An Exegetical Analysis of 2 John 12: The Syntactic Ambiguity of the Dative Pronoun ὑμῖν
This exegetical study of ‘An Exegetical Analysis of 2 John 12: The Syntactic Ambiguity of the Dative Pronoun ὑμῖν‘ is based on a b-greek discussion from January 31st, 2014. The initial query focused on resolving the ambiguity of the dative pronoun ὑμῖν in 2 John 12, specifically whether it modifies πολλὰ ἔχων (“having many things for you”) or γράφειν (“to write to you”). The discussion also explored the implications of the word order, its potential for emphasis, and the interpretive consequences of an editorial comma found in some editions.
The main exegetical issue revolves around the precise syntactic function and semantic scope of the dative plural pronoun ὑμῖν within the clause Πολλὰ ἔχων ὑμῖν γράφειν οὐκ ἐβουλήθην διὰ χάρτου καὶ μέλανος. This ambiguity presents two primary interpretive pathways: either ὑμῖν serves as a dative of reference or interest modifying πολλὰ ἔχων, implying an ellipsis of an infinitive such as ‘to say’ or ‘to tell’; or it functions as the indirect object of the infinitive γράφειν, indicating the recipients of the intended writing. The resolution of this syntactic dilemma significantly impacts the nuance of the author’s intention regarding his communication, influencing whether he possesses matters concerning them or simply intends to write to them extensively. Parallel constructions in other New Testament texts, such as Luke 7:40 and Acts 25:26, are introduced to shed light on the flexible usage of ἔχω with dative and infinitive.
Greek text (Nestle 1904):
Πολλὰ ἔχων ὑμῖν γράφειν οὐκ ἐβουλήθην διὰ χάρτου καὶ μέλανος,
Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):
- The wording of 2 John 12 as presented in the Nestle 1904 text aligns substantively with the SBL Greek New Testament (2010) for this particular phrase. No significant textual variants altering the sense of the words πολλὰ ἔχων ὑμῖν γράφειν οὐκ ἐβουλήθην διὰ χάρτου καὶ μέλανος are present between these critical editions. The ambiguity arises from grammatical parsing, not textual variation.
Textual criticism (NA28), lexical notes (KITTEL, BDAG):
Critical editions such as NA28 (Nestle-Aland 28th edition) and the SBLGNT (2010) present a consistent Greek text for 2 John 12, lacking substantive variants that would resolve the grammatical ambiguity of ὑμῖν. While the Robinson-Pierpont Byzantine text (RP) includes an editorial comma after γράφειν (Πολλὰ ἔχων ὑμῖν γράφειν, οὐκ ἐβουλήθην…), this is an interpretive punctuation rather than a textual variant, and its placement implies a specific parsing that is questioned within the discussion. A notable point from the discussion is the mention of “some Byzantine MSS” that reorder the phrase to Πολλὰ ἔχων γράφειν ὑμῖν. This variant, though not cited in major critical apparatuses for this verse, is significant for its explicit attempt to clarify that ὑμῖν functions as the indirect object of γράφειν, thus eliminating the ambiguity present in the more widely attested text.
Lexically, the key terms contribute to the interpretive challenge:
- ἔχω (echō): BDAG provides a wide range of meanings, including “to have, possess,” “to hold,” and, when combined with an infinitive, “to be able to,” or “to have occasion to.” In the context of 2 John 12, the phrase πολλὰ ἔχων (lit. “having many things”) could signify possessing numerous topics, messages, or intentions.
- ὑμῖν (hymin): The dative plural pronoun “to you,” “for you.” Its grammatical function is at the heart of the exegesis. It could denote a dative of interest/reference (“for your benefit/concerning you”) or an indirect object (“to you”).
- γράφειν (graphein): The present active infinitive “to write.” It denotes the action of written communication.
- οὐκ ἐβουλήθην (ouk eboulēthēn): From βούλομαι (boulomai), meaning “to wish, want, intend, plan.” The aorist indicative here conveys a definite decision not to proceed with the action. It implies a considered choice rather than a mere lack of desire.
- διὰ χάρτου καὶ μέλανος (dia chartou kai melanous): “through paper and ink.” This phrase specifies the medium of communication, highlighting the contrast with the preferred method of in-person visitation mentioned later in the verse.
While KITTEL (Theological Dictionary of the New Testament) offers extensive theological and historical insights into major biblical terms, the specific nuances of syntactic parsing for ἔχω + dative + infinitive constructions are typically addressed by grammars (e.g., BDF, Wallace) and lexica like BDAG. BDAG’s entry for ἔχω, particularly its sections on constructions with infinitives and datives, supports the grammatical plausibility of both interpretive options for ὑμῖν, as discussed below.
Translation Variants
The grammatical structure of 2 John 12 presents two principal ways to understand the dative pronoun ὑμῖν, leading to distinct translation nuances. The core issue is whether ὑμῖν is associated with πολλὰ ἔχων or with γράφειν.
-
ὑμῖν construing with γράφειν: This is perhaps the more straightforward interpretation for many, where ὑμῖν functions as the indirect object of the infinitive γράφειν. The clause would be parsed as “(having many things) (to write to you), I did not wish to (do so) through paper and ink.” In this reading, the author possesses numerous topics or messages (πολλὰ ἔχων) and intends for the act of writing them to the recipients (ὑμῖν γράφειν) to be the object of his non-desire. The discussion points to the variant word order in some Byzantine manuscripts (πολλὰ ἔχων γράφειν ὑμῖν) as an explicit attempt to clarify this grammatical relationship, moving ὑμῖν directly adjacent to γράφειν.
-
ὑμῖν construing with πολλὰ ἔχων: This interpretation suggests an implicit infinitive, such as λέγειν (“to say”) or ἀπαγγέλλειν (“to announce”), to be supplied after πολλὰ ἔχων ὑμῖν. The construction would then mean “having many things for you (to say/tell), I did not wish to write (them) through paper and ink.” Here, ὑμῖν would be a dative of reference or advantage, indicating that the “many things” are concerning or intended for the benefit of the recipients. This parsing requires an ellipsis, which, while common in Greek, must be contextually justified. One participant in the discussion explicitly posited the necessity of an ellipsis, suggesting an implicit λέγειν or equivalent.
Comparative passages offer valuable insight into these constructions:
- Luke 7:40: Σίμων, ἔχω σοί τι εἰπεῖν (“Simon, I have something to tell you”). Here, σοί (dative singular, “to you”) is clearly emphatic and construed with ἔχω (“I have something for you to say”). This example provides strong support for the possibility of ἔχω + dative + infinitive, where the dative relates to ἔχω and the object for the dative.
- Acts 25:26: Περὶ οὗ ἀσφαλές τι γράψαι τῷ κυρίῳ οὐκ ἔχω (“Concerning him I have nothing certain to write to the lord”). In this case, τῷ κυρίῳ (“to the lord”) functions as the indirect object of γράφειν (“to write”), demonstrating the pattern of ἔχω + infinitive + dative where the dative clearly modifies the infinitive of communication.
The position of ὑμῖν in 2 John 12, located between ἔχων and γράφειν, is syntactically ambiguous. It does not definitively resolve the issue on its own. While some might argue for an emphatic placement, the nature of Koine Greek word order often allows for flexibility without necessarily implying emphasis. The “expected way of writing this” as “ἔχων ὑμῖν τι γράφειν” (as suggested in the discussion) implies that the dative with ἔχω in the sense of ‘for you’ might be understood, even if τι is dropped when πολλά is used.
Conclusions and Translation Suggestions
The exegetical analysis of 2 John 12 reveals that the precise syntactic relationship of ὑμῖν remains open to interpretation, given the flexibility of Koine Greek grammar and the attested parallels. Both interpretations—ὑμῖν modifying πολλὰ ἔχων (with an implied infinitive) or ὑμῖν as the indirect object of γράφειν—are grammatically plausible and supported by New Testament usage. The presence of the dative directly between the participle ἔχων and the infinitive γράφειν creates a grammatical interface that allows for either association. The discussion highlights that the author’s intent is to communicate extensively but prefers an in-person encounter over a written letter, regardless of the precise dative attachment.
Based on this analysis, the following translation suggestions are offered, each emphasizing a particular nuance:
-
Though I have many things to write to you, I did not want to do so with paper and ink.
This translation primarily construes ὑμῖν as the indirect object of γράφειν, emphasizing that the *act of writing* itself would be directed *to the recipients*. This aligns with the common English idiom for “write to someone.”
-
Having many things for you (to communicate), I did not want to write (them) by means of paper and ink.
This option associates ὑμῖν with πολλὰ ἔχων, implying an ellipsis of an infinitive like ‘to tell’ or ‘to say’. Here, the author possesses matters *concerning them* or *intended for them* to convey, making the dative a dative of reference or interest.
-
I have much to write to you, but I did not wish to do so using paper and ink.
This rendering seeks a natural English flow that subtly allows for both interpretations to coexist without forcing a strict grammatical parsing. It captures the overall communicative intent: the author has substantial content for the recipients, which he desires to convey in person rather than through a letter.