[B-Greek] Jn.4:23,24

Blue Meeksbay bluemeeksbay at yahoo.com
Fri May 7 13:09:45 EDT 2010


Hi Robert –
 
PNEUMA hO QEOS, KAI TOUS PROSKUNOUNTAS AUTON EN PNEUMATI KAI ALHQEIAi DEI PROSKUNEIN. JOH 4:24
 
I would also agree with Mark L. that both uses are being implied – that is *in spirit,* and *with spirit.* I believe, in this case, John’s anarthrous construction is significant. In fact, I think this is a good example as to why sometimes, (not all the time), an anarthrous noun can be important. I believe John is emphasizing the *spirital* nature of PNEUMA (I’m coining a new word)  and not the mere identity of the Holy Spirit or the human spirit. In other words, John is saying worship by all that is *spirit,* or worship by that which is essentially spirit. Worship by the Holy Spirit. Worship by (with) your human spirit, (as contrasted with the *physical* worship of the temple).  As Mark suggested, when the human spirit and not the physical body becomes the primary instrument of worship, it does not matter whether you are in a synagogue (as in the case of Jesus), or a mountain top (with Mark in Colorado). Because of this I would prefer worship *by
 the spirit.* 
 
In addition, since John includes ALHQEIAi and later connects it with that with the Word of God (Jn. 16:13; 17:17), I believe worship by all that is spirit would also include the Word of God (cf. Jn 6:63 – notice PNEUMA ESTIN KAI ZWH ESTIN).
 
TO PNEUMA ESTIN TO ZWiOPOIOUN, hH SARX OUK WFELEI OUDEN• TA hRHMATA hA EGW LELALHKA hUMIN PNEUMA ESTIN KAI ZWH ESTIN. John 6:63
 
 Therefore, IMO,  EN PNEUMATI would include the Holy Spirit, the human spirit, and the Word of God. It is all-inclusive.
 
Dana and Mantey have a good section (149) on the anarthrous use of nouns. Let me first quote them quoting Robertson.
 
*We adopt Robertson’s conclusion that it is more accurate to speak of the absence of the article than the omission of the article. When we use omission, we imply that the article ought to be present (R. 790), while as a matter of fact it ought not to be, because the writer was seeking to convey an idea which the use of the article would not have properly represented.*
 
*It is instructive to observe that the anarthrous noun occurs in many prepositional phrases. This is no mere accident, for there are no accidents in the growth of a language: each idiom has its reason. Nor is it because the noun is sufficiently definite without the article, which is true, as Greek nouns have an intrinsic definiteness.  But that is not the reason for not using the article. A prepositional phrase usually implies some idea of quality or kind…*
 
*When in Col. 2:20, Paul says, If ye died with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as if living EN KOSMWi, in the world, do ye subject yourself to decrees?  It is clear than EN KOSMWidefines a kind of life: an *in-the-world life.* So we might present innumerable instances in proof of the fact that in a prepositional phrase it is the qualitative aspect of the noun which is prominent, rather than its identity…*
 
This is what I think John is emphasizing.
 
Perhaps, an analogy would be if, let’s say, the King of Spain was visiting another country. Someone might say, *the King is Spanish, through and through. Therefore, he would love it if someone wanted to honour him, to honour him *in Spanish,* or, perhaps, *The King would love it, if someone wanted to honour him, to honour him *with everything Spanish* (for instance, honour him by speaking his language, dress according to his culture, offer him Spanish food, etc.
 
This is what I think John is telling us. Worship God * in or with everything spirit.*
 
In addition, in the context it seems John is saying we should worship as Jesus worshiped (noticed the NUN ESTIN in verse 23). The GNT infers he worshipped in or by his human spirit (possibly Luke 10:21, if one uses the Byzantine text), he worshiped with the Word of God (perhaps, Lu. 4:1, 8), and he, obviously worshiped through or by the Holy Spirit (Heb. 9:14; also cf. Lu. cf. 4:18).
 
Mary, also worshiped by her spirit (Lu. 1:47), and with the Word of God (Lu. 1: 50, 53). I cannot think of a verse that says she worshiped by the Holy Spirit, unless, since it intimates Elizabeth spoke by the Holy Spirit (Lu. 1:41), it is implying the same is true for Mary.
 
If John wanted to exclude all sense but the Holy Spirit he could have very easily used an article or include hAGIWi   as inEN PNEUMATI hAGIWi   (Jude 1:20).  John surely would have known that by leaving it simply as EN PNEUMATI it would create some ambiguity as to whether he meant the Holy Spirit or the human spirit. Of course, I do not think he intended it to be ambiguous because I think John purposely meant it to be all-inclusive by the anarthrous construction.
 
Secondly, it seems, if John wanted to exclude an instrumental sense, emphasizing only the locative sense, *in,* he could have used it with a verb carrying a stative sense. Consider the following examples.
 
hUMEIS DE OUK ESTE EN SARKI ALLA EN PNEUMATI, EIPER PNEUMA QEOU OIKEI EN hUMIN. EI DE TIS PNEUMA CRISTOU OUK ECEI, hOUTOS OUK ESTIN AUTOU. ROM 8:9 
 
EGENOMHN EN PNEUMATI EN THi KURIAKHi hHMERAi KAI HKOUSA OPISW MOU FWNHN MEGALHN hWS SALPIGGOS REV 1:10 
 
EUQEWS EGENOMHN EN PNEUMATI, KAI IDOU QRONOS EKEITO EN TWi OURANWi, KAI EPI TON QRONON KAQHMENOS, REV 4:2
(Others disagree with me, but I believe GINOMAI sometimes can carry a stative sense in the aorist).
 
Therefore, if he wanted to only emphasize the locative sense, perhaps, he could have worked in the present participle ONTAS as is used in the following examples.
 
ASPASASQE hHRWiDIWNA TON SUGGENH MOU. ASPASASQE TOUS EK TWN NARKISSOU TOUS ONTAS EN KURIWi. ROM 16:11
 
KAI hUMAS NEKROUS ONTAS [EN] TOIS PARAPTWMASIN KAI THi AKROBUSTIAi THS SARKOS hUMWN, SUNEZWOPOIHSEN hUMAS SUN AUTWi, CARISAMENOS hHMIN PANTA TA PARAPTWMATA. COL 2:13 (see Byz, TR)
 
And then, of course, when the hour came to which Jesus was referring to in verse 23, all that is spirit came to include the PNEUMATIKWN, referred to in I Cor. 12-14, that is IMO. 
 
As far as your second question, I agree with Mark, it should be understood as God is spirit, simply because that is John’s style. 
 
KAI ESTIN hAUTH hH AGGELIA hHN AKHKOAMEN AP᾽ AUTOU KAI ANAGGELLOMEN hUMIN, hOTI hO QEOS FWS ESTIN KAI SKOTIA EN AUTWi OUK ESTIN OUDEMIA. 1JO 1:5
 
Within the context of John’s writings, *God is light* is being used in the same way as God is spirit, (as you suggested). John would not be saying God is *a* light, anymore than he would say God is *a* spirit. John views God as the foundational source for all existence, and, therefore, would consider him Light and not a light; as such, I believe he is emphasizing the essential character of God in both cases.
 
 Others may disagree with me, but, at least, you will get different opinions and then be able to decide for yourself.
 
Sincerely,
Blue Harris

 



________________________________
From: Robert George <4examp at gmail.com>
To: B-Greek Lists <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Tue, May 4, 2010 5:17:27 PM
Subject: [B-Greek] Jn.4:23,24

23.  But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will
worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to
be His worshipers.
24.  God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and
truth. (NASB)

  23.  αλλα ερχεται ωρα και νυν εστιν οτε οι αληθινοι προσκυνηται
προσκυνησουσιν τω πατρι εν πνευματι και αληθεια και γαρ ο πατηρ τοιουτους
ζητει τους προσκυνουντας αυτον 24.  πνευμα ο θεος και τους προσκυνουντας
αυτον εν πνευματι και αληθεια δει προσκυνειν (w&h 1881)

What's truer?
- worship Him in spirit
- worship Him with spirit?

- God is spirit ~ (God is light)
- God is a spirit ~ (God is a light)?

What difference do you see by worshipping "in" or "with" spirit?

~ New World Translation = "with" & "a".
---
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



      


More information about the B-Greek mailing list