| 13. Linguistic Exegesis The verse begins with the article and participle ho iatheis {ὁ ἰαθεὶς | ho i-athéis} functioning substantivally, “the one who had been healed,” which identifies the subject by the result of an earlier action. The negated verb phrase ouk ēidei {οὐκ ᾔδει | ouk ēi-dei} uses a pluperfect form of the verb of knowing, conveying a state of ignorance that continued up to that point. The clause tis estin {τίς ἐστιν | tís é-stin} is a direct interrogative embedded as the object of “knew,” preserving the man’s uncertainty about the healer’s identity. The explanatory sequence ho gar Iesous {ὁ γὰρ Ἰησοῦς | ho gàr Iē-soûs} places the article with the proper name and the conjunction gar to foreground Jesus as the known subject in contrast to the man’s ignorance, while marking the clause as giving the reason for that ignorance. The aorist verb exeneusen {ἐξένευσεν | exé-neu-sen} conveys a single, decisive act of “slipping away,” suggesting a quiet, intentional withdrawal. The genitive absolute construction ochlou ontos {ὄχλου ὄντος | óch-lou ón-tos} provides circumstantial background, “with a crowd being,” which is rendered in English as a causal clause (“since there was a crowd”) to make the relationship explicit. The prepositional phrase en tō topō {ἐν τῷ τόπῳ | en tō tó-pō} specifies the location of that crowd and thus the context for Jesus’ withdrawal. In English, the sentence is reshaped into a single complex sentence with clear causal connectors (“for,” “since,” “because”) to mirror the Greek logic and to link the healed man’s lack of knowledge directly to Jesus’ discreet departure amid the crowd. |