Kai

[Mike Burke Deactivated]

So when Jesus said we must worship God "in Spirit and Truth" He was speaking of two different things?

And when John the Revelator said that His name is "Faithful and True" he was speaking of two different attributes?

There's no such thing as a "hendiadys," and the man who wrote the following doesn't know what he's talking about?

The “Kai” Connection


Although the Greek word “kai” is most often translated into English as “and" its meaning in Greek goes way beyond that of our familiar English coordinate conjunction.



For English readers, “and” is relatively unambiguous, almost always joining two things of equal nature. In Greek however, “kai” is much more complex, operating in ways that are foreign to English speakers. As a result, English readers often wind up with profoundly mistaken understandings of what New Testament authors originally intended. The purpose of this post is to sort through some of those misunderstandings.

The best place to start is with one of the most popular, but widely misunderstood verses in the New Testament– John 4:24 “God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth” (NASB). Scores, perhaps hundreds, of sermons center on John 4:24 every week. Most will predictably differentiate between two kinds of worship (one in spirit and the other in truth) and then invariably conclude that true worship must include both. They are, unfortunately, wrong!

That’s because the phrase “spirit and truth” in John 4:24 is a “hendiadys,” a grammatical construction literally meaning “one through two.” A hendiadys expresses one thing using two things. The two “things” are typically nouns in a subordinate, rather than coordinate relationship. In effect, the second noun takes on the function of an adjective. Thus, “spirit and truth” really means “true spirit.”

Although the existence of a hendiadys can have a significant effect on meaning, there’s really no foolproof way to determine whether one is actually present. Context, structural cues, and an overall sense of scripture and authorial intent are the best guides. John 4:24 is a good example in which structure, in this case parallelism, plays a key role in identifying “spirit and truth” as a hendiadys. Since God is one thing (spirit), those who worship must worship Him in one thing (true spirit), not two things (spirit and truth) as commonly understood.

Thus we see a significant misunderstanding underlying countless sermons on John 4:24. True worship is not a matter of balancing two opposing principles (spirit/enthusiasm vs. truth/doctrine) as commonly preached, but is a matter of worshipping according to a particular kind of spirit– true spirit.

“God is spirit and those who worship Him must worship Him in true spirit.”

Some other possible examples of hendiadys (some of which have significant theological consequences) include …
•Prov 29:15 —rod and reproof (RSV) = correcting rod (NIV)
•Eccl 9:11 —time and chance = chance times
•Phil 2:1 —bowels and mercies (KJV) = compassionate affection
•John 3:5 —water and spirit = spiritual water (arguably the waters of baptism which have been made “spiritual” by the divine meaning placed upon them)
•Rev 19:11 — is faithful and true = truly faithful (Note the singular “is” which requires a singular name “truly faithful,” not the two names “faithful and true”)
•1 Tim 3:15 —pillar and ground = grounded pillar
•Eph 4:11 —pastors and teachers = teaching pastors
•John 19:34 —blood and water = watery blood (i.e., “ichor,” the blood of the gods in Greek mythology, which John apparently uses as a testimony to the fact that Jesus truly was the Son of God)
--Bill Brewer

http://historeo.com/?p=791

[Jason Hare]

How about Ephesians 4:32?

γίνεσθε δὲ εἰς ἀλλήλους χρηστοί, εὔσπλαγχνοι, χαριζόμενοι ἑαυτοῖς καθὼς καὶ ὁ Θεὸς ἐν Χριστῷ ἐχαρίσατο ὑμῖν

Shouldn't that be translated "And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you"?

You misconstrued which words in the Greek text correspond to which parts of the translation:
"και" takes the whole clause "ο θεος εν χριστω εχαρισατο υμιν" as its complement.
"καθως" takes "και ο θεος εν κριστω εχαρισατο υμιν" as its complement.
"καθως και ο θεος εν χριστω εχαρισατο υμιν" adverbially modifies "χαριζομενοι".

So the whole phrase means "granting [forgiveness] to each other, just as also God granted [forgiveness] in Christ to you". It asserts two things, "you are to grant forgiveness to each other", and "God granted forgiveness in Christ to you".

Right. Here the "even as" is καθώς and καί should be rendered as "also." That's obvious from the text.

[Jason Hare]

Yes, καί means "even" at times, when we can take the two things joined as the same thing, the second being a restatement of the first...

Can you give me some examples?

A glaring example is how Matthew and John each render Zechariah 9:9.

Matthew 21:5 — εἴπατε τῇ θυγατρὶ Σιών· ἰδοὺ ὁ βασιλεύς σου ἔρχεταί σοι πραῢς καὶ ἐπιβεβηκὼς ἐπὶ ὄνον καὶ ἐπὶ πῶλον υἱὸν ὑποζυγίου.

John 12:15 — μὴ φοβοῦ, θυγάτηρ Σιών· ἰδοὺ ὁ βασιλεύς σου ἔρχεται, καθήμενος ἐπὶ πῶλον ὄνου.

Matthew follows the Septuagint (LXX), where it is written:

Zechariah 9:9 — Χαῖρε σφόδρα, θύγατερ Σιων· κήρυσσε, θύγατερ Ιερουσαλημ· ἰδοὺ ὁ βασιλεύς σου ἔρχεταί σοι, δίκαιος καὶ σῴζων αὐτός, πραῢς καὶ ἐπιβεβηκὼς ἐπὶ ὑποζύγιον καὶ πῶλον νέον.

It's not word-for-word, but it betrays that Matthew followed it more literally than did John. John understood that ἐπὶ ὑποζύγιον καὶ πῶλον νέον was referring to one animal, the word καί being used as a restatement. Therefore, he translated it with one phrase, ἐπὶ πῶλον ὄνου. Matthew actually understood the καί incorrectly and took it as simple coordination. Thus, there are two animals in Matthew's text: καὶ εὐθέως εὑρήσετε ὄνον δεδεμένην καὶ πῶλον μετ᾽ αὐτῆς (Matthew 21:3).

In his quotation of Zechariah's words, however, we should take the καί as Zechariah intended the meaning (utilizing this same feature with the Hebrew vav prefix to represent a restatement — עַל־חֲמוֹר וְעַל־עַיִר בֶּן־אֲתֹנוֹת) and translate it as "even." The original wording was speaking of a single animal, not two.

[brewerwt@gmail.com]

So when Jesus said we must worship God "in Spirit and Truth" He was speaking of two different things?

And when John the Revelator said that His name is "Faithful and True" he was speaking of two different attributes?

There's no such thing as a "hendiadys," and the man [Bill Brewer] who wrote the following doesn't know what he's talking about?

http://historeo.com/?p=791

"No such thing as a 'hendiadys."

Not hardly! Hendiadys is so common in NT Greek as to be unremarkable.

You misread my post if you think I said worshiping God "in spirit and truth" involves two things-- quite the opposite. The structure of the passage argues for one thing; i.e., God is Spirit (one thing), therefore true worshipers must worship Him in true spirit (one thing).

A similar thing applies to Christ's name in Revelation; i.e., His name is (singular verb) "Truly Faithful."

Please see the following link for a proximity search of "hendiadys" with "kai" to demo whether hendiadys exists and how "kai" is involved.

http://historeo.com/Resources/Simple_Se ... nd_kai.htm

Peace,

Bill Brewer

[Alan Patterson]

withdrew my comment

[David Lim]

So when Jesus said we must worship God "in Spirit and Truth" He was speaking of two different things?

And when John the Revelator said that His name is "Faithful and True" he was speaking of two different attributes?

There's no such thing as a "hendiadys," and the man who wrote the following doesn't know what he's talking about?

[...]

I don't accept those interpretations as the writers' intents. That is not my point anyway. I said that "και" means two things are asserted. Whether or not they ultimately refer to the same thing is dependent on the context. For example "ο θεος και πατηρ" clearly refer to the same person, but still "assert" two separate things: that the one spoken of is God, and that he is the father. Likewise "the faithful and true [one]" asserts that the one spoken of is both faithful and true. But I certainly think the context of John 4 clearly implies that to "worship in spirit and truth" means to "worship both in spirit (as opposed to flesh) and according to truth (as opposed to falsehood)". Whether or not these two ultimately refer to the same thing (the attitude) is interpretation, but basically two separate assertions were made. With this in mind, I suggest you go over those examples you gave from the person you quoted again, and you will easily see that indeed each phrase represents two assertions, regardless of whether it describes the same thing in two different ways.