John 17:3

‘Taking in knowledge of God and Jesus’

(By Lesriv Spencer, 6/13/2011; Updated 05/06/2014)

John 17:3 is one scripture which carries great significance for us all. The words of verse three
form part of Jesus' parting prayer. It is a highlight of the apostle John's account of the life of
Jesus where he makes it a theme that Christ is the Son of God, by means of whom everlasting
life is possible. This is made clear in this scripture. (Compare with John 3:16 and 20:31)

John 17:3 says, according to most Bible versions: “And this is life eternal, that they might know
thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” (King James Version) This scripture
has additionally been used to support the concept that Jesus is not identical to God. However, I
will not focus on this subject at the present, instead, I will consider what it means to “know” God
and Christ. Furthermore, I will consider if any other renderings of this scripture are viable for
Christians.

The main message of John 17:3 is transmitted fine by most Bible versions, even if they fall short
of conveying “all” the Greek meaning. Notwithstanding, there are a couple of expressions being
labeled as “mistranslations” in this text that some have brought up for Bible discussion on
various websites. Some have questioned the use in translation of “means” for “is” at the
beginning of this text. We will deal with that first. While most Bible versions read, “And this is life
eternal…”, other versions read like this: “Eternal life means to...” as found in the Bible version of
a Seventh-Day Adventist. (The Clear Word, by Dr. Jack Blanco) Likewise, the New World Translation (NWT,
in this writing) published by Jehovah's Witnesses use “means” for “is” in the text. Why would these
two versions do so?

The “is” is a translation of the Greek estin which follows a pronoun and a conjunction at John 17:3
(haute de estin) which literally means: “This but is….” Thus, estin (third person singular) is the present
indicative active verb form of eimi, first person singular. Bible translations generally render estin
as “is,” however, they also use other equivalents for either estin or eimi. For instance, The New
International Version renders “eimi” mainly as “is,” but also used: are; was; be; am; were; been;
mean; means; consist; meant; take for; belong to; stands for; represent, etc. (Sources: The NIV
Exhaustive Concordance & The Greek-English Concordance to the New Testament, Zondervan) For instance, in
Matthew 9:13, we read in the NIV: “But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, not
sacrifice.’” Matthew 27:33 reads similarly: “They came to a place called Golgotha (which means
“the place of the skull”).” And at John 16:18, we read: “They kept asking, ‘What does he mean by ‘a
little while’?” The Greek word for “mean[s]” in these texts is estin (literally “is”), which is the same
word used in John 17:3.

The NIV are not alone doing this. With the exception of a few ultra-literal translations, most Bible
versions are flexible in this matter. So even though the NIV and various other versions do not
use “means” for “is” at John 17:3, their translation practice is proof that this is done by
translator’s choice. Compare too the reading of Galatians 4:24 in different versions, where the
word estin (2x) and eisin (both forms of “eimi”) are used, and variously rendered.
Some Greek lexicons allow for the use of “means” within their definitions of eimi (This is the form
which appears in lexicons). See below:

Langenscheidt’s Pocket Greek Dictionary, under eimi: “to be, exist […]; to mean, signify.” (By Dr. Karl
Feyerabend)
A Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature: “... 3. explanatory: is a
representation of, is the equivalent of. [eimi] here, too, serves as a copula; we usually translate mean, so in
the formula [tout’ estin] this or that means, that is to say….” (2nd. edition, p. 223. ©1979 The University of Chicago
Press. Italics theirs)
Shorter Lexicon of the Greek New Testament: “In explanations or interrogations, esp. with [touto] or [ti]
means Mt 26:26; 27:46; Lk 18:36.” (F. W. Gingrich, 2nd Ed., Revised by Frederick W. Danker, p.56. ©1983 by The
University of Chicago)
A Concise Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament, by Barclay M. Newman, Jr.: “[ho estin] or [tout’ estin]
that means, that is to say.” (Pag. 52. ©1971 by United Bible Societies)
Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament: “II...(2) introducing an explanation or equivalence in another
language [tout’ estin] and [ho estin] that is, which means (MT 27.46; MK 3.17).” (©2005 by Timothy Friberg,
Barbara Friberg and Neva F. Miller, Trafford Publishing)
Greek-English Lexicon: “συστοιχέω*; εἰμί: To correspond to something else in certain significant features –
‘to correspond to, to stand for, to be a figure of, to represent.’” (Vol. 1, 58.68, p. 593. Louw & Nida. ©1988 UBS)
(*συστοιχέω [systoicheo] = ‘be in the same line with’; be in the same row or rank; correspond to, Gal. 4:25.) See also
The Concise Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, by Frederick William Danker.

Now, would these definitions of “eimi” apply to “estin” (a form of “eimi”) which appears in John
17:3? Some translators must think so, since they translate it in a way approaching those
definitions above. For instance:

“And eternal life means to....” (Today's English Version)

“And in this consists….” (R. F. Weymouth NT)
“And this is eternal life, namely....” (Kenneth S. Wuest)
“And this is the way to have eternal life….” (New Living Translation)
“Now eternal life means....” (C. B. Williams NT)
“And eternal life consists in....” (Sagrada Biblia del Pueblo Católico)
“And eternal life means….” (Goodspeed NT)
“Eternal life means to....” (The Clear Word, by Dr. Jack Blanco)
“And eternal life consists in....” (Versión Popular)
“And this is eternal life: [it means] to….” (The Amplified Bible, brackets theirs)
“Eternal Life consists in….” (Schonfield, The Original NT)
“And in this consists eternal life....” (L. A. Schökel)
“This means everlasting life....” (NWT)
“And by ‘the life of God's coming age’ I mean this:...” (The Kingdom New Testament)

Thus, Bible translators above render estin with other forms other than “is” in English. They must
believe that Greek grammar and the context surrounding John 17:3 allow for, suggest, or even
demand such renderings in translation.

Compare the use of “estin” here with 1 John 5:3, and 2 John 1:6, where various Bible versions find
it fitting to use “means” for “is.” The first part of 1 John 5:3 literally says: “This for is the love of the
God...[Gr. haute gar estin he agape].” Some versions render “is” as “means” here at 1 John 5:3:
 “For loving God means obeying his commands.” (An American Translation, Goodspeed)
“Loving God means keeping his commandments.” (New Living Translation)
“For love to God means this, to practice obedience to His commands.” (C. B. Williams N. T.)

And 2 John 1:6 literally reads: “And this is the love...[Gr. kai haute estin he agape].”

“Love means this, that we be guided by his commands.” (E. J. Goodspeed)

“What love means is to live according to the commands of God.” (Revised English Bible)
“To love means to live in obedience to God's commandments.” (William Barclay)

(See also: The New Berkeley Version; New Century Version; The Translator's NT; Good News Translation; The
Simple English Bible; New Life Version; The Message; and the New International Reader's Version.)

Now, there is another expression coming up under critical discussion, perhaps more so than
“means” for “is,” at John 17:3, and is this one which appeared in the main text of earlier editions
of the New World Translation: “This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the
only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ.” The Revised NWT of 2013
updated their translation of the text to read: “This means everlasting life, their coming to know
you,* the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ.” (*Footnote: “Or ‘their taking in
knowledge of you.’”) Now that the Revised Edition of the NWT made a change in the main text of
John 17:3, and subordinated “their taking in knowledge of you” to a footnote, it remains to be
seen whether the amount of attention and criticism the former reading received diminishes.

This change brings up a couple of questions. Was the main text reading of “their taking in
knowledge of you” defective in the first place? Why the objection to the initial reading - now
relegated to a footnote? This is because the rendering is interpreted by some as one ‘obscuring
the need for a personal relationship with both the Father and His Son Jesus Christ.’ It is often
asserted that it shifts the focus from a personal relationship with God to a mere intellectual
study of God to gain eternal life. For instance, Karen Clark (“The Armchair Scholar”) made a valid
observation about the earlier NWT rendering of ginōskō: “The emphasis of the NWT translation
of ginosko is scholarly learning, for where in ‘taking in knowledge’ is a relationship implied? […]
My objection lies with the translation offered for ginosko in that ‘taking in knowledge’ is
insufficient because a personal relationship with God is not involved or implied. JWs may teach
that forming a relationship with God leads to salvation, but this translation of John 17:3 certainly
gives us no indication of that.” Others claim it is wrong grammar. But do any of these objections
prove the irrelevancy of such translation?

First, I have yet to see a statement from the publishers of the NWT where they clearly assert that
“intellectual knowledge” is all it takes to obtain everlasting life, as some claim. Even Karen Clark
acknowledges: “I do not contend that JW doctrine asserts that Bible knowledge alone leads to
salvation.” The NWT itself (1984 Reference edition, as it did in 1950) offered an acceptable
alternative rendering with their footnote: “Or, ‘their knowing you.’ Gr., hi'na gi·no'sko·si se.” This
alternate rendering is more in-line with what other Bible versions have published. The literal
reading is also published in their Kingdom Interlinear Translation, another Bible publication of
theirs. The Revised NWT Edition makes this even more clear. The NWT translators then, are not
hiding the basic meaning of the word, as often claimed. I will cite what the publishers of the
NWT have said about what involves “knowing” or “taking in knowledge” of God and Christ:

The Watchtower (w) says: “Getting to know God, then, involves knowing both him and his Son. […]
(John 17:3) Such ‘knowing’ of God and his Son is not just head knowledge, acquired information.
It actually means to recognize the authority of God and his Son and to submit to it. [...] So the
person who really knows Jesus Christ as having such authority [“authority over all flesh”] shows this
by obeying his commands. (John 14:15; 15:10).” (w75, p. 117. Italics theirs.)

And: “Therefore, in the original Greek, Jesus’ words at John 17:3 imply continuous effort to get to
know the true God and his Son, Jesus Christ, and this is well brought out in the rendering of the
New World Translation. We acquire this knowledge by diligently studying God’s Word and by
obediently conforming our lives to its standards. (Compare Hosea 4:1,2; 8:2; 2 Timothy 3:16,17.) What
fine reward awaits those who acquaint themselves with God’s personality and with that of his Son
and then strive to imitate them? Everlasting life!” (w92, 03/01, page 23. Italics added.)

And another: “To know someone as a mere acquaintance or to have knowledge of something in
a superficial way falls short of the meaning of the words ‘know’ and ‘knowledge’ as used in the
Scriptures. In the Bible this involves ‘the act of knowing through experience,’ a knowledge that
expresses ‘a relationship of trust between persons.’ (The New International Dictionary of New Testament
Theology) […] Similarly, when Jesus said: [the words at John 17:3...] more was involved than merely
knowing something about God and Christ.—Compare Matthew 7:21.” (w93 6/15, pp. 13-14. Italics mine)

Ok, let’s compare the Watchtower publication quotes above with those of other Bible
commentators:

Commentary on the New Testament, by Robert H. Gundry: “Knowing has to do with information,
specifically with the truth that Jesus Christ embodied God and therefore provides the only way to
God (14:6-11). But since this truth is personal, knowing includes acquaintance too–close
acquaintance, very close (see 17:23).” (©2010, Hendrickson Publishers, p. 441)
One Volume Bible Commentary, edited by J. R. Dummelow says: “‘Knowledge’ here is not
intellectual knowledge, but knowledge based on the religious experience of the devout Christian
soul.” (Page. 803. ©1936 by Macmillan Pub. Co., Inc. 36th Printing)
Holman Christian Standard Bible: “Eternal life comes from knowing God and Jesus the sent Son
(1:4; 5:26; 20:31). Knowing God is not confined to intellectual knowledge; it involves living in
fellowship with him.” (©2010 by Holman Bible Publishers)
Life Application Bible: “Eternal life requires entering into a personal relationship with God in
Jesus Christ. When we admit our sin and turn away from it, Christ's love lives in us by the Holy
Spirit.” (©1988 Tyndale House Publishers)
The Wesley Bible: “This eternal life consists in fellowship with God through saving faith in Jesus
Christ.” (©1990 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.)
F. F. Bruce: “Nor is this knowledge [of God] a matter simply of intellectual apprehension: it
involves a personal relationship.” (The Gospel of John, ©1983 Eerdmans Publishing Co.)

If we compare the comments made by the WT publication above with those of other scholars
quoted here, we find that, although there are notable differences in terminology, there is no
measurable conflict between the two camps, as some critics would like us to believe. WT
comments emphasize studying God's Word, “knowing” God and Christ through experience, and
having a relationship based on trust and faith, and submitting to them. On the other hand,
traditional commentators focus more on “a personal relationship,” on “fellowship” or getting
acquainted with God and Christ. ‘Learning’ about God and Christ is not emphasized as much, but
instead the religious “experience” is, and “obedience” is mentioned less as a necessary factor in
this experience. For both camps, it seems to be a matter of emphasizing a particular viewpoint
over other rather than being totally opposed in meaning to each other.

To determine more accurately what ‘knowing’ God and Christ entails, let's consider the basic
meaning of the Greek word for “know” (ginōskō) used at John 17:3 in the present subjunctive
form:

Liddell and Scott: “To perceive, gain knowledge of, mark, and so to know, of persons and things: to
be aware of, understand... II. To examine, to form an opinion, decide upon, determine, decree...”
(Greek-English Lexicon, Abridged Edition. Impression of 1986, Oxford University Press)

Analytical Lexicon of New Testament Greek defines the verb ginōskō (in first person singular) as: “(1) I
am taking in knowledge, come to know, learn; (2) aor. I ascertained, realized….” (Maurice A. Robinson
& Mark A. House. ©2012 Hendrickson Publishers)

G. Abbott-Smith: “To be taking in knowledge, come to know, recognize, perceive, understand.

[…] Freq. of the knowledge of divine things, of God and Christ; τ. τθεóν...óν...[…]; Χριστóν,....Jo 17:3….” (A
Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament, p. 92. T & T Clark Ltd, Third edition, Latest Impression 1981)

The word “know” at John 17:3 (KJV) in the Greek is a form of ginōskō, in the present subjunctive
active mood. Verbs in this mood usually state a potential condition, a purpose, a contingency, a
wish, or a doubt. It may express a possibility, probability, an uncertainty or indefinite statement.
The subjunctive mood is generally indicated in English by words such as “may,” “might,” “ever,”
and “should.” It normally follows words such as: hina (in order that) and ean (“if”). It should be
noted that the use of the subjunctive does not necessarily imply doubt about the fulfillment of
the verbal action on the part of the speaker. This may or may not be so; each case must be
judged on its own merits. Note too, that some translators have chosen instead to use a simple
infinitive form (i.e. “to know”) in translation for the subjunctive.

You can see this subjunctive in action by reading the part in italics at John 17:3 which according
to the KJV says: “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus
Christ whom thou hast sent.” The Kingdom Interlinear Translation word-for-word translation
reads: “This but is the everlasting life in order that they may be knowing you the only true God
and whom you sent forth Jesus Christ.” The Concordant Greek Text likewise reads: ‘that they may
be knowing....’ The KJV uses the stative form “know” instead of the progressive form “their
knowing you” found in the NWT footnote. Most translations follow the KJV here.

Now, someone may ask: Is it not a deviation from the Greek language for someone to
incorporate a noun (ie, “knowledge” rather than a verb “to know”) in their translation of the Greek
subjunctive? Some apparently think so, in view of the existing criticism of the NWT reading.
Others believe that to convey the subjunctive in English one must use “may,” “might,” “should,”
etc. at all times to be faithful to the Greek. Not so! There are other ways to bring out the
imperfective aspect of the Greek present subjunctive in English.

Grammarians Stanley E. Porter, Jeffrey T. Reed, and Matthew Brook O'Donnell explain: “Words
like ‘may,’ ‘might,’ or ‘should’ are often suitable for translating the subjunctive mood, but at times
these will not be appropriate. In translation it is important to capture the idea of a ‘projected’ or
‘possible’ action.” (Fundamentals of New Testament Greek, p. 155. ©2010 Eerdmans) And, Dr. Richard A.
Young writes: “Moreover, students should be aware that the translation using ‘may’ or ‘might’ (as
commonly taught in Elementary Greek) cannot be universally applied to the subjunctive.”
(Intermediate New Testament Greek, pp. 137-38. ©1994 by Broadman & Holman Publishers)

It appears that the NWT translators were aware of these issues as well of the fact that the Greek
present subjunctive marks continuance and progressiveness. The NWT evidently made an effort to
reflect the durative, progressive factor of the present subjunctive active. Were they justified to do
so? Several scholars explain:

R. F. Weymouth: “Knowing] Or, as the tense implies, ‘an ever-enlarging knowledge of.’” (New
Testament in Modern Speech, footnote. ©1978 by Kregel Publications)

A. T. Robertson: “Should know (ginōskōsin). Present active subjunctive with hina (subject clause),
‘should keep on knowing.’” (Word Pictures in the New Testament, Vol. V, p. 275. ©1932, Baker Book House)

Westcott: “The tense of the verb (γινώσκωσι [ginōskōsi], cognoscant v.) marks continuance,
progress, and not a perfect and past apprehension gained once for all.” (The Gospel According to St.
John, by Brooke Foss Westcott, p. 242. Reprinted 1980, Baker Book House)

W. D. Chamberlain: “In the subjunctive […], the present tense is timeless and durative.” (An
Exegetical Grammar of the Greek New Testament, p. 87. ©1941, 1984 Printing, Baker Book House)

Hewett: “The present [subjunctive] tense views activity as durative, ongoing, or repetitive in
nature. […] Tenses in the subjunctive mood do not indicate time of action in and of themselves
but adopt a time of action dependent upon the context within which they occur.” (New Testament
Greek, by James Allen Hewett, Revised edition, p. 205. Italics his. ©2009 Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.)

W. E. Vine: “GINŌSKŌ (γινώσκω) signifies to be taking in knowledge, to come to know, recognize,

understand, or to understand completely, e.g., Mk 13:28,29; Jn 13:12; 15:18; 21:17; 2 Cor 8:9; Heb
10:34; 1 Jn 2:5; 4:2,6 (twice), 7, 13; 5:2, 20 […] In the N.T. ginōskō frequently indicates a relation
between the person ‘knowing’ and the object known; in this respect, what is ‘known’ is of value
or importance to the one who knows, and hence the establishment of the relationship, e.g.,
especially of God's ‘knowledge’ 1 Cor 8:3, ‘if any man love God, the same is known of Him;’ […]
The same idea of appreciation as well as ‘knowledge’ underlies several statements concerning
the ‘knowledge’ of God and His truth on the part of believers, e.g. Jn 8:32; 14:20, 31; 17:3...such
knowledge is obtained, not by mere intellectual activity, but by operation of the Holy Spirit
consequent upon acceptance of Christ. Nor is such ‘knowledge’ marked by finality; see e.g., 2 Pet
3:18 [“...but go on growing in the undeserved kindness and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus
Christ”]….”

Also: “ginōskō (γινώσκω) [means] ‘to know by observation and experience.’” (See “know”, “knowledge,”
and “perceive”).” (Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words)

J. H. Bernard: “...The present tense (ginóskosin) marking that continual growth in the knowledge
of God which is characteristic of spiritual life, as physical growth is a characteristic of bodily life.”
(The International Critical Commentary, St John, vol II, Edinburgh, T & T Clark, 1928, p.561)

J. H. Moulton: “The present simplex, γινώσκεóν...ιν [ginōskein], is durative, ‘to be taking in

knowledge.’” (Grammar of New Testament Greek, I, Prolegomena, p. 113. 1985 Printing, T & T Clark LTD)
(Note: Ginōskein, i.e. “to know”] is the present infinitive form of ginōskō.)

Max Zerwick writes: “γινώσκωσιν [ginōskōsin] sub[junctive mood of] γινώσκω [ginōskō], pre[sent
tense] implying a continuous process.” (A Grammatical Analysis of the Greek New Testament, M. Zerwick &
Mary Grosvenor, p. 336, on 17:3. Reprint 1981, Rome Biblical Institute Press)

Marvin R. Vincent: “Might know (γινώσκωσι [ginōskōsi]). Might recognize or perceive. This is
striking, that eternal life consists in knowledge, or rather the pursuit of knowledge, since the
present tense marks a continuance, a progressive perception of God in Christ. That they might
learn to know. Compare ver. 23; x. 38; 1 John v. 20; iv. 7, 8.” (Word Studies in the New Testament, Vol. 2, p.
263, on 17:3. Cursive letters his. Reprinted 1985 by Eerdmans Pub. Co.)

Appropriately, some scholars do understand that “knowing” and “taking in knowledge” are
reciprocally connected. According to these scholars, the present subjunctive verb form used in
John 17:3 indicates a durative idea of the verb, ginōskō, that is, that we should continue gaining
knowledge of God and Christ. How then, should the translator deal with the present subjunctive
in translation? Should we just stress the “personal relation” and ignore the above where the
present subjunctive verb marks “a continuous process”? Here are some issues to take into
account:

First of all, we need to understand what a classical Grammar states: “Unlike verbs in the
indicative mood, verbs in the subjunctive mood can not be translated according to any fixed
formula. Their meaning varies considerably with the type of clause or sentence in which they
appear.” And: “The translation of subjunctives...varies considerably, depending upon the type of
clause they appear in.” (Greek – An Intensive Course, pp. 42, 63, by Hansen & Quinn. ©1992 Fordham
University Press) Other factors to consider:

Hewett: ‘Specifically, the Greek subjunctive is used for: exhortations (but not outright commands);
conditional thoughts that have a good likelihood to be fulfilled; a variety of subordinate
clauses...Therefore, the goal of the translator is to convey the type of activity intended by the
particular tense that is used. […] An appropriate translation of a subjunctive-mood verb is
entirely dependent upon its use in a sentence.’ (Hewett 2009, pp. 205-06)
Porter: “The subjunctive...expresses visualization. A process in the subj[unctive] represents a
mental image on the part of the speaker which, in his opinion is capable of realization, or even
awaits realization.” (Stanley E. Porter, citing Gonda, Character, p. 70 – Idioms of the Greek New Testament, p.
57. ©1992 by Sheffield Academic Press)
Campbell: “The use of the present subjunctive reveals regular expressions of imperfective
aspect, viewing the action internally. Some common implications of imperfective aspect within
present subjunctives are activities that are conceptually unfolding, temporally ongoing, stative,
or personally characteristic […] its imperfective aspect makes the present subjunctive especially
suited to proverbial, general, and generic statements as seen below...John 17:3...that they might
know you….” (Basics of Verbal Aspect in Biblical Greek, Constantine R. Campbell, pp. 69,70. ©2008 Zondervan)
In light of this, The Zondervan Greek and English Interlinear New Testament (Mounce) renders “hina
ginōskōsin se” in John 17:3 as: “that they know you,” instead of, “that they may know you.” The
English Standard Version does likewise. And the International Standard Version and the Common
English Bible both use a simple infinitive “to know” at John 17:3. (Note: The English subjunctive is
often indistinguishable from the indicative as shown by Barron's 501 English Verbs)

A translator, besides having basic knowledge of a Greek grammatical structure (such as the hina
clause plus present subjunctive), also needs to deal with how to convey his understanding of the
Greek construction in modern English. The Oxford English Grammar tells us: “In present-day
English it does not make sense to speak of a subjunctive mood...How, then, are modal meanings
expressed in the language as it is spoken today? It is useful to think of English as displaying a
system of analytic mood, that is, a grammatical system of mood in which the meanings typically
expressed by inflectional endings on verbs in older forms of English are carried by a
construction, such as the combination of modal verb followed by a lexical verb, or a clause type.”
(Pages 275-278. Italics theirs. ©2011) And such construction is what we find at John 17:3.

Let's look at some Bible renderings for the present subjunctive at John 17:3:
21st Century New Testament: “And everlasting life comes from knowing you the only true God, as
well as Jesus Christ whom you sent.”
E. J. Goodspeed: “And eternal life means knowing you as the only true God, and knowing Jesus
your messenger as Christ.”
Williams New Testament: “Now eternal life means knowing you as the only true God and
knowing Jesus your messenger as Christ.”
Jonathan Mitchell's New Testament: “Now THIS is ... eonian life (life pertaining to the Age):
namely, that they may progressively come to intimately and experientially know You….”

Thus, considering the above, the English rendering, “their taking in knowledge” appearing in the
main text of earlier editions of the NWT, and in the footnote of the Revised Edition, in essence,
captures well the “imperfective” aspect of the Greek present subjunctive at John 17:3, ‘conveying
the type of activity intended by the particular tense that is used,’ which views the activity as a
continuing process. It also captures the idea of a “projected” or “possible” action, of a process
“capable of realization,” or ‘awaiting realization.’ After all: “An appropriate translation of a
subjunctive-mood verb is entirely dependent upon its use in a sentence.”

But, what about using the noun “knowledge” in translation rather than the verb ‘knowing’? Does
it not conflict with the idea of ‘a personal relation’ with God at John 17:3? There is really no
dichotomy between the exhortation to seek to ‘enlarge our knowledge’ of God and having a
personal relation. Consider a few commentaries on John 17:3, where they recognize a
connection between intellectual (objective, factual knowledge), and the personal relation:
World Biblical Commentary explains: “[John 17:3] As a definition of eternal life it reads
remarkably like a confession of faith: the eternal life, of which the gospel speaks, consists in the
knowledge of God and of Jesus the Son, the Christ he has sent......the utterance reflects more
closely the gospel tradition of Jesus' teaching, above all expressed in Matt 11:27....Such
knowledge advances beyond the intellect to include relationship and communion...” (Vol.36, p.297,
John 2nd ed. by George R. Beasley-Murray)
C. K. Barrett: “(a) Knowledge of God and Christ gives life; but the same result follows from
believing (20:31). Knowing and believing are not set over against one another but correlated.
This suggests that John's conception of knowledge is close to that of the Old Testament. (b)
Knowledge has also an objective, factual side. Men must know the only true God (cf. 8:32....) This
objectivity is partly Greek but owes something to the native Jewish conception that God reveals
himself, and is known, in concrete historical events..... Saving knowledge is rooted in knowledge of a
historical person: it is therefore objective and at the same time a personal relation.”
(Commentary on John's Gospel, SPCK, London, 1962, Barrett)
The New Bible Commentary: “The knowing here is progressive and its object is true as
contrasted with false deities.” (D. Guthrie & J. A. Motyer. ©1970 by Inter-Varsity Press, Reprint 1991 Eerdmans)
A Translator's Handbook on the Gospel of John: “The belief that knowledge is essential of
salvation is common to both Jewish and Greek thought. […] Knowledge then for both Old
Testament and New Testament writers is not a beatific vision or an intuitive feeling about God;
rather it is based on an objective revelation and demands a positive response in obedience and
love.” (Newman & Nida, ©1980 by UBS)
New Commentary on the Whole Bible: “Jesus defined eternal life. To experientially, progressively
know...God, and his Son, Jesus Christ, is eternal life. In other words, eternal life is the ongoing
knowledge of the Father and the Son. The Greek verb ginōskōsin signifies the continual action of
‘getting to know.’” (Based on the classic commentary of Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown. Edited by J..
Douglas and Philip W. Comfort. Ellipsis dots theirs. ©1990, Tyndale House Publishers)

A Grammar gives us further insight by explaining one function of the subjunctive after hina as
“substantival” in this construction of John 17:3. It states: “As with ὅτι [hoti] plus the indicative, ἵνα
[hina] plus the subjunctive can be used substantivally.” As one of four basic uses of this
substantival hina clause, he mentions the ‘apposition* clause,’ and adds: “The force of the
appositional ἵνα is namely, that. Although not frequent, it is almost idiomatic of Johannine
literature. John 17:3…This is eternal life, [namely, that they might know you, the only true God].”
(Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, Daniel B. Wallace. Brackets, italics and bold letters his. Pages 471, 474,
475. ©1996 Zondervan) (*Apposition = the placing of a word, phrase or clause in parallel with another word,
phrase or clause to give further information about the latter, Oxford Grammar of Classical Greek.)

This type of construction answers the question, What is eternal life? What does it mean? The
subordinate or dependent clause in brackets by Wallace answers: “[Namely, that they might
know you, the only true God].” The Expositor's Greek Testament says: “John 17:3. αὕτη δέ ἐστιν ἡ
αἰώνιος ζωή ἵνα [this but is the eternal life in order that]… On ἵνα in this construction, see Burton, 213,
and cf. John 15:8.” Hence, ‘the clause constitutes a definition of the content of the noun or
pronoun.’ (Burton) Thus, no less accurate is this definition: ‘This means everlasting life, their
taking in knowledge of God and Jesus Christ.’
The bracketed clause of Wallace above, is in apposition to the first few words of the verse,
namely, αὕτη (this): “This is (Or: This means...) eternal life...” Of this apparent usage of an
appositional clause in John 17:3, professor Robert Hanna wrote: “Westcott (in location) says that
ἵνα [hina] here expresses an aim, an end, and not only a fact. The ἵνα [hina] clause, then, as
compared with (τὸ)) γινώσκειν [to know], adds the idea of effort or aim at acquiring
knowledge of God.” (A Grammatical Aid to the Greek New Testament, p. 179. ©1983 Baker Book House)
Compare Hanna's conclusion with that of noted grammarian Moulton in Grammar of New Testament Greek,
Vol. 1, p. 206.)

Thus, considering the apparent substantival role of the hina clause with appositional force at
John 17:3, which emphasizes “the idea of effort or aim at acquiring knowledge of God,” the
alternate footnote translation by the NWT, namely, “their taking in knowledge of” makes sense,
is accurate, and should not be disregarded.

A lexicon gives as first definition of ginōskō: “to know.” Then as second definition: “learn (of),
ascertain, find out.” (Gingrich & Danker 1983) And another: “I am taking in knowledge, come to
know, learn.” (Compact Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, by Alexander Souter, M.A. Revised and
edited by Mark A. House. ©2008 Hendrickson Publishers, Inc.) In view of this, some Bible translators at John
17:3 may stress the state, “to know,” and some others, a translation which stresses the process, of
‘taking in such knowledge.’ Rolf Furuli (Lecturer at the University of Oslo), explains: “The difference
in meaning is simply one of stress, because even the active process of acquiring knowledge
leads to the state where one ‘knows.’…Obviously, though, what means everlasting life is the
result of this ongoing process, namely, an increase in the knowledge of God and his Son; not a
stative knowledge, acquired once and for all, but a knowledge that becomes fuller and fuller
because the active process is continuing, resulting in a relationship with both the true God and
his Son.” (The Role of Theology and Bias in Bible Translation, Rolf Furuli, pp. 301-02. ©1999, Elihu Books)

Some scholars recognize, at least in part, that eternal life depends on ‘the pursuit of true
knowledge’, a ‘progressive perception of God and of Christ’. The very same lexicons people use
and depend on, show that the Greek verb being considered at John 17:3 can mean “taking in
knowledge.” Although the translation of “taking in knowledge” found in the footnote is unique to
the NWT, it is not without Scriptural support. A few translations actually use a noun, namely,
“knowledge” at John 17:3. For instance:

The New Simplified Bible describes it this way: “This is everlasting life that they should have deep,
intimate knowledge of you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have commissioned.”
(By James R. Madsen, 2003. Canon City, CO)

And: “And this is the eternal life, namely, that they might be having an experiential knowledge of
you, the only genuine God, and of Him who you sent on a mission, Jesus Christ.” (The New
Testament, An Expanded Translation, by Kenneth S. Wuest. ©1961, Eerdmans, Reprinted 1981)

And another (The Bible in Basic English): “And this is eternal life: to have knowledge of you, the
only true God, and of him whom you have sent, even Jesus Christ.” This last translation, which
was well received in its time, was produced by a committee under the supervision of Professor S.
H. Hooke. Now, ask yourself: How many critical reviews have you read anywhere of this Bible
translation, and of the previous one by Wuest for using a noun “knowledge” in John 17:3 instead
of the verb to “know” as most Bibles versions do? So then, if they can do so at 17:3, why not the
NWT? Really, the NWT alternate rendering in the footnote does not violate Greek grammar.
The idea advanced here is not that the earlier NWT rendering of John 17:3 was the best possible
translation, rather, that it is a viable translation, and there seems to be no solid reason to reject
this footnote option in the current Revised NWT. Whatever rendering becomes your choice, it is
going to be a compromise – those favoring the traditional reading stressing ‘a personal relation’
may likely miss the verbal force of the present subjunctive indicating “continuance” and
responsibility, while those opting for the “taking in knowledge” rendering may end up missing
the importance of an intimate, personal relationship with both God and Christ, as Karen Clark
(“The Armchair Scholar”) rightly suggested. Therefore, both groups should be aware of these
issues to fully comprehend the import of Jesus' words.
Notwithstanding, there are some individuals who will only support the concept of a “personal
relationship” with God and Christ to gain eternal life with little if any intellectual activity involved.
For some reason they do not like the idea of ‘acquiring knowledge’ to have this Christian
experience, and undermine the need ‘to take in knowledge’ in a continuing fashion. They may
not like the idea of involving Christian responsibility in this process of “knowing.” For instance, a
website declares: “In keeping with the above, the Bible depicts salvation as something that
comes by faith alone through Jesus alone, without any mention of gaining knowledge or even
works.” That statement is only partially true. Those who resort to such reasoning fail to
understand that to have a lasting personal relationship and to experience Christian living, one
must continue “knowing,” or, “taking in knowledge,” and that's normally done by studying God's
Word on a regular basis, and applying it in our lives, as we are exhorted to do in the Bible itself.
(Joshua 1:8; James 1:25)

Some point to the Bible account at Acts 16: 25-34 where they conclude that “salvation” is easily
achieved, without effort on anyone's part ... that one only need to just say, “I believe in Christ.” In
this story, the jailer at the time of an earthquake in the presence of Paul and Silas, asked: “What
must I do to be saved?” And Paul and Silas replied: “Believe in the Lord Jesus and you and your
household will be saved.” But to correctly understand the significance of this statement, one
should take those spoken words within the whole of biblical context. A Bible commentary in
reference to the classic phrase (vv 30-31) stated: “It is just as Prof. Trenchard stated: ‘It was a
beginning, a rope cast to a man drowning, leaving for later the explanation of the full meaning
of ‘salvation’ and the presentation of the person of the Savior Jesus Christ.’” (Comentario Bíblico de
Matthew Henry, p. 1544, ©1999, Editorial CLIE, Barcelona)

Does such commentary make biblical sense? Yes, it does! It was Paul himself who urged
Christians: “With reverence and awe make every effort to insure your salvation.” (Philippians 2:12,
Goodspeed) James 2:17 tells us that, “faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.”
(NIV) ‘Salvation by faith alone’ does not mean that Christians can waste their lives doing nothing
in inactive faith. Everlasting life is contingent on ‘the pursuit of true knowledge,’ of a progressive
perception of God and Christ, as scholar Marvin Vincent indicated. Christians are urged to
“make every effort to enter through the narrow door” (Luke 13:24, NIV); and ‘to be filled with
knowledge of God's will, spiritual wisdom and discernment, to lead a life which yields a harvest
of good works of every kind, and to advance further and further in the knowledge of God.’
(Colossians 1:9,10, H. W. Cassirer's New Testament)
These exhortations do not in any way contradict the sublime Bible truth, that by Jesus' sacrificial
role, ‘salvation is by Christ’ and not by any “deserved” status of ours. Nor does it violate the
beautiful concept of “grace” in Scripture. For a consideration of what “grace” means, click here:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/35002730/John-1-14-Jesus-full-of-grace

As previously noted, the Bible context associates an objective revelation of God (factual side)
with a personal relation. What is wrong though, is to conclude that a lasting personal
relationship with God (of faith, trust, love, and obedience) is obtainable without true ongoing
knowledge. Also, it would be equally wrong for anyone to imply that “knowing” or “taking in
knowledge” of God at John 17:3 is only accomplished by academic learning, or by a systematic
course of learning the publications of a religious organization.
The Psalmist wrote: “And those knowing your name will trust in you. For you will certainly not
leave those looking for you, O Jehovah.” (NWT, italics added) Here, “knowing” God and “trust” are
closely associated. Knowledge and belief (faith) are interrelated. (John 6:68,69) Mounce’s Complete
Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words says: “Jesus defines eternal life as ‘knowing
God and Jesus Christ,’ which involves both faith in him and love for him (Jn. 17:3). By contrast,
John makes it plain that the world ‘does not know’ God (Jn. 17:25; 1 Jn.:3:1).” (William D. Mounce,
under: KNOW...New Testament, ginōskō, p. 382. ©2006, Zondervan)

Furthermore, knowledge is at times linked with wisdom, understanding, and discernment.

Obedience is equated with ‘knowing’ God. The theme of ‘knowing God’ is brought out
emphatically in the 1st letter of John (25 times), and mainly connected to obeying God's
commands and imitating Jesus in Christian love.
In Titus 1:16, Paul speaks of those who “claim to know God but by their works they deny him; they
are outrageously rebellious and quite untrustworthy for any good work.” (New Jerusalem Bible,
italics added. Compare with Matthew 7:21-23) Understandably, those getting “to know” God should
make a sincere effort to please him and not disobey him. (John 13:17) Mounce says: “...There is a
sense in which true knowledge (of God) leads to action in keeping with obedience (2 Cor. 10:3-
6).” (Mounce 2006, p. 383)
Albert Barnes explains what ‘knowing’ God means: “The word ‘know’ here, as in other places,
expresses more than a mere speculative acquaintance with the character and perfections of
God. ‘It includes all the impressions on the mind and life which a just view of God and of the
Saviour is fitted to produce.’ It includes, of course, love, reverence, obedience, honor, gratitude,
supreme affection. ‘To know God as he is’ is to know and regard him as a lawgiver, a sovereign, a
parent, a friend. It is to yield the whole soul to him, and strive to obey his law.” (Barnes' Notes On
The Bible, Reprint 1980, Kregel Publications)

Learning about what God and Christ have historically done for others, as well as all they have in
promise for us, will help us develop an intimate relationship with them. ‘Experiential knowledge’
is knowledge based on Christian experience. Atheists may have factual knowledge, but are
lacking personal devotion to God and Christ. Hence, true knowledge of God and personal
devotion to God and Christ are the clue to gaining eternal life.
The apostle Peter exhorts Christians: “Now for this very reason you must do your level best to
supplement your faith with [...] knowledge.” And again: “...You must continue to grow in the
spiritual strength and knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ….” (2 Peter 1:5, 3:18,
Williams New Testament) Peter's exhortation confirms John's statement at 17:3. And Paul further
entreated: “So, my dearly loved friends, as you have always been obedient, so now with
reverence and awe keep on working clear down to the finishing point of your salvation….” (WNT)
In conclusion, it is clear that it is not just the sole acquisition of intellectual biblical knowledge
that simply leads to life, but the application of it in one's life course, together with an earnest
desire in obtaining and keeping a personal relationship with the Heavenly Father and his Son that
will lead one to gain ‘everlasting life.’
__________________________________
Addendum:

I submit readings from other NWT language editions for comparison purposes with the English version.
Keep in mind that other international versions listed below do not reflect the most recent translation
effort of the English Revised NWT Edition of 2013:

English NWT (1984): “This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you [“Or: their knowing
you,” footnote], the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ.”
English NWT (2013): “This means everlasting life, their coming to know you,* the only true God, and the
one whom you sent, Jesus Christ.” (*Footnote: “Or ‘their taking in knowledge of you.’”)

French NWT: “Ceci signifie la vie éternelle: qu’ils apprennent à te connaître, toi, le seul vrai Dieu, et
celui que tu as envoyé, Jésus Christ”.
German NWT: “Dies bedeutet ewiges Leben, daß sie fortgesetzt Erkenntnis in sich aufnehmen [“Od.:
daß sie dich fortgesetzt erkennen”, footnote] über dich, den allein wahren Gott, und über den, den du
ausgesandt hast, Jesus Christus”.
Italian NWT: “Questo significa vita eterna, che acquistino conoscenza di te [“O, che conoscano te”,
footnote], il solo vero Dio, e di colui che tu hai mandato, Gesù Cristo”
Modern Greek NWT: “Αυτό σημαίνει αιώνια ζωή, το να* αποκτούν γνώση για εσένα, τον μόνο αληθινό
Θεό, και για αυτόν που απέστειλες, τον Ιησού Χριστό”. (*In modern Greek, a subjunctive clause or
sentence is indicated by the particles να or aς before the verb.)
Portuguese NWT: “Isto significa vida eterna, que absorvam conhecimento de ti [“Ou que te
conheçam”, footnote], o único Deus verdadeiro, e daquele que enviaste, Jesus Cristo”.
Spanish NWT: “Esto significa vida eterna, el que estén adquiriendo conocimiento [“O: te conozcan”,
footnote] de ti, el único Dios verdadero, y de aquel a quien tú enviaste, Jesucristo”.

Other subjects by the same author (For Spanish, see below):

Exodus 2:25: http://www.scribd.com/doc/38676458/Exodus-2-25-And-God-took-notice-Does-God-care-about-us
Matthew 5:3, ‘the poor in spirit’: https://www.scribd.com/document/35085619/Matthew-5-3-Blessed-are-the-poor-in-spirit
John 1:1, http://www.scribd.com/doc/34916458/The-correct-translation-of-John-1-1
John 1:1, Briefer text, with additional samples: http://www.scribd.com/doc/50330864/John-1-1-List-of-Alternate-Readings
John 1:14 (“grace”): http://www.scribd.com/doc/35002730/John-1-14-Jesus-full-of-grace
John 8:58: http://www.scribd.com/doc/35318309/The-correct-translation-of-John-8-58-List-of-alternate-readings-to-I-am
John 17:3: http://www.scribd.com/doc/57772552/John-17-3-%E2%80%98Taking-in-knowledge-of-%E2%80%99-God-and-Jesus
Acts 20:28, https://www.scribd.com/doc/231244155/Acts-20-28-Whose-blood-God-s-Or-Christ-s
Colossians 1:16, “all other things”: http://www.scribd.com/doc/209607822/Colossians-1-16-Is-the-translation-all-other-things-appropriate
1 Timothy 3:16, http://www.scribd.com/doc/76927834/Was-God-manifested-in-the-flesh-1-Timothy-3-16
Hebrews 1:6,8, https://www.scribd.com/doc/252268649/Does-Hebrews-1-6-8-prove-Jesus-is-God
Do the NW translators know Greek? http://www.scribd.com/doc/48234022/Did-the-New-World-Translation-Committee-Know-Greek
Translation Differences in selected verses: http://www.scribd.com/doc/59484457/Translation-Differences-Questions-and-Answers
Was Jesus Created First? https://www.scribd.com/document/378080373/Was-Jesus-Created-First

Otros temas – en español – por el mismo autor:

Juan 1:1, ¿“un dios”?: http://www.scribd.com/doc/35899788/Traduccion-correcta-de-Juan-1-1-Lista-de-lecturas-alternativas
Juan 1:1, Listado de lecturas suplentes: https://www.scribd.com/document/358556923/Lista-de-lecturas-suplentes-a-la-tradicional-de-Juan-1-1
Juan 8:58, “yo soy”: http://www.scribd.com/doc/36126649/La-traduccion-correcta-de-Juan-8-58-Lista-de-lecturas-alternas-a-yo-soy
Juan 17:3, ‘adquirir conocimiento’: http://www.scribd.com/doc/74629981/Juan-17-3-%E2%80%98Adquiriendo-conocimiento%E2%80%99-de-Dios-y-Jesucristo
Colosenses 1:16, “todas las otras cosas”: http://www.scribd.com/doc/209601066/Colosenses-1-16-%C2%BFEs-la-traduccion-
%E2%80%9Ctodas-las-otras-cosas%E2%80%9D-apropiada
1 Timoteo 3:16: http://www.scribd.com/doc/77336247/%C2%BFFue-Dios-manifestado-en-carne-1-Timoteo-3-16
¿Enseña Hebreos 1:6,8 que Jesús es Dios?: https://www.scribd.com/doc/255738165/Ensena-Hebreos-1-6-8-que-Jesucristo-es-Dios
¿Acaso tiene sentido la Trinidad? http://www.scribd.com/doc/173779117/%C2%BFAcaso-tiene-sentido-la-Trinidad
¿Conocen los traductores de la TNM griego? http://www.scribd.com/doc/51623596/%C2%BFSabia-griego-el-Comite-de-la-Traduccion-del-Nuevo-Mundo

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Note: This document was written using the free and open LibreOffice Writer, using Noto Sans Font,
Size 11 – originally in the .odt (Open Document Text) format. To submit comments, suggestions or
corrections: lesriv000@gmail.com
____________________________________________________