John 17:23

“`html

John 17:23: The Periphrastic Perfect Subjunctive Construction

This exegetical study of John 17:23 is based on a b-greek discussion from August 18, 2002.

The initial inquiry highlighted a specific grammatical construction in John 17:23: ἵνα ὦσιν τετελειωμένοι εἰς ἕν. The observer noted the presence of a subjunctive finite verb (ὦσιν) combined with a perfect participle (τετελειωμένοι), identifying it as a perfect periphrastic participle. This particular construction (conjunction + subjunctive + perfect participle) was recognized as relatively infrequent in the New Testament, appearing in only a few other passages such as Matthew 6:31, Luke 21:20, and James 5:15.

The central exegetical issue revolved around a perceived tension between the aspectual implications of the present subjunctive form of εἰμί (to be), which can suggest an incomplete or ongoing action, and the perfect participle τετελειωμένοι, which denotes a completed state with continuing results. This apparent contradiction prompted an investigation into the precise semantic and grammatical function of this periphrastic perfect subjunctive within Koine Greek, specifically concerning the relationship between these two verbal elements and their combined meaning.

ἵνα ὦσιν τετελειωμένοι εἰς ἕν (Nestle 1904)

Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):

• There are no significant textual differences in this specific phrase (ἵνα ὦσιν τετελειωμένοι εἰς ἕν) between the Nestle 1904 edition and the SBLGNT 2010 edition.

The Nestle-Aland 28th edition (NA28) textual apparatus for John 17:23 shows no significant variants for the phrase ἵνα ὦσιν τετελειωμένοι εἰς ἕν, indicating strong manuscript support for this reading.

Lexically, the phrase components contribute distinct semantic elements:

• ὦσιν: This is the 3rd person plural present subjunctive of the verb εἰμί (to be). As noted in the discussion, εἰμί lacks an aorist subjunctive form; therefore, the present subjunctive is the only available option for expressing subjunctive mood in periphrastic constructions involving εἰμί. Its primary function here is to carry the subjunctive mood rather than to emphasize an imperfective aspect in contrast to a non-existent aorist subjunctive for εἰμί. BDAG defines εἰμί generally as ‘to be, exist’, functioning as a copula. In periphrastic constructions, it typically provides the tense and mood while the participle conveys the main lexical meaning and aspect.
• τετελειωμένοι: This is the perfect passive participle (masculine nominative plural) of the verb τελειόω. BDAG provides meanings such as ‘to bring to an end, finish’, ‘to make perfect, complete, mature’. The perfect tense signifies a state resulting from a completed action. Thus, τετελειωμένοι describes a state of having been brought to completion or perfection. KITTEL (TDNT) emphasizes that τελειόω implies reaching an intended goal or a state of consummation. The perfect middle/passive 3rd plural is almost always periphrastic in Hellenistic Greek, further supporting the interpretation of this combination as a single functional verbal unit.
• εἰς ἕν: The preposition εἰς (BDAG: ‘into, to, toward, for, among’) with the numeral ἕν (BDAG: ‘one’) indicates a goal or direction. Here, it denotes movement or attainment ‘into one’ or ‘unto unity’.

Translation Variants

The construction ἵνα ὦσιν τετελειωμένοι εἰς ἕν combines the purpose conjunction ἵνα with a periphrastic perfect subjunctive. Grammatically, the periphrasis (ὦσιν τετελειωμένοι) functions as a single verbal unit. The perfect participle τετελειωμένοι carries the primary lexical meaning and, crucially, the perfect aspect, which denotes a completed state with ongoing results. The subjunctive ὦσιν conveys the purpose or desired outcome, fitting the introductory ἵνα clause.

The perceived conflict between the “imperfective” nature of the present subjunctive (as some grammarians might interpret it generally) and the “perfective” nature of the perfect participle is largely resolved by understanding the specific linguistic properties of εἰμί. As noted in the discussion, εἰμί does not possess an aorist subjunctive form; therefore, the present subjunctive ὦσιν functions simply to provide the subjunctive mood to the periphrastic construction without necessarily contributing a distinct imperfective aspect in this context. The resultant state of perfection, as conveyed by the perfect participle, is paramount.

Rhetorically, this construction in John 17:23 expresses the profound goal of Jesus’ prayer: that his followers might achieve and remain in a state of complete unity. This unity is not merely superficial but a deep, perfected cohesion that mirrors the intrinsic unity between the Father and the Son. The use of the perfect participle emphasizes the enduring nature and the accomplished state of this unity once it is realized, serving as a powerful testimony to the world concerning Jesus’ divine mission and the Father’s love for believers.

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

The periphrastic perfect subjunctive in John 17:23, ἵνα ὦσιν τετελειωμένοι εἰς ἕν, is best understood as a unified verbal expression of a desired, complete, and enduring state of perfection leading to unity. The aspectual force of the perfect participle dominates, indicating a state of having been brought to an ultimate completeness, while the subjunctive mood expresses the purpose of this divine action.

1. “so that they may be perfected into one.”

This translation emphasizes the ongoing process towards a state of perfection, fitting the subjunctive mood, while subtly retaining the completed state.

2. “that they may become completely one.”

This interpretation prioritizes the resultant state of unity and completion in a more idiomatic English expression, reflecting the perfective aspect.

3. “in order that they may attain a state of ultimate unity.”

This version focuses on the comprehensive and final nature of the perfection and unity, highlighting the goal and its enduring quality.

“`