Comprehensive Review of Syntax, Translation, and Exegesis — Bringing It All Together

Introduction: From Pieces to the Whole

By now you have spent nine weeks reading, parsing, diagramming, and interpreting Greek across genres—Johannine narrative and theology, Pauline argument, Catholic epistles, Revelation’s symbolism, and the poetry that sings Christ. This final week consolidates that work into a single, repeatable capstone workflow for advanced exegesis: (1) observe syntax; (2) establish text and translate; (3) analyze discourse flow; (4) integrate lexical and intertextual data; (5) formulate theological interpretation that is warranted by the Greek. The aim is not to add brand-new rules but to stabilize your instincts so that technical skill and spiritual understanding act together.

This chapter therefore reviews the core syntactic systems you have used—verbal aspect and mood; participles and infinitives; clause relations (purpose/result, condition, concession); information structure and word order; prepositions and case functions; apposition and equatives—and then rehearses a disciplined approach to translation and exegesis. We will practice with extended mini-commentaries on representative passages you already know (John 1:1–5; Philippians 2:6–11; Romans 3:21–26; Mark 2:1–12; Revelation 5:9–13), not to repeat earlier lessons but to show how the whole toolkit operates when deployed end-to-end. Keep BDAG, Wallace, Porter, Runge/Levinsohn, and BDF within reach (Bauer et al., 2000; Wallace, 1996; Porter, 1992; Runge, 2010; Blass et al., 1961).

I. Syntax in Review: The Systems You Must Hear Every Time You Read

1. Verbal Aspect, Time, and Aktionsart (What the Author Chooses to Show)

Koine tense-forms encode aspect (how an action is portrayed) rather than absolute time by themselves. Context situates time; the forms display profile (Porter, 1992). The aorist presents an event as a whole (perfective), the present/imperfect as unfolding (imperfective), the perfect/pluperfect as a current state grounded in prior action (stative). In narrative, aorist indicative typically carries mainline actions; imperfects and participles provide background. In exposition, perfects often serve state theology (e.g., συνέστηκεν, Col 1:17; ἑστηκώς, Rev 5:6), and aorists can front decisive divine acts (Wallace, 1996; Porter, 1992).

The doctrine travels with aspect. When John writes ὁ λόγος ἦν (imperfect), he protects ongoing existence; when he writes σὰρξ ἐγένετο (aorist), he stakes incarnation as a historic event (Keener, 2003). When Paul writes ἐχαρίσατο (Phil 2:9), the aorist presses God’s decisive exaltation; when he writes ἔκτισται/συνέστηκεν (Col 1:16–17), the perfects stabilize the present order of creation in the Son (O’Brien, 1982; Moo, 2008).

2. Mood and Modality (What the Author Intends to Do)

You have handled subjunctives in purpose/result and conditionality, imperatives for command and exhortation, participles and infinitives for subordinate nuance (Wallace, 1996). Remember the feel:

• Subjunctive in ἵνα and ὅπως clauses typically indicates telic intent: God exalts Christ ἵνα every knee bow (Phil 2:10); Jesus speaks so that you might believe (John 20:31). In Revelation, ἵνα frequently articulates divine purpose embedded in vision (“so that they might be nourished,” Rev 12:6).

• Imperatives structure ethical instruction and mark peaks (Gal 5:16; Rom 12:1; Mark 2:11). Imperative sequences often rest on prior indicatives (status → walk); translate by preserving the force and cadence of the line (Runge, 2010).

• Conditionals: First-class assume reality for argument’s sake; third-class open possibility; fourth-class (rare in the NT) express potentiality. Paul’s diatribe uses εἰ to stage objections (Rom 6:1; 9:14). Identify protasis/apodosis, then paraphrase the logic your translation asserts (Stowers, 1981; Wallace, 1996).

3. Participles and Infinitives (Compressed Clauses That Carry Theology)

Participles present circumstance and relationship: means (“by taking,” λαβών, Phil 2:7), manner, cause, concession, temporal setting, attendant circumstance. You learned to argue from function, not only form. The kenosis line is paradigmatic: ἐκένωσεν… μορφὴν δούλου λαβών… γενόμενος… εὑρεθείς. Kenosis occurs by addition, not subtraction; the participles say how (Martin, 1997; Silva, 2005). Infinitives do heavy work in purpose/result (εἰς τὸ εἶναι, Rom 3:26), as complements (βούλομαι μανθάνειν-type frames), and as substantives (to live is Christ).

4. Clause Relations and Connectives (The Joints of Reasoning)

Greek particles and conjunctions are the bones of argument and scene. You must hear γάρ as ground/explanation, οὖν/διό/ἄρα as inference, δέ as development/step, ἀλλά as strong contrast, μέν… δέ as two-sided development, ἵνα/ὥστε as purpose/result (Runge, 2010; Levinsohn, 2000; Wallace, 1996). In Romans 3:21–26, for example, the entire logic flows on νυνὶ δέ → γάρ → διὰ/ἐν/εἰς → ἵνα. In Markan stories, καί chains mainline aorists; γάρ opens windows into motives; δέ moves the scene (Porter, 1992).

5. Word Order and Information Structure (Topic and Focus)

Greek word order is pragmatic: fronted elements mark topic (aboutness) or focus (prominence, contrast). Read θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος with θεός as qualitative focus (John 1:1c). Watch νυνί front-positioning for pivots (Rom 3:21). Notice emphatic pronouns (ἐγώ, ὑμεῖς) and left-dislocations (e.g., περὶ δὲ headings). Translate so that the prominence felt by a Greek hearer is not flattened in English (Runge, 2010; Wallace, 1996).

6. Prepositions and Case Functions (Drawing the Theological Diagram)

Prepositions are not throwaway glosses; they map relationships. The triad ἐν/δι’/εἰς in Col 1:16–20 diagrams Christ’s relation to all things: sphere/agency/goal. In Romans 6, εἰς/σύν frame participatory union with Christ. In doxologies, ἐξ/δι’/εἰς compress origin/means/aim (Rom 11:36). Treat case uses with precision: genitive for relation/source, dative for sphere/instrument, accusative for goal/extent (Wallace, 1996; BDF §§192–201).

7. Apposition, Equatives, and Intertext (Fixing or Guarding Sense)

When the author interprets a symbol, he often uses equatives (X εἰσιν Y) and apposition; when he guards symbolic distance, he uses ὡς/ὅμοιος. Your exegesis must follow the line the Greek draws (Rev 1:20 versus 1:14–16; Aune, 1997; Beale, 1999). Intertext arises as lexical echoes and framed quotations—cite LXX Greek where possible to show the resonance (Moyise, 2001).

II. Translation in Review: Accuracy with Texture

A sound translation is not a word-for-word swap; it is a construed mapping of Greek syntax, aspect, and discourse cues into idiomatic English that preserves meaning and prominence.

1. Establish the text. Note significant variants where they affect exegesis (e.g., μονογενὴς θεός/υἱός, John 1:18; Metzger, 1994). Make a brief decision, record why, and move on.

2. Constrain by syntax. Keep ὡς/ὅμοιος as “as/like,” not as “is.” Keep ἵνα as purpose/result (“so that/that”) unless context shows ecbatic force. Translate γάρ as “for” or embed its grounding force in English.

3. Respect aspectual profile. You need not woodenly render every aorist with a simple past, but do not homogenize a deliberate perfect (it has been written) into a bland past (it was written). When the perfect is theology, say so in a note.

4. Carry prominence. Find ways to mark fronted focus (sometimes with italics, sometimes by English fronting, sometimes by rhythmic emphasis in oral reading). Let polysyndeton feel slow and solemn; let asyndeton hit hard.

5. Document your choices. An advanced translation includes marginal notes keyed to the Greek: “ὑπάρχων = concessive/manner participle; ἁρπαγμός = ‘exploitable advantage’” (Martin, 1997; Silva, 2005).

III. Exegesis in Review: A Capstone Workflow

Step 1: Stichograph and Tag. Place each independent clause on a line; indent subordinates. Tag connectives (γάρ ground, οὖν inference, δέ step, ἀλλά contrast, ἵνα purpose).

Step 2: Parse Prominent Forms. Verbs, participles, infinitives; mark tense-form, mood, voice; assign participial function. Mark prepositions and label semantic role (sphere, agency, goal).

Step 3: Track Participants and Themes. Articles and demonstratives reintroduce actors; pronoun shifts (ἡμεῖς/ὑμεῖς) often mark rhetorical pivots (Eph 1:12–13). Note lexical cohesion and inclusio.

Step 4: Map Information Structure. Identify topic and focus; note fronted constituents; mark emphatic pronouns.

Step 5: Integrate Lexicon and Intertext. Do targeted BDAG checks for key lexemes; identify LXX echoes with exact Greek where possible (e.g., Isa 45:23 in Phil 2:10–11).

Step 6: Synthesize. Write a 10-sentence paragraph that tells the flow in Greek terms and states the theological payoff that is warranted by the grammar.

Step 7: Preach/Teach Readiness. Produce a one-page “reader’s guide” with cola, cues, and two or three crisp claims tethered to the language you have marked.

This workflow is simple enough to memorize and strong enough to bear doctoral research.

IV. Guided Capstone Mini-Commentaries

The following brief commentaries model the full workflow while highlighting the syntactic levers that make each passage speak.

A. John 1:1–5 — Being and Becoming

Stichography and Tagging. Three balanced cola open with ἦν (imperfect: durative existence); πρὸς (relational towardness) and qualitative θεός fronted for focus (θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος). The next cola shift to ἐγένετο (aorist) for creation events and φαίνει (present) for ongoing shining; κατέλαβεν οὐ registers failed opposition.

Prominent Forms and Information Structure. Word order marks θεός as qualitative predicate. Πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο assigns agency; the double negative in v. 3 is emphatic. The present φαίνει (v. 5) keeps the theological claim current.

Lexicon and Intertext. Echoes of Gen 1 (ἐν ἀρχῇ) and Prov 8 (Wisdom) are woven into Johannine diction. BDAG will confirm πρὸς as more than “with,” carrying personal with-ness (Keener, 2003).

Synthesis. The imperfects confess the Word’s eternal divine identity; the aorist ἐγένετο confesses creation through him; the present φαίνει confesses ongoing revelation resisted but not defeated. Your translation must preserve qualitative θεός and the aspectual contrast (Wallace, 1996; Porter, 1992).

B. Philippians 2:6–11 — Kenosis by Addition, Exaltation to Kyrios

Stichography and Tagging. Descent strophe (vv. 6–8) built from participial chain (ὑπάρχων… λαβών… γενόμενος… εὑρεθείς); mainline aorists ἡγήσατο/ἐκένωσεν/ἐταπείνωσεν. Ascent strophe (vv. 9–11) hinges on marked inferential διό; aorists ὑπερύψωσεν/ἐχαρίσατο carry divine action; ἵνα introduces the telic homage.

Prominent Forms and Information Structure. ἁρπαγμός here = “a thing to be exploited”; μορφή language balances μορφῇ θεοῦ/μορφὴν δούλου. ἐν ὀνόματι marks the sphere/instrument of homage; εἰς δόξαν names the doxological goal.

Intertext. Isa 45:23 (LXX) supplies the every-knee, every-tongue language now addressed to Jesus as Κύριος—an inclusion of Jesus in the divine identity (Bauckham, 2008).

Synthesis. The grammar itself preaches: kenosis occurs by taking; exaltation universalizes homage; doxology returns to the Father. Preserve ὡς where present and keep the participles as means/manner, not coordinate events (Martin, 1997; Silva, 2005).

C. Romans 3:21–26 — Claim, Grounds, Means, Purpose

Stichography and Tagging. νυνὶ δὲ marks a hinge; γάρ in v. 23 grounds the universality; διὰ/ἐν/εἰς phrases specify mechanism and scope; ἵνα (vv. 25–26) articulates divine telos.

Prominent Forms. πεφανέρωται (perfect) presents the righteousness of God as now manifested; προέθετο (God “publicly set forth”) is aorist; ἱλαστήριον framed by διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν τῷ αἵματι; do not sever διὰ from πίστεως.

Intertext. Echoes of sacrificial language (Lev 16 LXX); προέθετο may allude to public placarding (Gal 3:1 imagery).

Synthesis. Paul states the thesis (righteousness apart from law), grounds it (all sinned), specifies means (redemption in Christ Jesus), and declares purpose (God’s righteous character vindicated as just and justifier). Translate to preserve the argument spine (Runge, 2010; Moo, 2018).

D. Mark 2:1–12 — Story with Argument at the Peak

Story Spine. Setting (2:1–2), complication (blocked access), development (roof removal), crisis (charge of blasphemy, v. 7), resolution (healing), evaluation (amazement, v. 12).

Cohesion and Prominence. Mainline in aorists (ἦλθον… ἀπεστέγασαν… χαλῶσιν with historical present), background participles for inner reasoning (διαλογιζόμενοι). Peak marked by rhetorical question and ἵνα δὲ εἰδῆτε—Jesus supplies a purpose clause that functions as argument: the visible healing authenticates the invisible authority.

Synthesis. In narrative, syntax and scene carry theology: the purpose clause is the exegetical hinge; mainline aorists effect the proof; the evaluative tailpiece states the claim (“we never saw it thus”). Translate to maintain that logic (Levinsohn, 2000; Porter, 1992).

E. Revelation 5:9–13 — Worthiness Because Slain

Stichography and Tagging. New song structured by Ἄξιος… ὅτι (“worthy… because”): ἔσφαγης, ἠγόρασας, ἐποίησας (aorists) with universalization in the next scene via concentric praise and polysyndeton (“power and wealth and wisdom…”).

Prominent Forms and Information Structure. Perfect ἑστηκὸς with perfect passive ἐσφαγμένον (5:6) underwrites the hymn: the Lamb stands as slaughtered. Prepositions do theology: people purchased ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους; a kingdom and priests τῷ Θεῷ.

Intertext. Exodus priestly language (Exod 19:6 LXX), Zecharian lampstand imagery in the chapter’s frame, and Isaianic doxology patterns.

Synthesis. The hymn’s logic is “worthiness because slaughter.” The Greek in both forms and lists carries the claim, which you must preserve by keeping ὅτι causal and letting polysyndeton breathe (Beale, 1999; Bauckham, 1993).

V. Intensive Practice: The Capstone Drill

Work through the following sequence on one fresh paragraph of your choice (e.g., Ephesians 2:11–22 or Hebrews 4:14–16) and then repeat on a narrative (e.g., Luke 7:1–10). Do not skip any stage.

A. Prepare the Text. Print the Greek, triple-space, leave wide margins. Note any major textual variants and state your working choice (Metzger, 1994).

B. Stichograph. One independent clause per line; indent subordinates. Mark cola in doxology or hymn if present.

C. Tag Connectives and Clause Relations. Write “ground,” “step,” “inference,” “purpose,” “result,” “contrast” in the margin.

D. Parse Prominent Forms. Verbs; participles with function; infinitives with complements; prepositions with semantic labels.

E. Track Cohesion. Articles for reintroduction; demonstratives for prominence; lexical repetition; inclusio; hook words.

F. Map Information Structure. Identify any fronted or accented elements; note topic continuity and focus shifts.

G. Translate. Produce a first pass, then a second pass that improves prominence and cadence.

H. Synthesize. Write ten sentences that tell the flow and the theological payoff, each sentence anchored to a marked Greek feature.

I. Teach. Draft a one-page handout with your stichography and two or three big ideas phrased for the classroom or pulpit.

If you practice this drill a dozen times across genres, you will carry a muscle memory of sound exegesis into research and ministry.

VI. Common Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them

1. Flattening connectives. Translating γάρ as a vague “for” without seeing its ground function will fracture Pauline logic. Always ask, “What is γάρ grounding?” (Runge, 2010).

2. Ignoring participial function. Treating every participle as temporal when it plainly expresses means (Phil 2:7; Col 1:20 εἰρηνοποιήσας) will invert the argument.

3. Perfect amnesia. Reducing perfects to past tense erases state theology (Col 1:17; Rev 5:6). Let perfects stand.

4. Symbol collapse. Replacing ὡς with “is” in apocalyptic confuses symbol and referent (Aune, 1997). Keep ὡς as like/as.

5. Word-for-word loyalty over discourse. A literal gloss that ignores topic/focus and peak will mislead readers. Translate to carry force, not just words (Levinsohn, 2000).

6. Intertext vagueness. Alluding to the OT without checking LXX vocabulary risks speculative echoes. Cite the Greek where possible (Moyise, 2001).

Suggested Assignments (graded)

1) Capstone Portfolio (15–20 pages total).
Select one epistolary paragraph (e.g., Rom 5:1–11; Gal 5:13–26; Eph 2:11–22) and one narrative (e.g., Mark 4:35–41; John 11:1–44). For each: include stichography; connective tagging with functions; full parsing of prominent forms; information-structure notes; lexical cohesion map; translation (with marginal notes defending five key choices); and a 1,200–1,500-word exegetical synthesis that states the theological payoff and its dependence on the Greek. Cite scholarship (Wallace, Porter, Runge, Levinsohn; one major commentary).

2) Syntax-to-Theology Essay (8–10 pages).
“Perfects that Preach”: Trace three perfect forms in your chosen passages (e.g., πεφανέρωται, συνέστηκεν, ἑστηκώς). Analyze aspect and discourse role; argue how each underwrites a theological claim. Engage Porter (1992), Wallace (1996).

3) Translation with Prominence (6–8 pages).
Translate John 1:1–18 or Col 1:15–20, then annotate how you carried topic/focus and polysyndeton/asyndeton into English. Justify three places where you chose idiomatic English over strict literalism to preserve discourse force (Runge, 2010; Keener, 2003; O’Brien, 1982).

4) Intertext Dossier (5–6 pages + table).
For either Phil 2:6–11 or Rev 5:9–13, build a table of OT/LXX echoes with exact Greek and a paragraph on each echo’s function. Conclude with a 500-word reflection on how intertext controlled your exegesis (Bauckham, 2008; Beale, 1999; Moyise, 2001).

5) Oral Defense (10 minutes, recorded).
Present your stichography and argument/story spine for one passage. Name each connective’s function, each participle’s role, and your intertext claims. Submit a one-page handout for classmates.

Conclusion: Stability for Reading, Freedom for Worship

A comprehensive review is not a test of memory; it is the gift of stability—knowing what to do next, every time you open the Greek New Testament. When you feel the aorist carry the line, when you see γάρ supply its ground, when you let ἵνα aim the paragraph, when you hear a participle explain how, when you mark a perfect as theological state, when you refuse to flatten ὡς into is, you are honoring the way the Spirit inspired these texts. The result is sturdy translation and credible exegesis—explanations you can defend and applications you can teach. And because form and meaning in Scripture converge toward doxology, disciplined reading will often end where Romans 11 ends: with “To him be the glory forever.” Let the grammar carry the glory. Keep the workflow simple, the notes honest, the intertexts real, and the worship informed. That is the maturity this course aimed to build, and the competence you now carry into research, teaching, and ministry.

References (APA)

Aune, D. E. (1997). Revelation 1–5 (WBC 52A). Word Books.

Bauckham, R. (2008). Jesus and the God of Israel: God crucified and other studies on the New Testament’s Christology of divine identity. Eerdmans.

Bauer, W., Danker, F. W., Arndt, W. F., & Gingrich, F. W. (2000). A Greek–English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed.). University of Chicago Press. [= BDAG]

Beale, G. K. (1999). The book of Revelation (NIGTC). Eerdmans.

Blass, F., Debrunner, A., & Funk, R. W. (1961). A Greek grammar of the New Testament and other early Christian literature. University of Chicago Press. [= BDF]

Keener, C. S. (2003). The Gospel of John: A commentary (Vols. 1–2). Hendrickson.

Levinsohn, S. H. (2000). Discourse features of New Testament Greek (2nd ed.). SIL International.

Martin, R. P. (1997). A hymn of Christ: Philippians 2:5–11 in recent interpretation and in the setting of early Christian worship (rev. ed.). IVP Academic.

Metzger, B. M. (1994). A textual commentary on the Greek New Testament (2nd ed.). United Bible Societies.

Moo, D. J. (2008). The letters to the Colossians and to Philemon (Pillar). Eerdmans.

O’Brien, P. T. (1982). Colossians, Philemon (WBC 44). Word Books.

Porter, S. E. (1992). Idioms of the Greek New Testament (2nd ed.). Sheffield Academic Press.

Runge, S. E. (2010). Discourse grammar of the Greek New Testament: A practical introduction for teaching and exegesis. Lexham.

Silva, M. (2005). Philippians (2nd ed., BECNT). Baker Academic.

Stowers, S. K. (1981). The diatribe and Paul’s letter to the Romans. Scholars Press.

Wallace, D. B. (1996). Greek grammar beyond the basics: An exegetical syntax of the New Testament. Zondervan.