[B-Greek] John 6:40 - PAS - "ALL" or "ALL THOSE WHO" ?

Oun Kwon kwonbbl at gmail.com
Thu Aug 6 15:08:35 EDT 2009


On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 11:52 AM, Jeffrey T.
Requadt<jeffreyrequadt_list at hotmail.com> wrote:
> 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.
>
<clipped>

Here is my attempt.  If we read v. 40 not in isolation, but in
continuity from v. 37, the original question should be answered by now
after all discussions.

I believe the original posting and subsequent elaboration by others
may boil down to this: whether v. 40 'PAS hO + participle' is trying
to say about 'that group of people', not 'everyone in general'.

Here is my way of solving it:

PAS in v. 40 is taken to refer to those in v. 39 = 37 ‘πᾶν ὃ
~’‘everyone who(m)’. The participle of the verb functions as defining
or explanatory (not much of delimiting/restricting function to give a
strange suspicion of in a sense of 'only those’).

If I may rephrase the verse,
"It is those whom Father has given to Jesus - these are the ones
beholding the Son and believing into Him - may have eternal life. -
This is how/what Father desires."

I hope it can make a workable sense,

Oun Kwon.

P.S. Thankfully I had to a chance to think a little more on the text
in question since my first try to post was filtered out, labelled as
doctrinal interpretation.

Yes, interpretations. Which we have one way or the other. Doctrinal?
I never thought I had my own DOCTRINE of OUN ;-/
Since there are more doctrines one can count and nothing is there new
under the sun, which one have I actually stumbled on?



More information about the B-Greek mailing list