[B-Greek] John 6:40 - PAS - "ALL" or "ALL THOSE WHO" ?
Jeffrey T. Requadt
jeffreyrequadt_list at hotmail.com
Thu Aug 6 11:52:23 EDT 2009
I'm also wondering if this difference in interpretation here is the difference between the participle acting adverbially or adjectivally? I.e., as an adverb it would be saying, "For this is the will of my Father (what my Father wants), that everyone, seeing the son and believing in him, would have eternal life, and that I would raise him in the last day." In this sense, the O QEWRWN TON UION KAI PISTEUWN EIS AUTON is modifying ECH ZWHN etc. Another way to put this in English word order--and I'm only doing this to aid in comprehension, not because Englishifying it is the goal--would be TOUTO GAR ESTIN TO QELHMA TOU PATROS MOU, INA PAS ECHi ZWHN AIWNIWN (UPO?) QEWRWN TON UION KAI PISTEUWN EIS AUTON.
As an adjective it would be modifying PAS, as in "This is the will of my Father, that everyone who should see the son and believe in him (but not other people) would have eternal life, etc."
John, is this what you're getting at when you say that the grammar doesn't decide the question? Correct me if I'm wrong, but what I think Carl and Iver have been saying is that the first way, with PAS separated logically from O QEWRWN, just isn't Greek. In other words, the construction PAS O + participle (without trying to get mathematical about it), in this case, is a natural way of defining a group of people, and that's the meaning that the grammatical layer brings to this text.
I just did a search with Logos of the Nestle-Aland text for PAS (nom-masc-sing) O (nom-masc-sing) PARTICIPLE (nom-masc-sing) with no words in-between any of the terms. It came up with 114 items. The first is Matthew 5:22, "ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι πᾶς ὁ ὀργιζόμενος τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ ἔνοχος ἔσται τῇ κρίσει·" EGW DE LEGW UMIN OTI **PAS O ORGIZOMENOS** TW ADELFW AUTOU ENOCOS ESTAI TH KRISEI," translated by NET as "But I say to you that anyone who is angry with a brother will be subjected to judgment." I.e., in this case, judgment is conditional upon being angry with one's brother. Another example is 1 John 3:3, "καὶ πᾶς ὁ ἔχων τὴν ἐλπίδα ταύτην ἐπ' αὐτῷ ἁγνίζει ἑαυτόν, καθὼς ἐκεῖνος ἁγνός ἐστιν." KAI **PAS O ECWN** THN ELPIDA TAUTHN EP' AUTW AGNIZEI EAUTON, KAQWS EKEINOS AGNOS ESTIN." Again, the purifying oneself (AGNIZEI EAUTON) is conditional upon having his hope focused on him (Jesus) ECWN THN ELPIDA TAUTHN EP' AUTW.
I haven't looked at each and every reference, but my understanding so far is that the PAS O PARTICIPLE is a way of defining a set group of people (or things?). In that sense, John 6:40 would indeed be "limiting" the actions of Christ in raising up people to only those who "see the son and believe in him." And that's God's will, according to that verse.
All this is to say that I think the grammar is less ambiguous in this case then one might think. It seems to be making a clear definition of a select group (but doesn't have anything to say about how big that group is, only that they are the ones who see the son and believe in him). It seems to be making clear that God's will is for that group of people (not everyone) to be raised on the last day, because they meet the condition of having seen and believed the son.
Or am I getting too much into exegesis here? I think as far as exegesis goes, one could glean just as much from reading a wide range of published translations and commentaries as from studying the isolated Greek sentence in great detail. For example, I just used Logos to do a comparison of all English translations on this verse (all the ones on my computer, anyway, which includes most reputable translations), and they all--without exception--translate a conditional element in the sense that we've been talking about. I'm not saying that it's pointless to learn Greek as long as we have English translations; I'm saying that it's pointless to take some classes that simply enable you to confirm what many English translations already make clear. Let's stop requiring seminarians and pastors to waste their time doing something that doesn't really help them in their task of interpretation and exposition. Let's require them instead to study the very good English translations that are available, and to become intimately acquainted with the content of the Bible. OR... let's require them to actually learn--really learn, down to the depths of their souls--Hebrew and Greek, to learn it because it will allow them to comprehend what they believe is Holy Scripture in a way that an English translation will not give them. Let's require them to delve into Greek passages with nothing but a great lexicon and hours of time. Let's require them to write their own letters--maybe to a congregation?--in Greek. Let's require them to compose a hymn, a psalm, a prayer in Greek. Let's require them to compare and contrast the theology of James and Paul in Greek. I think there could be a tremendous amount of good done for these men and women if they were required to spend their time doing this kind of thinking, and not being satisfied with anything less. But let's stop wasting precious time on something that can be picked up by reading some good books in a few hours--and I'm speaking as one who's been through the methodology and language requirements of the current system, as someone who took Greek as an elective because I wanted to, not because I was required to. Any Greek that I can actually understand comes from being genuinely interested and excited about learning it, not because I learned neat tricks for remembering grammatical terms. And I really, really wish that I had been able to learn Greek at a level beyond the surface that I'm barely scratching, but I think that it would have been very unlikely to happen with the methodology that I learned with. I just don't understand requiring that kind of shallow education from graduate students who are already severely burdened with ministry and home life and academics as it is. Let's really teach Greek, and stop teaching pretend Greek.
If I've offended anyone, I apologize. My comments are sincere, but not directed personally at anyone. My motives are heart-felt, not rancorous.
-----Original Message-----
From: b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:b-greek-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Carl Conrad
Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 6:14 AM
To: John Sanders
Cc: greek B-Greek
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] John 6:40 - PAS - "ALL" or "ALL THOSE WHO" ?
On Aug 6, 2009, at 8:56 AM, John Sanders wrote:
> I apologize once more. I believe that I am not making myself very
> clear. I
> do not wish to repeat myself, for that will not help. So I hope
> that this
> may make myself more understandable.
>
> I do not question your understanding of this particular text, I also
> think
> that is correct. Let me translate the text as I think it would read:
>
> TOUTO GAR ESTIN TO QELHMA TOU PATROS MOU hINA PAS O QEWRWN TON UION
> KAI
> PISTEUWN EIS AUTON EXHi ZWHN AIWNION KAI ANASTHSW AUTON EGW EN TH
> ESXATHi
> HMERAi.
>
> For this is the wish of my Father, that every one discovering the
> son and
> believing in Him will have life eternal and I shall raise him on the
> last
> day.
>
> Two notes: the retaining of a classical for (EXHi) does not
> necessarily
> imply retaining the classical meaning. Given this text, I suspect the
> "tentativeness" of the subjunctive has been replaced with the simple
> "future". Likewise, I suspect the future ANASTHSW is expressed with
> certitude. So, given that idiosyncracy of mine, we should be in
> agreement,
> I would think.
The subjunctive of ECHi is not tentative; it depends upon the
introductory hINA. "The will of my Father" = "My father wants." WHAT
my Father wants is stated in the hINA clause: "My Father wants
everyone who sees and believes the Son to have everlasting life." The
hINA clause sets forth exactly what it is that "My Father wants."
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
>
> What is the question, then? As I understand it, as I perceive the
> question,
> it is asking who is included in the set? Does the set include
> everyone and
> this is the process that each one will go through to receive life
> eternal
> and be raised on the last day, or is this actually the definition of
> the set
> and only they who comply with this definition will receive life
> eternal and
> be raised on the last day?
>
> The text itself is clear, but the text does not tell us which of
> these two
> choices comprise the set of those who will receive life eternal and be
> raised on the last day. Either the set will have to comply with the
> text
> because it is the definition of the set; or it gives the process for
> which the set is to comply. In either case you can come to this
> text and
> read it and not be discomforted. That is why I say that the text is
> insufficient to answer this question and you will need further
> information.
>
> John Sanders
> Suzhou, China
> On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Iver Larsen <iver_larsen at sil.org>
> wrote:
>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Sanders" <
>> john.franklin.sanders at gmail.com>
>> To: "Elizabeth Kline" <kline_dekooning at earthlink.net>
>> Cc: "greek B-Greek" <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
>> Sent: 6. august 2009 08:27
>> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] John 6:40 - PAS - "ALL" or "ALL THOSE WHO" ?
>>
>>
>> I think that the answers given are accurate as they pertain to the
>> Greek,
>>> but they do not answer the question as put forth:
>>>
>>> "The difference being in (1) it is the desire of the father that
>>> those who
>>> are in a condition of perceiving and believing would have eternal
>>> life.
>>> Whereas in (2) it is the desire of the father that all would be in a
>>> condition of perceiving and believing and that all would have
>>> eternal
>>> life."
>>>
>>
>> Well, I thought the arguments from grammar and similar
>> constructions were
>> clear enough to indicate that (1) is the intended sense, and (2)
>> would have
>> to be expressed in a different way with a subjunctive on the
>> perceiving.
>> Notice also how in English you/Matthew had to add a second "would"
>> in (2)
>> which is not reflected in the Greek text. Matthew also added an
>> "add" after
>> "believing" which is not in the text. You can say that the desire
>> of the
>> father is that all might have eternal life, but the condition is
>> clear in
>> that only (all) those who perceive that Jesus is the "son of God" and
>> believes in him will actually obtain that life.
>>
>> Iver Larsen
---
B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
B-Greek mailing list
B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.45/2284 - Release Date: 08/05/09 18:23:00
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list