and d/iiji' dfiTii/ X^yw vfuv ((roi), according to St. John.
Now, whilst final Amen as a formula of con- clusion or response remains unaltered throughout in NT in the various versions, it is of interest to notice the dift'erent ways in which this initial Amen is treated. The Vulgate, c.ff., invariably keeps the untranslated form, and reads Amen (or Amen, Amen) (lico fobis. The modern Greek equiv.alent is dXiiOiDs {a\T}eSis dXijSiis) ; and with this accords our KV 'Verily,' and also Luther's Wahrlieh. And, indeed, among the Synoptists themselves there are indications that an initial Amen has sometimes been replaced by another term. This is specially so in the case of St. Luke, Avho has only 6 instances of aix-qv as against 30 in St. Matthew, and 13 in St. jNIark. We have, « .</. , i-al in Lk 1 P' for dix-qv in the parallel Mt 23'" ; d\7,t»^j in Lk 9^ (cf. Mt !()-«, Mk 9M. AH this goes to ^llow that this use of Amen on the part of Jesus was quite a peculiarity.
The very \iyu v/iiv alone would have been notice- able as a mode of assertion : the addition of a/j.rii' does but intensify this characteristic, as an enforce- ment and corroboration of the utterances that are thus prefaced. The Heb. jpx, which in our Lord's time was usual only in responses, thus appears to have been taken by Him as an expedient for con- lirming His own statement ' in the same way as if it were an oath or a blessing.' Formulte of pro- testation iind affirmation involving an oath were in use among Rabbinical teacliers to enforce teachings and sayings, and with these the mode of Jesus invites comparison and contrast.
The attempt of Delitzsch to explain tliis Amen (p.irticularty in the double fomi) through the Aramaic Nr^:N 'I say,' cannot be sustained. Jannaris, again (Expos. Times, Sept. 1902, p. 564), has ventured the suggestion that ccf^y.* thus used is a corruption of S f^r,)/ (£*'^-<»); hut interesting and ingenious as this may be, it lacks confirmation, and auxongst the instances of the use of 5 /^ii* which he adduces from the LXX, the papyri, etc., not^one suits the case here by showing any such
A parallel between Amen and our ' Yes ' lias been already suggested : and in the NT we similarly find a/i-^v and vat closely associated (2 Co I''", Rev V), whilst we have before noticed how in St. Luke val is found as a substitute for d/x^i'. It may not therefore be out of place here to suggest tliat we have an illustration and analogy as regards the use of an initial Amen in the use of an intro- ductory ' Yes ' sometimes found in English (see, e.g., Shakspeare, ;^ Hen. IV. I. iii. 3G ; Pope, Moral Essays, i. 1).
The double Amen, which occurs 25 times in St. John, and is peculiar to tliat Gosnel, has provoked much curiosity as to how it is to be explained. If Jesus used as a formula in teaching now dinTjv 'K^yui iifilv and again dM';>' d/xjiv X^yw vtaiv, it is very strange that the Synoptics should invarial)ly re- present Him as using the former, and the Fourth Gospel invariably as using tlie latter. Why not instances of both promiscuously through all the Gospels if the two were thus alike used?
The statement that the Johannine form ' intro- duces a truth of special solemnity and importance ' (as Plummer in Camb. Gr. Te^t. for Schools, etc., ' St. John,' note on ch. P') is quite gratuitous, as a comparison of the sayings and discourses of our Lord will show. It is too obviously a dictum for the purpose of explanation. The truth is, if we have regard to the exclamatory character of d/i^i' as a particle in this special use, there is noth- ing surprising in its being thus repeated ; and we have the analogy of the repeated Amen in re- sponses, as noticed above. Why St. John alone sliould give the formula in this particular way is a further question. If a consideration of the pheno- mena connected with the composition of the Fourth
AMEN
Gospel leads to the conclusion that in the fofiii in ■vvhicli the utterances of Jesus are there presented ■we have not His ij>sissii)m verba, we may most naturally regard the repetition of d/i-^y as a peculi- arity due to the Evangelist, and (taking the evidence of the Synoptists into account) not neces- sarily a form actually used by Jesus.
3. Amen in the rest of the NT. — In the niimerous instances in which Amen occurs in the NT out- side the Gospels, it is almost entirely found in con- nexion Avitli prayers, doxologies, or Ijenedictions, as a solemn corroborative conclusion (final use). In addition, we have the rcsponsiue use of Amen illus- trated in 1 Co 14"= (see below, ,?. ' Liturgical use ') and Rev 5'^ : and d/xvij/ in Rev '22-" is responsive to the Ipxo/iai Taxi preceding. Extra -canonical writings furnish plentiful examples of the same use. Two instances, again, of an iittmihniuri/ Amen in the Apocalypse (7'^ ly*), as a form of exultant acclamation, are interesting, but are quite distinct from the initial Amen in the utter- ances of Jesus in the Gospels.
Amen as a substantive appears in two forms : (1) t6 djuiji', (2) 6 d.ij.T}v. We meet with the former in 1 Co 14^" and 2 Co 1^°. In both cases there appears to be a reference to a liturgical Amen. In the latter passage, indeed, it might be contended that dfLT^jP IS merely in correspondence with nai, both simplj' conveying the idea of confirmation and assurance ; but if we follow the better sup- ported readin" (as in RV) the i)reseuce of such a reference canliaidly be denied.