υ.. πάντα ἄνθρωπον ἐρχόμενον εἰς τὸν κόσμον is rightly recognized by J. Lightfoot (Horae Hebraicae, ad loc.) and by Schlatter (Sprache, pp. 18 f.) as the common Rabbinic phrase Diy אָתִי T:: all comers into the world', i.e. all that are in it.* The Aram. equivalent would be syn. Thus Westcott's proposal to regard τὸ φῶς as the subject of ἦν ἐρχόμενον (The true light... was coming, &c.': so R.V. margin) is excluded, and v тò pŵs TÒ åλŋóv can only mean, 'It was the true light', referring to the preceding verse. For this sense we seem to need a demonstrative pronoun; and this probably stood in Aramaic as , which was misread and rendered v. 7.10. καὶ ὁ κόσμος αὐτὸν οὐκ ἔγνω. Notice the adversative force of κaí = 'and yet', here and in v. 11 καὶ οἱ ἴδιοι κτλ. This is very frequent in Semitic (cf. p. 66). υ.". εἰς τὰ ἴδια ἦλθε, καὶ οἱ ἴδιοι αὐτὸν οὐ παρέλαβον, i.e. my bas (cf. Pal. Syr. and Pesh.). The use of Tà idia, oi idio cannot, of course, be claimed as unusual; but the expressions are striking, and at once suggest to an Aramaic scholar the phrase which to him', i.e. 'that which pertains (or those who pertain) to him '—'his belongings'. dos is a favourite term in Jn.; occurring 15 times (11lbis. 42, 44, 518.43, 718, 84, 103.4.12, 13, 15, 16, 1927), as against 5 in Mt., 1 in Mk., 4 in Lk. v. 12. ὅσοι δὲ ἔλαβον αὐτόν, ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς κτλ. The construction in thought some such words as 'he was born blind'; and 1525 where before dλλ' ἵνα πληρωθῇ ὁ λόγος κτλ. there is an implied ellipse of ‘This cometh to pass'. Cf. also Mk. 1449. Similarly, Schlatter (Sprache, p. 18) cites parallels from אלו אפשר להעביר מלאך המות הייתי מעבירו אלא שכבר 2019 .Mechilta on Ex לו If it were possible to remove the angel of death I should have removed him, but because the decree has already been decreed' (sc. 'I cannot do so'), and from Siphrê on Num. 251 'We are not under such obligation to him, but (sc. it is necessary) that thou, &c.' In spite of these parallels for an ellipse, it is clear that iva in the Aramaic rendering of our passage most naturally stands for the relative 'one who'; and this conclusion is supported by the other instances collected on pp. 75 f., where íva is a mistranslation of a relative. = * Schlatter quotes a remarkable para'lel to our passage from the Midrash Rabba אתה מאיר לעליונים ולתחת נים ולכל באי עולם -6 .on Leviticus, par. xxxi 'Thou (God) givest light to those that are above and to those that are below, and to all comers into the world'. with Casus pendens is very frequent in Semitic-Pal. Syr. s (0%) va, gl, olão? ~? edo, Pesh. o∞ uqala¤? ~? pado? Load. For the occurrences of the construction in Jn. see p. 64. Toîs mutevovσw eis tò voμa auroù, i.e. app. The striking τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ὄνομα αὐτοῦ, phrase τeve eis is strongly reminiscent of the Hebrew and Aramaic construction (Heb. 2, Aram. ?¡'?'). This is admitted by Moulton (NTG.3 p. 68), whose words are 'It would seem therefore that the substitution of eis or èí for the simple dative may have obtained currency mainly in Christian circles, where the importance of the difference between simple belief () and personal trust (?) was keenly realized. The prepositional construction was suggested no doubt by its being a more literal translation of the Hebrew phrase with ?.' The occurrences of πιστεύειν εἰς are as follows: (εἰς τὸν Ἰησοῦν, εἰς τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ, εἰς αὐτόν, &c.) Jn. 2, 316.18.36, 49, 629.35.40, 73.31.38.39.43, 830, 95.36, 102, 1125.26.45.48, 1211.37.42.44.46, 14112, 169, 1720, 1 Jn. 510; elsewhere, Matt. 18 Mk. 92, Acts 103, 14, 19, Rom. 10', Gal. 2, Phil. 12, 1 Pet. 18; (eis Tò pŵs) Jn. 12; (eis тò ovoμa avтoû) Jn. 12, 2, 3, I Jn. 5; (eis Tv paprνpíav) 1 Jn. 5 (37 Johannine cases in all; 9 other cases). 13 = 43 10 v.1. οἳ οὐκ ἐξ αἱμάτων . . . ἐγεννήθησαν, i.e. 1 1 2 1 29 great interest is the fact that the Latin variant ös. . . ¿yevvýbn ἐγεννήθη becomes considerably more plausible upon the assumption of an Aramaic original. Since the particle is invariable, it might form the relative either to 'as many as received Him', or to 'He gave'. The question of reading in Aramaic depends, then, upon the difference between the plural they were born', and the singular He was born'--a difference which involves solely the insertion or omission of the letter 1. Moreover, since the following v. begins with κaí, it is quite possible that the plural form s may have arisen through dittography of this 1. Very probably may not have had the relative sense at all, but (as in v.1) may have been intended to express the sense ‘inasmuch as', thus giving the reason why the fact previously mentioned became possible-'inasmuch as He was born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God'; i.ė. He, being born not after the manner of flesh, but of God, was thus able to give to those who received Him power to become sons of God. 3.4 This interpretation is of a piece with that which is given above for vv. just as the Logos was the Source of all physical life 'because in Him was life', so (vv. 12.13) He is the Source of spiritual life (the new birth) because He was born into the world, not by the ordinary process of human generation, but of God'. Cf. Lk. 135 Πνεῦμα ἅγιον ἐπελεύσεται ἐπὶ σέ, καὶ δύναμις Ὑψίστου ἐπισκιάσει σοι We note a connexion between υἱὸς Θεοῦ and τέκνα Θεοῦ of Jn. 1'2 which may not be accidental (cf. also éπeì ăvdpa ov yivóσêw, Lk. 13⁄44, with ovde ek beλýμatos ȧvdpós, Jn. 113). If this explanation of Jn. 112.13 be correct, the writer is drawing out the mystical import of the Virgin-Birth for believers on precisely the lines on which he elsewhere (5-29, 1125.26, 1419) draws out the mystical import for them of the Resurrection. 13 On the other hand, the generally accepted reading of . . eyevvýonoav surely involves a very strange sequence. The spiritual birth of believers is clearly the result of the grace described by ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς ἐξουσίαν τέκνα Θεοῦ γενέσθαι, but v. as phrased seems to imply that it was an antecedent condition. The author would surely have written and so they were born', or 'so that they should be born', had this result been the fact which he was intending to convey. 7-11 0.1. καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν. The verb ἐσκήνωσεν very clearly suggests the Jewish doctrine of the Shkīnā (Heb.), y Shekintā (Aram.), or visible dwelling of Yahweh among His people, typified by the pillar of cloud standing above the Tent of Meeting, as subsequently in Solomon's Temple (Ex. 337-11 from the old document E; 1 Kgs. 810.11. Cf. also, for the use of the verb 2 šākan of Yahweh's dwelling in the midst of Israel, Lev. 261112 (H), Ex. 25, 29, Num. 53, 353 (P), 1 Kgs. 613, Ezek. 439; of His causing His Name to dwell there, Deut. 12", 143, 166.11, 26, & .). In Hebrew passages in which Yahweh is said to dwell, or to cause His Name to dwell, in the midst of Israel, the Targumic phrase is, He caused His Sh kinta to dwell there. Examples are So, of the withdrawal of Yahweh's Presence, Isa. 57' 'I hid Myself'. 'I caused My Shekintā to depart (ascend) from them'. 'And Thou dost not cause Thy Sh kinta to dwell with our hosts'. 'And they are separated from the face of Thy Shekintā. confidence that κaì èσkývwσev Thus we may assume with some and caused וְאַשְׁרִי שְׁכִינְתִּיהּ בֵּינָנָא ev uv represents the Aramaic His Sh'kintā to dwell among us'. The choice of the verb σxnvoûv was doubtless largely dictated by its close resemblance to the Semitic root -k-n. The same usage is to be seen in Apoc. 715 καὶ ὁ καθήμενος ἐπὶ τοῦ θρόνου σκηνώσει ἐπ ̓ αὐτούς, 21 Ιδού, ἡ σκηνὴ τοῦ Θεοῦ μετὰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων, καὶ σκηνώσει μετ ̓ αὐτῶν. to O.T. passages. T: καὶ ἐθεασάμεθα τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ. Here we have a clear reference to a second term used in the Targums to describe God's Selfmanifestation to mankind, 77? 'the Glory of the Lord'. The conception of the Yekāra goes back, like that of the Shekintä, In these the Heb. term is Ti Kabhōdh. Thus, Ex. 16, 'Behold, the Glory of the Lord appeared in the cloud'; 246, 'And the Glory of the Lord abode upon mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days'; &c. The Targums employ Yeķārā, like Sh’kīntā, in paraphrasing passages which might, as they stand in the Heb., be taken to describe the actual appearance of God in bodily form. Thus— Heb. Ex. 3' 'And he came to the mountain of God, unto Horeb'. Ex. 36 For he was afraid to look upon God'. Ex. 2410 And they saw the God of Israel'. Targ. 'And he came to the mountain 'For he was afraid to look We sometimes find Sh'kīntā and Yeķārā coupled; 'the Dwelling of the Glory' Isa. 4022 He that sitteth upon the circle of the earth'. Ps. 4424 Wherefore hidest Thou Or, with inversion of order— Isa. 6 For mine eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts'. :ז'ז 'That causeth the Sh ̋kīntā of His Y kārā to dwell in lofty strength'. 'Wherefore causest Thou the Sh' kinta of Thy Yķārā to depart?' 'For mine eye hath seen the Y" ārā of the Sh'kinta of the King of the ages'. This last passage, from Isaiah's vision, leads us to a point which proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that when Jn. describes our Lord's Self-manifestation as Sóέa he has in mind the Yeķārā of the Targums.* In Jn. 120 the writer, after quoting Isa. 6', adds the statement, ταῦτα εἶπεν Ησαίας ὅτι εἶδεν τὴν δόξαν avrov. The opening of the vision (Isa. 6') runs in Heb., 'I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne', and this is rendered in Targ., 'I saw the Yķārā of the Lord resting on His throne'. Other instances in Jn. of δόξα in this sense are, 2 εφανέρωσεν τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ, II* ἐὰν πιστεύσῃς ὄψῃ τὴν δόξαν τοῦ Θεοῦ, 17 ἵνα θεωρῶσιν τὴν δόξαν τὴν ἐμήν. 40 We are now in a position to maintain that the λóyos-conception *Not of course necessarily the written Targums, but at any rate the conceptions which entered into the oral exposition of Scripture called Targum. |