Limited atonement?

[NorrinRadd]

Tab, this is not the Biblical Languages board, so for those of us who know no Greek beyond a few letters of the alphabet, please explain your point in simple English.

[tabibito]

Tab, this is not the Biblical Languages board, so for those of us who know no Greek beyond a few letters of the alphabet, please explain your point in simple English.

Unfortunately, the challenge was made and the distinctions are grounded in Koine Greek definitions and grammar, and need some rather esoteric English to explain. Still, I'll give it a try:
First:
Verbs in Koine have distinctive endings.

Pistue-o (I believe) one use only. (the o is omega - sounds as in the "oe" of "toe")
Pisteu-ete you (plural) believe, has two uses, 1/ statement of fact 2/ subdivided as command, request, expressing a need.
Pisteu-ète you (plural) may/can believe (exact application depends on a variety of conditions established by context.)

ina
ina introducing "pisteu-ète" means "so_that/in_order_to" with "make_possible" arising from the interplay of ina and pisteu-ète.



"This is the work of God: that you (plural) believe." Two things (at a minimum) are needed to make this translation work.
1/ "believe" would have to be translated from pisteu-ete: it isn't, it's from Pisteu-ète. (the dingus over the "e" changes the sound to the "e" of "cafe.")
2/ "that," for this verse, should be translated from (most likely) oti: it can't be translated from "ina" = "so_that/in_order_to_bring_about" which is in the Koine text. However, in some English language constructions, provided that no ambiguity would result, the "so" is optional.

The expositional translation of the critical phrase, then, is "in order to make it possible for you to believe." (side note: there is a parallel in 1 Cor 2:4-5)

Forgot to mention: I've used pisteu-ète in the explanation, but the screen shots show pisteu-s-ète. Both translate the same way in English, but the difference is subtle in Koine. The "s," indicates that the aim is to bring about complete belief; No "s," to bring about belief. UBS5 texts show ète, Byzantine Majority texts show sète.

[Just Passing Through]

That’s not correct. John 6:29 uses a substantival hina, not a purpose clause. It is a hina that points back to a demonstrative pronoun (or an implied pronoun), and simply says “This is what that this is.” The same usage as in verses 39-40: “And this is the will of him who sent me, that (hina) I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. For my Father’s will is (implied this) that (hina) everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.”
Also in 4:34 “My food,” said Jesus, “is (implied this: +hina) to do the will of him who sent me and to finish his work.”
Or in 15:13 “Greater love has no one than this, that (hina) he lay down his life for his friends.” All of these use the subjunctive, as in 6:29. “The work of God is this: (hina) to believe in the one he has sent.”

[tabibito]

That’s not correct. John 6:29 uses a substantival hina, not a purpose clause. It is a hina that points back to a demonstrative pronoun (or an implied pronoun), and simply says “This is what that this is.” The same usage as in verses 39-40: “And this is the will of him who sent me, that (hina) I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day. For my Father’s will is (implied this) that (hina) everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.”
Also in 4:34 “My food,” said Jesus, “is (implied this: +hina) to do the will of him who sent me and to finish his work.”
Or in 15:13 “Greater love has no one than this, that (hina) he lay down his life for his friends.” All of these use the subjunctive, as in 6:29. “The work of God is this: (hina) to believe in the one he has sent.”

Interesting. Do you have references?
As I said - this is included as an elementary translation exercise in a Koine Greek textbook.

[Just Passing Through]

Daniel Wallace: Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, p 474 would be the most accessible reference.

4) Substantival hina Clause (a.k.a. Sub-Final Clause)
As with ὅτι plus the indicative, ἵνα plus the subjunctive can be used substantivally. There are four basic uses: subject, predicate nominative, direct object, and apposition.

He would include this use under predicate nominative if the “this” is just implied, or apposition where he says,

d) Apposition Clause
The force of the appositional ἵνα is namely, that. Although not frequent, it is almost idiomatic of Johannine literature.
John 17:3 αὕτη ἐστιν ἡ αἰώνιος ζωὴ [ἵνα γινώσκωσιν σὲ τὸν μόνον ἀληθινὸν θεόν]
This is eternal life, [namely, that they might know you, the only true God].
1 John 3:11 αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ ἀγγελία ἣν ἠκούσατε ἀπʼ ἀρχ?ς, [ἵνα ἀγαπ?μεν ἀλλήλους]
This is the message that you have heard from the beginning, [namely, that we should love one another].

[tabibito]

Or in 15:13 “Greater love has no one than this, that (hina) he lay down his life for his friends.” All of these use the subjunctive, as in 6:29

μειζονα ταυτης αγαπην ουδεις εχει ινα τις την ψυχην αυτου θη υπερ των φιλων αυτου
Greater than this love no-one has, that he might lay down his soul for his loved ones.
Yes, there is a difference: as much difference in meaning as there is in structure. A nominative pronoun (tis) comes AFTER hina. In this case, some one lays down his soul for the sake of (which is more or less implicit in the hina). He might lay down his life (this is speculative) for his loved ones. In John 6:29 hina stands between the nominative noun and the subjunctive verb.

Clause structure in John 15:13 is radically different from that of John 6:29.

John 6:39 τουτο δε εστιν το θελημα του πεμψαντος με πατρος ινα παν ο δεδωκεν μοι μη απολεσω
and this is the will of the Father having sent me SO THAT all whom he has given to me may not perish - looks like the stock standard usage of ina + subjunctive to me. Of course it might also be rendered as "The will of the father having sent me is that," but it won't change "may not perish" nor will it change the motive for sending.
John 6:40 το θελημα του πεμψαντος με ινα πας ο θεωρων (present active participle - not subjunctive, and used as a noun at that) τον υιον και πιστευων εις αυτον εχη ζωην αιωνιον και αναστησω αυτον εγω τη εσχατη ημερα - there is NO subjunctive verb in this verse.

Perhaps you can point out in a text somewhere that shows a valid rendering or interpretation of a subjunctive as an indicative?

[Obsidian]

Your absurd "translation" has Jesus ignore their question in verse 28, and completely fail to explain what he is talking about in verse 27, despite being asked about it.

John 6:27-30

27 Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed. 28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? 29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent. 30 They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work?

[Sparko]

John 3:36
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on them.

John 5:24
“Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life.

John 6:47
Very truly I tell you, the one who believes has eternal life.



OK if you believe in the Son, then you HAVE eternal life. Eternal life means you will never die. That you will live forever. You are saved. ARE saved. Not "will be" saved. Not "will get" eternal life, but "HAS" eternal life.

So if you could lose your salvation, how can it be said that anyone "has" eternal life. You can't have eternal life then lose it, because that would mean you NEVER had it in the first place.

Take Bob. Bob believes in the Son and so Jesus says "Bob you have eternal life"

But then a week later Bob decides "I don't believe any more" - if he then loses eternal life, that makes Jesus a liar when he said "Bob you have eternal life" a week ago. And Jesus should know since God is omnipotent. So what Jesus should have said, was "Sorry Bob, but you don't actually have eternal life because your faith won't last long enough to get it"

[Cow Poke]

On a light note, one of my Church of Christ friends (who believes you can lose your salvation) taunts me with "at our Church, we sing...


EVERY OTHER DAY with Jesus is sweeter than the day before,
EVERY OTHER DAY with Jesus, I love Him more and more...."

[Just Passing Through]

John 15:13, you’re looking at the wrong word the “this” is tautes. You’re looking at the tis, “someone” after the hina. A paraphrase would be “No one has greater love than this (tautes), namely, someone or anyone (tis) laying down his life for his friends.”
That is directly parallel to 6:39: “My Father’s will is this, namely, (he wants) everyone whom he has given me to not be lost.”
John 6:40, again you’re looking at the wrong word. The subjunctive is eche “have.”
“The will of my Father is this, namely, (he wants) everyone who sees the Son and believes in him to have (subjunctive) eternal life.”
There is motive there, but that’s because the definition of the Father’s “will” is motive. The hina clause is telling us “This is what he wants; it’s his will” It’s a substantive, as if it was a noun, a thing he wants, not a purpose clause.

But as someone reminded us, this is not a Greek board. I don't want to extend the grammar discussion any farther; I just popped in to make a clarification.

[Obsidian]

People study a year or two of Greek, and they think they are smarter than the translators of the Bible who were fluent and actually spoke these languages. All you have to do is look at the context of the verse to see that Tabibito's translation is wrong. Jesus is answering their question, not ignoring them. He is explaining what it means to labor for bread that doesn't spoil.

[Cow Poke]

People study a year or two of Greek, and they think they are smarter than the translators of the Bible who were fluent and actually spoke these languages. All you have to do is look at the context of the verse to see that Tabibito's translation is wrong. Jesus is answering their question, not ignoring them. He is explaining what it means to labor for bread that doesn't spoil.

Yeah, I had a year of Greek and Hebrew 45 years ago, and, like Dirty Harry says, "a man has got to know his limitations". I haven't kept up with it, and there are plenty of people way smarter than me who have studied this stuff for most of their lives....

[tabibito]

We know that everyone who has been born of God does not keep on sinning

[tabibito]

People study a year or two of Greek, and they think they are smarter than the translators of the Bible who were fluent and actually spoke these languages. All you have to do is look at the context of the verse to see that Tabibito's translation is wrong. Jesus is answering their question, not ignoring them. He is explaining what it means to labor for bread that doesn't spoil.

And how many years have you been studying Koine Greek?
If it is less than 10 you have some catching up to do.

[Cow Poke]

We know that everyone who has been born of God does not keep on sinning

Except, of course, for Paul.