Page 3 of 3

Re: John 14:30

Posted: June 5th, 2011, 8:05 am
by Bill Ross 2
Jonathan Robie wrote:Bill, I think "he has no hold on me" does make sense here - Jesus is saying he is acting in obedience to his Father, so that the world will know that he loves him, not as a slave to the ruler of this world.

I think BDAG and the vast majority of translations got this right.
I think you are right about BDAG, but not abut the translations:

http://bible.cc/john/14-30.htm

If he's saying "no hold on me" then this can lead nicely into his doing the father's will in the next verse, and that seems to round out the thought. I'm beginning to embrace that.

Thank you.

Re: John 14:30

Posted: June 5th, 2011, 8:10 am
by Bill Ross 2
On the same link I sent (http://bible.cc/john/14-30.htm) are several commentators cited at the bottom on the page, giving a wide variety of translations and views.

Re: John 14:30

Posted: June 5th, 2011, 8:21 am
by Bill Ross 2
According to the NA apparatus, there only significant textual variant is the substitution εὑρήσει for ἔχει, which does nothing to change the issue.
I agree with the rule of thumb, but don't find εὑρήσει for ἔχει to be a trivial or inconseqential variance. Another variant appears in the previous phrase that seems to disagree with NA:

Clarke: "The prince of this world - Τουτου, of this, is omitted by ABDEGHKLMS, Mt. BH, one hundred others; both the Syriac, later Persic, all the Arabic, and several of the primitive fathers. I rather think the omission of the pronoun makes the sense more general;.."

In fact, in that light, I might side with Wakefield. See http://bible.cc/john/14-30.htm for his view, as well as views derived from εὑρήσει.

Re: John 14:30

Posted: June 6th, 2011, 7:16 am
by Barry Hofstetter
Bill Ross wrote:
I agree with the rule of thumb, but don't find εὑρήσει for ἔχει to be a trivial or inconseqential variance. Another variant appears in the previous phrase that seems to disagree with NA:

Clarke: "The prince of this world - Τουτου, of this, is omitted by ABDEGHKLMS, Mt. BH, one hundred others; both the Syriac, later Persic, all the Arabic, and several of the primitive fathers. I rather think the omission of the pronoun makes the sense more general;.."

In fact, in that light, I might side with Wakefield. See http://bible.cc/john/14-30.htm for his view, as well as views derived from εὑρήσει.
Bill, please be aware of the forum rules – we discuss how the Greek contributes to our understanding of the text, not how Wakefield or any other commentator sees it. The difference between the two verbs is "he will find nothing in me" as opposed to "he has nothing in me." Does that change the meaning? Surely, but it doesn't really tell us what "nothing" means, which seems to me to be the key point. As for the omission of τούτου, I really didn't notice, since I started with N-A, which doesn't read it, and doesn't note it as a variant. It looks like you may have been starting with the KJV or the TR as your base text rather than the Greek of N-A, which is the assumed text for B-Greek. Remember, this is not the forum for discussing text critical issues, though figuring out what one variant means in our reading of the text vs. another reading is fine -- as long as we keep away from the merits of a particular reading.

Re: John 14:30

Posted: June 6th, 2011, 7:29 am
by Bill Ross 2
While I still don't quite grasp the passage, I think you have all helped so much to make clear what the words mean, and for this I thank you. I think that the rest I will ponder privately based on the context etc. But again, many thanks.