The Free Grace Study Bible: John 8:59

I am pleased to share the latest installment of my ongoing work on The Free Grace Study Bible. Today's post features my translation of John 8:56, paired with original commentary and translation notes designed to clarify the meaning of the Greek text. I have provided the Greek-to-English rendering first, followed by the supporting notes that explain my translation choices.

John 8:59 

Greek Textus Receptus 

ἦραν οὖν λίθους ἵνα βάλωσιν ἐπ’ αὐτόν· Ἰησοῦς δὲ ἐκρύβη, καὶ ἐξῆλθεν ἐκ τοῦ ἱεροῦ, διελθὼν διὰ μέσου αὐτῶν· καὶ παρῆγεν οὕτως. 

Free Grace Translation 

Therefore they picked up stones that they might throw at Him; but Jesus was concealed and went out from the temple, passing between the midst of them; and was going away in this manner. 

Bible Translation Notes 

Grk. ἐκρύβη. "Second aorist passive indicative of kruptō. He was hidden. No Docetic vanishing, but quietly and boldly Jesus went out of the temple. His hour had not yet come." (A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, 6 Vols., Vol V, p. 159.) Lenski likewise renders the verb ἐκρύβη as a passive in his translation: "but Jesus was hidden and went out of the Temple." (R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. John's Gospel, p. 671, bold his.) Lenski goes on to explain further, saying: "Parts of the Temple were in the process of rebuilding during these and many following years, so that pieces of stone could be obtained for the deadly work. Yet a brief delay ensued as some of the Jews ran to the spot where the builders were at work and 'took up' the stones. During this interval, we may take it, Jesus 'was hidden.' The form ἐκρύβη, a second aorist passive, might be read in a middle sense, 'hid himself,' since the Koine increased the number of these passive forms and used them in preference to the middle (Robertson, 349). But here the passive sense is entirely in place (Robertson, 807): Jesus 'was hidden' from the Jews so that they could not reach him. We may suppose that he moved aside, and that his friends massed around him, and thus 'he went out of the Temple.' The addition found in later texts: 'going through the midst of them, and so passed by' (A. V.), must be cancelled as a combination that was added from Luke 4:30 and John 9:1. [Editor's Note: This KJV addition is not in the oldest Greek MSS; it was added at a later date.] This addition is also untrue in fact. For nothing miraculous took place in the escape of Jesus. 'He was hidden' and 'he went out' are two facts placed side by side, nor can we follow B.-D. 471, 3 in the suggestion that the second verb is used in place of the participle: 'by going out he was hidden.'" (R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. John's Gospel, p. 672, brackets added.) Alford similarly states: "There does not appear to be any miraculous escape intended here, although certainly the assumption of one is natural under the circumstances. Jesus was probably surrounded by His disciples, and might thus hide himself (see ch. 12.36), and go out of the temple." (Henry Alford, The Greek Testament [Boston: 1874], 4 Vols., Vol. I, p. 802, emphasis his. Note: The Roman numerals in the original have been updated to the current format.) Meyer writes: "He hid Himself (probably in the crowd), and went out (whilst thus hidden). The word ἐκρύβη explains how He was able to go out, and therefore . . . precludes the notion of anything miraculous . . . a notion which gave rise to the addition in the Textus Receptus (see the critical observations), which Ewald defends. Bauer, who likewise defends the Textus Receptus (p. 384 ff.), finds here also a docetic disappearance (comp. on 7.10 f.); if, however, such was John's meaning, he selected the most unsuitable possible terms to express it in writing ἐκρύβη (comp. on the contrary, Luke 24.31: ἄφαντος ἐγένετο ἀπʼ αὐτῶν) and ἐξῆλθεν ἐκ τοῦ ἱεροῦ. The 'providential protection of God' (Tholuck) is a matter of course, but is not expressed." (Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer, Critical and Exegetical Hand-Book to the Gospel of John, pp. 293-294, emphasis his.) The NT scholar Marcus Dods writes: "Ἰησοῦς δὲ ἐκρύβη καὶ ἐξῆλθεν. 'But Jesus went out unperceived'; on this usage vide [see] Winer, and cf. Thayer. Why it should be supposed that there is anything miraculous or doketic in this (Holtzmann and others) does not appear. Many in the crowd would favour the escape of Jesus. The remaining words of the chapter are omitted by recent editors." (Marcus Dods, The Expositor's Greek Testament, ed. by W. R. Nicoll, 5 Vols., Vol. I, p. 782.) Lange similarly states: "A vanishing out of sight (ἄφαντος γινεσθαι ['to become invisible']), as in Luke 24.31 (Augustine, Luthardt [Wordsworth]), is hardly to be thought of: to become invisible is not a withdrawal, a hiding, and Jesus was not yet transfigured. He hid Himself while disappearing among the multitude of the people, especially His adherents. [...] The conjecture of a docetic view (Hilgenfeld, Baur) is arbitrarily put in." (John Peter Lange, The Gospel According to John, in A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical [New York: 1872], 25 Vols., NT Vol. 3, p. 299, brackets added.) It should be noted in regard to John 8:59, however, that Bengel (and other Bible commentators) do understand this to be a miraculous disappearance of Jesus, comparable to the prophet Jeremiah's in the Old Testament (see Jer. 36:26). This, incidentally, would lend support to translating ἐκρύβη in John 8:59 in the passive sense: "Jesus was hidden" (see Jn. 8:59 HCSB, CSB, NLT, Berean Standard Bible, Majority Standard Bible, etc.). It's also important to point out that translating ἐκρύβη in John 8:59 as a passive is not dependent on some sort of miraculous disappearance of Jesus, because God uses means! That is to say, God uses different means to accomplish His purposes. Therefore, whether Jesus "was hidden" physically by His friends and disciples, or miraculously (i.e. supernaturally) by God the Father, in either event the meaning of ἐκρύβη would be passive. 

In my Free Grace Translation of John 8:59, I chose to simply translate the aorist passive ἐκρύβη as "He was concealed" (i.e., "He was hidden"), since this is the simplest and most direct translation of the Greek, and furthermore it makes perfect sense as a passive. As Cooper's "Golden Rule of Bible Interpretation" states (which I have repurposed and applied also to Bible translation): "When the plain sense of Scripture makes perfect sense, seek no other sense." The NT scholar A. T. Robertson affirms that "He was hidden" (i.e. the passive rendering of ἐκρύβη) is indeed the meaning of the Greek. Commenting on John 8:59 and the meaning of ἐκρύβη, Robertson writes: "Second aorist passive indicative of kruptō. He was hidden." (Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, 6 Vols., Vol. V, p. 159.) Robertson furthermore affirms that ἐκρύβη in John 8:59 is not reflexive in meaning, but rather "is passive, as Moulton [Prol. p. 156] points out." (Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, 4th Edition, p. 807.) The statement by Moulton is from his Prolegomena, when he says: "ἐκρύβη is not middle in form, nor does the verb show any distinct middle in NT." (James Hope Moulton, A Grammar of New Testament Greek, Vol. 1, p. 156.) In context, Moulton is pointing out that in the NT, the Greek middle voice is generally not reflexive. Moulton cites the verb ἐκρύβη in John 8:59 as an example of this: i.e. it is not middle in form, nor does it have a reflexive meaning. It should be noted, however, that in the 3rd Edition of Bauer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, it says concerning the meaning of the Greek verb κρύπτω ('to hide'): "This is also the place for the passive κρυβῆναι used in an active sense hide ... Ἰησοῦς ἐκρύβη J 8:59. ἐκρύβη ἀπ' αὐτῶν J 12:36." (Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd Edition, p. 571, emphasis his, ellipsis added.) But the 1st edition of Bauer's Lexicon (BAG, 1957) seems to define ἐκρύβη in John 8:59 as reflexive. (See below for more information.) Thus, no consensus! But consistent with A. T. Robertson's analysis of ἐκρύβη as passive in meaning, several respected English Bible translations render it as either "Jesus was hidden" (Jn. 8:59 CSB, HCSB, NLT) or "Jesus was hid" (Jn. 8:59, Smith's Literal Translation). Köstenberger provides a fair analysis (although he clearly favors interpreting ἐκρύβη as active) when he writes: "The passive verb ἐκρύβη (ekrybē) in 8:59 and 12:36 is customarily translated in English Bibles as reflexive/middle ('hid himself'; KJV; NKJV; NIV; TNIV; ISV; ESV; NLT; NET; NRSV; NASB) or even actively ('hid'; NAB; CEV). The sole exception is the HCSB [Editor's Note: The HCSB is not 'The sole exception'], which renders the expression as a genuine passive. See also Morris (1995: 421), who contends that the NT usage is to take the form as a real passive and consequently argues that the passive form may imply the agency of God the Father in concealing Jesus. This is possible; ekrybē does function as a genuine passive in Luke 19:42 and Heb. 11:23 [!], the only other two NT instances (besides here and in John 12:36) of the aorist passive indicative form of kryptō. But cf. BDAG 571, which treats both references as instances of the passive used in an active sense ('to hide')." (Andreas J. Köstenberger, John, p. 274, see footnote 109.) It should be noted, however, that the first English edition of Bauer's Lexicon (BAG, 1957) treats ἐκρύβη in John 8:59 as reflexive, not strictly active. See Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (1st English edition), p. 455, s.v. κρύπτω, definition 1.c. = "hide or conceal oneself (Gen 3:8, 10; Judg 9:5; 1 Kg 13:6; 14:11; Job 24:4; 29:8) Ἰησοῦς ἐκρύβη J 8:59; ἐκρύβη ἀπ' αὐτῶν 12:36." But in reference to John 12:36, the verb ἐκρύβη is translated as passive in the NKJV, NLT, and most (if not all) the "literal" English Bible translations. This highlights the fact that there is some debate (i.e. no real consensus) on exactly how to translate the Greek ἐκρύβη in John's Gospel; some NT scholars translate it as a reflexive verb, while others translate it as a passive. For example, Leon Morris states: "'Hid himself' [in Jn. 8:59] is really a passive, 'was hidden.' John is perhaps hinting that God protected his Son." (Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John, p. 421.) Morris goes on to say, "The aorist passive έκρύβη is used in the sense of the middle in the LXX and most interpreters understand it so here. But the New Testament usage [!] is rather to take the form as passive." (Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John, p. 421. See footnote 122.) F. F. Bruce likewise understands the verb ἐκρύβη in John 8:59 (and 12:36) as passive, although he seems to allow for the reflexive sense. (F. F. Bruce, The Gospel and Epistles of John, p. 206.) Ridderbos seems to favor the reflexive interpretation. (See Herman N. Ridderbos, The Gospel of John, p. 324, footnote 225.) A. T. Robertson seems to disagree that ἐκρύβη in John 8:59 is reflexive in meaning, noting: "The example cited by Winer from Jo. 8:59 (cf. also 12:36), ἐκρύβη, is passive, as Moulton points out." (Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, 4th Edition, p. 807.) Murray J. Harris simply presents the three options (passive, reflexive, active) without commenting further on it. (See Murray J. Harris, John, EGGNT, p. 183.) Suffice it to say that all three interpretations have merit and scholarly support. Personally, I would rather side with J. H. Moulton, A. T. Robertson, R. C. H. Lenski, and Leon Morris (not to mention F. F. Bruce). Besides, the very same Greek word (ἐκρύβη) functions as a genuine passive in John 12:36. Commenting on the phrase εκρυβη απ' αυτων ("he was hidden from them") in John 12:36, A. T. Robertson affirms: "ekrubē ap' autōn. Second aorist passive indicative of kruptō, late form (in LXX) for old ekruphē, 'was hidden from them,' as in John 8:59." (Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, 6 Vols., Vol. V, p. 231.) The fact that έκρύβη in John 12:36 is passive—not only in form, but also in meaning—is furthermore affirmed by the more "literal" English Bible translations (e.g., Jn. 12:36 Young's Literal Translation, Literal Standard Version, Berean Literal Bible), along with several other translations (e.g., see Jn. 12:36 NKJV, NLT). So there is not only scholarly support, but also Johannine support, and even broader New Testament support (see Lk. 19:42; Heb. 11:23) for translating έκρύβη as a passive in John 8:59. 

Grk. διά μέσου. On this phrase, Thayer writes: "the neuter τό μέσον or (without the article in adverb. phrases, as διά μέσου, ...) μέσον is used as a substantive; ... the midst: ... διά μέσου ... αὐτῶν, through the midst of them, Lk. 4.30; Jn. 8.59 [Rec.]; ... others take the phrase here in the sense of between." (Joseph Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, p. 401, s.v. μέσος, definition 2, brackets and italics his, ellipsis added. Note: The Roman numerals in the original have been updated to the current format.) It should be noted, however, that the NT scholar A. T. Robertson gives a more precise rendering. Under the heading "'Passing Between' or 'Through,'" Robertson says in regards to διά that "through" is not the original meaning of the word, but rather the original meaning is "passing between." Concerning this, Robertson writes: "The idea of interval between [another use of διά] leads naturally to that of passing between two objects or parts of objects. 'Through' is thus not the original meaning of διά, but is a very common one. The case [of the object of the preposition] is usually genitive [...] Some MSS. in Jo. 8:59 read also διὰ μέσου." (Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, 4th Edition, p. 581, brackets added.) In light of these statements by A. T. Robertson, in my Free Grace Translation of John 8:59 I opted to translate the phrase διά μέσου αὐτῶν as "between the midst of them" rather than "through the midst of them" because the latter rendering makes it sound as if Jesus was a ghost or phantom who passed right "through" the bodies of his would-be attackers! While this is indeed possible, New Testament scholars (e.g., Alford, Dods, Meyer, Robertson, etc.) generally agree that this is likely not the meaning of διά μέσου in John 8:59. The meaning, rather, is that Jesus passed "in between" his attackers (as they had scattered to gather rocks with which to stone Him), and thus Jesus escaped out of the Temple. Thus, in light of the original meaning of διά and also for the sake of clarity, I have translated διά μέσου in John 8:59 as "passing between." 

Grk. διελθὼν διὰ μέσου αὐτῶν καὶ παρῆγεν οὕτως. This last phrase is added in the newer Greek NT manuscripts (i.e. the Byzantine Majority Text and the Textus Receptus add this phrase); it does not appear in the oldest Greek NT MSS. Proponents of the "KJV-only" teaching impose an anachronistic methodology onto the historical facts by making the 1611 English King James Version the standard of supposed perfection, when in reality it is simply an English translation of relatively late date Byzantine-type Greek MSS, which added this phrase. (KJV-only advocates love to tout the fact that their 1611 English Bible is older than most of the relatively newer English Bible translations. But what these KJV-onlyists are hiding or at least not telling people is that their 1611 English translation is based on the newer Greek New Testament manuscripts! KJV-onlyists condemn the newer English Bible translations as "modern" and "corrupted." But ironically, this is actually the case in regard to the newer Greek New Testament manuscripts upon which the King James Version is based! Thus, the KJV-onlyists unwittingly condemn their own translation in that it is based on the more "modern" and "corrupted" Greek manuscripts, which in the case of John 8:59b contain the added phrase "going through the midst of them, and so passed by." Lange calls this added phrase in John 8:59 a "doubtful addition." (See Lange, op. cited.) Lange furthermore states: "The words from διελθών ['going...'] to the end [of the verse] are wanting [i.e. not found] in B. [Codex Vaticanus], D. [Codex Bezae], [Jerome's] Vulgate, and seem to have been transferred from Luke 4.30 by way of [poor] exegesis [instead of direct manuscript evidence]. Wanting also [i.e. also not found] in Cod. Sin. [i.e. Codex Sinaiticus]." (Lange, op. cited, brackets added.) Commenting on John 8:59, Lenski similarly states: "The addition found in later texts: 'going through the midst of them, and so passed by' (A. V.), must be cancelled as a combination that was added from Luke 4:30 and John 9:1." (R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. John's Gospel, p. 672.) As I noted, the Bible has stern warnings against adding to the Scriptures (see references); and thus the KJV, for all its virtues, is actually based on a more "corrupted" Greek text type (i.e. the newer Byzantine Greek NT manuscripts). Commenting on John 8:59b and this added phrase in the Authorized Version (KJV), the NT scholar Alfred Plummer states: "going through the midst of them, and so passed by] These words are apparently an insertion, and probably an adaptation of Luke 4.30. No English Version previous to the one of 1611 contains the passage." (Plummer, The Gospel According to St. John, p. 196.) What Plummer is pointing out is that the oldest English Bibles (e.g., the Tyndale Bible of 1526 up to the Geneva Bible of 1599) do not contain the phrase which the King James Version added in 1611. This is significant! Because what it shows is that the oldest Greek NT MSS as well as the oldest English Bible translations do not contain the words in John 8:59b that the King James translators added in to the King James Version in 1611. By way of contrast, the English Bible translations which are based on the oldest Greek New Testament manuscripts (e.g., the English Revised Version, ASV, NASB, NIV, NET, ESV, HCSB, NLT, etc.) correctly do not contain the phrase in John 8:59 which was added in by the King James translators in 1611.

Grk. παρῆγεν. The verb is in the imperfect tense, denoting past continuous action. Thus the meaning is "He was passing by," rather than the simple "passed by" found in the King James Version and several other English translations (e.g., see Jn. 8:59 KJV, NKJV, YLT). In contrast to the rendering found in the KJV, translating παρῆγεν as "He was going away" (Jn. 8:59, Free Grace Translation), captures the ongoing, linear movement as Jesus left the scene, rather than a sudden, completed "He went." Since the past continuous rendering makes complete sense in English, I have retained this syntactic nuance from the Greek in my English translation.

How To Use Chick Tracts to Proclaim the Clear Gospel

"Pray that I may proclaim it clearly, as I should." Colossians 4:4, NIV.

These 24-page illustrated gospel booklets 
by Jack Chick are known as "Chick tracts."

"I do enjoy reading the comic illustrations in the Chick tracts, and I'm sure the believers in the Lord for Chick Publications have the right heart and right motives behind writing their tracts, but my only concern for Chick is a little more clarity of the gospel. Otherwise, like I said, I do enjoy their comic illustrations. A lot of them are very creative."  —Peter Hann

*  *  *

This sticker can be placed over the unclear gospel

invitation inside the back cover of all Chick tracts:

This is the inside back cover of all Chick tracts:

With this simple hack, I can combine the appeal

of the Chick comics with the power of the clear gospel!

The Adventures of Arthur Croft: The Damascus Cipher

Episode 4: The Damascus Cipher

[Back to Series Hub]

The air inside the narrow ventilation duct was suffocating, thick with centuries of Alexandria's dust and the biting tang of rusted metal. Arthur dragged himself forward, clutching the scroll-case containing the Lexicon of Grace in one hand and his waterproof rucksack housing the 4th-century codex in the other.

Far below, the muffled voices of Dr. Alistair Finch's guards grew frantic. Their flashlight beams sliced through the darkness of the subterranean vault, searching for a sign of where Arthur had vanished.

Arthur didn't slow down. Following the structural blueprints of the subterranean complex he had memorized on the dhow, he pushed through a hinged maintenance panel at the end of the shaft. But the path took an unexpected turn. Instead of leading to the docks as the blueprints indicated, the ventilation duct terminated at a grated opening overlooking the interior of the Cathedral of St. Mark's active scriptorium. Rather than making an exit by sea, Arthur had to quickly improvise: he would need to drop down into the heart of the library's restoration wing and blend in with the scholars!

He landed softly on a stack of wool rugs. Discarding his mud-stained field jacket, Arthur quickly approached an elderly, gray-haired restorer wearing magnifying spectacles and an ink-stained linen apron. Exchanging a brief, knowing nod, the scholar handed Arthur a spare tunic from his work cart and looked away, allowing Arthur to tuck the codex and lexicon into a stack of unrelated Coptic liturgical folios that he quietly slipped into his rucksack.

Just as he reached the main reading room, the heavy wooden doors burst open. Dr. Finch, flanked by local security officials, held a physical warrant bearing the Institute's seal.

"Lock the doors," Finch announced, his voice echoing under the high arches. "Croft is inside, and he is carrying stolen property of the Institute."

Trapped with no exit, Arthur had to think fast. He noticed a microfiche projector being used to catalog ancient Syrian manuscripts. Walking past the table, he slipped the Lexicon of Grace onto the glass plate, projecting a massive, illuminated image of the Greek text for charis onto the sanctuary wall for the entire academic assembly to see.

The room went completely silent as scholars and clerics read the ancient definition of the pure, unmerited gift.

"Look at the syntax, Dr. Finch," Arthur called out, stepping into the light. "The manuscript doesn't hide the truth. It was just locked away in the dark."

Finch turned pale, realizing the control he sought over the text was broken; the secret was out in the open. As the assembly erupted into fervent discussion and photographs were snapped of the projection, Arthur quietly slipped through the side entrance into the early morning Alexandrian dawn.

Now safe on the streets of Alexandria, Arthur reviewed the microfilm notes he had gathered from the projector's catalog. The notes revealed a set of microfilmed letters written by early Syrian church leaders who had broken away from legalistic influences. The documents pointed to an ancient, underground archive outside of Damascus where the original copies were hidden.

The truth was out, and the mission had evolved: it was no longer just about preserving the ancient text, but following its truth to the very end of the road.

*  *  *

Study Insight: 

The transition from Alexandria to Damascus reflects the expansion of early Christian theological debates into the wider Greco-Roman world. In early texts, legalism often manifested as an attempt to merge the pure grace of the gospel with ritualistic obligations (such as the teachings rejected by Paul in Galatians 1:6-7). The concept of a "free gift" without any required merit remains the cornerstone of this theological framework. For a scholarly discussion on the historical and theological conflict between grace and law in the early church, see F. F. Bruce's commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians.

Have You Been Infected by the Lordship Gospel?

Do people have to stop sinning in order to be saved, or at least be willing to give up certain sins in order to receive eternal life? Lordship Salvationists say "yes," but what does the Bible say?

Notice the following statements by John MacArthur, one of today's leading Lordship Salvationists:

"I remember when I used to discuss this lordship issue and this kind of commitment for salvation with other theologians in the time when I was writing the material on The Gospel According to Jesus, they would pose a question. One of the main guys posed this question to me. If you have a couple that you know and they're living in adultery, they're not married and they're living together and you're going to give them the gospel, do you say to them you must stop sinning and then come to Christ? Or do you say nothing about that, just come to Christ and worry about that later? Well, the answer to the question would be, what would Jesus say. What would Jesus say? Jesus would say this. You have a quote 'love' going on here. Whether it's love or not, I don't know, but you have an affair going on, you have a relationship going on. How important is it for you to receive the forgiveness of sin and eternal life? Because if you're not willing to put a sword in that relationship or any other relationship and to deny the thing your heart craves, then you're not worthy to be My disciple. That really became the nexus of that whole debate."[1]

And it's not just the "big" sins that Lordship Salvationists say must be given up in order to be saved. They go so far as to say that unless a person gives up smoking cigarettes (or at least is willing to do so), they cannot be saved! Regarding this, Charles Ryrie shares the following true story of a run-in he had with a group of Lordship Salvationists who accosted him one time at an airport. Ryrie relates the following incident in his book So Great Salvation:

"Some years ago in another country I was literally accosted after an evening service by a group of American missionaries working in that country. They had been infected by the lordship/discipleship/mastery Gospel, and having read the thirteen pages I had written about the subject in 1969 [in Balancing the Christian Life], they were anxious to debate the issue. I did not know them; they were uninvited; but I could not avoid meeting with them. So we talked for quite a while that night. Finally it came down to an illustration. I posed this case to them. We all knew, even at that time, that smoking had been proven a serious risk to one's health. I asked about a hypothetical person who wanted to be saved, but he smoked. Furthermore, he knew full well that smoking was endangering his health, and he realized that if he became a Christian he ought to give it up. But he was unable to do so, nor was he even willing. So I asked these folks, 'Can he not be saved until either he gives up smoking or is willing to give up smoking?' Reluctantly they admitted that their view compelled them to say no, he cannot."[2]

 

Years ago William R. Newell wrote a gospel tract titled "The ONLY Kind of People God Saves." The tract is based on Romans 4:5, and it's very applicable to the Lordship Salvation debate. After quoting Romans 4:5, Newell writes the following:

"I wish to call your attention to one fact—God justifies ungodly men. He does not justify all ungodly men, but He justifies ONLY ungodly men. Men think that because they have been ungodly and wicked, God demands a change in their character before He receives them. This is not true. The quotation above definitely says that 'God justifies the ungodly who believe.'

What then does God ask an ungodly sinner to do? First of all, nothing, that is, to cease from absolutely all efforts to save himself. For the verse says, 'To him that worketh not.' A man is asked simply to accept God's verdict about him—that he is ungodly, unrighteous, and unable to save himself. Second, accept the blessed news that God Himself has already reckoned his sins and ungodliness to another Person, that is, to Christ, His Son, and that, because the punishment of sin was death, Jesus has by God's appointment died, has shed His blood, in the sinner's place. 'The Lord laid on Him the iniquity of us all' (Isaiah 53:6). Christ died for our sins—that is, instead of our dying for them. Death here means banishment from God under a curse, and Christ bearing our sins was forsaken on the cross as accursed of God. (Matthew 27:46; Gal. 3:13.)

Now when an ungodly man finds these two great truths: first, that he is utterly guilty and unable to help himself, and second, that Jesus Christ has already borne sin, in his place, by God's appointment; and when this ungodly man just accepts these facts and trusts this Saviour, whom God raised from the dead to be trusted, this ungodly man is saved then and there. That is, God forgives and justifies him on the basis of the price already paid—the shed blood of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

Do you believe this? Or, are you still trying to REFORM yourself—promising yourself that you will do better, and merit God's favor thus? Why do you not believe what God says: By deeds of righteousness shall no flesh be justified in God's sight? (Romans 3:20; Titus 3:5.)

Listen to the Gospel: 'To him that WORKETH NOT BUT BELIEVETH on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is reckoned for righteousness' (Romans 4:5).

This is good news! Every sinner in the world could have this salvation, if he were willing, this moment. Let anyone who wants Christ claim Him at once. As a sinner, claim the Saviour God has appointed for sinners, as your very own Saviour this moment. He sees your heart. Trust Him now as yours, and lo, He is yours!"[3]

The fatal problem with MacArthur's view of the gospel is that he confuses the free gift of salvation with the costly demands of discipleship. That's typical of Lordship Salvation. But more than that, MacArthur's gospel clearly contradicts what the Bible says about the only kind of people God saves: not those who clean up their lives first, but "the ungodly"!

 

"Just As I Am" 

A Gospel Hymn 

Just as I am, 

without one plea, 

but that thy blood was shed for me, 

and that thou bidd'st me come to thee, 

O Lamb of God, I come, I come. 

Just as I am, 

and waiting not 

to rid my soul of one dark blot, 

to thee, whose blood can cleanse each spot, 

O Lamb of God, I come, I come. 

 Just as I am, though tossed about 

with many a conflict, many a doubt, 

fightings and fears within, without, 

O Lamb of God, I come, I come. 

 Just as I am, 

thou wilt receive, 

wilt welcome, pardon, cleanse, relieve; 

because thy promise I believe, 

O Lamb of God, I come, I come. 

 —Charlotte Elliot

References:

[1] John MacArthur, "The Extreme Nature of True Discipleship, Part 1" (Oct 16, 2005), Grace to You website. Sermon on Luke 14:25-27. https://www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/42-195/the-extreme-nature-of-true-discipleship-part-1 (accessed December 31, 2022).

[2] Charles Ryrie, So Great Salvation (Wheaton: SP Publications, Inc., 1989), pp. 112-113. Note: The same statement appears in the second edition of Ryrie's book. See Charles Ryrie, So Great Salvation (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 1997), p. 103.

[3] William R. Newell, "The ONLY Kind of People God Saves" (Chicago: Good News Pub. Co., no date), pp. 1-3, emphasis his. Note: There is a date stamp from the library of the University of Illinois on the front cover of the tract with the date: "APR 4  1942."

The Adventures of Arthur Croft: The Labyrinth of St. Mark

Episode 3: The Labyrinth of St. Mark

[Back to Series Hub]

The salt spray of the Mediterranean had barely dried on Arthur's jacket before the humid, crowded chaos of Alexandria swallowed him whole. Unlike the silent isolation of the Sinai, Alexandria was a fortress of noise—the scraping of iron gates, the haggling of street-side markets, and the constant hum of a city built over its own ghosts.

Arthur kept his head down, the waterproof rucksack held tight against his side. He didn't head for the Great Library or the modern museums. Instead, he wound through the narrow, laundry-draped alleys of the Kom el-Dikka district, within the shadow of the Cathedral of St. Mark, following the cryptic annotations he'd decoded during the voyage.

The marks in the codex had pointed to a "Guardian of the Second Chair"—a title that led Arthur to a nondescript, basement-level bookstore specializing in Coptic manuscripts.

Inside, the air smelled of cloves and decaying paper. Behind a desk piled high with parchment sat a man whose skin looked like weathered vellum.

"I am looking for the commentary on the 'receptive hand,'" Arthur said, using the phrasing suggested by the marginalia.

The old man looked up, his eyes sharp. He didn't speak. Instead, he reached under the counter and produced a heavy, iron key. He pointed toward a door obscured by a heavy tapestry.

Arthur descended a spiral staircase that felt like it was drilling into the bedrock of the ancient city. At the bottom lay a private archive, a subterranean vault where the humidity was strictly controlled by clay jars of desiccated salts.

He found the shelf. There, tucked behind a series of Byzantine ledgers, was a small wooden scroll-case. Arthur's breath hitched. As he slid the parchment out, he saw it wasn't a biblical text, but a technical linguistic treatise from the early school of Alexandria.

It was a "Lexicon of Grace."

His eyes scanned the columns. The scroll specifically addressed the Greek word charis (grace). It compared it not to a wage or a reward for merit, but to the unilateral favor of a king who pardons a debt without requesting a single drachma in return.

"It's a linguistic absolute," Arthur whispered, his mind racing. "The grammar doesn't allow for a 'synergy' of works. It's a pure gift."

Suddenly, the heavy iron door at the top of the stairs slammed open.

"The problem with linguistics, Mr. Croft, is that they are so easily silenced," Dr. Finch's voice echoed down the stone shaft.

Arthur looked up to see Finch silhouetted against the light, flanked by a local official in a sharp suit. Finch wasn't wearing his field gear anymore; he was dressed in a formal academic suit, looking every bit the respected scholar—a mask for the legalistic predator beneath.

"You are trespassing in a restricted heritage site," Finch said calmly. "Hand over the rucksack and the scroll. The Institute has the legal authority to seize 'unstable' documents."

"Authority isn't the same as truth, Alistair," Arthur called back, surreptitiously looking for a second exit. The vault was a dead end—or so it seemed.

He noticed a small ventilation shaft near the ceiling, barely wide enough for a man of his stature. He looked at the Lexicon in his hand. If Finch took this, the technical proof of a "free gift" interpretation would be buried in a private collection, never to see the light of an academic journal.

Arthur didn't argue. He grabbed a heavy bronze book-end from a nearby table and hurled it at the overhead light fixture.

The vault plunged into total darkness.

"Grab him!" Finch screamed.

In the blackness, Arthur moved by instinct and memory. He didn't head for the stairs. He scrambled up a set of sturdy wooden shelves, his fingers finding the edge of the ventilation grate. With a heave that strained his shoulders, he kicked the grate loose and pulled himself into the narrow, dust-choked duct.

As he crawled through the darkness, stray beams from the guards' flashlights pierced the cracks in the air duct, sweeping the room below. He had the Codex, and now he had the Lexicon. He was no longer just a researcher; he was a smuggler of the Light.

*  *  *

Study Insight

In Episode 3, Arthur discovers a "Lexicon of Grace." In New Testament Greek, the word χάρις (charis) is fundamentally defined as "unmerited favor." A common mistake in legalistic interpretations is to treat grace as a "boost" that helps a person perform enough good works to be saved. However, as the Greek grammar suggests, grace and works are mutually exclusive categories in the context of salvation (cf. Rom. 3:24, 4:4-5, 11:6; Gal. 2:21; Eph. 2:8-9; Titus 3:5). For more on the technical distinction between grace and merit, see the works of C.I. Scofield or Lewis Sperry Chafer, who meticulously cataloged how "the gift" cannot be "earned" without changing its very definition.

The Free Grace Study Bible: John 8:56

I am pleased to share the latest installment of my ongoing work on The Free Grace Study Bible. Today's post features my translation of John 8:56, paired with original commentary and translation notes designed to clarify the meaning of the Greek text. I have provided the Greek-to-English rendering first, followed by the supporting notes that explain my translation choices.

John 8:56 

Greek Textus Receptus 

Ἀβραὰμ ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν ἠγαλλιάσατο ἵνα ἴδῃ τὴν ἡμέραν τὴν ἐμήν, καὶ εἶδε καὶ ἐχάρη. 

Free Grace Translation 

"Abraham your father exulted that he would see My day, and he saw [it] and was glad." 

Bible Translation Notes 

Grk. Ἀβραὰμ ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν. "There is a cutting irony in the apposition, Abraham, your father. Their father rejoicing in the expectation of a presence which excited only their malice and hatred." (Godet, Commentary on the Gospel of St. John, 3 Vols., Vol. II, p. 352.) 

Grk. ἠγαλλιάσατο ἵνα ἴδῃ. For the translation of ἠγαλλιάσατο as "exulted," see Leon Morris, The Gospel of John, Revised Edition (NICNT), p. 417. Bengel's translation is similar, and likewise supports my Free Grace Translation. Bengel writes: ἠγαλλιάσατο, ἵνα, exulted that...Evinced his eagerness with longing desire." (John Albert Bengel, Gnomon of the New Testament [Edinburgh: 1868], 5 Vols., Vol. II, p. 368.) Commenting on the phrase ἠγαλλιάσατο ἵνα ἴδῃ, the NT Greek scholar Henry Alford writes: "literally, rejoiced, that He should see." (Alford, The New Testament for English Readers [London: 1863], 2 Vols., Vol. I, Part II, p. 546.) While technically correct and grammatically defensible, the translation "he should see" is somewhat awkward in modern English and actually tends to convey a different idea than the meaning of the Greek. I chose to use the word "would" instead of "should" because in modern-day English, "should" can sometimes be confused with "ought to" (implying moral obligation). Whereas "would" reads much smoother and is still prospective. Several respected English Bible versions similarly translate ἴδῃ in John 8:56 as "he would see" (see e.g., Jn. 8:56 ESV, HCSB, NASB 2020). 

Grk. ἵνα ἴδῃ = hina clause with ἴδῃ (aorist subjunctive, 3rd person singular, from ὁράω). Literally, that he should see. Commenting on this phrase, Walther has this insightful comment: "ἵνα ἴδῃ--Instead of ἵνα we might have expected an infinitive or possibly a ὅτι clause. (Cf. 7:35.) ἵνα clauses gradually took over other "to" functions, a process which continued into the Modern Greek period." (James Arthur Walther, New Testament Greek Workbook: An Inductive Study of the Complete Text of the Gospel of John [Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1966, 1969], p. 129.) A. T. Robertson (Word Pictures, Vol. V, p. 158) sees the hina clause in John 8:56 as having a "Sub-final use," which would lend support to translating the aorist subjunctive ἴδῃ as the infinitive "to see" (Jn. 8:56 KJV, NKJV, etc.). In his monumental work A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, Robertson goes into more detail in regard to this "Sub-final use of hina." Under the heading "Sub-Final Clauses" (Grammar, p. 991), Robertson writes the following: "There are a considerable number of clauses which are not pure purpose and yet are not result. They are the bridge, in a sense, between the two extremes. [...] Ἵνα. Here again the main conjunction is ἵνα. [...] The development came on soon after the close of the classical age. [...] It came to be used in almost any sense that the infinitive bore and finally displaced it. This weakened use of ἵνα is one of the characteristics of the κοινή and is richly illustrated in the N. T., particularly in the writings of John. [...] There is a great variety of phrases which thus use ἵνα. [...] With these verbs ἵνα gives the purport or object rather than the purpose. [...] The examples in the N. T. are too numerous to give a complete list. But note ἵνα after [...] ἀγαλλιάομαι (Jo. 8:56); [...] No real distinction in sense can here be drawn between the infinitive and ἵνα. [...] The subjunctive is the usual mode [i.e. mood] employed even after secondary tenses." (Ibid., pp. 991-993.) Robertson goes on to say: "It is debatable whether ἵνα has the ecbatic use [i.e. expressing result] in the N. T. There is in itself no reason why it should not have it, since undoubtedly it was so used in the later Greek. [...] There is not space to follow the long debate in the grammars and commentaries on this subject." (Ibid., p. 997.) Robertson "advocates the freedom of commentators to interpret ἵνα as the context demands (final, sub-final, consecutive)." (Ibid., p. 998.) Robertson says: "The commentator must have grammar, but he needs the grammar of the author on whose work he is making comments." (Ibid., p. 998.) Robertson summarizes by saying: "So, then, we conclude that ἵνα has in the N. T. all three uses (final, sub-final, consecutive), and thus runs a close parallel with the infinitive which it finally displaced." (Ibid., p. 999.) Note that translating ἵνα in John 8:56 simply as "that" satisfies Robertson's statement regarding the "Sub-final use of hina" (Word Pictures, Vol. V, p. 158), where the ἵνα clause can be translated either as "that" (see e.g., Jn. 8:56 ESV, HCSB, NASB 2020) or "to" (see e.g., Jn. 8:56 KJV, NKJV, NET Bible). The translation of ἵνα as "that" in John 8:56 is also the definition assigned to it in Bauer's Lexicon (see Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd Edition, p. 476, s.v. ἵνα, definition 2a). In fact, I would propose that rendering ἵνα simply as "that" is the preferable translation in John 8:56 especially in light of the aorist subjunctive verb which follows. The use of the aorist subjunctive ἴδῃ in John 8:56 is a distinctive syntactical feature that the translator should aim to reflect, rather than obscuring the construction by rendering it as a simple infinitive. When the ἵνα + aorist subjunctive in John 8:56 is translated as an infinitive ("to see"), it tends to blur the prospective nuance that the subjunctive conveys. The translation of John 8:56 would then need to read something like: "Your father Abraham rejoiced at the prospect to see My day." While acceptable, that wording does not fully bring out the subjunctive force of ἴδῃ, that he would see. Translating ἵνα simply as "that" (rather than "to") strikes an optimal balance: "Abraham rejoiced that he would see." This wording correctly identifies the object (what Abraham rejoiced about) as well as the potential/future nature of the verb ἴδῃ—the fact that the "seeing" was a promised event that he anticipated and looked toward. In distinction to this, it is the view of Murray J. Harris that the hina clause in John 8:56 "is epexegetic, indicating the content...or ground...of the seeing, 'in that he saw.' In this case, the following statement [in Jn. 8:56b], 'he saw it and was glad,' is a repetition." (Harris, John, EGGNT, p. 183.) But this view seems to create more problems than it solves. The NT Greek scholar Marcus Dods writes: "[The phrase] ἵνα ἴδῃ ['that he should see'] cannot here have its usual Johannine force and be epexegetical (Burton, Moods, etc.), nor as Holtzmann says = ὅτι ὄψοιτο ['that he would see,' i.e. Abraham rejoiced merely at the fact or content of the report], because in this case the εἶδε καὶ ἐχάρη ['he saw it and was glad'] would be tautological [i.e. unnecessarily redundant]. Euthymius gives the right interpretation: ἠγαλλ., ἤγουν, ἐπεθύμησεν ['he rejoiced,' namely 'he longed for,' in other words, 'he rejoiced' is interpreted not so much as a reaction to a reported fact, but as a passionate exultation in a promise] (similarly Theophylact), and the meaning is 'Abraham exulted in the prospect of seeing,' or 'that he should see'. This he was able to do by means of the promises given to him." (Marcus Dods, Expositor's Greek Testament, ed. W. R. Nicoll, 5 Vols., Vol. I, p. 781.) Köstenberger's rendering of John 8:56 seems to convey the latter sense quite well, and although somewhat of a paraphrase, is nonetheless accurate to the idea. He translates it: "Abraham your father looked forward to the time when he would see my day, and he saw it and was glad." (Andreas J. Köstenberger, John, p. 271.) By using "looked forward to the time when," Köstenberger is leaning heavily into the prospective sense of the aorist subjunctive. This supports my objection to using the infinitive "to see" to translate the verb ἴδῃ, because doing so essentially erases the verb's prospective sense. 

Grk. ἐχάρη (aor. passive of χαίρω) = was glad. Cf. Edwin A. Abbott, Johannine Vocabulary, p. 30, footnote 3. This is also how ἐχάρη is translated in John 8:56b in the KJV, NKJV, NASB77, NASB95 (though not the NASB 2020 edition, which says "rejoiced"), ESV, NIV, NET Bible, etc. This is consistent with Bauer's definition of χαίρω: "to be in a state of happiness and well-being, rejoice, be glad ... J 4:36; 8:56." (Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd Edition, pp. 1074-1075, s.v. χαίρω, definition 1, emphasis his, ellipsis added.)

The Free Grace Study Bible: John 8:53

I am pleased to share the latest installment of my ongoing work on The Free Grace Study Bible. Today's post features my translation of John 8:53, paired with original commentary and translation notes designed to clarify the meaning of the Greek text. I have provided the Greek-to-English rendering first, followed by the supporting notes that explain my translation choices.

John 8:53 

Greek Textus Receptus 

μὴ σὺ μείζων εἶ τοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν Ἀβραάμ, ὅστις ἀπέθανε; καὶ οἱ προφῆται ἀπέθανον· τίνα σεαυτὸν σὺ ποιεῖς; 

Free Grace Translation 

"You are not greater than our father Abraham who died, [are you]? And the prophets died; whom do you make yourself [out to be]?" 

Bible Translation Notes 

Grk. ἀπέθανεν...ἀπέθανον. These are aorist tense verbs, not nouns. Thus the correct translation in John 8:53 is "died" (as in most English Bibles), not "dead" (the rendering found in the KJV, NKJV, and also in the older English Bibles). The Greek word for "dead" is νεκρός (nekros); that is not the word used here. Commenting on John 8:53, A. T. Robertson consistently translates these verbs as "died" (see Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, Vol. V, p. 156; Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, 4th Edition, p. 728.) 

Grk. τίνα. This interrogative pronoun is in the accusative case (not the nominative case), thus it is functioning as the direct object of the question, not the subject of the question. (The pronoun σεαυτὸν functions as the predicate accusative. See A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, Vol. V, p. 156.) What this means is that the correct translation of τίνα is not "Who?" but "Whom?" (as in most English Bibles, e.g. see John 8:53 in the Tyndale Bible, Geneva Bible, KJV, RV, ASV, NASB, etc.). In other words, the Jews are asking Jesus: "You are making yourself out to be WHOM?" The subject is σὺ = "You" (not τίνα), which corresponds with the verb ποιεῖς (present, active, indicative, second person singular) which also confirms that the subject is "You". Therefore it is not technically correct to translate the sentence as some English Bibles render it: "Who do you think you are?" (Jn. 8:53, NIV/NLT), or "Who do you make yourself out to be?" (Jn. 8:53, ESV), or "Who do you claim to be?" (Jn. 8:53, NET Bible). The correct rendering of the Greek interrogative pronoun τίνα is "Whom?" not "Who?" Commenting on John 8:53, Leon Morris affirms: "At the end of the verse NIV renders 'Who do you think you are?' but the force of the Greek is rather 'Whom do you make yourself out to be?' (so Bruce, p. 203)." (Morris, The Gospel According to John, Revised Edition, p. 417.) In English, "Who" is used for the subject (the one performing the action), while "Whom" is used for the object (the one receiving the action or being made out to be something). By using "Whom," we correctly identify Jesus as the object of the Jews' questioning.

Someone might try to argue that Bauer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament supports the translation of τίνα as "Who" in John 8:53, but a closer look reveals otherwise. For the definition of τίς (nominative case!), Bauer correctly gives the meaning "who?" (Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, 3rd Edition, p. 1007, s.v. τίς, definition 1.) Bauer then references Lk. 5:21 as an example of this usage. (It's important to notice that in Luke 5:21, τίς is likewise in the nominative case!) After citing Lk. 5:21, Bauer lists a number of cross-references, including Jn. 8:53. But these are merely cross-references! (Bauer uses the abbreviation "Cp." meaning "compare".) In other words, Bauer isn't saying that Jn. 8:53 is a direct equivalent or a direct example of the nominative case τίς (meaning "who?"), but rather that John 8:53 provides a broader range of usage for that specific term. To use an analogy, a cross-reference is less like an "= sign" and more like a "hyperlink" to a related file. Thus, Bauer's use of "Cp." (Compare) indicates a thematic parallel, not a syntactic identity. He is linking the recurring question of identity across the New Testament corpus, not suggesting that the accusative τίνα should be treated as the nominative τίς.

The Adventures of Arthur Croft: Echoes of Alexandria

Episode 2: Echoes of Alexandria

[Back to Series Hub]

The sound of heavy boots scraping against stone from the chute above forced Arthur back to reality. He had the codex, but he was trapped in a subterranean grotto with only one way out—a narrow, water-worn fissure at the far end of the chamber that smelled faintly of the Red Sea.

Arthur didn't hesitate. He jammed the lead-lined box into his waterproof rucksack, pulled his hat low, and squeezed into the fissure. The rock tore at his shirt, but the cool, damp air was a welcome relief from the suffocating tension of the tomb above.

As he scrambled through the narrow passage, he heard the muffled, indignant shouts of Dr. Finch behind him. They were coming down.

He emerged onto a hidden ledge overlooking a desolate stretch of coastline. Moonlight silvered the waves, and a small, weathered fishing dhow bobbed in the shallows. Arthur knew the captain, a local monk named Elias who had helped him navigate the Sinai backcountry for years. He scrambled down the cliffside, sliding on loose shale, and splashed into the surf.

"Elias!" Arthur hissed, waving his arms.

The dhow swung around, its lanterns dim. Within minutes, Arthur was aboard, gasping for air as the engine hummed to life. He looked back at the cliffs. Figures stood on the ridge—Finch's guards, their silhouettes sharp against the horizon. A flash of gunfire echoed, a bullet snapping through the sail, but they were already pulling into the dark safety of the open sea.

Once they were a safe distance out, Arthur ducked into the tiny, lantern-lit cabin. He laid the codex on the rough-hewn table. Under the steady light, he pulled a magnifying glass from his bag. He had to be sure.

He pored over the Greek again, his heart sinking and soaring in equal measure. There, in the margins of the manuscript, were small, hand-drawn annotations—shorthand marks he hadn't noticed in the heat of the tomb. They weren't just Scripture; they were a roadmap. They pointed to a secondary collection, rumored to be held in a private archive in the heart of Alexandria.

If this fragment was the key, then the archive held the vault.

"Mr. Croft," a calm voice drifted from the deck. It was Elias, peering through the cabin doorway. "The Institute has eyes everywhere. They will know you are headed for the city. And Dr. Finch? He is not a man who accepts defeat."

Arthur looked at the ancient, fragile papyrus. It felt heavier now—not with weight, but with responsibility.

"He's not looking for history, Elias," Arthur replied, his voice hardening. "He's looking for control. If he finds what's in Alexandria, he won't just misinterpret the text—he'll use it to silence the very message of grace this codex protects."

Arthur stood up, rolling the manuscript carefully into its protective tube. The mission had expanded. It was no longer just about recovery; it was about protecting the integrity of the message itself.

He stared out the porthole as the coast of Egypt faded into the night. The sea was dark, the path ahead was dangerous, and the Institute was closing in. But for the first time in his career, Arthur realized he wasn't just chasing a relic.

He was keeping a promise to the ancients.

"Alexandria," Arthur said, his eyes narrowing as he gripped the railing. "We sail for Alexandria."

*  *  *

Arthur has escaped with the codex, but Dr. Finch is a powerful adversary who will stop at nothing to recover the document and secure his influence. As Arthur heads toward the archives in Alexandria, what hidden dangers do you think await him in the city's ancient, labyrinthine libraries?

The Free Grace Study Bible: John 8:51

I am pleased to share the latest installment of my ongoing work on The Free Grace Study Bible. Today's post features my translation of John 8:51, paired with original commentary and translation notes designed to clarify the meaning of the Greek text. I have provided the Greek-to-English rendering first, followed by the supporting notes that explain my translation choices. 

John 8:51 

Greek Textus Receptus

ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, ἐάν τις τὸν λόγον τὸν ἐμὸν τηρήσῃ, θάνατον οὐ μὴ θεωρήσῃ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα.

Free Grace Translation

"Truly, Truly, I say to you, if anyone takes My Word to heart, he shall certainly never see death."

Bible Translation Notes

Grk. ἀμὴν ἀμὴν. Literally, Amen, Amen.

Grk. τηρήσῃ (aor. subj. act.), from τηρέω. For the meaning "takes to heart," cf. the NIV's rendering of τηροῦντες (the participle) in Rev. 1:3. Also see the definition of τηρέω in Bauer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, which conveys the same meaning: "to persist in obedience, keep, observe, fulfill, pay attention to, ... something ... τὸν λόγον J 8:51f, 55; 14:23; 15:20ab; 17:6; 1J 2:5; Rv 3:8. ... 10:a. ... J 14:24. ... Rv 22:7, ... vs. 9. ... 1:3. ὁ τηρῶν τὰ ἔργα μου the one who takes my deeds to heart Rv 2:26. Absolutely, but with the object easily supplied from the context τήρει pay attention to it 3:3." (Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd Edition, p. 1002, s.v. τηρέω, definition 3, ellipsis added. It is significant to note that in the 1st edition of Bauer's Lexicon, the gloss "to persist in obedience" is absent from the definition; it was added in later editions.) Most theologians define τηρήσῃ in John 8:51 in the sense of perseverance. Commenting on Jn. 8:51, Godet's statement is typical when he says: "What encouragement to those who should persevere!" (Godet, Commentary on the Gospel of St. John, 3 Vols., Vol. III, p. 351.) But the meaning of τηρήσῃ may simply be "pay attention to" or "take to heart" (as Bauer noted). Most English versions translate τηρήσῃ in John 8:51 (in the general sense) as "keeps" (e.g. KJV, NKJV, ERV, ESV, NASB, etc.). But is this the most exact rendering of the word in this context? Because in Jn. 8:51, "keeps" is often misunderstood by lay readers (and others) as "maintaining performance" (i.e. perseverance). In this regard, the use of the aorist subjunctive (τηρήσῃ) is especially significant. While many commentators import a requirement for "perseverance" into this verse, the aorist aspect focuses on the event itself rather than a linear process of ongoing obedience. As Dillow observes, "The word 'keep' (terese), however, is an aorist, and therefore probably no durative or continuous force is intended." (Joseph Dillow, The Reign of the Servant Kings, 1992 Edition, p. 400.) This observation aligns with the foundational work of A. T. Robertson (A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, 4th Edition, pp. 848-850), who affirms that the aorist subjunctive shows "punctiliar" action and that it conveys the action of the verb as occurring at a "point" in time, as opposed to linear or durative action expressed by the Greek present subjunctive. (Ibid., pp. 848-849.) Robertson notes that it is typical for Greek writers to "observe the distinction between the aorist and present subjunctive, as Englishmen observe that between 'shall' and 'will,' unconsciously and without any appearance of deliberately emphasizing the difference." (Ibid., p. 850.) But Robertson points out "that John employs the two forms with great deliberateness, even in the same sentence," to distinguish between the beginning of an action and its development. (Ibid., p. 850.) Robertson highlights "that John makes the sharp distinction between the aorist and present subjunctive that is common between the aorist and imperfect indicative. Cf. ἐάν τις τηρήσῃ (Jo. 8:51)." (Ibid., p. 850.) Robertson adds that "Paul also knows the punctiliar force of the aorist subjunctive. Cf. ἁμαρτήσωμεν (Ro. 6:15) with ἐπιμένωμεν (6:1), where the point lies chiefly in the difference of tense." (Ibid., p. 850.) The New Testament scholar W. Harold Mare affirms: "The present subjunctive forms [of verbs] stress durative (or, linear) kind of action, and the aorist subjunctive forms stress the punctiliar (or, point, or definite) kind of action." (Mare, Mastering New Testament Greek [Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1977], p. 62.) Thus, if we understand "keeping" Christ's word in the Johannine sense—not as a lifetime of legalistic adherence, but as "taking to heart" the truth of His message—the aorist tense is perfectly suited to the moment of faith. It views the "taking to heart" as a singular, decisive event. Consequently, the aorist does not support the idea of a "probationary perseverance" often read into the text; rather, it highlights the definitive nature of the condition: once the Word is taken to heart, the promise ("will never see death") becomes the believer's present and secure possession. Expounding on the meaning of τηρέω as used in the Gospels, Macaulay is correct to say: "He who 'keeps' Christ's 'word' (or 'words') is he who first attends to it, and lets the wonder and significance of the message it conveys sink into his mind, and who then appropriates and makes his own by faith the revelation it brings. To pay no heed to Christ's 'word' (or 'words'), to be at no pains to think out the purport of His appearance in history, and of the tidings of salvation He proclaimed; or, the meaning and worth of the gospel having in some measure been realized, to set it aside, to neglect it, to occupy one's self seriously with other things only—that is the attitude to Himself which Christ describes when He speaks of a man not 'keeping His word.' To 'keep' Christ's word, in short, is to take Christ at His Word—to believe in Him (cf. Jn 8:51-52, 14:23-24, 15:20, 17:6)." (A. B. Macaulay, "KEEPING," in A Dictionary of Christ and the Gospels, ed. James Hastings [Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1906], 2 Vols., Vol. I, p. 926.) It is also common for Bible expositors (typically non Free Grace Bible expositors) to connect Jesus' words in John 8:51 with His earlier statements in 8:31 (cf. Godet, op. cited, p. 350). But regarding the words of Jesus in Jn. 8:51, Lange says: "It is...incorrect to assume (with Calvin, De Wette) that these words after a pause were addressed to believers only, or to connect them (with Lücke) with John 8:31, instead of John 8:50." (John Peter Lange, Commentary on the Holy Scriptures [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976], 12 Vols., Vol. 9, p. 296.) While Jesus' statement in Jn. 8:31 is addressed to believers, His statement in Jn. 8:51 is addressed to unbelievers. Most Bible commentators blur this important distinction. Commenting on John 8:51, Dr. Constable correctly summarizes: "The central purpose of Jesus' mission was not glory for Himself but glory for His Father—by providing salvation for humankind. Jesus' introduction of this strong statement [in Jn. 8:51] emphasized its vital importance. Following Jesus' word is synonymous with believing on Him (cf. 5:24; 8:24). The 'death' in view here is eternal death (cf. 11:25)." (Thomas L. Constable, Notes on John, 2026 Edition, comment on Jn. 8:51, emphasis his, brackets added.)

Grk. θάνατον...εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα. Literally, he will certainly never behold death. Or, he will never see death forever. Guthrie explains two possible interpretations: "Jesus must have meant that his followers would have a totally different approach to the experience of death from others, an experience which would remove from it its terrors. An alternative interpretation would be to assume that Jesus was referring to spiritual death, which his own followers would not experience. This is possible, but there is nothing in the preamble to prepare his hearers for such a transference of thought." (Donald Guthrie, New Testament Theology, p. 825.) Yet Jesus often spoke spiritually (even cryptically) without His listeners understanding the deeper meaning or significance of His words (cf. John chapter 4). Many Bible commentators take the view that in John 8:51, Jesus is indeed speaking of spiritual death (e.g. Gill, Ellicott, Alford, Robertson, Ryrie, Constable, Hart, etc.). The one who believes in Jesus may die physically, but will never die eternally (i.e. never spiritually). Commenting on John 8:51 and the phrase θάνατον οὐ μὴ θεωρήσῃ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, A. T. Robertson affirms: "He shall never see death (thanaton ou mē theōrēsēi eis ton aiona). Spiritual death, of course. Strong double negative ou mē with first aorist active subjunctive of theōreō. The phrase 'see death' is a Hebraism (Psa. 89:48) and occurs with idein (see) in Luke 2:26; Heb. 11:5. No essential difference meant between horaō ['see'] and theōreō ['behold']." (Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, 6 Vols., Vol. V, p. 156.)

Grk. εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα. Literally, into the age. Or, into eternity. This is a figure of speech meaning "forever". Cf. William D. Mounce, Basics of Biblical Greek Workbook, 4th Edition, p. 69, footnote 6. Also see Isaiah 48:12 in Brenton's Septuagint translation, where the same phrase is used to describe God, and is translated as "for ever". Furthermore, secular papyri confirm this usage as standard: Moulton and Milligan (The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, p. 16) cite a 3rd/4th-century A.D. report from Oxyrhynchus in which a crowd cries, Ἄγουστοι κύριοι εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, "the Emperors for ever!" (P Oxy I. 41). In light of this lexical evidence and the emphatic nature of the Greek construction, I have translated the phrase θάνατον οὐ μὴ θεωρήσῃ εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα in John 8:51b as "he shall certainly never see death," following the interpretation of Alfred Plummer. Commenting on John 8:51b, Plummer writes: "Literally, shall certainly not behold death for ever. But 'for ever' belongs, like the negative, to the verb, not to 'death.' It does not mean 'he shall see death, but the death shall not be eternal:' rather 'he shall certainly never see death,' i.e. he already has eternal life (5.24) and shall never lose it." (Plummer, The Gospel According to St. John, p. 194. Note: The Roman numeral in the original has been updated to the current format.) Jesus' statement in John 8:51 is both definitive and emphatic: οὐ μὴ is in itself a double negative (the "nth degree" of emphatic negative in Greek), and to it Jesus adds εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, "into eternity"—i.e. forever! Think of it: forever never to behold the last enemy—DEATH, for Jesus went into the grave to conquer and defeat it. Then "Up from the grave He arose, With a mighty triumph o’er His foes, He arose a Victor from the dark domain, And He lives forever with His saints to reign. He arose! He arose! Hallelujah! Christ arose!" When assailed by doubt, meditate on these words of Jesus: "forever never"! That is, the believer in Christ is promised that he or she "will forever never behold death." What a promise! What a Savior! Reynolds affirms: "The promise is dazzling: 'He shall never behold,' i.e. steadily or exhaustively know by experience, what death means and is. He may pass through physical death, he may (γεύσηται) taste of dissolution, he may come before the judgment-seat, he may see corruption (ἰδεῖν διαφθοράν); but he will not behold (θεωρεῖν) death. He will never know what death is (cf. here; ch. 4.14; 5.24; 6.51, where the Saviour speaks of the 'living water,' and 'life eternal,' and 'living bread,' which whoso partaketh shall never die. See also ch. 11.26). He does not tell his disciples that they shall not see the grave, but that in the deepest sense they shall never die." (H. R. Reynolds, The Gospel of St. John, Vol. I, in The Pulpit Commentary, ed. H. D. M. Spence and Joseph S. Exell [London: Funk & Wagnalls, n.d.], p. 370, comment on Jn. 8:51. Note: The Roman numerals in the original have been updated to the current format.)

Grk. αἰῶνα, from αἰῶν.  Bauer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament defines αἰῶν as: "1. a long period of time, without reference to beginning or end, ... (b) of time to come which, if it has no end, is also known as eternity (so commonly in Gk. literature: Plato, et al.); εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα ... to eternity, eternally, in perpetuity: live J 6:51, 58; ... remain J 8:35ab; 12:34; ... be with someone J 14:16. ... In Johannine usage the term is used formulaically without emphasis on eternity [...]: never again thirst J 4:14; never see death 8:51f; cp. 11:26; never be lost 10:28; never (=by no means) 13:8." (Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd Edition, p. 32, s.v. αἰῶν, definition 1b, emphasis his, ellipsis and brackets added.) It's unclear what Bauer means by saying: "In Johannine usage the term [αἰῶνα] is used formulaically without emphasis on eternity." W. E. Vine's explanation sheds light on the topic, though it seems to somewhat contradict Bauer's statement. Commenting on αἰῶν and its NT usage, Vine states that it "signifies a period of indefinite duration." (Vine, Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, p. 33, s.v. αἰῶν.) Vine goes on to say: "The phrases containing this word should not be rendered literally but consistently with its sense of indefinite duration. Thus eis ton aiōna [as in Jn. 8:51] does not mean 'unto the age' but 'for ever' (see, e.g., Heb. 5:6). The Greeks contrasted that which came to an end with that which was expressed by this phrase, which shows that they conceived of it as expressing interminable [i.e. endless] duration." (Ibid.) Thus Bauer is correct that the "emphasis" of αἰῶν in Johannine usage is not strictly on "eternity" per se, but rather the term is used as part of a rhetorical idiom expressing strong negation (οὐ μὴ coupled with εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, cf. Jn. 4:14, 6:51, 8:51, 10:28, 11:26, etc.). The "emphasis" isn't on the philosophical nature of "Eternity" as a concept; instead, the whole phrase functions as a "super-negative." It's a formula used to say "Never, ever, under any circumstances." By way of contrast, Vine isn't so much looking at the rhetorical formula; he is looking at the inherent meaning of the word itself. Vine argues that the reason the Greeks used αἰῶν in these phrases is precisely because it signifies "interminable [i.e. endless] duration." To Vine, you cannot separate the "formula" from the "meaning." If the formula is meant to say "never," it only works because the word αἰῶν carries the weight of "forever." Thus, while Bauer and Vine seem to disagree, they are actually describing two sides of the same coin. Bauer is saying: "Don't get bogged down in a philosophical study of 'Eternity' every time you see this word in John's Gospel; recognize that John is using it as a standard way to express a total negation (Never!)." Vine is saying: "The reason John uses this specific word for his 'Never!' formula is that the word actually means 'interminable duration' (Eternity)." While Bauer focuses on the formulaic usage, the lexical reality (as Vine clarifies) is that the term functions to convey "interminable duration," which is synonymous with the theological concept of eternity. And so it seems that the distinction Bauer makes is a bit of a "distinction without a difference" regarding the final meaning. If a word is used formulaically to express that something will "never" happen—and that "never" is based on the concept of time having no end—then the word is functioning as a technical term for eternity. Whether the "emphasis" is on the finality of the statement or the philosophy of eternity, the result is the same: the action described (not thirsting, not dying) lasts forever. This suggests that even if the translator recognizes the formulaic nature of John's Greek (the repeated "never ... unto the age"), the English rendering must still account for the lexical reality that the duration being described is, in fact, eternal.

Free Grace Study Notes

To obey God's Word does not import good works into the offer of salvation, but rather it means to obey the gospel by believing it. In other words, obey the command to believe! As D. L. Moody has said: "It is obedience that God wants. You may ask, 'What may I do to obey God?' You are just to believe on his Son and be saved. Will you obey him to-day?" (Moody, The Gospel Awakening [Chicago: 1885], p. 330.)

John F. Hart summarizes: "With strong emotion (truly, truly), Jesus asserted (v. 51) that anyone who keeps His word (i.e., believes) will never see eternal death." (Hart, John, in The Moody Bible Commentary, ed. Michael Rydelnik and Michael Vanlaningham, p. 1633, commentary on John 8:51.)

The promise of John 8:51 is not a future reward for those who endure, but a present possession for those who, by faith, "take to heart" the Word of God today.