Joh 17,2 some questions on the sentence

Forum rules
Please quote the Greek text you are discussing directly in your post if it is reasonably short - do not ask people to look it up. This is not a beginner's forum, competence in Greek is assumed.
Peter Streitenberger
Posts: 224
Joined: June 3rd, 2011, 10:45 am

Joh 17,2 some questions on the sentence

Post by Peter Streitenberger »

Dear Greek-friends,

as I can recognize a special interest in the Gospel of John recently, I dare to ask my questions on Chapter 17,2, where it states:

καθὼς ἔδωκας αὐτῷ ἐξουσίαν πάσης σαρκός, ἵνα πᾶν ὃ δέδωκας αὐτῷ, δώσει αὐτοῖς ζωὴν αἰώνιον.

1) What is the other Proposition καθὼς is refering to - the preceeding verse, as I presume? That means the gloricifation of the son corresponds with the power over all flesh.
2) πᾶν ὃ why is there a neuter from - should it be translated as personal, "all you have given unto him"? (cf.6,37.39 for the same Feature). Not very common in Greek literature to refer to persons in the neuter.
3) I've read a proposal to understand that last clause this way:" so that he may give everything that he gave unto him to them, namely eternal life" - Seems to be grammatical possible, but I really hesitate - comparisons have to be made. Would that be Johannine? The only Advantage so far: one could Keep the neuter πᾶν ὃ.

Any thoughts are highly welcome !
Yours
Peter
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

Gender or case; πᾶν ὃ - πᾶσιν οὓς

Post by Stephen Hughes »

Peter Streitenberger wrote:2) πᾶν ὃ why is there a neuter from - should it be translated as personal, "all you have given unto him"? (cf.6,37.39 for the same Feature). Not very common in Greek literature to refer to persons in the neuter.
I don't think the issue is gender, but rather case.

For the phrase; πᾶν ὃ δέδωκας αὐτῷ, do you read it as accusative or a dative incognita?

I think it is possible that it is in apposition to the ζωὴν αἰώνιον which straddles the δώσει αὐτοῖς. What had God had given His Son during the dispensation, is what the Church / individual believers would be given after that.

You seem to be taking it in the sense of; πᾶσιν οὓς δέδωκας αὐτῷ, δώσει αὐτοῖς ζωὴν αἰώνιον. Is that so?
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
Peter Streitenberger
Posts: 224
Joined: June 3rd, 2011, 10:45 am

Re: Joh 17,2 some questions on the sentence

Post by Peter Streitenberger »

Dear Stephen,

thanks - you point to the real or crucial issue in this passage. I don't hesitate to write my own impression on that:

The accusative would pragmatically make "eternal life" coreferential to "all, that you have given", if both were the direct objects of "to give". Which I don't think would match. In the other samples Joh 6,37.39 and in 3,6 the neuter PAN O refers to persons (see BDF 282,4 for neuter singulars used for Collectiva) and BDF 138,1 where they state that in Joh 17,2 "all flesh", "all that" and "he will give *them*" is coreferential. Otherwise it would be equal to "eternal life" which is hardly the case. The other instances of PAN O in John are personal beings as in Joh 17,2 (used as a general expression), which wouldn't match to the eternal life. Accordingly Versions as NKJ have:
"that He should give eternal life (direct object) to as many as You have given Him. (indirect object)" - They treat it, as I think correctly, as indirect (!) object, just as I proposed, namely a Nominativ pendens which functions as indirect object and is stressed by fronting.
That would meet other instances by John as I mentioned - cf. especially Rev.2,26. So (almost) all serioous versions don't treat it as accusative - which is right, I think.

If you translates "in order that he might give life to all those you gave him" (which I'd support), but then one declares the PAN O as direct object, which won't work. I mean one translates the clause as indirect object and declares it as direct object, which would agree with the accusative. Rather the parallel is to other instances where the nominative pendens functions as indirect object, and meets with the Dative plural "them". That would be normal. And we see that the indirect object demands a Dative case (you gave *him*) and not an accusative. So I think we should treat the clause a morphological Nominative with is fronted for emphasis, but the sentence brakes up (Anacoluth) and the indirect object meets with the Dative (them) which is only possible by treating PAN DE as Nominative pendens. To sum up: I'd Support the normal Translation, but that would make PAN O to a indirect object which won't work with an accusative, but only with a Nominative pendens. We can also see in this sentences that direct object are connected with the accusative (eternal live) and indirect objects with the Dative, and you can't explain the PAN O Accusative getting a Dative function, which is possible by treating him as casus pendens.

I've read in BDF as well, Don. But if all the three mentioned referents are coreferential (and I agree), then we'd need an indirect object (not a DO in the accusative) for PAN O (a Dative and not an accusative - which would make the casus pendens necessary) otherwise it would meet with the accusative "eternal life", being the direct object of "to give", which won't work (the PAN O Points to persons as Receivers of the Action as BDF states correctly, namely an indirect object).
Sorry for bad English - I hope the basic idea gets clear.


Yours
Peter Streitenberger, Germany
Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 2159
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: Joh 17,2 some questions on the sentence

Post by Barry Hofstetter »

καθὼς ἔδωκας αὐτῷ ἐξουσίαν πάσης σαρκός, ἵνα πᾶν ὃ δέδωκας αὐτῷ δώσῃ αὐτοῖς ζωὴν αἰώνιον.

This passage just isn't that difficult, people. πᾶν ὃ is the direct object of δέδωκας. ζωὴν αἰώνιον is the direct object of δώσῃ, and stands in apposition to πᾶν ὃ as a particular item specifying part of the πᾶν ὃ. καθὼς coordinates -- nothing expressed. The sentence is highly elliptical, and implies a coordinate phrase such as ὼς αὐτῷ ἐξουσίαν ἔδωκας ἵνα...
N.E. Barry Hofstetter, M.A., Th.M.
Ph.D. Student U of FL
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
καὶ σὺ τὸ σὸν ποιήσεις κἀγὼ τὸ ἐμόν. ἆρον τὸ σὸν καὶ ὕπαγε.
Stephen Carlson
Posts: 3351
Joined: May 11th, 2011, 10:51 am
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: Joh 17,2 some questions on the sentence

Post by Stephen Carlson »

Barry Hofstetter wrote:καθὼς ἔδωκας αὐτῷ ἐξουσίαν πάσης σαρκός, ἵνα πᾶν ὃ δέδωκας αὐτῷ δώσῃ αὐτοῖς ζωὴν αἰώνιον.

This passage just isn't that difficult, people. πᾶν ὃ is the direct object of δέδωκας. ζωὴν αἰώνιον is the direct object of δώσῃ, and stands in apposition to πᾶν ὃ as a particular item specifying part of the πᾶν ὃ. καθὼς coordinates -- nothing expressed. The sentence is highly elliptical, and implies a coordinate phrase such as ὼς αὐτῷ ἐξουσίαν ἔδωκας ἵνα...
I would think so too, but that's not the way our English translations are taking it:
NRSV since you have given him authority over all people, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him.
NIV For you granted him authority over all people that he might give eternal life to all those you have given him.
NASB even as You gave Him authority over all flesh, that to [a]all whom You have given Him, He may give eternal life.
NASB n. Lit everything that You have given Him, to them He may
ESV since you have given him authority over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him.
RSV since thou hast given him power over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom thou hast given him.
KJV As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
NET just as you have given him authority over all humanity, so that he may give eternal life to everyone you have given him.
HCSB for You gave Him authority over all flesh; so He may give eternal life to all You have given Him.
Apparently, these construe πᾶν ὃ δέδωκας αὐτῷ as an antecedent αὐτοῖς despite the mis-match in case, number, and gender.
Stephen C. Carlson, Ph.D.
Melbourne, Australia
Iver Larsen
Posts: 127
Joined: May 7th, 2011, 3:52 am

Re: Joh 17,2 some questions on the sentence

Post by Iver Larsen »

Peter, I am inclined to agree with you. Robertson says about the vernacular κοινή that "The nominativus pendens is much in evidence." (Page 73).

So, I would take πᾶν in ἵνα πᾶν ὃ δέδωκας αὐτῷ, δώσει αὐτοῖς ζωὴν αἰώνιον as a nominative, neuter referring to each and every being. The relative ὃ is then object for δέδωκας. The relative clause narrows the reference from "all flesh" to those beings (here people) whom God has given to have faith in Jesus. Those are the people who will be given eternal life.

A wooden grammar-based translation might be: so that each and every being, whom you have given him, he may give them eternal life. Most translations are less literal in order to make it better English.
Peter Streitenberger
Posts: 224
Joined: June 3rd, 2011, 10:45 am

Re: Joh 17,2 some questions on the sentence

Post by Peter Streitenberger »

At least I'm not all alone here - thanks to all, and especially to Iver !

You wrote: "The relative ὃ is then object for δέδωκας."

May I ask: What case would you determine in the personal pronoun? That is not so easy - at least in my impression. PAN is treated best (at least in my thinkin) as nominative - but hO could be attracted regarding its case to its antecedent (as such a nominative as well) or play its own role in the relative clause as accusative. There is more to say, I'd think.

Yours
Peter, Germany
Stephen Hughes
Posts: 3323
Joined: February 26th, 2013, 7:12 am

πᾶν (nominative) ὃ (accusative)

Post by Stephen Hughes »

πᾶν can be nominative while ὃ is accusative, it is a relative pronoun.
Γελᾷ δ' ὁ μωρός, κἄν τι μὴ γέλοιον ᾖ
(Menander, Γνῶμαι μονόστιχοι 108)
Iver Larsen
Posts: 127
Joined: May 7th, 2011, 3:52 am

Re: Joh 17,2 some questions on the sentence

Post by Iver Larsen »

Peter, I was thinking πᾶν was nominative, but it may also be accusative according to Blass, Debrunner 466:

466. The resumption of a suspended case by a pronoun in another case (the suspended subject [or object] Rob. 436; Abbot 32) is a construction belonging to the popular idiom (cf. Raderm.2 219; also MGr, Thumb2 §42). (1) The simplest form of anacoluthon is where a preceding case is assimilated by attraction to a following relative clause which required an antecedent (§295; classical, s. K.–G. II 591, 7): A 7:40 ὁ Μωυσῆς οὗτος, ὃς …, οὐκ οἴδαμεν, τί ἐγένετο αὐτῷ (from the LXX Ex 32:1), 2 C 12:17 μή τινα ὧν (ὧν = τούτων οὓς) ἀπέσταλκα πρὸς ὑμᾶς, διʼ αὐτοῦ ἐπλεονέκτησα ὑμᾶς; (2) The nom. without such attraction is rare (nom. pendens: the psychological subject precedes the clause as if it were the grammatical subject): Mt 10:11 D ἡ πόλις εἰς ἣν ἂν εἰσέλθητε εἰς αὐτήν, ἐξετάσατε τίς ἐν αὐτῇ etc. (3) Anacoluthon after πᾶς is a peculiarity in which a Semitic convention left a definite mark on a tendency of the vernacular to anacoluthon (the πᾶς is usually subject to attraction): Mt 12:36 πᾶν ῥῆμα ἀργὸν (nom. or acc. by attraction?), ὃ λαλήσουσιν οἱ ἄνθρωποι, ἀποδώσουσιν περὶ αὐτοῦ λόγον; cf. Jn 17:2. Lk 12:48 παντὶ δὲ ᾧ ἐδόθη πολύ, πολὺ ζητηθήσεται παρʼ αὐτοῦ

Blass, F., Debrunner, A., & Funk, R. W. (1961). A Greek grammar of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (p. 243). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Barry Hofstetter
Posts: 2159
Joined: May 6th, 2011, 1:48 pm

Re: Joh 17,2 some questions on the sentence

Post by Barry Hofstetter »

Well, this is all highly annoying. I think my reading of the text makes better sense out of the syntax, but I'll have to look at this more closely. As I tell my students, if everyone disagrees with you on your understanding of the text, then it's probably you, not them...
N.E. Barry Hofstetter, M.A., Th.M.
Ph.D. Student U of FL
Instructor of Latin
Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy
καὶ σὺ τὸ σὸν ποιήσεις κἀγὼ τὸ ἐμόν. ἆρον τὸ σὸν καὶ ὕπαγε.
Post Reply

Return to “New Testament”