“`html
body { font-family: ‘Palatino Linotype’, ‘Book Antiqua’, Palatino, serif; line-height: 1.6; margin: 2em; background-color: #fdfdfd; color: #333; }
h2, h3 { color: #2c3e50; border-bottom: 1px solid #ddd; padding-bottom: 0.3em; margin-top: 1.5em; }
blockquote { background-color: #f8f8f8; border-left: 4px solid #ccc; margin: 1.5em 0; padding: 0.5em 1em; color: #555; font-style: italic; }
ul, ol { margin-left: 1.5em; }
li { margin-bottom: 0.5em; }
p { margin-bottom: 1em; text-align: justify; }
b { font-weight: bold; }
i { font-style: italic; }
An Exegetical Analysis of Luke 22:70: The Nuances of Jesus’ Affirmation
This exegetical study of An Exegetical Analysis of Luke 22:70: The Nuances of Jesus’ Affirmation is based on a b-greek discussion from October 26, 2023. The initial discussion centered on the precise interpretation of Jesus’ response to the Sanhedrin’s question concerning his identity as the Son of God in Luke 22:70. Participants questioned whether the Greek phrase Ὑμεῖς λέγετε ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι (Hymeis legete hoti egō eimi) constitutes an unqualified affirmative, a nuanced affirmation, or a rhetorical evasion, contrasting its potential implications with parallels in the other Gospels.
The main exegetical issue under examination is the exact semantic range and pragmatic force of Jesus’ statement, “You say that I am.” This seemingly simple reply holds significant theological and historical weight, as it is a crucial moment in Jesus’ trial before the Jewish authorities. Interpreters grapple with whether Jesus is directly confirming the title “Son of God” for himself, acknowledging their statement as true without explicitly endorsing their language, or if his response is a subtle redirection designed to avoid a direct, legally actionable confession, while still conveying his true identity to those with ears to hear. The grammatical structure, lexical choices, and rhetorical context are key to unlocking its intended meaning.
Εἶπον δὲ πάντες, Σὺ οὖν εἶ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ; Ὁ δὲ πρὸς αὐτοὺς ἔφη, Ὑμεῖς λέγετε ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι.
(Nestle, E. (1904). Novum Testamentum Graece. Stuttgart: Privilegierte Württembergische Bibelanstalt.)
Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):
- There are no substantial textual differences in Luke 22:70 between the Nestle 1904 edition and the SBL Greek New Testament (2010). Both editions present the same Greek text for this verse, indicating a strong consensus among textual traditions for this particular passage.
Textual Criticism (NA28) and Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG):
The critical apparatus of the Nestle-Aland 28th Edition (NA28) offers no significant textual variants for Luke 22:70 that impact its semantic content. The consensus among manuscripts for the phrase Ὑμεῖς λέγετε ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι is robust, suggesting its originality. Therefore, exegetical focus must reside on the interpretation of the established text rather than on variant readings.
Lexically, several terms warrant attention:
- λέγετε (legete): The verb λέγω (legō) means “to say, to speak, to tell.” In this context, the present indicative active `λέγετε` (second person plural) highlights an ongoing or present state of their saying. BDAG (p. 586) defines λέγω broadly, but for declarative statements, it often functions as a simple assertion. However, in responses like this, it can carry nuances of agreement, confirmation, or even qualified acceptance of the premise. KITTEL (TDNT Vol. 4, p. 75) emphasizes the broad range of λέγω, from simple communication to authoritative proclamation, underscoring the need for contextual analysis.
- ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ (ho huios tou theou): “The Son of God.” This is a messianic and divine title. BDAG (p. 1029) notes its use as a designation for Jesus, referring to his unique relationship with God as Father, implying divine nature and authority. The Sanhedrin’s question is direct, probing Jesus’ claim to a title with both political (Messiah) and theological (divine sonship) implications, which could be construed as blasphemy.
- ἐγώ εἰμι (egō eimi): “I am.” This phrase carries significant theological weight. While it can simply mean “I exist,” its use in the Septuagint (LXX) as a translation for the divine self-designation in Exodus 3:14 (אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה, rendered as ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν) and its recurring use in John’s Gospel as absolute claims of divinity (e.g., John 8:58) elevate its potential meaning beyond a simple existential statement. BDAG (p. 280) acknowledges this dual function, noting that it can be a simple predicate or an absolute divine claim. KITTEL (TDNT Vol. 2, pp. 398-400) provides extensive discussion on ἐγώ εἰμι, tracing its roots to the divine name and its profound significance in early Christian Christology, indicating self-disclosure of divine identity. The presence of the emphatic personal pronoun ἐγώ preceding the verb `εἰμι` lends further emphasis to the “I” of the statement.
Translation Variants
The grammatical structure of Jesus’ response, Ὑμεῖς λέγετε ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι, presents a direct second-person plural subject (“you all”) performing the action of “saying,” followed by a subordinate clause introduced by ὅτι (“that”) which contains an emphatic first-person singular statement (“I am”). The conjunction ὅτι can introduce either a direct quotation or an indirect statement. In this context, it is typically understood as introducing an indirect statement, “that I am,” rather than a direct quote of their exact words, “I am.” Rhetorically, the emphasis on Ὑμεῖς (“You”) at the beginning of the clause is crucial. It places the burden of the statement on the interrogators, even if Jesus assents to the truth of what they imply.
Different English translations reflect various interpretations of this rhetorical nuance:
- Some translations render it as a strong affirmation, focusing on the content of the statement: “You are right in saying that I am” (NIV). This interpretation understands Jesus’ reply as an implicit, yet clear, “Yes,” acknowledging the truth of the Sanhedrin’s question. The emphasis on “you say” is seen as a way to acknowledge their verbalization of a truth that Jesus knows about himself.
- Other translations convey a more ambiguous or qualified affirmation: “You say that I am” (ESV, KJV). This rendering maintains the literal word order and emphasis, leaving a slight open-endedness. It highlights that they are the ones making the declaration, which Jesus then does not deny, but also does not explicitly rephrase into a simple “I am.” This approach might suggest Jesus is affirming his identity while also highlighting their role in perceiving and articulating it, or perhaps alluding to their inability to fully grasp its implications.
- A third approach might lean towards an affirmation that carries a sense of “You have said it, and so it is” or “What you say is true” (NABRE, NRSV footnote). This interpretation bridges the gap, seeing the deferral to “you say” as a rabbinic way of confirming the statement without uttering it in the first person directly, which could be a strategic move given the charges against him. It implies an affirmation by agreement with their formulation.
Conclusions and Translation Suggestions
The exegesis of Luke 22:70 reveals that Jesus’ response, Ὑμεῖς λέγετε ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι, is most likely a nuanced affirmation of his divine sonship. While not a simple “Yes,” it avoids outright denial and, given the emphatic ἐγώ εἰμι, implicitly endorses the truth of their assertion. The emphasis on “you” (Ὑμεῖς) serves both to acknowledge their role in the accusation and to subtly highlight that the truth is evident to them, even as they condemn him. This response is rhetorically astute, affirming his identity while navigating the legal and political dangers of a direct, unqualified self-proclamation before a hostile court.
- “You state correctly that I am.”
This translation emphasizes the truthfulness of their assertion, suggesting Jesus confirms their perception without explicitly using their precise words, thus affirming his identity. - “It is as you say: I am.”
This option conveys a more direct agreement with the content of their statement, while still acknowledging that they are the ones who articulated it. It highlights both their formulation and his assent. - “You yourselves say that I am.”
This rendering captures the emphatic nature of Ὑμεῖς, implying that the truth of his identity is so self-evident that even his accusers are compelled to utter it, and he does not dispute it.
“`
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 http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/archives/index.html%C2%A0%C2%A0 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.
========
“There you go again…”
Ronald Reagan, October, 1980.
Blue wrote:
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
Ancient Greek Joke
Mortal: What is a million years like to you?
Zeus: Like one second.
Mortal: What is a million dollars like to you?
Zeus: Like one penny.
Mortal: Can I have a million dollars?
Zeus: Just a second…
========
Hi Mark,
I just stumbled across this book on google by A.T. Robertson: The student’s
chronological New Testament: text of the American Standard.
http://books.google.com/books?id=_-4oAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA18&lpg=PA18&dq=luke+22:70+%22because+i+am%22&source=bl&ots=4FG6ER32JO&sig=DMYL0fyrbd6G2UYehOqFIsbNGd0&hl=en&ei=eSLMTITaPIHmsQOu2O2FDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10&ved=0CDAQ6AEwCTgK#v=onepage&q=luke%2022%3A70%20%22because%20i%20am%22&f=false
The note under Luke 22:70 says, *Or, Ye say it, because I am.* At first I
thought it was a note by Robertson, but I think it is just the note of the
translators of the 1901 American Standard Version.
Per your suggestion, maybe in Luke we have the mocking referred to in Psalm 2:4.
: > )
PARESTHSAN hOI BASILEIS THS GHS KAI hOI ARCONTES SUNHCQHSAN EPI TO AUTO KATA TOU
KURIOU KAI KATA TOU CRISTOU AUTOU DIAYALMA
hO KATOIKWN EN OURANOIS EKGELASETAI AUTOUS KAI hO KURIOS EKMUKTHRIEI AUTOUS
Psalm 2:2,4
The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers gathered themselves together,
against the Lord, and against his Christ;
He that dwells in the heavens shall laugh them to scorn, and the Lord shall mock
them. Psalm 2:2,4
Best regards,
Blue Harris
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 http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/archives/index.html%C2%A0%C2%A0 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.
========
“There you go again…”
Ronald Reagan, October, 1980.
Blue wrote:
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
Ancient Greek Joke
Mortal: What is a million years like to you?
Zeus: Like one second.
Mortal: What is a million dollars like to you?
Zeus: Like one penny.
Mortal: Can I have a million dollars?
Zeus: Just a second…
========
Hi Mark,
I just stumbled across this book on google by A.T. Robertson: The student’s
chronological New Testament: text of the American Standard.
http://books.google.com/books?id=_-4oAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA18&lpg=PA18&dq=luke+22:70+%22because+i+am%22&source=bl&ots=4FG6ER32JO&sig=DMYL0fyrbd6G2UYehOqFIsbNGd0&hl=en&ei=eSLMTITaPIHmsQOu2O2FDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10&ved=0CDAQ6AEwCTgK#v=onepage&q=luke%2022%3A70%20%22because%20i%20am%22&f=false
The note under Luke 22:70 says, *Or, Ye say it, because I am.* At first I
thought it was a note by Robertson, but I think it is just the note of the
translators of the 1901 American Standard Version.
Per your suggestion, maybe in Luke we have the mocking referred to in Psalm 2:4.
: > )
PARESTHSAN hOI BASILEIS THS GHS KAI hOI ARCONTES SUNHCQHSAN EPI TO AUTO KATA TOU
KURIOU KAI KATA TOU CRISTOU AUTOU DIAYALMA
hO KATOIKWN EN OURANOIS EKGELASETAI AUTOUS KAI hO KURIOS EKMUKTHRIEI AUTOUS
Psalm 2:2,4
The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers gathered themselves together,
against the Lord, and against his Christ;
He that dwells in the heavens shall laugh them to scorn, and the Lord shall mock
them. Psalm 2:2,4
Best regards,
Blue Harris