| "If Not . . . He Cannot" Does John 3.5 allow for exceptions? (John 3.-5) "Truly, truly, I say to you, If one is not generated out of water and Spirit, he is not able to enter into the kingdom of God. |
| Mon,
7 Nov 2005 06:27:18 I need some Greek help on John 3:5. KJV John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. NKJV John 3:5 Jesus answered, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. NASB John 3:5 Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. How strong is the "cannot"? My Strong's says the "ou" is an absolute negative, but my pastor says it needs another word paired with it to mean "never." I can't tell whether it's there or not. A secondary question - even if it doesn't mean absolutely "never," doesn't it kind of imply that? The English was not chosen very well if it doesn't. I guess my question is - does the construction of the sentence allow for exceptions? Thanks! J. The reason that I'm asking is that I got a little talking to for giving my ladies (there are 14, from a variety of churches) all three major interpretations of the verse instead of just the Lutheran one. The reason that I gave all three is that I have always had questions on why it reads the way it does if there are exceptions with water baptism (the thief on the cross, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc). I treated each view the same and gave the support and the major question that it raises. |
| November
9,
2005 12:19:59 PM Hello J., |
| How
strong is the "cannot" [in John 3.5]? |
| First, it is two distinct
Greek words in John 3.5 translated "cannot"
by KJV, NKJV, NASB, etc. and "no . . . can" by NIV, NLT, NRSV,
etc. The phrase is ou dunatai
(literally "not he
is able/capable," i.e., he
does not possess the ability/capability). |
| My
Strong's says the "ou" is an absolute
negative, but my pastor says it needs another word paired with it to
mean "never." |
Ou
negates objectively, absolutely, unconditionally, matter-of-factly
(see the grammars and lexicons) but not as strongly or emphatically as
the compound negative your pastor referred to: ou me.
Ou me
can mean "never" with respect to time or eternity, i.e., "not ever,"
"not at any time," "at no time," etc., but that
is not an
across-the-board meaning. Context
determines
meaning.
Ou me ofttimes means
"never" in the sense of "certainly
not," "not at all," "not in any way," "to no extent or degree,"
etc. For
example, compare John
3.5
with the Greek
version of Jeremiah
36.5:---
|
| [E]ven if it doesn't mean absolutely "never," doesn't it kind of imply that? . . . I guess my question is - does the construction of the sentence allow for exceptions? |
| I
believe your question
can be answered by the little phrase ean me
(literally "if perhaps not," i.e., except on the condition that,
i.e., unless). The following are all the New Testament verses where occurring together in the majority of extant manuscripts1 we find ou dunamai ("NOT ABLE") and ean me ("EXCEPT ON THE CONDITION THAT"). It should become clear whether the Holy Spirit leaves room for exceptions when He pairs these phrases together. |
| (Matthew 26.42)
Again,
going away a second time, He [Jesus] prayed, saying,
"My Father, if [IT IS NOT
ABLE]
for this cup to pass
away [EXCEPT
ON THE CONDITION
THAT] I drink it, let Your
will be done." |
| Could the cup pass away
any other way? Consider Matthew 16.21;
26.54, Mark 8.31, Luke 9.22; 17.25; 22.37; 24.7,26,44,46, John 3.14;
12.34. All these have in common a powerful three-letter Greek
word: dei.
Dei
denotes necessity. |
| (John 3.27)
John
answered and said,
"A man [IS NOT ABLE] to receive
nothing [EXCEPT ON THE
CONDITION
THAT]
it is . . . given to
him from
Heaven. (The Greek
frequently uses a double negative.) |
| Was there any other way a man could receive anything (with respect to the context of John's words)? Was John mistaken? Lying? |
| (John
5.19) Then Jesus
answered and said to them [the Jews which were seeking the more to kill
Him], "Truly, truly, I say to you, The Son IS NOT ABLE to do anything
from Himself, [EXCEPT ON THE CONDITION
THAT]
what He may see the
Father doing;
for whatever that One does, these things also the Son does likewise. |
| Could the Son do anything any other way? Was He mistaken? Lying? |
| (John 15.4) Abide in Me [Jesus], and I in you [His disciples]. As the branch IS NOT ABLE to bear fruit of itself, [EXCEPT ON THE CONDITION THAT] it abide in the vine, so neither can you if not you abide in Me. |
| Was there any other way Jesus' disciples could bear fruit? Was Jesus mistaken? Lying? |
| (Acts 15.1) And some, coming down from Judea, were teaching the brothers, saying, "[EXCEPT ON THE CONDITION THAT] you [people] are . . . circumcised in the custom of Moses, YOU [PEOPLE] ARE NOT ABLE to be saved." |
| Here the Holy Spirit provides an accurate record of a false doctrine being spread at the time. In the mind of those having gone out from the apostles and the elders and the brothers (15.23-24; cf. 1John 2.19), was there any other way the Gentiles could be saved? |
| (Acts 27.31) Paul said to the centurion [Julius], and to the soldiers, "[EXCEPT ON THE CONDITION THAT] these men remain in the ship, you [people ARE NOT ABLE] to be saved." |
| Was there any other way
the centurion Julius and the soldiers could be
saved
from the sea? Was Paul mistaken? Lying? Do any of the preceding six occurrences allow for exceptions? |
| (John
3.3) Jesus answered and said
to him [Nicodemus], "Truly, truly, I
say to you, [EXCEPT
ON THE CONDITION
THAT] one
is . . . generated from above, HE
IS NOT ABLE to see the kingdom of
God." (John 3.5) Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you [Nicodemus], [EXCEPT ON THE CONDITION THAT] one is . . . generated out of water and Spirit, HE IS NOT ABLE to enter into the kingdom of God. |
| So to answer your question, |
| [D]oes the construction of the sentence allow for exceptions? |
| No. Corroborating the case is John 3.7 where we find that same powerful three-letter Greek word of necessity: |
| (John 3.7) Do not wonder because I [Jesus] said to you [Nicodemus], You [people] dei be generated from above. |
| I
hope this is helpful to
you, that it answers your question and documents the answer. Thomas John Dexter Notes: 1 The Greek text on which this investigation is based is the Robinson-Pierpont Greek New Testament (Byzantine Textform 2005) Morphology (produced by Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont [public domain]). Also consulted were the Aletti/Gieniusz/Bushell Morphologically Analyzed Greek New Testament (copyright © 1999-2001 BibleWorks, LLC) and the Aletti/Gieniusz/Bushell/CATSS Morphologically Analyzed Septuagint (copyright © 1999-2001 BibleWorks, LLC). |
| On Nov 9, 2005, at 1:13 PM, J.
wrote: Thank you so much for taking the time to do that. So, you have just shown from the Greek what I have accepted from the English for several years. Baptism does not rise or fall from this verse, but it would appear to me from what you have shown, that this particular verse does not refer to water baptism, for the very reason that there are biblical exceptions, including the thief on the cross, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, etc. I wrote a letter to my pastor today and told him that I could not teach the way he wanted me to. It's not a Mount Olive Ev. Lutheran Church study. It's not even a WELS study. It's a BEREAN study, with the entire emphasis on learning to check things out for yourself. I do not think, if the women's faith is in God and His word, that showing other ways of interpreting something is going to hurt them. If their faith is in their church and pastor, well, that's a different story. Thank you so much! Studying the Greek only from Strong's or from online sources like blueletterbible.org does have its drawbacks. I thought perhaps there was something there that I just couldn't see. Thanks again!! J |
| November 10,
2005 12:32:52 PM Hi J, You wrote: |
| Baptism does
not rise or fall from [John
3.5.] |
| Would you please explain to me what you mean by that? |
| [I]t would appear to me from what
you have shown, that this particular verse does not refer to water
baptism[.] |
| I agree. If one believes John 3.5 refers to water baptism then he is forced by the Greek to believe that water baptism is absolutely necessary to be able to enter into the kingdom of God. The Greek allows for no exceptions. |
| [I]t would appear to me from what
you have shown, that this particular verse does not refer to water
baptism, for the very reason that there are biblical exceptions,
including the thief on the cross, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, etc. |
| All these men
had one great thing in common: salvation by grace alone
through faith alone in what Yahveh alone says (Acts 15.6-11, Romans
4.3,
Hebrews 1.1-3; 2.1-4; cf. John 8.28; 12.49-50). |
| I do not think, if the women's faith is
in God and His word, that showing other ways of interpreting
something is going to hurt them. |
| Please remember
though, there is only one true interpretation. There is only one
thing the Holy Spirit intends to convey by the language of the
text. The primary
reason for various interpretations is faulty hermeneutics. I am not saying that principles stated within the text cannot be applied to practical uses. I am not saying that at all. But before we can hope to make proper application of a Scripture we must first determine the proper interpretation of the Scripture. For if our interpretation is wrong, so will be our application. Thomas |
| On Nov 10, 2005, at 1:47 PM, J
wrote: Quoting me you wrote: |
| "Baptism does
not rise or fall from [John 3.5.]" Would you please explain to me what you mean by that? |
| I just meant that I cannot argue
for or against any particular
baptism stance, especially infant baptism, by this verse alone. I
have
never believed that this verse referred to baptism, for the reasons I
gave. However, those
who insist on infant baptism do not have their argument crushed with a
lack
of baptism in this verse. Those who argue against infant baptism
do not win the argument based on this verse alone. I walk a very fine line for the time being. "How long, Lord?" has been my prayer, especially lately. I can't remember what I told you and what I didn't, but I have been told that I cannot teach contrary to WELS doctrine and remain a WELS member. So, what to do with this verse - which WELS insists is water baptism, but I have always believed is not? I didn't have the Greek argument - but the English seemed pretty clear. So, I didn't teach against the WELS view. I just gave the other views also. . . . I agree there is only one way that God means something to be truly understood. However, I also accept that we may not get there this side of heaven for some things. I just don't think that exposing people to non-WELS views is going to hurt them if their faith is in what it should be - God and His Word. Now, if their faith is in WELS as an infallible church - well, now we've got a problem and yes, that might hurt their "faith." But, I could argue that that "faith" needed a poke or two. (Not that my pastors would agree.) Thanks again for your help! I still haven't heard back from the pastor. Makes me wonder if he accepted what I had to say or if I'm in bigger trouble. J |
| November 10,
2005 2:07:01 PM If you believe it will help, feel free to send my answer to your pastor. I would be interested to know what he would do with the fact that the Greek allows for no exceptions. Should he point to Matthew 3.15 saying that Christ's baptism is credited to certain people who for whatever reason could not and cannot be baptized, know that that is not only reading the verse through theologically biased eyewear but handling the grammar and syntax of John 3.3,5,7 dishonestly by making exceptions to the necessity. Thomas |
|
· Home |
| The author
implores checking his
commentary against Scripture using the tools of biblical
interpretation. Please be diligent to present yourself
approved to God, a worker having no cause or need to be ashamed,
rightly dividing the Word of Truth. Copyright © 2005-2007 by Thomas John Dexter. All rights reserved. The matter of this work may be reproduced for distribution, but it is not to be sold. The author's commentary is subject to change as he grows in knowledge and wisdom concerning the Word of God. Unless otherwise indicated, all Scripture quotations on this page are from the KJ3—Literal Translation Bible - 2005 Edition. Copyright © 2005. By Jay P. Green, Sr. All rights reserved. |