[B-Greek] Jn 1:18b EIS TON KOLPON

Carl W. Conrad cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Fri Aug 18 17:47:26 EDT 2006


On Aug 18, 2006, at 2:48 PM, Iver Larsen wrote:

> [OK: ]>> All other translations I know take this to connect hO WN  
> (the one in
>>> the Father's bosom). However this traditional rendering would make
>>> sense if the text reads 'EN TW KOLPW' (as in Jn 13:23).  With the
>>> preposition EIS instead, the way she renders the text appears
>>> grammatically more acceptable.
>>>
>>> Can you help me see the basis of one over the other?
>>
> [CC:]> This is an interesting suggestion; I see nothing amiss in
>> understanding EXHGHSATO in the sense of "led the way" EXHGEOMAI can
>> certainly have that sense in extra-Biblical literature, although the
>> usage within the GNT seems to be limited to the senses, "explain" and
>> "report."
>
> I would consider this a strong argument against the innovative  
> suggestion. The verb is reasonably common in the GNT and
> always means "explain" or "describe". I don't see any instance of  
> "report" in the GNT, and certainly not "lead".
> BAGD says: "'lead', but never so in our lit.; explain, interpret,  
> tell, report, describe....Oft. t.t. for the activity
> of priests and soothsayers who impart information or reveal divine  
> secrets.."

BDAG says: "1. to relate in detail, tell, report, describe, chiefly  
narrative; 2. to set forth in great detail, expound."

> L&N suggest two options:
> "to provide detailed information in a systematic manner" or
> "to make something fully known by careful explanation or by clear  
> revelation."


> When the normal sense of "explain" makes perfect sense, it is  
> highly unlikely than an otherwise unattested sense could
> be intended.
>
> There are other words for "lead" used in the GNT, e.g. hODHGEW and  
> various compounds with AGW.

I have already indicated that I would prefer to stick with the  
traditional interpretation, but I just don't think it is quite so  
easy to dismiss the POSSIBLE sense of "lead the way." Granted it  
isn't found elsewhere in the GNT, but in fact there are only five  
instances of the verb apart from John 1:18. The verb DOES have the  
sense  "lead" in extra-Biblical literature, and this is in fact the  
primary sense listed in LSJ.

>> Her version in fuller context: "No one has ever seen God at any time.
>> The Only Son [reading hUIOS rather than QEOS}, the One who is closest
>> to the Father's heart -- he is the one who led the way to the place
>> of honor at the Father's side."
>>
> <snip>
>
> [CC:]> And finally, there's the awkward usage of EIS TON KOLPON  
> with the
>> verb EINAI in the nominal phrase hO WN EIS TON KOLPON; normally we
>> don't have an EIS + acc. phrase with an existential EINAI but rather
>> with verbs of motion. But earlier in the prologue we had something
>> similar in HN PROS TON QEON in 1:1 and 2, so I would suppose that
>> this particular usage of EIS + acc. with WN is intended to express
>> special intimacy, "who has his being deep in the heart of the
>> Father."
>
> It is fairly common to have EIS where we might have expected an EN,  
> also with EINAI.
> BAGD says: "EIS is freq. used where EN would be expected..." and  
> then goes on to list many examples, including John
> 1:18.
>
> The parallel usage to HN PROS TON QEON is interesting, because in  
> Hebrew thought pattern you would expect an inclusio,
> so that the beginning and the end of the section have overlapping  
> themes. The section starts with the close relationship
> between God, the Father, and hO LOGOS. And it ends with the close  
> relationship between the MONOGENHS hUIOS and the
> PATHR. It is also fitting that hO LOGOS should be able to explain  
> who the Father is, as the LOGOS was with the Father,
> and no one else has ever seen the Father.
>
>
> [CC:]> You have asked, Oun, for guidance to choose between two  
> alternatives.
>> I think I am inclined to prefer the traditional view of the syntactic
>> link-ups of John 1:18b, but (a) the text of the verse is loaded with
>> problems any way you look at it, and (b) understanding EIS TON KOLPON
>> as implicit with EXHGHSATO as "led the way" or "showed the way" is,
>> it seems to me, every bit as plausible as the traditional
>> understanding. I guess that leaves it a NON LIQUET: it ain't so
>> clear, after all.
>
> I find both the unusual meaning of EXHGHSATO and the supplying of  
> EIS TON KOLPON as object highly unlikely.
> The verse has two items in focus by virtue of their fronted  
> positions. First QEOS in QEON OUDEIS hEWRAKEN PWPOTE. Then
> MONOGENHS hUIOS in MONOGENHS hUIOS hO WN EIS TON KOLPON TOU PATROS,  
> and finally "that one" (Jesus, the one-and-only Son)
> in the last clause EKEINOS EXHGHSATO. There is no problem in  
> supplying "him" as object for the verb, since the two items
> in focus are the unseen God and the Son. Since the Son is the  
> subject, it is natural to understand the other item in
> focus as the object. According to relevance theory, when a  
> straightforward interpretation based on the normal sense of
> the words used makes perfect sense in the context, it is very  
> unlikely that a special and convoluted interpretation was
> intended.

I note that Iver too prefers to read hUIOS rather than QEOS; I think  
I would prefer it too, but I don't claim to be a textual critic (I  
just think it makes better sense in the context).
I will simply reiterate that (a) I prefer the conventional  
interpretation, but (b) I personally think that the phrasing of this  
verse is somewhat awkward, and (c) I think that Ann's interpretation  
is at least plausible.

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
1989 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad2 at mac.com
WWW: http://www.ioa.com/~cwconrad/





More information about the B-Greek mailing list