statement, I must point out the parallels between chapters 4 and 6. Even though in chapter 4 Jesus never does a miraculous “sign,” save for his word of knowledge about the woman’s marital status and never says “I am the living water,” the stories have some uncanny similarities (see Table 2 below). I could spend two or three blog posts just talking about these comparisons, but in some respects they speak for themselves. Besides, I want to get to the heart of the matter.

Table 2: Comparison of John 4 and 6

John 4: Woman at the Well; “Living Water”

John 6: Feeding 5000+; “I Am the Bread of Life”
“Will you give me a drink?” v. 7 “Where will we buy bread?” v. 5
“You have nothing to draw with and the well is deep.” v. 11 “It would take almost a year’s wages to buy enough bread for each one to have a bite.” v. 7
“Are you greater than our father Jacob, who gave us this well?” v. 12 “Our ancestors at the manna in the wilderness…. ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.'” v. 30
“Everyone who drinks this water will be thirsty again. Those who drink the water I give them will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give them will become in them a spring of water welling up to eternal life.” v. 14 “Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you.” v. 27
“It is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of God is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.” vv. 32b–33
“Sir, give me this water so that I won’t get thirsty and have to keep coming here to draw water.” v. 15 “Sir,” they said, “always give us this bread.” v. 34
“Whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.” v. 36
“My food is to do the will of him who sent me and to finish his work.” v. 34 “What must we do to do the works God requires?”
Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.” vv. 28–29

In John 6:35, we have the first of four “I am the bread” statements: “I am the bread of life” (Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ἄρτος τῆς ζωῆς egō eimi ho artos tēs zōēs). Jesus ties this in with both chapter 4 and 6 with his follow-up statement about never being hungry or thirsty again. He also picks up on the statement of the crowd and the quotes from Exodus 16:4 and Psalm 78:24–25 and speaks of himself as the one who has come down from heaven. (This may also inform the translation of John 3:3; Jesus is not saying “born again,” but “born from above.”) Verse 41 is interesting, because John seems to put words in Jesus’ mouth, but that is not the case. John is just letting us in on how the crowd interpreted Jesus’ first “I am” saying: “I am the bread that came down from heaven” (Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ἄρτος ὁ καταβὰς ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ egō eimi ho artos ho katabas ek tou ouranou). Jesus is the true manna from heaven, only this manna has a real name (the Hebrew word for manna is made up of an interrogative prefix and a suffix that together mean “What is it?” so it doesn’t even have a real word base).

Jesus repeats his initial “I am” statement in v. 48 and again ties it in with discussion about the manna. In v. 51, however, his final statement is slightly different, but different enough that it eliminates any doubt about a connection to chapter 4. “I am the living bread” (ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ἄρτος ὁ ζῶν ὁ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καταβάς egō eimi ho artos ho zōn ho ek tou ouranou katabas) brings together his first two statements, but instead of using the genitive phrase “of life” (τῆς ζωῆς), he uses the participle (ὁ ζῶν), which puts emphasis on the fact that he is living now and will be living when he “raises them up in the last day” (vv. 39, 40, 44).

As if all this information isn’t enough to blow you away (I feel like I’m writing a term paper here, and I’ve still got six more statements to go!), Jesus takes the whole metaphor a step further and starts equating his flesh with the bread! Jesus here prophesies that he will give his flesh for the life of the world, and anyone who eats his flesh “will live forever” (6:51, 58; ζήσει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα zēsei eis ton aiōna). Although this is presumably where the Catholics get the major theological underpinnings for transubstantiation, keep in mind that when Jesus breaks the bread at the last supper, he is specifically referring to the unleavened Passover bread and what that represented: deliverance from the enemies of God and his people. When Jesus says, “This is my body,” he is really saying, “This is how I’m going to deliver you.” When he says “This cup is the new covenant in my blood,” he is saying “And this is how I am going to pay for that deliverance.”

Now I don’t want to brush off transubstantiation too quickly. I believe there is a power in immersion (baptism) that is greater than the water in the baptistery. In the same way, I think there is more power in the little piece of bread and small cup of juice that we pass each week that surpasses the flour and grapes used to make those elements. In immersion, we come into contact with the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. In communion, or the Lord’s Table, we come into contact with the living bread, who was sacrificed on a cross for our sins. I truly believe that communion brings us into the very presence of Christ, because he is the one who invites us to the table, and he is there in person waiting for us to come. Maybe that makes me a consubstantiationist!

At this point I might usually say “finally,” because I’m getting ready to wrap this up, but I don’t feel like I’ve even scratched the surface in some respects, so there’s no “finally” about it. Twelve times (there’s that number twelve again!) in chapters 4 through 6, we find the phrase “eternal life” or “into eternity.” We have eternal life, and it begins the moment we believe! Just as drinking the living water of chapter 4 will cause us never to thirst again, so will partaking of the living bread of chapter 6 cause us never to go hungry again. John 6:39 reveals the comfort in all of this: “And this is the will of him who went me, that I shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day.” We could walk away of our own accord (Jesus doesn’t “lose” us if we decide to lose ourselves), but why would we want to? “To whom can we go, Lord? You have the words of life!”

A big helping of peace to all of you! Go and feast on the Word of God!

Scott Stocking

June 5, 2011

The “I Am” Statements of Jesus

Filed under: "I Am" Statements,Biblical Studies,Christology,Greek,John Gospel of,New Testament,Old Testament,Septuagint,Theology, Biblical — Scott Stocking @ 8:28 am

These last two weeks have been challenging to say the least. I have moved into an apartment, and my body is stiff and sore from carrying my stuff up two flights of stairs several times a day. I went to Illinois last weekend to see my kids—we had a great time in Chicago attending a damp but entertaining Kane County Cougars baseball game (single A team for the Royals), then waited two hours in a thunderstorm to get into Shedd Aquarium the next morning. We were wetter than the aquatic creatures by the time we got in there. I am also in the process of switching second jobs, which has taken considerably more time than I anticipated. And as I have come to the heart of John’s gospel with the seven “I am” statements of Jesus, Satan has ramped up his attacks on me, and some days, I have been too tired to think spiritually enough to resist. But I praise God that he has strengthened me in the past few days, and I’m feeling a renewed vigor and resolve to press forward.

Overview of “I Am” Statements in John

Some of you may already know that Jesus makes seven key “I am” statements about himself in John’s gospel. They usually take the form “Ἐγω εἰμι [predicate nominative case definite article and noun] [(genitive case definite article and noun translated “of X”) or (predicate nominative case definite article with adjective) or, in the absence of the latter two, (one or more additional nominative case noun descriptions]. (Nominative case is the “subject” case in Greek; predicate nominative means it comes after the “to be” verb; genitive case implies possession or source.) In some cases, the “I am” statements are repeated in various forms. Jesus makes other “I am” or “I am not” statements in John’s gospel that I will address below, but to begin, here are the seven main “I am” statements of Jesus, giving the first occurrence of each if there are multiple similar statements (taken from Nestle-Aland Greek NT, 27th edition, with McReynold’s Interlinear):

John 6:35

Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ἄρτος τῆς ζωῆς

egō eimi ho artos tēs zōēs

I am the bread of the life

(see also 6:41, 48, 51)

John 8:12

Ἐγώ εἰμι τὸ φῶς τοῦ κόσμου

egō eimi to phōs tou kosmou

I am the light of the world

John 10:7

Ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ θύρα τῶν προβάτων

egō eimi hē thyra tōn probatōn

I am the door of the sheep

(see also 10:9)

John 10:11

Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ποιμὴν ὁ καλός

Egō eimi ho poimēn ho kalos

I am the shepherd the good (= “the good shepherd”)

(see also John 10:14)

John 11:25

Ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ἀνάστασις καὶ ἡ ζωή

egō eimi hē anastasis kai hē zōē

I am the standing up (= “resurrection”) and the life

John 14:6

ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ὁδὸς καὶ ἡ ἀλήθεια καὶ ἡ ζωή

egō eimi hē hodos kai hē alētheia kai hē zōē

I am the way and the truth and the life

John 15:1

Ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ἄμπελος ἡ ἀληθινὴ

Egō eimi hē ampelos hē alēthinē

I am the vine the true (= “the true vine”)

(see also John 15:5).

Background

I need to mention one bit of grammatical background here: Greek verbs are “parsed” (that is, their spelling changes) depending on the “person” and “number” of the subject of the verb. As such, if the subject of the verb is a simple pronoun (first person: I, we; second person: you, y’all; third person: he, she, it, they), then Greek does not typically require an actual pronoun to accompany the verb. The subject is implied by the way the verb is spelled. So if I wanted to say “I am a sinner” in Greek, I would render it Εἰμί ἁμάρτωλος. When a pronoun is used as the subject of the verb, then it is considered emphatic. So if I said Ἐγώ εἰμί ἁμάρτωλος, I would be saying in effect, “I myself am a sinner.” So the fact that Jesus uses ἐγώ here means that he is calling attention to himself in a special way. He is not just saying, “I am hungry” or “I am thirsty.” He is making people sit up and take notice about who he really is.

The most obvious significance of Jesus making these “I am” statements is the direct connection to Exodus 3:14, where God reveals his name to Moses. In Hebrew, that name is usually rendered יְהוָ֞ה (yəh WAH, or commonly rendered in English as Yahweh /YAH way/, with the vowels corresponding to the Hebrew word for Lord, adonai, which Jews often spoke in its place because speaking the actual name Yahweh is considered taboo to them; NOTE: “Jehovah” is not a proper Hebrew or English rendering of this word). The Septuagint (LXX = Koine Greek translation of the OT) uses Ἐγω εἰμι to translate the Hebrew in Exodus 3:14, but whenever the Tetragrammaton (fancy name for the four Hebrew letters of Yahweh) appears in Hebrew, the LXX usually translates it κύριος (kyrios /KOO ree oss/ ‘lord’). In English texts, the name is printed with an initial full capital and small caps: LORD. All this background is necessary to understand that when Jesus says “I am” in these contexts, he is making theological truth claims about his very nature.

The Other “I Am” Statements

John’s gospel has ten “I am” statements apart from the ones mentioned above that usually serve as identifiers (“I am he”) in response to a question (e.g., 4:26) or that say something about his purpose or person (e.g., 13:19). The most significant of these, and one that could arguably be added to the seven statements above, is John 8:58: “Before Abraham was, I am.”

John also records six “Where I am” statements of Jesus. They either say something to the effect that “Where I am, you cannot come” (7:34), but later change to a promise (14:3; “That where I am you may also be”) and a prayer (17:24). Four additional times, Jesus indicates where he is and is not from: “I am from above, I am not of this world” (8:23). He repeats the last half of that in 17:14, 16.

Conclusion and a Promise

As is usually the case, time has passed by quickly here and I am not able to start unpacking the “I am” statements this morning. However, in the days and weeks to come, I will dedicate subsequent posts to unpacking each of these “I am” statements as time allows. These statements are so crucial to John’s Christology, and they always come at the appropriate point in the text to make the greatest impact on the conscientious reader. Have a great Sunday morning in worship, and have a great week to come. Rest in the promise of Jesus from Matthew 28:20: “I am with you always.”

Peace!

Scott Stocking

This post was updated 11/8/2011 to add hyperlinks to the “I Am” Scriptures for the respective blog posts on those Scriptures.

May 22, 2011

Honoring Galilee

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Greek,John Gospel of,New Testament,Theology, Biblical — Scott Stocking @ 7:43 am

Note: Second paragraph edited on 12/26/21 to clarify I’m speaking of chapters in John’s gospel.

Isaiah 9:1–2 [TNIV; MT & LXX 8:23–9:1] says:

Nevertheless, there will be no more gloom for those who were in distress. In the past he humbled the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, but in the future he will honor Galilee of the nations, by the Way of the Sea, beyond the Jordan—

2The people walking in darkness
have seen a great light;
on those living in the land of deep darkness
a light has dawned.

Let me start by recapping John chapters 2–4, because the whole context is important for what I have to say about the last part of chapter 4. In chapter 2, Jesus goes to Cana in Galilee, where, at a wedding celebration, he turns water into wine. Then he returns to Jerusalem, where he gets everyone mad at him by overturning the tables of the money changers. Nicodemus, however, in chapter 3, seems to understand who Jesus really is, and comes to Jesus asking about eternal life. Some debate whether Jesus’ words end after John 3:15, but setting that debate aside for a moment, John closes out chapter 3 with a discourse on who Jesus is and what his relationship is to the Father. In chapter 4, Jesus “needs” to go through Samaria to get to Cana again, and encounters the woman at the well. There he speaks to her of living water, and in the end, he spends a few days ministering to those whom the woman had brought to Jesus to hear his words. In the last part of John 4, Jesus is back in Cana, and he’s ready for another miracle.

Four times in John 4:43–54, John mentions that Jesus has gone “into Galilee” (εἰς τὴν Γαλιλαίαν eis tēn Galilaian /ace tayn gah lee LIE ahn/). In v. 44, John says that Jesus had mentioned that a prophet was without honor in his hometown. Cana was not his hometown (Matthew indicates his home town was Capernaum), so some think he may be referring to those who were against him in Jerusalem (see Craig Blomberg’s commentary in The Historical Reliability of the John’s Gospel, p. 105). He also says in v. 46 that Jesus specifically went back to Cana of Galilee, where he had performed his first sign of turning water into wine. In this pericope, Jesus heals a royal official’s son at a distance; he doesn’t even lay hands on or see the son, but simply speaks the word at the pleading of the distraught father.

So why the emphasis on Galilee here? If you read the opening quote from Isaiah, you’ve probably figured it out already. John is demonstrating that Jesus is the light to the Gentiles, Samaritans and Galileans alike (John’s excursus on God’s purposes for Jesus in chapter 3 is further evidence of this). Jerusalem (= the leaders of Israel) is rejecting him (see also the first part of chapter 5 where the Jewish leaders want to kill Jesus for healing on the Sabbath), but the Gentiles receive him with joy, wonder, and extraordinary faith. Chapters 2–4 form a unit that validates the fulfillment of prophecy from Isaiah 7–11. Matthew used the first verse of the prophecy (Isaiah 7:14: “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son and will call him Immanuel.”) to indicate fulfillment of the whole prophecy; John takes a different route to show the same prophecy is fulfilled.

Sorry this is so short today, but between a leaky ceiling, a watery mess in the basement, and trying to move into my own place myself this weekend, time is short.

Peace!

May 16, 2011

It Comes in Threes, Part β

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Ephesians,Greek,John Gospel of,New Testament,Numbers (Cardinal & Ordinal) — Scott Stocking @ 10:54 pm

Okay, so maybe there is something more to this pattern of threes. I am sure I only hit “Publish” once to submit my “It Comes in Threes” blog post this morning, yet somehow it wound up posting three times. Hard to believe that is any kind of coincidence.

Here is what I am thinking on all this. As Jesus kicks off his ministry here, the disciples must have thought they had it pretty good. After all, this man was going to be king of the Jews (or so they thought) and would overthrow Rome and Herod and anyone else who stood in the way of reestablishing a theocracy in Israel. Now I know I am spiritualizing here, but it seems rather obvious that whatever good things the world has to offer, Jesus offers more, and that more is so much better than anything we could ask or imagine. The water-turned-wine is better than the first stuff the steward brought out. God’s creation is great, but heaven is that much greater.

In keeping with the theme of water, I happened to look up the word for “draw” (ἀντλέω antleō), as in “draw the water out of the jar.” It occurs four times total, all in John—twice here in chapter 2 and twice (you shouldn’t be surprised) in chapter 4 with the woman at the well, where he speaks of drawing “living water.”

One more thing about threes: Paul and John both spent a considerable amount of time in Ephesus. Paul’s letter to the Ephesians has numerous patterns of three in it, so I guess it shouldn’t surprise me that John has patterns of three as well. Did Paul learn that from John, or John from Paul? What is it about Ephesus and the number three?

  • “Grace” (χάρις charis) appears three times Ephesians 1, three times in Ephesians 2, and three times in Ephesians 3.
  • “To the praise of his glory” (εἰς ἔπαινον δόξης eis epainon doxēs) appears three times in Ephesians 1:1–14.
  • Paul prays for three things for the Ephesians in 1:18–19, and the letter is divided into three sections around those themes.
    • “that you may know the hope to which he has called you,
    • the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints,
    • and his incomparably great power for us who believe”
  • God has done three things for us in Christ in 2:5–6:
    • Made us alive with Christ;
    • Raised us up with Christ;
    • Seated us with him in the heavenly realms.
  • There is another pattern of three threes in 2:12, 19, and 3:6.
  • There are two sets of three pairs in Ephesians 5:15–6:9.

I have Ephesians memorized, so I’ve spent a lot of time there (figuratively speaking) myself. So what is the number three going to mean for me? Well, I just got approved for a third floor apartment that I’ll be moving into on the third Saturday of this month. Does that mean I made the right choice? I have three kids. I hope and pray they are safe. I’m pretty sure I’m going to be tossing and turning tonight wondering about the significance of all this.

Peace! Εὶρήνη! Shalom!

It Comes in Threes

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Greek,John Gospel of,New Testament,Numbers (Cardinal & Ordinal) — Scott Stocking @ 6:47 am

I wanted to write just a quick note to follow up on one of my brief musings yesterday about τῇ ἐπαύριον (tē epaurion ‘on the next day’) occurring three times in chapter 1 and then chapter 2 beginning with “On the third day.”

The cardinal number “two” (δύο dyo) appears three times in chapter 1. The cardinal number “three” (τρεῖς treis) appears three times in chapter 2, which is introduced by a phrase with the ordinal for three: “On the third day.” Granted, John did not form his chapter divisions, so again, there’s not too much exegetical significance in how many times a number occurs in a chapter. But what is more than mere coincidence in my mind is that the word for the “banquet-master” (ἀρχιτρίκλινος architriklinos /ar khee TREE klee nos/; /kh/ sounds like German ch in Bach) occurs three times in the story of the wedding at Cana. Why is this more than coincidence? The word derives from three Greek words that mean, literally, “ruler of three beds,” according to the Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon and the NASB Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionary. To prepare a large banquet table, a host would place three beds (κλίνη klinē; the verb form of this word means “recline”) together to make a large enough table for the guests. Of course, the number of beds would have varied depending on the size of the feast, but that’s not really the point here.

In 2:19, after Jesus cleanses the Temple, Jesus says, “destroy this temple, and in three days I will rise again.” Just as God signaled the coming of the Messiah as early as Genesis 3:15 with the Protoevangelion (“And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.”), so John here is signaling to his readers early on the significance of the third day. I don’t have time to explore this more in depth on a Monday morning, but I wanted to get it out there before it slipped my mind.

Peace!

It Comes in Threes

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Greek,John Gospel of,New Testament — Scott Stocking @ 6:46 am

I wanted to write just a quick note to follow up on one of my brief musings yesterday about τῇ ἐπαύριον (tē epaurion ‘on the next day’) occurring three times in chapter 1 and then chapter 2 beginning with “On the third day.”

The cardinal number “two” (δύο dyo) appears three times in chapter 1. The cardinal number “three” (τρεῖς treis) appears three times in chapter 2, which is introduced by a phrase with the ordinal for three: “On the third day.” Granted, John did not form his chapter divisions, so again, there’s not too much exegetical significance in how many times a number occurs in a chapter. But what is more than mere coincidence in my mind is that the word for the “banquet-master” (ἀρχιτρίκλινος architriklinos /ar khee TREE klee nos/; /kh/ sounds like German ch in Bach) occurs three times in the story of the wedding at Cana. Why is this more than coincidence? The word derives from three Greek words that mean, literally, “ruler of three beds,” according to the Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon and the NASB Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionary. To prepare a large banquet table, a host would place three beds (κλίνη klinē; the verb form of this word means “recline”) together to make a large enough table for the guests. Of course, the number of beds would have varied depending on the size of the feast, but that’s not really the point here.

In 2:19, after Jesus cleanses the Temple, Jesus says, “destroy this temple, and in three days I will rise again.” Just as God signaled the coming of the Messiah as early as Genesis 3:15 with the Protoevangelion (“And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.”), so John here is signaling to his readers early on the significance of the third day. I don’t have time to explore this more in depth on a Monday morning, but I wanted to get it out there before it slipped my mind.

Peace!

It Comes in Threes

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Greek,John Gospel of,New Testament — Scott Stocking @ 6:46 am

I wanted to write just a quick note to follow up on one of my brief musings yesterday about τῇ ἐπαύριον (tē epaurion ‘on the next day’) occurring three times in chapter 1 and then chapter 2 beginning with “On the third day.”

The cardinal number “two” (δύο dyo) appears three times in chapter 1. The cardinal number “three” (τρεῖς treis) appears three times in chapter 2, which is introduced by a phrase with the ordinal for three: “On the third day.” Granted, John did not form his chapter divisions, so again, there’s not too much exegetical significance in how many times a number occurs in a chapter. But what is more than mere coincidence in my mind is that the word for the “banquet-master” (ἀρχιτρίκλινος architriklinos /ar khee TREE klee nos/; /kh/ sounds like German ch in Bach) occurs three times in the story of the wedding at Cana. Why is this more than coincidence? The word derives from three Greek words that mean, literally, “ruler of three beds,” according to the Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon and the NASB Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionary. To prepare a large banquet table, a host would place three beds (κλίνη klinē; the verb form of this word means “recline”) together to make a large enough table for the guests. Of course, the number of beds would have varied depending on the size of the feast, but that’s not really the point here.

In 2:19, after Jesus cleanses the Temple, Jesus says, “destroy this temple, and in three days I will rise again.” Just as God signaled the coming of the Messiah as early as Genesis 3:15 with the Protoevangelion (“And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.”), so John here is signaling to his readers early on the significance of the third day. I don’t have time to explore this more in depth on a Monday morning, but I wanted to get it out there before it slipped my mind.

Peace!

May 15, 2011

John 1: The Word Was God

Filed under: John Gospel of,New Testament — Scott Stocking @ 8:47 am

qrcode
Download the link to this post for your smart phone or smart pad so you can have a ready reference for Jehovah’s Witness encounters.

I have sensed the anticipation of the masses (in my mind, the 15–20 of you who read this blog each week are the masses; humor me pleaseJ): “The Jehovah’s Witnesses have been beating down my door. I’m tired of debating John 1:1 with them. I never get anywhere. When will I get some help from the Sunday Morning Greek Blog?” (Again, humor me please.) Well help has finally arrived!

Before I begin, I want to give credit where credit is due. Daniel Wallace is the “go-to guy” for us Greek scholars when it comes to issues of Greek grammar. Some of what I will write today comes from his Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, published by Zondervan and also available for the Logos Bible Software suite. Where I need to give him credit, I will either lead into the information with his name or simply use “(DW, pg #)” for a citation.

For those of you without immediate access to the Greek text, here is John 1:1 in Koine Greek (UBS 4th edition), transliterated, and in my English translation:

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.

En archē ēn ho logos, kai ho logos ēn pros ton theon, kai theos ēn ho logos.

The Word was in the beginning, and this Word was with God, and this Word was God.

Now I know I have some out there who are keying in on that last phrase. Be patient, I’ll get there in a minute. The first thing to note here is that ὁ λόγος is the subject of all three clauses. I did not follow the literal word order in my own translation because I wanted to emphasize this point. I also used this in the last two phrases to translate the definite article (ὁ ho ‘the’, but see below for exegetical significance; a legitimate use of it if the context allows) to emphasize that the same Word that was in the beginning was and was with God. (The past tense is used here not to suggest that the Word was but is no longer God, but that even “in the [past event we call the] beginning,” the Word was considered to be God. The phrase Ἐν ἀρχῇ stands at the beginning to give the whole sentence this context.)

I can see your mental wheels turning out there. Some of you are asking: “How can the Word be both ‘with God’ and ‘God’?” Others are saying, “Wait, I recognize those Greek words, and the word order in that last phrase is ‘And God was the Word’! What’s up with that?” And of course, my Jehovah’s Witness fans (of whom I have none that I’m aware) are furious because I didn’t say “a god” for the anarthrous (= without the definite article) θεός. Let me begin with a primer on the definite article in Greek, because that is an important concept to understand for this passage and throughout Scripture.

The Definite Article in Koine Greek

The English definite article is the. In English, we often use the definite article when what it modifies has already been specified or defined (get it, define/definite) in some way. Consider the following sentences and see which ones sound more natural to your ears:

  1. We have love in our hearts.
  2. We have the love in our hearts
  3. We have love of God in our hearts
  4. We have the love of God in our hearts.

If you are like me and didn’t grow up in the hippie generation, sentences 1 and 4 sound the most natural. Sentence 1 does not seem to have any particular manifestation of love in mind, so it does not need the definite article. Additionally, sentence 1 could be interpreted as making a statement about a quality of our hearts: “We have loving hearts.” Sentence 4, however, specifies the kind of love we have, so it takes the definite article. In English, we could play around with the word order a bit and get rid of the definite article by using a possessive form of God, but use of the possessive by default usually eliminates the need for the definite article: “We have God’s love (or love for God) in our hearts.” Sentence 2 might make sense if you grew up in the hippie generation, but you would still have some definite manifestation of love in mind if you said it. Sentence 3 could be reworded in a qualitative manner: “We have hearts that love as God loves”; or “We have hearts loved by God.”

In Greek, the definite article usage is somewhat backwards from English and much more diverse. The definite article is used 19,870 times in the NT, which represents 14.4 percent of the total word count in the NT (that is approximately 3 out of every 20 words for the math-challenged out there). In Greek, if you have the phrase “love of God”, it is by default definite, and the definite article is not needed, although sometimes the author supplies it anyway. But if the author wants to send a message to his reader that he has some specific manifestation of a noun in mind, he will use the definite article. In other words, the definite article, when used with a noun, makes the noun “definite” or specific. That is why translators can justify translating it as “this [one]” or “that [one]” sometimes, as I did above.

Theology of John 1:1

Now that you’ve had your primer on the definite article, it is time to get into the meat of this passage. I mentioned in the previous section about the qualitative interpretation of sentences 1 and 3. This is a critical concept for the proper understanding of John 1:1. Although the Greek word order makes it look like we should translate the last phrase “And God was the Word,” you should know that Greek word order is much more fluid than English word order. First, notice that in the final phrase, λόγος has the definite article and θεός does not. This is the first clue that λόγος is the subject of the phrase, even though both nouns are in the nominative (= subject) case. Second, according to Daniel Wallace’s grammar (pp. 266ff), if John would have used the definite article with θεός, he would have been saying that the person of the Word was exactly the same thing as the person of God the Father. This is Sabellianism, a heresy of the early church that said God the Father himself (the first person of the trinity) left the throne and came to earth. But we know Jesus spoke often about his Father (who was always) in heaven.

Wallace continues (see also his “Exegetical Insight” in William Mounce’s Basics of Biblical Greek, 2nd edition, pp. 26–27): If the word order had been switched around, καί ὁ λόγος ἦν θεός, then the Jehovah’s Witnesses and other Arianists would be correct in translating the phrase “And the Word was a god.” This would emphasize θεός as a noun. You might also want to point out to your Jehovah’s Witness callers that θεός appears in John 1:6, 12, 13, and 18 without the definite article, but they still translate it God (capital G) in those places.

But moving θεός to the beginning of the phrase gives it a qualitative force. In other words, John is not saying that the Word is God the Father, but that the Word has exact same divine qualities as God the Father. “The Word is divine” as Moffatt translates it, or “What God was, the Word was” is how the New English Bible renders it. So John used the only word order he could to indicate that Jesus was indeed the second person of the Trinity, distinct from the Father and the Holy Spirit.

Application to John 1:18

There is a curious phrase in John 1:18 that has scholars baffled, but I think the discussion above can help clarify. The phrase is μονογενής θεός (monogenēs theos /mȯ-nȯ-geh-NAYSS theh-OSS/ ‘only begotten God’). Copyists had problems with this over the years, trying to change it to “only begotten Son“, because that made more sense to some. But if we understand the phrase as an appositive construction, the θεός functions the same way as it does in the last phrase of John 1:1. Here’s how I might render it, although I’m sure translation committees would question me closely on this: “No one has ever seen God; the Only Begotten (μονογενής), that One who was divine (θεός) in the bosom of the Father, has made [him] known.”

Final Musings

Three times in chapter 1, John transitions with the phrase τῇ ἐπαύριον (tē epaurion dative case “on the next day”): vv. 29, 35, and 43 (he uses it only twice after that in 6:22 and 12:12). But John begins 2:1 “on the third day.” I don’t know that there’s any exegetical significance to this, but I just thought it something worth noting.

One more thing: many scholars have made the connection between John 1:51 and Genesis 28:12, Jacob’s ladder. I don’t have time to go into that connection here, but perhaps that could be grist for your mill.

Peace!

May 14, 2011

How Near the End?

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Greek,Luke Gospel of,New Testament — Scott Stocking @ 12:04 pm

As I read through Luke 21 last week, I could not help but think of the recent earthquake and tsunami disaster in northern Japan. In Luke 21:11, Jesus warns that “great earthquakes” (σεισμοί μεγάλοι seismoi megaloi /sighss-MOI meh-GAH-loi/) will be one of the signs of the end. Luke 21:25–26 (my translation) says: “There will be signs (σημεῖα, plural of σημεῖον sēmeion /say-MAY-on/) in sun and moon and stars, and upon the earth [there will be] anguish of the nations in perplexity of the sound and surge (σάλος salos /SAH-loss/) of the sea… for the powers/works of heaven will be shaken” (σαλεύω saleuō /sah-LOO-oh/; note the word comes from the same root as σάλος). Now obviously, the Richter Scale had not been developed in biblical times, so I don’t think Jesus was predicting modern terminology, but perhaps the term “great earthquake” was borrowed from the Bible.

The modern technical term “great earthquake” refers to an earthquake of magnitude 8.0 or greater according to the United States Geological Survey (http://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/faq/?faqID=24). Looking at the recent history of great earthquakes reveals that they seem to come in a cycle of every 30–40 years. Before the Christmas 2004 earthquake in Indonesia, the previous recorded great earthquake had been 1965 in Alaska, and the one before that was a year earlier in Alaska as well. And of course, we can’t forget the “surge of the sea,” Katrina, which left an indelible impression on the city and residents of New Orleans, not to mention other major hurricanes and floods in recent years.

I have always been tempted to see the judgment of God in these events and other natural disasters. But creation—every microbe, ant, butterfly, bird, cat, dog, human, horse, elephant, mountain, and ocean, not to mention the earth, and the universe itself—is subject to decay. This decay is part of the overall judgment that came down in Genesis 3 and later in the “global” flood of Genesis 6–9. Before anyone starts questioning me about how the water of the earth could cover the Himalayas, let me just say that I’m one who holds to the antediluvian Pangaea theory, that is, the earth as God originally created it was all one land mass whose topography was nothing as it is today. During the flood event, Pangaea was divided, causing the waters of the deep to come forth (perhaps the ancients’ way of saying the ocean poured in when the land masses separated) and initiating what we know today as continental drift. Mountains are formed by the collision of land masses, and the earthquakes we experience today are evidence that the process is ongoing.

The “rim of fire” around the Pacific Ocean (the presence of numerous volcanoes from Mt. St. Helens up to Alaska and through its Aleutian Islands and down the east coast of Asia into the Indonesian archipelago) should not surprise us, then. Have you ever taken a wet beach ball and spun it around? You know the water flies off in every direction. Now magnify that to global proportions. As the earth rotates on its axis in an easterly direction, the water of the Pacific Ocean is like that water on a beach ball, except that earth’s gravitational field keeps the water from flying out into space. Imagine the entire weight of the Pacific Ocean being thrust against the east coast of Asia, Japan, and the Philippines. If continents are not rock solid, that’s going to cause some moving and shaking on both shores of the Pacific. (This is why some think part of California may eventually fall into the ocean, because it’s being pulled away from the North American Plate.) The strongest currents in the world are along the eastern coast of Asia and Australia, because the rotation of the earth forces the water to flow that way. The deepest trench in the world is located at a place where the small Philippine Plate is separating from the Pacific Plate.

But enough of my amateurish geophysics: the point I’m getting at is that God’s “final” judgment on the world and humanity began at the fall in Genesis 3. “Natural” disasters are a part of this world we’re otherwise blessed to live on, and there aren’t too many more places out there in space where we could live without substantial technological adaptations. We often ask God, “Why do you allow such calamity?” He’s already told us (in so many words): “Because you live in a fallen world.” But he also says, “I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world” (John 16:33, TNIV). Do people die deaths we think they don’t deserve in these natural disasters? Yes, but people who don’t deserve to die pass from this life all the time by “natural causes.” Death is tragic regardless of its cause and regardless of the innocence or guilt of the deceased, but Christ followers know someone who has risen, victorious over death, who is readily waiting for us to claim the eternal life he has promised.

So what do we have to look forward to? Luke 21 is too long for me to copy into this blog post, but know that on top of all the “natural disasters” coming our way, we’ve got persecution and trouble coming our way as well if we are Christ followers. Let me just leave you with a few key verses from Luke 21 (TNIV) that give hope in a world full of trouble, because no one says it better than Jesus:

14–15: “But make up your mind not to worry beforehand how you will defend yourselves. For I will give you words and wisdom that none of your adversaries will be able to resist or contradict.”

19: “Stand firm, and you will win life.”

27–28: “At that time they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. When these things begin to take place, stand up and lift up your heads, because your redemption is drawing near.”

35–36: “For [all these natural disasters] will come on all those who live on the face of the whole earth. Be always on the watch, and pray that you may be able to escape all that is about to happen, and that you may be able to stand before the Son of Man.”

Εἰρήνη! Peace!

May 1, 2011

“If I’ve Told You Once, I’ve Told You a Thousand Times…”

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Greek,Luke Gospel of,Matthew Gospel of — Scott Stocking @ 8:23 am

I have an important message for all of us husbands, former, current, and future: for all the times our former, current, and future wives (respectively) said (or will say) things to us about their friends, jobs, or something that needed fixing in the house, and we quickly forgot those things until we were reminded that we weren’t good listeners, I grant general absolution. Before you start cheering, you former, current, and future wives, because for all those times we former, current, and future husbands (respectively) told you (or will tell you) things about the car, the electronics, or the computer but you failed to heed, leading to expensive repairs, I grant you general absolution as well. And need I say anything about what we tell our kids? You’re forgiven, kids, but don’t forget next time!

Have I unsettled you yet? Great! Know this, however: when you fail to take heed of things that someone else thinks are important for you to know, you are in prestigious company, namely, the company of the twelve apostles.

Three times in Luke’s Gospel (9:21–27, 43b–45; 18:31–34) Jesus tells his apostles, “Oh, by the way, I’m going to be turned over to the Jewish rulers and Roman authorities to be beaten, tortured, and killed, but I’ll come back in few days.” You would think that the first time that the man whom you most admire in the world drops this bomb on you, there would at least be some reaction from the apostles. (Actually in Matthew 16:21ff, Peter does rebuke Jesus for saying this, but Jesus turns around and promptly returns the rebuke in stronger terms, calling Peter “Satan,” but for whatever reason, Luke doesn’t record that in 9:21–27.) But like a stealth bomber at an Air Force air show, the statement zips right over their heads, and they never considered it again, until….

In Luke 9:21–27 (which is parallel to Matthew’s account in Matthew 16), Jesus first makes the statement, but then immediately begins talking about more stuff that we might be prone to forget: stuff like denying ourselves, taking up our crosses, and being willing to follow Jesus to death if necessary. So one might understand why his first statement went unnoticed. It reminds me a little of Moses in Exodus 3:5–14. God makes eight “I” statements to Moses about who he is and what he intends to do, most of which are miraculous or spectacular, but all Moses could key in on was the last statement: “By the way, Moses, I’m sending you to make sure Pharaoh knows I’m the one doing all this.” Moses’ response is not, “Wow, God, I’m so grateful to have your complete and total support and protection as I go back to the nation where I’m number one on the ‘Most Wanted’ list. I’ll get right on that.” Instead, Moses turns the attention back on himself. “Who am I?” (I can just see God giving Moses a Gibbs’ slap to the back of the head.)

Even if we take Peter’s response in Matthew into consideration, the point is that there is no apparent sadness among the apostles after Jesus says he’s going to die. When we get news that a loved one has cancer or was in a serious car wreck, are we, like Peter, more concerned about how this messes up our own agenda, or are we genuinely concerned about the well-being of our loved one? You see the point?

According to Luke, the apostles had eight days to process this first prediction (Luke 9:28) before something even more amazing took place, but only three of the apostles were in on that Transfiguration event. In that event, Jesus spoke about his coming death with Moses and Elijah, but again, the three in the inner circle are clueless, but understandably so. Luke 9:32 says the disciples were βεβαρημένοι ὕπνῳ (bebarēmenoi hypnō /beh-bah-ray-MEH-noi HOOP-no/ ‘burdened with sleep’), but I’m pretty sure it wasn’t because the conversation between three of Judaism’s most amazing men was boring! The sleepiness seems to be divinely induced, because in the next breath, they become “fully awake” (διαγρηγορήσαντες diagrēgorēsantes /dee-ah-gray-goh-RAY-sahn-tess/) and have once again completely missed the talk of their Lord’s impending death. Instead, Peter wants to build a booth, as if that will put off Jesus’ sacrifice.

It is no accident, then, that Jesus’ second prediction of his death comes right after this Transfiguration event. I like the way Jesus puts it in 9:44: Θέσθε ὑμεῖς εἰς τὰ ὦτα ὑμῶν τοὺς λόγους τούτους (thesthe hymeis eis ta ōta hymōn tous logous toutous literally, ‘you yourselves place in your ears these words’). Usually when a command is given in Greek, as in English, you don’t have to use the pronoun “you,” because the subject is implied. But we know when we hear the pronoun “you” in an English command, the person giving the command means business. The same goes for the Greek here. Jesus expressly focuses on his disciples, because he wants them to know this. He would be delivered over into the hands of men, but he says nothing in this instance of his resurrection.

Jesus says this, though, knowing that the disciples won’t get it. The very next verse says that the disciples “didn’t understand” (ἀγνοέω agnoeō /ah-gnaw-EH-oh/ ‘to be ignorant’; same root for the word “agnostic”) and that the meaning of the words was “hidden” (παρακαλύπτω parakalyptō /pah rah kah LOO ptoh/) from them. Jesus is preparing his disciples for the worst, but if Peter’s response in Matthew is any indication, he does not want the disciples focusing on his impending death. He wants them to stay focused on ministry in the here and now. (I think this is one of the reasons Jesus teaches against worrying; worrying focuses on things over which we have no control, and we fail to live in the here and now as God wants us to.)

In Luke 18:31–34, as Jesus and his disciples are on their way to Jerusalem, he again predicts his death, and again, the Twelve fail to “understand” (συνίημι syniēmi /soo-NEE-ay-mee/) because the meaning is “hidden” (κρύπτω kryptō /KROO-ptoh/), but by this time, I’d have to think that the disciples were suspecting something unusual was in the works, even if they didn’t comprehend it completely. It isn’t until the penultimate verses of Luke (24:45–49) that Jesus, just after his resurrection, finally reveals to them the meaning of all that talk of his death that had remained hidden to them until that point. At that point, they finally had their “Aha!” moment and could truly and fully rejoice, because their knowledge and understanding were made complete.

Maybe that’s why many Christians (including myself) seem to “go through the motions” at times, because it hasn’t hit home yet just exactly what God is doing in our lives. We’ve been reading the book The Christian Atheist in Wednesday night class. The subtitle for the book is “Believing in God but Living Like He Doesn’t Exist.” I wonder if a better title might be The Christian Agnostic: Christians believe that God exists, but like the disciples in these prediction stories, we just haven’t figured out yet how God is working in our lives or what he’s really saying, and we’re afraid to trust.

I think a strong case could be made here for regular Bible reading as well. Some Christians complain that the Bible is too hard to understand in places, so they don’t want to read it. But how many times have those of us who have read through Scripture more than once come across passages that seem brand new to us? We know we’ve read those passages before, but for whatever reason, they just didn’t stick. But at just the right time, if we are faithful in reading his Word, God will reveal to us those things we need to know for our encouragement and strengthening. And if we don’t understand something right away, we shouldn’t worry: Jesus promises in Luke 12:11–12 that the Holy Spirit will teach us what we need to know and say when we need to know it and say it. That will be much easier to do if we’ve read our assignments ahead of time!

Other Musings

I don’t have time to explore this in depth in today’s entry, but after reading the parable of the 10 minas in Luke 19:11–27, I asked myself if the man who made himself king of a distant country is in fact Jesus in the story. I did a cursory reading of Blomberg’s interpretation of this parable (and its parallel in Matthew 25:14–30) in Interpreting the Parables, but he seems to think the element of the story of the man going off to be made king is extraneous to the core message of the parable. Still, I think something can be made of the Scribes, Pharisees, and Sadducees wanting to kill Jesus, and the execution of those who did not want the man to be king can be taken as judgment against those who reject Jesus’ lordship. The parable is rather harsh in this way, but it certainly warrants further exploration. Blomberg cites Josephus to explain this particular aspect of the parable:

This second parable closely parallels the details of the trip of Archelaus, son of Herod the Great, to Rome in 4 b.c. to receive imperial ratification of his hereditary claim to rule Judea, along with the Jewish embassy which opposed him and Archelaus’s subsequent revenge on the Judeans (cf. Josephus Ant. 17:299–323, Bell. 2:80–100).

« Previous Page — Next Page »

Website Powered by WordPress.com.