Thanks!
Interesting writeup. But it doesn't look like it supports what you've said:
On the other hand, hina is always followed by subjunctive verbs,
I'm going to leave it to you to read your sources more precisely. Both resources you've supplied at my request do not agree with you.
A few things I noticed from the reference to Thayer's Greek Lexicon at your linked resource (BTW, Thayer's is one of 10 Greek Lexicons I use routinely in addition to some other references):
1. properly, of the purpose or end;
a.
followed by the optative; only twice, and then preceded by the present of a verb of praying or beseeching, where the wish (optatio) expressed by the prayer gave occasion for the use of the optative:
Ephesians 1:17 but WH marginal reading subjunctive;
Ephesians 3:16 R G; cf. Winers Grammar, 290 (273); Buttmann, 233 (201); and yet in both instances the relic force of the particle is so weakened that it denotes the substance rather than the end of the prayer; see 2 below.
d. By a solecism frequently in the ecclesiastical and Byzantine writings.
ἵνα is joined with the indicative present:
1 Corinthians 4:6 (φυσιοῦσθε);
Galatians 4:17 (ζηλοῦτε); (cf. Test xii. Patr., test. Gad § 7; the Epistle of Barnabas 6, 5 [ET]; 7, 11 [ET]; Ignatius ad Eph. 4, 2 [ET]; ad Trall. 8, 2 [ET], and other examples in Winers and Alexander Buttmann (1873) as below; but see Hort in WH's Appendix, p. 167{a}, cf., pp. 169^b, 171f); but the indicative is very doubtful in the following passages: (
John 4:15 Tr text);
John 5:20 (Tdf. θαυμάζετε);
John 17:3 T Tr text;
Galatians 6:12 T L marginal reading; (
1 Thessalonians 4:13 L marginal reading);
Titus 2:4 T Tr L marginal reading;
2 Peter 1:10 L; (
1 John 5:20 T Tr WH (cf. b. β. above));
Revelation 12:6 (T Tr τρέφουσιν); (
Revelation 13:17 WH marginal reading); cf. Winers Grammar, § 41 b. 1 c.; Buttmann, § 139, 39; Meyer on
1 Corinthians 4:6; Wieseler on
Galatians 4:17; (Sophocles as above). (In the earlier Greek writings ἵνα is joined with the indicative of the past tenses alone, 'to denote something which would have been, if something else had been done, but now has not come to pass' Hermann ad Vig. p. 847, cf. Klotz ad Dev. ii., 2, p. 630f; Kühner, § 553, 7 ii., 903; (Jelf, § 813; cf. Jebb in the Appendix to Vincent and Dickson's Modern Greek, § 79).)
So, hina is not always followed by a subjunctive. This is one of the problems when we make absolute statements with words like "
always." I'd also say that I doubted you looked at every verse that uses hina before you made the "always" statement. I still don't think you have and I will tell you again that I haven't. Its your job to do the work to back up such statements you've made.
I'd also have you note:
2. In later Greek, and especially in Hellenistic writers,
the final force of the particle ἵνα is more or less weakened, so that it is frequently used where the earlier Greeks employed the infinitive, yet so that the leading and the dependent sentence have each its own subject. The first extant instance of this use occurs in the Amphictyonic decree in (pseudo-) Demosthenes, p. 279, 8 (i. e. de coron. § 155): πρεσβευσαι πρός Φίλιππον καί ἀξιουν ἵνα βοηθήσῃ (cf. Odyss. 3, 327 λίσσεσθαι... ἵνα νημερτες ἐνισπη (cf. 3, 19)), but it increased greatly in subsequent times; cf. Winers Grammar, § 44, 8; R. 237 (204); (Green 171f; Goodwin § 45 N. 5 b.; Jebb in the Appendix to Vincent and Dickson's Modern Greek, § 55).
Accordingly, ἵνα stands with the subjunctive in such a way that it denotes the purport (or object) rather than the purpose of the action expressed by the preceding verb. This occurs
d.
after substantives, to which it adds a more exact definition of the thing; after a substantive of time: χρόνον, ἵνα μετανοήσῃ,
Revelation 2:21; after ὥρα,
John 12:23;
John 13:1;
John 16:2,
32 (elsewhere ὅτε,
John 4:23;
John 5:25); in these examples the final force of the particle is still apparent; we also can say time that she should repent (cf. Winers Grammar, 389 (318); Buttmann, 240 (207)); but in other expressions this force has almost disappeared, as in ἐστιν συνήθεια ὑμῖν, ἵνα... ἀπολύσω,
John 18:39; after μισθός,
1 Corinthians 9:18.
I need to get my eyes off of the screen for awhile today. I'd ask you to read your resources more closely.
IMO the thesis you're proposing is progressively weakening.
