No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 September 2019
While it has recently become a common assumption that the traditional understanding of the grammar of John 3.16 (‘For God so loved the world that …’) is misleading or simply inaccurate, this article demonstrates on the basis of parallel constructions from the ancient Greek corpus that οὕτως … ὥστε, when used with ἀγαπάω, functions as a correlative intensifier–result pair, exactly as it is presented in the traditional understanding.
1 See, for example, Carson, D. A., The Gospel according to John (PNTC; Leicester: InterVarsity/Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991) 204Google Scholar; Morris, L., The Gospel according to John (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995) 201–4Google Scholar; Wilckens, U., Das Evangelium nach Johannes (NTD 4; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2000) 71CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Köstenberger, A., John (BECNT; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2004) 129Google Scholar; Brown, R., The Gospel according to John (i–xii): Introduction, Translation, and Notes (AYB; New Haven/London: Yale University Press, 2008) 133–4Google Scholar; Michaels, J. R., The Gospel of John (NICNT; Grand Rapids/Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2010) 201Google Scholar; Harris, M., John 3:16: What's It All about? (Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2015) 10–11Google Scholar.
2 See, for example, Newman, B. and Nida, E., A Handbook on the Gospel of John (UBSHS; New York: United Bible Societies, 1993) 89Google Scholar; Keil, G., Das Johannesevangelium: Ein philosophischer und theologischer Kommentar (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1997) 62Google Scholar; Gundry, R. and Howell, R., ‘The Sense and Syntax of John 3:14–17 with Special Reference to the Use of οὕτως… ὥστε in John 3:16’, NovT 41 (1999): 24–39Google Scholar; Wengst, K., Das Johannesevangelium, 1. Teilband: Kapitel 1–10 (TKNT 4/1; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2000) 145Google Scholar; Keener, C., The Gospel of John: A Commentary, vol. ii (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003) 566Google Scholar; Kruse, C., John: An Introduction and Commentary (TNTC; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2003) 115–16Google Scholar; Thyen, H., Das Johannesevangelium (HNT 6; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005) 211Google Scholar; Kanagaraj, J., John (NCC; Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2013) 34Google Scholar; Weinrich, W., John 1:1–7:1 (CC; St. Louis: Concordia, 2015) 371–2Google Scholar; NET; ISV; NLT; HCSB; CSB.
3 Gundry and Howell, ‘John 3:16’.
4 BDAG s.v. 3.
5 BDAG s.v. 3.
6 Translation from W. Miller, LCL.
7 Translation from Charlesworth, J. H., ed., Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol. i: Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1983)Google Scholar.
8 A pronoun/proadverb functions anaphorically when it points to something said above (cf. ἀνά), as opposed to when it functions cataphorically pointing to something which will be said below (cf. κατά).
9 Translation from Tatian, Oratio ad Graecos and Fragments (ed. and trans. Whitaker, Molly; OECT; Oxford: Clarendon, 1982)Google Scholar.
10 ‘Correlative’ refers to cases where a pair of words combine to form a conjunction. Examples in English would be both … and and not only … but also.
11 A pronoun/proadverb functions cataphorically when it points to something which will be said below (cf. κατά), as opposed to when it functions anaphorically pointing to something said above (cf. ἀνά).
12 ὡς is also able to function similarly to ὥστε to signal a result-clause, but does not do so in this example. See LSJ s.v. B.iii; GE s.v. ii.c.a.
13 See Runge, S., Discourse Grammar of the Greek New Testament: A Practical Introduction for Teaching and Exegesis (Bellingham, WA: Lexham, 2010) 61–71Google Scholar.
14 Translation from C. L. Browson, LCL.
15 Wallace lists ἵνα, ὅπως, ὅτι and ὡς as the conjunctions which can indicate a substantival clause. Wallace, D., Greek Grammar beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996) 677–8Google Scholar. Postcedents such as this can also be introduced via asyndeton.
16 Note the phrasing of this sentence. The ὥστε-clause indirectly describes not how it was cold (manner), but how cold it was (degree of intensity).
17 A gradable adjective is an adjective which can be readily used in a comparative way or modified with respect to degree. For example, hot, big and fast are gradable adjectives, as something can easily be hotter, bigger and faster, and very hot, very big and very fast. Non-gradable adjectives, which tend to be binary in nature, are less readily used in such ways. For example, married, dead and perfect are non-gradable adjectives, as something cannot easily be more married, more dead or more perfect, or very married, very dead or very perfect, at least not without pressing the language for effect.
18 Fleischhauer, J., Degree Gradation of Verbs (Dissertations in Language and Cognition 2; Düsseldorf: Düsseldorf University Press, 2016), esp. 277–80Google Scholar.
19 For this reason, despite their formal similarities, Acts 14.1 is not really an exact parallel with John 3.16. ἀγαπάω in John 3.16 is a gradable verb. λαλέω in Acts 14.1 is not, meaning it could not easily admit an intensive meaning anyway. So the fact that in Acts 14.1 οὕτως must indicate manner and not intensity does nothing to rule out the intensive meaning in John 3.16.
20 Gundry and Howell, ‘John 3:16’, 26–7.
21 Gundry and Howell, ‘John 3:16’, 27–32.
22 Namely, those proposed for Josephus, Ant. 9.12.3; Philo, Det. 87; Congr. 168; Somn. 1.203; Abr. 31; Legat. 157, 163; Epictetus 1.11.4, 4.11.19.
23 Namely, those proposed for Demosthenes 2.26; Josephus, Ant. 8.7.7; 9.5.1; 9.12.3; Philo, Agr. 41, 50; Her. 83; Mos. 1.234; Spec. 2.87; Prob. 131.
24 When Gundry and Howell's identification of an antecedent does effect a somewhat coherent reading, this seems to be attributable not to a sound interpretation of οὕτως and ὥστε but to the fact that the passages they are interpreting are coherent, with the other elements of the οὕτως-clause containing anaphoric ties to the preceding sentence, and with the sentence with οὕτως … ὥστε being intended to develop and advance the previous sentence. This does not, however, mean that the οὕτως is necessarily anaphoric. Instead, as the other material points back, the οὕτως points ahead to move the discussion forward.
25 In several cases Gundry and Howell's renderings tend to obscure the gradability of the Greek original, but examination of the underlying text reveals verbs whose meanings clearly lend themselves to being gradable.
26 LSJ s.vv. οὕτως iii, ὥστε B.ii; BDAG s.vv. οὕτως 2, ὥστε 2aα, β; GE s.vv. οὕτως 2b, ὥστε ii.
27 Spicq, C., ‘Notes d'exégèse Johannique. La charité est amour manifeste’, RB 65 (1958) 358–70, esp. 359–60Google Scholar.
28 Spicq is, however, cited favourably by Carson, John, 204 n. 16.
29 Spicq, ‘Notes’, 360. The examples given where the verb is ἀγαπάω are Isocrates, De pace 8.45; Antidosis 15.88; Theopompus fr. 124. These examples which include ἀγαπάω, along with other similar examples, will be provided and discussed below.
30 The Greek examples given here were located using the TLG database. In an effort to focus on examples which more closely parallel John 3.16 I am omitting here those cases where οὕτως … ὥστε is found with ἀγαπάω but where οὕτως does not directly modify ἀγαπάω but rather an adverb which itself modifies ἀγαπάω.
31 In a number of the examples given below ὥστε is followed not by the indicative but by an infinitive, in keeping with the fact that the use of the infinitive had long been supplanting the use of the indicative with ὥστε in subordinate clauses; on that trend, see Robertson, A. T., A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research (Nashville, TN: Broadman, 1934) 1000Google Scholar. This does not diminish but instead perhaps enhances their usefulness as parallels for John 3.16, which does retain the indicative after ὥστε. That is because following ὥστε with the infinitive makes clear that the clause is both a result-clause and a dependent clause, the former of which speaks against the cataphor–postcedent interpretation of οὕτως, the latter against Gundry and Howell's anaphoric–dependent clause interpretation of οὕτως. The rarer use of the indicative in a dependent ὥστε-clause in John 3.16, found elsewhere in the New Testament only in Gal 2.13, emphasises that God not only had such love as would give his son, but also as did give his son.
32 Translation from G. Norlin, LCL.
33 Translation from G. Norlin, LCL.
34 Translation from R. G. Bury, LCL.
35 Apud Athenaeus, Deipn. 6.252b. Translation from S. D. Olson, LCL.
36 Translation from B. Perrin, LCL.
37 Translation from B. Perrin, LCL.
38 Translation from B. Perrin, LCL.
39 Translation from B. Perrin, LCL.
40 Translation from Themistius, The Private Orations of Themistius (ed. and trans. Penella, R. J.; Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2000)Google Scholar.
41 Translation from Themistius, On Aristotle: Physics 1–3 (trans. Todd, R. B.; London/New Delhi/New York/Sydney: Bloomsbury, 2012)Google Scholar.
42 Translation from W. C. Wright, LCL.
43 Translation mine.
44 Translation from Gregory of Nyssa, Homilies on the Song of Songs (trans. Norris, R. A. Jr.; Atlanta: SBL, 2012)Google Scholar.
45 Translation mine.
46 Translation from John Chrysostom, Commentary on Saint John the Apostle and Evangelist, Homilies 48–88 (trans. Goggin, Sister Thomas Aquinas; FCPS 41; Washington, DC: CUA, 1959)Google Scholar.
47 Translation from NPNF series 1, vol. xiii.
48 Translation from John Chrysostom, Homilies on Paul's Letter to the Philippians (trans. Allen, P.; WGRW 16; Atlanta: SBL, 2013)Google Scholar.
49 μετὰ κρίσεως ‘with judgement’, μετὰ λογισμοῦ ‘with reasoning’, μετὰ τοῦ αἰσθάνεσθαι ‘with perception’, ἀλόγως ‘stupidly’, ἁπλῶς ‘simply’ and ὡς ἔτυχεν ‘anyhow’.
50 Translation from NPNF series 1, vol. xiv.
51 Translation from Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on Isaiah, vol. iii: Chapters 40–50 (trans. Hill, R. C.; Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2008)Google Scholar.
52 Translation mine.
53 Translation mine.
54 Martyrium Juliani et Basilissae 2.36; Photius I, Epistula 216; Fragmenta in epistulam ad Romanos p. 514 Staab; Commentarii in Joannem 83.
55 If we include also examples where ὡς is used in place of ὥστε in the correlative intensifier–result pair with the same meaning (see LSJ s.v. B.iii; GE, s.v. ii.c.a), we have an additional twenty-five examples: Aristophanes of Byzantium, Historiae animalium epitome 2.118; Pappus, Synagoge 8; Themistius, Φιλάδελφοι ἢ περὶ φιλανθρωπίας 81d; Chrysostom, De sacerdotio 2.5; In sanctum Julianum martyrem 1; Quales ducendae sint uxores 2; In Joannem 27.2; In epistulam ad Romanos 32.2; In epistulam ad Galatas commentarius 2.8; 6.3; In epistulam ad Ephesios 20.6; In epistulam ad Philippenses 14.2; Theodoret, Epistulae: Collectio Sirmondiana 76; Explanatio in Canticum canticorum 2; Interpretatio in xii prophetas minores on Zeph 3.16–18; Cyril of Alexandria, Commentarii in Joannem vol. ii p. 389 Pusey; Commentarius in Isaiam prophetam 2.5; 5.3; Gerontius, Vita S. Melaniae Junioris 30; Marcus Eremita, De baptismo 14; John of Damascus, Commentarii in epistulas Pauli on 6.14; Oratio in Sabbatum sanctum 2; Oratio in nativitatem sanctae dei genitrices Mariae 5; Photius I, Fragmenta in epistulam ii ad Corinthios p. 592 Staab; Symeon Neotheologus, Orationes ethicae 7.1.
56 See Jensen, A. M., ‘Information Structure as a More Objective Criterion for Distinguishing between Cataphoric and Kinds of Anaphoric Demonstratives’, Filología Neotestamentaria 32 (2019, forthcoming)Google Scholar. Here in John 3.16a ‘God loved the world’ communicates informational content which has not been brought up in the immediately preceding context, which would prevent οὕτως from being cataphoric in the strict sense without severing the cohesion between this verse and the preceding context.
57 Gundry and Howell, ‘John 3:16’, 35–9.
58 See, for example, Eusebius, De ecclesiastica theologia 1.9.5; 1.12.6; 1.20.18; Athanasius, Epistulae quattuor ad Serapionem 1.20.5; Ps.-Athanasius, Contra Sabellianos 3; Oratio quarta contra Arianos 18; Basil, Regulae morales 5.1; Didymus the Blind, Commentarii in Zacchariam 4.236; Commentarii in Psalmos 22–26.10 p. 86 Gronewald; Commentarii in Psalmos 29–34 p. 221 Gronewald; Ps.-Macarius, Sermones 64 (collectio B) 4.29.2; Cyril of Jerusalem, Catecheses ad illuminandos 1–18 11.6; Chrysostom, Adversus Judaeos (orations 1–8) 3.4; In illud: Pater, si possibile est, transeat 2; Ad eos qui scandalizati sunt 17.4; In Genesin 27.1; Expositiones in Psalmos on Ps 41.4; In Joannem 27.2; De perfecta caritate 1; De regressu 14; Ps.-Chrysostom, In Samaritanam 2; De caritate; In adorationem venerandae crucis; In annuntiationem deiparae; Theodoret, Eranistes p. 197 Ettlinger; Commentaria in Isaiam 2, 3; De incarnatione domini 34; Interpretatio in Psalmos on Ps 29.11–13; 144.8; Interpretatio in xii prophetas minores on Zeph 3.16–18; Haereticarum fabularum compendium 5.2; De providentia orationes decem 10; Cyril of Alexandria, Commentarius in xii prophetas minores vol. ii, pp. 133, 310 Pusey; Commentarii in Joannem vol. i, pp. 226, 227, vol. ii, p. 565 Pusey; Fragmenta in sancti Pauli epistulam ad Romanos vol. iii, pp. 181, 247 Pusey; De sancta trinitate dialogi i–vii p. 507 de Durand; Quod unus sit Christus p. 768 de Durand; Epistulae paschales sive Homiliae paschales (epist. 1–30) 5.6; 13.4; Glaphyra in Pentateuchum 3, on Abraham and Isaac 2; Expositio in Psalmos on Ps 21.23; 91.5; Fragmenta in Canticum canticorum on 3.10; Commentarius in Isaiam prophetam 5.1; Thesaurus de sancta consubstantiali trinitate; Concilium universale Ephesenum anno 431 1.1.6, pp. 72, 92 Schwartz; Proclus, Homilia de caede innocentium et de vidua 8.33; Procopius, Catena in Canticum canticorum PG 87/2.1633; Commentarii in Isaiam PG 87/2.2524; Commentarii in Genesim 22.1; Justinian I, Edictum rectae fidei p. 168 Albertella, Amelotti and Migliardi; Chronicon Paschale p. 683 Dindorf; Germanus I, περὶ ὀρων ζωῆς p. 64 Garton and Westerink; John of Damascus, Contra Nestorianos 31, 37; Sacra parallela; Oratio in ficum arefactam et in parabolam vineae 2; Theodorus Studites, Parva Catechesis 40; Photius I, Bibliotheca pp. 88, 184 Henry; Constantius VII Porphyrogenitus, De contionibus militaribus 1; Symeon Neotheologus, Epistula de confessione 3.
59 Cramer, J. A., Catenae Graecorum patrum in Novum Testamentum, vol. ii (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1841) 206Google Scholar.
60 In Genesin 27.3. Translation mine.