The following academic biblical exegesis focuses on a key grammatical feature of Koine Greek—the contrary-to-fact conditional sentence—as applied to John 14:28b. This study is structured to provide a comprehensive analysis of the text, incorporating insights from textual criticism, lexical studies, and grammatical-rhetorical interpretation.
The Contrary-to-Fact Conditional in John 14:28b: An Exegetical Study
This exegetical study of ‘New Testament Re: verbless conditional Gal. 3:18 what mood?’ is based on a b-greek discussion from September 17th, 2012. The initial discourse explored the identification of contrary-to-fact conditionals in Koine Greek, examining whether their recognition is based solely on surface structural and formal characteristics. The discussion affirmed that established patterns for such conditionals in earlier Greek, specifically the use of the imperfect indicative with εἰ in the protasis and the imperfect indicative with ἄν in the apodosis for present counterfactuals, and the aorist indicative for past counterfactuals, consistently hold true in the Greek New Testament.
The main exegetical issue arising from this discussion centers on the application of these grammatical rules to John 14:28b, particularly the conditional clause εἰ ἠγαπᾶτέ με ἐχάρητε ἂν. The construction clearly indicates a contrary-to-fact condition, implying that the premise (“if you loved me”) is understood by the speaker as not being truly fulfilled in the present moment, and consequently, the conclusion (“you would rejoice”) is also not actualized. This raises significant questions regarding Jesus’ assessment of his disciples’ love, their emotional state, and their understanding of his imminent departure to the Father. Understanding the precise force of this conditional is crucial for interpreting Jesus’ communication of sorrow and joy within the context of his Farewell Discourse.
ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐγὼ εἶπον ὑμῖν· ὑπάγω καὶ ἔρχομαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς. εἰ ἠγαπᾶτέ με ἐχάρητε ἂν ὅτι πορεύομαι πρὸς τὸν πατέρα, ὅτι ὁ πατὴρ μείζων μού ἐστιν. (Nestle 1904)
Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):
- No key differences are observed between the Nestle 1904 text and the SBLGNT (2010) for John 14:28. Both critical editions present an identical Greek text for this verse.
Textual Criticism (NA28) and Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG):
The textual apparatus of NA28 confirms the stability of John 14:28, with no significant variants affecting the conditional clause εἰ ἠγαπᾶτέ με ἐχάρητε ἂν. The consensus among manuscripts supports the reading as presented in both Nestle 1904 and SBLGNT.
- ἠγαπᾶτέ (from ἀγαπάω): The imperfect indicative here denotes an ongoing or continuous state of love. According to BDAG, ἀγαπάω signifies “to have warm regard for and interest in another, to have affection for, love.” In the context of the disciples’ relationship with Jesus, it refers to genuine, affectionate loyalty and devotion. The KITTEL Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT) extensively covers ἀγαπάω, highlighting its depth as spiritual, volitional love, often distinct from purely emotional attachment. Here, Jesus points to a deficiency in the *quality* or *understanding* of their love that prevents them from rejoicing.
- ἐχάρητε (from χαίρω): The imperfect indicative of χαίρω, meaning “to experience a state of gladness, be glad, rejoice” (BDAG). This verb denotes an internal emotional state of joy or happiness. Its use in the apodosis of a contrary-to-fact conditional indicates that the disciples were not, in fact, experiencing this joy.
- μείζων: This is the comparative adjective of μέγας, meaning “greater, larger, more important.” BDAG defines it as “pertaining to being superior in quality, status, or rank, greater, superior.” In the Christological context of “the Father is greater than I,” the term μείζων refers to the Father’s positional preeminence or authority within the divine economy, particularly in relation to Jesus’ earthly mission and subsequent return. It does not imply an inferiority of essence or nature for the Son, but rather a functional distinction that makes Jesus’ return to the Father a cause for rejoicing.
Translation Variants
The conditional clause εἰ ἠγαπᾶτέ με ἐχάρητε ἂν is a classic example of a contrary-to-fact conditional of the second class (or “unreal” condition) in Greek. The structure—εἰ + imperfect indicative in the protasis (ἠγαπᾶτέ) and imperfect indicative + ἄν in the apodosis (ἐχάρητε ἂν)—indicates that the condition is presented as not true in the present reality, and therefore the consequence is also not true. This grammatical construction carries significant rhetorical weight.
Grammatically, Jesus is positing a hypothetical scenario (their complete love and understanding) which he knows is not fully realized among his disciples at that moment. Their current state is one of sorrow (John 14:1, 27) rather than joy, precisely because they do not yet fully grasp the spiritual implications of his departure and return to the Father. The imperfect tense in both clauses further emphasizes the ongoing nature of their lack of understanding and love, and the resultant absence of joy.
Rhetorically, Jesus is not necessarily condemning their love but rather exposing its limitations. He challenges them to consider a deeper, more informed love that would lead to a different emotional response. His departure to the Father is not a loss but an exaltation, as the Father is μείζων (greater) in terms of authority and position. A full understanding and love for Jesus would entail recognizing this and finding joy in his advancement, rather than sorrow in his physical absence. This rhetorical strategy aims to elevate their perspective and prepare them for a renewed understanding of his mission and identity.
Conclusions and Translation Suggestions
The grammatical structure of John 14:28b unequivocally presents a contrary-to-fact condition, signaling that the disciples’ present love for Jesus is not sufficient to elicit the appropriate response of joy at his impending return to the Father. This suggests a nuanced critique, inviting deeper spiritual insight rather than outright condemnation. The implication is that their sorrow stems from a limited understanding of Jesus’ true identity and mission, particularly his relationship with the Father. Translations should endeavor to capture this unfulfilled condition and the implied critique.
- “If you truly loved me, you would be rejoicing that I am going to the Father, because the Father is greater than I.”
This translation emphasizes the truth-value of the condition, directly stating the unfulfilled nature of their love and the expected, but absent, rejoicing. - “Had you loved me fully, you would have been glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.”
By using “Had you loved me fully,” this option attempts to convey the nuance of a love that is present but lacking in its complete realization or understanding, while still maintaining the contrary-to-fact implication. - “If you understood my love for you, you would be joyful that I depart to the Father, because the Father’s position is superior to mine.”
This rendering highlights the underlying reason for their lack of joy—a deficit in understanding not just their love for him, but also the significance of his filial relationship and exaltation. It also clarifies the sense of “greater.”