Dear blog readers,
I would like to draw your attention to a scholarly work produced by Margaret Davies entitled Rhetoric and Reference in the Fourth Gospel (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992) which contains a discussion INTER ALIA concerning the Johannine EGW EIMI sayings. The section I have in mind runs from pp. 82-87. In these pages, Davies shows how the Wisdom writings have probably influenced the EGW EIMI pronouncements in John's Gospel, and she thinks the Johannine sayings should be read in the light of such texts as Prov. 8:12-21 and Sirach 24:3-31. The book also critiques R.E. Brown's treatment of the sayings and concludes that EGW EIMI (in Jn 8:58 and elsewhere in John) serves as a marker of self-identification. Davies' study assumes this position for a few reasons that I will briefly delineate.
(1) Davies argues that EGW EIMI in Jn. 13:19 identifies Jesus as the Messiah since it evidently refers back to Jn. 13:14 and 18, and I might add Jn. 13:13 where we read: "You address me, 'Teacher,' and, 'Lord,' and you speak rightly, for I am such."
Also:
"I am not talking about all of you; I know the one I have chosen. But it is in order that the Scripture might be fulfilled, 'He that used to feed on my bread has lifted up his heel against me.'" (Jn. 13:18)
The context of Jn 13:19 thus suggests that Jesus is identifying himself as Lord, Teacher, and Messiah--the one who was foretold in Ps. 41:9 among other places in the Tanakh.
(2) Davies thinks that Jn 8:58 refers back to Jn 8:12
and that Jesus is ultimately identifying himself as
the light of the world, that is, the promised seed of
Abraham by means of whom all nations of the earth will
be blessed (Gn 12:3; 22:18). However she notes that
other scholars (Lindars 1972) think that Jn 8:58
actually points back to 1:5, which deals with the
light that apparently was shining prior to Abraham, the
father of all those having faith. But at this point, Davies asks:
"Is Jesus' remark, 'Before Abraham was, I am he' a
reminder that he is the eternal LOGOS?" (Davies 86).
She thinks that this reading of Jn 8:58 "is neither an
obvious nor a necessary reading." (86). The scholar
accordingly rejects the Jn 8:58/1:5 connexion since if John
wanted to highlight a thematic nexus
between the two texts, he would have used the
imperfect tense of the verb 'to be' at Jn 8:58 and not
the present. Since John does employ the present in
8:58, however, "The use of the present tense, 'I am',
connects with its use in Jn 8:12" (86).
Conclusion
Davies contends that Jesus (in Jn 8:58) is
answering a question about time, but does so by
identifying himself as the seed of Abraham (the light
of the world). She writes: "We should conclude,
therefore, that the Johannine Jesus' use of the 'I am'
form draws on Wisdom declarations from its Scripture,
and does not assert Jesus' divinity" (Davies 87).
Wednesday, November 02, 2011
Margaret Davies and the EGW EIMI Sayings in John's Gospel
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Davies appears to be arguing in Socinian terms.
Jesus' statement in John 8:58 refers to verses 56-57, of when Abraham rejoiced at seeing the Messiah's day, and in response to his opponents' insulting question to have been contemporaneous with Abraham or not.
As we know, Trinitarianism takes εγω ειμι as a name (I AM), not as a statement as it really is. If it was a name, the verse in English would have to read as: "Before Abraham was, I was I AM." Now, I invite you to present how the Greek text would have to read if εγω ειμι I AM was a name, including the necessary preface "I was" or something similar, like "I existed as."
In other words, how would this sentence look in NT Greek: "Before Abraham was, I was I AM."
Other brothers provided me with the following examples:
1)
πριν αβρααμ γενεσθαι (εγω) ἦμην ὁ εγω ειμι
The εγω in parentheses is not necessary in Greek.
ἦμην = I was
ὁ = article male, nominative singular. This word indicates, that the following is to be taken as predicate nomen instead of a sentence.
2)
πριν αβρααμ γενεσθαι εγω ειμι εγω ειμι
3)
πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ὁ ἐγὼ ἐγὼ εἰμί
"I [am] the I AM since before Abraham was."
Your brother,
Jim
Jim,
I don't know much about the religious views of Davies, but I take her comments to be endavors to analyze John's grammar. The whole "I AM" argument starts with the mistaken premise that God's name is identified as "I AM WHO [THAT] I AM" at Exodus 3:14; so they assert that ἐγὼ εἰμί is just being used "absolutely" (neither as explicit nor as implied predicate) in Jn 8:58. Then the writers appeal to the LXX for examples of this absolute usage (Isa. 43:25; 51:12, and so forth). Hence, Trinitarian commentators insist that ἐγὼ εἰμί alone names God without any accompanying verb or other terms.
If the claim is true, then ἐγὼ εἰμί alone would suffice. However, if a verb needs to accompny the "I AM" title/name, then I too would say that ἤμην would be a good candidate.
Thank you!
You're welcome, my brother :)
this article (https://www.bible.ca/trinity/trinity-texts-john8-58.htm)
Makes many mistakes of saying, 2 being (paraphrasing)
"John 8:58 does not contain past time implications because it does not contain the same "grammatical patterns" as the others" - What this user omits to mention is simply that "Before Abraham became" pointing to somewhere in the past, no PPA clause is to a specific point in the past! they are all vague.
citing an article it then goes on to talk about Heb 1:3 where "hos on" is applied to Jesus - which is not even the same as what is used in the LXX in Ex 3:14 (I may be wrong) and the articles point was simply to say that "I am" (or the Greek equivilent) is used not exclusively of Christ or the Father (as I have demonstrated previously)
another thing is this article makes the mistaken that "I was" is better than "I have been" - However as many scholars point out, "I was" would indicate an end to the PPA as its a present tense verb accompanied by past time implications NOT a past time verb
Hebrews 1:3 has ὃς ὢν ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης, etc. As you say, what does that have to do with ego eimi? The words in Exod 3:14 are different: ὃς in Hebrews 1:3 is a relative pronoun ("who") whereas Exod 3:14 should be understood to mean, "I am the being" although it has been rendered differently in Greek as well.
see the link for Hebrews 1:3, its a big section and I don't want to copy, paste basically an entire article (ironically they talk about others not knowing Greek)
search " Hebrews 1:3" or "Heb 1:3"
I find these sorts of articles amusing as some are still citing them to this day in different places.
And also because I saw your comments with Jimand noticed this article claims to the contrary.
But again my intention is amusement, not to be annoying
Thanks, I've been to the site before, but it's been a while. I will check out their claim. However, it already sounds wrongheaded.
please - let me know what else you observe (if you have time that is) would love to hear any observations you have on these sorts of things.
How's the kingdom hall building going?
Not sure that I will have much to say that's new, but we'll see. We completed the kingdom hall and had our dedication: things went great. However, I'm working more now, so my time is getting tight plus I coordinate talks, among other things.
Davies argues that “ego eimi” in John 13:19 identifies Jesus as the Messiah, linking it to earlier references in John 13 to Jesus as Teacher and Lord (John 13:13-14, 18). While this identification is valid in the immediate context, it does not preclude a deeper divine claim. In fact, ego eimi in John 13:19 echoes Isaiah 43:10:
• "You are my witnesses,” declares the LORD, “and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he (ego eimi)."
Isaiah 43:10 emphasizes Yahweh’s uniqueness and self-identification as the one true God. Jesus' usage of ego eimi in John 13:19, therefore, goes beyond self-identification as Messiah to suggest an equivalence with Yahweh. This becomes more evident in the broader Johannine context, where Jesus claims a role only attributable to God, such as being the object of faith ("believe that I am he").
The juxtaposition of Abraham's coming into being (genesthai) with Jesus' timeless existence (ego eimi) inherently asserts more than a mere messianic identity or Wisdom association. Jesus claims a form of existence that predates and surpasses time, aligning with the divine self-identification in Exodus 3:14 (ehyeh asher ehyeh—"I am who I am").The Jews' attempt to stone Jesus immediately after this statement (John 8:59) indicates they interpreted ego eimi as a blasphemous assertion of divinity. Merely identifying as the light of the world or the seed of Abraham would not have provoked such a reaction. Their response is consistent with Levitical laws against blasphemy (Leviticus 24:16).
Davies contends that John would have used the imperfect tense to highlight a thematic connection to 1:5. However, the use of the present tense (ego eimi) in John 8:58 emphasizes Jesus' timeless existence, consistent with the divine name in Exodus 3:14. The Septuagint uses ego eimi in Exodus 3:14 to translate Yahweh's self-revelation, and John's audience, familiar with the Septuagint, would have recognized the parallel. In John 8:58, Jesus contrasts His eternal nature (ego eimi) with Abraham's temporal origin (genesthai). This sharp contrast points to Jesus' existence as qualitatively different from Abraham's, aligning with divine attributes. Other uses of ego eimi in John's Gospel (e.g., 6:35, 8:24, 11:25) carry theological weight, identifying Jesus not only as the Messiah but as possessing attributes exclusive to God (e.g., giver of life, resurrection, truth). John 8:58 fits this pattern and complements John's high Christology (e.g., John 1:1-3, 1:14).
While Davies is correct that Wisdom literature influences Johannine theology, her interpretation misses the integration of Wisdom with divinity in John's Gospel. Jesus embodies divine Wisdom (cf. Proverbs 8:22-31), but this embodiment does not negate His divinity. Instead, Wisdom is personified and unified with God, as seen in texts like Sirach 24 and Proverbs 8. John extends this concept to identify Jesus as both Wisdom and the divine Logos (John 1:1).
The claim that ἐγὼ εἰμί in John 8:58 is unrelated to Exodus 3:14 oversimplifies the theological connections between the texts. In the Septuagint (LXX), Exodus 3:14 reads:
• Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν ("I am the being" or "I am the one who is").
This reflects the Hebrew אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה (Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh), commonly translated as "I am who I am." While the LXX uses ὁ ὤν ("the one who is") for specificity, ἐγὼ εἰμί is used in the first part of the verse and is recognized as a valid shorthand for self-identification. The use of ἐγώ εἰμι in John 8:58 without a predicate is a deliberate echo of the divine name revealed in Exodus 3:14. This is evident from the Jews’ reaction: they sought to stone Jesus for blasphemy, interpreting his words as a claim to divinity (John 8:59). This reaction would be disproportionate if Jesus were merely claiming pre-existence, as they would have accepted the concept of a pre-existent messianic figure or angel.
The reference to Hebrews 1:3, which describes Jesus as "the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being" (ὃς ὢν ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης), does not conflict with or dilute the significance of ἐγὼ εἰμί in John 8:58. In Hebrews 1:3, ὢν (a participle of "to be") emphasizes Jesus’ continuous nature and role within the Godhead. In John 8:58, ἐγὼ εἰμί emphasizes Jesus’ eternal, self-existent nature. Both texts affirm Jesus' deity but serve different theological purposes: one speaks to his nature in relation to God the Father (Hebrews), and the other to his eternal existence (John).
The critique that ἐγώ εἰμι is not a proper name fails to account for the theological nuances of John’s Gospel, where such declarations (ἐγώ εἰμι without predicates) echo Isaiah’s "I am" statements (e.g., Isaiah 43:10, 46:4). In both contexts, ἐγώ εἰμι serves as a declaration of divine identity.
The claim that ἐγώ εἰμι functions as a "Present of Past Action Still in Progress" (PPA) fails to account for the lack of an adverbial phrase denoting a starting point of the action. Genuine examples of PPA in Greek, such as John 14:9 ("Have I been with you so long?"), include temporal markers. John 8:58 lacks such markers, emphasizing a timeless present rather than a past action.
The argument downplays the significance of the Jewish leaders' response. If Jesus were merely claiming pre-existence (as an angel or messianic figure), their reaction of attempting to stone him would be unwarranted. Instead, their response indicates that they understood Jesus to be making a claim to divinity, which they considered blasphemous.
Post a Comment