John 4:17-18

B. Ward Powers bwpowers at optusnet.com.au
Tue Jun 26 22:04:33 EDT 2001


B-greekers all:

At 03:18 PM 010625 -0400, J. Norfleete Day wrote:
>     Does anyone know of grammatical documentation to support the notion
>that there is significance in the change of word order in John 17 when
>Jesus rephrases the Samaritan woman's confession that she has no husband?
>    She says,  oujk e[cw a[ndra and Jesus responds with
>                a[ndra oujk e[cw


The current list discussion of this passage is concentrating its focus 
primarily upon the question of word order. This issue of word order does 
indeed merit careful discussion, and I am one of those who would agree that 
the "fronting" of ANDRA is significant, focussing more specific attention 
upon it. I conclude that the intended meaning is "a husband is [precisely 
what] you do not have". As Jesus goes on to say, she now "has" another man 
(and the sexual connotation of "has" is very clear), but this man is not a 
husband to her. The placing of SOU in front of ANHR in this reply (verse 
18), contrary to "normal" word order, has this effect: whatever else he is 
for you, he is not a HUSBAND for you.

But let the consideration of factors of word order not divert our attention 
from two very significant issues of meaning to be recognized in what Jesus 
says here.

First, the woman is now living in a relationship with a man whom Jesus 
states emphatically is not her husband. Those people who would assert that 
a sexual relationship (or even a single act of sexual intercourse) brings a 
marriage into existence should note this, because it completely negates 
such a view.

Second, the woman asserts that she is currently unmarried ("I have no 
husband"), and Jesus completely agrees with her ("You are right in saying 
'I have no husband'"). Unless we are to read into the passage the idea that 
Jesus is here commiserating with her because she has been widowed five 
times in succession, it must be that at least some of these five marriage 
relationships have been ended with divorce. Thus when Jesus confirms that 
at that time she was indeed unmarried, it then follows that Jesus accepts 
that the act of divorce terminates a marriage relationship. (Otherwise the 
situation would be that she was still married to whichever of her previous 
five husbands were still alive, and could not be described by Jesus as 
"unmarried".) Paul cites the teaching of the Lord (1 Corinthians 7:10) for 
saying that a wife should not break up (CWRIZW) from her husband but that 
if she does she is then "unmarried" (AGAMOS, verse 11).  Those people who 
would assert that after a purported divorce a marriage relationship 
actually continues in God's sight because marriage is for life, and can 
only be terminated by death, should note this, because it completely 
negates such a view.

In our consideration of John 4:16-18 we can note these further significant 
aspects of its meaning.

Ward Powers

                                http://www.netspace.net.au/~bwpowers
Rev Dr B. Ward Powers        Phone (International): 61-2-8714-7255
259A Trafalgar Street          Phone (Australia): (02) 8714-7255
PETERSHAM  NSW  2049      email: bwpowers at optusnet.com.au
AUSTRALIA.                         Director, Tyndale College




More information about the B-Greek mailing list