John 8:40 ... ὃς τὴν ἀλήθειαν ὑμῖν λελάληκα ...

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.
Thomas Dolhanty
Posts: 401
Joined: May 20th, 2014, 10:13 am
Location: west coast of Canada

Re: John 8:40 ... ὃς τὴν ἀλήθειαν ὑμῖν λελάληκα ...

Post by Thomas Dolhanty »

A bit off-topic for B-Greek, but isn't נִּמְצְאוּ a perfect rather than a participle?
Indeed it is. Thank you. There aren't many 3rd person participles in Hebrew, are there?
γράφω μαθεῖν
RandallButh
Posts: 1105
Joined: May 13th, 2011, 4:01 am

Re: John 8:40 ... ὃς τὴν ἀλήθειαν ὑμῖν λελάληκα ...

Post by RandallButh »

Thomas Dolhanty wrote:
Great. So explain the examples just quoted.
Remember, this post was a request for assistance concerning MY understanding – or rather lack thereof – concerning the person of the relative pronoun.
Yes, it's just that you said that certain things were no problem.
First then, from MY understanding of ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος. The article stands before a finite verb here and this catches our attention. Nevertheless, this does not surprise me as I am a frequent reader of the Greek text of Revelation, and so I am used to encountering mulitple instances of this particular arrangement (Rev 1:8, 4:8, 11:17, 16:5). I am also aware of Wallace’s comment on this:
“The article can turn almost any part of speech into a noun: adverbs, adjectives, prepositional phrases, particles, infinitives, participles, and even finite verbs. As well, the article can turn a phrase into a nominal entity. This incredible flexibil¬ity is part of the genius of the Greek article.” pg 231ff
Yes, Wallace says that, but the problem is that the relative pronoun ὅς κτλ. is normally used to make finite verbs into a nominal item, not the article. And for the record, I grant that Greek users will cross that distinction occasionally.
The 3rd person plural niphal participle הַנִּמְצְאוּ־פֹ֔ה with the maqaf + “here” from 1Chron 29:17 does not surprise me in 1Chron 29:17. So also with 2Ch 29:36 (עַ֛ל הַהֵכִ֥ין הָאֱלֹהִ֖ים) and Ruth 1:22 (השָּׁ֖בָה). However, here I must be quick to say that I am not accomplished enough in Hebrew grammar to question such a phrase – or perhaps even to notice that it is anomalous. I will plead blissful stupidity (and an oxymoron to boot ;) )! Thus, inasmuch as this Hebrew is unusual, I do NOT understand it so well as I implied! I will be certain not to say so on a Hebrew forum!
You are excused for wading into Hebrew waters, no harm no foul. For accuracy's sake allow me to correct a couple items of the discussion. The form you label as "participle", נמצאו, is a finite verb. Likewise, Ruth 1:22 is accented as a finite verb, and correctly so in my opinion, although this creates an abnormal syntactic pattern. The abnormality is identical to the Greek one, since Hebrew prefers the relative אשר and ש for making finite verb clauses into nominal items.
When I teach a structure like Greek prepositional phrases, right from the get-go I emphasize to students – first year or other – that an articular prepositional phrase should be thought of as a unit, with the article telling us how to read it. Thus, I teach students to think of, “Ἀσπάζονται ὑμᾶς οἱ ἀπὸ τῆς Ἰταλίας” (Heb 13:24) as “’The-from-Italy-ones’ greet you”, rather than the anglicized “Those who are from Italy greet you.” I have found that if I try to approach the grammar from an imposed English arrangement, it is very hard for students to grasp the Greek.
Much agreed on the last sentence, even the paragraph..
Thomas Dolhanty
Posts: 401
Joined: May 20th, 2014, 10:13 am
Location: west coast of Canada

Re: John 8:40 ... ὃς τὴν ἀλήθειαν ὑμῖν λελάληκα ...

Post by Thomas Dolhanty »

I take all your points, and stand corrected on:
I do not see inconsistencies within the Greek or Hebrew, and I could explain quite readily (I think) the grammar
.
I am comfortable with the "Greek" portion of that statement, but the "Hebrew" part was hasty.

It all became so clear to me as I countenanced the thought of trying to explain Hebrew idiosyncrasies to a Hebraist on a Greek forum! :mrgreen: And this in the context of having done very little Hebrew in the past year!

Thank you for your comments, and interesting instances of "new vistas in Hebrew"
γράφω μαθεῖν
RandallButh
Posts: 1105
Joined: May 13th, 2011, 4:01 am

Re: John 8:40 ... ὃς τὴν ἀλήθειαν ὑμῖν λελάληκα ...

Post by RandallButh »

what remains is to describe the choice and implication between the article governing a finite verb clause and a relative (ὅς ἥ ὅ).

I would suggest that the article is nominalizing more strongly, more compactly, than the expected relative.
Thomas Dolhanty
Posts: 401
Joined: May 20th, 2014, 10:13 am
Location: west coast of Canada

Re: John 8:40 ... ὃς τὴν ἀλήθειαν ὑμῖν λελάληκα ...

Post by Thomas Dolhanty »

What about the suggestion by David Aune (WBC, V1, pg 30), Beale (NIGTC, pg 188) et al that "the incorrect' grammar is intentional" to match that of the LXX version of Exodus 3:14? LXX renders אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֶֽהְיֶ֑ה as ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν. Aune discusses at some length the fact that ὁ ὤν had become a standardized way of referring to "the name". Philo, for example, according to Aune, "often uses the phrase ὁ ὤν of God".

This, of course, would explain John's use, and the use in John's day, but not that of the "seventy".
γράφω μαθεῖν
RandallButh
Posts: 1105
Joined: May 13th, 2011, 4:01 am

Re: John 8:40 ... ὃς τὴν ἀλήθειαν ὑμῖν λελάληκα ...

Post by RandallButh »

ὁ ὤν is a normal Greek structure.
Thomas Dolhanty
Posts: 401
Joined: May 20th, 2014, 10:13 am
Location: west coast of Canada

Re: John 8:40 ... ὃς τὴν ἀλήθειαν ὑμῖν λελάληκα ...

Post by Thomas Dolhanty »

Yes, except that in Rev. 1:4 one expects a genitive after ἀπὸ rather than a nominative. The idea, though, with the reference to Ex. 3:14, as Beale suggests, is that "the full, threefold phrase may have become a general title for God in Judaism." (pg 188). If that's correct, then perhaps the ὁ ἦν - or rather ὁ in place of ὄς was simply "attracted" to the other two constructions over time. That is, if the entire phrase developed from a reference to Exodus 3:14, which seems plausible, and was in use over much time, as Beale suggests, then perhaps the relative pronoun gave way to the article to maintain the consonance of the whole phrase.
γράφω μαθεῖν
Post Reply

Return to “New Testament”