Ulrich Berges, «'Ich gebe Jerusalem einen Freudenboten'
Synchrone und diachrone Beobachtungen zu Jes 41,27», Vol. 87 (2006) 319-337
The references to Zion and Jerusalem (41,27; 44,26.28; 45,13; 46,13) in the
section Isa 40–48 dedicated to Jacob and Israel and which follows the Prologue in
40,1-11, require an explanation because they present the perspective of the return
from the point of view of the Jewish homeland, which for the first time appears
only in Isa 49,14. Synchronically Isa 41,27 interrupts the parallel double structure
of the dispute with the foreign gods in 41,21-24.25-29. Diachronically Isa 41,27
is not attributable to the redactor of the first collection, composed between 539
and 520 BC, but to a more recent hand, which — starting from the first Servant
Song with its expansion and reinterpretation with Darius I in mind — introduces
the perspective of the return into the dispute with foreign gods. JHWH proves his
unique and overpowering sovereignty over history not only with regard to Cyrus
but also to Darius I.
78 Hellen Mardaga
Among the verses referred to by grammars and dictionaries of the New
Testament, we point the attention to two other verses: 10,35-36 and 11,13.
10,35-36
εἰ á¼ÎºÎµá½·Î½Î¿Ï…Ï‚ εἶπεν θεοὺς
Ï€Ïὸς οὓς ὠλόγος τοῦ θεοῦ á¼Î³á½³Î½ÎµÏ„ο,
καὶ οὠδύναται λυθῆναι ἡ γÏαφή,
ὃν á½ Ï€Î±Ï„á½´Ï á¼¡Î³á½·Î±ÏƒÎµÎ½ καὶ ἀπέστειλεν εἰς τὸν κόσμον
ὑμεῖς λέγετε ὅτι bλασφημεῖς,
The pronoun á¼ÎºÎµá½·Î½Î¿Ï…Ï‚ in 10,35 is specified by the relative clause, which
follows37. The pronoun is used in opposition to ὃν á½ Ï€Î±Ï„á½µÏ in 10,3638.
11,13
εἰÏήκει δὲ ὠἸησοῦς πεÏὶ τοῦ θανάτου αá½Ï„οῦ.
á¼ÎºÎµá¿–νοι δὲ ἔδοξαν
ὅτι πεÏὶ τῆς κοιμήσεως τοῦ ὕπνου λέγει.
In 11,13 á¼ÎºÎµá¿–νοῖ is used by the evangelist in one of his remarks39 and
points to οἱ μαθηταί in 11,12. The antithesis with ὠἸησοῦς explains the
use of the pronoun.
This overview shows that (i) when á¼ÎºÎµá¿–νος is used in the afore-men-
tioned oppositions, with the exception of 10,6, it usually refers to the
more remote person or object. The reader knows from the immediate
context the identity of the remote person or object; (ii) in an antithesis
á¼ÎºÎµá¿–νος never introduces a new person or object. The pronoun always
indicates a person or object of which the identity is known; (iii) when the
fourth evangelist uses á¼ÎºÎµá¿–νος within the antithesis different entities can
be distinguished from one another. The reader knows the identity of the
different poles, which is not the case in 19,35. M. Sabbe’s thesis on the use
of á¼ÎºÎµá¿–νος in an antithesis in 19,35 is only partially valid because it does
not help in identifying the identity of the persons mentioned in the verse.
If placed in an antithesis in 19,35, one cannot know exactly to which
person á¼ÎºÎµá¿–νος is referring.
IV
The thesis we propose is the following: á¼Ï‰Ïακώς and á¼ÎºÎµá¿–νος are not
opposed to one another in 19,35, but the pronoun resumes the preceding
C.G. Bretschneider, Lexicon Manuale, 208a; A.T. Robertson, Grammar of the Greek
37
New Testament, 708; L.C. Fillion, Jean, 215.
P. Schanz, Johannes, 396; L.C. Fillion, Jean, 215.
38
R. Bultmann, Evangelium des Johannes, 89 n. 1.
39
FOLLOW US