To Whom Did Jesus Hand Himself Over?
Posted: Fri Apr 05, 2024 12:53 pm
Let's say you are an apostle writing to the first churches, and you want to encourage those members who are slaves, when they are under abuse from their masters. You might remind them of the example Christ left for them -- how he did not talk back when insulted and did not threaten anyone while under maltreatment. And you could tell them that Christ handed himself over. But would you point to how he handed himself over to Pilate to be judged unjustly or to how he handed himself over to God to be judged justly? Which way of imitating Christ would be more encouraging to these slaves who are Christian?
Well, how Christ took the abuse and unfair sentence from Pilate would be a good concrete picture that slaves can follow. But how could they picture his handing himself over to God? Though we can assume that he did submit to Pilate out of trust in his Father's will, we don't have a graphic story of his "handing himself over" to God, unless it is his praying in Gethsemane, before he was even arrested.
Maybe you recall that there was an apostle who was in this position, who did write a letter to the churches, in which he dealt with this subject. It was Peter, and the letter in question is First Peter. In chapter two, after urging everyone to be subject to kings and governors, he tells slaves to be patient when they suffer, that is, suffer at their masters' hands in spite of doing good work. Peter then says (vs.23) that Christ handed himself over to a judge. All English translations that rely on the Greek tell us that Christ handed himself over to one who judges "justly." But those that rely on the Latin say he handed himself over to one who judged him "unjustly." Both can be true, but they cannot both be what Peter meant.
Unlike its translations, the Greek itself actually says, "he was handing himself over to one who was judging justly" -- using the past progressive tense, not the present tense of their translations, namely, "... who judges justly." Their translations don't keep that past tense about God because then it doesn't make much sense: Was God in a process of judging Jesus, the way Pilate certainly was? (And since when does God the Father even judge God the incarnate Son?) But it makes sense in the Latin for Pilate: he "was judging" Christ, but unjustly. Although the Greek we have is usually assumed to be more original than the Latin, this case begs the question. My solution is that instead of changing the verb to make sense, English translations should keep the verb past and change the adverb from "justly" to "unjustly"; to make sense.
Am I the NormandT of Bible details, or what?
Well, how Christ took the abuse and unfair sentence from Pilate would be a good concrete picture that slaves can follow. But how could they picture his handing himself over to God? Though we can assume that he did submit to Pilate out of trust in his Father's will, we don't have a graphic story of his "handing himself over" to God, unless it is his praying in Gethsemane, before he was even arrested.
Maybe you recall that there was an apostle who was in this position, who did write a letter to the churches, in which he dealt with this subject. It was Peter, and the letter in question is First Peter. In chapter two, after urging everyone to be subject to kings and governors, he tells slaves to be patient when they suffer, that is, suffer at their masters' hands in spite of doing good work. Peter then says (vs.23) that Christ handed himself over to a judge. All English translations that rely on the Greek tell us that Christ handed himself over to one who judges "justly." But those that rely on the Latin say he handed himself over to one who judged him "unjustly." Both can be true, but they cannot both be what Peter meant.
Unlike its translations, the Greek itself actually says, "he was handing himself over to one who was judging justly" -- using the past progressive tense, not the present tense of their translations, namely, "... who judges justly." Their translations don't keep that past tense about God because then it doesn't make much sense: Was God in a process of judging Jesus, the way Pilate certainly was? (And since when does God the Father even judge God the incarnate Son?) But it makes sense in the Latin for Pilate: he "was judging" Christ, but unjustly. Although the Greek we have is usually assumed to be more original than the Latin, this case begs the question. My solution is that instead of changing the verb to make sense, English translations should keep the verb past and change the adverb from "justly" to "unjustly"; to make sense.
Am I the NormandT of Bible details, or what?