Grace Theological Journal 3.2 (1982) 163-75.
[Copyright © 1982 Grace Theological Seminary; cited with permission;
digitally prepared for use at Gordon College]
THIRD (AND FOURTH)
CLASS CONDITIONS
JAMES L. BOYER
Third class conditional sentences, a very frequent type of
conditional sentence, are identified and characterized by their use of
the subjunctive mood in the protasis. The subjunctive indicates
potentiality, contingency, or simple futurity. It is the condition which
points to a future eventuality. The common notion that it indicates a
degree of probability is examined by inductive study of all the NT
examples and is concluded to be totally incorrect. Also, the often-
made distinction between present general and future particular condi-
tions within this third class is shown to be neither helpful nor
indicated by NT Greek texts. All third class conditions are essentially
future contingencies.
* * *
THE third classification of conditional sentences in the Greek NT
occurs almost as frequently as the first and five times more
frequently than the second.1 It is designated by many names, reflecting
different understandings on the part of grammarians of its basic
significance.
FORM IDENTIFICATION
This group of conditional clauses is identified by the use of ἐάν
and the subjunctive mood in the protasis. The ἐάν of course is the
ordinary conditional particle εἰ, found in all the other types of
conditions, combined by crasis and contraction with the modal
particle ἄν.2 Primarily it is the use of the subjunctive mood which
l There are about 305 first-class, 47 second-class, and 277 third-class conditions in
the NT. For a treatment of the first and second-classes see my preceding articles,
"First-Class Conditions: What Do They Mean?" GTJ 2 (1981) 74-114, and "Second-
Class Conditions in New Testament Greek," GTJ 3 (1982) 81-88.
2 Historical grammarians point out that in late Greek the distinction between
and e]a<n seems to be fading. See A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New
164 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
identifies the type. All other conditions use the indicative mood3 in
the protasis.
The apodosis appears in a wide variety of forms. About 150 are
simple statements of fact, 32 are questions, 32 are promises or threats,
27 are admonitory, 16 are warnings, 12 are commands, 11 are
instructions.
There is no pattern of tenses used, either in the protasis or in the
apodosis. In the NT examples there are 110 present, 205 aorist, and 3
perfect subjunctive4 verbs in the protases. In the apodoses there are
116 present, 119 future, 7 aorist, and 6 perfect indicatives, 25 aorist
subjunctives, 26 present and 16 aorist imperatives, 1 present optative,
1 present infinitive (of indirect discourse), and 2 present participles
(dependent on an imperative verb). The relationship of this great
variety to the significance of this class of condition will be examined
later.
In the discussion of this many-faceted grammatical construction
two major questions need consideration; first, the significance of the
Testament in Light of Historical Research (Nashville: Broadman, 1934) 1017. N.
Turner says, "It is a feature of Hell. Greek that the connection between the mood and
the conjunction (e.g., subj. after ἄν) is becoming less determined, and so we have εἰ
with subj., ἐάν with ind., ὅτε with subj., ὅταν with indic., etc. In M Gr only the fuller
conjunctions ἐάν and ὅταν remain, and they have both indic. (real) and subj. (probable)"
(Nigel Turner, A Grammar of New Testament Greek. Vol. 3: Syntax [Edinburgh: T. &
T. Clark, 1963] 107 n. 2).
The NT text shows a very few variations from the usual pattern of εἰ with the
indicative and ἐάν with the subjunctive, and almost always they are textually suspect.
The UBS text has 3 examples of εἰ with the subjunctive: Phil 3:12, Rev 11:5 (here it is a
verbatim repetition of a normal εἰ + indicative example in the preceeding verse, and
apparently with precisely the same meaning), and I Cor 14:5 (where ἐκτὸς εἰ μή is a
fixed formula). There are two examples of ἐάν with a present indicative: I Thess 3:8
and I John 5:15 (οἶδα is semantically present). These probably reflect the later
confusion which used ἐάν for εἰ and thus should be classified as first-class. There are
two examples of ἐάν with a future indicative (Luke 19:40; Acts 8:3l) which may also be
first class. However, the situation may be different in the case of a future indicative,
since these forms in other constructions sometimes seem to function as aorist sub-
junctives (e.g., 23 instances of ἵνα followed by a future indicative, with no difference in
meaning). A. T. Robertson points out, "it is quite probable that the future indicative is
just a variation of the aorist subjunctive" (Robertson, Grammar, 924-25). Hence, ἐάν
with a future indicative may be a normal third-class condition.
3 The classical fourth-class condition which used the optative mood does not occur
in the NT or the Greek of that period except in archaic expressions or fragments of
sentences. This type shared with the third class the use of a non-indicative mood. Its
relation to the third class and the actual NT remnants will be treated later in this article
(see n. 41).
4 In John 3:27; 6:65; James 5:15. Also, there are three examples (1 John 5:15; I Cor
13:2; 14:11) of the perfect subjunctive of οἶδα, but although οἶδα is perfect in form it is
in sense present, and I have counted these three among the presents.
BOYER: THIRD CLASS CONDITIONS 165
subjunctive mood used in the protasis and its bearing on the semantic
significance of the type of conditional sentence, and second, the
validity of the oft-claimed distinction between the present-general
and the future-particular sub-classifications of these ἐάν + subjunctive
conditions.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SUBJUNCTIVE
Since the use of the subjunctive distinguishes this class from the
others, it seems obvious that the basic significance must be seen in the
meaning of the subjunctive mood. Here we face a confusing divergence
of expression on the part of grammarians. As A. T. Robertson says,
". . . mode is far and away the most difficult theme in Greek syntax.”5
Later he says specifically of the subjunctive mood, "So the gram-
marians lead us a merry dance with the Subjunctive.”6 In spite of the
difficulty and confusion, however, there is wide-spread agreement7 on
its basic meaning.
Mood of Uncertainty. Potentiality, Futurity
A. T. Robertson, in his Short Grammar, calls both the subjunctive
and optative moods "the modes for doubtful affirmation.”8 Later, in
his major work, he more explicitly summarizes the use of the sub-
junctive under three headings: (a) futuristic, (b) volitive, and (c)
deliberative.9 Admitting that some do not see these as distinct, yet,
"for practical purposes," he uses them. When he deals specifically
with conditional sentences he uses the term undetermined to designate
those which use the subjunctive or optative moods, in contrast with
those he calls determined, which use the indicative. He explains
undetermined by saying, "Naturally the indicative is not allowed here.
The element of uncertainty calls for the subj. or the optative. . . . They
are the moods of doubtful, hesitating affirmation. . . . In this type the
premise is not assumed to be either true or untrue. The point is in the
air and the cloud gathers round it."10 He calls the subjunctive "the
mode of expectation,"11 and says of its time reference, "the third class
5 Robertson, Grammar, 912.
6 Ibid., 927.
7 In the following discussion I have chosen to use the words of one well-known and
influential scholar, A. T. Robertson, rather than to record the many similar statements
of other grammarians. Where there is not this essential agreement I shall seek to
compare and evaluate, as, for example, in the section "Degree of Probability."
8 A. T. Robertson, A Short Grammar of the Greek New Testament (New York:
Doubleday, Doran & Co., 1929) 129-31.
9 Robertson, Grammar, 928-34.
10 Ibid., 1004-5.
11 Ibid., 1016.
166 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
condition is confined to the future (from the standpoint of the
speaker or writer).”12 He frequently calls attention to this element of
futurity: "The subj. is always future, in subordinate clauses relatively
future.”13
Seeking to summarize, it seems to me that the use of the
subjunctive points essentially to the condition expressed by the protasis
as being doubtful, uncertain, undetermined (because it has not yet
been determined). The term potential is accurate. It is "not yet." It
may be, if. . . . Perhaps the term contingent would be even clearer. It
depends on any number of factors.14 In any case, the common
denominator is futurity. As Goodwin says, the "only fundamental
idea always present in the subjunctive is that of futurity",15 and he
traces it back to the idiom of Homer. Perhaps the best name for this
type of condition is simply the Future Condition.16
Basis of Potentiality
One major item for investigation in this inductive study of all the
third class conditions in the NT has been the question of the basis of
the potentiality. Why does the writer use the mood of contingency?
What is the element of uncertainty involved? On what factors or
circumstances does the fulfillment of the condition depend? In the
study of each example in context, first a "basis of potentiality" was
assigned. Afterward, this list was classified under appropriate group-
ings. The results are seen in this tabulation, with the number so
designated, and some examples.
Personal will, choice, judgment 5317
Spiritual condition 2318
Personal actions 10919
Actions of others 3620
Ability, opportunity 421
Providence or Futurity 6122
12 Ibid., 1018.
13 Ibid., 924.
14 See my next section, "Basis of Potentiality."
15 W. W. Goodwin, Syntax of the Moods and Tenses of the Greek Verb (New
York: St. Martin's, 1965) 371; cf. also 372-74, 2-4.
16 J. G. Machen, New Testament Greek for Beginners (New York: MacMillan,
1950) 132.
17 Examples: Matt 21:25, 26; Luke 5:12; 1 John 2:29.
18 Examples: John 3:3, 5; 8:31; Matt 10:13.
19 Examples: Mark 3:27; John 13:17; 14:14; Rom 10:9.
20 Examples: Matt 5:23; Luke 17:3, 4.
21 Example: Matt 9:21.
22 Examples: Matt 18:12; Rom 7:3; I Cor 4:19; 14:28; 16:10; I John 2:28; 3:2.
BOYER: THIRD CLASS CONDITIONS 167
The purpose in listing these is not to provide a system of
classification, but to illustrate and enforce the point that these third
class conditions are indeed doubtful, contingent, undetermined,
belonging to the future. All of the instances manifest this quality. I
believe an examination of the examples will confirm this claim.
Degree of Probability
The matter next to be considered brings us to a major problem
in the way most grammarians have dealt with the third class con-
ditions: Does the use of the subjunctive imply anything as to the
degree of uncertainty involved? This clearly is claimed by many
grammarians. Robertson calls this "Undetermined, but with prospect
of determination" in contrast with the fourth class, "Undetermined,
with remote prospect of determination," and says further, "This
fourth class is undetermined with less likelihood of determination
than is true of the third class with the subj."23 Of the third class he
says, "The subj. mode brings the expectation within the horizon of a
lively hope in spite of the cloud of hovering doubt.”24 Blass considers
it to denote "circumstances actual or likely to happen.”25 Winer
makes it a "condition with assumption of 'objective' possibility where
experience will decide whether it is real or not.”26 Burton says of it, "a
supposition which refers to the future, suggesting some probability to
its fulfillment.”27 Blass-Debrunner describes it as "that which under
certain circumstances is expected," calling it "a case of expectation.”28
Chamberlain says of it, "The condition is stated as a matter of doubt,
with some prospect of fulfillment," then of the fourth class he says,
"even more doubtful than the third class.”29
Most explicit of these is the grammar of Dana and Mantey. In a
very helpful appraisal of the general significance of the subjunctive
mood, they point out that there are only "two essential moods. . . that
which is actual and that which is possible. . . . So the two essential
23 Robertson, Grammar, 1016, 1020.
24 Ibid., 1016.
25 F. Blass, Grammar of New Testament Greek. Tr. by Henry St. John Thackeray.
(London, MacMillan, 1911) 213, 214.
26 G. B. Winer, A Grammar of the Idioms of the Greek Language of the New
Testament (Andover: Draper, 1897) 291.
27 E. D. Burton, Syntax of the Moods and Tenses in New Testament Greek
(Chicago: University of Chicago, 1897) 104.
28 F. Blass and A. DeBrunner, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other
Early Christian Literature, trans. and rev. by Robert W. Funk (Chicago: University of
Chicago, 1961) 188.
29 W. D. Chamberlain, An Exegetical Grammar of the Greek New Testament
(Grand Rapids: Baker, 1941) 198-99.
168 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
moods in language are the real--represented in Greek by the
indicative; and the potential--embracing the subjunctive, optative
and imperative.”30 Then, however, they proceed to characterize these
potential moods as representing a continuum of degree of potentiality,
from objectively possible (subjunctive) to subjectively possible (op-
tative) to volitionally possible (imperative), or from probability (sub-
junctive) to possibility (optative) to intention (imperative), or from
mild contingency (subjunctive) to strong contingency (optative). Thus,
the third-class condition becomes the "More Probable Future Condi-
tion" in contrast with the fourth which they call the "Less Probable
Future Condition.”31
Are these measurements of potentiality or degrees of probability
valid? Can we say of a third-class condition, "There is doubt, of
course, but it probably will be realized"? One of the primary purposes
of this study was to investigate this question. It is the judgment of the
present writer that this scheme, while it may be theoretically logical,
is completely unsupported and in fact totally discredited by actual
usage in the NT.
In conducting the study, an attempt was made to assign to each
of these examples a "measure word" indicating from the context the
degree of probability or improbability involved in the realization of
the condition. Out of this grew a list of words, arranged here
somewhat in a "logical" order, with the number of instances and a
few representative examples.
Fulfillment certain 1932
Fulfillment probable 6333
Fulfillment doubtful 2034
Fulfillment improbable 1635
Fulfillment possible 436
Fulfillment conceivable3037
30 H. E. Dana and J. R. Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament
(New York: MacMillan, 1948) 165-67.
31 Ibid., 290.
32 In addition to the illustrations given in the discussion following, see: Mark 4:22;
10:30; John 5:31; 8:14,16; Rom 2:25; 1 Cor 6:4; 10:8; CoI4:10; I John 2:29.
33 Examples: Matt 5:46; 21:3; 24:23; Mark 12:19; Luke 17:3 (contrast v. 4); John
8:36; 9:31; 12:24; 14:23; 1 Cor 8:10; CoI3:13; 1 John2:1; 5:14.
34 Examples: Matt 21:24; Mark 8:3; Luke 17:4 (cf. v 3); 22:67.
35 Examples: Luke 16:31; John 7:51; 11:48; Acts 26:5; I Cor 13:1-3; 14:7, 8.
36 Examples: Matt 24:48-51; 28:14; 1 Cor 14:28; 2 Cor 9:4.
37 Examples: Matt 21:21, 25, 26; Mark 3:24, 25; 14:31; Luke 16:30; John 21:22;
Rom 2:26; I Cor4:15; 12:15; Gal 1:18.
BOYER: THIRD CLASS CONDITIONS 169
Certain not to be fulfilled 738
No indication of probability 12039
Several observations result from this study.
First, the first category above represents third class conditions
which are used of future events which are absolutely certain of
fulfillment, such as the lifting up of Christ on the cross (John 12:32),
his return to heaven (John 14:3; 16:7), his second coming (1 John
2:28; 3:2), the multiplication of Israel as the sand of the sea (Rom
9: 27), Paul's preaching the gospel (1 Cor 9:16), the perishing of our
earthly house (2 Cor 5:1). The potentiality of such things is simple
futurity; it has not happened yet. To use the word "probable" with
such would be completely misleading. We could never understand
Christ to say, "I probably will come again," and the third-class
condition used does not in fact mean that.
Second, the seventh category above represents third-class condi-
tions which are certain not to be fulfilled. Some are set in pairs as
opposites to others in the "certain" category (John 16:7; 1 Cor 9:16).
They include such totally impossible items as Christ not seeing what
the Father does (John 5:19) or his saying he does not know the
Father (John 8:55), or the apostasy not coming first (2 Thess 2:3), or
man's keeping the law (Rom 2:25), or the sailors not remaining in the
ship with resulting loss of life (Acts 27:31) after Paul has already
assured them that God had promised all would be safe. Again, the
element of contingency here is simple futurity, and the remarks in the
preceeding paragraph are applicable here.
Third, the vast bulk of examples in the middle of the spectrum
obviously fit the characterization of third-class conditions as doubtful,
contingent, or potential, but they do not support the concept that
degree of potentiality is involved. They range from probable to
doubtful to improbable. They include what possibly might occur and
what the mind can conceive as possible. It should be noted that all
these "degree of probability" terms are derived from the context; they
all are simple ἐάν + subjunctive conditions.
Fourth, the very large number of instances labeled as "No
indication" (120 out of 277, or 42%) underscore the same conclusion.
They are passages where even the context cannot tell the degree of
probability. Often, opposite contingencies are listed, each using the
38 All of the examples so classified have been listed in the discussion following.
39 In addition to the examples given in the discussion, see: Matt 4:9; 18: 13; 22:24;
Luke 13:3, 5; John 6:44, 51; 7:17; 15:7; Rom 7:2-3; 13:4; I Cor 4:19; Heb 3:7; James
5:15; Rev 2:5.
170 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
same conditional form; you may forgive, or not forgive (Matt 6:14,
15), your eye may be single or evil (Matt 6:22, 23), the house you
enter may be worthy or not worthy (Matt 10:13), your brother may
hear you when you rebuke him, or he may not, or he may refuse to
hear when you take another along, or he may refuse to hear the
church (Matt 18:15-17), a man may walk in the day or in the night
(John 11:9, 10), we may live or die, in either case we do so "unto the
Lord" (Rom 14:8). More frequently they are single contingencies; a
man may or may not “want to do His will” (John 7:17), it may be the
Lord's will or it may not (I Cor 4:19; James 4:15; Heb 6:3), a virgin
may marry or not (I Cor 7:28), a man or a woman may have long
hair or not (I Cor 11:14, 5), the Thessalonians may, or may not,
stand fast in the Lord (I Thess 3:8). Clearly, degree of probability or
potentiality is not in the third-class construction. If it is present at all
it is in the context.
Comparison with Fourth-Class Conditions
Such terms expressing comparison have their origin in the clas-
sical grammarians and refer to a comparison between two classes of
future condition, those using ἐάν + subjunctive and those using εἰ +
optative. W. W. Goodwin distinguished these as "Future More Vivid"
and "Future Less Vivid.”40 By vividness he did not mean more or less
probable, but a greater or lesser distinctness and definiteness of
concept. B. L. Gildersleeve, followed by Robertson and a host of NT
grammarians, made mode rather than time the decisive factor in
classification of conditional sentence and gave us the familiar "four
class" terminology. Within this group, apparently, the more probable-
less probable concept has grown.
It is usually not clearly recognized that this comparison, whatever
its nature, referred to classical grammar, not to NT grammar. With
no attempt to evaluate the propriety of this analysis for classical
Greek, it should be noted that such can have no application to NT
Greek, for the obvious reason that the NT has no fourth-class
conditions.41 As Robertson himself says, "It is an ornament of the
40 W. W. Goodwin, Greek Grammar, rev. by C. B. Gulick (Boston: Ginn, 1930)
298.
41 The correctness of this statement needs to be supported. There are 10 instances
where εἰ appears with an optative verb, thus possibly a fourth class protasis. Of these,
one is not conditional at all: εἰ is introducing an indirect question, "whether" (Acts
25:20; perhaps also 17:27). Five appear to be stereotyped, almost parenthetical expres-
sions, the kind which might survive after the construction has become archaic (εἰ
τύχοι I Cor 14:10; 15:37; εἰ δύναιτον, Acts 27:12, 39; εἰ δύνατον εἵυ, Acts 20:16). The
three remaining seem clearly to be fourth-class protases; one with an apodosis which is
BOYER: THIRD CLASS CONDITIONS 171
cultured class and was little used by the masses save in a few set
phrases. It is not strange, therefore, that no complete example of this
fourth-class condition appears in the LXX, the NT or the papyri so
far as examined. . . . No example of the opt. in both condition and
conclusion in the current κοινή. In the modern Greek it has
disappeared completely.”42 Now, if all future conditions in the NT are
third class, that is, all are more probable, there is no longer any
meaning to "more." "More probable" must be understood to mean
"more probable than if he had used the optative," not "more likely
than not." It seems much better to follow the suggestion of Duncan
Gibbs, "that the ἐάν with the subjunctive has become merely a
formula for presenting a future condition. Any suggestion of expecta-
tion of fulfillment which might have existed at one time (if ever it did)
has now vanished. The condition is simply a large basket made to
hold any future condition, likely or unlikely, possible or absurd.”43
Comparison with εἰ + Future Indicative
When we call this third class the Future Condition we do not
mean that all conditions future in time belong to this class. In my
previous study I discovered 14 examples of εἰ + future indicative in
the protasis. These first-class conditions of course are also future in
time reference. How do they relate to the third-class future conditions?
The discussions of the grammarians reflect their own understanding
of the basic significance of the two classes. Goodwin says, "The future
indicative with εἰ is very often used in future conditions implying
strong likelihood of fulfillment, especially in appeals to the feelings
and in threats and warnings.”44 Smyth calls it the "Emotional Future
Condition. . . . When the condition expresses a strong feeling, the
future indicative with εἰ is generally used instead of ἐάν with the
subjunctive. Such. . . commonly contain a warning or a threat or in
general something undesirable.”45 Zerwick, who characterizes the first
class as "the concrete case," says "εἰ with future (instead of ἐάν with
in indirect discourse (Acts 24:19); the other two (I Pet 3:14, 17) have apodoses in which
the verb is left unexpressed. There is thus no complete example of the fourth-class
condition.
It should be noted that the only optatives which are involved here are those with εἰ
forming a protasis. Optatives occurring in so-called "implied apodoses" (without a
protasis) are simple instances of the potential optative and are not conditional, except
perhaps by implication.
42 Robertson, Grammar, 1020-21.
43 Duncan G. Gibbs, "The Third Class Condition in New Testament Usage” (Th.
M. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1979) 51.
44 Goodwin, Grammar, 298.
45 H. W. Smyth, A Greek Grammar (New York: American Book Co., 1916) 346.
172 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
the subjunctive) is of course perfectly correct and classical, so long as
the condition is to be represented as a concrete one.”46 Turner says,
"This sometimes conveys the same idea but occurs very seldom in
Ptol. pap. The feeling of definiteness and actual realization accom-
panies it. It is almost causal.”47 But after citing several examples he
admits, "The difficulty about this view is 2 Tim 2:12 where the
condition was surely conceived as no more than hypothetical.”
Robertson surprisingly says, "The kinship in origin and sense of the
aorist subj. and fut. ind. makes the line a rather fine one between εἰ
and the fut. ind. and ἐάν and the subj."48 If we understand the first
class as being simple logical connection, as I have attempted to
demonstrate earlier,49 then εἰ with a future indicative indicates a
simple logical connection in future time. If we accept the understand-
ing of the third-class being presented in this paper, then ἐάν with a
subjunctive calls attention to some element of future contingency
involved. The form used will depend on the purpose of the speaker or
writer.
Summary
What term can be used to express the essential meaning of the
third class condition? Such terms as "probable," "likely," "expectancy,"
"anticipatory" are all misleading and not suitable. "Potential" or
"contingent" are neutral terms which express well the meaning if
properly understood. Zerwick, in the English translation, uses the
term "eventual," apparently to refer to that which may eventualize or
come to pass. The English dictionary gives that as a legitimate
meaning for "eventual," but probably it is not normally understood in
that sense by English readers. We come back to the term "Future
Condition," which in my judgment is to be preferred.
GENERAL VERSUS PARTICULAR
It has been broadly recognized that within this ἐάν + subjunctive
class there are two distinct50 types of conditional statements. One
46 M. Zerwick, Biblical Greek, trans. by Joseph Smith (Rome: Pontifical Biblical
Institute, 1963) 111.
47 N. Turner, Syntax, 115.
48 Robertson, Grammar, 1017.
49 In the first article of this series, GTJ 2 (1981).
50 One needs to take care not to overestimate this distinctness.
While semantically it is easy to see the distinction, yet in actual usage it often is
not so obvious. The present writer has attempted to classify these third-class conditions
in the NT between present-general and future-particular, on two occasions widely
separated in time. The results were greatly divergent. And when these were compared
BOYER: THIRD CLASS CONDITIONS 173
group expresses general or universal suppositions which, whenever
they are fulfilled, bring the stated results. "If a kingdom is divided
against itself it cannot stand" (Mark 3:24); "The law does not
condemn if it does not first hear. . . and know. . . ." (John 7:51); "If
anyone walks in the night he stumbles" (John 11:10). The other group
speaks of particular, specific, future suppositions, such as, "Lord, if
you will you can heal me" (Matt 8:2); "If someone should come to
them from the dead, they will repent" (Luke 16:30); "If I send them
away fasting they will faint in the way" (Mark 8:3). All these
examples share in common the ἐάν + subjunctive form.
If it seems strange to us that such distinct types should be thrown
together in one grammatical form it should alert us to the probability
that we are not looking at it as the Greek writer did. Apparently he
did not see these as diverse types; there must be some common
characteristic which in his mind linked them in the same manner of
expression. His choice to use the subjunctive points to the common
element. They are both undetermined, contingent suppositions, future
in time reference. Whether that potentiality was seen as some par-
ticular occurrence or one which would produce the result whenever it
occurred was not the primary thought in the mind of the speaker. He
used a form which in either case expressed the future eventuality.
Some grammarians do attempt to distinguish two separate classes.
W. W. Goodwin notes that "the character of the apodosis distinguishes
these future conditions from the present general supposition" and
claims that the present general class uses a present indicative or its
equivalent in the apodosis, while the future particular class has some
future form.51 Machen calls the ἐάν + subjunctive class "future
conditions," but in a footnote he calls attention to the fact that this
term takes no account of the large group of present general conditions
which share the structural form.52 Zerwick also distinguishes two
classes, the "eventual" and the "universal," warning, however, that
"the distinction between type C (eventual) and E (universal), though
certain grammarians make it, is not a linguistic or grammatical one,
but a purely extrinsic one based on subject matter (and an analysis
according to the speech-habits of some other language than Greek).”53
with the conclusions of another scholar an even wider difference was seen. It is not easy
to decide whether "If anyone wants to do His will he shall know. . ." (John 7: 17) or "If
you love me you will keep my commandments" (John 14:17) is expressing a general
truth always true, or is to be thought of as looking to some particular future situation.
The distinction is highly subjective, as well as totally without indication in the language
itself.
51 Goodwin, Grammar, 298.
52 Machen, Greek for Beginners, 132 n. 1.
53 Zerwick, Biblical Greek, 111.
174 GRACE THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL
The term "present general" commonly used for the universal condition
is an unfortunate one, based probably on the claim by Goodwin
quoted above that the apodosis is a present indicative or its equivalent.
Elsewhere he speaks of this as a "quasi-present.”54 Zerwick uses still
another limiting designation of this present, "a general (universal)
condition in the (atemporal) present, referring to any case of the kind
expressed.”55
Thus Goodwin affirms and Zerwick denies that the form of the
apodosis indicates the distinction between the general and the par-
ticular sub-classification of this third-class. Again, without presuming
to evaluate the propriety of this as it applies to classical Greek, I have
in this study attempted to check its validity for the NT. The present
indicative occurs about 135 times in the apodoses of this class in the
NT, 81 times (61%) in those which I have classified as general, 52
times (38%) in those classified as particular. The future indicative
occurs 118 times, 18% in general examples, 82% in particular
examples. While these may conform in a majority of cases with the
proposed rule, yet 4 out of 10 or even l out of 5 is a high percent of
error.
But the problem is even greater. The rule as stated spoke of
"present indicative or its equivalent," and on the other hand "any
future form." When we ask more specifically for the time-reference of
the apodosis instead of the tense form, a very interesting factor
appears: in almost every instance the time-reference is discovered to
be future.
Let me illustrate and explain this conclusion. The apodosis uses
the imperative mood 45 times (27 present, 15 aorist, 1 aorist sub-
junctive with μή as a prohibition). Also, in another example the
apodosis is expressed by two participles which depend on an
imperative verb and in another by an infinitive of indirect discourse
representing an imperative in the direct. The imperative time-reference
is clearly future. On 12 occasions οὐ μή + aorist subjunctive, a strong
future denial, forms the apodosis. On 10 other times the aorist
subjunctive is used when the apodosis is a purpose clause with ἵνα,
etc. Once, the apodosis has πώς with the deliberative subjunctive.
Again, these are all future in time reference.
Next, examining the 81 examples of the present indicative in the
apodoses of general suppositions, it is probable that even these
represent future time. 20 of these seem to be gnomic or atemporal,
which includes future time. But specifically in the apodosis of a
54 W. W. Goodwin, "On the Classification of Conditional Sentences in Greek
Syntax," Transactions of the American Philological Association 4 (1873) 66.
55 Zerwick, Biblical Greek, 111.
BOYER: THIRD CLASS CONDITIONS 175
contingent condition this present must be logically future to the
fulfillment of the protasis. Two examples of these presents are
"futuristic" ("I am coming," John 14:3; note that it is accompanied by
a future tense verb in the same apodosis). Another 21 instances
involve verbs which involve potential action looking forward to the
future: "I am able to . . ." etc. Some 26 express what I choose to label
"resulting action," what will happen or result when the protasis is
realized: "even if someone strives he is not crowned if he does not
strive lawfully" (2 Tim 2:5); "If we love one another God abides in us”
(I John 4:12); "If we ask anything. . . he hears us" (1 John 5:14). The
remaining 55 present indicatives in apodoses express what I have
called "discovered state," identifying the condition which will be
discovered to be true when the condition is met: "If you abide in me
you are truly my disciple" (John 8:31); "If I do not wash you, you do
not have a part with me" (John 13:8); "If you release this man you are
not a friend of Caesar" (John 19:12); "Circumcision is profitable if
you keep the law"(Rom 2:25); "Woe is me if I preach not the gospel"
(1 Cor 9: 16); "If we walk in the light. . . we have fellowship. . ."
(1 John 1:7).
The only apodosis verbs left to be considered are 7 aorist
indicatives. These I would consider to be expressive of "discovered
resulting action": "If he hears you, you have gained your brother
(Matt 18:15); "If anyone does not abide in me, he has been cast out
and has withered. . ." (John 15:6); "If you marry you have not
sinned" (I Cor 7:28, twice); "If a man enter your assembly and
you. . . , have you not discriminated and become judges. . . ?" (James
2:2-4).
It is not expected that everyone will agree with all of these
explanations, but certainly it is clear that there is no discernible
distinction in form in the NT Greek which will identify the two types
of conditional statements within the third class. In fact, there is some
future time-reference in all of the examples, even those which are
often called present-general. The general-particular may be a valid
distinction, but it depends on subject-matter and the interpretive
exegesis of the commentator, not on the Greek text of the NT.
This material is cited with gracious permission from:
Grace Theological Seminary
200 Seminary Dr.
Winona Lake, IN 46590
www.grace.edu
Please
report any errors to Ted Hildebrandt at: thildebrandt@gordon.edu
for biblicalelearning.org.