[B-Greek] hINA in Jn 9:3, 11:4

Elizabeth Kline kline_dekooning at earthlink.net
Tue Feb 3 16:04:10 EST 2009


Ivar,

thanks again for your response.


On Feb 2, 2009, at 9:27 PM, Iver Larsen wrote:

>>
>> A prime example is her reading (pages 170-171) of hINA in Jn 9:3  
>> where
>> she rejects the telic reading of hINA in Jesus' reply to the  
>> disciples
>> ALL hINA FANERWQHi TA ERGA TOU QEOU EN AUTWi. There have been
>> suggestions that this hINA introduces a results clause and even the
>> more improbable suggestion that it introduces an imperatival clause.
>> However,  R.E. Brown, F.F. Bruce, D. Carson. L. Morris, G. Beasley-
>> Murray, to name just a few, read it as telic. The clincher is John
>> 11:4 where the telic meaning is explicit.
>
> What is meant by "telic"?

telic = final = purpose, I think this is correct. Not sure.

> The hINA has to refer to result rather than purpose here, but this  
> is a
> contextual interpretation. The word hINA in and of itself does not  
> specify a choice between purpose
> and result, especially in John's Gospel. hINA is extremely common in  
> John, and is often used to
> refer to result. (hINA occurs 145 times in John, 39 in Matthew, 46  
> in Luke).
>
> According to Webster "Telic" means "tending toward an end" and this  
> corresponds to the Greek word it
> is derived from. Both purpose and result tends toward an end. If  
> "telic" is understood to mean
> purpose, then hINA is not telic in these verses. That some  
> commentators think this is the case,
> only shows how they have been misled by their tradition, and they  
> have not made their own
> independent research.
>
> In John 11:4, the hINA is also used to refer to result or  
> consequence rather than purpose, but again
> that is a contextual interpretation that is probably linked to one's  
> theological presuppositions. My
> point is that it is a mistake to say that hINA in Koine Greek and  
> especially in John's writing by
> default refers to purpose.

JOHN 9:3 APEKRIQH IHSOUS: OUTE hOUTOS hHMARTEN OUTE hOI GONEIS AUTOU,  
ALL hINA FANERWQHi TA ERGA TOU QEOU EN AUTWi.

JOHN 11:4 AKOUSAS DE hO IHSOUS EIPEN: hAUTH hH ASQENEIA OUK ESTIN PROS  
QANATON ALL hUPER THS DOXHS TOU QEOU, hINA DOXASQHi hO hUIOS TOU QEOU  
DI AUTHS.

The commentators cited (see above) refer to Jn 11:4 as a more explicit  
expression of the idea in Jn 9:3. In Jn 11:4 we have two comments  
which follow Jesus statement  hAUTH hH ASQENEIA OUK ESTIN PROS  
QANATON. The first ALL hUPER THS DOXHS TOU QEOU is rendered in BDAG  
1030 A.1.b "to reveal the glory of God". A marker that indicates  
something which is done or some event that transpires on behalf of or  
in someone's or some entity's interest (my paraphrase of BDAG).  
Therefore, how we read the hINA clause will depend on how we  
understand the  hUPER THS DOXHS TOU QEOU. I wouldn't get terribly  
upset about a result clause reading of hINA but it seems that   
hUPER ... QEOU suggests purpose, does it not?


> only shows how they have been misled by their tradition, and they  
> have not made their own
> independent research

R.E. Brown, D.Carson, G. Beasley-Murray and L.Morris,  represent  
significant diversity, we are dealing with more than one tradition here.


>
>
> BDF says in §388 "The following picture obtains for the NT: What can  
> be interpreted as intended or
> probably result is expressed to a great extent by hINA..."
>
> Further down he says: "The infinitive is still used abundantly by  
> all authors and the choice between
> the inf. and hINA appears to be a matter of preference in each case.  
> John exhibits a marked
> preference for hINA instead of the inf."

Preference doesn't rule out choice, and choice is often understood to  
suggest that the chosen expression better served the author's purpose.  
The infinitive doesn't communicate mood nor does it encode person and  
number. M.Sim suggests that the hINA plus subjective was used instead  
of the infinitive in order to communicate mood, a potential state of  
affairs, or a desirable state of affairs rather than a present state  
of affairs (factual). It was also used to disambiguate person and  
number. For this reason Sim does not see the hINA plus subjective as  
an equivalent alternative to the infinitive.

thank you

Elizabeth Kline







More information about the B-Greek mailing list