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.
542 MARTIJN STEEGEN
At first sight, the reading yıov toy ueoy may seem preferable
Ωù ˜ ˜
since 9,35 is the only occurrence in the Fourth Gospel where the
expression yΩov toy anurwpoy is used as the object of belief
ıù ˜ß ¥
(pisteyein eıv) 24. The yıov toy ueoy by contrast occurs regularly
Ωù ˜ ˜
¥ ß
throughout the Gospel as the object of belief (cf. 1,34.49; 3,18;
11,27 ; 20,31). However, the strong textual support for the reading
of yıov toy anurwpoy makes the reading yıov toy ueoy highly
Ωù ˜ß ¥ Ωù ˜ ˜
unlikely 25.
It is our opinion that the absence of 9,38-39a was not because
Jesus could not be the direct object of the proskynew by the man
Â¥
born blind. If one reads the absence of 9,38-39a in combination
with the variant reading of 9,35 (yıov toy anurwpoy or yıov toy
Ωù ˜ß ¥ Ωù ˜
ueoy) and if one considers Jesus’ question to the healed man (sy
˜ ù
pisteyeiv eıv ton yıon toy anurwpoy), the text-critical problem
¥ ß ù Ωù ˜ß ¥
is not so much concentrated on Jesus himself as on his designation
as the yıov toy anurwpoy. For it is reasonable to suppose that the
Ωù ˜ß ¥
designation of Jesus as the yıov toy anurwpoy was felt to be too
Ωù ˜ß ¥
weak after the healing of the man born blind and in the context of
coming to belief. In the Greek as well as in the Latin Patristic
traditions, the designation yıov toy anurwpoy was first interpreted
Ωù ˜ß ¥
as referring to Jesus’ humanity and the designation yıov toy ueoy
Ωù ˜ ˜
as referring to his divinity 26.
See for example J. BLIGH, “Four Studies in John I. The Man born
24
Blind â€, HeyJ 7 (1966) 141-142. He defends the reading “Son of God†in place
of “Son of Manâ€.
See F.J. MOLONEY, The Johannine Son of Man (Eugene, OR 21978) 149.
25
Also “the Committee†classified the reading of yıov toy anurwpoy as
Ωù ˜ß
“ virtually certainâ€. “The external support for anurwpoy is so weighty, and the
ß
improbability of ueoy being altered to ueoy is so great, that the Committee
˜ ˜
regarded the reading adopted for the text as virtually certain.†See METZGER, A
Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 194.
F.J. MOLONEY, “The Johannine Son of Man Revisitedâ€, Theology and
26
Christology in the Fourth Gospel. Essays by the Members of the SNTS
Johannine Writings Seminar (eds. G. VAN BELLE – J.G. VAN DER WATT –
P. MARITZ) (BETL 184; Leuven 2005) 201-202. He refers to Ignatius,
Ephesians, 20.2; Letter of Barnabas, 12,10. According to Moloney this
distinction becomes almost axiomatic in both Greek and Latin patristic writers.
See also R. MADDOX, “The Function of the Son of Man in the Gospel of
John â€, Reconciliation and Hope. New Testament Essays on Atonement and
Eschatology Presented to L.L. Morris on his 60th Birthday (ed. R.J. BANKS)
(Exeter 1974) 189; M. PAMMENT, “The Son of Man in the Fourth Gospelâ€,
FOLLOW US