Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Jo 8:25 THN ARCHN

Expand Messages
  • mjriii2003
    Wieland, From a grammatical standpoint the use of THN ARXHN is unambiguous. It the non prepositional use of the accusative expressing extent of space or
    Message 1 of 7 , May 7 6:13 AM
      Wieland,

      From a grammatical standpoint the use of THN ARXHN is unambiguous.
      It the non prepositional use of the accusative expressing "extent of
      space or duration of time." Hence the rendering "from the
      beginning..."

      But the context of Jesus' remarks are even more telling. His use of
      EGO EIMI = ani hu' is an unequivable self identification by Jesus
      Himself as YHWH = Yahweh.

      But even further the use of THN ARXHN echoes back to both the LXX and
      Masoretic texts in Genesis 1:1, EN ARXHi EPOIHSEN hO QEOS...

      Malcolm

      ___________________


      --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "Wieland Willker" <wie@...>
      wrote:
      >
      > Chrys C. Caragounis
      > "What Did Jesus Mean by THN ARCHN in John 8:25?"
      > Novum Testamentum 49 (2007) 129-147
      >
      > After a detailed check of the thousands of occurrences in the Greek
      literature Chrys Caragounis (2007) comes to the conclusion that THN
      ARCHN is used as an adverb without accusative force. The meaning as
      such is then "the beginning". The preposition must be deduced from
      the context. The position of THN ARCHN at the beginning is for
      emphasis.
      > He further concludes that hO TI should be taken as "that
      which/what" and the KAI as "precisely" (Caragounis: "Needless to say
      KAI does not mean 'precisely'. This is only the force it assumes in
      the present context"). His final translation of the sentence is:
      >
      > "[I am] From the beginning! - precisely what I have been saying
      (speaking) to you."
      >
      > with the comment: "The English may translate it with '[I am] what I
      have been saying to you from the beginning', but this is only a
      functional reading deprived of the literary effect of the original."
      >
      >
      > Is this a textcritical issue?
      > Yes. We have variant readings here:
      > 01 adds EN (meaning?)
      > P66 adds EIPON hUMIN
      > 047 omits THN ARCHN
      >
      >
      > Best wishes
      > Wieland
      > <><
      > ------------------------------------------------
      > Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
      > mailto:wie@...
      > http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
      > Textcritical commentary:
      > http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html
      >
    • Diana Fulbright
      Dear Malcolm, EGO EIMI does not equal or translate ANI HU . I am does not mean I am he. If you want to discuss why EGO EIMI implies that Jesus is in
      Message 2 of 7 , May 7 7:42 PM

        Dear Malcolm,

        EGO EIMI does not equal or translate ANI HU’.   “I am” does not mean “I am he.”  If you want to discuss why EGO EIMI implies that Jesus is in these words (cf. Jn. 8:58) identifies himself with God, go for it.  But please stick to accurate translation. 

        Thanks,   Diana

         

        From: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com [mailto:textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of mjriii2003
        Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2008 9:13 AM
        To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [textualcriticism] Re: Jo 8:25 THN ARCHN

         

        Wieland,

        >From a grammatical standpoint the use of THN ARXHN is unambiguous.
        It the non prepositional use of the accusative expressing "extent of
        space or duration of time." Hence the rendering "from the
        beginning..."

        But the context of Jesus' remarks are even more telling. His use of
        EGO EIMI = ani hu' is an unequivable self identification by Jesus
        Himself as YHWH = Yahweh.

        But even further the use of THN ARXHN echoes back to both the LXX and
        Masoretic texts in Genesis 1:1, EN ARXHi EPOIHSEN hO QEOS...

        Malcolm

        ___________________

        --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "Wieland Willker" <wie@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > Chrys C. Caragounis
        > "What Did Jesus Mean by THN ARCHN in John 8:25?"
        > Novum Testamentum 49 (2007) 129-147
        >
        > After a detailed check of the thousands of occurrences in the Greek
        literature Chrys Caragounis (2007) comes to the conclusion that THN
        ARCHN is used as an adverb without accusative force. The meaning as
        such is then "the beginning". The preposition must be deduced from
        the context. The position of THN ARCHN at the beginning is for
        emphasis.
        > He further concludes that hO TI should be taken as "that
        which/what" and the KAI as "precisely" (Caragounis: "Needless to say
        KAI does not mean 'precisely'. This is only the force it assumes in
        the present context"). His final translation of the sentence is:
        >
        > "[I am] From the beginning! - precisely what I have been saying
        (speaking) to you."
        >
        > with the comment: "The English may translate it with '[I am] what I
        have been saying to you from the beginning', but this is only a
        functional reading deprived of the literary effect of the original."
        >
        >
        > Is this a textcritical issue?
        > Yes. We have variant readings here:
        > 01 adds EN (meaning?)
        > P66 adds EIPON hUMIN
        > 047 omits THN ARCHN
        >
        >
        > Best wishes
        > Wieland
        > <><
        > ------------------------------------------------
        > Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
        > mailto:wie@...
        > http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
        > Textcritical commentary:
        > http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html
        >

      • Jack Kilmon
        EGO EIMI translates into Judean Aramaic as ana itai )n) ).ty FWIW Jack Kilmon ... From: Diana Fulbright To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday,
        Message 3 of 7 , May 8 6:34 AM
          EGO EIMI translates into Judean Aramaic as ana itai   )n) ).ty
           
          FWIW
           
          Jack Kilmon
          ----- Original Message -----
          Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2008 9:42 PM
          Subject: [textualcriticism] Jo 8:25 THN ARCHN/EGO EIMI

          Dear Malcolm,

          EGO EIMI does not equal or translate ANI HU’.   “I am” does not mean “I am he.”  If you want to discuss why EGO EIMI implies that Jesus is in these words (cf. Jn. 8:58) identifies himself with God, go for it.  But please stick to accurate translation. 

          Thanks,   Diana

           

          From: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com [mailto:textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of mjriii2003
          Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2008 9:13 AM
          To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [textualcriticism] Re: Jo 8:25 THN ARCHN

           

          Wieland,

          >From a grammatical standpoint the use of THN ARXHN is unambiguous.
          It the non prepositional use of the accusative expressing "extent of
          space or duration of time." Hence the rendering "from the
          beginning..."

          But the context of Jesus' remarks are even more telling. His use of
          EGO EIMI = ani hu' is an unequivable self identification by Jesus
          Himself as YHWH = Yahweh.

          But even further the use of THN ARXHN echoes back to both the LXX and
          Masoretic texts in Genesis 1:1, EN ARXHi EPOIHSEN hO QEOS...

          Malcolm

          ___________________

          --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "Wieland Willker" <wie@...>
          wrote:
          >
          > Chrys C. Caragounis
          > "What Did Jesus Mean by THN ARCHN in John 8:25?"
          > Novum Testamentum 49 (2007) 129-147
          >
          > After a detailed check of the thousands of occurrences in the Greek
          literature Chrys Caragounis (2007) comes to the conclusion that THN
          ARCHN is used as an adverb without accusative force. The meaning as
          such is then "the beginning". The preposition must be deduced from
          the context. The position of THN ARCHN at the beginning is for
          emphasis.
          > He further concludes that hO TI should be taken as "that
          which/what" and the KAI as "precisely" (Caragounis: "Needless to say
          KAI does not mean 'precisely'. This is only the force it assumes in
          the present context"). His final translation of the sentence is:
          >
          > "[I am] From the beginning! - precisely what I have been saying
          (speaking) to you."
          >
          > with the comment: "The English may translate it with '[I am] what I
          have been saying to you from the beginning', but this is only a
          functional reading deprived of the literary effect of the original."
          >
          >
          > Is this a textcritical issue?
          > Yes. We have variant readings here:
          > 01 adds EN (meaning?)
          > P66 adds EIPON hUMIN
          > 047 omits THN ARCHN
          >
          >
          > Best wishes
          > Wieland
          > <><
          > ------------------------------------------------
          > Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
          > mailto:wie@...
          > http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
          > Textcritical commentary:
          > http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html
          >

        • Peter
          Wieland is surely right to ask, Is this a text critical question? People ask us, but what does the Greek say? The Greek uses Kyrios for Jahveh, but John avoids
          Message 4 of 7 , May 8 8:18 PM
            Wieland is surely right to ask, Is this a text critical question?
            People ask us, but what does the Greek say?
            The Greek uses Kyrios for Jahveh, but John avoids using it.
            The translations we are subjected to at church are now deciding the
            meaning of EGO EIMI in favor of a solemn I AM--as though the "I" who
            spoke in the Jewish scriptures was not the Father but Jesus. At
            least, that's my problem with thinking the doctrine is Johannine.
            It is a text critical "issue," perhaps, to get the translators to
            leave ambiguous and pregnant with meaning or obscurity what was
            clearly obscure to the scribes and remains debatable to the exegetes.
            John can use an EGO alone, without verb, to mean "I am" (1:23), but
            he feels forced to use the verb for his Greek. I'll bet he's giving
            more Semitic color than Greek emphasis (on EGO) when he has "I" am
            the bread of life, etc. "I am he," also, works too often (esp. 18:8)
            to think it means the God who really is there.
            THN ARCHN is one of those places we fault scribes for trying to clear
            it up, so let's signal translators to let it remain ambiguous.
            I don't know what Sinaiticus had in mind, where EN could mean one and
            the same thing (as in, the Father and I are TO EN--one and the same
            (thing, not person--definitely not the same "I").
            The Latin, Qui et loquor, I can't help but see as an attempt to make
            the "quia et loquor" refer to the Lord Jesus as the ARCH.
            Even the O-TI separation may be the natural attempt to make it refer
            to Jesus, where That I speak to you at all! is rhetorical retort to a
            sarcastic question, Who are you? The fact that the question often
            calls for origin may miss the sarcasm behind, Whom do you make
            yourself to be? A question Jesus meticulously avoids answering for us.
            --Pete

            --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "Jack Kilmon" <jkilmon@...>
            wrote:
            >
            > EGO EIMI translates into Judean Aramaic as ana itai )n) ).ty
            >
            > FWIW
            >
            > Jack Kilmon
            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: Diana Fulbright
            > To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
            > Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2008 9:42 PM
            > Subject: [textualcriticism] Jo 8:25 THN ARCHN/EGO EIMI
            >
            >
            > Dear Malcolm,
            >
            > EGO EIMI does not equal or translate ANI HU'. "I am" does not
            mean "I am he." If you want to discuss why EGO EIMI implies that
            Jesus is in these words (cf. Jn. 8:58) identifies himself with God,
            go for it. But please stick to accurate translation.
            >
            > Thanks, Diana
            >
            >
            >
            > From: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
            [mailto:textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of mjriii2003
            > Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2008 9:13 AM
            > To: textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com
            > Subject: [textualcriticism] Re: Jo 8:25 THN ARCHN
            >
            >
            >
            > Wieland,
            >
            > >From a grammatical standpoint the use of THN ARXHN is
            unambiguous.
            > It the non prepositional use of the accusative expressing "extent
            of
            > space or duration of time." Hence the rendering "from the
            > beginning..."
            >
            > But the context of Jesus' remarks are even more telling. His use
            of
            > EGO EIMI = ani hu' is an unequivable self identification by Jesus
            > Himself as YHWH = Yahweh.
            >
            > But even further the use of THN ARXHN echoes back to both the LXX
            and
            > Masoretic texts in Genesis 1:1, EN ARXHi EPOIHSEN hO QEOS...
            >
            > Malcolm
            >
            > ___________________
            >
            > --- In textualcriticism@yahoogroups.com, "Wieland Willker" <wie@>
            > wrote:
            > >
            > > Chrys C. Caragounis
            > > "What Did Jesus Mean by THN ARCHN in John 8:25?"
            > > Novum Testamentum 49 (2007) 129-147
            > >
            > > After a detailed check of the thousands of occurrences in the
            Greek
            > literature Chrys Caragounis (2007) comes to the conclusion that
            THN
            > ARCHN is used as an adverb without accusative force. The meaning
            as
            > such is then "the beginning". The preposition must be deduced
            from
            > the context. The position of THN ARCHN at the beginning is for
            > emphasis.
            > > He further concludes that hO TI should be taken as "that
            > which/what" and the KAI as "precisely" (Caragounis: "Needless to
            say
            > KAI does not mean 'precisely'. This is only the force it assumes
            in
            > the present context"). His final translation of the sentence is:
            > >
            > > "[I am] From the beginning! - precisely what I have been saying
            > (speaking) to you."
            > >
            > > with the comment: "The English may translate it with '[I am]
            what I
            > have been saying to you from the beginning', but this is only a
            > functional reading deprived of the literary effect of the
            original."
            > >
            > >
            > > Is this a textcritical issue?
            > > Yes. We have variant readings here:
            > > 01 adds EN (meaning?)
            > > P66 adds EIPON hUMIN
            > > 047 omits THN ARCHN
            > >
            > >
            > > Best wishes
            > > Wieland
            > > <><
            > > ------------------------------------------------
            > > Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
            > > mailto:wie@
            > > http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
            > > Textcritical commentary:
            > > http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html
            > >
            >
          • Wieland Willker
            Please keep comments regarding the meaning of EGW EIMI etc. off-list. Best wishes Wieland
            Message 5 of 7 , May 8 11:14 PM
              Please keep comments regarding the meaning of EGW EIMI etc. off-list.


              Best wishes
              Wieland
              <><
              ------------------------------------------------
              Wieland Willker, Bremen, Germany
              mailto:wie@...
              http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie
              Textcritical commentary:
              http://www.uni-bremen.de/~wie/TCG/index.html
            • A. Dirkzwager
              Dear Wieland, I am a little bit late, but time is lacking from time to time. Hereby I give a summary of an article I wrote in the Dutch language some time ago.
              Message 6 of 7 , May 9 3:00 PM
                Dear Wieland,


                I am a little bit late, but time is lacking from time to time. Hereby I
                give a summary of an article I wrote in the Dutch language some time
                ago. Persons who want to get the article can send me an e-mail.

                It is not difficult to read Dutch if you understand English and German
                (like most theologians).


                The discussion reported in John 8: 21-29 seems to lack unity. If we see
                such a lack there is probably a discussion between Jesus and his
                opponents by means of allusions. One person makes a statement using an
                allusion to a verse of the Old Testament. The other answers by means of
                another allusion taken from the same chapter of the Old Testament or
                from a chapter with the same theme. If we find these chapters, we find
                the unity of the discussion. This way of discussion was very normal
                between Jewish theologians.


                The theme behind John 8: 12-29 are the prophesies about the Servant of
                the Lord in Isaiah (42: 1ss., 49: 1ss., 50: 4ss., 52: 13ss.). Jesus
                claims to be that Servant.


                Light of the world (vs. 12) can be found in Is 42: 6 and 49: 6. The Jews
                don't accept the way Jesus presents Himself as the predicted Light (vs.
                13), for Isaiah says that God Himself declares who is the Servant (see
                Is 42: 5-6, 49: 6).


                In vs. 14 gives Jesus an answer based on Is 49: 5 and 7, where is stated
                that God knows the origin and the destination of the Servant. Jesus says
                that He Himself knows about his origin and destination. His opponents
                can conclude that Jesus means to say that He is God or that God had said
                to Him that He should be the Servant.


                Jesus says in vs. 15 that He does not judge anybody, according to Is 49: 4.


                In vs. 17-18 says Jesus that there are two witnesses indeed: the Father
                and Jesus. required


                In vs. 19 Jesus says that his opponents don't know the Father, like is
                stated in Is 50: 10.


                Vs. 21 gives a paraphrasis of Is 53: 8. "I am going away" represents "he
                was cut off from the land of the living" , " you will look for me" is
                the compliment of " who of his generation considered that he was cut off
                from the land of the living" and " you will die in your sin" is the
                consequence of the fact that people did not realise that " he was cut
                off from the land of the living for the transgression of my people".


                If you don't see that Jesus is speaking about Is 53: 8, his words " you
                will die in your sin" don't have any connection with the beginning of
                the verse. So Is 53: 8 gives the unity in the sentence of Jesus.


                Then we have in vs. 24 "that I am". I don't think that "I am" is
                equivalent with God's name. We should understand "that I am the Servant
                of the Lord".


                For the moment I skip vs. 25 and then comes vs. 26. "What I have heard
                from Him" comes from Is 50: 4.


                From vs. 28 begins Jesus to quote more directly: He sees that his
                opponents don't understand enough of the allusions. He calls Himself the
                Son of Man and claims to be the fulfilment of Dan. 7. But He combines
                that prophesy about his glorious future with Is 52: 13 ("lift up") about
                the suffering Servant. At the end of the verse He nearly quotes Is 50: 4.


                Vs. 29 contains a combination of Is 50: 7, 8, 9, 5.


                And now vs. 25 with THN ARCHN.

                R. Kühner B. Gerth, Ausführliche Grammatik der griechischen Sprache,
                II. Teil Satzlehre, 1. Band, Hannover Leipzig 1898, third edition (=
                Darmstadt 1966), p. 315, n. 15, tell us

                ARCHN, THN ARCHN, zum Anfange, dann omnino (von vornherein), in den
                letzteren Bdt. in der Regel in Verbindung m.e. Negat. .... cf.
                Andocides, 3, 20 EXHN GAR AUTOIS KAI THN ARCHN EWSIN ORCOMENIOUS
                AUTONOMOUS EIRHNHN AGEIN

                Our sentence in John 8 does not contain a negation. So the meaning
                "omnino" does not apply.

                J. Humbert, Syntaxe grecque, Paris 1960, third edition, p. 264,
                translates ARCHN with au début.

                The sentence of Andocides quoted above has been translated by G.
                Dalmeyda in his edition of the works of Andocides Andocide Discours,
                Paris 1960, as "car ils pouvaient, dès le début, laisser l'autonomie à
                Orchomène et vivre en paix".


                So we have as translation of our sentence "what I am saying you from the
                beginning". He points his opponents to a text of Isaiah in the
                neighborhood of the prophesies about the Servant of the Lord (Is 48: 3-6a):

                I have declared the former things from the beginning; and they went
                forth out of my mouth, and I shewed them; I did them suddenly, and they
                came to pass. Because I knew that thou art obstinate, and thy neck is an
                iron sinew, and thy brow brass; I have even from the beginning declared
                it to thee; before it came to pass I shewed it thee: lest thou shouldest
                say, Mine idol hath done them, and my graven image, and my molten image,
                hath commanded them. Thou hast heard, see all this; and will not ye
                declare it?


                Arie


                A. Dirkzwager

                Hoeselt, Belgium
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.