[B-Greek] hINA in Jn 9:3, 11:4
Carl Conrad
cwconrad2 at mac.com
Wed Feb 4 10:23:50 EST 2009
On Jan 31, 2009, at 5:40 PM, Elizabeth Kline wrote:
>>
>
>
> JOHN 9:1 KAI PARAGWN EIDEN ANQRWPON TUFLON EK GENETHS. 2 KAI HRWTHSAN
> AUTON hOI MAQHTAI AUTOU LEGONTES: hRABBI, TIS hHMARTEN, hOUTOS H hOI
> GONEIS AUTOU, hINA TUFLOS GENNHQHi 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.
>
> M. Sim, in her thesis on hINA in Koine, IMHO shows an intemperate zeal
> to stamp out the purpose clause introduced by hINA. The author faults
> others for trying to force hINA into a inflexible semantic mold but it
> seems to me that she does the same thing by hammering away on
> "representation" as the one and only function of hINA in the Koine
> period.
>
> 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.
>
> I think M. Sim is worth reading and I am all in favor of using
> Relevance Theory as a model, but it is just another framework within
> linguistics which will soon pass into the archives of old frameworks,
> it is already over twenty years old.
I would agree with Elizabeth that FANERWQHi IN Jn 9:3 ought to be
considered telic rather than consecutive, pace Iver. I did not read
through the whole dissertation but rather looked at several sections
of it. I am surprised, indeed rather shocked, that she used BGAD
rather than BDAG when she did her research, considering that she did
review what Chrys Caragounis had to say about hINA in his
"Development ..." book, which is much more recent than the publication
of BDAG (I was interested to see that she questions (as do I)
Caragounis' claim (based on Apollonius Dyscolus) that hINA is causal
and should be understood as meaning "because" in Mk 4:12 and Rom 5:20
Mark 4:11 καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς· ὑμῖν τὸ
μυστήριον δέδοται τῆς βασιλείας τοῦ
θεοῦ· ἐκείνοις δὲ τοῖς ἔξω ἐν
παραβολαῖς τὰ πάντα γίνεται,
12 ἵνα βλέποντες βλέπωσιν καὶ μὴ
ἴδωσιν, καὶ ἀκούοντες ἀκούωσιν καὶ
μὴ συνιῶσιν, μήποτε ἐπιστρέψωσιν
καὶ ἀφεθῇ αὐτοῖς. [KAI ELEGEN AUTOIS: hUMIN TO
MUSTHRION DEDOTAI THS BASILEIAS TOU QEOU; EKEINOIS DE TOIS EXW EN
PARABOLAIS TA PANTA GINETAI, 12 hINA BLEPONTES BLEPWSIN KAI MH IDWSIN,
KAI AKOUONTES AKOUWSIN KAI MH SUNIWSIN, MHPOTE EPISTREYWSIN KAI AFEQHi
AUTOIS]
Romans 5:20 νόμος δὲ παρεισῆλθεν, ἵνα
πλεονάσῃ τὸ παράπτωμα· οὗ δὲ
ἐπλεόνασεν ἡ ἁμαρτία,
ὑπερεπερίσσευσεν ἡ χάρις, [NOMOS DE
PAREISHLQEN, hINA PLEONASHi TO PARAPTWMA; hOU DE EPLEONASEN hH
hAMARTIA, hUPEREPERISSEUSEN hH CARIS.]
I think most interpreters do indeed understand hINA in these two
passages as telic, and so do I. Of course the interpretation of Mark
4:10-12 does indeed puzzle interpreters, some understanding it in
ironic terms as I do, others literally as what Jesus intended to
affirm. Reading that hINA as causal, however, appears to cut the knot
rather than untie it: "everything comes in riddles to them BECAUSE
they see without seeing and hear without understanding, so as not to
repent and be forgiven."
I need to go back and work through the whole dissertation and try to
understand the way she differentiates hINA from hOTI as introducing
representations of what is spoken or urged. I do think that BDAG has
got hINA pretty much right, but my own guess is that hINA +
subjunctive clauses in Vulgar Koine (as opposed to the literary
language) functions much as does the infinitive -- in a variety of not-
so-readily distinguishable variant functions.
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list