Martijn Steegen, «M. Steegen: To Worship the Johannine 'Son of Man'. John 9,38 as Refocusing on the Father», Vol. 91 (2010) 534-554
Important early textual witnesses show John 9,38-39a to be absent. Because of the use of uncharacteristic vocabulary, the use of rare verb forms such as e¶fh and pistey¥w, and the unique confession of faith and worship of Jesus as “Son of Man” during his earthly life, John 9,38 has been said to stand outside Johannine theology. I argue that, although John 9,38-39a confronts the Gospel’s reader with uncharacteristic vocabulary, this does not necessarily imply that these words were added by a later hand under liturgical influence. Instead of standing outside Johannine theology, the confession of faith and the worship by the man healed from his blindness function as the first fulfilment of the proleptic prediction of the words in 4,23 kaiù gaùr oO pathùr toioy¥toyv zhtei˜ toyùv proskynoy˜ntav ayßto¥n. Then, I confront the absence of 9,38-39a with yet another text-critical problem in the larger pericope 9,35-41 — the replacement of the title yiOoùv toy˜ aßnurw¥ poy in 9,35 by yiOoùv toy˜ ueoy — and argue that these two text-critical problems cannot be separated from one another. Finally, I explore how the designation “Son of Man” functions within the framework of pistey¥w and proskyne¥w. The worship of the Johannine Jesus can hardly be seen as a goal in itself. Instead, it is an acknowledgement that the Father is made known in the person of Jesus (cf. 9,3), and hence is typically Johannine.
539
TO WORSHIP JOHANNINE “ SON MAN â€
THE OF
from 9,1-38 and that lesson 33 begins with 9,39 up to 10,9 15. This
division is also found in the Synaxarion of the Greek Gospel
lectionary. Based on these findings, Porter explains the words kaıù
e®pen o ÃIhsoyv in 9,39 as an incipit or an orally given opening
ı Ω ˜
formula at the beginning of the lesson which runs from John 9,39-
10,9. This incipit did not originally belong to the Gospel’s text.
Thus, in Porter’s opinion, both verse 38 as an endorsement of the
story in 9,1-37 and verse 39 as an orally given opening formula
could have been copied into the continuous text at an early date.
2. Unity Restored
Porter’s reading of 9,38-39a as a liturgical addition has not
found much support among the majority of commentators 16. Their
reaction is mainly against the understanding of the rare verb forms
eφh and pisteyw as non-Johannine, and against the conclusion
¶ ¥
that since proskynew directed to Jesus only appears here, it is out
Â¥
of harmony with the Gospel’s teaching. Commentators argue that
the present 1st sg. pisteyw is best explained by its context, since
Â¥
Jesus addresses a question to the healed man in 9,35. The rare use
of eφh in its turn does then correspond with its normal use of
¶
introducing direct discourse (cf. Matt 13,29; 26,61; 27,11.23;
Mk 10,29 ; John 1,23; 18,29; Acts 7,2; 8,36; 10,30) 17. Benedikt
Schwank proposes that the argument to set 9,38-39a apart from the
text because of its unjohannine character is untenable since the
word krıma in verse 39 also occurs just once in the Gospel 18.
Â¥
H.C. HOSKIER, Codex B and its Allies (London 1914) 267.
15
See R. BULTMANN, Das Evangelium des Johannes (Göttingen 1941)
16
256 - 260 ; C.K. BARRETT, The Gospel According to St. John (London 21978)
302-304 ; R. SCHNACKENBURG, The Gospel According to St. John (New York,
NY 1980) II, 252-258; D.A. CARSON, The Gospel according to John (Grand
Rapids, MI 1991) 375-379; F.J. MOLONEY, The Gospel of John (SPS 4;
Collegeville, MN 1998) 295-296; C.S. KEENER, The Gospel of John. A
Commentary (Peabody, MA 2003) I, 794-799; U. SCHNELLE, Das Evangelium
nach Johannes (Leipzig 32004) 190-192; H. THYEN, Das Johannesevangelium
(Tübingen 2005) 470-476.
Â¥
W. BAUER, “φhmı â€, BDAG (32000) 1053.
17
SCHWANK, Evangelium nach Johannes, 280-281. However, just like
18
Porter he defends the position that the words in 9,38-39a were added under
influence of the early baptismal liturgy.
FOLLOW US