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.
545
TO WORSHIP JOHANNINE “ SON MAN â€
THE OF
man ? Furthermore, does the image of Jesus as God, presented by
Keener, correspond to the general thought structures developed in
the Fourth Gospel? The answer to this question is probably more
complex than — as Keener does — simply referring to passages such
as 1,1; 20,28 or, to prove the contrary, to passages where the unity is
denied and subordination seems to be the key for understanding the
relation between Jesus and God (cf. 14,28). It is not possible to
decide whether the Johannine author already claims what in later
tradition has been called Wesensgleichheit to God 31.
2. The Johannine Son of Man as the One Who Makes God Known
In view of its linguistic background in the Aramaic bar enasha
and the Hebrew ben adam, stressing a mere human status, Francis
J. Moloney argues that the designation yıov toy anurwpoy has
Ωù ˜ß ¥
become a christological title in the Fourth Gospel. He considers the
use of the expression yıov toy anurwpoy taken from the Christian
Ωù ˜ß ¥
tradition by the author of the Gospel to be a continuation of a
dynamic, growing interpretation of Dan 7,13 32. Within this
understanding of the designation, John 9,35 plays a crucial role 33.
It is the only time in the Gospel that — within that framework of
coming to believe and worship — the designation yıov toy Ωù ˜
anurwpoy seems to stand explicitly as a christological title,
ß ¥
especially in view of the climactic nature of the final encounter
between Jesus and the healed man 34.
On this issue, see the very thorough reflection on John 5,18 by
31
B. LATAIRE, “Jesus’ Equality with God. A Critical Reflection on John 5,18â€,
The Myriad Christ. Plurality and the Quest for Unity in Contemporary
Christology (eds. T. MERRIGAN – J. HAERS) (BETL 152; Leuven 2000)
177 -190.
MOLONEY, The Johannine Son of Man, 219.
32
M o r e ove r, the titular understanding of the expression yı o v toy
Ωù ˜
33
anurwpoy is supported by the saying in 3,4 where Jesus, in a way similar to
ß ¥
that in 9,35, also refers to himself in the third person. See M. LABAHN, Jesus
als Lebensspender. Untersuchungen zu einer Geschichte der johanneischen
Tradition anhand ihrer Wundergeschichten (BZNW 98; Berlin 1999) 347-349.
For a contrary opinion, see M. MÜLLER, “‘Have You Faith in the Son of
34
Man ?’ (John 9,35)â€, NTS 37 (1991) 294. See also L.W. HURTADO, Lord Jesus
Christ. Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity (Grand Rapids, MI –
Cambridge 2003) 294-305.
FOLLOW US