EGO EIMI, part I

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

In your message of Tue, 19 Dec 1995 10:51:23 -0600 (CST) you said:

To:  ormsbee@MIT.EDU
Subject:  Re: EGO EIMI, part I (was Re: Re: Two wills or One will?)
Date:  Tue, 19 Dec 1995 10:51:23 -0600 (CST)
From:  Mike Murphy <tes@moscom.com>


>>Bultmann's categorization of the uses of ego eimi are drawn from several 
>>ancient greek sources - not just the Bible. He presents four possible 
>>shades of meaning (From Raymond Brown's commentary, Index IV, mentioned 
>>earlier):
>>a) *Introduction*, answering the question, "who are you?" ex. Gen. 17:1 
>"I 
>>Am El Shaddai" [also your "blind guy" before the Pharisees] 
>>b) *description* of the subject, answering the question, "What are you?", 
>>ex. Ez 28:2, the king of Tyre says, "I am a god." 
>>c) *Identifikationsformel*, where the speaker identifies himself with 
>>another person or thing. Bultmann cites a saying of Isis, "I am all that 
>>has been, that is, and that will be." The predicate sums up the identity 
>>of the subject. 
>>and d) *a formula*, separates the subject from others. It answers the 
>>question, "Who is the one who...?" with the response, "It is I." This is 
>>where the "I" is really a predicate.

>So the last is clearly the category in which Jesus spoke, as evidenced by
>the blind man and his usage when the disciples saw him coming on the sea 
>and
>thought he was some kind of ghost, and he said, "Fear not, It is I". or,
>"Ego Aimi", meaning, not, "I am the OT God" (an absurdity), but rather,
>"It's me guys".

Mike, you're quite correct in that the ego eimi in John 6:20 and John 9:6 
(Jesus walking upon Galilean Sea and the blind man, respectively) represent 
the common "secular" use of the term.  I have absolutely no problem with 
this. These are both fine examples of this particular category, I grant you 
that. :) (BTW, you meant category a, not d. See below.)  I wasn't 
attempting to claim that *each and every* "ego eimi" out of Jesus' mouth 
had significant religious implications.  I was going to get to that.
  
My point was that each scriptural scenario should be taken in it's *own* 
context. One cannot simply cite John 6:20, 9:6 in order to dismiss John 
8:58, 18:5. Or vice versa.  One type of usage in some scriptures in no way 
diminishes the force of other types of usages in other passages. Each 
biblical context carries it's own weight. This is especially crucial to 
remember when dealing with a phrase with the extremely diverse semantic 
range as ego eimi.  It's just naive to think that one scripture 
"over-rides" another when it comes to translation or exegesis.

Lastly, I owe you and the list a more thorough explanation of the Bultmann 
categories, because they're only adding more confusion:

1. First, Bultmann's categorization of ego eimi usages should not be 
thought of as a fool-proof guide to translation/exegesis.  They are simply 
a general listing of it's various usages in the OT, NT and pagan writings. 
There are some contexts in which it is quite difficult to tell what *one* 
meaning was intended.
2. Category d (formula) is the one that really has the more significant 
religious overtones. "Separates the subject from others" means the speaker 
is holier, or somehow set apart from others.  The response, "It is I" is 
*implicit* and not necessarily translated as such. i.e. Every time you see 
an "it is I" in the Bible does *not* indicate the fourth category. In fact 
it is most likely category "a", answering the implied question, "who are 
you?"  The fourth category is the most difficult one to translate and seems 
incomplete in a sentence.  
3. Don't be fooled into thinking the lack of an expressed predicate 
automatically puts the ego eimi into the fourth category. It could easily 
fall under *any* category. In other words, ego eimi could be understood as 
under category a,b or c even though the predicate is not actually stated. 
The predicate can be just understood, as with the blind man, or Jesus on 
the sea. (although, Jesus on the sea is a borderline case) Only the fourth 
category is where the subject *acts* as it's own predicate!
4. Forget about Bultmann's categories. The different usages of ego eimi can 
be seen in the Biblical texts themselves.

I hope this helps!

Wishing everyone a "Christ-filled-Christmas", 

Charles Ormsbee