| 11. Linguistic Exegesis The verse opens with the aorist verb apekrithe {ἀπεκρίθη | a-pe-kri-thē} ‘answered’, followed by a dative pronoun auto {αὐτῷ | au-tôi} and the subject Iesous {Ἰησοῦς | Iē-soûs}, forming the narrative frame “Jesus answered him.” The main assertion is expressed with the imperfect indicative in a conditional construction: Ouk eiches exousian kat’ emou oudemian {Οὐκ εἶχες ἐξουσίαν κατʼ ἐμοῦ οὐδεμίαν | Ouk eî-khes ex-ou-sí-an kat’ e-mou ou-de-mí-an}. Here the placement of the negation Ouk and the adjective oudemian ‘none’ intensifies the absolute denial of independent authority, while kat’ emou ‘against Me’ specifies the direction of that authority. The protasis ei me en dedomenon soi anothen {εἰ μὴ ἦν δεδομένον σοι ἄνωθεν | ei mē ēn de-do-mé-non soi á-nō-then} functions as an exceptive condition (“unless”), combining the imperfect of eimi with the perfect passive participle dedomenon to portray authority as a completed grant with ongoing effect, sourced “from above,” a theologically loaded adverb indicating divine origin. The inferential phrase dia touto {διὰ τοῦτο | di-á toû-to} introduces the consequence based on that theological premise. The nominative ho paradous {ὁ παραδούς | ho pa-ra-doús} is a substantival participle, “the one who delivered over,” serving as subject of echei {ἔχει | é-khei} ‘has’ in the clause ho paradous me soi meizona hamartian echei {ὁ παραδούς μέ σοι μείζονα ἁμαρτίαν ἔχει | ho pa-ra-doús mé soi meí-zo-na ha-mar-tí-an é-khei}. The comparative adjective meizona governs hamartian, creating a graded evaluation of guilt. English renderings preserve the logical flow by reflecting the conditional structure (“You would have no authority … unless it had been given…”) and by turning the participial ho paradous into a relative clause (“the one who handed Me over”) to maintain clarity while retaining the comparative “greater sin” for doctrinal precision. |