I want to keep adding thoughts to this blog entry.
Alan J. Thompson (Luke, page 994 of the electronic edition): Ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν, see 1:48. Ἔσται (see 1:14) with καθήμενος (nom. sg. masc. of pres. mid. ptc. of dep. κάθημαι, “sit”) is a fut. periph. cstr. (see 21:17 for this cstr.; see 5:24 for ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου). The locat. ἐκ δεξιῶν τῆς δυνάμεως τοῦ θεοῦ (“at the right hand of the power of God”; see NLT; Harris 106–7) is a circumlocution for the sovereign rule of God in which Jesus is both identified with God the Father and yet is distinct from him (see 20:42). The allusion to Ps 110:1 (and Dan 7:13) together with the use of the term δύναμις in the context of a trial before the ruling council (22:66) emphasizes where the true locus of divine authority resides. Jesus is actually the Judge over them (Pao and Schnabel 391c).
Baylor Greek Handbook on Luke (page ): ἐκ δεξιῶν. The preposition (probably technically denoting separation) is characteristically used with the plural form of δεξιός in a locative sense: “at the right side” (see also 1:11; 20:42; 22:69; 23:33; Acts 2:25). τῆς δυνάμεως τοῦ θεοῦ. In this phrase, τῆς δυνάμεως is likely an attributed genitive with the entire expression perhaps serving as a circumlocution for “God”: “the right side in relation to the powerful God.
Luke Timothy Johnson (Gospel of Luke, page): sitting at the right hand of the power of God: The basic statement is shared with Mark 14:62 and Matt 26:64, but Luke's small alterations give it a startlingly different meaning. Like the parallels, he combines the saying about the Son of Man from Dan 7:13 with the image of one "sitting at the right hand" which derives from LXX Ps 109:1. Unlike them, however: a) Luke drops the "you will see" (which the tradition probably had derived by midrash from Zech 12:10); in Acts, only Stephen will so see the Son of Man (Acts 7:55-56); b) Luke adds "of God" to the phrase "right hand of power," which also brings this prediction more in line with Acts 7:55-56; c) Luke omits the phrase "coming on the clouds of heaven," so that the statement refers not to the "coming of the Son of Man" at the end-time (see 11:30; 12:8, 40; 17:22, 24, 26, 30; 18:8; 21:27), but to the resurrection of Jesus.
Robert Stein (NA Commentary on Luke, page): Luke also omitted the reference to the Son of Man’s “coming on the clouds of heaven” (cf. Mark 14:62; Matt 26:64) possibly because it might have been interpreted as a prediction of the parousia in the lifetime of the Sanhedrin members, who now either because of age or Jerusalem’s destruction were dead. That coming, mentioned in Luke 21:27, finds its fulfillment at the end of history. See Introduction 7 (3). “Mighty God” is literally the power of God. Luke substituted this
phrase for Mark’s “right hand of Power” (14:62) since the use of “Power” as a circumlocution for God might not have been clear to his Gentile readers. Seated at the right hand of God, Jesus is the believer’s advocate (Luke 1228) but the unbeliever’s prosecutor (12:9).
Sporadic theological and historical musings by Edgar Foster (Ph.D. in Theology and Religious Studies and one of Jehovah's Witnesses).
Thanks for this post brother Foster, as you know, this is something I've been poking at for a while, not only this, but the dynamis wording in the trial scene in all the synoptics, trying to figure out how/why dynamis got in a quotation of Ps 110:1/Daniel 7:13, rather than Kyrious.
ReplyDeleteWas it related to an oral/Aramaic tradition? Why is there a circumlocution there? And why is dynamis there instead of Kyrious or something else, was dynamis a common circumlocution (there are a few examples I found, but not many, Philo's usage seems unlikely to be a candidate).
One theory I've thought of is that Dynamis is a rendering of Sabaoth (hosts/armies), as it often is in the LXX, i.e. right hand of (Jehovah of) armies, which would make his quotation more aggressive and threatening.
"power" as a circumlocution is perhaps accurate, but it doesn't explain why it's there and only there.
A very interesting circumlocution is in the gospel of Peter 19:
And the Lord screamed out, saying: 'My power, O power, you have forsaken me.' And having said this, he was taken up.
This goes against my theory of Sabaoth (it wouldn't really make sense there). But it's certainly interesting.
Another theory (in line with the GOspel of Peter section) is the focus on the vocalization, but you still have the problem that in the synoptic trial scene it replaces the divine name, whereas in the gospel of peter it replaces Eli.
ReplyDeletePhilo also associates power with the titles of God (God and Lord), i.e. his creative and kingly powers, but as I said in the earlier post, I think it's a stretch to include Philo here ... I may be persuaded otherwise though.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1584226
ReplyDeletepage 214, associates the Gospel of Peter's use of Dunamis rather than Theos with the synoptic trial scene, but not much more is argued.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3262686
ReplyDeleteA strange but interesting solution.
You're welcome, Brother Montero. I will keep adding to this entry as I find more sources dealing with this subject. For Psalm 110:1 and the whole "right hand of God" issue, you might see the book, David M. Hay, Glory at the Right Hand: Psalm 110 in Early Christianity. I have not finished the book, but he seems to be pretty thorough with his investigation.
ReplyDeleteI also like the book, Darrell Bock, Blasphemy and Exaltation in Judaism: The Charge against Jesus in Mark 14:53-65. Don't have it anymore but read it some years ago.
BDAG/ABD might both be helpful with studying circumlocutions in ancient Judeo-Christianity. From my brief study of the issue, I've found the circumlocution approach to be the most popular although some have criticized it.
I read the JSTOR article on the Gospel of Peter. That is a strange solution :)
See also https://books.google.com/books?id=3mfnDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT525&lpg=PT525&dq=luke+22:69+circumlocution+for+god&source=bl&ots=HMYZ6QLBBx&sig=ACfU3U2F6sHkimQoAoteBaR5vNv_D_MOuA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiOoMWB_sTxAhUDkWoFHedEApY4ChDoAXoECBYQAw#v=onepage&q=luke%2022%3A69%20circumlocution%20for%20god&f=false
The circumlocution approach doesn't really explain much ... why Dynamis and why only right there? Kyrious is the standard circumlocution, so why Dynamis?
ReplyDeleteI find that approach to not really explain the phenomenon.
I've been too busy or lazy to research BDAG/ABD and other sources, but let's say that Luke 22:69 is one verse that uses the circumlocution; Mark 14:62 would be another one. Thayer's also says that dunamis is sometimes equivalent to equivalent to ὁ δυνατός and it gives some references for this usage that include the verses in Luke and Mark. I've recently discussed Heb. 1:3 which apparently uses a circumlocution and another example would be substituting Kingdom of God for Kingdom of heaven. But I admit that more research needs to be done on the circumlocution view.
ReplyDelete