by BlackSwan of Memphis 28 Replies latest watchtower bible
Hey there:
The other day I was discussing the topic of the verse where Jesus apparently uses the term I AM in reference to himself.
This claim obviously referring to his being God.
I could swear that I have read somewhere that this term Ego Emi (sp) was used elsewhere in the NT by someone Other than Jesus.
I am wondering if anyone here would have any information on this topic.
thx in advance.
Egô eimi in itself is a pretty common phrase when it introduces a predicate (e.g. "I am the God of Abraham," Matthew 22:32) or when it explicitly or implicitly answers a question about identity (e.g. "it's me," 14:27). What is definitely NOT common (hence theologically "loaded") is the absolute use which doesn't correspond to the above contexts, as is found in the Fourth Gospel (e.g. 8:24,28,58; 13:19), which may also, as a kind of double entendre, carry over other uses in the same work which would otherwise correspond to common linguistical use (e.g. 4:26; 6:20,35,41,48,51; 8:12,18; 9,9 [not Jesus]; 10:7,9,11,14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1,5; 18:5ff).
The characteristic use of egô eimi in the Fourth Gospel is strongly reminiscent of a similar absolute theological use in Deutero-Isaiah (Isaiah 40--55), where it translates the monotheistic proclamation of "God," in Hebrew 'ny hw', literally "I am he" (41:4; 43:10,13,25; 46:4; 48:12; 52:6). Similar expressions are also found, out of Deutero-Isaiah, in Deuteronomy 32:39 and Psalm 102:8 (2nd person).
The example Witnesses sometimes cite is the blind man who was healed in John 9:9: Some would say: "This is he." Others would say: Not at all but he is like him."The man would say: I am [he]." (egô eimi)Witnesses point out that if egô eimi was intended to specially identify Jesus as God in John 8:58, then it is strange that the author put the same phrase into the mouth of another just a few verses later.
It is claimed by Trinitarians that while the phrase may have an everyday self-identificatory use, where Jesus uses the phrase without a predicate then it becomes a claim to deity. But in reality there are few or no passages where it is absolutely clear that no predicate is implied. Often where there appears to be no predicate the context suggests that Jesus is claiming to be the Messiah. In John 8:58 the claim is that he existed since before Abraham, not that he is God.
Trinitarians once argued that Jesus' use of egô eimi echoes the language of Exodus 3:14, but modern commentators have largely abandoned that line of argument. In the Greek Septuagint the fuller phrase egô eimi ho on (I am the being) is used in that verse.
Greg Stafford makes some interesting observations on the claim that the 'I am' expressions of John's Gospel are intented to echo the divine expression ANI HU of Deutero-Isaiah.
If you are up for reading a very long (longer than many monographs) detailed discussion of the subject this is an interesting online debate that took place a few years ago. Jason BeDuhn is a non-JW scholar who defends the New World Translations's rendering of John 8:58 against the evangelical apologist Rob Bowman.
http://www.forananswer.org/Mars_Jw/JB-RB.Jn8_58.Index.htm
I read this debate while it was actually taking place on Rob's yahoo group and it was good fun at the time as we all got to chip in.
A rather compelling example (imo) that the Fourth Gospel does play on some "hidden" meaning of egô eimi while using it in the most unremarkable way on the surface is in 18:5ff:
Then Jesus, knowing all that was to happen to him, came forward and asked them, "Whom are you looking for?" They answered, "Jesus of Nazareth." Jesus replied, "I am he." Judas, who betrayed him, was standing with them. When Jesus said to them, "I am he," they stepped back and fell to the ground. Again he asked them, "Whom are you looking for?" And they said, "Jesus of Nazareth." Jesus answered, "I told you that I am he. So if you are looking for me, let these men go."
Another possible echo of this motif is the consistent contrast between Jesus and John the Baptist who constantly defines himself by what he is not (1:20f,27; 3:28).
More generally, as far as the exegesis of the Gospel is concerned, it must be kept in mind that "Trinitarianism" and even the orthodox conception of the exclusive "deity" of Christ are about as much of an anachronism as "Arianism," "Unitarism," or JW theology. The extension of christological expressions to the elect may run against the (4th-century) orthodox view of the Trinity but it reflects a dynamically inclusive understanding of the deity (extending through Jesus to the elect) which doesn't fit the current "heterodoxies" either.
In John 18:6 it seems fairly clear that the implied predicate is "Jesus of Nazareth". In fact it seems that predicate was so obvious to early readers of the gospel that the Vaticanus manuscript actually supplies it.
Then Jesus, knowing all that was to happen to him, came forward and asked them, "Whom are you looking for?" They answered, "Jesus of Nazareth." Jesus replied, "I am he." Judas, who betrayed him, was standing with them. When Jesus said to them, "I am he," they stepped back and fell to the ground. Again he asked them, "Whom are you looking for?" And they said, "Jesus of Nazareth." Jesus answered,"I told you that I am he. So if you are looking for me, let these men go."
If Jesus is meant to be claiming divinity rather than identifying himself as Jesus, then the fact is it would have been inaccurate for him to state "I told you that I am he", or, "I told you I am Jesus", in response to the statement they were looking for Jesus. Otherwise he should have said, "I told you that I am divine". The conversation makes much less sense if you think Jesus was claiming to be the I AM and then affirming it. Why did the soldiers not fall down the second time in that case?
This makes much more sense: the soldiers are looking for Jesus. A man asks them who they are looking for. They say Jesus. The inquirer responds boldly that he is Jesus. The soldiers are startled at the self-identification from the famous preacher who is supposed to be on the run. Rousing them from the ground Jesus asks again who they are looking for, and again he confirms that he is Jesus and asks that the others be let go.
It is also anachronistic to believe that Jesus must have been stating more than simply that he was Jesus, the Messiah in order to produce the reaction.
There is no need to suppose that there was any particular divine implications in his words to account for the fear of the soldiery. For such men in such an age it was quite natural. But to suppose that our Lord said "I am He (the Great One)" and then repeated "I told you I am He," purposely instilling terror into his enemies, neither suits the context nor his own divine humility." James, Bishop of East Bengal, "'I am' in the Gospels," Theology 62.468 (1959), 238. (quoted from Greg Stafford's Jehovah's Witnesses Defended, page 287.)
Wow, okay. Not what I thought it would come up with. Thanks for explaining so much Narkissos.
Slimboy, ya know thanks for bringing up those thoughts AND also the articles. I definitely they are worth taking the time to read. And I actually do remember the Jason DeBuhn thing but had entirely forgotten about it.
At the time I had no interest, but at this point think it will be a bit more relative to where I'm at.
Greatly appreciated posts from both of you.
meagan
The parallel with Deutero-Isaiah is closest here:
Isaiah 43:10 LXX: "Be my witnesses (moi martures); I too am a witness (martus), says the Lord God, and the servant whom I have chosen (hon exelexamén) so that you may know and believe and understand (hina gnóte kai pisteuséte kai sunete) that I am (hoti egó eimi)".
John 8:16-18, 24, 28, 13:19: "I stand with the Father, who sent me (ho pempsas me). In your own Law it is written that the testimony (marturia) of two men is valid. I am one who testifies (ho marturón) for myself; my other witness (marturei) is the Father, who sent me (ho pempsas me)....If you do not believe (pisteuséte) that I am (hoti egó eimi), you will indeed die in your sins... When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know (gnósesthe) that I am (hoti egó eimi)... I am telling you now before it happens, so that you will believe (hina pisteuséte) that I am (hoti egó eimi)".
Although Jesus speaks with the language of Yahweh in Deutero-Isaiah, it is noteworthy that the source text in the LXX (not the MT!) distinguishes between the collective "you" and Yahweh's servant who appears in the text as a third "witness" figure. This suggests that perhaps the author is picturing Jesus as this "servant" figure who speaks with the voice of the Lord God because he has through the will of the Father the same authority, power, and activity as the Father (cf. John 1:18, 3:35, 5:19, 21-22, 6:46, 8:19, 10:38, 14:9-11). Such a reading of Deutero-Isaiah would of course be enhanced by the fact that the author (along with many other NT writers) construed the "servant of Yahweh" of Deutero-Isaiah as Jesus (cf. John 12:38). Another text that may have contributed to this reading is 2 Samuel 12:5 LXX: "The Lord is a witness among you (martus kurios en humin) and his anointed (khristos auou) is a witness (martus) in this very day that you have not found anything in my hand".
The emphasis on temporal priority in John 8:58 (in which the present tense underscores the point) is a little different and recalls the similar language in Psalm 90:2 LXX (which addresses God): Before the mountains came into existence (pro tou oré genéthénai), you are (su ei)".
I am glad to see that the very knowledgeable still frequent this site.
It's been years since I've been here.
I miss reading the insights. I suggested this site to a witness I've been debating. I hope he visits. And I'm glad to know that some really well read people are still active here.
Great stuff guys.........
