In a recent group study of John 12, an interesting question came up concerning verse 32. Let's look at several translations of the verse (incidentally, including each version's use of caps or no caps for God's pronouns). Jesus is speaking:
"And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me" (KJV).
"And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself " (NIV).
"And I, if and when I am lifted up from the earth [on the cross], will draw all people to Myself [Gentiles, as well as Jews]" (AMP 2015).
Do you see it? If in some places, when in others? A reasonable hypothesis would be that the Greek word has connotations of both English words, each translation committee made its respective decision, and that the Amplified includes both because that's what the Amplified does: offer as many shades of meaning for key Hebrew and Greek terms as possible.
The concern raised was that Jesus obviously knew He was going to the cross, so why would he say if, as if this were in doubt? We proposed that Jesus might have been using if/then logic, we looked up the meaning of the Greek word for if in Strong's Concordance and found it is indeed a "conditional particle," we brought up that Jewish thought has less trouble with seeming paradoxes than our Western either/or way of thinking, and we pointed out that Jesus had free will and could have said no to the cross. None of us believed He would have considered going against the Father's will for even a moment, but in Gethsemane He did ask for the cup to pass if that were possible. And when Jesus was arrested and Peter cut off the ear of the high priest's slave, Jesus said to him, "Do you think that I cannot appeal to My Father and He will immediately provide Me with more than twelve legions of angels" (Matthew 26:53)? Finally, we know Jesus' life wasn't taken from Him. Rather, Jesus gave up His spirit (Matthew 27:50). Jesus explains more in John 10:18--"No one takes it [His life] away from Me, but I lay it down voluntarily. I am authorized and have power to lay it down and to give it up, and I am authorized and have power to take it back. This command I have received from My Father" (AMP 2015). So yes, Jesus could have said no. He could have called down angelic help at any time. Of course, we know beyond a shadow of a doubt that He had no intention of doing less than the Father's complete and perfect will.
The morning after this discussion, I was in the shower, and I mention this because if you're anything like me, the ideas, thoughts, and solutions start flowing when the water starts flowing. Suddenly I was singing under my breath a song from decades ago: "Let's lift up Jesus, let's lift up Jesus, lift Him up for the world to see; He said IF I be lifted up from the earth, I will draw all men unto me." IF. Almost certainly the composer of this little song was following the KJV wording. But what if they had chosen when? Now, for all I know the song was written before the first NIV came out in 1978, but let's try this anyway:
"He said WHEN I be lifted up from the earth, I will draw all men unto me."
This is what the NIV is saying, although for some reason the song made it hit home more. For reasons probably best known to the Lord, I then began to think about my mathematics training and the concept of "necessary and sufficient conditions." In short, the statement "When I be lifted up [then] I will draw all men," taken at face value, means that His being lifted up is a sufficient but not necessary condition for drawing all men. In other words, His being lifted up will certainly draw all men, but it cannot be concluded solely from the when/then statement that He must be lifted up--must go to the cross--for that to happen.
Whoa.
If Jesus already knew he would ask in Gethsemane for another way if that were God's will, that could explain why the word when, in the above statement, might accurately convey His meaning. But I'm more persuaded to believe that Jesus never intended to imply there could be any other way. As much as Jesus the man wouldn't have wanted to go to the cross, He was never confused about the master plan, and He was never less than One with the Father. So at this point, the word when alone, though we consider it a surer word than if, seems to be the weaker word of the two, because logically it allows uncomfortable wiggle room about whether the cross is actually required.
At this point I knew it was time to rest the speculation and pull out my concordance. The Greek word for "if" is ean, pronounced eh-AN, according to Strong's, and that same Greek word can also mean when. As mentioned above, Strong's Concordance says that, in terms of grammar, ean is a conditional particle. We may think the word "conditional" suggests that if is the more correct translation, but in fact the word when can also be a conditional particle in certain usages. Specifically, in sentences that express known truths, if and when can be used interchangeably without really altering meaning.
If you drop a brick, it will hit the ground.
When you drop a brick, it will hit the ground.
If you strike a match, it ignites.
When you strike a match, it ignites.
Can you argue that these sentences don't mean exactly the same thing? Sure. But I think you'll agree that in everyday speech, both the "if" and "when" sentences will get the same meaning across equally well.
To close, let's go back to necessary and sufficient conditions. Jesus said that going to the cross would draw us to Himself (the cross was sufficient), but did He say He must go to the cross for that to happen (the cross was necessary)? I believe He did. Because the Greek word ean can be translated "provided." I think Jesus was saying, "And I, provided I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to Myself."
No comments:
Post a Comment