- Plural of representation
The narrative frequently uses plurals
that would normally mean a number of unspecified persons, eg "scribes", "Pharisees",
"Jews", "disciples", "apostles". These mean specific persons in the singular, the
single head of a group or party. He represented his party, so could be spoken of in the
plural in his function as leader. "Scribes" means the Chief Scribe, who in the gospel
period was Judas Iscariot, and after his death his successor. "Pharisees" was the Chief
Pharisee, who in the gospel period was Caiaphas the high priest. "Jews" means
Antipas Herod, a Herod who had adopted all aspects of orthodox Judaism including
ordinary marriage. His position in the system was later taken by other Herods with the
same definition.
"Disciples" means the Chief Disciple, a Gentile. There were two main Gentiles to
whom this term applies, John Mark and James Niceta, one of the "sons of Zebedee."
At the schism of the post-crucifixion period James Niceta replaced John Mark as the
Chief Gentile. In the gospels, the two are distinguished by the addition of "his" to
John Mark, its omission with James Niceta. Thus "his disciples", with "his" referring
to Jesus, is John Mark, and "the disciples" means James Niceta. (James Niceta and
John Aquila were two Gentiles, called "sons of Zebedee " in the gospels, whose
history is given in the
Clementine Homilies 2:19-31, a major source.)
This device is applied even to adjectives. As has been seen in Special Meanings, the
adjective "all", pas in Greek, refers to a royal Herod. When it is used in the plural,
pantes, it means a representative of the Herods. In the gospel period this was Antipas
Herod, who had been the only Herod left in the country after the abolition of the
monarchy. The word is subsequently used of his successors.
- Questions are statements
A general rule is that nothing is to be assumed if there is no word for it. There is to be
no reliance on punctuation, which was not used in the early uncial manuscripts, nor
any subjective judgement about whether some words form a question. Expressions
that may be naturally understood as questions from the context, but do not have the
word meaning "if", are not questions, only statements. For example, in
Luke 23:3
(Clementine Homilies 2:23-24), su
ei ho basileus tōn Ioudaiōn, apparently "Are you the king of the Jews?", is a
statement, "You are the king of the Jews". The sense of this is seen when "him"
preceding it is understood, see below on "rule of the last referent".
- "And" starts a new sentence.
The very frequent use of "and", kai, in the gospel style has been thought to reflect
the Old Testament, where the word "and" appears frequently and unnecessarily, being
a feature of Hebrew grammar rather than simply a copula. This fact gave an
additional function to kai. Since there was no reliance on punctuation, kai was used as
a verbal full stop. It always starts a new sentence. Sometimes it is used with a short
phrase only, but the phrase is still intended to act like an independent sentence.
- Rule of the last referent
The device that makes most demands on pesharists is the rule of the last referent
(RLR). This is a mechanical procedure, disregarding normal Greek usage. The rule is:
"When the subject of a verb or referent of a pronoun is not stated, the referent is the
last occurring person who is of the same person, number and gender that has appeared, even if this is not
the referent that would naturally be assumed. The referent can be in the nominative,
accusative or dative case. Since genitives are regarded as adjectival, a genitive cannot
be the referent."
The application of the rule often makes a significant difference to the meaning. Some
examples are:
In Acts 8:38, ...ho te Philippos.
Kai ho eunouchos. Kai ebaptisen auton."...Philip.
And the eunuch. And he baptised him". The natural meaning is that Philip baptised
the eunuch. But since "eunuch" is the last masculine singular noun appearing before
the verb, the meaning is that the eunuch baptised Philip. This is understood when the
party politics are known.
In John 18:33,
eisēlthen...ho Pilatos. Kai ephōnēsen ton Iēsoun. Kai eipen autō, Su ei
ho basileus tōn Ioudaiōn. Literally, "there came out Pilate. And he called Jesus. And
he said to him, 'You are the king of the Jews'." The subject immediately preceding
the verb eipen is Jesus (in the accusative case). The meaning is therefore that Jesus
said to Pilate, "You are the king of the Jews"- not a question but a statement. This
only makes sense when it is know that the word basileus is used, not for a king, but
for any graduate. Pilate had been admitted as a member, given graduate status, in the
house of Antipas.
In Luke 23:3 Pilate made the statement (not a question) "You are the king of the
Jews" addressed to "him" (auton) just preceding. This "him" refers back to heauton,
"himself" in v.2. As seen in Special Meanings, the word "himself" always has the
special meaning Himself, and is a derisive title for Simon Magus. It was to Simon that
Pilate addressed the statement, meaning that he, like others, was a graduate in the
house of Antipas.
The device of RLR is used in Acts to show the continuing presence of Jesus after the
crucifixion. In
Acts 9:22-23, Saulos.....symbibazōn hoti houtos estin ho
Christos.....synebouleusanto hoi Ioudaioi anelein auton. Literally, "Saul....proving
that this is the Christ... the Jews plotted to kill him". "Him" refers back to the last
singular masculine noun "the Christ", therefore the meaning is that Jesus was present
in Damascus, and an Antipas successor was planning to excommunicate ("kill") him.
In
Acts 7:55-56, Atenisas eis ton ouranon eiden doxan theou. Kai Iēsoun estōta ek
dexiōn tou theou. Kai eipen...(Stephen) staring into heaven saw a glory of God. And
Jesus standing on the right of God. And he said....." . "He" in "he said" means Jesus,
since "of God" is a genitive. The meaning is that Jesus is physically present on a
"heaven", that is a platform where prayers were offered. He was standing beside
"God", an Annas priest, and it was Jesus who spoke quoted words. He was acting as
the deputy of the high priest Theophilus Annas in September 37 AD, when the
episode took place.
- All events successive
In the narrative parts of the text all events are successive. When it appears at first
sight that a previous event is referred to, it is in fact the next event in succession. For
example, in
John 4:46, "He came again to Cana of Galilee, where he made the water
wine". This does not refer back to
John 2:1-10, when Jesus first "made the water
wine", He was now doing it again, because "making water wine" was a way of saying
that he gave the privilege of full initiation to Gentiles who had been limited to
baptism by water. He repeated this action on a further occasion when a Gentile was
present.
In John 10:40, at a date late in his ministry, Jesus "went again across the Jordan to the
place where John was baptising first (hopou ēn Iōannēs to prōton baptizōn). This does
not refer back to
John 1:28, which says that John the Baptist was baptising across the
Jordan at the beginning of Jesus' ministry. It is the next event at a date late in Jesus'
ministry. "First" does not mean "previously" but is always a term for status. But John
the Baptist was dead at the date late in Jesus' ministry. It is found that all uses of the
name John for a priest (not a layman) after the death of the Baptist refer to his
successor as Pope, John II. According to the history given in the
Clementine Homilies 2:23-24,
the successor of John the Baptist, after a short intermediate period, was Simon Magus.
As the new Pope, he brought about a change of policy. He is the one who continued
the baptising ministry in
John 10:40.
The rule that all events are successive applies only to narrative. In quoted speech a
past or future event may be described.
|
