Sunday Morning Greek Blog

June 11, 2011

“I Am the Light of the World” (John 8:12)

Filed under: "I Am" Statements,Biblical Studies,Christology,Ephesians,John Gospel of,New Testament,Old Testament,Theology, Biblical — Scott Stocking @ 1:16 pm

 I used the last part of this for our Christmas Eve 2024 service at Mount View Presbyterian Church. The audio recording is below.

What does a primitive tent have to do with Jesus being the light of the world? Read on and find out!

Jesus at the Feast of Tabernacles (John 7)

Before diving into Jesus’ statement, “I am the light of the world,” some background information is crucial to understand both the context of the statement and the connection to other “I am” statements and some of Jesus’ seven signs that John records. In this case, John 7 provides the setting for Jesus’ statement. Seven times in chapter 7, John mentions the “Feast” (or “Festival” in some translations), referring to the Feast of Tabernacles or Feast of Booths (7:2; ἡ ἑορτὴ… ἡ σκηνοπηγία hē heortē… hē skēnopēgia /hay heh-or-TAY hay skay-nȯ-pay-GEE-ah/ [g as in girl]). This feast originated in the days of Israel’s wilderness wanderings before entering the Promised Land (Leviticus 23:33–44; חַ֥ג הַסֻּכּ֖וֹת hăg hăssǔkkōth /hag hass-sook-KOATH/, ‘Feast of Tabernacles’ or ‘Succoth’), when the Israelites had to live in temporary shelters to remember their desert sojourn. Deuteronomy 16:16 says that the Feast of Tabernacles is one of the three feasts at which all Israelite males must present themselves every year.

There is no definitive mention of the festival after Deuteronomy until the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, when the Israelites returned from exile. In Ezra 3, Joshua and Zerubbabel rebuild the altar, begin offering sacrifices, and command that the Feast of Tabernacles be restored once again, all eight days of it. In Nehemiah, the celebration of the Feast is reinforced when, as Ezra was reading the law (Nehemiah 8), the people hear the instructions for the Feast and waste no time building booths wherever they could find a spot: on their roofs, in the Temple courts, and especially by the Water Gate. The law of God was read during the eight days of the Feast in Nehemiah, and the text said the people celebrated it as none had since the days of Joshua, son of Nun, when the Israelites had entered the Promised Land some 800 years earlier.

The fact that the people dwelt near the Water Gate is significant, and provides continuity with and a connection to the first “I am” statement and its connection to Jesus’ “living water” statement in John 4. According to Craig Keener, in the section on John 7 in his IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament, one of the rituals of the Feast, at least as it had developed in Jesus’ day, was for the priest to take water from the Pool of Siloam and pour it out at the base of the altar each day of the feast. Two of the Scripture passages that had become important for the Feast were Zechariah 14 and Ezekiel 47. Consider Ezekiel 47 first, where a river of life flows out of Ezekiel’s temple (one that has never been constructed in history as far as we know, if the dimensions are to be taken literally) toward the Dead Sea, thus transforming it into a fresh-water lake teeming with life. Add to that Zechariah 14:8 (TNIV), which says: “On that day living water will flow out from Jerusalem, half of it east to the Dead Sea and half of it west to the Mediterranean Sea, in summer and in winter,” and one understands the significance of pouring out the water at the base of the altar. Finally, Zechariah 14:16–19 speaks of the Israelites once again celebrating the Feast of Tabernacles (three mentions).

It is important here to note the connection with John 4: Jesus gets into a discussion with a Samaritan woman about the appropriate place to worship. Jesus says he is the living water. In other words, Jesus is the river flowing from Ezekiel’s yet-to-be-built temple! Jesus makes the claim that it is only through him that God can be worshiped (perhaps looking forward to another “I am” statement in John 14:6), and the geographical location doesn’t matter. In the Bread of Life post, I made the connection between John 4 and 6, so we have the beginning of some insight into John’s organizational scheme (I told you I was working these things out as I go along!).

Another interesting feature of John 7 is that Jesus initially tells his disciples to go to the feast without him, and they do. But Jesus is not far behind. He already knows the Jewish leaders are out to kill him, so he’s trying to be low key, but there is nothing low key about Jesus. He always attracts a crowd. John even makes a point of saying that the crowd was expecting him to be there. Jesus shows up in the middle of Feast week and begins teaching in the Temple. John 7:37–38 is a key passage here, and I use Keener’s suggested translation: “On the last and greatest day of the Feast, Jesus stood and said in a loud voice, ‘If anyone thirsts, let this one come to me; and let whoever believes in me drink.‘” (Because the ancient manuscripts did not have any original punctuation, this is an acceptable means of exegeting a passage.) Jesus once again calls attention to himself, this time to a huge crowd, as the living water. Those who drink of him will never thirst again.

Jesus, the Light of the World (John 8:12)

But there is one more feature of the “last and greatest day of the Feast” that relates directly to Jesus’ “I am the light of the world” (Ἐγώ εἰμι τὸ φῶς τοῦ κόσμου egō eimi to phōs tou kosmou) declaration in 8:12. On that last night, the entire city was lit up with torches. Streets, houses, temples, market places, and even the walls of the city were not exempt from being lit up brightly. What is problematic for biblical scholars at this point is the debated insertion of the story of the woman caught in adultery in John 7:53–8:11. (What is interesting about this insertion is that Zechariah 14:4 says that God will stand on the Mount of Olives and fight for Jerusalem, while the spurious passage in John 7:53 says that Jesus spent the night on the Mount of Olives before returning to the Temple the next morning. Something else to make me go “hmm”.) If 7:53–8:11 is not original to John (and what I am about to say here makes me think it is not), then Jesus’ statement “I am the light of the world” is a direct reference to this lighting ritual of the Feast of Tabernacles.

The moniker “light of the world” was not unique to Jesus. Keener says that it was applied to the law, the patriarchs, Israel, Jerusalem, famous rabbis, and, of course, the Messiah. But for Jesus himself to declare “I am the light of the world” was a bold statement indeed (see the Pharisees’ reaction in 8:13 and Jesus’ response in the following verses). But John has been setting his readers up for this from the very first chapter. Six times in John 1:1–14 and five times in 3:19–21, John describes Jesus as the light (φως phōs) that has come into the world and shattered the darkness. I wrote previously about the connection to Isaiah 9 in my Honoring Galilee post, that Jesus was the light to those walking in darkness. What is even more fascinating is that in chapter 12, the last chapter before Jesus’ passion begins in earnest with the Last Supper, the word for light appears another six times, forming an obvious inclusio with chapter 1 and leaving the reader no doubt that Jesus is in fact the light of the world sent from the Father himself.

But Jesus is not satisfied to draw on the imagery of the Feast for his own testimony. The rest of chapter 8 records a debate about who Jesus is and about whose children the unbelievers are. So if the Feast imagery and the light inclusio still isn’t enough, Jesus puts the pièce de résistance on the whole event in chapter 9: he heals a man born blind. [Added 6/19/2011: Note especially Jesus’ words in John 9:5: “While I am in the world, I am the light of the world,” just before the man receives his sight.] He proves for all eternity (at least for those smart enough and willing enough to believe it) that he is the light of the world because he gives the ability to see light to someone who’s never had a visual sensation of it. And if you thought the Pharisees were fussing in chapter 8, you should see their attempts to twist this spectacular sign into a work of the devil. But Jesus puts them in their place at the end of chapter 9: “For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind.” Jesus has the power to give and take light, both natural light and spiritual light. He truly is the light of the world.

The Practical Side of Being Children of Light

Paul and John both spent a considerable amount of time in Ephesus, and as I have alluded to before, Ephesians seems to have some traces of a Johannine influence. In no place is that more apparent than Ephesians 5:8ff. Not only does Paul tell us to “live as children of light,” but he also exhorts us to expose “the fruitless deeds of darkness.” As such, we have an active role in living as Christ-followers, and we also have an obligation to be proactive in turning the tide of evil. There is nothing passive about walking in the light of Christ! We could not navigate through the evils of this world without the light of Christ, and that is why he gives himself to us as light.

One final note: I think the light God created in Genesis 1:3–5 is something more than a concept. We know that the light of those verses can’t come from anything physical, because the sun, moon, and stars had not yet been created. Could it be that when Jesus says, “I am the light of the world,” he is also referring to himself as that first and primary “unmade creation” of God? Obviously, I don’t think Jesus was created or made in the same way everything else was created or made, and the Genesis text doesn’t say God “made” the light. He simply said, “Let there be light”; it is a recognition of what already exists (note that the existence of water is assumed; it is not created or made either, or at least, we are not told directly it is created or made). Light and water, two of the “unmades” of creation and two of the foundations of life, and Jesus calls himself the light of the world and living water. Boy, I’m really hmming now!

Peace!

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.

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!

« Previous Page — Next Page »

Website Powered by WordPress.com.