G.R. Beasley-Murray writes: "PROSEKUNHSEN [in Jn. 9:38] is commonly translated 'he worshiped him' (so KJV, RSV, JB, NIV, etc.), but this is 'doubtful'" (Murray, John, 159). He later goes on to say that the honor which the healed man ascribes to Jesus in Jn. 9:38 was beyond the honor due to other men but short of that "due to God Almighty." I have no problem with this observation. Where I am suspicious of Murray's interpretation of Jn. 9:38 is when he insists that the man in 9:38 attributed honor to Jesus as "the Redeemer from God" (Murray 160). Notice that Murray capitalizes the word "Redeemer." Why? Is this an implicit attribution of Deity to Christ? While it is no secret that Murray is a trinitarian, I wonder just what he means by this statement. If he is implying that the blind man gave honor to Jesus as DEUS REVELATUS qua DEUS REVELATUS--then I definitively reject this aspect of his explanation. But he seems to be making the claim that the PROSKUNEW Jesus received in Jn 9:38 should not be fully equated with the worship that Almighty God's worshipers render to Him.
Another Johannine commentator named Schnackenburg also implies that while the formerly blind man does not express "formal adoration" to Jesus, he does grant adoration to "the God-sent bringer of salvation which itself gives honor and adoration to God. It shows the man's advance from his Jewish faith to Christian faith." Depending on what Schnackenburg means here, I can accept his contention. But if his words tacitly express trinitarian concepts, then I unequivocally and without reservation reject this part of Schnackenburg's exegesis.
Wednesday, May 15, 2019
John 9:38: "he worshiped him"?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
24 comments:
http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/vocabulary_definitions_worship.html
Thanks, Duncan. I agree with Mr. Benner in some respects, but have some points of disagreement with him. See https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2018/08/the-potential-meaning-of.html
There are times when SHACHAH and PROSKUNEW may denote worship, but context must help us sort out the meaning.
One needs to bear in mind the diachronic aspect of Benner's web site. He is referring to early Hebrew. So I don't have a problem with his point. It was Jehovah that they were to "serve", one may call that worship now.
EVED is the word I have in mind.
I particularly took issue with these words of Mr. Benner:
"The concept of 'worship,' as defined by Webster’s dictionary is not Hebraic in any way and is not found in the Bible. While there is nothing wrong with 'worship,' in the sense that we normally understand this word, we should recognize that it is not a Biblical concept."
He implies that the Hebrew Bible as a whole contains no concept or notion of worship as we understand that term. I disagree and lexicographers seem to part ways with Benner too. See https://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionary/worship/
Compare https://www.biblestudytools.com/passage/?q=2-kings+10:19;+2-kings+10:21
James Orr:
The principal Old Testament word is shachah, "depress," "bow down," "prostrate" (Hithpael), as in Exodus 4:31, "bowed their heads and worshipped"; so in 94 other places. The context determines more or less clearly whether the physical act or the volitional and emotional idea is intended. The word is applied to acts of reverence to human superiors as well as supernatural.
"bowed their heads"? Really?
There is more than one way to prostrate.
https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/woman-prostrate-in-prayer-bhutan-picture-id141475431
Is Orr claiming that prostration merely happens one way? To me, he's saying that shachah has that meaning at Exod 4:31, not in every verse. I think he recognizes what it means to prostrate oneself.
But, "bowed their heads"? Evidence for this translation?
The worship is all the things that lead up to this gesture / action of submission.
Just as the woman in bhutan as a budist may do this thousands of times on her actual journey to what she thinks is a holy place. The worship is the whole package. Not the prostration as of itself.
Compare the Hebrew terms used in Exodus 20:5.
The English "worship" is ambiguous and not always clear: the act of prostration itself can be an act of worship if performed with a certain attitude of heart and mind. Hence, the correction of John's actions in Rev. 19. On the other hand, the prostration in Rev. 3:9 is not worship although it's presumably the same action. See https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/physical-movement-in-jewish-prayer/
Compare https://studybible.info/strongs/H6915
Concerning the range of proskunew: https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/search?q=ross+taylor
Annotations for Exodus 4:31: https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=hDBmAAAAcAAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA9&dq=exodus+4:31+bow+the+head&ots=nV_0z4CNPw&sig=iIxxN3zrK-C-8rnrmfnrZcrEIfI#v=onepage&q&f=false
I have a problem with using Jewish tradition to justify anything. There is reverse engineering going on. Eg. psalms 35:10 and using the terms - arms or limbs. https://biblehub.com/text/psalms/35-10.htm
Bones as you know can have a very different meaning, unattached to physical ritual movement.
I've tried to make a case based on lexicality rather than Jewish tradition per se--trying to look at how writers use terms in the Hebrew Bible. The term "bones" is like any other word insofar as it usually has figurative, extended or idiomatic senses. Each occurrence has to be taken on a case by case basis.
The simple point I've tried to emphasize is that "bow their heads" is not a mistranslation of Exodus 4:31. See https://www.studylight.org/lexicons/hebrew/6915.html
It's the impression that it gives, that many think the final word means worship. It is talking about concrete action.
"they bowed the head and they bent {them}selves down" which is normal in near Eastern and eastern cultures - as a single action.
This is not splitting hairs. It's important.
https://biblehub.com/hebrew/6915.htm
So bowing of the head is one interpretation among many.
Lexicons say that shachah sometimes means worship, not that it always does. Nor may that be the primary meaning of the word. Besides, worship is both a feeling and action.
Exodus 4:31 uses 2 words to describe what Israel did. It's possible that 2 words are describing one action, but we could also have two actions being done. Compare Genesis 24:26.
1st definition for worship in MB:
reverence offered a divine being or supernatural power also : an act of expressing such reverence
Geneva vs kjv
31 And the [w]people believed, and when they heard that the Lord had visited the children of Israel, and had looked upon their tribulation, they bowed down, and worshipped.
https://youtu.be/8OBlmHfxTGw the two aspects of a single action. May not have been exactly like this and it would be done just once.
NET Bible for Exodus 4:31:
tn The verb וַיִּשְׁתַּחֲוּוּ (vayyishtakhavu) is usually rendered “worshiped.” More specifically, the verbal root חָוָה (khava) in the hishtaphel stem means “to cause oneself to be low to the ground.” While there is nothing wrong with giving it a general translation of “worship,” it may be better in a passage like this to take it in conjunction with the other verb (“bow”) as a verbal hendiadys, using it as an adverb to that verb. The implication is certainly that they prayed, or praised, and performed some other aspect of worship, but the text may just be describing it from their posture of worship. With this response, all the fears of Moses are swept aside – they believed and they were thankful to God.
Seems like a balanced comment to me.
Questions
John 5:23
English Standard Version
that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.
Many Trinitarians say honor and worship means the exact same thing. So since we are to honor the Son just as the Father it means Jesus is God. Is it true honor and worship means the exact same thing? And if so wouldn't that mean we are to worship the Jesus like the Father?
Post a Comment