Christ received life from God at John 1:4 and 5:26 according to Robertson

The Real John Milton

Well-known member
I don’t believe I am. It doesn’t say τῷ υἱῷ ἔδωκεν ζωὴν “he gave the son life.” It attaches an infinitive to it, which changes the meaning of διδόναι. It reads τῷ υἱῷ ἔδωκεν ζωὴν ἔχειν ἐν ἑαυτῷ “he allowed/permitted/authorized the son to have life in himself.”


The part where it goes on and has an infinitive after it. You’re not translating the whole phrase. It’s not so much unclear as it is poorly translated.

The infinitive only strengthens the original assertion. There is no difference between saying “God gave the son eternal life” and “God gave the son to have eternal life.” You have to show proof that ἔδωκεν with infinitive becomes an idiom which transforms the meaning of ἔδωκεν to something closer to “allowed.” I haven’t seen any evidence so from the Greek for your assertion.
 

The Real John Milton

Well-known member
I’m glad you understand what “give” means in English. We’re talking, however, about how διδόναι (i.e., δίδωμι) is used in Greek. You might try dealing with Greek and not placing so much value upon how words are used in English.
διδόναι means “to give,” in Greek as it does in English. Not sure what you are trying to ask here. I showed in an earlier post that the meaning of empowered” or “allowed” is not assumed with this word in the Greek, but you did not interact.

I think however you are now trying to argue that διδόναι with infinitive has an idiomatic meaning. Surely you are not trying to suggest that διδόναι means something other than “to give” in Greek. If so let’s see proof.

But first, you need to develop a clear argument and a clear position with which I can interact.
 

The Real John Milton

Well-known member
I haven’t seen any evidence that you know anything at all about Greek.
It’s true that you have not provided any evidence for you assertion, nor do you even have a clear assertion.

By the way, I was mulling over John 5:26 and realized that the infinitive (ἔχειν) is there because of ἐν ἑαυτῷ, and not because ἔδωκεν with infinitive is an idiomatic use which apparently means “allowed” at John 5:26.

οὕτως καὶ τῷ Υἱῷ ἔδωκεν ζωὴν ἔχειν ἐν ἑαυτῷ.
 

The Real John Milton

Well-known member
εἶχεν with ἐν and dative is a biblical stock expression which means “to have (in) X” — ἔχειν ἐν ἐπιγνώσει, ἔχειν ἐν ἑαυτῷ, etc.
 

Gryllus Maior

Active member
διδόναι means “to give,” in Greek as it does in English. Not sure what you are trying to ask here. I showed in an earlier post that the meaning of empowered” or “allowed” is not assumed with this word in the Greek, but you did not interact.

I think however you are now trying to argue that διδόναι with infinitive has an idiomatic meaning. Surely you are not trying to suggest that διδόναι means something other than “to give” in Greek. If so let’s see proof.

But first, you need to develop a clear argument and a clear position with which I can interact.
You didn't even check the lexicons, did you?

to cause to happen, esp. in ref. to physical phenomena, produce, make, cause, give fig. extension of mng. 1 ὑετὸν δ. (3 Km 17:14; Job 5:10; Zech 10:1; PsSol 5:9) yield rain Js 5:18; send rain Ac 14:17. τέρατα cause wonders to appear Ac 2:19 (Jo 3:3). Of heavenly bodies φέγγος δ. give light, shine Mt 24:29; Mk 13:24 (cp. Is 13:10). Of a musical instrument φωνὴν δ. (cp. Ps 17:14; 103:12; Jdth 14:9; Pind., N. 5, 50b [93]) produce a sound 1 Cor 14:7f.


Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., Bauer, W., & Gingrich, F. W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed., p. 242). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

There are simply times when "give" is not the best English rendering.

Here it is closer to the arguments being given above:

to grant by formal action, grant, allow, freq. of God (cp. 7 above) ἐξουσίαν δ. (Hippol., Ref. 5, 26, 21 grant someone the power or authority, give someone the right, etc


Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., Bauer, W., & Gingrich, F. W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed., p. 243). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
 
Last edited:

The Real John Milton

Well-known member
to grant by formal action, grant, allow, freq. of God (cp. 7 above) ἐξουσίαν δ. (Hippol., Ref. 5, 26, 21 grant someone the power or authority, give someone the right, etc


Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., Bauer, W., & Gingrich, F. W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed., p. 243). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
I notice that there are no examples given. So this seems like a circular argument to reinforce a Trinitarian a priori. Do you have an example from the bible ?
 

Roger Thornhill

Well-known member
By the way Gryllus, what exactly does “ the Father allowed the Som to have life in himself” mean ? Could you please explain? Thanks,
The entire entry is here.

The examples at the beginning of the entry have "authority" as a direct object of the verb "give." That's a no-brainer.

John 5:26 is farther down the entry and more complex. I already posted on the verse in Acts 4:29 that follows it. God granted boldness and did not by means of His holt spirit which empowered them.

They are focusing on the gloss and explicit verses that fit it and transferring the "phenomenal" usage 100% to John 5:26 and making it "ontological." That's a fallacy.

The real sense can be derived from the context where God gives divine revelation to Jesus (J 5:19-20) along with the authority to use it.

Their fallacious approach ignores the context.

What, Roger brings up context? Well no, it's more like co-text in this instance. When God gives the knowledge and power along with the authority it's a matter of more than the gloss with explicit examples where authority is given.

@Gryllus Maior
 

The Real John Milton

Well-known member
The entire entry is here.

The examples at the beginning of the entry have "authority" as a direct object of the verb "give." That's a no-brainer.

John 5:26 is farther down the entry and more complex. I already posted on the verse in Acts 4:29 that follows it. God granted boldness and did not by means of His holt spirit which empowered them.

They are focusing on the gloss and explicit verses that fit it and transferring the "phenomenal" usage 100% to John 5:26 and making it "ontological." That's a fallacy.

The real sense can be derived from the context where God gives divine revelation to Jesus (J 5:19-20) along with the authority to use it.

Their fallacious approach ignores the context.

What, Roger brings up context? Well no, it's more like co-text in this instance. When God gives the knowledge and power along with the authority it's a matter of more than the gloss with explicit examples where authority is given.

@Gryllus Maior
Wow, thanks for pointing that out Roger. Don't know what Gryllus had hoped to accomplish by attempting to deceive me (as though that is at all possible).

By the way, the skills you acquired in law enforcement are serving you well.
 
The examples at the beginning of the entry have "authority" as a direct object of the verb "give." That's a no-brainer.

John 5:26 is farther down the entry and more complex. I already posted on the verse in Acts 4:29 that follows it. God granted boldness and did not by means of His holt spirit which empowered them.
It’s obvious that διδόναι can mean several different things, based on the context in which it is found. It just happens to be the case that you don’t need to have the words ἐξουσία or δύναμις for it to mean “allow, permit, grant.” If I say she gives her daughter to eat dessert before dinner, the context confirms that this means “allows” or “permits,” and to allow someone to do something is to give them the privilege or power to do it. I don’t see what you guys are making a big deal over. You’re arguing over something that is obvious.
 

Roger Thornhill

Well-known member
It’s obvious that διδόναι can mean several different things, based on the context in which it is found. It just happens to be the case that you don’t need to have the words ἐξουσία or δύναμις for it to mean “allow, permit, grant.” If I say she gives her daughter to eat dessert before dinner, the context confirms that this means “allows” or “permits,” and to allow someone to do something is to give them the privilege or power to do it. I don’t see what you guys are making a big deal over. You’re arguing over something that is obvious.
I agree that it could be interpreted that way. However editorial decisions need to be made on examples that are less clear.

Acts 4:29 is an example where God uses His holy spirit to embolden the disciples. So he gave more than permission.

The fallacy would be to infer that each entry only includes authority because of the explicit entries where authority is the direct object of "give."

As far as J 5:26 goes, it's clear from J 5:19-20 that God gives the Son a "divine revelation" (BDAG) so he sees what the Father is doing before he does it himself and that the resurrection is one of these things.
 

The Real John Milton

Well-known member
You love to praise those that share your opinions, no matter the content of their posts, don’t you?


Attempting
to deceive you? No one talks like this today. You’re a character rather than a human being.
Stick to the discussion. Ad hominems don't help anyone.

Could you please tell us what "the Father allowed the Son to have life in himself” means ? Also, could you point to a translation which has "(he) allowed" rather than "(he) gave" for ἔδωκεν at John 5:26.

It's hard to have a honest discussion with you because you simply ignore honest questioning which questions your assertions.
 

The Real John Milton

Well-known member
It’s obvious that διδόναι can mean several different things, based on the context in which it is found. It just happens to be the case that you don’t need to have the words ἐξουσία or δύναμις for it to mean “allow, permit, grant.” If I say she gives her daughter to eat dessert before dinner, the context confirms that this means “allows” or “permits,” and to allow someone to do something is to give them the privilege or power to do it. I don’t see what you guys are making a big deal over. You’re arguing over something that is obvious.
That's not an argument though, it's more like magical thinking a la Gandolf from Lord of the Rings. Give up the childish things and attempt an actual discussion.

It's already been explained to you that any sense of "gave authority to," "allowed," etc. is always connoted by direct objects (and the like) connected with ἔδωκεν. δίδωμι means "give." Since when did "give" and "allowed" become synonyms ? Just look at the following examples to see how you're abusing the Greek :

ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς ἐξουσίαν, τίς σοι ἔδωκεν τὴν ἐξουσίαν, καὶ εὐχαριστήσας ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς λέγων, ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς σημεῖον, etc. etc.

Do you see any such modifying / helping word at John 5:26 ?
 
Could you please tell us what "the Father allowed the Son to have life in himself” means ? Also, could you point to a translation which has "(he) allowed" rather than "(he) gave" for ἔδωκεν at John 5:26.
Whereas Jews had always thought of life coming only from Yahweh, he made it possible for the son to be the source of life. He permitted him to have life in himself, to be a lifegiving spirit (πνεῦμα ζῳοποιοῦν), as Paul stated (1 Cor. 15:45). Only God could have been considered the life-giving spirit, but he shared that with Christ, according to both John and Paul. If you weren’t so stubborn, you’d agree with me. What I’m saying isn’t controversial.
 
Top