John 8:58 - Grammatical? πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί

Forum rules
Please quote the Greek text you are discussing directly in your post if it is reasonably short - do not ask people to look it up. This is not a beginner's forum, competence in Greek is assumed.
Jason Hare
Posts: 951
Joined: June 2nd, 2011, 5:28 pm
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Contact:

John 8:58 - Grammatical? πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί

Post by Jason Hare »

Hello, friends.

Of course, I'd like to keep this as theologically neutral as possible, so I would ask that no one reply with their opinion of how the verse applies to their views of the Trinity (though this is, unavoidably, the topic that's being discussed on another forum over this verse).

The phrase is:

πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί.

This is my thinking and then I'll place my question:

Obviously, we have two phrases tied together with a preposition and Ἀβραάμ is the accusative subject of the infinitive of the first phrase that follows the preposition.

πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι - before Abraham was/existed/came into existence

I would assume that εἰμί here is supposed to be understood as we would render the present perfect in English: "I have been." This, since it refers both to the past and to the present together and there is no present perfect forms of εἰμί.

Now, the English sentence "I have been before Abraham was" doesn't sound good to my ears. It feels like bad English. "I have been in Tel Aviv before you were born" is just awful. I would say "I lived in Tel Aviv (or, I was in Tel Aviv many times) before you were born." In either case, I would use the past tense, and I think the same is true in this sentence. I would naturally use the past tense.

The way to create the present perfect from this would be to add the word "since" to the construction: "I have been in Tel Aviv since before you were born" makes perfect sense. Likewise, "I have been (existed) since before Abraham was born" is good English.

So, three questions:

(1) Can something like "since" be assumed from the πρίν preposition alone when it comes with a present perfect sense (even if not in form) in the second phrase?

(2) Would there be a better way to express this in Greek if it had been intended?

(3) Could the ungrammatical feel of the sentence (I cannot tell if it is as ungrammatical in Greek as it is in English, thought it still looks weird to me) be intentional as a way to pull in a reference from Exodus 3 with the ἐγὼ εἰμί?

Thanks,
Jason
Jason A. Hare
The Hebrew Café
Tel Aviv, Israel
George F Somsel
Posts: 172
Joined: May 9th, 2011, 10:11 am

Re: John 8:58 - Grammatical? πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί

Post by George F Somsel »

The phrase πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί does seem to be ungrammatical as you stated. It must be noted, however, that the GoJ uses ἐγὼ εἰμί quite frequently (24 times) following Trito-Isaiah where it appears 22 times as a statement regarding God. It is used in the GoJ in order to establish a claim for the divinity of Christ. It is therefore quite deliberate that this form is used even though it is not strictly grammatically correct. I would resist any desire to correct it. As much as we might wish to avoid theology, when a statement is consciously used for a theological purpose, it is unavoidable.
george
gfsomsel



… search for truth, hear truth,
learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
defend the truth till death.



- Jan Hus
Jason Hare
Posts: 951
Joined: June 2nd, 2011, 5:28 pm
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Contact:

Re: John 8:58 - Grammatical? πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί

Post by Jason Hare »

George F Somsel wrote:The phrase πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί does seem to be ungrammatical as you stated. It must be noted, however, that the GoJ uses ἐγὼ εἰμί quite frequently (24 times) following Trito-Isaiah where it appears 22 times as a statement regarding God. It is used in the GoJ in order to establish a claim for the divinity of Christ. It is therefore quite deliberate that this form is used even though it is not strictly grammatically correct. I would resist any desire to correct it. As much as we might wish to avoid theology, when a statement is consciously used for a theological purpose, it is unavoidable.
That's my assumption, too. I'm not thinking about correcting the text, but I'm wondering about other possibilities for saying "since before." I'm aware of ἀφ᾽ ἧς γὰρ οἱ πατέρες ἐκοιμήθησαν, πάντα οὕτως διαμένει ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς κτίσεως (2 Pet 3:4) as an example of "since X happened," but I'm not sure how this could be paired with either πρίν or another "before" conjunction that could possibly be used to say "since before X happened." Are you aware of any other?

Thanks!

The LXX has also καὶ ἀφ᾽ οὗ πεπόρευμαι πρὸς Φαραω λαλῆσαι ἐπὶ τῷ σῷ ὀνόματι, ἐκάκωσεν τὸν λαὸν τοῦτον, καὶ οὐκ ἐρρύσω τὸν λαόν σου (Ex. 5:23) and ἡ δὲ χάλαζα πολλὴ σφόδρα σφόδρα, ἥτις τοιαύτη οὐ γέγονεν ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ ἀφ᾽ οὗ γεγένηται ἐπ᾽ αὐτῆς ἔθνος (Ex. 9:24) among others.
Jason A. Hare
The Hebrew Café
Tel Aviv, Israel
David Lim
Posts: 901
Joined: June 6th, 2011, 6:55 am

Re: John 8:58 - Grammatical? πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί

Post by David Lim »

George F Somsel wrote:It must be noted, however, that the GoJ uses ἐγὼ εἰμί quite frequently (24 times) following Isaiah where it appears 22 times as a statement regarding God. It is used in the GoJ in order to establish a claim for the divinity of Christ.
Well, these are theological assumptions, because "εγω ειμι" is not unique to Isaiah in the LXX, but simply translates the Hebrew "אָנֹכִי" = "I" much of the time. For example, see Gen 23:4, 24:34, 27:32, 30:2, 31:38,41, 45:3,4. Furthermore, it is frequently used not regarding God, such as in 2 Sam 2:20, 13:28, 15:26,28, 20:17, 24:17. Thus these assumptions are not valid in my opinion.
Jason Hare wrote:I would assume that εἰμί here is supposed to be understood as we would render the present perfect in English: "I have been." This, since it refers both to the past and to the present together and there is no present perfect forms of εἰμί.

[...]
I don't see a reason for the assumption at all, because it seems to me that the phrase means "I am earlier than Abraham.", nothing to do with a present perfect "have existed".
Jason Hare wrote:So, three questions:

(1) Can something like "since" be assumed from the πρίν preposition alone when it comes with a present perfect sense (even if not in form) in the second phrase?
I don't think it can be assumed without reference to the context. For example, John 14:29 has "και νυν ειρηκα υμιν πριν γενεσθαι ινα οταν γενηται πιστευσητε" = "and now I have said to you before [it] comes to be, so that you might believe when [it] comes to be." Anyway as I said, I don't believe "ειμι" in John 8:58 has any perfect sense.
Jason Hare wrote:(2) Would there be a better way to express this in Greek if it had been intended?
αμην αμην λεγω υμιν πριν αβρααμ γενεσθαι ημην και εως του νυν ετι ειμι
The imperfect can be used for the past tense regardless of whether the statement is true in the present (John 11:15, 16:4). Thus I think this is one way to convey "I existed since before Abraham came to be." = "I existed before Abraham came to be, and even until now I still exist.".
Jason Hare wrote:(3) Could the ungrammatical feel of the sentence (I cannot tell if it is as ungrammatical in Greek as it is in English, thought it still looks weird to me) be intentional as a way to pull in a reference from Exodus 3 with the ἐγὼ εἰμί?
I don't think John 8:58 is ungrammatical at all, because "πριν αβρααμ γενεσθαι" adverbially modifies "ειμι" and it is placed in front so as to emphasize it. (It is not always the first clause; see John 4:49, 14:29, Acts 2:20.)

Did I get anything wrong?
δαυιδ λιμ
Eeli Kaikkonen
Posts: 611
Joined: June 2nd, 2011, 7:49 am
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: John 8:58 - Grammatical? πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί

Post by Eeli Kaikkonen »

This subject has been discussed in the old mailing list. They can be found by searching for "bgreek john 8:58" or something similar. It's needless to say that discussions didn't end well...

But now some musings of my own. The best explanation to say that it's correct, normal grammar is the "extending from past" present (as Wallace names the category). The problem is that the clause is unlike the undisputed examples. There's no logic in that explanation. The deeper problem is that the EFPP category hasn't actually been researched very deeply and has been understood incorrectly, IMHO. I have been trying to write a some kind of essay or paper (very unofficial, never journal quality) about it, but it's in so bad shape that I don't want to publish it in any form. One of the biggest problems is that I don't have enough examples, so if anyone can find an EFPP in extrabiblical Koine literature I would be very thankful.

And the answers for your questions:

(1) My strong opinion, based on quite deep pondering and research, is "no". To say otherwise requires examples, and at the moment I don't believe there are any. The preposition means "before", not "since before". Claiming that it can mean "since before" is utter folly, unless clear examples can be shown.

(2) At least some commentators say that using imperfect tense would have been grammatically and semantically natural. It would have meant, of course, that Jesus spoke about the time before Abraham: "I was there already". Not "I have been and am even now". But do you mean "natural way to say 'since before'"?

(3) Most (good) commentators agree that Ex 3 isn't probably in view, simply because the wording there is different. Isaiahs "I am" statements are discussed instead.
Jason Hare
Posts: 951
Joined: June 2nd, 2011, 5:28 pm
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Contact:

Re: John 8:58 - Grammatical? πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί

Post by Jason Hare »

Eeli Kaikkonen wrote:(1) My strong opinion, based on quite deep pondering and research, is "no". To say otherwise requires examples, and at the moment I don't believe there are any. The preposition means "before", not "since before". Claiming that it can mean "since before" is utter folly, unless clear examples can be shown.
That's what I suspected, which turns this isn't a grammatical problem.
Eeli Kaikkonen wrote:(2) At least some commentators say that using imperfect tense would have been grammatically and semantically natural. It would have meant, of course, that Jesus spoke about the time before Abraham: "I was there already". Not "I have been and am even now". But do you mean "natural way to say 'since before'"?
I also thought of that option. To say ἤμην instead of εἰμί would have been clearer, if that's what he meant, and it would have saved us from the mess that the verse is in.
Eeli Kaikkonen wrote:(3) Most (good) commentators agree that Ex 3 isn't probably in view, simply because the wording there is different. Isaiahs "I am" statements are discussed instead.
That's what George mentioned before. A much more plausible suggestion. Thanks to you both.
Jason A. Hare
The Hebrew Café
Tel Aviv, Israel
Jason Hare
Posts: 951
Joined: June 2nd, 2011, 5:28 pm
Location: Tel Aviv, Israel
Contact:

Re: John 8:58 - Grammatical? πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί

Post by Jason Hare »

David Lim wrote:
George F Somsel wrote:It must be noted, however, that the GoJ uses ἐγὼ εἰμί quite frequently (24 times) following Isaiah where it appears 22 times as a statement regarding God. It is used in the GoJ in order to establish a claim for the divinity of Christ.
Well, these are theological assumptions, because "εγω ειμι" is not unique to Isaiah in the LXX, but simply translates the Hebrew "אָנֹכִי" = "I" much of the time. For example, see Gen 23:4, 24:34, 27:32, 30:2, 31:38,41, 45:3,4. Furthermore, it is frequently used not regarding God, such as in 2 Sam 2:20, 13:28, 15:26,28, 20:17, 24:17. Thus these assumptions are not valid in my opinion.
And that is certainly your opinion, but it's not necessarily the correct opinion. Do you make nothing of the fact that the verse is grammatically problematic? The desire to incorporate the ἐγὼ εἰμί phrase might have lent to the author's leniency toward clear grammar, don't you think?
David Lim wrote:
Jason Hare wrote:I would assume that εἰμί here is supposed to be understood as we would render the present perfect in English: "I have been." This, since it refers both to the past and to the present together and there is no present perfect forms of εἰμί.

[...]
I don't see a reason for the assumption at all, because it seems to me that the phrase means "I am earlier than Abraham.", nothing to do with a present perfect "have existed".
Because πρίν doesn't mean "earlier than." This is not a temporal comparative phrase.
David Lim wrote:
Jason Hare wrote:So, three questions:

(1) Can something like "since" be assumed from the πρίν preposition alone when it comes with a present perfect sense (even if not in form) in the second phrase?
I don't think it can be assumed without reference to the context. For example, John 14:29 has "και νυν ειρηκα υμιν πριν γενεσθαι ινα οταν γενηται πιστευσητε" = "and now I have said to you before [it] comes to be, so that you might believe when [it] comes to be." Anyway as I said, I don't believe "ειμι" in John 8:58 has any perfect sense.
Yes, before, as would be expected. This is not the same as the other verse.
David Lim wrote:
Jason Hare wrote:(2) Would there be a better way to express this in Greek if it had been intended?
αμην αμην λεγω υμιν πριν αβρααμ γενεσθαι ημην και εως του νυν ετι ειμι
The imperfect can be used for the past tense regardless of whether the statement is true in the present (John 11:15, 16:4). Thus I think this is one way to convey "I existed since before Abraham came to be." = "I existed before Abraham came to be, and even until now I still exist.".
Thanks for that.
David Lim wrote:
Jason Hare wrote:(3) Could the ungrammatical feel of the sentence (I cannot tell if it is as ungrammatical in Greek as it is in English, thought it still looks weird to me) be intentional as a way to pull in a reference from Exodus 3 with the ἐγὼ εἰμί?
I don't think John 8:58 is ungrammatical at all, because "πριν αβρααμ γενεσθαι" adverbially modifies "ειμι" and it is placed in front so as to emphasize it. (It is not always the first clause; see John 4:49, 14:29, Acts 2:20.)

Did I get anything wrong?
But how can εἰμί (present indicative) be modified by a past tense adverbial without it taking on some past tense or present perfect sense? It doesn't make sense.
Jason A. Hare
The Hebrew Café
Tel Aviv, Israel
Eeli Kaikkonen
Posts: 611
Joined: June 2nd, 2011, 7:49 am
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: John 8:58 - Grammatical? πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί

Post by Eeli Kaikkonen »

Jason Hare wrote:But how can εἰμί (present indicative) be modified by a past tense adverbial without it taking on some past tense or present perfect sense? It doesn't make sense.
+1. And for any suggested understanding for this sentence, I require clear parallels/examples. They must be of form "A + B" or "B + A" where A is a temporal clause with a word or phrase which semantically means "before" (usually πριν or προ του in Koine) and B is main clause where the main verb is in the present tense. Hint: you can find some in the LXX, but they lead to certain theological conclusions. Those temporal words or phrases are rare enough to search for and check all of them. Unfortunately because of lack of resources I haven't been able to check them in extrabiblical Koine literature - would someone who has access to full TLG corpus be willing to do it? Only if examples can be shown I'm willing to believe that the sentence is grammatically normal.

BTW, this topic doesn't belong to beginner's section.
Stephen Carlson
Posts: 3351
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: John 8:58 - Grammatical? πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί

Post by Stephen Carlson »

Eeli Kaikkonen wrote:BTW, this topic doesn't belong to beginner's section.
Moved
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
SusanJeffers
Posts: 69
Joined: June 3rd, 2011, 8:49 am
Contact:

Re: John 8:58 - Grammatical? πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί

Post by SusanJeffers »

"Could the ungrammatical feel of the sentence (I cannot tell if it is as ungrammatical in Greek as it is in English, thought it still looks weird to me) be intentional as a way to pull in a reference from Exodus 3 with the ἐγὼ εἰμί?"

I say, emphatically, yes. Exodus 3 as well as Isaiah, as George S. says.

For what it's worth -- I'm a theological and grammatical minimalist -- I don't go so far as to say that "It is used in the GoJ in order to establish a claim for the divinity of Christ" -- however, some years back I took on a verse-by-verse examination of all the εγω ειμι statements in John's gospel, and many of the εγω ειμι statements elsewhere in the LXX/GNT. I concluded that, at least in this book, at least when uttered by Jesus, this is a very special formula, NOT used in the mundane sense found in other characters' mouths elsewhere in the LXX/GNT. The εγω refers to himself, Jesus, and the εγω ειμι is meant to echo Ex 3 and Isaiah.

I think of Jesus saying εγω ειμι in John as being grammatically analogous to "Presto!" or "Wow!" or "ta-da!" with the εγω referring to ... himself... and the whole εγω ειμι one with both Ex 3 and Isaiah all the other εγω ειμι's that Jesus utters in John's gospel, e.g. just to name a few Jn 4:26, 6:20, 35, 41, 48, 51, 8:12 etc

If I were writing my own colloquial translation of John's gospel, I would leave εγω ειμι as "I am" but I'd put all of the ones that Jesus utters in a special large bold type-face and include a footnote to Ex 3 and some of the key Isaiah verses so the reader "gets" that it's a special formula. So:

Before Abraham existed, I am.

But the reader only gets that the phrase is special if you do that for all of its occurrences in John's gospel, and if the reader gets that the phrase was already special before John's gospel existed.
Post Reply

Return to “New Testament”