The Subjunctive in Purpose and Result Clauses — Form, Function, and Exegesis

Why this lesson matters

Welcome to your first deep dive into the subjunctive mood. In real New Testament prose, the subjunctive is one of the primary ways authors signal intention and outcome. If you can see quickly whether a clause expresses purpose (“in order that…”) or result (“so that…with the result that…”), your exegesis becomes sharper and your translations become far more natural.

This chapter gives you everything you need to (1) recognize the subjunctive on sight, (2) distinguish ἵνα purpose clauses from ὥστε result clauses (including the crucial infinitive vs. indicative distinction with ὥστε), (3) read aspect-sensitively, and (4) argue your exegetical decisions with evidence. We’ll practice with guided exegesis labs and then turn you loose with intensive drills.

As always, whenever I list something, keep reading—I will explain why it works that way, how to detect it when your eyes hit the line, and what it means theologically for the author’s argument (Wallace, 1996; Porter, 1992; Fanning, 1990; Runge, 2010).

Orientation: what the subjunctive is (and isn’t)

The subjunctive mood presents an action as projected, potential, willed, aimed at, or expected rather than as a simple statement of reality. In the indicative, the writer tells you what is; in the subjunctive, the writer guides you toward what should or may be—especially in purpose and result constructions.

• Morphology (forms to spot): Subjunctives use lengthened connecting vowels (ω/η) with primary endings.

  • λύω (1 sg. pres. act. subj.), λύῃς, λύῃ, λύωμεν, λύητε, λύωσι(ν).

  • Aorist act. subj.: λύσω, λύσῃς, λύσῃ, λύσωμεν, λύσητε, λύσωσι(ν).

  • Aorist pass. subj.: λυθῶ, λυθῇς, λυθῇ, λυθῶμεν, λυθῆτε, λυθῶσι(ν).

  • Present/passive-middle: same lengthened vowel pattern with the appropriate stem/endings.

Aspect reminder. Outside the indicative, aspect is primary (Porter, 1992; Fanning, 1990).

• Present subjunctive = imperfective viewpoint (process, ongoing).

• Aorist subjunctive = perfective viewpoint (whole event as a unit).
  The difference does not mean “present time” vs. “past time.” It’s how the action is conceived relative to the main verb and discourse context.

Negation: The subjunctive takes μή, not οὐ. Purpose clauses often appear as ἵνα μή… (“in order that not…,” i.e., to avoid an outcome). Result with infinitives often has μή before the infinitive as well.

Part I — The Subjunctive in Purpose Clauses (ἵνα + Subjunctive)

1) The core construction

The New Testament’s default way to express purpose (“in order that…”) is ἵνα + subjunctive. This is true across authors, but John especially loves ἵνα to communicate authorial intent and divine purpose.

• Form: ἵνα + subjunctive (present or aorist).

• Function: expresses aim, design, intention.

• Negation: ἵνα μή + subjunctive = “in order that not …” (to prevent).

• Aspect choice:

  • Present subjunctive → the purpose is conceived as ongoing/process (“so that they may be continually…”)

  • Aorist subjunctive → the purpose is conceived as a single, whole achievement (“so that they may [decisively] do…”).
    Keep the nuance; don’t overread it. Context decides whether it’s meaningful or stylistic (Wallace, 1996; Porter, 1992).

2) Why Greek often prefers ἵνα over an English “to + verb”

English uses infinitives for purpose (“He came to save”). Greek can do that, especially in Luke–Acts with articular infinitives (e.g., τοῦ σῶσαι), but the most common NT signal of purpose is ἵνα + subjunctive, which foregrounds the clause as a distinct, live aim in the discourse (Runge, 2010). When John tells you, “These things are written ἵνα…,” he isn’t merely stating a goal; he’s directing your reading toward the intended outcome.

3) Classic NT examples (with slow, guided reading)

A. John 20:31 — Authorial purpose of the Gospel

ταῦτα δὲ γέγραπται ἵνα πιστεύ[σ]ητε ὅτι Ἰησοῦς ἐστιν ὁ Χριστός, ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ, καὶ ἵνα πιστεύοντες ζωὴν ἔχητε ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ.

Walkthrough:

• Two ἵνα clauses. First: ἵνα πιστεύσητε (aor. act. subj.) → decisive belief as goal.

• Second: ἵνα πιστεύοντες ζωὴν ἔχητε → present participle (ongoing believing) + present subjunctive (“you may have life”).

• Exegesis: John aims at initial faith and continuing life-in-faith. Aspect shepherds the rhetoric: aorist for the decisive act; present for the ongoing life (Wallace, 1996, pp. 472–476; Runge, 2010).

B. Mark 3:14 — Purpose of appointing the Twelve

καὶ ἐποίησεν δώδεκα ἵνα ὦσιν μετ’ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἵνα ἀποστέλλῃ αὐτούς κηρύσσειν…

Walkthrough:

• Double ἵνα—two coordinated goals: presence with Jesus (be with) and mission (be sent to preach).

• ἀποστέλλῃ (pres. subj.) carries an ongoing sending profile: mission is not one-off but continual.

• Exegesis: Mark articulates formation-in-presence and participation-in-mission as co-purposes.

C. Ephesians 2:8–10 — Soteriology and design

… κτισθέντες ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ ἐπὶ ἔργοις ἀγαθοῖς οἷς προητοίμασεν ὁ θεός ἵνα ἐν αὐτοῖς περιπατήσωμεν.

Walkthrough:

• ἵνα περιπατήσωμεν (aor. subj.) → divine design: a decisive “walk” envisioned corporately.

• Context shows a lifetime walk, but Paul conceptualizes it as a purposeful outcome of new creation.

• Exegesis: Grammar shows teleology: salvation toward embodied obedience (cf. Wallace, 1996).

D. 1 John 2:1 — Preventive purpose (negative)

ταῦτα γράφω ὑμῖν ἵνα μὴ ἁμάρτητε· καὶ ἐάν τις ἁμάρτῃ…

Walkthrough:

• ἵνα μὴ ἁμάρτητε (aor. subj.) expresses a preventive purpose: “I write so that you do not (at all) sin.”

• The aorist here typically encodes “no sinful event at all” as the envisioned aim.

• Exegesis: The next clause (ἐάν + subj.) handles contingency—pastoral balance between aim and reality.

4) Comparing ἵνα purpose with articular infinitive purpose

Luke–Acts often uses τοῦ + infinitive (genitive articular infinitive) for purpose where John might use ἵνα.

• Luke 19:10: ἦλθεν ζητῆσαι καὶ σῶσαι (bare infinitives after a verb of motion)—also purpose.

• Luke 5:17 (pattern): ἐγένετο … καθῆσθαι… (infinitive of circumstance/purpose).

• Luke 4:43: ὅτι ἐπ’ τοῦτο ἀπεστάλην—(ἵνα is not used here, but the idea of purpose is expressed with a demonstrative + verb).

Takeaway: Expect ἵνα to dominate in John/Paul for purpose; expect more articular infinitive purpose markers in Luke–Acts (BDF §389–§403; Wallace, 1996). Your job is to recognize both at reading speed.

Part II — The Subjunctive in Result Clauses (ὥστε + Infinitive / Indicative)

Where ἵνα + subjunctive signals aim, ὥστε clauses signal outcome. Greek has a beautiful distinction here:

• **ὥστε + infinitive → natural tendency/general result (expected/typical consequence).

• **ὥστε + indicative → actual, realized result (it happened).

You must learn to feel this difference; it will refine your exegesis (Wallace, 1996, pp. 673–679).

1) ὥστε + Infinitive — result viewed as tendency or intended/expected outcome

• Often translated “so that [someone would/could …]” or “with the result that [the tendency was…].”

• Common with degree expressions: οὕτως, τοσοῦτος, θεραπεύειν πολλούς … ὥστε…

Examples:

A. 1 Thessalonians 1:7

… ὥστε γενέσθαι ὑμᾶς τύπον πᾶσιν…

Walkthrough:

• ὥστε + infinitive (γενέσθαι) → frames the outcome as resulting status/role; many translate as actual result, but the infinitive keeps it in the resultant tendency/category.

• Exegesis: Paul praises their exemplary status as the outcome of transformed reception (hearers became models).

B. Matthew 8:24 (pattern with degree)

… σεισμὸς μέγας ἐγένετο ἐν τῇ θαλάσσῃ, ὥστε τὸ πλοῖον καλύπτεσθαι ὑπὸ τῶν κυμάτων.

Walkthrough:

• ὥστε + infinitive → “so that the boat was being covered” (expected/resultant effect of the great storm).

• Present infinitive καλύπτεσθαι underscores the ongoing covering as the typical effect of such a storm.

• Exegesis: The grammar makes you feel the force of the storm as a state-creating event.

C. Mark 1:45

… ὥστε μηκέτι δύνασθαι αὐτὸν φανερῶς εἰς πόλιν εἰσελθεῖν…

Walkthrough:

• ὥστε + infinitive(s) → the consequence of the man’s report is that Jesus was no longer able (tendency/functional result) to enter towns openly.

• μή negates the infinitive.

• Exegesis: The story’s dynamic effect is encoded grammatically as a resulting restriction.

2) ὥστε + Indicative — result asserted as actual fact

• Often translated “so that [and therefore X actually happened].”

• NT examples clearly marking actuality help you see the difference.

A. Galatians 2:13

καὶ συνυπεκρίθησαν αὐτῷ καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ Ἰουδαῖοι, ὥστε καὶ Βαρναβᾶς συναπήχθη αὐτῶν τῇ ὑποκρίσει.

Walkthrough:

• ὥστε + indicative (συναπήχθη) → actual result: “so that even Barnabas was carried away…”

• Exegesis: Paul hammers home the real damage of hypocrisy; the grammar leaves no room for “mere tendency.”

B. Mark 2:2

… ὥστε μηκέτι χωρεῖν μηδὲ τὰ πρὸς τὴν θύραν…

This is ὥστε + infinitive, but many contexts in Mark flip between actual crowding and its functional effect (no room). When ὥστε + indicative occurs, translate as “so that in fact…” and preach the reality.

Rule of thumb:

• ὥστε + infinitive: the writer paints the kind of effect or intended/expected outcome.

• ὥστε + indicative: the writer points to what actually happened (Wallace, 1996).

Purpose vs. Result: a decision flow you can trust

When you meet a clause introduced by a marker, decide with this short sequence:

1. Identify the marker: Is it ἵνα (purpose), ὥστε (result), or articular infinitive with a preposition (e.g., εἰς τό, τοῦ, πρὸ τοῦ, etc.)?

2. Check the verb form after the marker: subjunctive? infinitive? indicative?

3. Ask the semantic question: Is the author aiming forward (purpose) or looking back to an outcome (result)?

4. Note aspect: present vs. aorist in the subjunctive; present/aorist infinitive after ὥστε; this can soften/strengthen your translation nuance.

5. Negation: Is there μή? With ἵνα μή, think “preventive purpose.” With ὥστε μή + infinitive, think “prevented result/tendency.”

6. Translate in English with the correct logic:

   • ἵνα + subj. → “in order that / so that [subjunctive idea]”

   • ὥστε + inf. → “so that / with the result that [tendency/functional effect]”

   • ὥστε + ind. → “so that [and in fact] [it happened]”

This simple path will keep you from confusing aim with outcome.

Guided exegesis labs

Lab 1 — John 3:16–21 (Johannine teleology: why the Son was given)

Text (selected):
οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον, ὥστε τὸν υἱὸν τὸν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν, ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων μὴ ἀπόληται ἀλλ’ ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον· … τοῦτο δέ ἐστιν ἡ κρίσις ὅτι τὸ φῶς ἐλήλυθεν εἰς τὸν κόσμον, καὶ ἠγάπησαν οἱ ἄνθρωποι μᾶλλον τὸ σκότος…

Steps:

1. ὥστε ἔδωκεν (here ὥστε + indicative): John asserts the actual result of God’s love—He gave the Son.

2. ἵνα μὴ ἀπόληται … ἀλλ’ ἔχῃ: purpose of the giving, double aim (negative/positive). Both verbs are subjunctive (aorist ἀπόληται for the event of perishing; present ἔχῃ for ongoing life).

3. ὁ πιστεύων: substantival present participle—identity category for the target group.
   Exegetical payoff: John distinguishes God’s act (realized) from its aim (belief → life). The aspect pattern matches theology: no perishing event, continuing life for the believing ones.

Lab 2 — Mark 5:43 (Preventive purpose)

Text:
καὶ διεστείλατο αὐτοῖς πολλὰ ἵνα μηδεὶς γνοῖ τοῦτο…

Steps:

1. ἵνα μηδείς γνοῖ (aor. subj. of γινώσκω) = preventive purpose.

2. Why aorist? Think of knowing as a single event to be prevented (“that no one should come to know this [at all]”).
   Exegetical payoff: Jesus’ command aims at secrecy; Mark’s motif of the Messianic Secret is grammatically encoded in purpose clauses.

Lab 3 — Galatians 2:13 (Actual result with ὥστε + indicative)

Text:
… ὥστε καὶ Βαρναβᾶς συναπήχθη αὐτῶν τῇ ὑποκρίσει.

Steps:

1. ὥστε + indicative → realized result. Barnabas was carried away—it happened.

2. Tie it to Paul’s rhetoric: the gravity of hypocrisy is emphasized not as potential but as actual communal distortion.
   Exegetical payoff: Grammar supports Paul’s rebuke; the apostolic example itself was compromised.

Lab 4 — Romans 15:13 (Purpose or result of the blessing?)

Text:
ὁ δὲ θεὸς τῆς ἐλπίδος πληρώσαι ὑμᾶς πάσης χαρᾶς καὶ εἰρήνης ἐν τῷ πιστεύειν, εἰς τὸ περισσεύειν ὑμᾶς ἐν τῇ ἐλπίδι ἐν δυνάμει πνεύματος ἁγίου.

Steps:

1. εἰς τὸ + infinitive → purpose (or intended result): “in order that you overflow in hope.”

2. Compare with ἵνα purpose: same logic, different marker.
   Exegetical payoff: Paul prays toward a telos—overflowing hope empowered by the Spirit.

Lab 5 — Matthew 13:2 (Result nuance with crowding)

Text:
καὶ συνήχθησαν πρὸς αὐτὸν ὄχλοι πολλοί, ὥστε αὐτὸν εἰς πλοῖον ἐμβάντα καθῆσθαι…

Steps:

1. ὥστε introduces the consequence of the great crowds. Manuscripts reflect ὥστε εἰς πλοῖον ἐμβάντα (participial/infinitival structure by implication) → the functional outcome is that Jesus gets into a boat and sits.

2. Many English translations render as actual result; watch the form carefully where your text prints infinitive or indicative; translate accordingly.
   Exegetical payoff: The grammar dramatizes how the crowd pressure determined Jesus’ teaching posture.

Practice: you try it (with prompts)

For each, (1) identify the marker and form; (2) classify as purpose or result; (3) comment on aspect; (4) translate idiomatically; (5) write one sentence on theological/exegetical force.

1. John 17:21 — ἵνα πάντες ἓν ὦσιν· καθὼς σύ, πάτερ, ἐν ἐμοὶ κἀγὼ ἐν σοί…
   Prompt: ἵνα + present subjunctive; enduring unity; why present?

2. Ephesians 4:14 — ἵνα μηκέτι ὦμεν νήπιοι, κλυδωνιζόμενοι…
   Prompt: preventive communal aim; link to maturity language that follows.

3. Mark 2:12 — … ὥστε πάντας ἐξίστασθαι…
   Prompt: ὥστε + infinitive; tendency/functional effect? render naturally.

4. Galatians 3:14 — ἵνα εἰς τὰ ἔθνη ἡ εὐλογία τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ γένηται ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ…
   Prompt: salvation-historical aim; aorist subjunctive.

5. 1 Thessalonians 3:10 — … δεόμενοι νυκτὸς καὶ ἡμέρας εἰς τὸ ἰδεῖν ὑμῶν τὸ πρόσωπον…
   Prompt: articular infinitive of purpose; why aorist infinitive (ἰδεῖν)?

6. Mark 9:30–31 — οὐκ ἤθελεν ἵνα τις γνοῖ· ἐδίδασκεν γὰρ τοὺς μαθητὰς…
   Prompt: secrecy as preventive purpose; tie to passion predictions.

7. 2 Cor 12:7 — ἐδόθη μοι σκόλοψ τῇ σαρκί… ἵνα μὴ ὑπεραίρωμαι.
   Prompt: pastoral/theological function; present subjunctive with μή—ongoing prevention.

Assigned readings and translations (this week)

Translate, analyze, and annotate every ἵνα and ὥστε clause:

1. John 20:30–31; John 17:20–23 (Johannine ἵνα theology of belief and unity).

2. Mark 1:38–45; 2:1–12 (purpose of itinerant mission; result nuances in crowd scenes).

3. Ephesians 1:3–14; 2:8–10; 4:11–16 (teleology of salvation and maturity).

4. Galatians 2:11–16; 3:10–14 (actual result vs. intended aim in argument).

5. 1 Thessalonians 1:6–10; 3:9–13 (ὥστε with infinitive; purpose in prayer).

Deliverable: A clause log with columns
Ref | Greek clause | Marker (ἵνα/ὥστε/εἰς τό/τοῦ) | Verb form | Purpose/Result | Aspect note | Negation | Translation | Exegetical note (2–3 sentences).

Suggested assignments (graded)

1. Subjunctive parsing drill (40 items).
   Gather 40 subjunctive forms from John and Paul (include both present and aorist, and at least five aorist passive). For each: lemma; tense-form; person/number; clausal function (purpose/result/other); translation.
   Goal: instant recognition + correct function classification (Wallace, 1996).

2. Purpose vs. result portfolio (24 clauses).
   Select 12 ἵνα clauses and 12 ὥστε clauses (half with infinitives, half with indicatives). For each, argue why it is purpose or result, and if ὥστε, why infinitive (tendency) or indicative (actual).
   Goal: build reflexes for the aim/outcome distinction (BDF; Wallace, 1996; Runge, 2010).

3. Mini-commentary (6–8 pages): John 20:30–31 in context.
   Track every ἵνα in John 20 and the Gospel’s prologue. Defend the aspectual and rhetorical force of πιστεύσητε vs. ἔχητε in 20:31. Show how John uses grammar to shape reader response (Porter, 1992; Runge, 2010).

4. Sermon/teaching outline from grammar (2 pages).
   Choose Eph 2:8–10 or Gal 3:13–14. Build a teaching outline that relies on the grammar of ἵνα/εἰς τό and the aspect of the verbs to articulate doctrinal teleology.
   Goal: turn grammatical insight into theological clarity.

Study tips you will actually use

• Mark the markers. When reading, circle ἵνα and ὥστε (and εἰς τό/τοῦ). Your eye should snap to them.

• Write the logic above the line. Over ἵνα write “aim.” Over ὥστε write “outcome.” Over εἰς τό/τοῦ write “purpose (inf.).”

• Note aspect shorthand. Above each subjunctive write IMP (present) or PERF (aorist). Above each ὥστε-infinitive write tend; above ὥστε-indicative write actual.

• Translate last. Decide function first; then craft English. This prevents wooden renderings.

• Defend your call. In notes, jot one reason for your label (context cue, degree expression, verb semantics, discourse flow). That habit makes you exam-ready.

Conclusion — What you should now be able to do

By the end of this lesson, you should be able to:

1. Parse subjunctives and recognize their aspect (present vs. aorist) at sight.

2. Distinguish ἵνα purpose from ὥστε result, and within result, infinitive (tendency) vs. indicative (actual).

3. Read Johannine and Pauline purpose/result logic with sensitivity to negation (μή), aspect, and authorial strategy.

4. Explain how these grammatical decisions shape theology (e.g., belief and life in John; salvation’s telos in Paul; realized distortion in Gal 2).

When you can do these things briskly, your reading will stop feeling like code-breaking and start feeling like following the author’s argument in real time.

References (APA)

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

Fanning, B. M. (1990). Verbal aspect in New Testament Greek. Oxford University Press.

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

Robertson, A. T. (1934). A grammar of the Greek New Testament in the light of historical research (4th ed.). Broadman.

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

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

Young, R. A. (1994). Intermediate New Testament Greek: A linguistic and exegetical approach. Broadman & Holman.

Decker, R. J. (2015). Reading Koine Greek: An introduction and integrated workbook. Baker Academic.

Campbell, C. R. (2008). Basics of verbal aspect in Biblical Greek. Zondervan.