[B-Greek] Here we go again (Luke 22:70)

Mark Lightman lightmanmark at yahoo.com
Fri Oct 29 21:03:19 EDT 2010


"There you go again..."

Ronald Reagan, October, 1980.

Blue wrote:

<maybe Luke is actually 
having Jesus reply, *You speak, because I am [he].>

Hi, Blue,

If true, this would be a type of pun on the word ὅτι.  Your argument would be 
stronger if John were the writer, where these types of double meanings are more 
common.  Joking around with people who are thinking about putting you to death 
is a Greek tradition as old as Socrates, so maybe Luke is having a little fun 
here.

 Mark L
Φωσφορος


FWSFOROS MARKOS




________________________________
From: Blue Meeksbay <bluemeeksbay at yahoo.com>
To: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Sent: Fri, October 29, 2010 10:22:24 AM
Subject: [B-Greek] Here we go again (Luke 22:70)

On  Thu Aug 11 06:53:09 EDT 2005 Carl Conrad wrote:
 
Here we go again: I'm not complaining, just commenting. Seems to me  
this is a question that won't ever be resolved to everyone's  
satisfaction. Some are fully confident that they know exactly what  
this means while others (myself included) can only admit to endless  
puzzlement. My own inclination (not by any means a firm conclusion)  
is that the ambiguity is intentional.
 
This was found in the archives. For those who may not know, (I did not know 
until Carl did one of his helpful posts), the archives can be found at 
http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/archives/index.html   where a google search can be 

done. It has a wealth of information.
 
Carl was commenting on the thread entitled  Luke 22:70 & 23:3 'you say'?   I 
agree with him that this question probably will never be resolved to everyone’s 
satisfaction. (Here comes the *Here we go again*) Nevertheless, I had one final 
comment/question. : > ) 
 
LUKE 22:70 EIPAN DE PANTES• SU OUN EI hO hUIOS TOU QEOU; hO DE PROS AUTOUS EFH• 
hUMEIS LEGETE hOTI EGW EIMI.
 
I realize that after verbs of knowing and saying hOTI normally introduces an 
indirect statement. However, sometimes it seems, even after a verb of saying, 
hOTI is used to introduce a causal phrase.
 
NEHEMIAH 6:8 KAI APESTEILA PROS AUTON LEGWN OUK EGENHQH hWS hOI LOGOI hOUTOI 
hOUS   *SU LEGEIS  hOTI APO KARDIAS SOU SU YEUDHi AUTOUS.*
 
Cf. also I Maccabees 13:18; Jer. 1:6 and Gen. 3:17.
 
If this is true, and, indeed, there are some exceptions, maybe Luke is actually 
having Jesus reply, *You speak, because I am [he].  

 
In other words, Jesus is indirectly affirming that the reason why his accusers 
are able to question and speak to him in such an authoritative manner, (being 
part of the Sanhedrin), is because he was indeed the Christ, the Son of the 
Blessed, the one who would sit at the right hand of the power of God. It was he 
who gave them the authority they possessed; they thought they were the ones 
possessing the power and authority, but Jesus was declaring to them their power 
and authority was derived from him. He was the one who actually gave them the 
right to sit in Moses’ chair and *speak.*   

 
MATTHEW 23:2-3 LEGWN, EPI THS MWSEWS KAQEDRAS EKAQISAN hOI GRAMMATEIS KAI hOI 
FARISAIOI•  PANTA OUN hOSA EAN    EIPWSIN     hUMIN POIHSATE KAI THREITE, KATA 
DE TA ERGA AUTWN MH POIEITE• LEGOUSIN GAR KAI OU POIOUSIN.
 
If this is what Jesus is saying, it seems it would be a similar concept spoken 
to Pilate in John 19:10-11.  Obviously, they would take offence at such a 
declaration.
  
I realize all the other occurrences of the exact phrase hUMEIS LEGETE hOTI in 
the GNT do not introduce a casual phrase (Jn. 4:20,35;8:54; 9:19; 10:36), 
however, perhaps, this might be one of the exceptions.?
 
Sincerely,
Blue Harris
 
P.S. I noticed that the Clementine Vulgate 1598 gives Luke 22:70 as the 
following – Dixerunt autem omnes: Tu ergo es Filius Dei? Qui ait: Vos dicitis, 
quia ego sum. 

 
From my almost non-existent knowledge of Latin, it seems quia can also be used 
in the sense of *that;*  if this is so, why would they put a comma after 
dicitis? By use of the comma are they are also indicating, (in their opinion), 
that quia might also be understood in the casual sense of *because?*  Is this 
their way of bringing ambiguity into the text? 

 
This seems to be the only edition of the Vulgate that I can find with a comma 
after dicitis. 



      
---
B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek



      


More information about the B-Greek mailing list