I am puzzling over John 6:58 and the explanations of the Greek that I have seen in the resources I own
The wider context isοὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἄρτος ὁ ⸀ἐξ οὐρανοῦ ⸁καταβάς, οὐ καθὼς ἔφαγον οἱ πατέρες ⸆ καὶ ἀπέθανον· ὁ τρώγων τοῦτον τὸν ἄρτον ⸀1ζήσει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα.
οὐδεὶς δύναται ἐλθεῖν πρός ⸀με ἐὰν μὴ ὁ πατὴρ ⸆ ὁ πέμψας με ἑλκύσῃ αὐτόν, κἀγὼ ἀναστήσω αὐτὸν oἐν τῇ ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ. 45 ἔστιν γεγραμμένον ἐν τοῖς προφήταις· καὶ ἔσονται πάντες διδακτοὶ θεοῦ· πᾶς ⸆ ὁ ⸀ἀκούσας παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ μαθὼν ἔρχεται πρὸς ⸁ἐμέ. 46 οὐχ ὅτι τὸν πατέρα ἑώρακέν τις εἰ μὴ ὁ ὢν παρὰ ⸂τοῦ θεοῦ⸃, οὗτος ἑώρακεν τὸν ⸀πατέρα. 47 ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ὁ πιστεύων ⸆ ἔχει ζωὴν αἰώνιον. 48 Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ἄρτος τῆς ζωῆς. 49 οἱ πατέρες ὑμῶν ἔφαγον ⸂ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ τὸ μάννα⸃ καὶ ἀπέθανον· 50 οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἄρτος ὁ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καταβαίνων, ἵνα τις ἐξ αὐτοῦ φάγῃ καὶ μὴ ⸀ἀποθάνῃ. 51 ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ἄρτος ὁ ζῶν ὁ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καταβάς· ἐάν τις φάγῃ ἐκ ⸂τούτου τοῦ ἄρτου⸃ ⸀ζήσει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, καὶ ὁ ἄρτος oδὲ ὃν ἐγὼ δώσω ⸉ἡ σάρξ μού ἐστιν ⸆ ὑπὲρ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου ζωῆς⸊.
52 Ἐμάχοντο οὖν ⸉πρὸς ἀλλήλους οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι⸊ λέγοντες· πῶς δύναται ⸉1οὗτος ἡμῖν δοῦναι τὴν σάρκα⸊ o[αὐτοῦ] φαγεῖν; 53 εἶπεν οὖν αὐτοῖς oὁ Ἰησοῦς· ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ἐὰν μὴ ⸀φάγητε τὴν σάρκα τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου καὶ ⸉πίητε αὐτοῦ τὸ αἷμα⸊, οὐκ ἔχετε ζωὴν ἐν ἑαυτοῖς. 54 ὁ τρώγων ⸀μου τὴν σάρκα καὶ πίνων μου τὸ αἷμα ἔχει ζωὴν αἰώνιον, κἀγὼ ἀναστήσω αὐτὸν ⸆ τῇ ἐσχάτῃ ἡμέρᾳ. 55 ἡ γὰρ σάρξ μου ⸀ἀληθής ἐστιν βρῶσις, ⸋καὶ τὸ αἷμά μου ⸁ἀληθής ἐστιν πόσις⸌. 56 ὁ τρώγων μου τὴν σάρκα καὶ πίνων μου τὸ αἷμα ἐν ἐμοὶ μένει κἀγὼ ἐν αὐτῷ⸆. 57 καθὼς ⸀ἀπέστειλέν με ὁ ζῶν πατὴρ κἀγὼ ζῶ διὰ τὸν πατέρα⸆, καὶ ὁ ⸁τρώγων με κἀκεῖνος ⸀1ζήσει διʼ ἐμέ. 58 οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἄρτος ὁ ⸀ἐξ οὐρανοῦ ⸁καταβάς, οὐ καθὼς ἔφαγον οἱ πατέρες ⸆ καὶ ἀπέθανον· ὁ τρώγων τοῦτον τὸν ἄρτον ⸀1ζήσει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα.
Here pretty much all the resources I have such as the UBS handbook, the Baylor handbook etc say that we ought to read the second clause a οὐ καθὼς [ὁ ἄρτος ὃν] ἔφαγον οἱ πατέρες καὶ ἀπέθανον
Baylor
UBS handbookοὐ. The negative particle modifies the elliptical construction after καθὼς, which requires the repetition of ὁ ἄρτος and the addition of the relative pronoun ὄν serving as the accusative direct object of ἔφαγον: οὐ καθὼς [ὁ ἄρτος ὃν] ἔφαγον οἱ πατέρες καὶ ἀπέθανον (“not like [the bread which] the fathers ate and died”).
Exegetical Guide to the Greek New TestamentThis, then, is the bread that came down from heaven is verbally almost identical with the first part of verse 50 (but the bread that comes down from heaven is such that) except that in this verse the past tense came down is used. Note also the link with verse 31 and the dialogue that followed.
It is not like the bread that your ancestors ate, but then later died is literally “not as the fathers ate and died.” In NEB this passage is rendered “and it is not like the bread which our fathers ate: they are dead.…”…
TEV translates “but then died” of the Greek text by but then later died, in order not to suggest that the persons who ate died immediately, perhaps as a result of eating the bread.
While both TEV and NEB translate so that the comparison is between the bread that the ancestors ate and the bread that Jesus offers, NAB makes a comparison between the ancestors who ate and died (“unlike your ancestors who ate and died …”) and those who eat the bread which Jesus will give. The Greek text itself can be understood to support either interpretation. However, the renderings of most translations are basically the same as that of TEV and NEB (see, for example, JB, Mft).
The BDAG reference here is toThis verse summarizes vv. 32–35 and 53–57. The general antecedent of οὗτος is “the Son who gives life” (Schnackenburg 2.64). Καταβάς 3:13. Ἔφαγον v. 23. Οὐ καθώς, lit. “not in the way (your ancestors ate)” = “not like (the bread your ancestors ate)” (cf. BDAG 493d). Οἱ πατέρες refers to the generation of the Exodus (v. 49). Ἀπέθανον v. 49. Τρώγων v. 54. Ζήσει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα v. 51. Regarding the manna eaten in the desert (v. 49) and Jesus as the “bread of life” (vv. 35, 48), both are “bread from heaven.” But whereas manna nourished bodies temporarily, the nourishment that Christ provides benefits the believer eternally.
So, having laid out what the sources that disagree with me are saying, time for my ignoranceSomet. an expression may be condensed to such an extent that opposites are compared ἀγαπῶμεν ἀλλήλους οὐ κ. Κάϊν 1J 3:11f. οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἄρτος … οὐ κ. ἔφαγον οἱ πατέρες quite different from that which the fathers ate J 6:58. In compressed speech, to introduce a quotation, e.g. εἰς τὴν κατάπαυσιν … , κ. εἴρηκεν (after Ps 94:11) in the rest … of which God has said Hb 4:3; 8:5 (s. HLjungvik, Eranos 62, ’64, 36f)
In John 6:57-58 we have two instances of a clause introduced by καθως. The first introduces a clause that is compared to what comes next - just as the living father sent me and I live through/by the father, the one eating me, that one / he will also live through/by me. This makes me want to take the next καθως clause similarly leading to “not as the fathers ate and died, the one eating this bread will live forever” where there is a comparison laid introduced by καθως between the two instances of eating, and not two types of bread
57 καθὼς ⸀ἀπέστειλέν με ὁ ζῶν πατὴρ κἀγὼ ζῶ διὰ τὸν πατέρα⸆, καὶ ὁ ⸁τρώγων με κἀκεῖνος ζήσει διʼ ἐμέ. 58 οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἄρτος ὁ ⸀ἐξ οὐρανοῦ ⸁καταβάς, οὐ καθὼς ἔφαγον οἱ πατέρες ⸆ καὶ ἀπέθανον· ὁ τρώγων τοῦτον τὸν ἄρτον ⸀1ζήσει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα.
The difficulty with this view seems to be what to do with οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἄρτος ὁ ⸀ἐξ οὐρανοῦ ⸁καταβάς. I think that that is a surmountable objection though if the wider context of 44-58 is taken into consideration. Particularly verse 48 has Jesus call himself the bread of life, then verse 50 οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἄρτος ὁ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καταβαίνων… followed by verse 51 where Jesus again says that this bread that descends from heaven is him.
If we take it John 6:58 as an reference back to this, reminding people that he is the bread of life that he is about to talk about, and blithely ignore the punctuation of people who know more than me and the manuscripts that have that punctuation then my reading could work. This would lead to a sense of “just as the living father sent me and I live through the father, the one eating me will also live through me. This is the bread of life (reintroducing elliptically Jesus as the bread of life) who descended from heaven. Not like the fathers died and ate, the one eating this bread will live forever (or to restructure - the one eating this bread will live forever, unlike how the fathers ate and died”
Am I onto a complete loser here? I am pretty sure I must be just given that I seem to be away on my own on this one. Thoughts?