“`html
body { font-family: ‘Times New Roman’, serif; line-height: 1.6; margin: 20px; }
h1, h2, h3 { color: #333; }
h2 { border-bottom: 1px solid #ccc; padding-bottom: 5px; margin-top: 30px; }
h3 { color: #555; margin-top: 20px; }
p { margin-bottom: 1em; text-align: justify; }
blockquote { border-left: 5px solid #eee; margin: 1.5em 0; padding: 0.5em 10px; color: #666; font-style: italic; }
ul { list-style-type: disc; margin-left: 20px; }
li { margin-bottom: 0.5em; }
b { font-weight: bold; }
i { font-style: italic; }
.greek-text { font-family: ‘Gentium Plus’, ‘Palatino Linotype’, ‘Lucida Grande’, serif; } /* Or another suitable Unicode Greek font */
An Exegetical Examination of John 17:3: The Granville Sharp Rule and Christological Implications
This exegetical study of ‘Question on John 17:3’ is based on a b-greek discussion from Mon Dec 27 11:44:41 1999. The initial query concerned the applicability of the Granville Sharp rule to John 17:3, specifically examining the phrases “The only True God” and “Jesus Christ Whom You sent.” The central question posed was whether the presence of the term ὃν preceding ἀπέστειλας might be regarded as a second definite article, thereby disqualifying the Granville Sharp rule and negating the possibility of identifying the two phrases as referring to a single entity, as seen in other texts like 1 John 5:20.
The main exegetical issue at the heart of this discussion revolves around the precise grammatical construction of John 17:3 and its Christological implications. The application, or non-application, of the Granville Sharp rule directly impacts whether “the only true God” and “Jesus Christ whom you sent” are grammatically identified as one person or distinguished as two within the immediate context. This has profound implications for understanding the relationship between the Father and the Son and the nature of Christ’s deity in Johannine theology. Further complexities arise from the specific grammatical function of the relative pronoun ὃν and a minor textual variant concerning the verb γινώσκωσιν.
αὕτη δέ ἐστιν ἡ αἰώνιος ζωή, ἵνα γινώσκωσίν σε τὸν μόνον ἀληθινὸν Θεόν, καὶ ὃν ἀπέστειλας Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν. (Nestle 1904)
Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):
- No substantial lexical or grammatical differences exist between the Nestle 1904 text and the SBLGNT 2010 edition for John 17:3. Both texts present the same wording, with only minor orthographical variations (e.g., initial capitalization).
Textual Criticism (NA28) and Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG)
Textual Criticism (NA28):
The primary textual variant discussed in the associated correspondence concerns the verb γινώσκωσιν. While the Textus Receptus (TR) and most critical editions, including NA28, SBLGNT, and UBS, read γινώσκωσιν (present active subjunctive, 3rd person plural with a movable nu), some manuscripts (e.g., Codex Alexandrinus, Codex Cyprius, Codex Washingtonianus) and thus the Majority Text tradition, present γινώσκωσι (without the movable nu). This difference is primarily orthographic or phonological, reflecting a common phenomenon in Greek grammar where the nu is optionally added at the end of certain verb forms (e.g., 3rd plural present/future/aorist indicative or subjunctive) before a word beginning with a vowel or at the end of a sentence. It does not alter the meaning or grammatical function of the verb in this context. NA28 retains the reading with the movable nu, which is widely attested across early and significant manuscripts (e.g., Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Bezae).
Lexical Notes:
- ἀληθινόν (alēthinon): From ἀληθινός, masculine singular accusative adjective. BDAG 39a defines it as “pertaining to what is in accordance with objective reality, real, true, genuine.” In Johannine theology, particularly when applied to God, as in this verse, it designates God as the genuinely existing, authentic God, in contrast to false deities or human misconceptions. KITTEL (TDNT, s.v. ἀληθής) notes its use to signify that which genuinely corresponds to reality.
- Θεόν (Theon): Masculine singular accusative noun, from Θεός. BDAG 445a (1) refers to “God, the Supreme Being.” In this context, it unequivocally refers to God the Father, distinct from Jesus Christ.
- ὃν ἀπέστειλας (hon apesteilas): This phrase consists of ὃν, the masculine singular accusative relative pronoun (“whom”), and ἀπέστειλας, the aorist active indicative, 2nd person singular from ἀποστέλλω (“you sent”). BDAG 129b (1) translates ἀποστέλλω as “to send (on a mission).” This clause emphatically highlights Jesus’ divine commission and his role as the Sent One. The relative pronoun ὃν connects the clause to its antecedent, Jesus Christ.
- γινώσκωσιν (ginōskōsin): Present active subjunctive, 3rd person plural from γινώσκω. BDAG 199b (1) denotes “to know, recognize, understand.” In the Johannine corpus, γινώσκω often conveys an intimate, experiential, and relational knowledge, rather than mere intellectual apprehension. The present tense subjunctive, in conjunction with ἵνα (introducing a purpose clause), implies a continuous, ongoing, and vital knowledge, emphasizing that eternal life is a state of perpetual communion with God and Christ.
Translation Variants with Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis
The primary point of grammatical contention in John 17:3 is its potential to be interpreted through the lens of Granville Sharp’s first rule. This rule postulates that when a definite article (τὸν, in this case) precedes a substantival adjective or noun, which is then followed by καὶ (and) and a second substantival adjective or noun without a preceding definite article, both substantives refer to the same person or entity. In such constructions (e.g., “the God and Savior” if applied to one person), the two nouns are in apposition, identifying the referent with both descriptors.
However, the structure of John 17:3 differs significantly from the typical Granville Sharp construction. The verse reads τὸν μόνον ἀληθινὸν Θεόν, καὶ ὃν ἀπέστειλας Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν. The first substantive phrase is “the only true God” (τὸν μόνον ἀληθινὸν Θεόν), which clearly refers to the Father. Following καὶ, the second phrase is “whom you sent, Jesus Christ” (ὃν ἀπέστειλας Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν). The crucial element here is the relative pronoun ὃν (“whom”).
As noted by prominent grammarians such as Daniel Wallace (Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, p. 272, 276) and earlier scholars like Bishop Middleton, the Granville Sharp rule has specific limitations. One key limitation is that the second noun must *not* be preceded by another article or a pronoun that functions like an article in its particularizing force. A relative pronoun like ὃν, while serving to specify its referent, is grammatically distinct from a definite article. It introduces a dependent clause and refers back to an antecedent, rather than functioning to define the following noun in the way an article does within a Sharp construction.
Therefore, the presence of the relative pronoun ὃν unequivocally separates “the only true God” from “Jesus Christ whom you sent.” Grammatically, the objects of knowledge are clearly two distinct entities: the Father, identified as “the only true God,” and Jesus Christ, identified by his divine mission as “whom you sent.” The καὶ functions as a simple connective, joining two distinct but intimately related referents, not equating them as per the Granville Sharp rule.
Rhetorically, this construction emphasizes a clear distinction in person between God the Father and Jesus Christ, the Son. Eternal life is thus presented as knowing both the Father as the unique, authentic God and the Son as His divinely appointed emissary. This passage, therefore, articulates a foundational Trinitarian distinction within a strictly monotheistic framework, highlighting the unique roles of the Father and the Son in salvation, rather than directly equating them in identity. The present tense subjunctive of γινώσκωσιν further underscores that this knowledge is a continuous, experiential relationship, integral to the very nature of eternal life.
Conclusions and Translation Suggestions
Based on the grammatical analysis, particularly the presence of the relative pronoun ὃν, the Granville Sharp rule does not apply to John 17:3. The passage clearly presents two distinct objects of knowledge essential for eternal life: God the Father, identified as “the only true God,” and Jesus Christ, identified as the one sent by the Father. This distinction maintains the personal integrity of both the Father and the Son while affirming their intimate and necessary relationship in the divine economy.
Here are three suggested translations, aiming to reflect the grammatical and theological nuances:
- “And this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you sent.”
This translation adheres closely to the Greek word order and structure, emphasizing the distinct grammatical objects and their individual descriptions. - “This is eternal life, that they know you, the one true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.”
This version offers a slightly more natural English flow while maintaining the clear distinction between God the Father and Jesus Christ as separate persons to be known. - “Eternal life means this: to intimately know you, the only genuine God, and Jesus, the Messiah whom you sent.”
This dynamic translation attempts to capture the deeper sense of “knowing” (γινώσκω) and provides a more interpretive rendering of “Christ” as “Messiah” to highlight Jesus’ role as the Anointed One.
“`