Skip to main content

Full text of "A Greek grammar to the New Testament, and to the common or Hellenic diction of the later Greek ..."

See other formats


This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 

to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 

publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 
We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at |http: //books .google .com/I 










Printed by William Clowxs aud Suna. 

Stamfurd Street. 




&c. &c. &c., 







By the AUTHOR. 

April, 1841 



f There can be no doubt that the genuine sense of the writers 
I of the New Testament, as of any other ancient writer whom- 
soever, is more readily ascertained by due attention to the 
' principles of grammatical construction ; and many of those 
I dangerous errors, upon whi^h different Christian sects have 
L built the peculiarities of their respective creeds, tind an easy 
refutation in the same quarter. The want of some standard 
book of reference in this important braiich of sacred philology 
i therefore a constant source of perplexity, not only to the 
editor of the Greek Testament, who is not apt to regard the 
endless discussion of minute points of grammar as a legitimate 
portion of his labours, but to the university professor, tlie col- 
lege tutor, and the masters of pubhc schools ; and, in this 
country at least, no such work has hitherto appeared, to which 
the student can be satisfactorily directed. As far as classical 
■ Greek is concerned, almost all that can be wished or expected 
I has been performed in the laborious works of Buttmann and 
Matthi.*;; one of which, in the excellent translation of Boi- 
leau, (re-edited from the learned professor's last corrections by 
Dr. Shpf,) or the other in that of BSomfi^^ld, is in the hands of 
I every scholar. It formed no part of their object, however, to 
illustrate the Greek language, except in its state of purity and 
vigour ; and their citations are taken exclusively from those 
writers who preceded the times of Alexander the Great, 
MattkitB had once indeed entertained the design of making 
I his Grammar complete, by the collation of an unbroken series 
L of examples from writers of every age, the earliest to the 
latest, of Grecian literature ; but the idea seems to have been 
abandoned: and the Complete Greek Grammar of BiUtmann, 
of which his death in 1830 unhappily interrupted the progress 


would not, even had it been brought to a conclusion, hai 
superseded the necesBity of a Grammar exclusively devo1 
to the peculiar dialect of the writers of the New Testament. 
It is but very recently, and only in Germauy, that tl 
grammar of the New Testament has been separately and sys- 
tematically investigated on correct philosophical principles, 
and with reference to the true constitution of the language. 
The first humble effort in this department of philological in- 
quiry was that of Solomon Glass, whose Philologia Sacra, 
published in 1643, contained two chapters on Grammatia 
Sacra, which are included in the first book of the new at' 
rangement by Dathe. His remarks are confined to Hebraistm 
only. In 1650, Gaspar Wi/ss published his DialectologijI 
Sacra; in qua quicquid per unicersum Aoci Fosdcris content- 
turn, in Apostolica et voce et phrasi, a communi GrtECorum Inf 
gud, eoqtie Grammatica anaiogid discrepat, methodo congrui 
disponitur, accurate definilur, el omnium sacri contextus exetib 
plorum induclione illustratvr. As a collection of exampleiB^ 
this work is very valuable. The peculiarities of the New Tei 
tament diction are arranged under seven heads, as belonging 
respectively to the Attic, Ionic, Doric, JEoUc, Bofotic, Poetic, 
and Htbroistic dialects; and, though betraying no very ex- 
tensive acquaintance with Greek, the several sections exhibit 
ample proofs that the language of the Apostles and Evange- 
lists contains something from all the ancient dialects, mixed 
up with much that was extraneous and new. A more accurate 
idea of what was required in a Grammar of the New Testa- 
ment seems to have been possessed by George Pasor, the 
author of a small Lexicon which has passed through several 
editions, who left behind him, at his death, a Grammar of 
siderable merit, which was edited by his son, Matthias Pasor, 
with additions and emendations of his own. The title is, G, 
Pas-oris Grammatica Grteca Sacra Aovi Testamenli, in tTe$- 
libroa dislribula a Jilio M. Pasor. Theol. Prof. 1655. This 
work, which is now very scarce, contains mucEi that belongs to 
Greek grammar in general ; but the syntax is copious and ac- 
curate, and there is an appendix, relating to the dialects of 

the New Testament, wliich is particularly valuable. From this 
period, until PA. 11. Haab published his Hebrew-Greek Gram- 
mar (Hebraisch-GTiecliische Grniamatik fur das N. T.) in 1815, 
no work expressly devoted to this subject appeared ; and the 
arbitrary manner in which this author has referred the common 
properties of all cultivated languages to a Hebrew origin ren- 
ders the utility of his work extremely questionable. 

In the mean time, however, the attention devoted by philo- 
logists to the structure of the Greek language had greatly in- 
creased the stock of grammatical knowledge ; and the labours 
of Fischer, Hermnnu, Matthite> Buttmanv, Lobeck, and Elmx- 
Icif, had entirely exploded the system of the older gramma- 
rians. Under these circumstances, Dr. George Benedict fViner, 
Professor of Theology at the University of Erlangen, in Ba- 
varia, published, in 18'22, his Grammatik des neutestamentU- 
chen Spraekidioms, ala nvhere Qrttitdlage der neiitestamentlicken 
Exegese bearbeitet; and the work has been greatly augmented, 
and altogether remodelled, in subsequent editions.^ Availing 
himself of the researches which have been so successfully insti- 
tuted, more especially by Siurz, P/aiick, Tittmann, and Lobeck, 
into the character and composition of the New Testament dic- 
tion, he has distinguished what is really Hebraism from that 
which belongs equally to the Greek or to all languages indif- 
ferently J and has shown that, although many of the tbrms and 
constructions may find a parallel in the most approved speci- 
mens of Attic elegance, still the true basis of the language, 
employed by the aacred writers, ia the popular dialect of con- 
quered Greece. A New Testament Greek Grammar, written 
in Latin, was published in 1829 by /. C. G. Ait ; but it con- 
B little, if any thing, wliich is not to be found in Winer, 
whose extensive, and, for the moat part, very accurate re- 
searches will form the necessary groundwork of all future in- 
quiries into this highly important branch of biblical inter- 
^L The different ingredients, which enter into the composition 

^H is: 


' The rererences in Ihis wock are to the fourth edition, pablished at Leipgic h 

of the New Testament diction, indicate three methods of ar- 
rangement in the treatment of its grammar. Either the Greek 
basis and Hebraistic peculiarities may be separately considered; 
— or those instances in which it so frequently agrees with the 
purest Attic models, and those which belong to the later 
speech, whether written or spoken, may be investigated apart; 
the Hebraisms being also thrown together by themselves ; — 
or the language may be regarded as a perfect whole, and exa- 
mined on the general principles of philosophical grammar. 
The inconveniences attending the two first of these methods 
will be apparent from the most cursory perusal of those trea- 
tises, in which either the same or different authors have eluci- 
dated the Greek idiom of ihe sacred penmen, and the Hebra- 
isms with which it abounds, under distinct heads. Not to 
speak of the contradictions, real or apparent, which continu- 
ally recur, there are so many forms of inflexion, which belong 
equally to two or more of the dialects of ancient Greece, as 
well as to the later speech, and so many syntactical expressions 
which may be referred either to a Greek or Hebrew origin, 
that innumerable repetitions arc unavoidable, and ambiguities 
continually arise. Hence the latter method is not only infi 
nitely preferable in itself, but is open to the adoption of some 
approved work, in which the grammatical rules of classical 
Greek have been eBtahlisheJ and illustrated, as (he foundation 
upon which it may rest. 

Such is the plan pursued in the present volume, which has 
been constructed with immediate reference to the Larger or 
Intermediate Grammar of Buttmann; a work which ia di- 
gested on the strictest principles of philosophical accuracy, and 
presents the utmost perspicuity of connected arrangement. 
By following the order of that work, section far section, with 
the exception of such as have no bearing upon the subject, the 
student is enabled to perceive at once in what points the seve- 
ral forms of inflexion and construction accord with, or vary 
from, those of the best writers. In the former case, the ex- 
amples from the New Testament are to be compared with those 
which Bultmann has adduced, to whicJL in some few instances 

one or two others are added ; and, in the latter, the New Tes- 
tament forms either stand alone, or are illustrated by corre- 
sponding examples from the later Greek, the LXX version of 
the Old Testament, Josephus, or the Christian Fathers. He- 
braisms, whether perfect or imperfect, are referred in either 
case to those passages in the Hebrew Scriptures in which the 
original expressions occur ; and, when it is doubtful to which 
language the idiom belongs, parallel constructions are given 
from both. It is obvious to remark, however, that, when the 
same mode of speaking is common both to the Greek and 
Hebrew, the sacred writers, from their national propensities, 
would be more likely to have derived it from the latter. 

With respect to the nature and use oithe prapasitive article, 
the theory of the late lamented Bishop Middleton has been 
adopted, in the firm and settled conviction of its truth. It 
was not proposed by its highly-gifted framer without that 
severe and impartial scrutiny, for which his deep critical acu- 
men and thoughtful turn of mind rendered him so peculiarly 
qualified; and though it has been frequently disputed, and a 
few impracticable examples have been brought against some of 
its canons, no definite objections have been urged against it as 
a whole, nor are the violations of its rules either so numerous 
or important as to invalidate, in the slightest degree, the 
soundness of the hypothesis. That it accounts for the inser- 
tion or omission of the article upon the same unvarying prin- 
ciple is at least a strong presumption in its favour; and a 
I mere comparison of the sound reasoning by which the doctrine 
I is supported, with the careless and un philosophical manner in 
' which this part of the subject ia treated even by Winer, will 
I show that it is not a few detached exceptions which will be 
I able, without a full discussion, to set it aside. Bishop Middle- 
ton's work is cited as one of Winer s authorities ; and it is 
I therefore curious, and even painful, to wade through his con- 
i fused mass of examples, which, without even an allusion to 
Mr. Skarpe's Canon, tend to its complete vindication. He 
Qs to have thought that the use of the article depends, in 
I some manner, upon the sameness or difference of the nvmher 

or gender of the nouna ; and the exceptions will be found to 
be almost as numerous as the proofs, inde|>endently of much 
carelessness and inaccuracy in the classification. Many of 
them even violate iiis own rules; whereas it will be found, on 
the other hand, that a large proportion of those citations, 
which militate against the Bishop's theory, are derived from 
the poets. 

It was only after mature deliberation that the Grammar of 
Buttmann was selected as the basis of the work, which indeed 
was originally designed as a supplement to that of Matt Aits ; 
but the consideration that the former is now more generally 
adopted in our schools and universities, that it is less volumi- 
nous and cxjjensive, and that a new and improved edition of 
it, in which the syntax is discussed and illustrated on a less 
meagre and contracted scale than formerly, was on the eve of 
publication, determined the question. At the same time a 
table of reference to the corresponding sections of Matthiae 
has been given, for the use of those students who give that 
work the preference. 

The present work was in a state of considerable forwardness, 
when a New Testament Greek Grammar, by Professor Stuart, 
ofAndover, in the United States, was reprinted in this country ; 
and, had it appeared to pre-occupy the same ground, the 
xindertaking would necessarily have been abandoned. To 
detract from the merits of a fellow-labourer in the same field 
would be little in accordance with the views of the author, even 
if such an expedient were necessary to justify the publication 
of his own book. SufBco it to observe, that the two volumes 
are designed for very different classes of students; and that 
a Grammar, intended as a supplement to those of Biitlmarm 
and Maithite, is required to be more copious in its illustrations, 
and more critical in its details, than one in which the New 
Testament peculiarities are only a somewhat more prominent. I 
feature than usual, and which is adapted solely or principally | 
to the use of schools. 

W. T. 


§ 1 . Of the Language of Palestine in the time of Christ. 

§ 2. Of the Common or Hellenic Dialect of the later Greek writers. 

§ 3. Interchange of Letters. 

§ 4. Moveable Final Letters. 

§ 5. Hiatus; Contraction; Crasis; Apostrophus, 

Of the Noun, 

§ 6. First Declension. 

§ 7. Second Declension. 

§ 8. Third Declension. 

§ 9. Anomalous Declension ; Meiaplasmusy &c. 

§ 10. Declension of Hebrew-Greek Proper Names. 

§ IL Defectives and I ndeclinables. 

§ 12. Adjectives. 

§ 13. Degrees of Comparison. 

§ 14. Numerals. 

§ 15. Pronouns. 

Of the Verb. 

§ 16. Augment and Reduplication. 

§ 17. Formation of the Tenses. 

§18. Verbal Adjectives. 

§ 1 9. Unusual Forms employed in the New Testament. 

Irregular Conjugation. 

§ 20. Verbs in pi. 

§ 2). "Irjpif 'ElpL 

§ 22. Anomaly of Signification ; Causatives and Immediatives. 


§ 23. List of Irregular Verbs. 
§ 24. Termination of Words. 


§ 25. Government of the Noun. 

§ 26. Apposition. 

§ 21 — 35. Article and Pronouns. 

§ 36. Neuter of the Adjective. 

§ 37. Subject and Predicate. 

§38,39. Vocative and Oblique Cases ; §40. Accusative; §41 — 44. 

Genitive; § 45—47. Dative. 

§ 48. Passive Voice. 

§ 49. Middle Voice. 

§ 50. Tenses. 

§ 51 — 56. Moods; Particles av, cl, cav, and others. 

§ 57, 58. Infinitive ; Attraction. 

§ 59. Construction with the Relative, and its Attraction. 

§ 60. Construction with the Participle; § 61. Casus Ahsoluii, 

§ 62. Particles. 

§ 63 — 65. Prepositions. 

§ 66^ 67. Negative and other Particles. 

§ 68. Peculiar Phrases. 

§69. Particular Constructions : 1. Attraction; IL Anacoluthon ; III. 

Ellipsis; IV. Pleonasm; V. Asyndeta; VI. Hendiadys, 

§ 70. Rhetorical Figures: I, Metonymy ; II. Hyperbole; III. Synec- 
doche; IV. Antanaclasis ; V. Paronomasia, 

§71. Metrical Lines. 


English and Latin. 


Texts of Scripture. 


Tablb of the Sections in Matthlb's Gre«k Grammar, which correspond with those 

of the present work. 

Introduction . 
Sect. 42 . . . 

43 et sqq. 


53,54 . 

68, Obi. 2, 9 

69, Obi. 1 

69, Obs. 3 

70, Obi. 2 

78, Obi. 7 
81 ... . 
83, Obi, 6 
83 b, and 84 
85. . . . 
90. . . . 
91,1 . . 
92, 3 • • 
95, 96 . . 
113, Obi. 1 
116—118 . 
119b, Obi.Z 
130. .. . 
133. • . . 
136. .. . 
loo • . • . 
148. .. . 
162, Obi. 3 
165, Obi. 2 
165, Obi. 3 
167,6 . . 
168, Obi. 1 
168, Obi. 2 
169,06*. . 
170. .. . 
177 b. . • 
181,2 .. . 

184, 06«. . 

185. .. • 
193, Obi. 7 
198, Obt. I 
198, Obi. 5 
198, Obi. 6 • 

198, a . . . 

200,2 . . 
200, 4, Obi. 

201.5 . . 
203, Obi. 1 

208.6 . . 
208,6. , . 
210, Obi. 1 
210, Obi. 2 
210, Obi. 5 
210, 6, Obi. 1 
211,11. . . 

. • * 


} 2 

4, and 5, 4 

6, Obi. 1, 2 

7, Obi. 2 

8, Obi. 1 

8, Obi. 2 
8, Obi. 3 

8, Obi. 5 

9, Obi. 1 
10, Obi. 1 

9 2 
6 9^ 3, and Obi. 3 


8, Obi. 2 
& 13, Obi. 1 
13, Obi. 2 
13, 06*. 3 

16, Obi. 2 
16, 06f. 3 
16, 06*. 1 
16, Obi. 4 
16, Obi. 6 
16, 06«. 7 
16, Obi. 4 

16, 06*. 8 

17, Obi. 3 

22, Obi. 9 
17, 06«. 4 

19, 06«. 3 
19, Obs. 1 

19, 06«. 2 

20, 06«. 7 
19, Obi. 8 
19, 06*. 7 
19, 06<. 6 

19, 06m. 4, 5 

20, 06«. 5 
20, Obi. 4 

} 20, 06«. 2 
20, 06f. 1 
20, 06f. 6 

20, 06«. 3 

21, 1. 
21, II. 



Sect. 22-2—255 
264 . . 
265, 266 

267 . . 

268 . . 
268, 06f . I 
268, 06*. 2 
272, 273 

274 . . 

275 . . 

276 • . 

277 . . 
280 . . 

282 • . 

283 . . 
286 et sqq 

292 . • 

293 . . 

295 . . 

296 . . 
298,1 . 
300 . • 
302 • . 
304 . . 

306 . . 

307 . . 

311 . . 

312 . . 
315, 316 
318 et sqq 
325 . • 
326, 3, 06«. 
327 . . 
328, 329 

330 . . 

331 . • 
334, 335 
342 . . 
344, 345 

347 . . 

348 . . 

349 . . 

350 . . 

351 . . 

352 . . 

353 et sqq 
356 . . 
363 . . 
367 . . 
373 et sqq 
377 . . 
378, 379 
380 • . 
382 . • 
384 . . 







27, 3, 4 




30, 06«. 11 



30, 06*. 9 



30, 06s. 11 

46, 1 


33, 06«. 4 


& 37, 10 

61, 06*. 1 

41, 06«. 9 
41 4 

41* 06«. 8 
4] 5 

44| 06«. 12 
44, Obi. II 
44, 1 

44, 06*. I 

42, 3, 1 
42, 3, 2 
42, 3, 6 
42, 3, 3 
42, 2, 2 
42, 3, 4 

42, 06f. 10 







Supple Mc NT. 

Sect 385, 386 . . 

. 6 46,4 
. 545,7 

Sect. 478 ... , 

. 6 69, II. 2, Obt. 

387 • . . , 

487 ... . 

(6 15, 4 
6 34, 3 

388 .. . 

. & 45, Obs. 13 

391,392 . . 

. 6 45,5 

488 ... . 

. 6 iJ, 3 

393 ... . 

. 6 45,2 

489 .. . 

. h 34, 2, Obt. 13 

394 ... < 

» 6 46, 5 

490 ... . 

. 6 43, 1 

395 .. . 

. $48,2 

491,492 . , 

. 6 49 

396et8qq. . 

. 6 47 

493 ... . 

. § 22, Obs. 6 

401 . ; . . 

. iib,S 

495 ... , 

. $22,4 

402 .. • 

, 6 45, 06ff.]6 

496 ... , 

, § 22, 1—3 

403,404 . . 

. 6 46,3 

497 ... . 

. 6 50, 1—3 

405 ... , 

» 6 46,2 

498 . . . . 

. §50,4,5 

406 ... . 

. 6 47, (Mm. 15 

499 et sqq. , 

. § 50, Obt. 6 

408 .. • 

. 6 40,4 

502 ... , 

. 6 50, Obs. 4 

409 ... . 

, 6 40, OU, 8 

504 et 8<iq. , 

. 6 50, Obt. 5 

411 ... . 

. H0> 1 

507 et sqq. . 

, 6 51 

412,413 . . 

. 6 40, 2 
. J 40, 3 

511 .7 . , 

, $52 

414 ... . 

513 et sqq. . 

. §53,1,2 

415el8qq. . 

. 6 40,5 

516,517 . . 

. 6 53, 3 — 5 

420 .7. , 

. 6 40*6 

518 et sqq. . 

. 6 56 

421 .. . 

. i 40, Obt. 15 

521 . • . . 

. 6 55,1,2 

424 . . . . 

. 6 4^*3 

522 .. . 

. §55,3 

425 ... . 

. 6 40,7 

523 et sqq. , 

. 6 54 

. § 59, Obt. 9 

427, Obs. 3 . 

, 6 69,11.2 

527,528 . , 

429,430 . < 

. 6 25, 7 

531 ... . 

. §57,1 

430 ... . 

(6 41, Obi, 16 
16 25, Obt. 13 

532 ... . 

, § 57, Obt. I 

533 ... . 

. §57,2 

431,432 . . 

. }26 

534 ... , 

. 6 58, 1,2 

434 ... . 

. 6 25,1,2 

536,537 . . 

, A 58, 3-^5 

435 .. • 

. 6 25,3 

540 et sqq. . 

, § 57, 4 

437,438 . 

. 6 37,5 

545 • . . . 

. 6 57, 3 

439,440 . 

. 6 25,4 

546 ... . 

§ 58, Obt. 6 

441 .. . 

. 6 25,5 
. H6 

548,549 .) 
550 et sqq.j ' 

. §60,4 

442,443 . 

443 ... . 

d 25, Obt, 10 

556 et sqq. . 
.559 . . . . 

. § 60, 5 

. 6 60, Obt. 16 

453 .. . 

. M3>2 

560 et sqq. , 

. 6 61 

455 .. . 

. 6 43,3 

568 • . • . 

. 6 60, Obt. 5 

457 .. . 

. 6 43, Obt, 4 

570 ... . 

. §60, Obt. 19 

458 . . . 

. i 13, Obt. 4 

572 et sqq. 

. § 63, 2 

4631 • • • 

f41, Obt. 2 

577 .. . 

578,579 . 

. §.63,3 
. 6 63,4 
. §64 

464 ... . 

, 6 43, Obt. 7 

580 et sqq. 

465, 1 . . . 

, {37,6 

583 et sqq. . 

. §65 

466 .. . 

f6 34.4 
• 16 44, 2, Obt. 5 

594 et sqq. 

. § 6&, 06«. 5, &c. 

597 et sqq. . 

.6 62 

467 et sqq. , 

§ 15, 2 
' 16 34, 2 

608 ... . 

609 et sqq. . 

. §66 
. 467 

470,471 . 

. 6 34, 1 

630 .. . 

. § 69, I. and V. 

472 .. . 

. 6 34,2 

631,632 . . 

. {69,11. 

473 .. • 

. 6 59,1 

634 .. . 

. §69,111.2 

474 .. . 

. 6 59,2 

635 ... . 

. §69,111.1 

475 c . . 

. §59,4 

636 ... . 

► §69, IV. 




§ L — Introductory Notice of the Language of Palestine in the 

time of Jesus Christ. 

1 , There are two circumstances, which tend materially to affect 
the peculiar character of a language — conquest and commerce. 
While the Jews maintained their independence, and had but 
little intercourse with surrounding nations, the Hebrew, gra- 
dually developing itself towards that degree of perfection in 
which we meet with it in the Scriptures of the Old Testament, 
yet still the same original language which was spoken by the 
patriarchs and the native tribes of Canaan, continued to be 
the national speech of the inhabitants of Palestine. The 
schools of the prophets, established by Samuel, contributed 
greatly, no doubt, to its richness and purity ; and it was be- 
tween the judicature of the last judge of Israel and the Baby- 
lonian captivity that the principal portion of the sacred writings 
of the Jews was composed. From their intimate connexion 
with the Chaldseans, however, during a period of seventy years, 
it would almost necessarily happen that the Aramcean dialect of 
the country, which differed very little from their own, except 
in its pronunciation, should at first be intermingled with, and 
at length entirely supersede, the native Hebrew of the captive 
people. So completely, indeed, did the one give place to the 
other, that, on the return from captivity, the Syro-ChaldaiCy or 
Babylonian-Aramaicy became the national language of the 


Jews. Hebrew still, indeed, existed as tlie language of lito« 
raturc, thougli fragments of Aramaic are introduced into the 
books of Daniel and Ezra; but Chaldce Targums, or para- 
phrases, were universally employed in the synagogues for the 
benefit of the unlearned, to ivhom the original scriptures had 
become utterly unintelligible.' 

2. The extreme aversion of the Jews from anything foreign 
would have presented an insuperable obstacle to any revolution 
in their language, which extended beyond a simple change o| 
dialect. Both the Hebrew and the Aramaic were branches o 
the same parent stem : the grammar of both, as of the othei^ 
Shemilic tongues, was essentially the same; and the name of 
the former, which in the time of Christ had become totally; 
extinct even as the language of literature, was universaUy 
applied to the latter. This practice is followed in the NeK 
Testament and Josephus, in the Babbinical writings, and nianj 
of the early Fathers.' It was this strong nationality that, aftca 
Ihe victories of Alexander, and during their subjection to theS 
Grgpco-Egyptian and Syro-Macedonian rulers, resisted th* 
introduction of the Greek language, which prevailed at thj 
courts of those princes, anil had been very generally ado 
in their conquered dominions. It seems, indeed, that Gred 
was held in peculiar abhorrence ; probably because it had bee| 
sometimes employed in the service of treachery.^ Such bcioj 
the case when Pompey laid siege to Jerusalem, a curse i 
denounced against every one who should teach Greek to hu 
children; and during the war with Titus the Jewish youtl 
were expressly forbidden to learn that language. ' Inde 
pendently of these considerations, however, the more distill' 
guished families among the Jews had too much national prid< 
to seek the acquisition of a foreign tongue;' and the doctorB 
and scribes considered the knowledge of Greek to be entirel] 

' Bab. Aiaiiai 

in Mote Ereyim, c 

9. Stroalvitil 

«10, Ifl 


imdi legem Ml 

lingua Armnaa 



* S«e Julin V. 

2, xix. la. Acts X 

xvi. 14 



i. 3. 

3, ii. 1. 1, 

10. G. Kuiuhan 

t.ii. 1)0.117,188. 



ad M 

1.13. Comp 

>]><> Lighlfoufs 

Hor. Hubr. in John v. 2. 


Essay ou the Laugi 



Ayo. olic Age, ur. 

• Bava Kama 


c. it. U. 

» Joseph. Ant 

xx. 10. 2. nu' ^ 

• ^ • 

UHix't^M, nUA 19 

1i iwJ 


mperfluouB to the interpretation of the Scriptures.' Even the 
Jewish princes, whose residence at the court of Kome rendered 
them perfectly familiar with the language and literature of 
Greece, always spoke to their own countrymen in the verna- 
cular Aramaic* 

3. With theexception, therefore, of certain words and expres- 
sions, chiefly of Greek and Latin origin, which constant inter- 
course with foreigners had engrafted upon it, the language of 
Palestine in the time of Christ and his apostles was identical 
with the Aramrean or Syro-Chaldican of the age of Daniel and 
Ezra. From the oriental colouring of hia discourses, as well 
as from the fact that they were more usually addressed to the 
humbler classes, it is certain that our Lord generally employed 
the vernacular Aramaic ; and St. Paul relates that, on the 
occasion of his conversion, Jesus spoke to him 'E^^aiSi SiaXtxTw 
(Acts xxvi. 14). The Gospels also have preserved the very 
words which he uttered in performing two of his miracles; 
and a variety of other words and expressions are scattered 
throughout the New Testament, which are Aramaic terms, 
either genuine or exotic, written in Greek characters. 

Ola. 1. The Aiarnaic <liaUct was not apuken in all paits ef the cDimtry with equal 
In JuJsH, and parlicularlj at Jenisatem, whicli was the gre^t resort 
^ penona of Jjsttnction and liberal ediK^ation, it voa nECesaarily distin^iahed by 
il purity of diction and gtammatical accnracy. The provincial diaWcfs exhibited a 
« rude pronunciation, and Euudiy idiomatic expresiiont, which were studluuBly 

oded by the polJEhed classes of society. That of Galil«e more especially < appears 
D Malt. Kivi. 73, to have been exceedingly harsh and inhaimanious, so that a 
Galilean WIS easily ivcogaiBed by hia pronunciation ; and the same character is 
attributed to it in the TuliDud." 

Oil. 2. It may he proper to collect the pciticipal Aramaic expressions occurring iu 
Ibe Nev Testament, and in some casoit to place iDJuxta-positioa the eorreiponding 
ArsmBie form : — Mail. iii. 7, tr^^irmat ; y. 22, finx and y'ana; vj. 24, //.x/ijuiiS, 
Aiiiin. R3'iaD;iL.3,B«;3.)../.«.-«; xii.24, Bi.>.<<^i*, Aram. ^131 ^2' "i. 1?, 
Si( 'law ; iiiii. 7, ^«efli, Aram. 13,1 5 ^""i- 2. *-rto. Aram. Np[D3 ! "vii. 16, 
Bat^S$il i 33, yiXyiSa ; 4li, 'SX.), 'Hxi, }.a/ii m^r^Sai; (in Mack xv. 34, 'Ekm is 
»aolher form, >^Jt, instead of l^N); Aforiiii. 17,j5(an(}.l(, Aram. l^J-) *33; 

1.15, liyiir, Aram. -ffS^ (L&U Jjgio); v. 41, » 



' Mcnath. fol. 90, b. ^ge igitur, rrpvla leetm. qviriam til il/a horn, ijme ntc ail 
dimtuee ad noL-lfm prriuieat; giiam fi invenerit, ticfbtt tibi Hipitntia Greets lipe- 
ram navari. There is a refennce to the precept in Jaih. i. 8. 

* Joseph. Ant. xviii. 7. 10. 

• Tolm. Bab} I, Krubhim, fol. 53. Haminrt J«ilaa, qui po/Ila uliinlvr lingua .— 
(oin6iH OoRlaai, f»t impoiUa. Bee also Lifrhtfout's Hor. Heh. in Act. Apost. ii. 7. 
SehoellBan. H. H. iii Matt. Kxvi. 73. PfeiJier dt dial. Gaiilaa; Excurs. x., and Bux- 
torfii Lex, Ch, in r. y% 

M. 1 



Aram. "^^^^PBO (Lat. Speculator or Spiculaior); vii. 11, xd^^av] 34, i(p<pa^»; 
X. 46, BafTtfMUdi] 51, fet^ficvt; xiv. 36, 'A/S/SS, Aram. ^^3,i»i; ^w*« i. 15, ^Ut^, 
Aram. J^l^tU;; xi%. 20, fdvla^tdv, Aram. "^TlD (l-*^** Sudor iumj ; John i. 43, 

KffCpa;; iv. 2b, Miff tecs; y. 2,BnBtffla; xix. 13, yet(i(iaBei; Acti i. 19, 'AxcX^a/xa ; 
24, Btf^ra/Saf ; iv. 36, B««yai3tff ; ix. 36, T«r.jS/S^ ; xiii. 6, 'Rttf>tyi<rovi; w\. 12, je«XA»via, 
Aram. J>^^^7p (Lat. coionia); 1 Cor. xvi. 22, fMcoetvuBei. 2 ./oAn 12, x*f»'»»f» Aram. 

D^lOlp (Lat. charta).^ To these may probably be added the word xeffuxov (Heb. 

ix. 1), which is probably the rabbiuical noun ]to^Dtip, signify ing/i/r/iiVwre;* and 

in Matt,Y, 22, the term fAoipl is far more likely io be the Aramaic n'^lD» ^'^ apos- 
tate, than the Greek word denoting a fool. In Josephus also there are a great 
variety of words which are Grsecised from the Aramaic language of his age.^ 

§ 2. — Of the Common or Hellenic Dialect, and the Greek 
Idiom of the New Testament, (Buttm. Gr. Gr. § 1 . Text 9. 
Obss, 8, 9, 10.) 

1. Although the Babylonian- Aramaic still maintained its 
ground as the language of Palestine in the commencement of 
the Christian era, and notwithstanding the contempt and aver- 
sion with which they affected to regard the language and lite- 
rature of foreign nations, the Jews had become very exten- 
sively, if not universally, acquainted with Greek. In Alex- 
andria^ Seleucia, Antioch, and those other populous cities 
which sprung up after the victories of Alexander, . and the 
consequent establishment of the Seleucidse, the same privileges 
were allowed to the Jews as to the other inhabitants, and vast 
numbers of them were accordingly induced to remove thither.* 
As Greek was now the current language, not only of literature, 
but of commerce, and even of social intercourse, in all the 
countries west of the Euphrates,* not only would the Jewish 
residents in these cities almost necessarily adopt it as their 
own, but without a knowledge of it even the Hebrews of Pales- 
tine would find it impossible to have any extensive communi- 
cation. A knowledge of Greek had become, indeed, not 
merely an accomplishment confined to persons of education, 
but a necessary acquisition, which people of all ranks made in 
their childhood. 

^ Pfannkuche's Essay, § xi. 1. PfeifTer de locis Ehraicis et exoticis N. T. 
' Middleton on the 6r. Art. nd loc. 

8 Joseph. Ant. i. 3. 3 ; ii. 1. 1; iii. 7,2; 10. 6; iv. 4. 4; xiv. 2. 1. B. J. 
V. 2. 1; 11.5. 
* Joseph. Ant. xii. 3. 1. 
' Marsh's Michaelis, vol. ii. p. 39. 


Obs, 1. It is generally supposed that the Hellenists, mentioned in Acts vi. 1, 
were Greek Jews, who were utterly unacquainted with the Aramaic language of 
Judaea, and read the LXX version of the Scriptures in their peculiar synagogues. 
Although it may not be necessary to suppose that Jews born in foreign countries 
had entirely discarded their native language, it is certain that the Greek had so far 
superseded every other tongue as the medium of universal intercourse, as to have 
rendered a faithful version of their Scriptures highly essential. Thus also Jose- 
))hus, who had written a history of the Jewish war in the language of his country, 
undertook a Greek version of the work with the assistance of some Greeks whom 
he knew in Home, in order that foreigners, and, among them, ike Jew* who dwelt 
beyond the Euphrates, might know what had happened.^ 

2. The Greek, however, which had now become the common 
language, as it were, of the whole world, was perfectly distinct 
from each and every of those four great national dialects, which 
characterised the literature of the Grecian states during the 
sera of their independence. After the Macedonian conquest 
the Attic was indeed universally regarded as the only dialect 
adapted, from its inherent grace and elegance of diction, to 
the purposes of literary composition; but it was not to be 
expected that all writers would possess the same ability, or 
exert the same diligence, in forming their style after the most 
approved models. Thus, while some, as Lucian, -^lian, and 
Arrian, have written with the strictest attention to the purest 
examples of Attic diction, the far greater number have exhi- 
bited the utmost carelessness in this respect, introducing the 
idiomatic peculiarities of the other dialects, together with many 
words and significations which arc not to be found in the 
ancient language. To this later speech, varying in its degree 
of approximation to Attic purity in the different writers who 
employed it, grammarians have given the name of Common or 
Hellenic (vi ytoivn SiafXexror, 'ExXrjviXY)) ; and it has been copi- v 
ously illustrated by the Atticists, scholiasts, and lexicographers, 
who have set the pure Attic forms in opposition with those 
which were used by later writers. 

3. Besides the change thus effected in the language of lite- 
rature, the reduction of Greece under the dominion of a single 
conqueror produced a far greater revolution in the speech in 
general use among the people. Wlicrever the power of the 
Macedonians reached, their language was speedily introduced ; 
but in Attica it would naturally be more strongly impregnated 
with Atticisms, in the Peloponnesus the Dorian peculiarities 
would prevail, and in the colonies, composed of settlers not 

^ Joseph. B. J. Procem. § 1, et c. Apion, i. 9. 


only from all the provinces of Greece, but from other con- 
quered countries, something would be contributed from all 
the dialects, confused and mixed up with a variety of forms 
and idioms derived from foreign sources. 

Obi, 2. Such forms as fifiavX^^nv, flfjt,tkXt, Bovktif from the Attic ; afw^veu, from the 
Doric'; the ^olic optative in -f/«, and the Ionic aorist ittret, are found in the New 
Testament ; to which may be added the imperf. 3 pi. in -00-«y, the perf. 3 pi. in -ay, 
and a variety of other forms and inflexions which occur only in the later writers. 
See }J 16. 17. 19. 

4. The Jews of Palestine, who learned the Greek language 
from their countrymen settled in these colonies, and especially at 
Alexandria in Egypt, combined with it much that was charac- 
teristic of their own vernacular tongue. Their's was in fact a 
dialect founded upon the later Greek speech, as it was spoken 
after the times of Alexander the Great, but intermixed with 
numerous forms and expressions of a purely Oriental com- 
plexion, and wholly unintelligible to a native Greek. It was 
this spoken language, and not the style of writing employed by 
the learned, in which the books of the New Testament was 
composed, and of which the Alexandrian version of the Old 
Testament, the Apocryphal books of the Old and New Tes- 
taments, and the writings of the Apostolical Fathers, are the 
only other existing specimens. 

Obtm 3. Such expressions, for instance, as a,<plimt o(piiX.vfJuaTa, ^^iw^ot \af/^tu9t 
and others, would convey either an inaccurate idea, or no idea at all, to a native 
Greek. These, however, are lexicographical peculiarities. 

Obi» 4. The sources from which a knowledge of the true character of Sacred Bel- 
/enum, or the Greek diction of the New Testament, may he accurately derived, are 
extremely limited ; but, as much belonged to it in common with the later Greek of 
the »etm itaXtxTos^ the writings of those authors who wrote after the age of Alex- 
ander, and particularly Plutarch, Polybius, Diodorus Siculus, Artemidorus^ Appian, 
Herodian, and the Byzantine historians, may be consulted with great advantage 
for the purpose of illustration. The nature and properties of the Mnh %taXt»vt have 
been diligently investigated and explained by Saumaise, Kirchmaier, £ngberg, 
Benzel, and Sturz ;^ and its origin traced to the confusion of all the dialects of 
Greece after the conquest of Alexander, by the accurate and learned Planck. ' 
Much also, which bears upon the subject, will be found in Lobeck's work on Phry- 
nichus the grammarian.^ 

' Salmasii Commeniariut de iingua Heiienisiica, Lugd. Bat. 1643 ; G. G. Kirch- 
ipaieri Dissertatio dedicJecto Grtscorum communij Viteb. 1709; And. Engbergii Dit- 
sertatio de dialecto Hellenistica, Hafn. 1714; H. Benzelii IHssertatio de lingua Uel' 
/enittica, Gx)th. 1734; F. G. Sturzii de dialecto Macedonica et Alexandrina Laber^ 
Lips. 1809. This last is a work of great learning and extensive research. 

' H. Planckii de vera natura atqne indole orationit Grcecee Nov, Tett, Commenta- 
riu», Gott. 1810. It has been several times reprinted. 

^ Phrymci Eclogte nominum et verborum Atlicorum, Cum notii Nunneni, Hoet' 
che/ii, Scaligerif et de Pauw, edidit et expHctdt C« A. Lobeck, Lips. 1820. 


5. With respect to the character by which the Greek of the 
New Testament is distinguished, a great deal has been written 
to very little purpose. In the dissertation prefixed to his 
edition of the Greek Testament, published in 1576, H. Ste- 
phens denounced those critics, qui in his scrip tis inculta omnia 
et horrida esse putant; and, though he admits the presence of 
Hebraisms to a certain extent, maintains the purity of diction, 
and even the Attic elegance, of the sacred style. Early in the 
seventeenth century a controversy arose, in which the saving 
qualification of Stephens, confined as it is within the narrowest 
limits, became the ground of contention. . It was boldly as- 
serted on the one hand, that the language of the Apostles was 
excellent Greek, altogether unadulterated by any foreign ad- 
mixture; and as hardily affirmed on the other, that it was 
wholly and intrinsically Hebraistic. 

Obs. 5. The contest was begun by Sebastian P/ocken^ in 1629. He maintained 
the absolute purity of the New Testament Greek, and was followed on the same 
hide by /. Junge, Jac, Qrotse, Erasmus Schmid, Sigismond Georgi, J, C, Schwarz, B, 
Paiairet, and others. Their opponents were D, Wulfer, J, Miaceus, Thomas Gataker, 
John f^orstiuSf S. fferen/eis, and John Leusden, Passing over in silence whatever 
forms or expressions baffled all attempts to bring them within the scope of classical 
ilhistration, those who advocated the former position contented themselves with 
adducing such passages from the profane writers, and especially the poets, as ex- 
hibited any resemblance, however remote, to the Hebrew idiom ; whilst the He- 
braists went no further than simply to point out those usages, which either have no 
parallel whatsoever, or only a very imperfect counterpart, in Greek composition. 
Thus the whole controversy was for a long time exclusively directed to the He* 
braistic complexion of the New Testament language ; and even when a new turn 
was given to the contest by a class of writers, who adopted a middle course and 
admitted the Oriental character of the sacred diction, its true nature and origin 
were still entirely overlooked. These middle men, among whom were /. H. Boeder, 
T. Gataker, Horace Fitringa, J, Olearius, J. Leusden, Solanus, J. H» Michaelis, and 
j4. Blackwall, did not indeed deny the Hebraisms of the New Testament, but 
affirmed that their presence was in nowise incompatible with the requisites of a 
pure and elegant Greek style ; in which respect they maintained that the sacred 
penmen were not a whit inferior to the most approved authors of Attic Greece.' A 
somewhat similar opinion was also advanced by D. Heinsius, without reference to 
this particular controversy, in which, if the combatants did little to decide the 
matter in debate, they were by no means sparing of mutual abuse and scurrillity. 

* In his Diatribe de Linguee Greecce puritate. Amst. 1629. 

' The most important works connected with this controversy are the Findicite 
N. T* ab Hebraismis, and the Hierocrifieus Sacer of Georgi ; Palairet's Observationes 
Phil, Crit. in N. Testamentum ; Th. Gataker's De Novi Testamenii Styio Disser- 
tatio ; Vorstius, Lensden, and Olearius, de Hebraismis ,* and Blackwall's Sacred 
Classics defended and iiiustrated. See also Ernesti^s Institutes, chap. 3, and Camp- 
bell's Preliminary Dissertations to his Translation of the Gospels, Most of the older 
writers on either side were collected by J. Rhenferd in his Dissertationum Philol, 
Thed, de stylo N, T, Syntagma (Leov. 1702), to which a Supplement was published 
by Van den Honert at Amsterdam in 1703. 


Independeuily of such 'terms as Simplicists, Puruts, Hebraists, Mixiyrists, BtfiXtofii^- 
Tiyts, and Hellenisticismifices^ by which the several parties designated each other, 
there were not wanting satires and lampoons to complete the apparatus of literary 

6. Although the speculations of these controversialists fell 
infinitely wide of the truth, their researches in the cause of 
sacred philology have not been without their use. It is now 
very generally acknowledged that the basis of the New Tes- 
tament language is the popular Greek speech which prevailed 
after the Macedonian conquest, combined with such Hebrew 
idioms and forms of construction^ as the character and position 
of the sacred writers would naturally lead them to employ .» 

Obs, 6. Had the Apostles and Evangelists written with the elegance of learned 
Athenians, the inconsistency of their style with the circumstances, in which they 
are known to have stood, would have detracted materially from the evidence in 
favour of the authenticity of their writings. There is no reason indeed to believe 
that either St. Luke or St. Paul were illiterate persons ; nor was there anything 
in the humble condition of the other Apostles to prevent them from writing a lan- 
guage, which they had heen in the habit of speaking from infancy, with gram- 
matical accuracy ; but, with relation to religious matters more especially, it would 
frequently be impossible to express themselves in genuine Greek. Consequently 
they were led either to coin new words, or employ those already at hand in new sig- 
nifications 'y* and their Hebrew feelings and Hebrew education gave an Oriental 
turn to many of their sentiments. The Hebraisms of the New Testament are 
therefore for the most part of a lexicographical or rhetorical character ; and it is 
exceedingly seldom that the grammatical construction departs from the later Greek 
usage. Abundant materials for illustration will therefore be found, on the one 
hand, in those writers who took the Hebraizing side of the question ; and on the 
other, in those who maintained the Attic purity, whether absolute or modified, of 
the sacred penmen ; since a great proportion of the examples adduced by them are 
derived from authors who wrote in the common dialect* The observations of Eisner, 
Albertif Kypke, Raphel, and Krebs^ are also readily available to the same purpose. 

^ See Georg, Hierocriti Sacer, passim, and £. Schmidii Not, ad N, T., pp. 1390, 

* See a pamphlet entitled Genius Seculi (Altenb. 1760), pp. 125, sqq,* and ano- 
ther entitled Somnium in quo preeler cetera Genius Seculi cum moribus ErudUorum 
vapu/atf p. 97, sqq, (Altenb. 1761.) 

' Planck de vera Or at. N,T.\ 1. Winer's Sprachidioms, Sect. 1 & 2. 

* To this class belong the technical significations afiixed to such words as ^ifrts, 

* J. Klsneri Observatimes Sacrec, Traj. ad Rhen. 1720; J. Alberti Observationes 
Philologicit in Sacros N. T. libros, Lugd. Bat. 1725 ; G. Raphelii Annotationes in S. 
S. ex Xenophonte, Polybio^ Arriano, et HerodotOj Lugd. Bat. 1747; Krebsii 06- 
serrationes e Josepho ; Kypkii Observationes^ &c. 





§ 3. — Interchange of Letters. (Buttm. § 15 & seqq.) 

A considerable difference seems to have prevailed in the 
manner of writing and pronouncing words according to the 
respective dialects of ancient Greece, of which vestiges are to 
be found in the books of the New Testament. In addition to 
the variations thence derived, and other more recent innova- 
tions introduced into the later speech, an orthography has been 
attributed to the Alexandrians entirely distinct and peculiar 
to themselves. According to this method of writing, adopted 
in certain manuscripts, it should seem that they interchanged 
certain letters with each other, as ai and e, e and oj, « and 6«, y 
and X ; that they omitted some which were necessary, and 
others which were superfluous ; and neglected the various rules 
of euphony practised by the other Greeks. 

Obi, 1. In illustration of these peculiarities examples have been adduced in such 
forms as fiu^tXiavt vvxravj ^Buivuv, for fiafftXixj vvx-ra, (pBautV, yivr,fiara, iv^tfihsj for 
yitfnftttraj ^vffftfifis ; araXtifiipBuSj airifKrayxari, Ux'^i'^** ^^^ avecXt}<pBi)s, avixreixaffi, 
iyX'^V^^ ; &c. &c. It is obvious to remark, however, that these forms are only 
found in a few Egyptian manuscripts,' which cannot be proved to have bein written 
earlier than the sixth century ; and, since almost all manuscripts follow the ortho- 
graphy of the country in which they were written, this particular mode of writing 
was undoubtedly introduced by their transcribers.' 

Obi, 2. As instances of the various dialects, which occur in the New Testament, 
none can be safely adduced, of which the genuineness is not established by the 
c oncurriug testimony of the best copies. Among these will be found numerous 
Atticisms; such as airoi (Matt. xxiv. 28), for which the rest of the Greeks used 
uUrot', ^iftXif and 0ftX0f (Rev. V. 8; xxi. 18), for which the loniaus and Dorians 
used piXn and ui\6s,^ There is the Doric x\i^am for x^ifiufos (Matt. vi. 30) ; 

» Principally the Codd.Alexandr. and Turicensis. Also Cod. Vatic. ; Cod.Kphrem. 
Rescript. ; Cod. Bezae, &c. See Hug's Introd. N. T. 

' Sturzius de dialect. Alex. p. 116 ; Planck de orat. Gr. N. T. p. 25. 

* Thom. M. p. 862, and Hemsterhuis ad 1. Mceris, pp. 18, 389; £tym. M. p.51 
49 ; Eu&tatb. ad II. A. p. 21. f. 


KofAfitvuv for xttretfjbvw (Matt. xiii. 15; Acts zxviii. 27) ; 9'av}a;^tT«9' €ot ita9%tzu0 
(Luke X. 34) ; ^rM^tn for ^n^uv (John vii. 30).^ lonisms are less frequent ; but St. 
Paul writes Wt^aitn for l^t^utn (Eph. v. 14)'; ^4[M( for fid^fAog (1 Tim. iii. 13). See 
also Acts xxi. 35.' 

Ob» 3. Of the later orthography traces are readily discernible, though many 
changes have been made by the copyists and grammarians. In Matt, xxiii. 37, Luke 
xiii. 34, 9»ffftov and 96«-^t» still remain ; and the best manuscripts have vo^f$vs in 
Luke ii 24, where uefnvs, the Attic form, has been substituted.' Many manu- 
scripts, in uncial characters, read l/^^ayfta for ^i^^axf^^f ^^ Matt. xvii. 24, and a yet 
more remarkable instance is found in 1 Cor. xiii. 2, where very ancient manuscripts, 
and some of the Fathers, read oi/fiiv ufM, instead of the common reading eviiv,^ 

§ 4. — Moveable final Letters. (Buttm. § 26.) 

1. The N s^skKUffTiKov is not always thrown off in the manu- 
scripts of the New Testament before words beginning with a 
consonant. Thus also evexev is used before a consonant in Matt 
V. 10, xix. 5, 2 Cor. iii. 10, and so in the LXX continually. See 
Gen. xviii. 28, Isa. v. 23, lix. 20, Jer. xxvi. 3. 

Obi, U Corrections have nevertheless been very generally made in the printed 
text. For example, Cod. Diez. gives liKowiv ^mn^j in Acts ix. 4 ; and u^-nyyi^ 
xikiv^as, in Acts xxiv. 7. 

2. There is also a considerable want of uniformity in the in- 
sertion of the final s at the end of the adverbs oStm, fJisx^h ^^^ 
aixqh before words beginning with a vowel; and the v is con- 
tinually rejected from adverbs ending in Oev.* 

Obt. 2. In Matt. xxiv. 38, Luke i. 20, ax^t ns still holds its place in the text ; but 
elsewhere the manuscripts have ax^tsj even before a consonant, though the editions 
in general omit the final g. See Luke xxi. 24, Acts xiii. 6, Rom. v. 13, viii. 22, Gal. 
iv. 2. In Acts xxvii. 33 a few manuscripts have ax^ss ov, without the particle ^t. 

§ 5. — Hiatus — Contraction — Crasis — Apostrophus. 

(Buttm. § 28—30.) 

1. The Greeks in general, and the Attic writers more espe- 
cially, carefully avoided the harshness of sound produced by 
the concurrence of two vowels, whether in the middle of a word, 
or at the end of one word followed by another beginning with a 
vowel ; and the hiatus was remedied by Contraction, by Crasis, 
and by the Apostrophus or Elision, 

> Phrynich. pp.76, 134; Thom. M. pp. 554. 676 ; Athen. iii. p. 110, C; Gre- 
gor. de dial. p. 165 ; Etym. M. p. 671, 30. 

« Phrynich. p. 142 ; Thom. M. p. 46. 

3 StuTz. de dial. Alex. p. 185; Fischeri Prolusiones de vitiis N.T. p. 676. 

^ Phrynich. p. 76, Ol/fitis ^i« rav f tl xm Xpuff'iitvros xa.) ol eiu^* avrev tlvrt* xiy»ort, 
fh 2t aVT^i^tu Xiyttv' ol yap »^»T§t ha rov V Xiyawn ovhtif. See Plauck ubi supra, 

* See Matt. Gr. Gr. § 4l ; Lobeck ad Phryn. pp. 14. 284, 


2. The contractions which are usual in other writers prevail 
in the New Testament. There are a few deviations in the 
plural of certain nouns ; but the usage is not constant. Thus 
we have ojrga, ooTicjv, for offra, offToJv, in Matt, xxiii. 27, Luke 
xxiv. 39, Eph. v. 30, Heb. xi. 22 ; 6qim, for 6quv, in Rev. vi. 
15. So also xeiXe'ft/v, in Heb. xiii. 15; but xsiXn, in Rom. iii. 

Obs. 1. The uncontracted forms, howrever, are not uncommon even in Attic writers. 
See Matt. Gr. Gr. § 69, Obs, 1, § 78, Obs. 7, and add Eur. Hec. 1071, Plat. Phaed. 
p. 728, Ailstot. Probl. 26, 25. Examples also occur of the forms 2tt/, dttr«/, tx"*i 
«crX£ty, &c. ; but they are by no means either uniform or predominant. Thus in 
Luke viii. 38, lyuro for ihTre ; John ii. 15, Acts ii. 33, Tit. iii. 6, f|t;^it for i|i;^ii. 
So Gen. xi. 9, LXX, ffvnx^t. On the other hand, Matt. ix. 17, Mark iu 22, ixxurett ,* 
John iii. 8, 9rn7; Acts xviii. 18, i^ifrXt/; xxii. 20, i%ixi7ro; xxiii. 11,^1?; xxvii. 2, 

3. In the New Testament Crases are of less constant usage 
than in Attic Greek, and are confined to those which are 
effected with xal, or the neuter article. Matt. v. 23, Mark i. 
35, Acts xiv. 7, xaxeT; Matt. x. 32, 33, xoiyw ; xv. 18, xx. 4, 
xajtervor ; xxi. 21, x«v; (Mark x. 12, xaJ iav;) Luke i. 3, xdfjLol; 
(Gal. ii. 8, xai sf^ol ;) John vii. 28, xa/t^g ; Matt, xxvii. 57, toi/vopkjk; 
Gal. ii. 7, Touvivriov.^ 

4. The same prepositions, particles, and other words ordi- 
narily suflfer elision in the New Testament as in the Attic 
writers ; but the neglect of the Apostrophus, as exhibited in 
manuscripts and editions, is very frequent, and altogether arbi- 
trary. Among a multiplicity of instances, we find in Matt. ii. 
1, dTTo dvoiroKciiy ; vii. 9, vtto sl^ov&iav ; xxi. 22, wctvroc oja av ; Mark 
ii, 17, aXX' ol xaxftJr, (xK'Kai ayuaqrojKovs \ vii. 5,6, e^siTof stth^cd' 
ru'ffiVy aWoi av/wTOir, o Sg aTTOKpi^sU ; xi. 33, ov^s syti. See also 
Luke xix. 42, John i. 3, vi. 29, xi. 53, Acts xx. 25, 1 Cor. x. 
29, XV. 11, Col. iv. 17. Again, the Alexandrian manuscript 
has avl dqxi^piotfy in Luke iii. 2 ; /xsri oLitsyJj^ns, Luke xiv. 9 ; 
and two Vienna manuscripts have aXXa aXa)&etar, Acts xxv. 25. 

06s. 2. A remarkable instance of this uncertainty occurs in 2 Cor. vii. 1 1, where 
the printed editions have kWoL d^akoyiavf akka dyetvaftrma'tVf but aXX' ixhixn^tv* 
Doubts seem to have existed respecting the word x(*}0-r«, in 1 Cor. xv. 33 ; but as it 
occurs in a regular Iambic senarius cited from Menander, the true reading must be 
X^ntrB^. The LXX, Josephus,and the early Fathers, present the same irregularities. 
Thus, Gen. xvii. 22, a^ro 'Afi^aeifjt,; xviii. 15, ikkei iytkeca-ets ; Joseph. Ant. iv. 6. 2, 
a^o Bi/ip^urov ; Iren. Hsr. iii. 3, vto a^offraXa/f. In the manuscripts of the New 
Testament the particles a^«, tira, tn, 7y«, never suffer elision. 

^ Leusden de Pialect. J«I, T. c, I. p. 14, 


Obs. 3. From the very general neglect of the Jpottrop/tut in Ionic writers^ eX' 
aroples of similar usage in the New Testament have been called Jonumt. * 


§ 6. — First Declension. (Buttm. § 34.) 

The terminations and genders of this declension are the 
same in the New Testament as in Attic Greek. 

Obi, 1. There is a solitary deviation from the Attic rule, which forms the genitive 
of nouns ending in a pure, or ^a, in »Sf in the case of the substantive rsnT^et, of which 
the genitive ffWt^nt is found in Acts x. 1, xxi. 31, xxvii. 1. 

Obt, 2. Proper names of this declension, ending in «;, make the genitive, with 
very few exceptions, iu a, instead of w, Luke iii. 27, 'lueifva; SOj 'W2«; 31, MiXm; 
35, 2aX«; xiii. 29, Rev. xxi. 13, Baffa; Lukexvi. 9, MecfifMtm; Johnviii. 13»KiB4«^a; 
xix. 25, KXm^Z ; xxi.l5, Matf. xii. 39. 41/lA»ya Acts xi. 30, xv. 12, Col.iv. 10, B«^mc)3«; 
Acts xix. 14, 2»iva ; 1 Cor. i.l2, KtitpZ ; i. I6,xvi. 15, 'ZrKpava ; 2 Cor. xi. 32, *A^cr«; 
Col. i. 7, *£Ta^(« ; 2 Thess. ii. 9, Rev. iii. 9, 2ara>a. The regular form occurs in 
Matt. i. 6, Ov^iov'f Luke iii. 3, Zax'^^'^'^ t Luke iv. 17, Acts xxviii. 28, 'Ha^atev ; Luke 
iv. 25, 'HXiav; John i. 45, 'Av'^^iav, In the Fathers, and later writers generally, the 
termination a, is continually recognised. Thus Origen c. Cels. i. p. 7, UvSayi^m; 
Phot. Bibl. n. 254, Nig/5«.« 

Obs. 3. Many proper names in -ug seem to be popular abbreviations ; as Si'JU; 
(Acts XV. 32), for ^tkivavog (1 Thess. i. 1). Iu like manner "Avvm; (Luke iii. 3) is 
perhaps the same as *Ayay/«e; (Acts xxiii. 2); AavKois and AfificZg (Col. iv. 14) the 
same as \$vKtot (Acts xiii. 1, Rom. xvi. 21) and Anfitec^Kos or AnfAv^r^tas*^ 

Obs, 4. Names of dignities, compounded of the verb ei^x^n, are formed in the 
earlier writers after the second declension ; but in the New Testament they prin- 
cipally belong to the first. Thus Matt. xiv. 1, Luke iii. 19, ix. 7, rir^ei^x^f > Acts 
vii. 8, 9, nvf ^ar^iu^x^f i ^* 1* ^'^t t^ec'rovra^x'^f l xxlv. 23, XXvii. 2. 31, ixetT09<rd»xi '* 
xxviii. 16, fl-TjaTtfiri Ja^jj ; 2 Cor. xi.32, iha^x^g. There is, however, no uniformity 
of declension, for ixarivTu^tg repeatedly occurs, as in Matt. viii. 5. 8, Luke vii. 6, 
Acts xxviii. 16, and elsewhere ; and x*^*^iX*f ^^ declined solely after the second 
declension. Neither is the usage of the Attic writers altogether constant ; but, as a 
rule, they adopted the termination in og, and later authors that in tig. Hence Gen. 
xU. 34, Dan. ii. 3, rora^x^'f '» 2 Mace. xii. 2, Kv^p4»^x*if i ^^^* 12, i>^i(pavrd^x*'s i 
Joseph. Ant. i. 13. 4, ytvei^x*if > ***• ^* ^i a\u^oi^x^g ; Kuseb. V. Const, iv. 63, 
rti\ta^fis» This was also the form which the Latins followed. Cic. Epist. Att. ii. 
17, Abelarche$ ; Auctor Hist. Bell. Alex. c. 67, Tetrarckes ; Spartian. v. Hadrian, c. 
13, Toparcha; Tertull. de Anim. c. vii. 55, Patriarcha; Cod. Theodos. xv. 9.2, 
Miarcha, Of course the genitive case, whether singular or plural, is doubtful; as 
^Affd^m^ Acts xix. 31.^ 

* Georgii Hierocrit. i. 3. 9; Wyssii Dialect. Sacr. p. 17. 
« See Alt. Gram. N.T. §6. 

» Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 433 ; Winer's Sprachidioms, § 2, 23. Another form of 
abbreviation is 2«^iraT0f, for iMfficrar^ag, Compare Acts xx. 4 ; Rom. xvi. 21, 

* Parkhurst gives ixecrovra^x^ih *"^» according to the third declension. See Lex. 
in v. This must have been an oversight. 

* Alt. Gr. Gr. § 5 J Poppo ad Xen. Cyr. ii. 1. 22. 


Obi. 5. With respect to declension in general (Biittm. $ 33.), and conjugation 
also, it may be observed that the Dual number, which is very rarely used by the 
later Greek writers, is never employed in the New Testament. Hence the plural is 
used in the strict sense of the dual in Rev. xii. 14, xai^of *eu tuti^avg »at *'fjuifu 
xuiacu, three times and a half, 

§ 7. — Second Declension. (Buttm. § 35 — 37.) 

In the flexion of nouns the remains of the ancient dialects, 
which occur in the New Testament, are exclusively Attic ; in 
accordance with which the nominative dsos is always used, with 
a single exception, for the vocative. This exception is Matt, 
xxvii. 46, where the vocative &sg is employed in rendering the 
words from Ps. xxii. I, which were uttered by Christ upon the 
cross. In the parallel place, Mark xv. 34, the nominative is 
used. There is also an example of the vocative &g6 in Judg. 
xxi. 3, LXX. 

Obs. 1. Of contracted nouns of this declension, both the uucontracted and con- 
tracted forms occur indiscriminately. See § 5. 2. 

Obs. 2. Proper names of the Attic second declension ending in a/Si as *A^akXM! 
(Actsxviii. 24) commonly omit the final y in the accusative. See Acts xix. 1, 1 Cor. 
iv. 6. Some manuscripts also have Ku, for K£v, in Acts xxi. 1. 

§ 8. — Third Declension. (Buttm. 38. ct seqq.) 

With respect to the gender and inflection of nouns of this 
declension, the ordinary grammatical rules are applicable 
throughout to the usage of the New Testament. The following 
observations may, however, be subjoined : — 

Obs. 1. Some manuscripts and editions have the Attic accusative kXuv from xkugf 
in Rev. iii. 7, xx. 1 ; but xktT'iu is perhaps the correct reading, as in Luke xi. 52. 
The plural xXtTs, for xktJieis, occurs in Matt. xvi. 19, Rev. i. 18. In like manner 
we find i^ttg in 2 Cor. xii. 20, Gal. v. 20, Tit. iii. 9 ; but \'^ths, uncontracted, in 
1 Cor. i. ll.» (Buttm. § 44, 2, and Obs. 1.) 

Obs. 2. In the contracted declension, nouns ending in vs and u did not contract 
the genitive, either in the singular or the plural, except in the later writers ; and 
thus hfAiffovs occurs in Mark vi. 23; ^nxoiv in John xxi. 8y Rev. xxi. 17. So also 
the neuter plural hfiiirnt in Luke xix. 8, of which the Attic form, whether adjective 
or substantive, is nftiaa without contraction.^ (Buttm. § 51. Obs. 5.) 

Obs. 3. According to the old grammarians, the accusative plural of nouns in -ivs 
was not contracted by the Attics from 'iag into 'Ug. This assertion is made with 
too great confidence ; and it is impossible to refer such contractions exclusively to 
the later writers. As examples, we have yenTsf Matt. x. 21, Luke ii. 27 ', yfufftfitet' 
TiTi, Matt, xxiii. 34.» (Buttm. § 52. Obs. 1.) 

* Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 460 ; Passov. Lex. in v. xXug ; AU. Gr. Gr. § 8, 5. 
' Phrynich. (ed. Lobeck, p. 432,) &fMcaT»vov^t» al ru. hfii^n Xiyayrif, xtil $u ret hfitftet. 
See also Lobeck ad p. 78 ; Fischer, Prolus. p. 666. 
' Fischer, Prolus. p. 663. 


Obt. 4. NoiinB ending in -n;, wilU a vowel berore ii, usual)/ coutriut thatermin 
tian -is nf the accuiatiie into i ; but the rorm i-yni, which is fauud cODBtontlf 
Pinto, occurs ia John v. 11. 15, Tit. ii. 8.' (Buttm. f 53, 1.) 

Obi. t>. OfueiitHrB ia -nr, the Attic contraetioa of the dative occurs in yiff, tn 
yifi, in Luke i. 36. Grieabach, indeed, upon the authorily of certain raaniisciip 
has sdmittvd the Ionic form •yifn into the text, hut without due consideratiou. J 
the plural. jii;i>( and rifxc are univerB:illy uncontracteil iu the New Teatamint, ea 
trary to the Attic usaf^.' See Acts ii. 43, v. 12 ; Rom. iv. 19 ; Rev. v. G, ii. IS. 
liii. I. 11, ivii. 12. Tbe contracted accuBative x^in, from xfias, is found 
lii. 21, 1 Cor. viii. 13. (Buttm. § 54.) 

§ 9. — jinovtafous Declension. (Buttm. § 56.) 

1. There are many nouns which have more than one forn 
of inflection, or are declined in a different way from that whicfa 
the nominative indicates. Of these the New Testament is n 
without its examples : as, for instance, the accusative vavv, from 
the Attic nominative mor, in Acts xxvii. 41," and some others.. 

Oil, 1. Perhaps the nuhstantive niii, an iiiSccted by the writers of the New T« 
lament, can scarcely be classed with nouns nkiaidantia caaibui, as it iuvatiably fi 
lows the futm of the third declension. Thus Ibe genitive »«( occurs in Rom. lii. 
1 Cor.xiv. 19,Eph. iv. 17. 23, Col. ii. 18, and the dative ts^n Rom.vii. Z5, 1 Cl 
i. 10, niv. IS. The same maybe said of vkavt, at which the genilive rXiii ia foui 
In Acts zivii. 9. Examples of this moile of inBection, which is peculiar to the lat 
writers, may be seeo continually in SiinpliciuB, Philo, and the ecclesiastical Father 

2. By metaplasTmi.1, the dative plural of ad^^any is alwaji 
ad^^aat, after the form of the third declension. See Matt 
xii. 1. 10, II, 12, Mark i. 21, Lulce iv. 31. So also in JosepI 
B. J. i. 7. 3, Ant. xiii. 8. 4, and elsewhere. 

Obi. 2. Tlie pioper form sa^f.iri.s is found in Numb, uniil. 11) ; 2 Chnin. ii. 
LXX; Joseph. Ant li. 8. 6. In utht^r writers, t^i^ei is frequently uied fiir ■ 
0<rr«; ; hut although the nouu uccuts repeatedly in the Kew Testameot, it is nei 
employed in the dative plurul. 

3. Of neuters phiral in -o:, from viasc. in -or, St. Luke UB 
- Tti Sea^a in Acts xvi. 26, xx. 23, xxii. 30, sxiii. 29, and ela 

where. St. Paul has the Ionic SeuihoI in Phil. i. 13. 

plural Ta rfxTo, occurs in Acts vii. 12. 

Oba. 3. Kot only in the form and inflection, but in the S'l^cri of noiins. tl 
were frequent vatieties in the ancient dialects ; and peculiarilits of this kind 
observable iu the New Tetitament, in occorduiice wilh the usaj^e of the later writ 
They made ^'rsj, a buih or brambli, masculine; but iu the Hew TtBtament il 

■ HeindorfadPlEt.Cbarraicl.p.6-1. 

• Mieiii, pp. 36G, 369 ; Thorn. M. p. 849. 

• Planck, de Oraf. Gr. N. T. ii. 3. 

• Fi-cher ad Weller, ii. p. 181; Herodiun, II 
Schleusner and Bietsihueider in v. 


I slwayi faunti in the femiaine, and so aUo in llie writers of the liter epoch. See 
Vuk xii. 26 ; Luke vi. 44, xx. 37 ) Acta vii. 33 ; Theophr. H. Plant, iii. IS ; Dio9- 
coiiii. iv. 37.' Theie is little doubt that in Lidce xv. 14 the true leediog in x./cii 

•li, aud iu Acts xi. 28, ki/tir /LiyaXin, accocding to the best a 

though ir^nfit and ^7211 are kISII retained in the printed tut. If the msiiculine 

stljectivei be genuine, it is impossible to account for the intinductioD of the feroiuine 

iatn *o many copies; whereas h Ai'/uf, which is Doric, seems to have heen adopted 

into the later tongue.' Generally, ixiTw occurs in the neuter (Matt. iv. 16, vi. 23, 

vlii. 12) ; but in Heb. xii. IS it is masculiae. Both funus were also in use among- 

the Attics. There U also a feminine noun t^irli (Matt. if. 27 ; John vi. 17, n. 1)' 

which is peculiar to the Doric dialect.' la Attic, SiiXti is feminine ; iu Rev. mi. IB 

it is maaculine. The word Kn-it Is feminine in Rev. lix. 15, and masc. in Geo. iia. 

37, 42, LXX. Hence some would account for the remarkable resding in Rev. liv. 

19, Tijii Xmcr Tir fiiya; for which twi ntyiKnt now stands.' Besides these vaiiutions 

^^of gender, which accord with one or other 'of the ancient dialects, it is remarkable 

^Bttat the Doua txias, which is masculine in all the Greek writers, is neuter in the 

■llaw Testament and in the LXX. See Luke i. SD, 78, Ham. ix. 23, 1 Pet. i. 3, and 

^Bnnnpare Gen. xix. 9> Mumb. xi. IS, LXX. So also in the writings of tlie Fathurs.' 

^V § 10. — Declension of Hebrew-Greek Proper Names, 

i. To the head of Anomalous Declension maybe referred 
a large proportion of the proper names which occur in the 
New Testament. Many of them, indeed, though derived from 
the Hebrew, are declined in Greek after the first deelensioii, 
except that tlieymake the genitive in a, instead of oi/, as before 
mentioned in § 6. But others have a more simple form of in- 
flection, changing the final s of the nominative into » in tho 
I. accusative, and rejecting it altogether in the other cases, which 
B^c all alike. (Buttm. § 5G. 1. Obs. 1.) To this class belong, 

1. Nom. 'Ubws (Matt. i. 16) 

Gen. Dat. Voc. 'Uaav (Matt. i. 1, xxvi. 17 ; Mark i. 24) 
Ace. '[■naovv (Matt. xxvi. 4, Acta xx. 21).^ 

; 2. Nom. \ii,U or A^ft (Luke v. 29 ; Heb. vii. 9) 
Gen. Aeut (Luke iii. 24, Hcb. vii. 5) 
Dat. Aei/i 
Ace. hiu'iv (Mark ii. 14).' 

Schol. ad Theacr. ld;l. i. 132 ; Planck, de Oral. N. T. ii 
ValckuEBrii Specim. Annot. Crit. in N. T. p. 3S3 ; ¥ 
inck, ubi tupra. 
Passov, Lex. in v. naVit ; Stun, de Dial, Mac. et Alex, i 
r3. la tL Ttry few manuscripts, ^XtSni is neulef in Kuj 
'. 19 i Col. ii. 2. 

* Sea Lubeck ad Phryn. p. 188. 

* Planck, nit 11^0. 

* The Egyplbn name Sa^tSi, whidi occurs in Plat. Phw.l 
the same manner. See Malt. Gr. Gr. S 70. Olis. «. 

_ ' Nom. All,;, dat. \,i„, iu Joseph. Ant. i. 19. 7, ji. 7. -1. 


3. Nom. 'lojffris (Matt. xiii. 55) 
Gen. 'Icjffyi (Matt, xxvii. 56) 
Dat. 'Icjffvi 

Ace. ^Icijoriy, 

Obs* 1. There is an exception io tlie rule in the name M«y«^«-?f, gen. Maveta^^Ti 
(Rev. vii. 6), which makes Mufa^ffti also in the accusative (Matt. i. 10). The name 
of the Hebrew lawgiver, Ma^tih or Mu'CrtiSi ^^^ &" heteroclite inflection somewhat 
similar to the Greek name ^vK^ecrfis* Some grammarians have imagined an obso- 
lete form muftvsj from which the cases are formed in the same manner as c/7sa>;, vUeif 
from the old nominative vhug.^ Not only is this form altogether unknown, but the 
genitive MMff'ws is expressly referred to the nominative Mvatie in John vii. 22. Jo- 
sephus, however, and the LXX adhere to the above mode of declension, except that 
the gen. Mtitffiais is sometimes used by the former. In the New Testament it is thus 
'declined : — 

Nom. Mtt^riSi or Muvfftis (Luke iz. 30 ; Acts vi. 15, vii. 37) 

Gen. Matfius MuVAats (Mark xii. 26 ; Acts xv. 1. 5) 

Dat. Mufftr ana MoKrp liI»t;<rfr(Luke ix. 33; Matt. xvii. 4; 2 Tim. iii. 8) 

Ace. MA>0't» and MA>0-?y Muuo'hv (Luke xvi. 29 ; Acts vi. 11, vii. 35). 

2. Female names assume the form of feminine nouns of the 
iirst declension. 

06*. 2. There are a few exceptions, as Ai^xag (Acfs ix. 36), A«t; (2 Tim. i. 5)j 
and some are undeclined, as 'Is^as^^a, in Rev. ii. 20. In the instance of Mofiitc, -«;, 
an indeclinable form, Ma^tuft, also occurs frequently, as in Matt. i. 20^ Rom. xvi. 6, 
and elsewhere. 

3. A few Hebrew-Greek names are declined after the third 
declension. Thus SoXo/Jiciv (Matt. i. 7), gen. SoXoptaJvTor (John 
X. 23, Acts iii. 11), ace. 2o\of/.a/vrcc (Matt. i. 6). The manuscripts 
vary between SoXoptftJvrof and -o/vof, but either form is in accord- 
ance with ordinary Greek usages.* In Matt. xi. 24, Luke iv. 
26, 2iScyv, -ft/vof, is an example of the latter form. 

Obs. '^. A great proportion of Hebrew proper names, which might readily be de- 
cline*^ "tn tile same manner, are undeclined in the New Testament : for instance, 
*U^txu>f gen. and ace. (Matt. xz. 29, Luke xx. 30) ,* 'A«^a>v, gen. (Luke i. 5, Heb. vii. 
11); '%wsM«^X and 'A^«*, gen. (Luke ii. 36); Na^ava^x, ace. (John i. 46); 'Jmik, 
gen. (Acts ii. 16); 'E^^o^, gen. (Acts vii. 16); 'I^^ajjx, gen. (Rom. ix. 6, 22) ; BtutX, 
dat. (Rom. xi. 4) ; 2i^v, gen. and dat. (Rom. xi. 26, ix. 33). Many other instances 
will be found in the genealogies in Matt. i. 1, sqq., Luke iii. 23, sqq. 

Obi. 4. It is worthy of remark that many Hebrew names which are undeclined in 
the New Testament, are declined by the LXX and tlie later Greek writers. Thus, 
in the dative, r^ MiXx/^, r^ ^Afiiet, 1 Chron. xxiv. 9, 10. From *U^t;^«i the gen, 
and ace. ^UQtxovvrog, -t«, occur in Strabo and Fabricius ;■ and Josephus declines 
'if^etnMs, -»«/, after the second declension. Epiphanius (Hbbi. ii. p. 19) declines the 
appellative ra Teatrxu- as a neuter plural ; whereas in the New Testament it is always 

» Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 68 ; Matt. Gr. Gr. § 91. 1. 
' Thus we have 3iy0^&/y, -uvrggf and Uafu^Vf -Mvaf. 

3 This noun was also inflected after ihe second declension ; for we meet with the 
gen. 'U^tx^u in 3 Esdr. v. 4-J, and dat. 'U^ixv i" Procop. de jEdi/iciis. 


an indeclinable noun in the singular: as in Luke ii, 41, rw tatx"^* ^^ ™^y ^^ 
doubtful whether ffUt^u, in Luke i. 15, is declinable or otherwise. The LXX treat 
it as undeclinable in Numb. vi. 3, &Ta otvov Km ffUi^et, On the other hand, the geni- 
tive ffiKi^oi is found in Euseb. Praep. £v. vi. 10.^ For InK, which is undeclined in 
the LXX as well as in the New Testament, Josephus employs to liveuov, with t^ts 
sometimes expressed, and sometimes understood. See Ant. ii. 13. 2, iii. 5. 1. As 
an opposite example, 'lu^uvas, which follows the first declension in Acts ix. 35, is 
the same with la^uvj imdeclined, in Isai. xxxiii. 9, xxxv. 2. LXX. In the Latin 
Fathers the Hebrew proper names are very commonly undeclined. 

§ 11. — Defectives and Indeclinables, (Buttm. § 57.) 

1. Many nouns in the New Testament which are used in the 
pluraly though a single object only is designated, may probably 
be regarded as defective, though the reference is, it should 
seem, to the several parts of which the object consists : as in 
Matt. V. 16, ol oi/§avol, the heavens, of which the Jews reckoned 
three (2 Cor. xii. 2) ; viii. 11, avaroXa! xal iva^.%\y the east and 
west, i. e. the countries so situated ; Heb. i. 2, ol auuv^s, the 
worlds, or the universe ;* ix. 24, to. Sytof, the temple, as consist- 
ing of three parts. Thus also Matt. xx. 21, Ik Se^iwv, l| ilmv 
/Aft/v, which include the entire right and left sides of the body ; 
and in like manner, Luke xvi. 23, ev ToTf xoKirois, John i. 13, 
i§ al[Aoirctfv, To this head may also be referred ra Upoi y^apt- 
/jLocrac, in 2 Tim. iii. 16 ; the names of certain festivals which 
lasted several days, as ra a}^ufxa, yevicria, eyxa/vifls (Matt. xxvi. 
17, Mark vi, 21, John x. 22) f and of some cities, as 'A^rtvai, 
^iKmiroi, &c. 

Obf. 1. Although ra fufifiara in the plural denotes not only a vteeA or period of 
seven days (Matt, xxviii. 1, Mark xvi. % Luke xxiv. 1^ John xx. 1. 19, Acts xx. 7, 
1 Cur. xvi. 2), but also the Sabbath day (Luke iv. 16, Acts xiii. 24, xvi. 13, xvii. 2), 
the usage doubtless originated in the former meaning. Thus Joseph. Ant. iii. 10. 1, 
i/ihfitn hfti^ec, iirts ffei^^ttrn xxXtTreu, Some have thought the word not so much a 
real plural as a mere imitation of the Aramaean 2^/)]2ttf i ^^^ ^^^ occurrence in the 

oblique cases (Mark i. 21, ii. 23), independently of its easy reference to this class of 
nouns, renders this supposition entirely inadmissible.^ 

2. Several indeclinables^ as ro Traiffxa, and the names of let- 
ters, aX(pa; cufjLBya, \uroc, occur in the New Testament. There 
are also, besides those already adduced (§ 10), many other in- 

' See Passov. Lex. in v. 

' The usage is the same as in the Hebrew D^D7i^. 

. — • . 

° There is the same usage in the Latin Saturnaiia, Lupercalia, &c Josephus 

(Ant. xii. 7. 7) uses r» (puree, for rei iyxetivtet, 

* Winer's Sprachidiom, § 27. 2, 3 ; Alt, Gram. N. T. } 21. 2, 3. • 




declinable names from the Hebrew ; such as Bri^Xeefi,, Na^apV 
(Matt. ii. G. 23), 'A^ii (Luke i. 5), liXcuifx (Luke xiii. 2), Kayi 
(John ii. L 11, iv. 46, xxi. 2), Bri^a^jU (John v. 2), Si/x^V (Acts 
vii. 16), Maiiafx (Acts vii. 29), 2*va (Acts vii. 30. 38, Gal. iv. 
24. 25), &c. &c. 

Obs, 2. In addition to the indeclinable form 'Iigat/^^xV (Matt, xxiii. 37, Mark 
xi. 1, Gal. iv. 25), the neuter plural *Ii^9f o^vfiu, -m, is very generally used ; and so 
2e%fiaf-Mv, in Matt. x. 15, xi. 23, Rev. xi. 8. Some commentators understand a 
third form, regarding 'it^ofeXv/ia. in Matt. ii. 3 as the nom. sing, of Si/emimne noun; 
but it is far more probable that trZcec agrees with ^o}.ts understood. At the same 
time re'fMppu is declined both as a fern, ting, and a neut, plural. Compare Matt 
X. 15, 2 Pet. ii. 6. 

Obs. 3. The formula expressive of !Christ's eternity, « &v xeu o nv xeti i l^ofutu, 
assumes the character of an indeclinable noun in Rev. i. 4, et alibi, 

§ 12.-0/ the Adjectives. (Buttm. § 59—64.) 

The declension of Adjectives in the New Testament presents 
very little variation from the ordinary usage. It is merely 
necessary to remark that compound adjectives in -os-, and those 
in -lof, which are derived from substantives (Buttm. § 60. 4. 
and Obs. 3.) are not always common in the New Testament. 
Thus dpyof is formed with a feminine termination in the verse of 
Epimenides, cited in Tit. i. 12, Kprirsf dsl vJ/gyjTotJ, xaxa bytpla, 
yoLarepBs dpyat. We have also in 2 Thess. ii. 16, wocQoiKXnm 
aictivioLy. Heb. ix. 12, aiuvlxv Xvrpojaiv. On the other hand, 
omos, which has almost universally three terminations,^ is com- 
mon in 1 Tim. ii. 8, eTrxipoyrxf haiouf %Biq(Zh\ To refer htjlovs to 
av^paf in the preceding clause, is extremely harsh ; and the 
various reading, oalccf, is but weakly supported. 

Obs. Griesbach would also read Tpig o/Ams, instead of 0^0/^, in Rev. vr. 3, upon 
very good authority.^ 

§ 13. — Of the Degrees of Comparison. (Buttm. § 65 et seqq.) 

1. The New Testament writers follow the ordinary rules 
in forming the degrees of comparison ; though a few later forms 
are also observable. 

Obs. 1. The comparative of T«;^;y; is cax/wv in the New Testament, not the more 
Attic form ^affvuvj or 9-ar7A;y.^ See John xiii. 27, xx. 4, 1 Tim. iii. 14, Heb. xiii. 
19, 23. (Buttm. § 67. 3.) 

^ MatthiaB (Gr. Gram. § 118.) says always i but there is an exception^ if genuine, 
in Plat. Leg}?, viii. p. 831. D. * Alt, Gram. N. T. § 7. 

» Fisch. Prolus. p. 672. Phryn. p. 7G, 


Obs, 2. Of superlatives, which have no regular positive, there is a new instance 
in the form ^tri^Tds, which is not employed by the more ancient Greeks.^ Herodian. 
p. 473. ^trtuTovs S^viBecff otf wv nrifrovt xiyav^t. The word occurs in Matt. xxii. 4, 
and in Joseph. Ant. viii. 2. 4, Athen. xiv. p. 656. £. It is formed from the ob- 
solete adjective fftrtt? or probably from the substantive corresponding to it. (Buttm. 
§ 69,3,and06f. 1.) 

Obi, 3. New forms of comparison sprang up rapidly in the later speech ; of 
which two only are found in the New Testament. In Eph. iii. 8 we have the new 
comparative XXtt^tffrin^ds, from the superlative ikeix"^ros; and /luZon^dg from 
the comparative fAuiav, in 3 John 4.^ (Buttm. § 69. 3. Obt, 3.) 

Obs, 4. The positive is put with fuikXdw for the comparative in Mark ix. 42, xaX$9 
iffrn aiirf fAak?icv tl, x» r, ^. This adverb is also frequently put with the com- 
parativcf thereby forming a sort of double comparative ; as in Mark vii. 36, 2 Cor. 
vii. 13, fMiXXov ^i^i^aon^iv.- And, with a yet greater degree of emphasis, in Phil. i. 23, 
fTdXXip fitaXkn »ft7fa»v. The Latins also have a like usage. Thus Plant. Men. v. 
4. 22, Maffis du/cius, 

2. There are some modes of expressing a superlative in the 
New Testament which indicate a Hebrew origin. Thus a subst. 
is sometimes repeated in the genitive; as in Heb. ix. 3, iyia, 
ay/wv, the Holy of Holies^ i. e. the most holy place. Rev. xix. 
16, ^ocGi'Kzvs ^oe.(riKiojv xou xupios xvqiuv. Precisely similar is 1 
Tim. vi. 15, ^<x,<riK&vs rm SaiffiXsuovrcov, x%i xvgios rcuv KvqiBvovTuv, 
So in Levit. xxiii. 32, ai^^dTa aa^^drm. 

Obs. 5. A similar form is also used to imply eternity: as in Luke i. 50, %U ytnug 
yivtuv. Gal. i. 5, 1 Tim. i. 17, Rev. i. 6. 18, tig rovg etleHvus rSv etluvatv* In 2 Pet. iii. 
18, it is lU hfM^av aiuMf, The Hebrews expressed the same idea by a copula^ tig 
ytneif xu) ytvteiv. There is an analogous repetition of the same word to express con- 
tinuity in 2 Cor. iv. 16, avetKatvovrat vfAt^e^ xeti fifii^a* 

Obs, 6. It is also according to the Hebrew idiom that the name of God is 
frequently used, with or without an adjective, to denote some superlative quality of 
an object. See Gen. xxii. 6, £xod. iii. 1, 1 Sam. xiv. 15, Cant. viii. 6, Isai. xxviii. 2, 
xxiv. 1. It will be observed however, that the usage obtains only with the names 
of real substances, or visible effects, and never with abstract nouns ; so that it is 
improperly applied by some commentators is such cases as the following: 2 Cor. i. 
12, if tlXix^mitf Biov, the sincerity which God approves, not perfect sincerity: Col. ii. 19, 
vhv uS^fifftv rod Siov, a growth in grace which God requires, not an exceeding growth : 
Markxi. 22, <rW/» 0tov,/aiih in God, nota strong faith (see § 44. 1) ; Rev. xxi. 1 1, rhv 
Vo\et9 rov^tou, the glory derived from God, not an exceeding glory ; James v. 11, riXog 
Ku^Uv, the end which God put to JoVs troubles, not the glorious end of them. Nor is 
the idiom required in Luke i. 15, fAiyug iydxtev rou 0tou, 1 Thess. iv. 16, h viXTiyyt 
0iw (Compare 1 Cor. xv. 52) ; Rev. xv. 2, xiBu^ag rod 0tov, Much less will it 
admit of an extension, so as to include such expressions as those in Rom. xiii. 1, 
retTg y7jufffaig ruv ayyiXoiiv. 2 Cor. xi. 10, uXyiBuu X^i^rov, Col. ii. 18, B^n^xttet rut 
ayyiXm, Compare Acts vi. 15, Rom. ix. 1, Rev* xxi. 7.^ These passages are, indeed, 

» Moeris, p. 794. « Planck de Orat. N. T. ii. 5. 

8 Winer's Sprachidioms, § 37, 2, Alt, Gr. N. T. § 23, 3 and 35. 1 b. Gesen. § 173, 
Obs. I, 
* See Haab's Heb.-Gr. Gram. N. T. p. 162. 

c 2 


more readily intelligible from the simple meaning of the words employed ; and 
even in Acts vii. 21, the expression karuti r^ ei^, thoagh it may well be rendered 
exceedingly beatUi/ui, will admit of explanation upon ordinary principles. See} 
47, 2, Obt. 6. 

Obt, 7, Certain figurative expressions, and others indicatiyeof intensity or emphasis, 
may be herenoticed ; though they do not, in reality, partake of the nature of a super- 
lative. Such are Matt. xvii. 20, iat 7;^fiTt ^i^rtv it »»»»»¥ fnm^tfg, i, e. the ieatt degree 
of faith ; 1 Cor. xiii. 2, vri^Ttt, &ffri S^n fAt^tfravtn, t. e» the greaUtt faith ; Rev. i. H 
eti r^ixtSt Xf (/»«i eitftt t^tn ktv»of^ ^ X**^** ^'^^ ^* S^BaXfMt ttvrelS, itt ^X«^ ftttpigf ». r. X. 
Such also are those passages, in which two or more words of the same or cognate 
meaning are joined by a copula; as in Matt. ii. 18, B^fh^t mCI xXetu^ftot mu Hv^fuf 
vroXvSf Luke i. 14, t^reet ;^a^a fci xa) xyeiXkiafis, See also Rom. ii. 8, l^Thess. ii. 9. 
A like reason will probably explain the expression in Heb. x. 37, fUK^o* t^n U», 
which signifies a very very short period. Precisely similar are Arist. Vesp. 213, h» 
offn f^ixvvf Arrian. ludic. 29, gfov e^af rns x^i^^f* Words are thus doubled frequently 
in the Hebrew ; and thence in the LXX, as in Exod. i. 12, ff^Sh^a cp^^a* Hence 
such forms are generally regarded as Hebraisms ; but there is a yet more striking 
example, in which the same adjective is repeated with xa), in the Rosetta Inscrip- 
tion, V. 9, *Effinf fitiyecf xtu fjuiyecgf u e, fAtyt^rds,^ 

§ 14.— Of Numerals. (Buttm. § 70, 71.) 

1. The cardinal number sh is very commonly employed in 
the New Testament instead of the indefinite pronoun nV. 
Thus, in Matt. viii. 19, els- yp<x,yuij.a,r^us sfirgv avrco. xxi. 1 9, ISiv 
avytriv //.Ixv Im Tvis oiov. John vi. 9, eVrt TrociJas^jov ev (55g. See 
also Matt. ix. 18, xvi. 4, xviii. 24, 28, xix. 18, xxvi. 69, Mark 
xii. 42, Luke v. 12, 17, John vii. 21, xx. 7. 

Obt. 1. This was probably an imitation of a similar Hebrew usage, though it also 
occurs sometimes in Greek. In the same way the Latins also employ unus; as in 
Plin. N. H. XXXV. 36, Tabu/am anus una cutiodiebat. Terent. Andr. I. i, dl. Forte 
unam aspicio adolescentulam* 

Obs. 2. For the ordinal r^uros, the cardinal tT; is also frequently used ; more espe* 
cially in speaking of the first day of the week; as in Matt, xxviii. 1, ii; [aUv rafi^rm. 
Mark xvi. 2, vr^eA vns fitZs tra^^eirm. Also in Luke xxiv. 1, John xx. 19, Acts xx. 7, 
1 Cor. xvi. 2. In enumerations lis may generally be rendered either as a cardinal 
or an ordinal. See Gal. iv. 24, Rev. vi. 1, ix. 12, and compare Thucyd. iv. 115, 
Herod, iv. 161, Herodian vi. 5. 1. Thus also, in Latin, Cic. Orat. pro Cluent, c. 64, 
unuMi alterum, tertium diem quiescebat. In the Hebrew the cardinal number is con- 
stantly put for the ordinal, as in Exod. xl. 2, Levit. xxiii. 24, Numb. i. 1, 18, xxix. 1, 
Deut. i. 3, Ezra iii. 6, x. 17, Ezek. xxvi. 1, Hagg. i. 2, ii. 1. Sometimes also, 
though more rarely, in Greek and Latin. Thus in Diod. Sic. iii. 16, fiMg *OXuft^M' 
hf. Cic Senect. c. 5, uno et octogetimo anno. See also Herod, v. 89.' 

I Winer, J 37. Alt, § 35. Georg. Hierocrit. i. 3, 29. 

« Alt,Gr. N. T. § 45. 1. Winer, § 17. Obs. 3. Ast ad Plat. Legg. 219. Schaefer 
ad Long! Past. 399. Passov. Lex in v. rig, Tursellin. de Partic Lat. in t« wms , 
n. 17. 



Obs, 3, In Matt, xviii. 22 Ihe cardinal number Wra is used, euphomm cautd^ for 
the adverb irveiziSf seven times, A similar usage occurs in the Hebrew of Ps. cxiz. 
164, and is preserved by the LXX in Gen. iv. 24. It may also be remarked by the 
way, that the number seven, being constantly employed by the Jews as a round 
number (Isa. iv. 1, xxiii. 14, Jerem. xxv. 11, et alibi), is used with the like inde- 
finiteness in the New Testament. See Matt. xii. 45, xviii. 21, Luke xi. 26. 

2. The numeral Svo is frequently undeclined in the New 
Testament. It occurs in the genitive, for instance^ in Matt. xxi. 
31, xxvii. 21, John i. 41, Acts i. 24. 

Obs, 4. In Acts xii. 6 the dative W) is used. So also in Gen. ix. 22, LXX, and 
constantly by Aristotle and Theophrastus. Matthise* cites a solitary example from 
Thucydides ; but there Si/w» is probably the correct reading.' 

3. Instead of the compounds ov^c\s and pta)Sgly, for which the 
Hebrews have no corresponding expression, the writers of the 
New Testament, in accordance with their vernacular idiom, 
sometimes employ the adjective war, with a negative particle 
closely connected with the verb. Thus, in Matt. xii. 25, gracra 
TToKis iJi,spi<j^EX(ra xaO' Eaurrif ov (Tra&TjVerai, xxiv. 22, Ma^k xiii. 
20, ovK av l(7'ci&7) 7roi(ra adp^. Luke 1. 37, ovk a^vvxTTiGzi vaqi ©eo; 

TToiy prifAx. (Here ptifJLx signifies a thing according to the Hebrew 
usage ; and, indeed, the passage is cited from Gen. xviii. 14. 
In Greek, however, eVos- has frequently the same import.) 
John vi. 39, Tva ttSv, S SgSa;x£ ptoi, pt^ aitoKiacij, Acts X. 14, ovSg- 
TTOTB 6(pa7ov Tcay KOiyov, Eph. iv. 29, TTois Xoyos" axTrpos Ix rov crS" 
fxarof vfAcuy juir) EKTropsvEa^a}, 1 John ii. 21, TToiv Nf/gDSor Ix rrif aXin-' 
^eIxs ovx, EffTi, Rev. xxii. 3, wav xarava^Efxa oux, ectxi eti. Add 

John iii. 15, Rom. iii. 20, 1 Cor. i. 29, Eph. v. 5, 2 Pet. 20, 
1 John ii. 21, Rev. vii. 1, 16, ix. 4, xviii. 22, and compare 
Judith xii. 20, Susan. 27. A similar expression, but some- 
what stronger, is Matt. x. 29, ^v 1% aurwv ov ^rgcrerrai 1^1 r-nv y-Sv, 
(Compare Isai. xxxiv. 16, in the Hebrew.) 

Obs, 5. When the negative particle is not immediately connected with the verb, 
but with vas, the exclusiun is not necessarily universal. Thus in Matt. xix. Wyou 
^eivrts x^^flyfl-i rov Xeyw rovrov, «XX* (its ^ilorett, i. e., not all, but some only. So 1 Cor. 
xy. 39, oh ^afftt rapl fi au'rh ffci^l, all fesh is not the samefiesh, i. e., there are different 
kinds of flesh. See also Matt. vn. 21, Rum. ix. 6, x. 16. Although both these 
forms are philosophically accurate, the former is not found in classical Greek, nor is 
it very common in the New Testament.^ 

4. Reciprocity is sometimes expressed by the repetition of 

1 Matth. Gr. Gr. § 138. 

« Thorn. M. p. 253. Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 21 K Wahl's Lex, in v. 

' Winer, §26, 1. Alt, § 45, 3. 


lis in a different case ; as in 1 Cor. iv. 6, "va ii,ri eTi v^i^ 
ipvsioun^e, one over another. So 1 Thess. v. 1 1, oiitoSo,u,E(i 
hx. Equivalent are the forms in Acts ii. 12, ak\o$ wgw StWtt. 
Horn. XV. 2, EKSiTTor riji Tr\y>ai 

5. Tile Greeks and Romans, as well as the Hebrews, omit- 
ted the names of meanirrs and monies after numerals ; and 
thus S^^xM-wv must be supplied in Acts xix, 19, dpyvp'iau tJ-upi- 
aSxs n-jvTE. This is the only example in the New Testament.' 

G. An ordinal number may be concisely employed, so as to 
include the companions of tho individual designated; as in 
2 Pet. ii. 5, oySoov NiSe i<pu\a.%f, i. e., Noah mth seven others. 
In such cases avTas is usually added, as in Polyb. xvi. 2, rplntl 
auns 6 Aiovi/croSwgoi diKvril^ara. Sometimes, however, the pros' 
noun is omitted, as in Plutarch. Pelop. p. 284, sij olxi'av SwS^- 
Karos xareX^uv. Appian. Punic, p. 12, TgiVoi ■bots tv oTniKaup 
x/iuwTnw£V" 6^i5e. Compare '2 Mace, v. 27.' 

" 5 15.- 0/ Pronomi.^. (Buttm. § 72—80.) 
1. In the New Testament the gen. of the personal pron. ii 
more usually employed than a poxsessU-e pronoun. Sce§ 34.4. 
(Buttm. 572.4.) 

on. the a-IJ. 'his is cccagioniilly employeil, a 

r( TH 'litsr OLy^h, d ^ Il'r l/tn^M* /tlrtU, XXV. 

(Irri). Su Josh. Tii. ID, Prov. xxvii. B. LXX. Mure genecully, however, tliU adjeBt 
live U not aimply equivateat to it f oaseBsive piououo, but implies aa antithena (f 
diatinction, as deootin^ one'a sun, in oppo^tion to that of snulher. Thus, Matt, il 
X;l9i> uV n> ;!''«> »^.v. So Polyb. xiiii. 9. 14, 9ixvr» <;[ ^i: Xmt I>»f-« vj; 
Again, Uatt. xxr. 15, luErrfi xet> ni liiat litxfia. Saia. xiv. 4, tii tit il • x^ 
^X^^iTfio afxlTxi; T» ISJ» (VfiV rntiid, i) s-i'imi. Compare also Luke X. 34, Joh^ 
X. 3, 4, Acta ii. 6, iv. 32, Rom. viii. 31, xi. 24, Heb. vii. r. The anlitheiis i\ 
clestly roarked in 1 Cor. vii. 2, Iiowths ^i IsnTn j^uru Ix^t". "" iKittn 7-» Hm 
diJjx IjK'™. When B pronoun ia added, as in Tit i. 12, '!.« airZt rfspims,'^^ 
niciely indicutea a poBsesiion which ia more diatiactly marlied by tha adjectiv 
The ineBninR therefore ia a nalive poti, not a,fireigiier. Compare jEscbin. c. Ct( 
siph, 143. Xen. Hell. 1. 14. 13, In a Eimilar way the later Roman author* n 

2. The pronoun a^ror has the following senses (Buttm. 
74. 2.) :— 

1. Joined with a noun, or as the nominative to a finit 
verb, it signifies self, as in John xxi. 25, ouSI avr'ov oTtM 

' Winer, 4 ar., 2, Alt, Gram. N. T. ^ 45, 4. -' See Kuinuel ad loe. 

3 Winer, § 6. 1, 2, Alt, Gram. N,T. 5 4(1,4, 5, 6. Welstein & Kj-pko o 
3 Pel. ii. 5. TuiBdlin. Panic, in v. imui, n. 18. 


«05Ai.5V yjn^riO'xi ra Y^aipi/AEn )3i(S>,i'«. See also Rom. 
viii. 16, 1 Cor. is. 27, 2 Cot. si. 1-1. 

Oil. 2. Connectt 

A with this sense is its use to point out, e 

ot thing of peculii 

r dignity, aa when aervanla speak of their 

maslets, cliiJiJreu of 

their t«ichetB, &<:. 

Thus also it 19 used of '7(iJ in Rom. x. 

i, lleb. Kiii.5i and 

vof (Srij/ in Matl. 


^v 2. It is used in the oblique cases as a mere personal pro- 

^B noun, thougli generally witli reference to some preceding 

^ft word, as in Matt. i. 18, 19, 20, el alibi jxismii. 

^V Obt. 3, There are man; places in nhich it appears to be used in a rrftcxive sense 

^Bbr airif. Thnx tn Matt. xii. 45, >: i-^i.^mc. iymm Si-i <ri;i airT. i/}-!.. John iv, 

47, ^x aiTir, rtfl .'.frxT^. b^» rit i.;ir. Add Matt. iii. 16, John 1. 4S, xiii. II, Epb. 

L 9, Heb. xi. 21. This may be a Eebreir idiom, though it may also La sapportvil 

tif a nmilai usage in the Greek wi'iters. Thus Diod. Sic. xvii. 64, tit x-jic oiTct 

linUt. Add Hetod. ii. 2, Thucyd. vii. 5, Arlstut. Ethic, xi. 4, Acrian. Bpict. i. I'J. 

11, Herodian, i. 17. 3,ii. 4. 13, iv. II. 13. Compare also 1 Mace. i. 2, It !a s^il- 

dom, however, that in such ca«es some manuscripts do not exhibit a variation in 

the breathing.* 

13, With the article prefixed it signifies the same, as in 
Matt. XV. 46, xxvi. 4, Luke ii. 8, Acts i. 15,"xv. 27, 
1 Cor. vii. 5, 1 Thess. ii. 11, Heb. i. 12, xiii. 8. 
4. It is used sometimes, though rarely, in the sense of 
aponle. Thus in Luke xi. 4, kx\ yag biJtoi dpliu-tv tiiiti 
o^Ei'?.ovTi Viv. Compare John xvi. 27, 1 Pet. ii. 24.' 
5. It stands sometimes for fiovoi, as in Mark vi. 31, Seute 
Cij-iTi alW> v.'XT :S,'*v. See also 2 Cor xii. 13.* 
6. For the sake of emphasis it is sometimes added to the 
subject of the verb, when the sentence contains some 
case of the reflexive pronoun taur^u, so as to exclude 
any other agent. Thus Rom. viii. 33, ^.liSs air'A h 
UuTw (TTsvi^oaEv. Add 2 Cor. i. 9. 
Ofr(.4. There is ako an emphaiiis, when lirii is connected with a primitive pro- 
Itn ; as ia Luke ii. 33, mi rn !i butri n, ■^'•'x^i liiXiiiriTiu fs/i^o-'ia. John iii. 29, 

3, In the New Testament the interrogative pronoun tU 
(Buttm. g 77-} is used, as in other writers, both in direct and 
indirect questions. See Matt. v. 25. 31, Mark v. 9, 30, 31, 
tix- 33, 34, Lute vi. 11, Acts xiii. 25, et alibi. So also when 
t is equivalent to eI' tk, as in 1 Cor. vii. 18, irEgirsT/xij/iEvw tU 
wT.'n^n ; EiTitTTaff&w. Compare James iii. 13, v. 1 3. 

■ See Heintina adHcsiud. Op. D. p. 226. 

« Winw, i 22. 6. Alt, N. T. { liS. 3. Matt. Gr. Or. } US. OiJ. 3. 

• Alt, Gram. N. T. J 6. Fasm.v. Ux. in v. 

* Kuster nd Atint. Adium. 50e. 


Oba, 5, The interrogative power, though still less direct, is also plainly discenii- 
ble in such passages as Mattt vi. 3, fAfi yvtirtt fi a^t^rt^a rev ri itonT 4 2t^a tov* xx. 
22, chx othnri ri airu^Bt. Compare John x. 6, xix. 24. It also retains this import 
in the formula rts i^rtv i| vfuSv AvB^m^ct ; and the like, in which U there a^y onel n 
put for whof Compare Matt. vii. 9, xii. 11, xziv. 45, Luke xi. 5, 11/ xii. 45, 
xiv. 5. 

0b8, 6, There are many passages in which, however rare the usage may be in 
classical Greek, r)s is used for the relative ofrts. Thus in Matt. zv. 32^ oix, ix^^ 
ri ^eiyifft. Luke xvii. 8, iroifta^of ri htitvnftt. Add Matt. x. 19, Mark vi. 36, xiv. 
36, Rom. viii. 26, 1 Tim. i. 7. 

Obs, 7. On the other hand, the relative is put for the interrogative pronoun in 
Matt. xxvi. 50, Irat^t, t^* f ^a^u» 

Oba. 8. Frequently r)! is used for xon^ot, which of two: as in Matt. xxi. 31, rig m 
tS* 3t/« i^oififft T« BiXnfAO, rov Targes J XXV ii. 21, rtfet SfXiri a«r« rZv ^V0 ««r«XiV*> vfuf'j 
So Matt. ix. 5, xxiii. 17, xxvii. 17, Luke v. 23, xxii. 27, John ix. 2, Phil. i. 22. 

Obs, 9. Followed by a negative particle, ris implies a strong afiBrmation, as in 
1 John ii. 22, t/s Utsv o yptuff'Tus, il fih x. r. X ; Every one is a iiar, who denies, &c. 
So 1 John V. 5, Rev. xv. 4. On the other hand, it denies without a negative ; as in 
Matt. vi. 27, riV ^t t^ vfiZv ivvecrect ; notie of you is abie,"^ 

4. In its proper acceptation r\s is found in Matt. v. 23, 
Acts xi. 36, et sceplvs. Sometimes eTy ns occurs, as in Mark 
xiv. 51, x«J ^s Tis veavtVxos- moXoiJ&e/ avrcb, Luke Xxii. 50, sis ris 
k% avruv. So John xi. 49. See also § 69. iv. Obs, 1. There 
are besides the following usages in the New Testament : — 

1. It is added to adjectives of quality, quantity, or magni- 
tude, both when they stand alone, and with a substan- 
tive, for the purpose of marking dignity or eminence, or 
giving intensity to an expression, as in Acts viii. 9, 
Xeyo/v etva/ T<va iat^Tov fxiyav, Heb. X. 27, (fo/Sega rts IxJoj^ri 
xqia-ecos. So Diod. Sic. v. 39, hni'novos ns ^i6s. Compare 
Heliod. ii. 23. 99, Lucian. D. M. v. 1, Plutarch. V. Cic. 
p. 784. 

Ohs, 10. In the same sense it is found with a substantive in James i. 18, n's r« 
uveit rifAug a^et^x^* "^'^"^ "^^^ ecvrev nrttrfiiruv, unless, perhaps, the meaning is merely a 
hind of first 'fruits. The adjective is sometimes wanting, ng being used by itself in 
the sense of eminent^ distinguished, Tlius in Acts v. 36, \iym Cimi met, iecvriv. Also 
in the phrase tTvai ti, to be somewhat of importance : as in 1 Cor. iii. 7, «rr« wrt i 
(pvTivuv iffr'i T/. Gal. ii. 6y}oxovvruv tivai rt. Compare also 1 Cor. \iii. 2, x. 19, Gal. 
vi. 3, and see above.* 

2. With numerals it is frequently redundant, or may be 
supposed to indicate that the number is not to be re- 
garded as strictly exact. Thus in Luke vii. 19, ^r^oaxa- 
Xgffa/xevos" S:/o Tivar twv fxa^yiTuv avrov. See also Acts 

xix. 14, xxiii. 23. 

» Winer, § 25. 1. Alt, § 43. Passov. Lex. in v. rig, « Winer, § 25. 2. Alt,*§ 44. 


3. Added to proper names, it has been supposed to desig- 
nate an obscure individual ; in which sense the English 
frequently say one. Thus in Acts xix. 9, Iv ax^'^V Tt/- 
^dyvQv rmsy of one Tyrannus; xxi. 16^ Mv«(ra;y/Tivf. Com- 
pare Acts XXV. 19. 

Ohs. 1 1 . Some commentators suppose that the nouns a^^ and atB^Mtot sometimes 
supply theiplace of rss in the New Testament, in imitation of the Hebrew ; in sup- 
port of which such examples are adduced as Matt. xix. 6, 9 «Zv « 610; ri/yi^fi/^iy, 
av^^uiros fitri ;^Ar^i^tra>. Luke ix. 3S^ eivfi^ avro rtiu 0%X0(/ an^on^t,' In the former of these 
passages, however, av^^v^os is plainly opposed to 610;, and in the latter may be appro- 
priately rendered a man among the crowd: nor is there any reason against a similar 
rendering in other places, though it is true that the Hebrew words ^^ and Q*72^ 

• T T 

are rendered by rts in Nehem.iv. 17, Prov. vi. 27, Ecclus. vi. 8, LXX. Compare 
Matt. ix. 9, Luke v. 18, vi. 31, Acts x. 5^ et alibi. The same remark will also apply to 
the alleged use of uv^^vtos for txa^rog, since a man^ or mankind generally^ will equally 
meet the sense ; as in 1 Cor. iv. l,0t;r«; hfJMs Xoyt^it^i &vB^m^»S) iis vxn^irat$ X^tg-rov* 
xi. 28, ^oxtfjuaZiTof eiv^^v^os leturiif* Compare Prov. xxiv. 12. It may also be re- 
marked, that avh^ will sometimes admit of being rendered by the demonstrative pro- 
noun, when it is followed by a relative ; as in Rom. iv. 8, fiaxoipies arnf,f ou fith XoyUn^ 
rat Ku^tof u/ia^rietv. So also James i. \2j fietxa^ios avn^i OS v^o flint 9rn^affAev, This last, 
however, is the only instance in which such examples are not citations from the Old 
Testament. Compare 1 Kings xix. 8, Ps. xxxii. 2. 


§ 16. — The Augment and Reduplication. (Buttm. § 82 — 86.) 

In the flexion of verbs there are several peculiarities in the 
later speech, some of which accord with the Attic, and some 
with the Doric, dialect ; but no traces of the Ionic are observ- 
able in the New Testament. 

Obs, 1. The Attic form i?x»j(p« is used, instead of x«x»^«. See Rev. ii. 27, iii. 3. 
xi. 17.— (Buttm. § 83. 0**.3.) 

Obs, 2. The three verbs, /Sot/Xo^ff/, 3t/y«^0e/, and /k/xx«, sometimes take the temporal 
augment instead of the syltabid in the aorist and imperfect tenses, after the Attic 
usage. Thus in 2 John 1 2, hfiovXtiBfiVi Matt. xvii. 1 6, nhwrt^nfct^i xxvi. 9, fihvvaro^ 
Luke vii. 2, ^^iXXt. The practice, however, is not uniform ; for in other places the 
syllabic augment is used; as in Matt. i. 19, ifiovXri^n) xxii. 46, tivvecro, Luke x. 1, 
«^«XX«.i (Buttm. § 83. Obs, 5.) 

Obs. 3. The omission of the augment in the jD/t/j^f/amjoer/*. continually occurs. 
Matt. vii. 25, Luke vi. 48, TiSs^fXsarr0, Mark xiv. 44, h^xu, xv. 7, ^ixetnxtiff»v» 10, 
vra^cthihuxufftzvy xvi. 9, txfit^K^xu, Acts xiv. 23, iri^ta'TiuKUffuy, 1 John ii. 19, fcifci- 
vnxuffxy. These and similar omissions of the augment, which occur in the later 
speech, have sometimes been referred to the poetic figure Apharesis^ and supposed 

> Planck de Orat. N. T. ii. 3. Georg. Hierocr. p. 32. 


io be a vestige of the Poetic dialect ; but they are simply indications of negligent 
writing, equally prevalent in Attic Greek.^ (Buttm. § 83. Obs, 6.) 

Obs, 4. In verbs beginning with tl there is the usual fluctuation between tu and 
nv, in the tenses which take the augment ; and the MSS. variations are propor- 
tionably numerons.* Thus we have in Matt. iii. 17, tvlixfi^a, Luke iii. 22^ nvUzvu^ 
Acts xvii. 21, tvxaifevv, Mark vi. 31, nv»»!^evv, x. 16, tilxiyu. Acts xi. 29, ittnr^^urii 
xxvii. 29, nuxovro. For texts in which the readings vary, see Luke xii. 16, Actsil 
26, xxvii. 35, Rom. i. 21. It may here be observed that the verb tv^T^ytX/^fif in- 
variably takes the augment after iv, in the manner of verbs compounded with preposi- 
tions : Gal. iii. 8. vt^otvnyytxia'are, Heb. iv. 2, 6, wtiyytXt^/Atvoi, Rev. x. 7, tunyyi^m. 
(Buttm. § 84. 5. and 86. 2.) 

Obt. 5. In John xix. 31, xarutyuf^i, 3 pi. aor. 2, past* of »»'reiypvfiu, has the 
syllabic augment, instead of the temporal. (Buttm. § 84. Obs. 5.) 

Obt, 6. The syllabic augment is prefixed to the temporal in the perfl Ui^euut, u 
Luke ix. 36, and elsewhere. With respect to the verb xvoiytiv, instead of the forms 
ctntf^uj dvsM;^Bfiv, amfynv, employed by the Attics, the New Testament writers nse 
me^ecj &c. Thus Johu ix. 17, 21, ^»w|«. Acts xii, 10, Mx^iy Rev. xi. 19, xv.5, 
imyfi. Sometimes this verb is found even with a triple augment, as in Rev. iv. 1, 
^u^a nntiyfilvnt XX. 12, mteS^B-fi. So in Gen. vii. 11, LXX, i^vs^'p^Sn^'tfy, viii. 6, ntia^i. 
The regfular form occurs in Luke i. 64, John ix. 14, 30, Rev. x. 2.^ (Buttm. § 84. 
Obs, 8.) 

Obs,'?, A reduplicate form in the perfect of verbs beginning with a vowel, which 
is very common in the Attic dialect, is not unusual in the New Testament. For 
instance, Mxeeij in Luke vii. 24, John iv. 42, 1 John i. 1 ; a^oXa/Xatg^ Luke zv. 4, 
et cUibi seepius ; and the plusq. perfect eXqXc/Siiy, in Luke viii. 2, John viii. 20, 
Acts viii. 27, ix. 21. (Buttm. § 85. 1, 2.) 

Obs, 8. In 2 Cor. xi. 4, nnix^ff^^ is read with a double augment, instead of ktu- 
Xf^^s* There is also a various reading which gives aTtxetritrrei^n for a^oKarifru^n 
both in Mark iii. 5, and in Luke vi. 10. Similar instances are of frequent recur- 
rence, especially in the later writers ; and they seem to have arisen from the variable 
usage by which the augment is placed sometimes before, and sometimes after, tbe 
preposition, which led to its insertion, in some cases, both in the beginning and 
middle of a compound verb. (Buttm. ^ 86. Obs, 4.) 

§ 17. — Formation of the Tenses. (Buttm. § 93 et seqq.) 

1. The Attic contraction of the future of verbs in -l^o) into 
-iftj occurs very frequently, but not universally, in the New 
Testament. Among others, the following examples will suf- 
fice.* Matt. xii. 21, IXTriouji, xxv. 32, aipopi^T, Luke i. 48, 
ix»xxqiov(yiy xix. 44, iSa^/oDcn, Acts vii. 43, [jlbtoikioj, Roni. x. 19, 
TTaqoqyioJy Heb. ix. 14, xacQa^pisT, x. 37, xpovistf James iv. 8, 
lyyisi, 1 Pet. v. 4, xoptisrcx&g. On the other hand, Matt. iii. 11, 
^a'^ridBif XXV. 31, xa^iasi, Mark xvi. 3, a7roxv\i<rsi, 2 Cor. ix. 6, 
^epi(jit. To these may be added a-aXma-Bt, which is used in 1 Cor. 
XV. 52, for the more regular form acfXTriy^Bi,^ (Buttm. 95, 9.) 

» Poppo on Thucyd- 1. i. p. 228. Leiisden de Dial. N. T. p. 17. 
« Alt, Gr. N. T. § 16. Georg. Hier. i. 3. 13. 

3 Planck de Orat. N. T. ii. 3. ■» Georg. Hierocrit. i. 3. 1 1. 

* Tbom. M. p. 789. Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 191. 


Obs, 1. There is a similar analogy in the noun ffaXn^rtigt for which the older 
}vriteTs used ^a>.irty»Thst Rev. xviii. 22. 

2. The formation of the second aorist after the manner of 
the^r^Vhas been attributed to the Cilicians/ but it was equally 
prevalent with the Alexandrians. It is followed by the LXX 
in a multiplicity of passages. Thus 1 Sam. x. 14, el'Sa/xev, 
2 Sam. X. 14, elSav, s(pvy»y^ xvii. 20, eSgav, xix. 42, ^(pdyatMev, 
xxiii. 16, eXafiav, 2 Chron. xxix. 6, eyKariXi'jratv, Esth. V. 4, 
IX&aTft/, Ps. Ixxvi. 18, g(p«v«v, Prov. ix. 5. eXSare, Isai. xxxviii. 
14, e^s/XotTo, a^EiXaro, Amos iv. 4, ggrXoQ&^vare, rjvcyxaTg. There 

is one unquestionable example in the New Testament^ where 
we find EvpiiMBvof, in Hebr. ix. 12. Nor is there reason to 
doubt, from the very great consent of the best MSS., that the 
true reading is in Matt. xxv. 36, ^X&are, Luke vii. 24, IgrA&aTe, 
xi. 52, gJeroiX&aTe, John vi. 10, eveTreerav, Acts ii. 23, dveiXpire, vii. 

10, xii. 11, l^eiXaTo, vii. 21, avsiXaTo, xxii. 7, eTreeroc, Rom. xv. 3, 
eTTiTTBOdv, 1 Cor. X. 8, Rev. vi. 13, sTrecrav. (Buttm. § 96. 
Obs. 1. note.)* 

Obs. 2. In the second person singular, and, in the infinitive, this form never appears ; 
unless, which is probably the case, the aorist if^a, from uvnTv, should be referred to 
this head* It occurs in the second person sing, in Matt. xxvi. 23, Mark xii. 32, 
Luke XX. 39. The imperative tiirov is found in Gen. xii. 13, xx. 13, Exod. vi. 6, 
viii. 5.16, Levit. xxi. 1, and elsewhere repeatedly; and the manuscripts vary be- 
tween eiVtfy and i/Vi in Acts xxviii. 26. In other places, however, it is always liVi, 
even when a vowel follows. See Matt. iv. 3, xxii. 17, Luke iv. 3, vii. 7, x. 40. 
Nevertheless we have tl^art in Matt. x. 27, xxi. 5, Col. iv. 7 ; and iWa^e^^av in 
Acts xxiv. 20. The Alexandrian manuscript has also tiWy, indie. 3 pi. in Markxi. 
6, Luke xix. 39, Acts i. tl, and the part. liW; in Acts xxii. 24.^ 

Obf. 3. From k^9tei%My the aor. 2. pass, h^^eiynvi and part, a^^rayiis, are found 
2 Cor. xii. 2, 4. Some copies also read ^^tray^fv, for «^«ra0-d>}y, in Rev. xii. 5. This 
aorist is rarely used by the Attics. (Buttm. § 100. Obs, 9.) 

Obs. 4. It may admit of a doubt whether the Attics gave the preference to d or « 
in the aorist of verbs in -a/vm. Grammarians, however, decide in favour of the 
former, although the exceptions are almost as numerous as the proofs of the rule, 
independently of various readings.^ In the New Testament we have Wi^ava in 
Luke i. 79 ; i<rfifMtffi in Acts xi. 28, xxv. 27. (Buttm. § 101, 4, and Obs. 2.) 

§ 18.— Verbals. (Buttm. § 102.) 

Verbals, derived from verbs pure, have r before the final 
syllable, which however is frequently omitted. Thus the more 
ancient Greeks used aVe/garos-, or lonice, aTreifmrof, as in Horn. 

11. M. 304. Pind. 01. xi. 18. Nem. i. 33. But although aTreipa^- 

^ Heraclides ap Kustath. p. 1759, 10. * Sturz. de Dial. Alex. pp. 60, seqa. 

* Matt. Gr. Gr, §} 201, 6. and, 232. * Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 24. 


ras is used in James i. 13, and in the Epistles of Ignatius to 
the Philippians, the latter can scarcely be considered as a new 
form, since both were indifferently employed by the Attics in 
other instances ; as yvaxTros and yvatrof, in Soph. CEd. 7. 361, 
396. oc^ifxioTOf and disiJt,iros, in Xen. Cyr. i. 6. 6. Eurip. Ion. 1093. 

Obt* 1. The above remarks are equally applicable to the ndun fitaa'Tfis, Matt. xii. 
12. With this orthography it is found only in Philo^ and in the Ecclesiastical 
writers. It is elsewhere fiiarhsf as in Find. Nem. ix. 130.^ 

06«. 2. New compoundst however, were frequently formed by the later writers, 
which were not to be found in their predecessors. For example, dxetra^ecuo-res, uneeat- 
ing, for which aiteiu^ros was formerly used, occurs in 2 Pet. ii. 14 ; and d^iyintrrts, 
neuhbom for noyii>hi or d^rtyiffts, in 1 P«t. ii. 2. Compare Polyb. iv. 17. 4. Lucian. 
Dial. Marin, xii. 1« 

§ 19. — Verbs Barytone and Contract. (Buttm. § 103, 105.) 

The Paradigmas of rvTcrca, ttoiecj, rifjLacj, and fjna^oof, are 
equally applicable to the conjugation of the verbs in the later 
writers, and the New Testament. It is merely necessary to 
subjoin the following remarks : — 

Obs. 1. The termination -t/0-flty of the third person plural of the plusq. perfect 
is much more usual than -i^uv. See the examples at § 16. Oba, 3. We haTe in. 
Rev. vii. 11, Urwo'ecv, but tUr^xu^av in Luke xxiii. 10, Acts ix. 7, and elsewhere.) 

Obs, 2, Of the ^olic form of the optat. aor. 1, in -ua, -ueti, -ut, there are two 
instances, and two only, in the New Testament, and both in the third person 
plural, viz., Luke vi. 11, ^omuav^ Acts xvii. 27, ^i^nXet^i^<ruav. (Buttm. § 103. 
II. Obs. 4.) 

Obs, 3. In the third person plural of the imperative the termination -rM^af, for 
which the Attics more commonly employed -vratv, is used in the New Testament. 
Thus, Acts xxiv. 20, u^iruerocvy XXV. 5, Ketryiyo^tirvfKV^ 1 Cor. vii. 9, yetftfi^eiTit^Kh 
36, yufjuttruffuv, 1 Tim. v. 4, /juavfiaviTuffav. (Buttm. ^ 103. II. Obs. 5.} 

Obs. 4. lu the New Testament the original termination of the second person 
sing, uf the present and future, both in the passive and middle voice, is retained : 
as, ei^vvZirui for o^wZy Luke xvi. 25 ; xav^Zirut for xavx^t l^om. ii. 1 7. 23, 1 Cor. iv. 7. 
With respect to Ivvaffut^ which occurs in Matt. viii. 2, Mark i. 40, and elsewhere, 
the grammarians maintain that it is the proper form, and condemn the use of %vns 
except in the conjunctive.^ It is somewhat curious therefore, that ^vvvi is found in 
the indicative in Rev. ii. 2, and so also in Job xxxiii. 5, Esth. vi. 13. 24. See also 
Polyb. vii. 11, ^lian V. H. xiii. 32. Synes. Ep. 80, Diog. Laert. p. 158. K. To 
this head belong the foims (^aynrai and ^hffut,* being the second person sing, of the 

1 Planck de Orat. N. T. § ii. 5. 
« Leusden de DialL N. T. p. 16. 

* Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 359. Thom. M. p. 252. 

* Wetstein in Luke xyii. 8. Matt. Gr. Gr. § 183. Winer improperly regards 
the forms ^dyt(rett and 9rii(reu as Jirsi aorislSj either infinitive or imperative • and 
others, no less incorrectly, explain them to be present tenses with a fitture siirai- 


obsolete futures ^uyafieu and ^iofieu, of the former of which the third persons sing, 
and plural, ^dyiren and ^dyovrat are found in James v. 3, Rev< xvii. 16^ respectively. 
(Buttm. § 103. III. Obs, 1.) 

Obs, 5. The contract form in -tt, which is commonly employed in three verbs 
only, is found in two of them, Sypu and /3«vA.ii. See Matt, xxvii. 4, Luke xxii. 42, 
Of the third, mu, there is no example ; but there is another instance of the same 
form, if the word be genuine, in Luke vii. 4. Here, however, the best manuscripts 
read «r«(t|*}, according to the common orthography, which should probably be re- 
ceived into the text. (Buttm. § 103. III. Obs. 3.) 

Obt, 6. Peculiar to the later speech is the termination of the third person plural, 
both in the imperf. and second aorist, in -m'«i>, instead of -«y. Of this form there is 
one example in the New Testament, viz., I'^aXtaV^av for t^okuvvf in Rom. iii. 13. 
Some manuscripts also read iXecfio^av for vra^ikafit, in 2 Thess, iii. 6* In the LXX 
the form is very frequently found, which proves it to have been essentially Alexan- 
drian,^ though it has been also referred to the Ghalcidians and the Asiatic Greeks.^ 
Thus, Gen. vi. 4, iymSaruv, £xod. i. 1, ua-^kBo^a*j xvi. 24, «ariXiV««'«y, xviii. 26, 
t«^iW«y, Deut. i. 24, ixafie^av, Ps. xiii. 3, t^oktov^afy xlvii. 4, HxBo^uVf Ixxvi. 16, 
iiloffoLVy &c. &c. It was also commonly employed by the Byzantine historians : 
as in Niceph. Greg. vi. 5, sT^A^'ay, Nicet. xxi. 7, ^iTiiXS«0-«y. Since verbs in -/At 
have precisely the same formation, the ending may be traced to the ancient lan- 
guage of the Greeks, and Phavoriuus ascribes it to the Dorians.^ (Buttm* § 103. 
V. 06*. 1.) 

06*. 7. The termination -ay for 'Mt in the third pars. pi. of the perfect active is 
said by some to have been in use at Ghalcis/ but it seems to have prevailed more 
especially in the Alexandrian dialect.^ It might readily arise out of a confusion 
between the similar inflexion of the first aorist.* Besides the various readings, 
Luke ix. 36, Rom. xvi. 7, and elsewhere, there is in John xvii. 7, tyvantetf, Rev. xix* 
3, ti^fixnv. In the LXX the usage is much more frequent; as in Deut. xi. 7, Ui^axuv, 
Isai. V. 29, vret^Urnxuv, (Buttm. § 103. V. Obs, 3.) 

Obs, 8. Instead of the usual Attic forms vruvp and }t\pp9, the New Testament 
writers use the contraction into a ; as, for instance, in John vii. 37, Rom. xii. 20. 
We^find also the future innagv for vtMwuy in Rev. vii. 16 ; but the other form, 
h^WM, in the same text. So the aorist Wiimffa in Matt. xii. 1, Mark ii. 25, xi. 12 ; 
and again in John vi. 35, where, however, it is coupled with Wy^nfei, The verbs 
Z,^v and xviff^ai follow the Attic usage.? (Buttm. § 105. Obs, 5.) 

§20. — Verbs in fjn, (Buttm. § 107.) 

The Paradigms of the Conjugation in -fxt suggest the follow- 
ing observations : — 

^ Planck, ubi supra : Sturz. de Dial. Alex. pp. 59, 60. 

« Eustath. pp. 1759, 35 ; 1761, 30. Tzetzes ad Lycophr. 21. 252. 

^ Fischer in Prolus. p. 681. Phavoriu. in v. t^vyorav. The third person plural 
of the optative in •0/0'ay and 'Uta'avy for 'onv and 'any, is frequently met with iu the 
LXX. For example, Psalm xxxiv. 25, e7ir0i0'«y, Job xviii. 7, Bn^tvo'ett^ety, In the New 
Testament this form does not occur. See Matt. Gr. Gr. p. 318. 

* Tzetzes ad Lycophr. 252. The form is found in the inscription on Trajan's 
Pillar, and in the Oxford Marbles. 

* Sext. Empir. adv. Gramm. § 213, Xt^ig h flr«^« 'ro7s * AXtl9,y\tvffivy UnXi/Say x») 
»9eiX'n>.v^eiy, See Sturz. de Dial. Alex. p. 58. 

« Planck de Orat. N. T. § ii. 3. 
7 Lobeck ad Phryn. pp. 61. 204. 


Obs, 1 . There are occasional iustances of the third person plural of the present in 
'Mt: as Ti^U^t, for rt^iT^i, in Matt. v. 15, xxiiL 4, Mark xv. 17. (Buttna. § 107. 
Obs, i. 1.) 

Ob8» 2. The contract form of verbs in •/»!, which passed from the Ionic and Doric 
dialects into the later speech^ is common in the New Testament. Thus we ha?e 
Matt. xiii. 13, 2 Cor. x. 12, ruftwfh Matt. xiii. 23, Rom. iii. 11, ^wtSi^i Matt, xriil 
8, zxvi. 26, Mark xv. 23, I'^iUu, Acts iii. 2, \ri^w9, Rom. iii. 31, t^TMfuv, 2 Cor.iiL 
13, tr/Sfi, iv. 2, ^vn^rSfrtS' In Rev. ii. 20, many copies read Jipug, instead of ims. 
For these forms in the LXX see I Chron. xxv. 7, 2 Chrou. xxxiv, 12, Psal. xli. 1, 
Jerem. xx. 12, and elsewhere.^^ (Buttm. § 107. Obs, 1, 2.) 

Obs, 3. Although the aor. 2 opt. Xjtnv is very generally censured by the old gram- 
marians, it is sometimes regarded as a regular Ionic form, contracted from 2«iW 
It is found in Rom. xv. 5, Eph. i. 17, iii. 16, 2 Tim. i. 18, iii. 7, and in Gen. xxviii. 
4, xliii. 14, LXX, and elsewhere. In Plat. Gorg. p. 481, Lysias c. Andocid. t.iT. 
p. 215, recent editors have substituted ^ for hiy. Later writers frequently em« 
ployed it. See Themist. Orat. 13, 174. Appian. Punic, xviii. 324.' (Buttm. § 107. 
Obt. i. 3.) 

Obt, 4. There is an instance of the plusq. perf. l^rvtctiv, with the simple aug- 
ment, in Rev. vii. 11. Some manuscxipts have also Urtlxi^uv for u^Ttixttvat, ia 
Luke xxiii. 10, Acts i. 10, ix. 7. (Buttm. } 107. Obi. i. 7.) 

Obs, 5. Among the unusual inflexions of this class of verbs which the JVew Tes- 
tament exhibits^ may be noticed the aor. 1 conjunctive Wjj, from tiato'ety for ?^»c, 
in John xvii. 2) Rev. viii. 3, xiii. 1, 6. This has been regarded as a Doric form ; 
hut the texts are most probably corrupt. In every instance the copies vary between 
^f**}, ^f*!/, and 'hZffti, of which '^ugu is probably the true reading. Many critics, 
indeed, regard W»}, not as the aorist, but as the future conjunctive.^ Kxamples 
of this tense are occasionally met with in the older Greek writers, but they are 
universally attributed to the errors or ignorance of transcribers. Instances also 
occur in the New Testament, which are still retained in the text ; as in 1 Cor. xiii. 3. 
xetvBfi^ufiutj 1 Petk iii. 1, xi^ln^riffmretu The various^eadings also give in Rom. 
xi. 26, iTM^^a'fiTui, 1 Tim. vi. 8, a^xiv^wufAt^a* In no one passage, however, is 
there even a tolerable consent among the manuscripts ; so that the future indicative 
should unquestionably be replaced in every instance.*^ 

Obs, 6. With respect to the second person singular of the imperative, we have 
litouy for J<%S/, in Matt. v. 42, Luke vi. 30. In compound verbs, Kyeiffrtty for «*«- 
vrnBt, is found in Acts xii. 7, Eph. v. 14. So also Mark xv. 30, xarcifia, Rev. iv. 1. 
uvdl^et. Nevertheless we find ecvMrHBi, in Acts ix. 6, 34, IvtffrnBt, 2 Tim. iv. 2. 
(Buttm. 107. Obi, i. 14.) 

Obi, 7, Syncopated forms of the perfect participle of 'itrrnfn frequently occur, 
both in the simple and compound verb. See Mark xiv. 70, Luke i. 11, John xi. 42, 
Acts xxii. 20, xxiii.^4, xxviii. 2. So also the infinitive irreimiy for Urnxivat, in 1 Cor. 
X. 12. (Buttm. § 107. II. Obs, 3.) 

1 Georg. Hierocrlt. ii. 3. 17. « Thorn. M. p. 326. 

3 Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 346. Georg. Hierocrit. 3. 15. Sturz. de Dial. Alex. p. 52. 
There is a similar contraction in the substantives, ^ar^ttXiuus and fAPiroaXeiecs in 
1 Tim. i. 9. See Wetstein in loc. The Attic form vretrpaXoMs occurs in Plat. 
Phaed. §62. 

♦ Glass. Phil. Sacr. t. i. p. 313. Georg. Hierocrit. p. 253. 

* Lobeck ad Phryn. pp. 720, seqq. Abresch. Diluc. Thucyd. pp. 293, 795. Obss. 
Misc. t. iii. p. 13. Lipsjius de indicativi usu in N. T. § 6. Gebser on James iv. 


§ 2\.—The verbs Infxi and el/xt. 

I. iVj/xi, to send. (Buttm. § 108. 1.) 

1. The imperfect of the compound d(pivm,i has frequently 
the augment at the beginning; as ^(pie, in Mark i. 34, xi. 16.^ 

2. The third person plural of the perfect, i(^imTtti, for 
a(pgrvTai, occurs in Matt. ix. 2, 5, Luke v. 20, 23, 1 John ii. 12, 
and elsewhere. 

Obs, 1. This form has been attributed to the Attics, and supposed to be analogous 
to the word tiw^«, which is prolonged in a similar manner from tt^a? But it is 
nowhere employed by any other writer ; and the grammarians more generally refer 
it to the Doric dialect.^ The syntax will not admit of the supposition that it is an 
aor. conjunctive,^ as a^fj;, for «^»i, in Homer. 

II. slptl, I am. (BuTTM. § 108. 4.) 

1 . Of the imperfect ^^xajv, which the grammarians strongly 
condemn, the use is sufficiently frequent in the writers of the 
Alexandrian period.* In the New Testament it is found in 
John xi. 15, xvi. 14, xvii. 12; Acts x. 30, xi. 5, 11, 17, and 
elsewhere. The second person ^j&a occurs in Matt. xxvi. 
69, Mark xiv. 67.® Of the 3 pers. plural h, for ^jav, there is 
an instance in Luke ii. 33. 

2. For BGTcj, in the imperative, we have riru, 1 Cor. xvi. 22 ; 
James v. 12. So also in Ps. civ. 3U LXX. This inflexion is 
said to have been Doric.^ 

Obi. Instead of cvso'ti, the syncopated form tn is used in Gal. iii. 28, Col. iii. 11, 
James i. 17. 

§ 22. — Anomaly of signification, (Bottm. § 113.) 

1. In the New Testament, as in other writings, the causative 
and immediative, or the transitive and intransitive, significa- 
tions of verbs are frequently, and for the same reasons, inter- 
changed ; so that the act., midd,, and pass, voices deviate from 
their proper meanings in a multiplicity of instances. Thus the 
immediative is changed into the causative sense in Matt. v. 45, 
Tov rp^tov dvareWsi, Luke xii. 37> avaxXivsr »vrovs. 2 Cor. ii. 14, 

» See Matt. Gr. Gr. J 170. and 212, 7. 

* Etym. M. p. 107, 1. Phavorin. in v. 

3 Siiidas in v. * Eustath. p. 1077, 8. 

* Lobeck ad Phrvn. p. 152. c See Matt. Gr. Gr. § 201, 8. 
7 HeracUd. ap. Eustath. p. 1411, 22. 


ra> ipiocixfiiiovrt r^xas, Phil. iv. 10, ave&aXeTg to v^lp e/mov ^poyili, 
1 Thcss. iii. 12, vfxoif o Kvpiof TrXeovaJai xa\ vs^ia-ffsviTOLi, Com- 
pare 2 Cor. ix. 8, et alibi. The verb, tr^svSstif signifies Bot 
only to make haste (Luke ii. 16, xix. 1, 6), but transitively, 
to desire earnestly, as in 2 Pet. iii. 12, vpoo^oKwyiraf xxl oTTB^n- 
ras T^v vapovolav rrif rov ©soD r^i^i^oLs, See also Prov. xxviii. 
22, LXX; Thucyd. vi. 39, Eur. Hec. 1175, 1201 ; ^Uan. V. tt 
xiii. 30 ; Polyb. iii. 62. 8. 

Obt, 1. It is probable, indeed, that to most of the above verbs were attached by 
the Greeks a double import, and thus «y«rtXXi/y has an active sense in Anac. liiL 
40, Died. Sic. xvii. 7 ; and dmxXmiv, in Polyb. xxxi. 4, 5. At the same timeilie 
LXX have frequenlly thus expressed by a neuter verb the causative import of Ha 
Hebrew Hiphil ; as in Oen. xlvii. 6, xaroixiffov r»v trari^ vum 1 Sam. zv. 35, 
i^M'iXivffx rev ^euvk M 'l^^et^X. See also I Sam. viii. 23, 2 Kings xiv. 21, Ps. bod. 
21, cxix. 50, cxxxii. 17, Isai. xvi. 5, Ezek. xvii. 24. As frequently, however, by a 
periphrasis with vronTvf as in Deut. xxxii. 39, ^?y ir«ii}0'«, Isai. xxix. 21» sr^MavTs; afut(- 
rm, Jerem. xxviii. 15, irsntoSiveu Wmaretg, Sometimes the Latins also employed* 
neuter verb in an active sense; as in Virg. ^n. vi. 132; Ne tania animUadeh 
escit heUa^ 

2. With some verbs used intransitively the reflective pro- 
noun may probably be supplied; though many verbs were 
doubtless originally endued both with a transitive and intran- 
sitive signification. Of such we have examples in Mark ix. 
29, oroLy Sg TTixpxico o xctpTro^, i. e. presents itself: v. 37. tj 
KUfjLara b'^i^olXK^v elf to TrXoioy, poured themselves, or, with a like 
intransitive sense in the English, poured into the ship : Acts 
xxvii. 14, g/3aX5 xar aur^f a^^yLos, set against it. Add to these 
Luke ix. 12, ^ Sg weV* ^p^(3iro kXivbiv, So again, Luke xxiv. 
29. (Compare Judg. xix. 9 11, LXX. Herod, iv. 181, Arrian. 
Exped. iii. 4.) Luke xviii. 24, Tit. i. 5, iii. 13, Xeiireiv, to be 
wanting ; Acts vii. 42, s(rrpsy\/s Se o &e6s, (This verb is regu- 
larly intransitive in the New Testament, except in Rev. xi. 6, 
arqe^siy avra b\s (xtf^x,) Acts XXvii. 41, i5 Trpolfpx BpzUdorac e/xeivev 

* Alt, § 49. — As the active sometimes bears the sense of the Hebrew Hipful^ so 
it has been thought the passive may express that of the Hophal; and examples of 
this signification have been adduced from 1 Cor. viii. 3, xiii. 8, 12, iv. 9. In each 
of the passages it has been argued that yivuffKiff^ou signifies, to be earned to knwy 
i. e. to be taught ; but in the first oZres tyvucreu, he t> known, refers to God, not to 
him who loves God, In the last yvottr^ivris will more appropriately mean approved, 
or loved, which is a common sense of the verb. Compare Matt. vii. 23, John viii. 
55, llom. vii. 15, 2 Tim. ii. 19, Heb. xiii. 23. In 1 Cor. xiii. 8, the insertion of ««<, 
after »»Bm(, is altogether overlooked in the proposed translation : whereas xm^itf 
xeu WtyvMa^nv, clearly indicates a sense identical with the preceding word, r«rt 
iirtywff'efMct, then shall I know even as also I am known, i. e. of God : or in other 
words, my knowlege will be perfect and universal. Compare Qlass. Phil, Sac. 
p. 253. Pott, ad I Cor. viii. 3. 



affikevros, 43, sKeXsvas rovs iuy^fMsvovs xoXt/pc/S^v, ofTToppi^avras 
(sciL kaurovs b\s ddXava-av) , vpofrous ettI t^v yrtv e^lsvai. Here 
also belongs au^dvsiv, to grow, in Matt. vi. 28, Luke i. 80, and 
elsewhere ; which intransitive sense it also bears in the later 
Greek writers. 

06«. 2. Somelinaes a noun is required to complete the sense; as in Mait. vii. 1, 
st^»^iXM, 9cil. T«y ftiuv, to observe; Mark xiv. 72, l^tfieiXXuVf scii* rh* IteitMav^ to 
reflect. (Some understand simply iavrh; but compare Diod. Sic. ii. 7 ; M. Anton. 
X. 30. The omission is stipplied in Diod. Sic. xx. 44, ^^os ov^h WifietXt riit ^Mvoietv.) 
Liuke v. 3, 11, Wetviytiv aud xariytny sell, rnv vauv, to put out to tea and to make the 
land, respectively ; Acts xxvii. 15, l^tttVemt, soil, ro TkoTov, So Heliod. iEth. i. 3, 
ixiovros rZ avifA^. Here also some supply iaurovs. We have in Sil. Ital. xi. 275. 
Puppim dat vento^ To this head of transitives used intransitively has been also 
referred, but improperly, John xiii 2, row iiafioXou ij^n puptXniMros us fhv ku^Ikv ^Uvh», 
where the object is implied in the subsequent words <W uurov ^et^ti^u.'* Also in Acts 
ix. 1 9, the verb ty/0^t;f/y is naturally intransitive, though it has an active sense in 
Luke xxii. 43.' The verb I^Ttif/tt is used in various senses both transitive aud in- 
transitive ; the present, imperfect, aor. 1, and fut. 1. tenses bearing an active signi- 
fication, and the perfect, plusq. perfect, and aor. 2, a neuter one. For examples, 
see Matt. iv. 5, x. 3, xii. 46, 47, xiii. 2, xxvi. 15, Mark ix. 36, Luke ix. 47, xix. 8, 
John i. 26, viii. 44, Acts i. 23, viii. 38, xvii. 31, xxvi. 22, Rom. iii. 31, Heb. x. 9, 
et alibi* Properly the compound hUrnfit signifies to separate in an active sense 
(Isai. lix. 2, Prov. xvii. 9, LXX) ; but it is intransitive in Luke xxi. 59, xxiv. 51, 
Acts xxvii. 28.^ 

Obs» 3. The middle sense is apparent in many active verbs : as in 2 Cor. xi. 20, 
it Tis vfjuas xarci^ov>.e7. Compare Oat. ii. 4. Perhaps also 2 Tim iv. 4, a«r« rns ot>.n' 
htas rnv itcohf i^ofr^i^ovtrn* Sometimes the reflexive pronoun is added, as in Matt, 
xxvi. 65, ^iip/»i|f r« i/AarM uureu. So Mark xiv. 63, Acts xiv. 14. The verb ^on7v is 
frequently used in the New Testament where the early Greeks would rather have 
used vTMl^^au Thus in Mark ii; 23, oiov irentVf to make a Journey ; which iu good 
Greek would signify to make a road ; Acts xxiii. 13, ^wufM^ietv ^rctuv. Compare 
Herod, vi. 42, vii. 42, Xen. Anab. iv. 8. 6, v. 17. See also John xiv. 23, Ephes. iii. 
11. Likewise tv^tfxuv, to obtain, for lif^iffxt^^xt, in Luke i. 30, ix. 12, Rom. iy. 1, 
2 Tim. i. 18. But Lucian. Reviv. T. i. p. 396, fiokig yovv tv^ifinv vroXXat l»iriv<ra.s» 
Occasionally the active and middle are used indifferently, as in Luke xv. 6, ffvynotXi! 
roui <pi>.ws x«< r»vi yttrovagj which is repeated in v. 9, with g^vy»ec>.itT»t.^ 

Obs. 4. The following instances of the active, in a passive sense, are closely allied 
to a reflexive import : 1 Pet. ii. 6, ^toil^u h rip y^et(p'f, for trt^nxireth So in Joseph. 
Ant. xi. 4. 7, xet^in h nltrfi (tJ iir/tf-T^XJ) 9r$^iixi's» The same verb occurs in its 
proper active sense in Acts xxiii. 25, .1 Mace. xv. 2, 2 Mace. ix. 18, Joseph. Ant. 
xi. 4. 9, xiv. 12. 2. There is another example in Ant i. 1 1, us ffrvXm akos ftsTi(i»Xsv» 
she was changed, viz. Lot's wife.^ 


" Winer, § 39, 1. Alt, Gr. N. T. § 48, 1. Reitz. ad Lucian. T. vi. p. 591. Bip. 
Poppo ad Thucyd. i. p. 186. Wetstein and other Interpp. ad 11. cc. 

* See Kypke ad 1. c. 

* Passov. Lex. in v. 

* Winer, ubi supra* 

» Winer, § 39, 6. Alt, § 48, 4. Kuster de V. M. pp. 37. 67, Dresig. p. 401. 
Poppo ad Thucyd. pp. 185. 189. 

^ Winer, § 39, 1 Alt, 48, 2. Georg Hierocrit. i. 3. 31. Glass. Phil, Sacc, t^. 
245. Krebs et Pott ad 1 Pet. ii. 6. 



3. Passive verbs have sometimes an active or neuter signi- 
fication ; as in Acts xx. 13, oSru yaq h iiarsrceyfjLevof. Tit. ii. 11, 
9ir6favn yip 71 %%pis Toi) ©eoD i o-wrrj^/oy 9raw-iv aJbptltwois. See abo 

2 Pet. i. 3, 4. 

Ohn. 5. The construction is peculiar in Acts rrvi. 16, us T«Zr« ZfSn* 01^ «^i^ 
0H9^eu 9% tf^n^irnv xa) fAa^rv^a, uv rt iTJif , tSv rt i^B^fofiuti 001, From the similaritj 
of the two last clauses, some regard them as equivalent to fjM^rv^m rm-mw & JSw.aci 
rUrm A i^i^^gcfial •-«/, and render o^^fc/nai, in an ac/tve sense, Iwii/ make /© appew 
to yoUf or will thow you. Since, however, the aor. 1. A^Bn* has its true passive im- 
port, / have been $een, or have appeared, it is preferable to render i^^n^H^mt in tbe 
passive also, understanding Si« or 9ri(i with the second £v. Hence the sense will be, 
tho»e thirtffg which thou hait now teen, and ihote concerning which I unll hereafter op- 
pear to you. The same future has a passive sense in Isai. xl. 5, LXX.* 

Oht, 0. The perf. and plusq. perf. pass, are sometimes used in the sense of the mid- 
dle ; but chiefly, if not exclusively, in those verbs in which the regular middle form 
is wanting or incomplete. Thus in John ix. 22, trvnTi^urrt »/ *Uti^M. Acts xiil 2, 
i^*^/V«Ti U fAOt rif Ba^vdfiav »u) rn IctvXdv tig ro t^yov, 8 ^^MXixXnputt mvTotis. (Com- 
pare Acts xvi. 10, XXV. 12.) 1 Pet, iv. Z,^i';ro^tviAUm h h^tXyuatg. Compare 1 Sam- 
xir. 17, 2 Kings v. 25, Job xxx. 28. It may sometimes appear donbtful whether the 
passive or middle acceptation is intended ; but the former is generally to be preferred 
in such cases ; as, for example, in Rom. xiv. 23, ^l ^tax^nifuvos, ieiv ^ayn, xanni' 
x^trtu, 'Ui 6lx \x irUrtm* Phil. iii. 12, »ux on tfin ikufiov, « iShri rtrtXtiatfiMt, 1 Pet.iv. 1, 
i watUm if ea^x), iriiruvra/ afjM^rtas, A middle sense, however, is indicated in Act» 
xxiii. i| irtiroX/rtvfAas rf 6ff , I have conducted my self obedient /y to Crod*g iawt. Com- 
pare 2 Mace. vi. 1. In like manner the aor. 1. pass, has sometimes a middle 
fense ; as in Matt. x. 26, fith cvf ^ofitiBvrt uvrovg. So in Matt. xvi. 2, xvii. 1 1, Luke 
xxii. 8, hirax^tBtivccs, (The middle is used in Mark xiv. 61, Lulce xxiii. 9.) In Matt, 
xxi, 21, Mark xi. 23, Rom. iv. 20, we bave hux^S^feu. (Compare Acts x. 20.) Again, 
in Acts V. 26, Api^rv Bw}asi f ^^offtxoXknh u^tifies av^^Sv uan) rtr^axoe-iatv, James if. 
10, rairtimBfiri Im^tav rciv Kv^iou. So 1 Pet. v. 6. Compare Ecclus. xviii. 21. In 
Acts xvii. 4, r^a^txkn^uBuffMv, and in Eph. i. 1 1, IxXtt^u^fi/nv, are doubtful. Of the 
aor. 2. passive, so used, there iA an example in John viii. 59, 'IfuroVg ^i ixov^, zai 
i{?X$f r. Perhaps also xetruXkuyfivat, in 1 Cor. vii. 11,2 Cor. v. 20.' 

4. Deponent verbs, which have a middle or passive form with 
an active or neuter sense, require no particular notice, except 
that some of the passive tenses arc frequently used in a passive 
sense. This is more particularly the case with the aor, Ipass.^ 
when the aor, 1. mid. is also in use. Thus we find l&ea&tjv in 
Matt, vi.* 1, Mark xvi. 11. (compare Thucyd. iii. 28) ; Id^y in 
Matt. viii. 13, Luke vi. 18, (and in Isai. liii. 5. LXX); gXo- 
^/(T&ajv in Rom. iv. 3. (compare Herod, iii. 95, Xen. Cyr. iii. 1. 
33) ; Ix^pitT^fiy in 1 Cor. ii. 12, Phil. i. 29 ; and ippda^viy in 
2 Tim. iv. 17. Tha perfect Yaixaci is found in Mark v. 29, and 
va^i}r%iMai in Luke xiv. 19. Of futures, there are in Matt. viii. 

* Winer, § 40, 3. Obs. 1. Alt, § 50, 3, Note, Schott et Kuinoel ad Acts xxvi. 16. 
8 Winer, \ 40, 23. Alt, § 50. Lex. Passov. et Wahl. in vv. citt. 


8, <a9"yi(Topt«i, Liuke xii. 9, a7ra§v>)&7i^o/jia«, Rom. ii. 26, Xoy^r&^jo- 
fxai. The present of this last verb has a pass, sense in Rom. 
iv. 5. Sometimes siqyadfjLoci has an active, and sometimes a 
passive, signification. Compare John iii. 21, 2 John 8.^ 

5. The middle voice is frequently used in an active significa- 
tion ; as in Luke i. 1 , dvdri^addxi ^iinyriffiv. vii. 4, i^i6s gjTJv, y 
TToLpi^H TowTo. (Here vapB^si has been regarded as the 3 sing, 
active, instead of the 2 sing, middle. That the latter is cor- 
rect, other examples of the middle voice of this verb in an ac- 
tive sense abundantly prove. Some manuscripts read Tracqi^r^. 
See above, § 19. Obs. 5.) Acts xix. 24, 'ffaqeix^ro roTs r^y^nrais 
Bpyaaixv ovk oKiyny, (In Acts xvi. 16 the active is used in pre- 
cisely the same sense.) Eph. i. 23, rov t» ^ivra h craa/ grXaj^ot;- 
fAEvov. Col. i. 29, T^v lvl§ygiav t^v kve^ovfAiynv Iv Ipw)/. (It seems 

that the active Ivipysty is used with reference to persons, and the 
middle Ive^yej&ai, with reference to things. Compare Matt, 
xiv. 2; 1 Thess. ii. 13, 2 Thess. ii. 7.) Col. iv. 1, to S/xatov xal 

Obs. 7, Hence it frequently happens, that the middle voice is accompanied with a 
reflexive pronoun ; as in John xix. 24^ ht/At^i^uvro r^ t/Acirta fccu lavrots* (Compare 
Matt, xxvii. 35.) Tit. ii. 7, rtavrn vtct^tx^fAtfot ru^n kxXuv t^yu*. So Xen. Gyr. viii. 
1. 3i), ^»^»huy/Mt TMvtt letvTov frMgi/x>T0. 

Obs, 8. It is scarcely possible to regard ^ayt^ovfASf»f, in Eph. v. 13, in any other 
light than as a passive participle, since it is immediately preceded by ^eevt^evrat in 
the same voice. Some, however, refer it to this head ; and the passage is some- 
what obscure ; but the sense may be that whatsoever is made manifest is, i. e., has 
the nature of, liffht, and is adapted to the exposure of error.^ 

Obs, 9. A great number of active futures, from which, although perfectly regular 
iu their formation, the ancients sedulously abstained, are nevertheless used by the 
later writers ; and the following, among others, are found in the New Testament. 
Matt. v. 33, \9no^Knffi; xii. 14,15, uxevffu; xviii. 21, afAti^rnffu] xix. 18, »)ii\Pu; 
Mark xiv. 13, i^avrwa/; Luke i. 13, xaXUu; vi. 21, ytXeiffv; 25, xXccv^ati xiii. 24, 
%,nrfnfi\ John vii. 38, ^ivffu ;^ Actsxv. 29,«'ga|«;* xviii. 9, inu^rYifu -, xxii. 5, flf|«;* 
1 Cor. xi. 23, iiretivi^ct; 2 Pet. i. 15, ff^ovhiffu ; Rev. ix. 6, iv^nrat. For these several 
forms the Attics used l^t^xn^ofiai, axov^o/Aeti, kfAu^rnfofMu, xXi-^ofAaiy a^etvrnffo' 
fiM, KaXelvfAeu, ytXaffofiai, xXecv^efiett, ^vtrwofiat, ftv^ofiat, ^^d^efitxi, atu^^ffo/AcUf u^oftetif 
iTttiniirofAat, f9r»uharofAu,t, tv^i^o'ofjMi, In Rom. vi. 2. 8, 2 Tim. ii. 11, ^q^'or occurs ; but 
l^fi^tfMt iu Matt. iv. 4, Mark v. 23, John vi. 51, xi. 23. It is difficult to account for 
the neglect of these forms by the older writers ; but probably it arose from some- 
thing ungrateful iu the sound, to which their descendants were less sensible. 

* Winer 5 39. 7. 

« Winer, § 39. 6. Alt, Gr. N. T. § 51 . 3, 4. Kuster de V. Med. p. 69. 

* Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 789. * Moeris, p. 293. 

* Moeris, p. 38. The form, however, occurs in Eur. Iph. T. 1 1. 24. 



Obt, 10. Analofi^us to these futures are certain ,/frji aarUis, which in the esle 
writers assume the middle form.^ For instance^ Matt. L 2, Luke i. 57, iyinmk 
iyivfti^tififiv ; Matt. viii. 21, Acts v. 6. 10, tBmy^a for IBm^pmfMiv ; Matt. xx.'24, (}»| 
i«»rifr« for ny»vttKTwafitfiv; Acts iv. 25, l^vc^ ^^^ i^mm^f^nw ;* James r. 5, iSp^ 
for l^^ty^tifAtiv. In Luke i. 47, ^y«XX/«n, hut i^yrnXXm^afttiP ia Luke x. 21, Ae(iir.| 
34. To these may he added several other forms of rare occurrence ; such ss ^i | 
2 Pet. ii. 5.' Also \(iX»^rti^», nfU^rnfa, tS^fftt, ^*i'«^ ly^^tt0-a, of which see tlKfirl{ 
of defective verhs. 

6. Of middle verbs for passives, the usag^e prevails not onlj 
in those tenses for which the middle has no distinct form, but 
also in the future and aorists. It has been doubted^ 
the New Testament affords any example of such practice; 
certainly it exists, according to the received text, in 1 Cor.i 
2, Travres- eh tov Mcoariv IfiaTrrbayro. Many manuscripts, how- 
ever, read i^aTrrla^'noaLv, which is very probably correct. There 
can be no question respecting Gal. v. 1 2, ocpsXov Koi ^voxo^/oyts. 
vwuld that they were cut off^ i, e., destroyed, or, perhaps^ er- 

Obs, 11. Another interpretation has certainly heen proposed, but it is scarcely 
consistent with the Apostles* character and dignity. In Acts xv. 22. 25, it is 
certainly possible that IxXi'^ot/iUous may have been used rather thao IxAixSirt;. 
in order to indicate that the delegates had a voice in their own appointment, or con- 
sented to undertake the mission; but such an interpretation seems somewhat moR 
refined than the occasion requires. It is therefore preferable to consider the passage 
as another example of the usage under consideration.'* 

Of anomalous signification in the tenses, see the Syntax^ 

§ 23. — List of Anomalous or Irregular Verbs. (Buttm. § 114.) 

Several verbs belonging to this class exhibit moods and 
tenses in the later speech, which were never used by the more 
approved writers of ancient Greece, and are consequently con- 
demned by the old grammarians. The following peculiarities 
occur in the New Testament : — 

"Ayo; (/ lead) has the fat. a^cj, instead of a^o(jt,ai. Acts xxii. 5, 
1 Thess. iv. 14. The aor. 1. ^?a is very uncommon in the 

» Planck de Orat. N. T. ii. 3. * Gataker ad M. Anton, x. 13. 

'^ Matt Gr. Qr. § 222, in v. 

* Winer, § 39. 5. Kuinoel and Eisner on Acts xv. 22. 


old writers; but the compound part, kfri^as occurs in 
2 Pet. ii. 5. See § 22. Obs. 9, 10. 
ai^ica (I take). Of the aor. 2. elXa/xtjv, see above, § 17. 2. Some 
manuscripts exhibit the v^xefut. dfsXeX in Rev. xxii. 19. 

i(Ji.aqrdyco (^I sin). Fut, 1. afxetprriaea, for which the Attics used 

afxaprria'ofjiai, Matt, xviii. 21. Aor, 1. TifA^prntja, instead of 

riyiMprov, Rom. V. 14, 16.* 

/Sioo; {I live). Of this verb the aor. 1. injin. ^laacLt occurs in 

1 Pet. iv. 2 ; instead of which the aor, 2. iSio/vai, as from 

^ieafjLi, is ordinarily employed. 
^Xaariyaf (I bud). The aor. 1. eiSXaV-nQtra, which occurs in Matt. 

xiii. 26, James v. 18, is only found in the later writers. It 

is used by Hippocrates^ de Aliment, i. 

yxtxiou (/ marry). In Mark vi. 17 the aor. 1. kyiyLnaa, is found ; 
but the regular form gyio/jL« in Luke xiv. 20, 1 Cor. vii. 
28. The aor. I. pass. lyafXTj&iQv, which is rarely met with 
in profane writers, occurs in Mark x. 12, 1 Cor. vii. 39. 

ylyvofjiMt (/ become). The aor. 1. pass, lygvoi&tjv, which is chiefly 
confined to later writers, is used in John i. 13. Hence the 
pari, ygvtj&elf, Heb. vi. 4. The old aorist lygvo/xiQv is com- 
monly employed ; as in Matt. xix. 8, Mark i. 11^ John i. 
14, Acts xii. 1 1, Phil. ii. 7, and elsewhere. 

Bilaj (I see). Of this verb the plural number of the perfect^ 
o'iiafjLev, "are, -affi, for which JVptgv, IWg, Yaadi are more com- 
monly used,* is very generally retained in the New Tes- 
tament. See Matt. vii. 1 1, xxvii. 65, Mark xi. 33, John 
X. 5, XV. 21, 1 Cor. viii. 1, ix. 13, Gal. iv. 13. 

eiTreiv (To say). Aor, 1. sT^x. Imper. gTwov. See above, § 17. 
2. Obs. 2. 

ffX^pwe* (/ go). Imper f. 'hpxoixnv, Mark i. 45, ii. 15, John iv. 
30, vi. 17. Fut. IXgiJtropcai, Matt. ix. 15; aTsXevtroiAah XXV. 

45. See also Matt. ii. 6, John xiv. 23, 2 Cor. xii. 1, and 
elsewhere. Instead of the imper/. -xigiv is more commonly 
used in Attic ; and sifxi, with a future acceptation, instead 
of sXeioofjiQu. It is only in Homer, and the later writers, 
that this last is found, either in the simple or compound 
state: as Arrian. Exped. Alex. vi. 12, Philostr. ApoUon. 

' Thorn. M. p. 420. Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 732 
« Thorn. M. p. 474. 


iv. 4, Max. Tyr. Diss. xxiv. p. 295, Chrysost. Orat. 33. p. 
410. So likewise in Gen. xix. 2, LXX, et alibis 
svpl<ntaf {I find), Aor, \. ivpnaa. Rev. xviii. 14. The aor. 2. 
E2S/)oy is used by Attic writers. Of the aor. 2. mid. %vpiymi 
see above, § 17. 2. 

lyfit) (I have). The fut. mid, of the compound verb is dyij^oyLaa, 
not ava<Tx>i<TOfxa», in Matt. xvii. 17, Mark ix. 19, Lukeix. 
41, 2 Tim. iv. 3. 

^oo; (/ live). Fut. 1. i^y^qca. Aor. 1. g^oKxa. See above, § 22. 
Obs. 9, 10. For this last the old writers used k^iojaa. 

9nMCi {I sit). The less genuine einperafire xa&otr, of the com- 
pound verb Ki^viiuai, is used for Ki^vifso in Matt. xxii. 44. 
In Acts xviii. 3, the 2. sing. pres. indie, is xo^y), instead d 

Kaiof (J burn). From the aor. 2. pass, of the compound verb, 
xarsxaTiv (Rev. viii. 7), a nevf future^ xctraKocnaofjLaci, occurs 
in 1 Cor. iii. 15, 2 Pet. iiL 10. The fift. 1. xcz-raxavdrnjo' 
fXM, which is usually employed, is found in Rev. xviii. 8.* 

X6givvi;/x* (I mix). Part. perf. pass, xsxfgatrixeyos-. Rev. xiv. 10. 
Although this form is sometimes used by the older writers, 
yet K€xpa(Aevos is preferred. An analogous form is Treirerdc' 
lAxi, for vinrayLOLiy Herod, i. 62.* 

xepiacivof {I gain). Aor. 1. exg^Wa, Matt, xviii. 15, xxv. 20. 
Conj.Kzpl'ntseo, 1 Cor. ix. 19, James iv. 13. Infin. xep^riffah 
Acts xxvii. 21. Part, K^p^mfts^ Luke ix. 25.* 

xTsiW (/ kill). In the compound verb, the aor. l.pass. is 
written a^exrav&oiv, for aTreKroiQnv, in Rev. ii. 13, ix. 18, 
20, xi. 13, xix. 21. //z/?w. aVoxrav&Tivat, Luke ix, 22, Rev. 
xiii. 10.« See § 3. 06^. 1. 

oXXt/p« (/ destroy). Generally in the. New Testament the fut. 

is oXeVo;, as in Matt. xxi. 41, John vi. 39, and elsewhere; 

but the Attic form SltoXSj is used in 1 Cor. i. 1 9. The 

part. aTToKkvcffv, for aisoKkls, occurs as a proper name in 

Rev. ix. 11, et passim.'^ 
ovlviofxi {I benefit). Aor. 1. opt. ova/pcyjv, Philem. 20.® 

» Planck de Orat, N. T. ii. 3. 2 Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 359. 

« Thorn. M. p. 511. 

* Lobeck ad Phrj n. p. 582. * Ibid. p. 740. « Ibid. pp. 36. 757. 

7 MoBiis, p. 12. Tliom. M. p. 98. » Lo>>eck ad Phrvn. p. 13, 


o^BiKca {I owe). The aor, 2. o(pgXov, as employed in the expres- 
sion of a wish, is used without the augment in L Cor. iv. 
8, 2 Cor. ix. 1, Gal. v. 12, Rev. iii. 15.^ 

^groptai (I fly). The pres, part. vBTuixevof, formed as it were 
from the contract verb TTBrdoixa^i, is used in Rev. iv. 7, viii. 
13, xiv. 6, xix. 17. Some MSS., however, have the old 
form TreTOfAevos* 

'privoj (/ drink). Fut. mid, vlofxxiy for gr<oy/xai. See above, § 19. 
Obs. 4. 

'TTiTrroj {I fall). Aor. 2. %7iz(ra. See above, § 17, 2. Some 
consider this form as a regular aorist from the obsolete 
root Trircij. 

pica (I flow). Fut. 1. ps6<TM, See above, § 22. Obs. 9. 

arprnwyi^i (J strew). The compound verb has the aor. 1. pa^s. 
yiQLTBorpu^nv, 1 Cor. x. 5. Grammarians say l(7-rog£(T&aiv. 

T§6(pw {I nourish). Aor. l.g&§6%J/a. See above, § 22. Obs. 10. 

(paycy (/ eat). Fut. mid. (pdyof^g^i. See above, § 19. Obs. 4. 

(puM (/ produce). The aor. 2. part. pass. (pvcU, which is an 
Hellenic form, occurs in Luke viii. 6, 7, 8. 

%ai^oj (I rejoice). Instead of the Attic flut. 1. x^^P''^^^* we 
have xaprKroiJt.(3Li, which prevailed in the other dialects, in 
Luke i. 14, John xvi. 20. 22, Phil. i. 18. Some would 
take 6xa/>^<yav from the aor. I, exaqriaa, in Mark xiv. 11, 
Luke xxii. 5. It may equally come from the ao?-. 2, 
e^a§7iv, which is more usual, and is found in Luke xxii. 8. 

XaM {I pour). The compound verb exj^eo; has xsu in the f^iture, 
instead o{ xbvo-co, Acts ii. 17. Properly this form belongs 
to verbs of which X pt v § are the characteristic letters, 
though it has sometimes been transferred to other con- 
jugations. Hence perhaps the idea of a second future, 
in the scheme of the regular verb, suggested itself to 
grammarians.^ The same future is employed by the 
LXX, in Exod. iv. 9, xxix. 12, Ezek. xii. 14, and else- 

ofviofAM (/ buy). Aor. 1. cJ'VTKja/x^v, Acts vii. 16. For this aorist 
the Attics always used eTrpid/ji/nv, with the single exception 
of the proverb in Athen. vi. p. 91. Xlof Sgffirorwv cjv>)(TaTo. 
It occurs in Pausan. iii. 4. 4, Phaedr. Fab. 75. 

^ Lipsius de Indie. § 1. * Lobeck ad Phiyn. p. 581. 

3 Pianck de Orat N. T. ii. 3. Matt. Gr. Gr. § 182. Obs. 1. 


§ 24. — Terminations of words, (Buttm. § 119.) 

1. It may here be proper to direct attention to an extensive 
class of nouns substantive, which in the later speech take the 
form of neuters of the third declension ending in fxa, instead of 
the terminations -vi, -sia, and -ais, of synonyms in the ancient 
language.^ Several instances occur in the New Testament 
Thus in Luke ii. 7, xardXvfjia, an inn, of which there is no ex- 
ample in Attic writers, and instead of which xariXvatf is used, 
in the same sense, in Eur. Elect. 393. Plat. Protag. p. 220, D.* 
The word avragroSo/ma, retribution, which occurs in Luke xiv. 1.2, 
Rom. xi. 9, and also in 2 Chron. xxxii. 25, Ps. xxviii. 4, Ecclus. 
xii. 2, LXX, is nowhere else to be met with; but uvra^oiwns 
has the same meaning in Thucyd. iv. 81,Polyb. vi. 5. 3, xx. 
7. 2, xxxii. 13. 6. For the Attic form ouTna-is, a petition, we 
have aimyi^ in Luke xxiii. 24, Phil. iv. 6. Compare Judg. 
viii. 24, Ps. cv. 16, LXX. None of the Grammarians or Lexi- 
cographers mention the word avrXoi/ma, which denotes a bucket 
in John iv. 11. Except in Rom. xv. 1, iodimfjia, is nowhere 
found ; and the Attics used a<j&6vg<a, as in Eur. Here. F. 269. 
To these may be added ^TToi/xa, inferiority, in Rom. xi. 12, 
1 Cor. vi. 7 ; instead of which ^Vtra is found in ThucyS. iii. 109, 
vii. 72 ; and ^rra in Xen. Cyr. iii. 1. 11. Also dwoKpiyLXy a 
sentence of condemnation, in 2 Cor. ii. 9, in lieu of dwoxpian, 
which bears a like sense in Isocrates and Plato. 

Obs, 1. Many other examples of the same nature might be adduced from <he 
Septuag^nt, but the above from the New Testament are sufficient to mark the 
peculiarity; which perhaps, after all, belongs rather to the department of the 
Lexicon : and though the termination is remarkable from its frequency, it is not 
to be denied that words, having two forms without any change of sense, occasionally 
present themselves in the best writers. Thus, for instance, tTfhuyfMi, and U^i^^ 
in Demosthenes ; ^^ovti/uM and ^^oynris in Eur. Suppl. 862, Tem. fr. 13 ; lofta and 
Iwts in Thucyd. ii. 51, Soph. Elect. 876 ; l^nrnfA» and ^^m^is, in Eur. Bacch. 1137. 
Thuc. i. 20. 

Obs, 2. It may also be remarked that the above is not the only change in the 
forms of substantives, which has been pointed out in the New Testament. Gram- 
marians have noticed fAtrosxto'U in Matt. i. 11, instead of ^ird/xttf*/;, which is used 
by Plato (De Legg. viii.), or fttToueU, in iSsch. Eum. 1016. There is also fut^nr^U, 
for /Ax^fir^is, in Acts ix. 36,^ and xavxwts, for K»ux*it ^^ Rom. iii. 27, et passim. 

1 Passov. Gram. N. T. p. 571. Planck de Orat. N. T. § ii. 5. 
^ The Attics commonly used xarayeiyMv in this sense. See Mceris p. 241. Tbom. 
M. p. 501. 
B Mceris, p. 263. Thorn. M. p. 593. 


Analogous with this last^ however, are the duplicate fonuB aS^n and aSlnftg, Plat. 
Phaed. p. 1211. D. Xen. (Econ. 5. 1 ; (iovXh and fi^vXti^if, Xen. Hell. vi. 4. 3b, 
Thucyd. vi. 69. 

2. The terminations of adjectives were frequently changed 
by the later usage ; and a prominent example of such change 
in the New Testament is afforded by those ending in *vor^ ac- 
cented on the final syllable, and involving the notion of time. 
Thus, instead of jta&iQixe§*oy, the later writers have xot&iQfxepivw, 
whch is also found in Acts vi. 1. Compare Soph. Elect. 1414. 

Obs. 3. In Rev. zxii. 16, the MSS. vary between i^B^nog and it^Mitis, both of 
which are new forms ; instead of which the more ancient authors employed S^B^tog 
(which is also used in Luke zziv. 12) and it^mtg. See Xen. de Fectig, i. 3. llie 
latter of the two readings is preferable ; and the adjective also occurs in Kev. ii. 28. 
Another form is «r^4v/^f , cognate with oypifMgj with which it is found in conjunction 
in James v. 7. These^ however, are rather lexicographical distinctions, and, as well 
as others of a like character, are duly marked by fFahf, and in the late edition of 
Parkhurst, by Rose, 




§ 25.— Of the Noun. (Buttm. § 123.) 

1. An Adjective, whether used as an epithet or predicate, 
ought properly to agree with its substantive in gender and 
number ; and the same is true of adjective pronouns and rela- 
tives. From this rule there are some deviations in the 
New Testament ; as, for example^ when the concord is regu- 
lated by the sense of the substantive, so that a noun is accom- 
panied by an adjective, participle, or pronoun, in a different 
grammatical gender. 

Obt, 1. This conutruction occurs with an adj. otpart. inEph. iv. 17, r« A.0i«r« cSm 
9'iQi^ctriTy XiTKortirfAivot rvi ^latvoia ofrtg, 2 John 4, \%ei^nit XietVf on tv^fixet ^T/ya) l» rth 
TiKwy <rov m^t^uTovvretf, Rev.iv. 8, riwet^a ^£a am^avirn ouk txovirn, X.iy»9Tgg» (Another 
reading is \iyovr».^ xix, 14, r'& <rr^tt,rivfi,»rei, iiihihufAivot ^uffirtvov \tuxoit xeu xecB^apif. 
Compare also Rev. v. 13. Some refer to this head £ph. ii. 11, ufAtTg, ret tBm h 
ffu^Ki, ai XtyofAivoi, x. t. X. ; but it is scarcely an example in point. The following are 
examples of different gender in the pronoun: Matt, xxviii. 19, fAa^nrtvffnrt ^mtxtx 
«3y»j, ^ec^ri^ovTts avrovg. Markv. 41, x^urn^etg rtis X%i^i rov ^xihlou, Xiyn eturri. Acts 
XV. 17, «r«yra tot (Sy*), 1^' out WtxixXnTat, x, r. X. Rom. ix. 23, itrt irxtvfi iy.Uvs,it 
9r^onrolfMtffiv ils VoT^ettf oSg x») Ixtiktftv, x» r. X. Gal. iv. 19. rtxviei fcoUf oug «r«Xiy mhivm. 
Col. ii. 19, rhv xtpetkhv ^ ou 9'avTo o'S/aoIj x, r. X. 2 John 1. roig rixvoig eturtig, ovg 
ayetirS* Rev. xvii. 16, ra yixec xi^etrXf & Cttig W/ ro ^n^iofj ourot fAtvnffouffi irnv ^innu 
Also in John vi. 9 the true reading seems to be Un ^ratlei^sov h uh, Sg txu, «• r, X. 
(Vulgo 0.) The apposition in John xv. 26, renders the example irrelevant.^ In 
Latin the same syntax in also common ; as in Ter. And. iii. 5. 1, Scelus, qui me 
perdidit. Hor. Od. i. 37. 21, monstrum, qu», &c. 

2. A collective noun in the singtdar is often accompanied 

1 Winer, § 21, 1, and 35, 1, a. Alt, } 33, 1, a, and 36, a. Georg. Vind. i. 3. 26. 
Eisner ad Matt, zxviii. 19. 


with an adj. or pronoun in the plural, and sometimes in a 
different gender. 

Obs, 2. There are instances with an adject, or partic. in Luke ii. 13, frXiiS*; 
^r^etrieis •h^mUv, mwuvruf vh 9uit, xix. 37, Hfiavra diretv ri 4rXi}5«; rSv futinruif X'^*i^^ 
rts etUuf vof Bto9, Acts iii. 11, fUfi'^^^f/^t vas i XuoSf txBofifiot. V. 16, ^vni^tro vi 
trXti^aSy ^ifovTtft ». t. X. Rev. vii. 9, a;^X«; vt^.vsy l^rSrts UmfMv rod ^^ivov. There is 
a double construction in Mark viii. 1, ^etfAviTikov S^^ov hrosi »»i fih Ix^yrAry r) ^«- 
yvo't, ». r. X. So Diod. Sic. xiv. 78, rod 9'XiiBaus oujfrfixtvros, xeti roug fcwBouf 
vr^oTi^of ec9'atrovvrvf. Again with a pronoun, in Matt. i. 21, aMg ya^ vm^u rh Xeu9 
tthrou avo rm afia^rtSv abrSn, Mark vi. 46, &9rore^afitf9s »vra7sy i. e. r^ ^X^f* ^ph* 
V. \\, fjbh ^vyx9twvt7rt roTg i^y»ts roTg ata^vrotg rav ifKoroug' va yetp x^vipn ynofiifa tn^ 
aurSvf scii* iffxortfffAUuv, k»t* X. Phil. ii. 15, ytftZg ffxoXmgf if aig ^etinff'Bt* 3 John 9, 
iy^ev^ei rp ixxkti^ta, «XX' i ^/Xtf^'^ArriMwy avrSv Ator^t^hg olx tiriiix*r»* flftZg. Com- 
pare 1 Mace. i. 25. Indeed similar examples are frequent in the LXX. On the 
other hand, it has been thought that a singular relative is referred to an antecedent 
in the plural in Phil. iii. 20, nfitSf y»^ ro 9raXirtvfA» iv tv^ecvug v^ri^n, i| oZ xeu trtn^^et 
axtx'itxofAt^a. But S| oSf tubaud. ri^au, is constantly used adverbially in the sense 
of the Latin unde.^ 

Obs. 3. Since the adjective itag includes the idea of multitude, the same con- 
struction is employed with reference to it ; as in Acts xv. 36, xurdi ^reitrat ToXn, if 
etigf X. r. X. So also with ordinais j as in 2 Pet. iii. 1, rotvrnf n^fi ^tvri^ctf ufcTf yoaiptt 
IfTM'rtfXtty, iy »tg, x. r. X : that is, in both of which. 

3. The word, to which an adjective or pronoun is referred, 
is sometimes merely implied in some preceding word, or sug- 
gested by the nature of the context. This is particularly the 
case in the New Testament with the demonstrative pronoun 
avTos, which constantly indicates in a collective sense the in- 
habitants of a country, mentioned in the preceding sentence. 
Thus in Matt. iv. 23, Tregi^yev oXoiv t^v YotkCKaiav o ^Intjovs, SiSaV- 
xft;v Iv roLis (rusoLyeayoLis ocvrm, i. e. TaXiXatwy, implied in YaXiKxioLM. 
Acts viii. 5, ^ikiTnros Se xaTeXSa/v z\s ttoKiv rr^s ^aixoLpzias , ex.iopV(T' 
crey auroif tov X/)<(ttov, i. e. to the Samaritans, Add Matt. ix. 35, 
Luke iv. 15, Acts xx. 2, 2 Cor. ii. 13, 1 Thess. i. 9. 

Obt. 4. Occasionally the reference is somewhat more obscure ; as in Matt. xi.'. 
xai iyifire ort irikt^if i ^ln<rovg ^lardvintf rug ^$(x« /MtBtiraig avrou^ fAtri^n ixtlhfn-i 
'hihiffxuf x») xn^ufffftn if ToClg ^roktvtf uvrSv, i. e. of the Galiiaans, in whose country 
Jesus then was. Compare Matt. xii. 9, Luke v. 17, Acts iv. 5. Closely similar 
is the use of ahrZf in 1 Pet. iii. 14, rw ^ ^o(icf uvrZf fith (pefin^nTty i. e. rSf xaxoufruf 
ufieig, with reference to xnxuffm in the preceding clause. Sometimes the reference 
is indicated by some official designation, or an abstract noun, preceding; as in Luke 
xxiii. 51, oZrog olx nf vvyxetretri^ttfAifog rt] ^0t;X^ xa) r^ ^^ei^st etttrm, i. e. 0/ the 
council, of which Joseph has just been described as a member {fiovXturng^ ; Rom. ii. 
25, l^v oZf h nxoo^wria veL hxecMfiecra rev fo/Aou (pukd^ffiff ot/x* n ax^o^vffrlei eturov tig 

1 Winer and Alt, ttbi supra; Poppo adThueyd. i. 92. PassoT. Lex. in vv. i», "ig. 


s'lfiTajiuii Kty^S^tiTsi ; wlieie afnii must mEHiiBa uncircunicised indii'idua/, inclii 
in the /Atlroclum pro cancreio of Iha furegoing clause. 

Obs. 5. It ie iisubI Id class tmder this head John viii. 44, on •^tirrni irri, 
i iraTii; aiiTiii ou the Supposition that eutsd lefcn tn •i'luhm implied in i^im 
But il is manifest that after i tbtJj •iriC tlie words -^.timi icri are to be repeated} 
for if a irnTn; eutiu is to folluw Itti, the atticlii is wholly ioadmiMible. CompUN 
vr. 31, 42, 'A, of this same chapter, anJ see § 27. 4. infra. The seuee of the 
passage is rendered abuudautly simple by supplying rJt befota ).itXii in tlio iiraceding 
clause. See } 37. 7. 04s. 17. In the beginning of the versa ithad, been said, K 
are of your father the devil: enJ it is here addud, W/iea aag Bfi/BV tptakt falnli/^ 
he speaks after the manner of his kindred: for he is a liar, and ii 

Obs, G. The reference of airis is sometimes oalj discoverable fcom the iiibjed; 

can only refer to the Mtstiah, as being uppermost in Die thoughts of the per 
addressed ; John xx. 15, Ku^n, i' I'v i^sfrif rac aursr, uVi fui vsS airir i9itiii«. 
person has here been mentioned, but the deud body of Jesus is pl^nly intendeds 
Compare 1 Jobn ii. 12, 2 John G.< 

Oil. 7, There isno case in the New Testan:ient in which an adjective or pro 
is refeiced, in respect to gtndtr, to a word implied in a pieceding one, exce[>t 
porhapi in Matt. ixi. 42, Mark xii. 11, xi^si, U ixi'itixi/<xirx> u' i.'.s^fiTtc, 
IjriniSii lif iii(tB>.»> ■jtailai' fTufi Kuj/aii i;.iyiT« niiTit, xai i>Ti SavftaeTii J> riut ifSmXfiiti. 
k/iSu Since alirx and 3aui/>xmi cannot he referrad to miftcXyi yuiiiLs, 'he n 
is generally considered as a Hebrew idiom, according to which, there beiagnoni 
theEemioineiscanslantlf employed, where in other langu^es the neuter ii necea 
The LXX have retained this idiom in Gen. usiv. 14, Judg. xil. 30, 1 Sam. iv. 7, 
Ps. xxvii. 4. and ulscwheie : and the passage under consideration is a citation froq 
Pb. ciiiii. 32. It may not, however, be altogether iinprohablu that the femlni: 
adjective may have a reference to iSxihfii, implied in the participle iih1«h»t 
There is a precisely similar example in Epiplian. Hter. ii. 3G8. A. tliat fwii wAr 

Hebrew feminine has been also supposed to exist in Luke li. 33. thhii xi^f '^ 
111 KftrTJi Ti'dnrn, iu!i ini t9> fiiiiit. It should rather seem that xfurrii is a sub 
stantive,^ with which the word crj/i( corresponds in English j mora etpacisllj ■ 
M TCF /iihn follows in immediate canneuon with it. 

4. Pronouns, whether demonstrative or relalice, instead 
taking the ^cnrfer of the substantive to which Ihcy refer, , 
put in the neuter singular, when the substantive is to be con- 
sidered generally in the abstract as a thing or matter, and 
that even if the substantive be ^/uto/. This will explain 
Mark xii. 42, i^a'ks Xi^rri Son, a Iuti KoSgavrwj. 

Olii. S. Similarly an ai^cl. oiproa. is put in the neuter singular, when 

> See Middleton on the Gr. Art. Note in he. 
s Winer. } 22. 3. Alt,{3C.2. 

» Vurstius d« Hebraism. N. T. p, 282. Fischer ad LeusJru. do Hebr. M. T. 
p. 80. Gesen._ i 160, 2. 
* Biolschneider and Fassow in v. 

word, or a.a entire propoiiilion preceding-, anil a masculine or rcminine aubstantire 
aJileil per exegetia. Thus 2 Car. xiii. 0, TtZra li k*1 lux't^i^'t -nt i/ti> xnT-a^u-K. 
By a like enallage the ailjectlve trZi is used in the maaeulme or neuter, with 
ferHOcetoasuhstBnliTein ft diEFarent geniler audcase. Ofthisthete is an eiample 
Maik xii. 28, t.!^ l,ri xfJr, -ri.r*. UtJx^. So Thueyd. iy. 52, Ti, ti ixx«[ 
!XM txi ritrm fuif^sm ri.'A.rivSei™. Lucian. Pise, ji, SSS.^/a »«',™. Sj-i bXhSb'! 

5. If an orfj.ipnri., or pron. refers to two or more substaii- 
'tives ia the same gender, it ia properly in this gender in tlic 
■plural : as 1 Pet. i. 18. ou p^apro7s apyu^iu ^ Xpuala/ iXuTpttl&TiTE. 
Very generally however the singidar number is used. Thus 
in Acts i. 25, XarjStrv tov xTJnp^v Tiji SiaKoviat rayrric wl aVoD-To?,?,*-. 
This is even sometimes the case, when one of the substantives 
B in Ihe jilural; as in Matt. vii. 1'2, oStoi yip io-riv o vit^os xal oE 
•■fo^Tai. When all are plural, the rule is sirictly observed; as 
in Matt. iv. 24, wiui?.oni voooir xai ^airavnit avvi-xpi/.imu!. Mark ii, 
15, iroWi) vikSixi KKi a(/.aprai\at'. Acts vi. 8, c'jroki TcpxTa tcai 
imiisTa uAyixKft. 

OiiT. 9, If the aulistantivea arc of different gendera, and inanimate objocts are 

ngnifleJ, Iha neuter plural ii commonly empleyeil ; aa in Acts ii. 45, tk •.tifutrx 

rii^ii Wirfetirica; nai Sii^i^i^iiv nuTs vam. With animated beings Ihu O'f). ia 

in the mate, as the worthieT gender, if one of the subeUntivea be in the 

WC; B9 in Matt. xii. 50, alrisitauii'ilXpisixia.llXfi 11,1^ /i^Tii^\ifTlv. lilC.3, jfSfairif 
[MiuU.f|9ifnTEii T* yiitsiai n'liTK' KB.) IrivTiii si lit I'.i crx;*a /ii'i.. II alao happens 
intinually that an ail}, agrees in gender or number with one onlyufitaaubiitsntireH. 
tike I. 1, lif waiit mXn u) To-rn. 2 Tlieaa. i. 4, l> T£r. tiTi iiuy/uT, ifJSt nni ■ruTi 
ki-^uit, nil HirJx"9'. Equally common, though perhapa with a »iew to some 
mitt uf emphaiia, is the ii^'. repeated with each aubatantive; aa in Matt. iv. S3, 

UilMarkxili. I.Actair. 7,1 Pet. ii. 1, Rev. ixi. 1. Compare 3 Eadr.'iii. 3, Aiist. 
0. In Jamea i. 17, raru Sim iya&ri, ""i ''• Si^fn/iK ri>.iin, a,uSi, jm 
the pari, agreea with the neuter noun only. There are each of Iho 

three genders with one repelltiun of Ihe adjectite in Eph. i. 21, vrt^dni rs'imt 

ifX'i' »"■ ii"^'"! «""' Jl"«^>*! ««' xUfiiriirai, xai vatrss niltuits i'.ifta'^ In 

Heb. ix. 9, 10, there is a double conElruction, iu vhich two of the above piinciplvs 

an combined. The former pari, lini/taif agrees with Ihe feta. aubstontive only, 

ktthough referring ei^uallyto both; and the letter Wmu/j-tw is in Ihe ne«r. ^/nr., 

not with more especial reference to Sh^b, but becaiiae the things iiidieatcd are iu- 

It has been proposed to [end Wmilnaxi, wilhout any authority, and liltlu 


Obi. ID. Several adjectives am frequently Joined to one substantive trithout a 

Im^i>/u,S0 OS to preaent one undivided image to the mind. Thus Ueb. vii. 3, iJti; 

l'( lla;£irt!iiit,sT<iT.;, ^^nVa;, iyiviiXsViTic, ■. t. >.. Jiimea i. S, i>n; il^ux't, inx-ri- 

us tiui iliii auTiU. In like manner, a sccoud ailj, refers to Ihe entire 

> Alt, ii 33, 2. 36, note 2. 


idea, which a substantive forms together with a preceding ocjf . / as in 1 Pet i 18, 
iXvr(«Sn<rf 2» riis futveitetf v/iHv ava^rft^tis ^rar^^a^aiirwf from the vmm eo H v ertttt imj 
which (vain conversation) wa$ traditioneUfy derived from our ancetiars, 

Obs, 11. The contrary usage in the case of ^tXvs, which the Greeks join by mm 
with another adjective expressive of praise or blame,^ is not oheerved in the Nev 
Testament. Thus we have in John z. 32, ^•xxk Km\M X^ya ttul^m v/m. 2 'jHsLir. 

Obi, 12. All adj, is frequently followed by another adj, or a pari., which emphfti 
tically repeats the sense in a negative form ; as in Acts xiii. 11, Tv^y2s » f»>h ^iJatm 
riv ^Xjw. Eph. V. 15, fih ut &ffo^ot, «x>.* ig ^«f«/. Nearly the same is 1 John u»%7, 
aXnSig Urtf »») alt* tffri ^^ft^* 

Obs. 13. The adj. oft part, sometimes, though rarely, agrees with the relaiioe in- 
stead of the substantive, from which it is separated ; as in Rom. iv. 24, ly^^lfn V 

6. Adjectives are sometimes used in the sense of substantives, 
and tal;e a subst. in the genitive^ or another adj. in concord; 
as in Mark x. 42, ol t^iyaXoi oLVTm. Acts xxv. 2, ol 'jrpZroi Tm 
'lot/Saiwv. See also 1 Cor. i. 26. To the same class belonsrs 

Acts xxv. 5, of ^VVCLToi Iv l5/UlTv. 

Obs. 14. Hence, perhaps, the origin of substantives; and hence, ia the New Tes- 
tament as in other writings, the addition of the words &vfi^ and ityd^fr«r to a peisooal 
denomination expressive of an office, employment, situation, or the like $ and also in 
addresses. Such forms occur in Matt. xii. 41, iiv\ts VtvivTrm. xiii. 45, a^B^ei^^ V**''ift^ 
52, avi^tiitM otKoiiffvririf. Luke ii. 1 5, S.f^^tt$r6t ^ttfiins. Acts i. 16, iith^if &%%x^i. ii. 14, 
22, &vi^is 'lov^Toi. viii. 27, avh^ Ai^/0^^. x\ii. 22, ifi^tg 'aShmmW. Compare Gen.ix. 
5. 20, xiii. 8, xiii. 20, 33, Exod. ii. 14, Levit. xxi. 9, 1 Sam. xiv. 15, in the Hebrew 
and LXX. The Hebrew has no corresponding word in Levit. xx. 10, xxi. 20, e/ 
aiibi. Precisely similar is troTs oUirtis, in Gen. ix. 25. Strictly speaking, un( 
more commonly implies respect, Av^^urf, contempt : but in the New Testament 
this distinction does not appear to have been observed, though it sometimes obtains; 
as, for example, in Matt. xi. 19, h^^ares ^dyog xai oha^irm, xiii. 28, ixJ^f^i ivB^a** 
^9s. It has been thought that ywh x^i^ (Luke iv. 26) is a circumlocution of a 
similar kind ; but x^i^ ^^ ^^ ^^^ ^ feminine adjective, which is used ellipti- 
cally in Luke ii. 37, vii. 12, 1 Tim. v. 3. So, in Latin, C, Nep. Praef. c ^.faanimt 
vidua. Terent. Heaut. v. 1. 80, vidua muUeri.^ 

Obs. 15. The ar/y. also, when referred to a masc, or fern, substantive, supplies the 
place of an adverb ; as in Mark iv. 28, avrofAdrn ya^ h yn xu^r«^c^t7. John viii. 7, 
c »v»[Aoi^rnros vfiZf ir^uros rev kiS^of t«r* aur^ fiakirt^ (some manuscripts read v'fUrn) ', 
XX* 4, nk^t TT^Zroi tit to fivtifAtTof. Acts xii. 10, ^ns (frvAn) AvTofieLm nwtx^n »vrtis, 
xiv. 10, uvuffrn^t o^Bog. 1 Cor. ix. 17, tl y»^ Ixiiv touto *^»ffffu, fAt^^h ^X"*' <' ^ Attn, 
aJxavofcixv v'ivri^rtvfcat. 1 Tim. ii. 13, *AiafA yeip ^r^Zrog tfrXflsrSi), flra EZa, Compare 
Herod, ii. 66, viii. 138, Xen. Cyrop. i. 4. 2, iv. 2. 11, v. 3. 55, vi. i. 45, vii. 5. 49, 
Anab. ii. 3. 19, iv. 3. 8, v. 7. 3, Diod. Sic. i. 8, Arrian. Alex. vii. 4. 8, Isocr. Epist. 
8, Dio Chrysost. xl. p. 495, 2 Mace, x. 33. Thus also adjectives denoting time ; 
as in Luke xxiv. 22, ytwfAtmt S^^^tat !«*} ro fivtiftitof. So Job xxix. 7, LXX, V^tro- 
^tvifim oQ^^tog. Of adjectives in a7ag, derived from ordinals, thus employed, we have 
examples in John xi. 39, nra^Teuog yap i^n; Acts zxviii. 13, hurs^ot iJXStf/eur tig 
Uurtixovg. So Herod, vi. 106, Xen. Cyrop. v. 2. 2.*^ 

> Matt. Or. 6r. § 444. « Alt, Gram. N. T. ( 23. 2. 

» Winer, ( 58. 2. Valekn. ad Herod, viii. 130. 


7. Substantives expressive of a general idea are frequently 
put for a definite person or thing : abstractum pro concreto. 
Thus in Matt. xv. 13, 7ra(ra, ^t/rs/a, for wav ^^''^^^^ the act of 
j)lanting for the plant itself; Rom. iii. 30, TrepiTofAfiv xal dxpo^va- 
r'laVi the circumcised and uncircumdsed ; 2 Cor. viii. 23, dTroaroXoi 
FxxXoQffiftiv, io^a Xgjffrot). Col. iv. 11, olriVBS Iygv»i9'if3(yav ixoi voLqin^ 
yoqtx. 1 Pet. ii. 17> T17V aSsX^orwTfit dyavare. See also Phil, 
iii. 2, 1 John iv. 10. Thus also xJ/eUSo^ signifies a false god, 
or idol, in Rom. i. 25. On the other hand, the author of any- 
thing is put for tte thing itself; as when Moses and Christ are 
put for the Law and the Gospel : Luke xvi. 29, exovai Mwjsa 
xai rous 7rpo(fintas. Eph. iv. 20, jy/xeTs Se o^x ovreus l/xa&ere tov 


06«. 16. Many manuscripts read for ^a^tXitt xeci U^us, in Rev. i. 6, ifroiti^av hfias 
(lafftXiiaf, it^tTf, For examples in the LXX see Gen. zix. 6, Ps. xxi. 7. 

8. Two substantives are employed in the same case, one of 
which must be rendered as an adjective or participle. Thus in 
Mark xiii. 19, soovrxi yip ou 'hfJiipoct sKeXvxi dXtNl/tf, i. e. reSr\i(Afjiiyai . 
So in Herod, i. 32, ^as- ean av^poDvos (Tvtx(p6qin» Arrian. Epict. 
ii. 1, t/ yip l<rri TfaciSiov ; aywia' rl eart 7raiS/ov; ai^xhla,* Again 
1 Cor. ix. 5, fitSeX^r/v yvyauxa, i. e. a Christian uife^ 1 Tim. ii. 
2, Tit. i. 3, ii. 10, iii. 4, roy crwrSgo^ ^/xo/v ©eot), our Saviour God. 

§ 26. — Of the Noun in Apposition. 

1. Apposition is frequently used in the New Testament as 
an explanation, more or less direct, of a preceding substantive. 
Luke ii. 30, erSov ol 6(p^aXfAot fjLov to (jwT'nqiov gov (feus sh d'TioKoi' 
Xi;\J/iv l&vftJv, Kcti So^cev Xaoy cov *laqari\, xiv. 1, ToJv ap^ovrofv rm 

Oa§<(r<jfra;v, rulers, who were Pharisees. Add Rom. viii. 25, Eph. 
i. 7, ii. 15. 

Obs, 1. Although, strictly speaking, Apposition should agree in gender and number y 
an abstract noun in the net//. «t7i^. frequently answers to a plural ; as in James v. 
10, v^ShttyfjM Xeifiirt revs a^roffroXovs* See § 25. 8. V^Te have also in 1 John y. 16, 
^a^ii etvrS ^um} roTs a/ia^rdvov^t fAfi 9'pos ^dvarov^ where ulrZ is used distributive i$f, 
ufiet^rufovfft collectively. Of the use of the article in apposition see }§ 27. 4. Obs, 12. 
and 30. 2. The following cases are also to be noticed : — 

1. Apposition is sometimes used, though the word which it defines is omitted ; 
as in 1 Pet. v. 1, 9r^t<r^vrifous vevs iv ufMf ta^etxa'kei e ffvfAT^ttrfivn^os ttct) fAu^ruf, 
X. r. X., where i trufA^^iff^vri^os is in apposition with iyuf contained in «ra^a- 

» Alt, Gram. N. T. § 23. 1. « Kypke ad Mark xiii. 19. 


2. Sometimei a whole ii put in apporition with ifta parity a vetwel with its cw- 
tentif and the like. Thus Mark viii. 8» ^wt wt^if0%^fnmTM icXmrfUrm,tm 
rtrvfihtf, 1 Pet. ii. 5, is X/S«« ^m; «/»«)«/u7rSc, «lMf «-»cv/MM'/jMr, ». r. JU 

3. A substantive, sometimei accompaoiud with an adj., is added by way of 
explanatory apposition to a whole sentence. Rom« xiL 1» m'^c^xmXm dtifut* 
etitX^si, 4r«^«rriir«M ra ^tifiarm vfiSf Bu^iaf {««'«»> ayimvj fvoj^frrw* r^ 6if , n 
X0yi*w XuT^iiaf vfuip, i. e., if Urt X^ysMti XMT^tim, So 2 Thess. i. 4, 1 Tim. 
ii. 6. So« in Latin, Q. Curt. iv. 7. 13, RepetUe obductte cctlo tmbe* amdidnt 
ioienif ingent astu fatigaiis auxilium. Upon this principle is to be explained 
the introduction of an adj, or part., with or without an article, at an appos- 
tion with an entire sentence : as, for instance, r« X.§m9, wkai rtmahu ; « 
fi\yi9r»9, what it greatest ; and the like. Thus in Gal. ii. 7, aXXm rwmtrUh 
». T. X. 1 Thess. iv. 1, ri k^tvif 0Zf, i^tX^ti^ «• r. X. Heb. viii. 1, mt^rnXmim 
3), ». r. X. To the same class must be referred Mark vii. 19, »mi tit rii iff 
2^Sfa l»9'a^ivtrai, xa4a^t^»v ^mta tu fifiiftMTet, which, i. e., t« ix^sftvi/Ufm ut 
rof i^t^pSm, purines all meats, or, in other words, separates the nutritiuiu 
part from that which is ejected as useless. 

4. An intervening word or sentence is sometimes interposed between the appo- 
sition and the leading noun ; as in James i. 7, ftn yif •tirSt^ « &9^^§tir§t Isimi, 
•rt knypiteti Ti 9ra^a Kuf/ou' »f»ip ^i'4^i*X*fy Itxara^rttTts, », «*. X. In this case 
apposition will sometimes agree with a relative, of which the leading word ii 
the antecedent. Thus in Phil. iii. 18, w-aXXm ya^ v't^txaTsZw^tw, »Ct wtXXtuus 
iXiy§9 vftif, rout Ix^i'^S ^'^ ^rav^w roZ X^t^roS, 1 John li. 25, mStw Urhi 
W»yytXia, fly mvrit iTtiyyitXttrt iiftTt, rnf ^ttnv rnv atiifuv. Somewhat similar 
is 1 Pet. iii. 21, ^i#^S««'a» H SlmrtSt '^ "^ *^/*^t arrlrtnroit tSv g-ti^u fiuitrt^fuh 
which still, L e., its antitype, baptism, saves us. The readings f has every 
appearance of being the correction of some transcriber. 

2. Instead of an apposition, the latter suhst. is occd^ionally 
put in the genitive. This is the case particularly with the 
names of places, as in 2 Pet. ii. 6, ^roXetf 2oSo/xa/v xai Tofjuoppas. 
So the Latins said urbs Romcs, fons Timavi, fluvius Evphratis, 
and the like. 

Obs. 1. The same construction is employed in other instances ; as in 2 Cor. v. 5, 
"hdus %/ih T§f itffa^w v§u rvtvfAecrof, who has given us the spirit, as a pledge: Rom. 
iv. 11, ffn/Mt»f tkafit trt^iTofAtif, where another reading is vn^iro/A^v. Another examjde 
is Acts iv. 22, t* o'ufJi.iTov rovro rm Idctetf, this miracle of healing, i. e. which con- 
sisted in healing. Add Col. iii. 24, Heb. xii. 11, 1 Pet. iii. 3. To this head should 
also, in all probability, be referred Eph. iv. 9, xurifin ^^mrav ut t» xartirmra ns 
yns, which does not mean the lower parts of the earth, but the lower regions, namely, 
the earthy as the context plainly indicates. Thus we have in Isai. xxxviii. 14, LXX, 
re vypos rw •l^uvelu. Compare Acts ii. 19. In Latin the genitive is used in the 
same manner ; as, for example, in Cic. Off. ii. 5, Commemoratis cceteris causis, eluvionis, 
pestilentiof, &c., that is, qua: consistunt in eluvione, pestUentia. 

3. A new proposition, in which os hn may be supplied, occu- 
pies the place of an apposition in a few instances. Thus in 

James iii. 8, t^v yKafaara'^ ovSeif SiJvaTa* dv^patTTCtfy ^acfJLoiffai* dxari" 
a^sTov xaxov, f/^Barf^ lov ^avaTn^opou, Rev. i. 5, aTro 'Irjo^oy X§i^tov, 


o ixa^TifS m(rro9, x. t. X. Somewhat similar are the anacolutha, 
which are noticed in § 69. II. 

Olt. 2. It should seem that an apposition is involved, as it were, in the concise 
expression of 2 Cor. vi. 13, rhv avrhv avrtfu^Bi'av ^rXMTUfhn »») vftug, i. e. rh avriv 
r^ttTSfj i^rttf dtrtfit filet} 

Of the Articulus Prcepositivus. (BuTTM. § 124, 125.) 
§ 27. — Insertions and Omissions of the Article. 

1. The difference in the use of the article by the old Greek 
poets and the Attic writers is rather apparent than real. As 
to the assertion that there is no article, properly speaking, in 
Homer (Buttm. § 126. Obs, 7*), it must be received with consi- 
derable limitation ; * for it is not to be denied that there are 
numberless passages which precisely correspond with the Attic 
usage. Still the pronominal nature of the article is, in some 
instances, established beyond contradiction ; as in II. ii. 793, 
Toy S' aTTo /X6V xqarof xwi'/iv /3«Xe OoiJSoy 'A^oXXciv, 'H Se kv\iV' 
So/x6V9} xavaxfiv ex^ Toaalv v(f* I'jnroj^, Had the sentence ended 
here, it is evident that ri would be a pronoun referring to xyvfTjv, 
exactly as tov refers to Patroclus ; but it so happens that aif- 
XwTTts Tqv(paXBia foUows in the next verse. Hence the difference 
between the pnepositive article and pronoun is not essential, 
but accidental ; and, consequently, there is in fact no difference 
at all. It becomes therefore only necessary to inquire whether 
it ever loses this pronominal character, not only in Homer, but 
in other Greek writers ; and it will be seen that the article 5 
and the pronoun o are essentially the same thing, differing only 
in having or not having an adjunct. 

Obs. 1. The adjunct is annexed to the art, by means of the participle of existence 
nnderbtood ; so that the art, may be considered as the subject y and its adjunct as the 
predicate of a proposition, which differs from ordinary propositions, only as assump" 
tion differs from assertion. Thus o avh^ signifies He, or the male^ being, or as- 
sumed to be a man ; and the same reasoning will hold if the predicate be an adjec- 
tive. Sometimes indeed the participle of existence is expressed, though the au- 
thor's meaning would have been equally certain had it been omitted. Thus Arlof . 
Ethic. Nicom. iv. 2, el /xdxtvra a^tos ovns in»i<rra, ^kovrevvs. If the predicate be a 
participle, it is plain that it contains an assumption within itself, which supplies the 
place of the participle of existence, 

Obs, 2. Since the article and its predicate together constitute an assumptive pro* 

^ Winer, § 48. Alt, $ 31. Erfurdt ad Soph. (Ed. T. 602. Monk ad Eur. 
Alcest. 7. Matthiffi ad Eur. FhoBn. 223. Stalbaum ad Plat. Gorg. p. 228. 
* See Matt. Gr. Gr. } 264. 



positionf it can be employed only where an assumption will be allowed^ eitliK 6n 
its reference poniively to something which has preceded, or hypoiJketieally to sum* 
thing which is about to become the subject of an assertion. The article therefore 
may be used, either when conjointly with its predicate it recalls some former ideii 
or when it is the representative of something, of which, whether known or unknofB, 
an assumption is to be made. In the latter case the use of the article is not, as iht 
grammarians say, indefinite ; but it denotes the whole particular class of objects to 
which its adjunct can apply.^ 

2, When a person or thing recently mentioned is spoken of 
again, or when the existence of such a person or thing is oz- 
sumed from what has been said^ or when a well-knotcn person 
or thing is mentioned xar l^ox^v, the article is always inserted.' 
Thus in Matt. i. 24, o ayysXos is the angel recently mentionedi 
and rov v'ttvov refers to ova^ preceding. Matt. ii. 11, t^v oIxmy, 
sciL, eTrivo) oi$ eJ^ov tov ioripa ; v. 25, o avriSixof^ 6 Kplmsy o vm- 
piTnsj persons well known in the courts of law ; viii. 12, S xXoi/J- 
i^os nal ^quyi^os ruv oSovto/v, sciL of the person last mentioned; 
xiii. 2, TO 7r\o7oy, the boat appropriated to Jesus and his dis- 
ciples ; 26, Ta ^i^avia, a renewed mention from the preceding 
verse. So again in v. 27 ; but many MSS. there omit the 
article, which may be right ; since the servants would rather 
perhaps express surprise at there being any tares at all, than 
at ihG particular tares in question. Again^ Matt. xxi. 12, ris 
TTspiarepaf, the doves, expressly prescribed for the offerings of 
the poor ; Luke ix. 16, rov^ wevre aprovs xal rous SiJo ly^^vas, the 
loaves and fishes spoken of in v. 12; John vi. 10, ev to) row, 
sciL Iv a> 6<mQjt6v o 'loicoys-; vii. 51, rov av&/)ft;wov, the man amen- 
able to the law ; 1 Cor. iv. 5, 6 eVaivor, the praise, with refer- 
ence to the action which merits it; 2 Cor. vii. 11, Iv toJ sr/wcy- 
fAari, the main business respecting the incestuous person ; and 
so in 1 Thess. iv. 6, the matter in hand; Eph. vi. 12, rt vdkn, 
the contest implied in the preceding verses; Heb. xi. 28, o 
oKo^peucjVf the destroying angel mentioned by Moses; James 
ii. 25, rovt oiyyk'Kovs, the well-known spies. In John vii. 24, tw» 
Sixatav x^iViv xg/varg specifies the judgment which is strictly just, 
and not in appearance only. The use of the article in this 
passage is similar to the example cited by Matthias (Gr. Gr. 
§ 267.) from Eur. Iph. A. 305. Its force will be seen by resolving 
thus, 71 Kpms, fiv xqivars, Stxa/a sa-rof. Of words used xar' l^ox^v 

* Middleton on the Gr. Art. ch. 1. 

' Middleton on the Gr, Art., part i ch. 3, } 1, 2. Most of the examples are taken 
from ff^ner, but his mode of illustration is generally different. 


there are examples in Matt. i. 23, ti vipbtvos^ the virgin fore- 
told by Isaiah (vii. 14); Matt. xi. 3, o eqx^fjLS'^os, the person 
confessedly expected to come, i. e. the Messiah ; Mark i. 7, o 
ioyju^rBpoSy that one who is stronger^ L e. Christ ; John i. 2L 
5 9r/)o(p^T9is, the prophet promised in Deut. xviii. 15, sqq.; Acts 
iv. 12, ^ auTnplx, the expected salvation. Thus'also o ^idfioXos, 
o voyyipos, 6 itztpil^m, by which expressions the devil is desig- 
nated xar' l^oj^^jv. 

Oha, 3. Under this head may be placed the monadic nount ; i. e* nouns indicating 
.persons or things which exist tingle, or of wluch, if there be several| only onef from 
the nature of the case^ can be the subject of discourse.^ Thus Matt. v. 15, rn fti^uvf 
the measure; rhv >.ux*iaf, the lamps of which articles only one would probably be 
found in a house ; Luke iv. 20, rf uirn^irif, the only attendant who was employed 
in the synagogue ; John xiii. 5, rot vtrrnfa, the only basin used on the occasion. In 
Matt. iy. 5, vo itrt^vytav is evidently something monadic ; but it is difficult to deter- 
mine what part of the Temple is meant. By ro rern^uv, in Matt. xxvi. 27, a tingle 
cup is designated; though it may have been filled several times during the Paschal 
feast. So also, in the preceding verse it has been thought that a tingle loaf is 
indicated ; but here some important MSS. omit rn, and the omission is rendered 
highly probable by a comparison with the parallel places in Mark xiv. 22, Luke 
xxii. 19.« 

Obt, 4. It is evidently the reference to a single portion of time which explains 
such expressions as the following : Matt. xx. 2, U ^fiva^Uu rriv fifii^etv. Luke xviii. 
1 2, })s vu fft/SjSardv. Heb. ix. 7, txe^ rov htavrw. For the same reason, the true 
reading in Matt. x. 29 is probably rw ete^a^Uu, which is found in some MSS. 

Obs* 5. The numerous examples, in which the article has the sense of a possessive 
fironotfit, may be explained on the same principles. Thus Matt. xi. 29, ru^tms <rj 
xmfhlif, lowly in my heart ; Mark vi. 55, v7$ z^afifiuruff their beds ; Rom. xiv. 13, r^ 
mhkf^, your brother. See also Matt. iii. 12, xxvii. 50. So again in 1 Cor. v. 9, 
2 Cor. vii. 8, iir r^ iTi^roky, in my letter. The proper mode of expressing simply by 
letter is )/ ifrurr9>.ni> or V IrtfroXm, See 1 Cor. xvi. 3, 2 Thess. ii. 2. In 2 Cor. x. 
10, eu IfrifTtfXtf} are his (St. Paul's) Epistles in general.^ 

Obs, 6. In connexion with this class of insertions it may also be remarked, that 
the subject of proverbial allusions has the article ; since allusions naturally suppose 
the thing alluded to to be generally known. Thus in Matt, xxiii. 24, rov jcmurtt, 

Obt. 7. It is scarcely to be expected, that no anomalies should present themselves 
in the use of the article, for which it may be difficult or impossible to account ; but, 
at the same time, it is satisfactory to find that the deviations from the regular prac- 
tice may be arranged under specific heads, and that they are omissions where 
the article might have been inserted, not insertions irreconcilable with its alleged 

1, Nouns employed »ar' i'iox'^h ^^'^ under the similar circumstances noticed 
above, are frequently anarthrous after prepositions ; and consequently their 
definiteness or indefiniteness must, in such cases, be determined on other 
grounds. Thus in Matt. i. 18, \» rvstl/Mtres ayUv, by the Holy Ghost: and 
'here it may be observed that, in its personal sense, vrnufAK. or Trnufia &ym is 

^ Middleton, part i. ch. 1. § 3. ' Middleton in 11. cc. 

' Middleton on 1 Cor. v. 9. 


never anarihroui, except in cases where other terms, confessedly moet defimte, 
lose the article ; but when his i^flueneet or operatiant^ which are of Taiioa 
kinds, are indicated, the article, unless there be reneteed meniiam or sw 
other reference, is omitted. Matt. z. 15, xi. 22, l» jl/ftl^ x^ieimt. Ads nil 
13, 9m^k wira/uf* Rom. v« 13, &xit m/mv> Sy »i^f»^m Similar ex s nif i w 

2. Where two or more nouns are coupled together by conjunctions, or vhen 
the conjunctions are omitted by the figure Jtyndftont the article, which vooU 
otherwise be inserted, is frequently rejected. In the New Testament, Emau- 
rationt of this kind are very common : as, for instance, Matt. x. 28, m2 ^ 
xh Mi 9mf»M» Luke xviii. 29, ynu% n «^iX^vf, ». r. X* xxi. 25, h ii)aif m 
riXifHi »«) a(#r^«/f .| 1 Cor. xiii. 13, ^Urtf^ iXri;, ayav-n* Heb. iv. 12, 4^ 
rt ««} a^fiutTtf, and again, iySi/^jvrMry Mti iff§tetu See also Heb. tL 2, 5, 
1 Pet. ii. 13, et alibi pastim. 

3. It might be expected that ot'dittait would uniformly be preceded hj tiie 
article, since, in a series of things of the same class, only one can be j6n(, 
secoftd, &c. Ordinals, however, for the most part, whether the nouns w^ 
which they agree be expressed or understood, are anarthrous. Matt, ut.26) 
rtru^rp (pvXetKy. xxii. 3d, vr^Mrn lfri>.tit hvri^ec li ifM$» au*r^. In Luke SOT. 
2 1 , the anomaly seems to have extended its influence so far as to cause tk 
omission of the article before ravrtfff and a similar reason may possibly l^ 
count for its absence in Acts i. 5, xxiv. 21. See § 35. 1. Compara ibo 
John xxi. 14, 2 Cor. xiii. 1. Many MSS. omit T«y in Matt. xx. 3, and a 
other places the same variety is observable : nor can the correct readings be 
ascertained with any degree of accuracy. The reason of the irreg^ltnty 
seems to be, that while their natural definiteness gives to onlinals a right to 
the article, it at the same time renders it unnecessary. 

4. Su{)erlativcs have so close an affinity to the ordinals signifying ^rs/ and M, 
that they also sometimes reject the article. There are but few, if any, in- 
stances in the New Testament. Such expressions as vies v^to'Tw (Luke i. 32) 
may be accounted for upon other grounds.^ The above anomalies will also 
be found to occur in some other relations, to be subsequently noticed. 

Obt, 8. Analogous to the use of the article with monadic nouns^ is the reason of 
its insertion before the great objectt of nature : as in Matt. v. 45, vov fiXuv. vii. 25, 
27, ii fi^«X*i) ^' 9r§retfAo)y oi An/iot. viii. 26, To7t avifius xeii r*} SaX««-0'ff . Acts iv. 24, 
riv 0u^avovj xet) rh y*iv, xa} r^y BecXei^^eif, Compare Matt. xxiv. 29, 33, Luke xii.30, 
xvi. 17, Acts ii. 20, Rev. v. 13, vi. 12, et alibi. In Matt. xiii. 6 a single MS. hti 
the article ; but there arc several instances, both in the New Testament and in the 
classical writers, in which ^y-m is anarthrous. A principal reason of this may be, 
that it is one of those nouns, which are closely allied to the nature of Proper Nawm; 
but in genitives absolute, as in the place in question, the case differs little from ss 
OMtertion of existence only ; and the same remark will generally hold, when meielj 
the time when an event is said to happen is expressed. So Matt. xiv. 6, ytrtfi^ 
Aycfiimf. Luke xxiii. 54, ^afifiecrav Wi^u^xt, Acts xvi. 35, xxiii. 12, nf^i^ms yf- 

Obi, 9. Not only the names of the elements, but of many other objects which 
exist singly , or singly in certain relations, have been supposed to present g^reat ine* 
gularities in the use of the article ; and Winer' has given a list of words which, both 

' Middleton, part i. ch. 6. See also his notes on the several examples cited. 

' Middleton, part i. ch. 3, § 5. See also his note on Matt. !• c, and comptie 
Krtiger on Xen. Anab. ii. 10. 15. 

• Fart iii. ch. 1. ( 18. 1. See Rose's Preliminary Observations to th^ last editioa 
of Bishop Middleton'a work. 


in the New Testament and the best Greek writers^ he supposes to take or reject the 
article ad iibitum, on the ground that they are so definite in their nature as to leave 
no room for mistake. It will be seen, however, on a very slight examination, that 
the irregularities lie, almost without .exception) within one or other of the limit- 
ations already indicated. Those from the New Testament alone demand attention 
in this place. They are the following : — 

tiXjos* Out of thirty.two instances in the New Testament the article is omitted only 
eight times. Of these, Mark iv. 6 is parallel with Matt. uii. 6, which has 
been already noticed. In Luke xxi. 25, Winer gravely observes that the ar- 
ticle is omitted, because the sun is mentioned in connexion witk the moon arid 
start. The case is one of Enumeration ; and so is Acts xxvii. 20. We say, in 
like manner, 5tm, moon, and stars. Nearly similar is 1 Cor. xv. 41, though it 
may here depend upon the regimen j as it does in Rev. vii. 2, xvii. 12, xxii. 5. 
See also § 30, 1. 
yn* Regimen prevails in Mark xiii. 27. A preposition precedes in Luke ii. 14, 
Heb. viii. 4. In Acts xvii. 24 it is a case of Enumeration* So also in 2 Pet. 
iii. 10, where the article is also omitted in many MSB. before av^am}, and, it 
should seem, correctly. Compare v. 12. With respect to v. 5 of the same 
chapter, oh^aw) n^ecv x»i yfj, there were heavens and an earthy is a simple asser- 
tion of existence. § 27. 4. 
w^etvofj ov^afoL The omission of the article is confined to cases of Enumeration, as 

those just cited, or to those in which a preposition occurs.* 
BaXa^^a. Before this word the article is very rarely omitted. In Acts vii. 36, x. 6, 
32, 2 Cor. xi. 26, it fails after a preposition; and in James i. 6, Jude 13, 
the regimen excludes it. The existence of a sea is asserted indefinitely in 
Kev. iv. 6. As a case of Enumeration, Luke xxi. 25 has been already noticed ; 
and Rev. xiv. 7 must fall under the same head, though it is somewhat peculiar. 
If the received text be correct, however, 2 Pet. iii. 10 is a similar instance. ^ 
There is an obscurity in Matt. iv. 15, where the words il^f Bocxd^^fis are copied 
from the LXX version of Isaiah ix. I. The translator probably regarded cio* 
in the light of a preposition, as the original Hebrew word has sometimes the 
sense of versus; but regimen will also account for the omission of the article. 
fUfffififi^iet, There are no omissious except after a preposition ; as in Acts viii. 26, 

xxii. 6. 
vu^, ^Vith this word may be combined fifAt^a and iypiei, though omitted in Winer's 
list. All the cases in which they occur without the article are either simple 
assertions made by a verb substantive, and notes of time similar to those above 
cited,^ or they fall within the established exceptions. Matt. xvi. 2, o^plas 
ytvofAiffis, XXV. 6, fciff-ns vvxTog. Luke vi. 13, xxii. 66, on iyinro hfti^et. Acts 
xii. 3, fi^etv It hfAi^eti ruv a^vftatf. The article fails before an ordinal in Acts 
xxvii. 33 ; after prepositions, and iu enumerations^ in 1 Thess. v. 2, 5. 
ciye^d. The article is omitted after prepositions in Matt. xi. IG, Mark vii. 4, Luke 

vii. 32. It is much more frequently inserted." 
uy^os> Mark XV. 21, Luke xxiii. 26, ax* a.y^w,from the country, as distinguished 
from a city or town ; Luke xv. 25, h ky^cf. These are the only cases of omis- 

1 The first noun of an Enumeration sometimes takes the article, though the others 
do not. Mr. Rose cites an example from ^sch. Socr. Dial. ii. 2, ra uM^o^et, »»} 

■ So, iu English, we say, day breaks, morning dawns, night advances, 

3 The well-known expression vrkrtfiev^ns uyo^at, cited by Winer from Xenophon 

(Anab. i. 8. 1), Herodotus (iv. 181), and iElian (V. H. xii. 30), is a mark of time 

similar to those just noticed. . 


iLau, sieoiit in an £niiiMra(i<m in Muk vii. SG. la Ihe sense of a Jleld ot fa 
o/ranil, the insertion of the article deptnila upon the deliiiiteness oi inileGlii» 
new of Ihe aentence. The plural, as trellMtheBingiiliir, occurs inboth>?iin, 

3u(. Winei obaetves thai Iheabscuee oftheBckielB is must Crequent in tlie epiiUlt: 
and parlicukily when the genitive Siiu depends upon a governing noun, u a 
Rom. iii. 3, liii- 4, xt. 7, 8, 1 Cor. xi. 7, 2 Cor. viii. r>, 1 Then. ii. 13 ; in Ik 
fonna 9ii( nri; (1 Coi. i. 3, 3 Cor. i. 2, Qal. i. 1, Pbil. i. 2, 1 Pet.i. 2), ud 
hIiI ot W»> 3>H(Roni. yiii. 14, 16, Gal. ui. 26, PfaiL ii. 15, 1 Johai. i}; 
and vhen it ii joined with an adjective, ai 1 Theta. i. 9, BiS (Stri »>] iikuSii- 
Be addi tbe eipreaaioa SuS 3iX*>nt from Acta ii. 18, 21. The fact ii ' 
the words Siii and ■ilguc. in the senia of Qoo, iJte or reject the article indit- 
crimiaatelf, in conaeijuence of their partaking of the nature both of i^pt/laliai 
and praptmaiim. It ia, nererlheleis, remarkable that Sim, which oceiinii 
the New TeatnmeDt more than 1300 limes, invariably conformi to theUoitl 
rt^onm, and treqnenlly to the other Tulei ot cammon sppeUativeH ; buEKipn 
by which the LXX frequently exprcased the Hebrew Jbuovah, apptoidB 
more neatly to a pnpir noaw. Generally, therefore, though not mulenullj, 
when there ia no reaaon for omitting the article, g SiJi is put for theowfnt 
(Tn/, OS dlbtiaguiahed from other 3ul; and Ku;iir, u'lf Aoiif Ike article, without i 
additiun of the name of Chrisl, and ao circumila&ced that ao rule of appelk- 
titea will account for the omiaiion of the article, ia olmoat inToriabl}' uKd of 
Gad ike Father. There are, however, a ftsw instances in which it is so used uf 
GadiheSan, See 2 Cor. iii. 17, Itj, 1 Theia.v. %, 2 Pet. ui. 10. All Winert 
ingtariceB are example! oflbe uie of Sisf in regimtn, or as a proper n 

ttiiiim. Hytf. See above, Obi. 7. 1. 

iKTiif and ^^fTi^, Thtae are not used without the article, except under 

circumslancei. Wiuer'a examples are Matt, i 

. 12, U *«>.Ui 


iaif and yitt. Most of the apparent irrEgularitica fall within one or otfaer of the 
tulea which have been repeatedly noticed : and, indeed, the frequent oinisnon 
of the article before words itnplyijif; rrlationihip, which has beeu remarked bj 
numeroua critics,' accor<lB very well with their continual uae in Enumeralieni 
and exctaiivt propoailioos. Sue Matt, xii, 50, Murk x. 29, 30, uud elsewhere. 
In Matt. V. 32, xix. 9, Luke xvi. 18, z«Xi>.v/ii>,(>dops not indicate apaiticulii 
individual, but any ivomon tuha Am heat dmorccd; and it\it wanla the artidt 
by reason of the prtptiilion. The proposition is exelusitB,— no hmbartd or wiff 
mkoHuonier J and so 1 Tim. ii. 12. See ^ 28. 3. Many maDuscrtptB wuut the 
artida in Bph. v. 23 ; nor is the aenae oF the pasaage affected either by the 
mniuioa or inKrlion. Tbete is n difficulty in 1 Cor. v. I, Sm yutiiixi •riix rti 
«r^F ixur. Since yuino t^'" >" ^ common ihroae signifying lo lair a infi. 
may it be Uiat ttus led to a caaual omission of the article, which seems l« be 
■Ddiapensable ? Compare Mark vi. 18. 

rfitutrn. The article is omitted aftur a prrposilion in Luke v. 12, xviL IG, .\cu 
XXV.I6, 1 Cor.xiv.25. To these inataiices, cited by Winer, maybe added* 
ease o! Eiuimeraliaa in 1 Pet. iii. 12. In the expresaioiis rfinnnr Ju^i^Hir 
(Luke XX. 21), and ■r(ir«!r>. S:ii'^«fi<> (Jude 16), the article is plainly inadmi*- 

isiJum's. This word, which occurs very inacy times in the New Testament 
aeemi to be used with the strictest regularity. In 1 Tim. iii. 15 it follows i 
verb lubilatUive ; in Heb. ii. 12 the rtginien expels the article; and in 
6 a prepoaliiiH precedes. liliddleton duubta respecting I Cor. lix. 4 (Wit 

■ Schsf^ ad Soph. (Ed. T. 630. Matt. Qt. Gt. { 264. p. 462. 



emaining example), and prefers the reading i»»>.ti^taf Btev, which is found in 
two or three copies. There is no reason, however^ why the word may not here 
signify, indefinitely, any church or congregation. 

luitvov. John xiii. 2, hiirvou yifdfuinUf during mpper. This is a mark of time similar 
to those already noticed. The phrase ^uuv hiirvav, to makeafeati (Mark vi. 21, 
et aiibi)f is of course anarthrous. In 1 Cor. xi. 20, the old Syriac version ren- 
ders Kv^x0» hTirvov, a meal which is proper for the LordPt day ; hut the article 
may also he rejected by the same licence, by which it is so frequently waiting 
in Kt/^i0f. 

^»ietr»s. The usage of this word is perfectly regular in the New Testament. Of 
Winer's examples, two (Matt. xxvi. 38, 2 Cor. iv. 11) are after prepositions f 
and one (Rom. i. 32) is owing to the regimen. In Luke ii. 26, ^avetros is per- 
sonified, and therefore used aa a proper name ; and so also in the similar ex- 
pressions yivu^tu ^aveiroVf B'Utfuv Sayar«y, in Matt. xvi. 28, John viii. 51* 

^v^ei. There is no irregularity in the use of this word. The article is omitted after 
prepositions in Matt. xxiv. 33, Mark xiii. 29. 

wfMs* In St. Paul's Epistles the import of this word is very extensive. It is used 
of every rule of life ; of every revelation, and especially of the Law of J^oses, 
both moral and ceremonial ; and even of that moral obedience which it is the 
object of every law to inculcate. These various senses are undoubtedly cal- 
culated to produce perplexity, though the context will generally aid in affixing 
the particular sense required. With respect to the article, it may be observed 
that when the Mosaic Law, xetr i^ox**^* ^^ ^^^ Jewish Scriptures, are indicated^ 
it is always inserted, except in those cases where it would be excluded bywords 
the most definite. When the word is used in any of its subordinate senses, the 
insertion or omission of the article is, of course, regulated by the laws of its 
ordinary usage. In a large majority of the instances which Winer has adduced 
of its omission before vofAosf in the sense of the Mosaic Law, a preposition is the 
regulating cause : but in some few the Mosaic Law is not intended. Thus in 
Rom. iii. 31, it means moral obedience, as opposed to faith ^ in Rom. v. 20, it is 
the Law of Nature, or a Rule of Life, an actuating principle generally: and in 
Rom. vii. 1, it is any natural or revealed Law whatsoever. 

»»{•/. Taken generally, the dead are ot nx^oi, although there may be reasons for 
omitting the article. Thus 1 Cor. xv« 15 mc^c) evz lyu^oftat is an exclusive 
proposition (§ 28. 3) ; and so throughout the chapter. The expressions lyil^ttv, 
ly%i^w^u, ava^rnrnt U nx^Sff of which alone Winer's examples consist, omit 
the article by reason of the preposition. When used for dead bodies, it is pro- 
perly anailhroas j as in the passages cited by Winer from Thucyd. iv. 14, v. 
10, Mlian. V. H. i. 34. 

xo^fMf, Matt. xiii. 35, Heb. iv. 3, into xetrafieXfis xofffAou, John xvii. 24, ir^ xar, 
xe^fiuu. Matt. xxiv. 24, ««•' a^x^f xo^/mu. These fbrmulae are perfectly regular ; 
besides which Winer cites oi^y U xc^f^tu, from Rom. v. 13, et alibi. With xl^fMs 
may be classed »tm, which, in the New Testament, always has the article, ex- 
cept after prepositions, or from some other causes. In the singular it denotes 
life, eternity^ the Jewish and Christian dispensations^ &c. ; which are all monadic : 
in the plural, it may be classed among the objects of Nature. ^ 

M^a. With ordinals and superlatives, the article is omitted in Matt. xv. 33, xxvii. 
45> Acts xxiii. 23, 1 John ii. 18, &c« 

a^X^- ^here is not a single instance of irregular usage in this word throughout 
the New Testament. Winer's examples (Matt. xix. 18, John i. 1, 2, Acts xi. 
15, xxvi. 4, 2 Thess. ii. 15, 1 John i. 1), are all governed hy prepositions. In 

^ MiddletonoaJolmiKvi*!^. 


Mark i. 1^ iiU Urn is understood ; ind there if a simUar ellipsis in Maxk xuL 
9. Hence the verb substantive excludes the article. 

»v^i»s. See under Btof* It may be added that in a single instance (Acts zzv. 26)i 
xu^t»s is used of the Roman emperor, tuir c|«x«f v. 

iteificXof. With the exception of Acts xiii. 10, 1 Pet. v. 8, Rev. xx. 2, the ariick 
is always prefixed, if Me DevU is meant. The first and last are cases of ordi- 
nary usage ; and in 1 Pet. v. 8, &*Tiitx»f is an adjeciive, so that the true reader* 
ing will be, your opposing evil spirit. So rS vctrn^t vfm 0f^> your Saviour M 
in lit. iii. 4. 

3. In expressions similar to the well-known Grsecism, eijiv ol 
Xiyovrsf, a class of persons is distinguished by the particular action 
attributed to them ; i. e., the existence of such persons is assumed^ 
and consequently the article is necessary. Thus in Gal. i. 7, 
TiveV ei(Tiv ol roLpiaooyTBs vfjLas, the existence of some who troubled 
the Galatians is assumed, and they are spoken of definitely as 
such. The case is similar in Luke xviii. 9, ^lire Trpof Ttvar row 
'jTETrot^oraf l(p' exvroXf, Here certain persons not accurately 
defined (nysf) are more exactly marked by a character well 
known to belong to them. So again in Acts ii. 47, tovs- (t^^o- 
iuiEvo:;^ are those particular persons who^ being admitted into 
the church, were thereby placed in a state of salvation. 

Obt. 10. In like manner, after verbs signifying to cai/, or name, the predicate 
takes the article, when 'the name given is universally recognised as the appropriate 
designation of the individual specified, and of him exclusively ; as in Rev. vi. 8, 
cvo/JM uhrcf QeivuTOS' xix. 13, xaktTrat re ovofxet eturou o Xoyof rov 6tdt/.* 

4. The case is very different in propositions which merely 
affirm or deny existence, or where a verb or participle, substan- 
tive or nuncupative, is used to indicate, as hitherto unknown or 
unnoticed, the very truth, which the presence of the article 
would imply to be known or supposed already. This usage 
arises out of the nature of the article, which always implies the 
existence of the person or thing, to the name of which it is pre- 
fixed ; and therefore to affi^rm or deny an existence which is 
already assumed, would be either superflous or absurd. Ex- 
amples everywhere abound, as. Matt. v. 9, uloi Secy xXiQS'rJerovTai. 
xxiii. 9, TTocfi^cx, /XT) xaXejoQTe. Mark xi. 13, ou yip m xaigos tjuxatv, 
Luke xxi. 25, earait (jnfjLsTa, ev riXico, John v. 2, %<7ri Se xoXi;/A/3oj&§gE. 
Rom. iii. 18, ouyc ejr* <^o^qs» Eph. v. 18, Iv <3 botxi afrcorioL, In 
Rev. viii. 11, the article is unquestionably spurious; and it 
may be remarked, that many of the best manuscripts omit it 

* Winer, Compare Xen. Cyrop. iii. 3. 4, Anab. vi. 6. 7, cited by Matthiae. 


even in Rev. vi. 8, xix. 13. There is an apparent irregularity in 
Matt. viii. 12^ eKuhral o kkitv^f/LOf, x. r* X. ; but the affirmation 
here terminates in ixeT, not in itrrxt? 

Obs, 11. To this head may be referred^ by an easy transition, the omission of the 
article after verbs of appointing, chootingt creating, &c., since the existence of an ap- 
pointment cannot be recognised before it is made. Thus Luke xii. 14, rts /ai ««ri- 
fm^t h»a^riiv S /At^t^rriv i^* vftug i John X. 33, ^etug 0t»urn Sitf'y. Acts XX. 28, fSir* 
lxi(r»oirous' Rom. iv. 17, ir«ri^« ^cXXSv IBvSv riiuKei ri* This case may, in fact, be 
resolved into the former by means of tTyai or yvtw^ett understood. Sometimes, in- 
deed, they are expressed; as in Deut. xxvi. 17, 18, LXX, rh Oitfy fnfit^ov iimi 
irou Bus, xeii Ku^teg iVXtrtf ^t ytvi^B^eu ketiu 

Obs. 12. It seems to be from the same cause that nouns in appotition, explanatory 
of the end or object to which a person or thing is said to be subservient, are always 
anarthrous ; for iu such examples some case of uv, or A>Vri tttat, may be supplied.' 
Thus Horn. viii. 23, vioBt^letv ei^txitx^fAtvet, rhf a^oXMr^uffm riiu fatfiMTdf hfMV, waiting 
for the redemption qfour bodies, as our adoption. Compare Matt. ii. 11, iii. 9, Mark 
xii. 23, Rom. iii. 25, James v. 10. ViThen the apposition is explanatory of the essence 
of the preceding noun, the case is different. See below, } 30. 2. 

§ 28. — Hypothetic use of the Article. 

1. It has been observed that the article is not only employed 
to recall to the mind some familiar object, but as the represen- 
tative of something respecting which an assumption is to be 
made. This is called its hypothetic use ; and takes place in 
what may be denominated universal propositions. Thus b 
ay^qcunos means mankind in general ; as in John ii. 25, iyivMUKB 
rt h 6v rw av&^ft/gro?.' If the noun be limited by any qualifica- 
tion, it will still include the full extent of such qualification : as 
in Matt. xii. 35, o dyo&os oDi^qwiros, eoei^ good man ;* and so a 
little before, in verse 29, o U^v^os conveys a like general notion. 

' See Middleton ad loc, 


' Middleton on the Greek Article, part i. ch. iii. §. 1 — 4. The numerous examples 
which are cited as anomalous by Gersdorf (Beitrage, pp. 325. 399) are, in fact, so 
many confirmations of Bishop Middleton's theory. 

" The irregularity of the use of the article with avB^ot^toi is frequently noticed by 
the critics ; and passages continually occur in which it is difficult to account for its 
omisiiion or insertion. See Stalbaum on Plat. Crit. p. 51, A. Protag. p. 355, A. 
Pol. p. 619, B, Borneman de gem. Cyrop. recens. p. 65. N. With respect to the 
plural, Mr. Rose throws out a suggestion whether uv^pet^ot, without the article, may 
not be used in a less decided sense than men generally ; as we say, for example, 
The man passed among men^' an old man. Compare ITiucyd. i. 41. 

^ The passage above cited from Matt. xii. 35 demands a moment's attention. It 
stands thus : h aya^oi eivBputres IxjSaXAf / ret uyetBet, xeii o ^ovfi^of avB^wrag 'jrevn^u. 
There is something remarkable in the insertion of the article before uyetB«, and its 
omission before ^ovn^d. If the reading be correct, ^ovn^a will merely be less definitely 
marked than rei otya6a, ; but it is scarcely probable that the difference originally ex- 
isted. The article is omitted before aytiBa, in very many manuscripts, and it ought 
to be rejected: for the assumption, that the things brought forth were good, is 
scarcely allowable \ this being the very thing to be asserted.— Middlelon od, <oc« 


It has been thought, indeed, to have a reference^ xar c?dxw,to 
Satan ; but the parallel place in Luke (xi. 21^ 22) has o \(Fff- 
qoTspof, which will not admit of this supposition.^ See also Matt 
xviii. 17, XXV. 32, Luke vii. 28, Gal. ii. 20. 

Obs. I. In the same manner the article is used to denote a whole ekut, or jfoni; 
and, in the plural, whoie dosses or descriptions of persons or things. Thus in Mttt. 
V. 9, 0i f JgnydfTtf/tf/. viii. 20, »i &XM^t»tf, xv. 26, tmIt Mntt^itg, XYiii. 3, rit icsXis> 
xxiii. 23, r« iiivo^fiav xeit r$ tlvti^iv xet) ri KVfAtuit, Luke ziv. 34, r« £Xms, 1 Cor. TU. 
28, fi ^a^ht9{i virgins generally; 2 Cor.zi.4, i i^;^0/eftiv«f, any or every one whocmriu 
So in Rev. xii. 14, roZ Jitrw rov fttyaXov, the Great Eagle, a species so called, h 
Matt. Y. 16, we have is ^^ofietra, but »i S^ug. This minute distinction is not wift- 
out reason ; for aii sheep are not to be supposed to be in the midst of wolves, ht 
a// serpents are supposed to be prudent. The use of the article in these exampia 
may be termed inclusive, as distinguished from the case of eofditgive propositioB^ 
which will be noticed ^hereafter.' V^here only some of a class are intended, tk 
article is omitted ; as in Matt. x. 8, xi. 5, xv. 30, et atiln, 

2. The insertion of the article by way of hypothesisy and it8 
omission after verbs substantive, will explain the usage in tkt 
class of propositions in which the subject is found with the ar- 
ticle, and the predicate without it. Such propositions being 
conversant, not about particular y but about universal truths, 
the declaration is made universal by means of the article in its 
inclusive sense ; but the predicate not being equally unlimited, 
the article necessarily fails after the verb substantive. There 
is a good example in Job xxviii. 28, LXX, n ^soai^etd eart <jo^ 
Here it is asserted that Piety, however comprehensively under- 
stood, and in all its forms, is Wisdoin ; not wisdom, indeed, in 
the same comprehensive sense, because benevolence also is 
wisdom, and so is temperance ; but a species of wisdom, so 
that he is wise, but not he alone y who is pious. 

Obs* 2. An excellent example in the New Testament, as illustrating the oseof 
the article in making a distinction between assumption and auertion, is Luke xviii 
27, ret aiuvetrtt tru^a av^^v^eis, iuvarei i^ri tra^it rcf 61^. Thirds assumed to be in* 
possible with men are assuredly possible with God, Similar instances are 1 Cor. iii. 
19, 4 fyk^ tre^plet rtlu xoffAov rovrov fiM^iet x»^eL r^ BtS X^ru 1 John iii. 15, « mitm rw 

Obs. 3. If both the subject and the predicate are equally comprehensive, as when 
two things or attributes may be predicated either of the other, the article wUl then 
be prefixed to both terms alike. It is nut to be expected, from the nature of these 
propositions, that examples will frequently occur 5 but they are to be met with oc- 
casionally in the New Testament. Thus in Matt, vi* 22, « Xvxm; rev esiftMrit Ura 
ip^»\fAOf» xiii. 38, }i ayfog tirrn xifffMs x, r. X? 1 John iiit 4, ri kftMsrla i«v2i 

^ Middleton ad loc. See also Winer. 

' Middleton, part i. ch. ii. sect. 2, and note ad 1. c. 

' In V. 39, several manuscripts have n #i/yriXti«, which seems to be correct ; and 
&yytXM must be rendered simply angels. Compare, however, v. 49, infra^ and Matt 
zxv. 31. See Middleton tit loc* 


4 &wfMa, Care must be taken not to confound these univertai propositions with 
others widely different in character^ though similar in form. In the last example, 
for instance^ iftm^ria and ^m^/« had both been previously mentioned, but so men- 
tioned that the article affixes to each word its fullest import ; whereas, in 1 Cor. z. 
4, If ^^ stir^a h « Xfifret, the first article indicates renewed mention simply, and the 
second is emphatic.^ 

0&9. 4. It may be observed also that convertible propositions are sometimes found, 
in which the article is wanting either with the subject, or predicate, or both, when its 
absence may be accounted for upon some of the principles which have been already 
developed. There is an example in Matt. v. 34, Sfn ^ivog l«v} Suv, Here « w^dtitf 
understood, is the subject ; and ^^iws is equally definite by reason of its relation 
with StoS, ' See § 30. 1. There is also another form, in which two convertible 
terms form the united subject of a proposition, whereof the predicate is r«pr», or its 
equivalent ?y. So 1 Cor. iii. 8, I ^wxum *oCi i rtfr/JWv U iiViv. 

Ob9» 5. Analogous to these reciprocating propositions are those, in which thepr^* 
dicette after tifii frequently has the article, where the subject is a pronoun pertonal or 
demonstrative; as in Matt. xiv. 16^ ^u C i u*h r»u Bi§u, xxvii. 11, rv i7 fia^tXths r«fy 
*UoieUtif ; Mark vi. 3, «vx writ ifrtv « rixrttv ; John x. 7, iyti u/is h ^u^a rSv irf 
^irm. Rev. xxii. 16, \y«* ufjts fi fii» Ao^/B. Compare John viii. 12, xv. 1, £ph. ii. 
14, Rev. i. 17, et teepius. In such instances the existence is assumed; the purport 
of the proposition being to identify the predicate with the subject.' So in Mark 
vii. 15, i»frp» l^rt t« tutvMvreCf where r« xotvovvret is the basis of the proposition, in 
which it is assumed that there are things which defile a man, and the object is to 
identify them with those under consideration. Thus again in John iii. 10, rv iT « 
iiid^xmX^s rsS 'l^^tt^x. The English version translates indefinitely, a master of Itrael : 
but the allusion is doubtless to a title by which Nicodemus was distinguished from 
less celebrated teachers, and similar to that of i Xvxf»s tuuefAiwt^ applied to the 
Baptist in John v. 35.^ There is no real difficulty in John iv. 37, it yk^ rwr^ i yiyt 
irriy « kXn^nif If we render, in this instance the saying is true, the article must be 
omitted ; and a few MSS. are without it ; but if, in this i» exempted the true saying^ 
it is absolutely necessary; as in John i. 9, vi. 32, xv. 1. See § 30.3. 

Obs. 6. Sometimes a persona/ pronoun is one of two subjects where ly is the pre- 
dicate. So in John x. 30, lyit »«> • ^arii^ tv U/uv, There are also cases closely 
similar to these convertible propositions, in which «(xx«; is the subject : as, for in- 
stance, John iv. 37, &X.\6s Urh 9V%i^m, xai &X>.9s i i^i{*>y* V« 32, &k>Ms Ifriv i 

Obs, 7. It is observable that in examples of this kind the verb substantive is 
always expressed. There is apparently an exception in Mark xii. 26, iyv « Bxof 
'Afi^akftj ». r. X> This, however, is a direct citation from the Hebrew, and in that 
language the verb in such cases is almost invariably understood. The LXX, how- 
ever, insert the article in Exod. iii. 6. In Eph. iii. 1, the sense is interrupted by a 
parenthesis, and l^^ n. « Vifffua, where some would supply tlfii, is the nominative 
to the verb nafucrtj in v. 14. Compare Eph. iv. 1.' 

^ These, and other examples equally discrepant, are classed together by Winer 
under the same head. 

^ Grotius supposed the article to be employed »a.r* ^fix^v in Rev. iii. 17, rv %i 
vaXcUtufos, X. r. X., which brings the place under this head ; but such usage before 
an adjective is unexampled in Greek. The Hebrew |7 is, however, frequently so 
used ; and the Hebraisms in the Apocalypse are so numerous, that very probably 
this may be of the number. See Middleton ad loc. 

' Middleton, part i. ch. 3. ( iii. 4. 1, and notes ad U. cc. See also fViner's 
Sprachidioms, part iii. ch. I. § 17. 4, 5. 


3. In propositions which are not merely negative, hut in 
which the negative extends to every indiyidual> or to the wide 
species in question^ so as to exclude universally, the article is 
omitted. It has been seen that there is in the article an k- 
elusive or generic sense (§ 28. Obs, 1.), which renders it unfit 
to appear in cases of total exclusion ; for in all such cases the 
word any maybe supplied in English before the noun or nouns 
employed, or, which is the same thing, the negative must be 
rendered by wo.* Thus in Matt. x. 24, ovx, sa-rt fjt.a^'nTis, m 
disciple ; xviii. 14, oyx ecrrt ^sKfiixx, there is no wish ; 2 Cor. vL 
17, dKdQctprou fjiri aTTTgd&e, any unclean thing ; 1 Tim. 12, yv- 
vocikI SiSa<Txgtv ouK emrpeTroj, any woman whatever. In James ii 
20, 26, xupU rm epyav is not without works generally, but 
without the works produced by faith : for xetjpU epyofv would ex- 
clude all works whatsoever.^ 

4. The use of the article with adjectives and participles 
without a substantive, which thereby acquire the sense of sub- 
stantives, is of frequent occurrence in the New Testament 
Thus Matt. iv. 3, 1 Thcss. iii. 5, 5 v^i^xi^m. Matt. v. 4. sqq., 
01 ^ev&ouvrey, ol vq^sif, oi iXerifAoyeS, x. r. X. viii. 22, robs^ vex^wJ. 
Luke viii. 5, 5 trveiquv. Matt. xiv. 14, to^^ appiarovs, 

Obs* 8. AUhough in all such cases it is the article which gives to its adjunct th« 
force and nature of a substantive, still its use is regulated according to the strictest 
principles. Thus, for instance, o fu^a^euv is the tempter kkt lloxhv, and i wvil^ 
may either be considered as having a special reference to the Messiah, or the article 
may have the impart which it usually bears in proverbs and parables. See above, 
§ 27, Obs. 6. Where a noun thus formed is not intended to be definite, the article 
may be omitted before the participle. See § 35. 2. Obs, 4, It is, however, in its 
inclusive sense that the article is thus more frequently employed, as indicating the 
whoie class of individuals to whom the adjective or participle applies, as in the ex- 
amples from Matt. v. 4. sqq. Of the art. with a neut. adj., see (36. 1. 

§ 29. — Article with Attributives. 

1 . When two or more attributives, whether subs, adject, or 
part., are joined together by conjunctions, and assumed of the 

' Middleton, part i. ch. 3. § 5. 

• Winer, § 17. 1. Mr. Rose inquires whether this may not extend to interroga- 
tions, where an exclusion is conveyed, though not in a direct form ? Thus 2 Cor. 
vi. 15, <rU (Ai^h ^nrfZ fAircc d^itrrou. This amounts to, there is no portion for amy 
believer : and if it had been rS ^rta-r^, the rendering would have been, there is no 
portion for believers generally. The proposition is equally exclusive with that in the 
next verse but one, which is cited above ; and there seems to be no reason why the 
same principle should not prevail. Compare also 1 Cor. i. 20. At the same time 
fti^ii and Ti^rS being correlatives^ the omission of the article with the former rejects 
it from the latter. See § 30. 1. 


same person or thing, the article is inserted before the first 
attributive, and omitted before the remaining ones.^ Exam- 
ples are — Matt. xiii. 23, o ukovuv xai a-vvlafv, Mark ix. 25, to 
^irvEiffAcx. TO akoKov xal Kcu(p6y, Mark xvi. 16, o vio'rBva'af xai o fiair- 
riff^sls, John vi. 40, 5 ^scjpuv xai marevcoy. xxi. 24, o f^aSryirri^ 5 
fji^prvpuv TTsqi Tourcuv nai y^i^as. Acts ii. 20, t^v Tif^ipav Kvplou 
T^v fJLByaXinv xai l^ri^av^. iii. 14, tov iyiov xai Hkxiov, Eph. i. 3, 
tvXoyYifJiivos &60f xai TTxriiq* V. 5, Iv rrl fiaffiKBigc rov XgUToy xai 

®sov. So Phil. iii. 3, Tit. ii. 13, Heb. iii. 1, 2 Pet. i. 1, Jude 4. 
Add Mark xvi. 16, Luke vi. 49, John vi. 40, x. 1, xxi. 24, 
Rom. xii. 2, 2 Cor. i. 3, Gal. i. 7, Phil. iv. 20, Col. ii. 2. iii. 
17, 1 Thess. iii. 11, 2 Thess. ii. 12, 16, &c. &c. 

Obt. 1. The remarkable exclamation in John xx. 28, « Kv^tig fMuxeu « ei«f imo^w 
an apparent exception ; but in this instance the Evangelist has deemed it important 
to retain the Hebrew idiom in which it was delivered. In this language the affix is 
necessarily subjoined to both nouns ; and the LXX have translated ^^"720 TD^ 
by eso; fAov *ai i Ku^tog /lou, in Ps. XXXV. 23. See also Ps. v. 3. In each case the 
nominative with the article is used for the vocative.^ 

2. When different persons or things are intended, the article 
is repeated; as in Matt, xviii. 17, o ebvtxo^ xal 6 r^Xiyns, Luke 
XV. 6, Tovs flXouf xal TQvs ysiTovaf. John ix. 8, ol yslrovef xai 
of &ectjpovvre^ avrov. Acts xiii. 50, ra^ ffs^ofxiva^ yvvaTxas xal roi/s 
^pdfTOvs TTjr TtoKms. xxvi. 30, o fiaaiKBv^ xai o ^ye/xc^v. xxvii. 1 1, 
T^ xu^epv'nr'Q xai rZ vavx\r]q(jj» Add Col. ii. 13, v. 1, Rev. vi. 15, 
xiii. 10. 

Obt. 2. The reason of this usage is readily deduced from the nature of the article, 
considered as a pronoun united with its adjunct by means of the participle un under- 
stood ; for if the art. be united to each of two nouns coupled by a conjunction, such 
nouns cannot refer to the same person without involving the absurdity of joining 
an individual to himself. Care must be taken, however, to distinguish such pas- 
sages as John ii. 7, ovrog Urtv o ^Xavos »a) avrtx^tffrcs. Here it is not the intention 
of the writer to asiume the identity of the two characters, but to assert that they are 
united in certain persons. Compare Rev. i. 11. Be it observed, moreover, that 
the rule is strictly limited to attributives, being inapplicable to the names of sub' 
stances, abstract ideas, and proper names. And this is just what might be'expected. 
Though the same object may possess divers attributes, it is impossible that sub- 
stances in their nature distinct and incompatible can be predicated of the same in- 
dividual, that several abstract ideas should be amalgamated into a single essence, 
or that the name of two persons should be applied to one only. In such cases, 
since no ambiguity cau possibly arise from inattention to the rule, it is not always 

' This is the celebrated canon of Mr. Granville Sharpe, The passage cited by Mat- 
thisB (Gr. Gr. § 268, Obs. 1) from Plat. Phad. p. 78, is a good illustration of it ; 
but the several examples there considered, as coming under the same head, do not 
fall within the canon, but require other methods of explanation. 

> Middleton ad loc. 


Mcuraleljr ohaervBd l hut of things oi qualities is Ihetr nature tttterly usunpiMiUi, 
the iiame ofthu Gr^toulj' has the articlu In QumberkEii iiulances. With reapFdli 
plurati also the rule ia not alwayi applicable; for though one iudindual mijid 
la several capacities, yet it is not likely that a ntnltituilc of indinduaU should id 
in the same several capacities. When, however, (wo or more persons orlbiDgiut 
so related, that what is attributed to one is attributed to all, and anji ambigiii^ 
vould aiise fram aa infringement of the rule, it seems tu have beeu invaiiiblr 
obseiTed. The followiiig examples will illuitrale the above rematkif ; and otbtn 
willcuntiauBlljpteseat themselves: — Mark iv. i, ^ira n> Tfir^vn^i sai ^i^ 
fmrUit. Luke kit. 23, i',i nr Utiii mhI ^^ly/uii. Ads iii. 11, rn nirj«*o' 'Iain. 
PhiL i. 19, ilk ni i/imt Jiiirui xil Ir^xfciy'iv- ii. 17, Tji Svri'^ mkI Ai'TW(T;f. 
Col. ii. 22, TA-Urix^uTM «.i i.tMWMMXlm,. Heb. ii. 19, ^S, ftirx.-' >»i t^f^ 
Bev. T. 12, rst iinfiii as) r>.ivri'. In none of thvac instances could any ambiguilf 
arise from the omission a! the article, since the two ideas in each case are mta- 
Ually dintinct. 

§ 30. — Article with Correlatives, ^c. 
1 , Nouns having a mutual relation to each other, and therfr 
fore called correlntives, or said to be in reginien, have the ar- 
ticle prefixed to botli of them, or to neit/ier ; and to a scries of 
nouns in regimen the rule is equally applicable. Xo give a 
familiar example, we must either say, Xeovror <j«uM.viov, or r'a tw 
X^ovToi TKv/jinDv ; for, though we may say, in English, the cub of 
a lion, yet the accuracy of philosophical language denies that 
of Xe'ovTof, which is indcBnitc, there can be any definite aTtvu.tim, 
or vice versa. In Matt. xii. 27, o &£m vanpaJv, if the words were 
in regimen, could not be tolerated ; but the passage is elliptical, 
and would stand thus in full : oux. eonv o ©em vtKgiSy Seoj, aXXa 
Seoj ^wvtwv- The construction in 2 Cor. x. 13, is not a ©em 
IjArpau, but o5 /j-erpou a ©cot hi^epiapi if/iv. 

Obt, 1. Many examples will occur which are apparently repugnant to this canoai 
The principle of omission, however, leijuires that the governing noun should ntil 
only be anarlhrGiia, hut also indtjiuile in leiiie; for it may, though definite, have loll 
its article by some rule which dues nut require that the governed noun should In- 
come anarthrous also. In Hehr. i. 3, the , foimer article is omitted uHet the parti- 
ciple it, which the very natuie of the article requires ; and again in the same verae 
afteta verb ot appointing. See J 27, Ol/s. 11. Eniantralivn sometimes also, though 
extremely seldom, interferes with the laws of ngimea. In 1 Pet. iii. 3, tha readiag 
is unquestionably i* Tl»li(.' Nor is it only where a noun is inde£nite in sense Ihal 
the usage takes place. Even where it ia from its nature definite, as ia the ease of 
preper name; &e., if it be anarlhroia, the governing noun is not unfrequently 
thraia also.' Thus Rom. xi. 34, I Cor. ii. 16, rU Syw »»> Kuf/tv. A very 
instance will also be found in the very first verse of St. Matthew.' But it 

' Midclleton ad lac, , 

* Miildleton, pact i. ch. 3. In the Epitttles of St. Paul anarthrous forms are peeit- 

liarly prevalent, and even more so in those of St. Fet«r. 
' Perhaps, however, vieu ^a^ii may ba literally translated from the Hebrew, wbieh 

in the ttatm mnirruclui does not usually admit the H emphatic ; and !i!li\ts fuinu 


well to illustrate the rale by examples : Luke i. 5, rSv ^uyetri^vf 'Aa^y. i. 66, 
Actsxi. 21, x*k K(^^i«v> Lukeiii. 4, Iv fiifiX^ Xoym 'H^mov* xiii. 19, »«x»*> ^im^utSf 
and rk ^truw rtu alf^avou. Acts viii* 5^ ug itiXit rns letfuc^uaf, Rom. i. 20, «ir* 
MvUtets xifffAw, 1 Cor. xri. 15, rify •Ixia* 2r«(p«y2(, and ivtt^x^ ^^^ *A;^aJ«;. Eph. iv. 
30, t/V hfAt^av ei^eXvr^tuftvs. Phil. iv. 3, U fiifiXt^ ^oms* Col. ill. 10, xar ii»c>» rw 
Mri^ecvr^fn Heb. xii. 2, rov rns trirrt^f a^xiy^^* ^ P^^* ^* ^^i ^ ''"'^ ^*'^ futx^eSufAta. 
1 Pet. ii. 6, itixttf 'loVofMn xai Ta/Mffrng,^ In 1 Cor. xi. 3, there is an apparent, but not 
real, breach of the rule ; for weivr^g &9i^«g is equivalent to rw avl^ig with the article 
in its inclusive sense.' 

Obt. 2. It is perhaps unnecessary to observe that the second of two correlatives is 
not necessarily, though usually, in the genitive case. The rule is equally appli- 
cable in I Cor. vi. 16, j xoX^Mfitfog r^ iti^vi^,* Be it remarked also that genitives, 
used in an adjective sense, and placed before the governing noun (see below § 44. 
6, Obs. 20,) omit the article. Thus Origen, c Cels. p. 116, 4^9 AfB^ti^an ^vr/v, i. e. 
dv^^atvtivnv* Such examples, however, are extremely rare in the N^w Testament. 

Obs, 3. Analogous to the case of words in regimen is that of partitives, between 
which and their respective whole* a mutual relation subsists. Thus Phil. i. 14, r»lt 
^Xtiwag rSv Ahx^Sv, Some partitives indeed are of such a nature as not to admit 
the article before them, or else admit it only in particular cases ; of which the fol- 
lowing are examples: — Matt. xvi. 28, rmg rSv S^t irrWr^y. xxi. 31, rtg U rSv 16« 
lirain^t ; Acts xvii. 12, rSv 'EXXfiviivf ytnettKuv rSf ttftr^fi/iovuv »eu avi^Sf wx eXiy»t, Rev 
vi. 1. fAtetv U rSf r^uythnv. It might be expected in Luke xix. 30 that Avfi^Miteaf, 
after evhiig, would have the article ; but the proposition is there exclusive, and 
therefore the article is rejected. See § 28. 3. 

Obs. 4. On the same principle of mutual relation may be explained the two ar^ 
tides which are employed in divisions with /ujy and ^1. In the pronominal use of the 
article this usage is extremely common ; nor is it unusual where the article has its 
adjunct, or even when the opposition is between persons and things. Thus Luke x. 
2, i fUf Bt^iffAog ^oXvgf tit 3s l^yureu eXtyas** 

2. When a noun in apposition is explanatory of the essence 
of a preceding noun, as when a term of distinction, such as an 
appellation of office, or title of honour, is added to a proper 
name for the purpose of affixing it more accurately to a par- 
ticular individual, it takes the article ; as in Matt. iii. 1 , ' luainynf 
o BaTrrta-rrif. xiv. 1, ^H^cu^ins o rsrqipx'fif. Acts xviii. 8, K^iWof 
o aq^iffuviyofyo^. xxi. 8, Q>iKiwov rov evayys\KTTov» See also 
Matt. X. 1 — 4, xiv. 2, Luke i. 5, John xx. 1, Acts xiii. 1, 
xviii. 17, xxiii. 26. If, however, it be not intended as a specific 
definition, but merely to indicate one of a class, the article is 
omitted. Thus Lukeii. 36,''Avva 7Fpo(priTi^, Acts vii. 10, ^apau 

^(tffikicuf, X. 32, Si/jia/voi' ^vpaius, XX. 4, Yaias ^ip^ouos, 2 Cor. 

is exactly rendered from the Hebrew n*l/)Jl "^SDy which sometimes signifies a 
pedigree ; as in Gen. v. 1. 

^ These examples are chiefly from Winer (ch. i. } 18. 2. b.), who seems to regard 
them as irregularities, though he notices a like usage in the best writers. He unites 
in the same class those cases in which a personal pronoun is the correlative ; but he 
instances only in cases where a preposition precedes. 

« Middleton ad 1. c. " See Matt. Or. Gr. § 268, Obs, 2. 

« Middleton, part i. ch. 3., $ 8 and 9. 


i. 1 , IlauXof iTFocrroXof, In inscriptions to letters^ indeed, tbk 
seems to have been the usual practice ; as in 1 Mace. zv. 16, 
AvkIo^ vvaros ^Pojfjiatafv UroXeixaia fiaaiXBi, y(^ipeir. Compare^ 
however, Acts xxiii. 26. 

Obt» 5, Nearly similar is the case of an attributive, placed in apposition with i 
personal pronoun ; as in Luke vi. 24, v/i7f r§ts ^Xsuritts, xi. 46^ »/J» r§!f Mfum 
xviii. 13, ifui rf kfia^rvXif. The article implies the tutumption of the attribotei od 
in this last example the sense will be, teeing that I am a sinner. So again RontiL 
27, ri r0» hk y^aififietrdt xeii rt^i^cfitift *ciL 0yra, albeit ffou profess to observe the Ust\ 
Heb. X. 10, (nt'^iis) •* ^t» rnt ^^of^ofZft we who partake of the sacrifice. Much uifte 
same manner must be understood the greatly disputed expression 1 Cor. xr.fl^ 
i^itt^ti rf iKv^atfAevrt &^^n *»/mU St. Paul here intends to apply the term iatf^ 
to himself, and it was therefore necessary to employ the article, otherwise the meiB- 
ing would have been that ixr^uftara commonly saw what he had seen, not that be 
was, as it were, an txr^vfjM, or last bom child (for such is prohahly the meaning of 
the word in this place), among the Apostles.^ 

Obi. 6. With the nouns vlhi ^aui, Bvyarnf, yuni, understood, the form is ?aiisble. 
Matt. i. 6, Ttis reuOh^icv, iv. 21, 'laxt^v vh rw Zi^iWa. Mark xv. 47, Mm^m 'Iwi. 
Luke vi. 16, *UvUf 'laxtt^v, where ahx^h is probably the word to he supplied. Ii 
Rom. xvi. 10, 11, 1 Cor. i. 2, the sense requires oUttuf* So also in Acts xvL 23.* 

3. When a part, or adj, is added to a noun for the sake of 
definition, both the noun and defining word take the articla 
Thus Acts xxi. 38, o Alyvurtos o dvoKTrarcia-a^. Eph. i. 3, 5 Sew I 

Obt, 7. So with personal pronouns ; as in Eph. i. 13, n/Aus T«ug irs§nXwi*iTm' 
And with words, which, being otherwise definite, omit the article ; as 1 Thess. 1 10, 
^Invouv rev pvifitvov n/nag. See also Acts i. 11, 23, 1 Thess. ii. 4, iv. 5, Heb. iv. 3, 
vi. 18, James iii. 6, 1 Pet. i. 3, 1 John v. 13. The nominative of the pronoun ii 
included in Ihe verb in Rom. ii. 1, r« yu^ avrei ^^a^ffut e x^Uuv, 

Obt, 8. If, on the other hand, no express definition is intended, but the participle 
merely indicates a simple act or possible contingency, it rejects the article. Thns 
Acts iii. 26, o iii(, itvaffrnffett rov ^ctTia echrov, ari^rttXtf avrof ». t. X. Rom.iL 27, 
>i ix (pvctoff &x»t^vfriei, rh vofiov riXouffct, So John iv. 6, 39, Rom. xvi. 1, 1 Cor. viii. 
7, Heb. X. 2. The diflPerence between this and the preceding case is clearly marked 
in 1 Pet. V. 10, « fitog e xeixi^as fifitcis oxiy^f ira^ivras* Compare also Rom. viii. 

Obt. 9. A similar apposition is sometimes expressive of irony or sarcasm; as in 
Matt. XXvii. 40, (»•«), o *«r«Xu«» re* vaof, fSvev ftavrov, 

4. The neiit. article to is commonly placed before an entire 
phrase or sentence, which is cited as a maxim or proverb, or 
repeated as the main subject of discourse; and also before 
single words which are to be explained or illustrated. Thus 
in Matt. xix. 18, to Ou (povsutreis- x. r. X. Mark ix. 23, to, cI 

> See Middleton on Luke xviii. 13, 1 Cor. xv. 8. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 22. b. 
' Winer, p. 116, Note, and § 19. 3. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 22. a 3, and Addend, p* 

•Winer, §19.1. 


^vvatTOLi, Luke l. 62, to, t» av SIXoi xaXsiff^on olvtov, xxii. 2, to, 
7roJ9 dveXcotJiv alrov. Acts iv, 21, to, 'jtws yioKi(jeavrai avrous» Som. 
viii. 26, to yip^ ri Trpoo'cu^cufj.s^cc xaSo Sg?. Add Luke ix, 46, 
xxii. 4, 23, 37, Acts xxii. 30, Bom. xiii. 9. 

Obi, 10. It will be observed, that this mode of writing is chiefly employed by St. 
Liuke and St. Paul. Of the usage before a single word, of which an explanation is 
offered, there is an instance in Gal. iv. 25, ta yd^^Ayu^ 2iy« S^cg (Vr/y, the name of 
Agar desiffnaies Mount Sinai,^ Closely similar is 2 Cor. i. 20, ctrut yti^ i^ecyytxleu 
0t9v, U aurS re Na}, xeu if ahr^ ri ^Afitiv, i. e., whatever God has promised, he will 
assuredly fulfil through Christ ; in whom is tAe Yea^ and the Amen^-^eti and afAnf 
being well-known asseverations of the Truth.^ 

Obt. 11. MoRt of the other cases, in which the article is used absolute/^ by Greek 
writers generally, may be equally illustrated by examples from the New Testament. 
It stands, for instance, 

1. In a collective sense, before a noun which limits the signification ; as in 
Matt. xxvi. 51, Toiv fitr^ *In(rou, Acts v. 17,0/ avv ahrcf. xii. 1, rm &t§ rtjs 
ixxkfi^ietf, xvii. lljTAryty Bt^^xXovixri, Rom. iv. 14, ei l» fofiou. Heb* xiii. 
24, at en'o rns ^IraXias* Phil. iv. 22, oi i» rns Katf»f«s olxlas* 

2. With a noun understood ; as in Matt. xiv. 35, rhv itt^ix»'^»* ixtiffif, sciL yh. 
Luke vii. 11, Ur^ i^ns» scU. fifAs^tf. John viii. 23, riHf xxruf rm &vu. 
Col. iv. 9, Tu uh. 1 Tim. iii. 7, »! i%*,Bif, iv. 8, ^uns rns niv. 2 Pet. i. 9, rciv 
^rakeu etvrw kfjM^rnf-^fuv, When the substantive is not expressed, it may 
always be readily supplied from the context. 

3. With neuter adjectives, adverbs, and adverbial expressions ; as Matt. xxiv. 
21, Luke xxii. 69, vo wv, Luke ix. 3, to xaH* hf*i^etv. Acts iv. 29, ra, vwy scii, 
^r^uyfiara, xviii. 1, ro xetfi^ cXcv, Phil. iv. 8, to Xtf/ir^y. 

4. With the genitive of a substantive, either as denoting possession or property, 
or serving the mere purpose of a periphrasis. Thus Matt. xxi. 21, re rns 
ffvxris* xxii. 21, r» Keti^x^of, ra r§v 6c0tf. Luke ii. 49, ToTs rod ^etr^es, Rom. 
viii. 5, ra rnt vu^xoSi rei rou itnvfixrof* 1 Cor. X. 24, ro iavrov, ro rev trigou. 
James iv. 14, ro rns av^toy* 2 Pet. ii. 22, ro rns a>>n^oZs xu^oifAixs* 

5. With prepositions and their case : John xxi. 2, NadayajfX o a^o Kay«. Acts 
xii. 20, rev icri rsv xotroivos* xxiv. 22, rx frig} rtis o^v, Rom. ii. 8, oS i^ I**' 
di/ftf. ix. 11,1} xar ixkoyhf it^oBt^ts* xi. 27, h xx^ i/Aou ImBnxn* Phil.i. 27, 
ra Ti^i ufioiy. Col. iii. 2, ret litt rtis ym. Heb. ii. 17, r» sr^os rop 8f0y. Tit. ii. 
8, il imfrUs.^ Of the formula ol ^i(i nva, see ^ 68. 

§ 31. — Article with Abstract Nouns and Proper Names. 

1. Abstract nouns, or the names of Attributes and Qualities, 
generally reject or take the article, as they are used in a par- 
ticular or universal acceptation respectively ; and this is pre- 
cisely what might be expected : for as ol aSixot will signify all 

^ Alt, Gr. N. T. § 22. a. 8. Rosenmuller and Kuinoel on Mark ix. 23. W^iitby 
on Gal. iv. 25. 

^ Middle ton ad loc, 

3 Alt, Gr. N. T. § 22. a. 7. Matt. Gr. Gr. § 272. The observation of Matthiap, 
that this construction is generally explained by supplying the part, £f, is strongly 
corroborative of Bishop MiddletonU Theory. It will be remarked that the idiuai is 
very constantly employed by St. Paul. 

' i 


who are vnjusit^ so i aSix/a will signify every act of which /; 
tice can be assumed.* 

Obt. 1 . The practice is, however, somewhat irregular ; and many instances 
in which the noun is anarthrous, when the mere abstract sense would ban 
equally true. But there is a wide difference between omitting the article «1 
mi);ht have been uscfl, and inserting it where it would be out of place. Thui 
verbs oihavingy obtmning, fulneity &c., and adjectives allied to the last, the 
is always omitted ; fur no attribute or quality can belong to one person so 
sively, that it cannot be ascribed to nny other. Hence snch expressions as tl 
Matt. vii. 29, V^nucMt f;^«y. xxiii. 23, fi.t^T«) v^tx^ig-iMf »«) ^vofiiag. Luire 
Wkn^S-fifeif Buu9v, 1 Cor. xiii. 1, 2,3, ayaTtiv tx**- James ii. 14, vrUm 7%ii<. 
of partaking also for the most part, though not invariably, follow the same mli 
though aitributet or qualities, as who/es, cannot be exclusively claimed by any i 
dual, yet he may have a part in such wholes. On the same principle, in the eo 
phrase*', avotetv i^'ktffKcinn^ Vikkv ^!hiva$i h^vx'** &yuv, and the like, the artide 
variably omitted. A somewhat similar expression is «t^« dt^ij*, in 1 Cor. ix. S 

Obi, 2. Similarly we may account for the anarthrous use of abstract noian, 
they are employed in the dative case adverbial/g, with reference to the ma» 
which anything is said to have happened ; as in Gal. iv. 8, ToTg /ch ^Utt «?n 
See ^ 47. 2. In the same way such words as gk^\, ^rnvfjua^ xatf^w, m/ut, &( 
used in the dative adverbially, to express the characteristic qualities of those 
tions. Compare Rom. viii. 13, x. 10, Gal. iii. 3, v. 5, 16, 18, 25, et alibi. Ii 
cases the reference is not to any particular subject ; and if it were, as it mig 
the article would be prefiiced. Sometimes it is immaterial whether the Ki 
limited or not ; as in Luke i. 80, and elsewhere. 

2. Besides its use as an indication of their most abs 
sense^ the article is sometimes prefixed to abstract nouns ii 
sense of a possessive pronoun ; and also where there is 
kind of reference, or where the attribute is personified. 
Acts xxviii. 4, ^ Aiycn is the Goddess of Justice ; and in 
instances the practice seems to be founded on the notorie 
celebrity of these imaginary persons. In 1 Cor. xiii. 4, tj a 
may either be used in its most general sense, or it may be 
sonified, or the article may be the index of renewed met 
In 2 Cor. i. 17, tt) £X(z(ppi^ indicates the sin of light-mimh 

_- _ . .71 7 l!i.__ :--l i. •_- 1 J. e 


I supposes to exist in the several words which he has enumerated, will he found to be 
in very close conformity with the nature of the article, as it has been here explained. 
They are hxaia^vvfi, Matt. v. 10, Acts x. 35, Rom. viii. 10, Heb. xi. 33, &c. ; ayairni 

I John V. 42, Gal. v. 6, 2 Cor. ii. 8, &c. ; iriW/;, Acts vi. 5, Rom. i. 5, iii. 28, 2 Cor. v. 

1 7, 1 Thess. v. 8, &'c. ; KaxU, 1 Cor. v. 8, Eph. iv. 31, James i. 21 ; irXim^/a^ 1 Thesa. 

I ii. 5, 2 Pet. ii. 3 ; ufitaaria, Rom. iii. 9, Gal. ii. 17, 1 Pet. iv. 1, &c.^ 

3. With respect to Proper Names, which, from their very 
I nature, belong to definite individuals, it seems to be deducible 
« from the practice of the best writers, that they never have the 
article, except where the individual has been recently men- 
tioned; or when, from some cause or other, a person is of such 
notoriety, that even without previous mention he may be imme- 
diately recognised by the reader. 

Obs. 4. Although the poems of Homer do not suffice to establish these points, yet 
their origin may be traced to him ; and the assertion of Heyne, that Homer never 
prefixed the article to proper names, is altogether untenable.^ The very many pas- 
sages which are at variance with his opinions, he considers to be either corrupt or 
spurious ; hut it will be sufficient here to advert to the remarkable instance in //. A. 
11, Ot;yi«a «■» XfvcTif nrifjtna^ a^mrti^ec, *AT^ii^tis, It is certainly a difficulty (hat Chryses 
is here mentioned for the first time ; but he was known by all to have been the 
author of the pestilence just described, and the article is therefore inserted on the 
ground of notoriety,^ So in //. A. 532, the article is prefixed to Tvhi^vSf there named 
for the first time, as being the well-known antagonist of Hector. At the same time 
the simple circumstance of notoriety, which was a sufficient cause for the insertion of 
the article by subsequent authors, is not enough to account for the practice of 
Homer ; but the notoriety must be marked by some fact in immediate connexion 
with the introduction of the name.^ It furnishes, however, the origin of the more 
enlarged usage which afterwards prevailed ; and of which the New Testament sup- 
plies a variety of examples. Thus Luke i. 7, h 'EXt^afitr, renewed mention from v. 5 ; 
ii. 16, rnv Tc Ma^iufi xai rov'Jat^^, from ch. i. 27 -J Acts i. 1, o ^InvoZs^ where, as else- 
where repeatedly, the article indicates celebrity. It is needless to multiply instances, 
which are to be met with in almost every page ; and it will be merely necessary, on 
the part of the student, to take into consideration the various exceptions to which, 
as in the case of common nouns, the application of the rule is liable.^ 

06«. 5. In the Genealogy of Jesus Christ, as given in Matt. i. 2, sqq., the use of 
the article is directly the reverse of the Greek practice, which would require * A)8ja«^ 
Xyivvwiv *lffudx' o Si ^IveutK iyivyfieiv ^letxufi' o 'hi ^lecxaifi », r. X. The article with the 
accusative represents the particle JHK* ^vhich is also so rendered by the LXX. 
(^ompare 1 Chron. vi. 4, Ruth iv. 18, et passim. In the Genealogy by St. Luke the 
use of the article is strictly Greek, red being everywhere an ellipsis of <reu vUv. 

Obs, 6. It is upon the principle oi notoriety that the names of Gods and Heroes 
usually take the article, as well as the proper names of places, VV^iuer indeed 

^ Winer, J 18. 1. 

* Heyne on IL A. 11. See also Matt. Gr. Gr. § 264. 

^ "Wolf ad Reiziutn depros. Gr. p. 74. Nihil dubito quin rev X^vcnv Poeta dixerit, 
ut personam fama celebrem, et auditor ibus jam turn, cum primum ejus nomen audirent, 

* Middleton on the Greek Article, part i. ch. iv. 
^ See Middleton. 

^ 'i 


obsenres, that although, in the New Testament, the names of countriei and mm 
with the exception of ASyv^rt and M««i^y/«, aeldoin want the article, thoierf 
cities are occasionally anarthrous. The exceptions, however, will be found to con- 
sist chiefly, though not entirely, of cases, in which a prcpotiiion precedes, or that 
is an enumeration, or the regimen or some other ground of limitation inteifeNi 
See Matt. ii. 13, 14, 1 5, iv. 25, Luke v. 1 7, vi. 17,xxiii. 28, Acts xiv. 2 1, xvi.9,xTilW, 
15, XX. 15 ; and elsewhere. In Mutt. ii. 3, iii. 5, ii ^-ixts, is in all probabiiitjtobe 
supplied before *li^»eo\vfAeti and in Acts xix. 26, some MSS. read tms '£fM» 
Winer himself remarks that in Acts xvi. 10, sqq., the article is inserted u 
times before M«»i30ir/«, though it is again omitted, but after a prepotiiiom, in Acti 
XX. 3.» 

§ 32. — Position of the Article in concord. 

Although the Art. is frequently prefixed to adjectives, it is 
always a substantive expressed or understood, conjointly will 
the adjective, which must be considered as forming the entire 
adjunct, between which and the article the participle of exist- 
ence is the connecting link. Hence the position of the article 
in concord is by no means immaterial ; and care must be takeft 
to distinguish the assertive from the assumptive relation 
between an adjective and substantive. Thus ip^oy o ^arip and 
l/xw 'ff»rriq are by no means equivalent ; for the former will 
mean mine is the father ; whilst in the latter something is to be 
predicated of the person already assumed to be my father : as, 
for instance, 5 ifxos Tcxrrig dnedave. Hence, 

Obs, 1. If the adjective be a qualifying word, belonging essentially to the sob* 
stantive, supposing one article only to be employed, it must be placed immediatdj 
6<r/(>rtf the adjective : as in Matt, xxviii. 19, rod ayUv trvsvfitecTas. John iv. 23, « 
eikvBivot fr^o^Kvvfiruf, The reason of this position is plain; for unless the qualifying 
adjective were placed before the substantive, the mind of the reader would rest 
satisfied with the sense contained in the substantive alone, without lookinir further; 
and should any limitation or explanation be required, the repetition of the article 
becomes necessary. In such cases^ the rule invariably is that the substantive vith 
its article should be placed first ; since in such an expression as • aya^os • afBitim, 
the addition of i &vB^mxos would be without meaning ; and as in e avBpMiras there is 
a complete sense, if any thing more is to be assumed of the dejinite individual in- 
dicated by the article, it must be repeated. So Luke iii. 22, 70 vrvivuM t« «>«*• 
John 1. 9, TO (pus T0 uXft^tvov* vi. 13, rav'^syn a^ra/y reiiv x^iBiva>». What has been 
said respecting adjectives, is equally applicable to participles, adverbs, aud prepoU' 
tions with their cases, employed in the capacity of adjectives. Cxamples of the 
several cases will be found in Matt. ii. 2, nx^^U fiafftXtvs. iii. 7, Ttis f*tXX»int 
e^yfis* John iv. 11, to t/Ja»^ ro ^aiv, Phil. iv. 3, T»is uva xkneieag, Rom. xL 24, rw 
xar» <pvffiv (^tX0«r>f;. 2 Cor. viii. 4, r^f hecxovtetg Ttjg tig ratfg ayUug, James i. 1, rtuf 
^uXaTf reus <> rji '^m^^a^a. See also Matt. ii. 7, iii. 17, vi. 6, Mark iv. 31, xiii. 25, 
Luke i. 70, ii. 17, iu. 22, vii. 47, viii. 8, xv. 22, 23, xx. 35, John i. 46, xii. 21, Acts 

* Middleton, ubi supra: and Ruse's note at p. 82. Winer, § 17. 7. 


xi. 22, xii. 20, xv. 23, xxiv. 5,acxvi, 4, 12, 22, Rom. iv. 11, vii. 5, 10, viii. 39, x. 5, 
xiv. 19, XV. 26, 31, xvi. 1, 1 Cor. ii. 11, 12, iv. 17, vii. 14, xii. 2, xvi. 1, 2 Cor. ii. 6, 
viii. 22, ix. 1, Gal.iv. 26, Eph. i. 10, 15, 1 Thess. iv. 10, 1 Tim. iii. 13, 2 Tim. ii. 1, 
James i. 9, iii. 7, 1 Pet. i. 11, iii. 3, 16, Rev. ii. 12, xiv. 17, xvi. 12, xix. 40, xx. 13.» 
Nor is this order ever violated, though the first article is sometimes omitted, inas- 
much as that with the adjective is alone sufficient to correct the indefiniteness of the 
substantive. Thus in Acts x. 41, fAu^rv^t roig 9'^9Kt;^u^oroffifitiv9ts» Compare Acts 
X. 41, xix. 11, xxvi. 18, 22, Rom. ix. 30, Phil. i. 11, iii. 6, 1 Tim.i.4,iv. 8,2 
Tim. i. 13, 14, ii. 10, James iv. 14, 2 John 7, Jude 4.* In 1 Tim. i. 17, the 
adjectives i^Ba^rS^t uo^ktm, are in concord with StZ, not with fi»fftku. 

Obs. 2. It does not appear that there is any material difference between the two 
forms aya^og uv^^ai^di and avB^M^og o ayecBog, Thus TO &yi09 ^nvftet and r« 
^TftufAa re aym are strictly equivalent in the New Testament. There may be some 
instances which seem to confirm the opinion, that the former is employed when 
the principal idea is conveyed by the adjective, and the latter when the main stress is 
to be laid on the substantive \^ but this is far from being the universal practice. At 
the same time it is not always a matter of indifference, which of the two forms is 
iised. The former, as it is the more simple and natural, is by far the more common ; 
the latter seems to be employed either in a sense of limitation^ or to mark an 
jetnphasis or opposition. Although the import of to ^nufjMf for instance, is in 
general sufficiently clear, yet the addition of rl etyiov prevents at once the pos- 
sibility of misconception ; and, on the other hand, our Saviour calls himself « ^otfithf o 
xaXog (John x. 11), as opposed to him who is fAiff^urog,* 

Obs, 3. If 'the adj, is the predicate, or where the attribute is not assumed of the 
substantive, the adjective stands without the article either before or after the 
substantive. The first case, in which the verb is either expressed or understood, 
needs little illustration. Such examples as Kukog ovo'fMg (soil, f^-r/,) continually occur; 
as, for instance, in Rom. ii. 13, ev y»^ ol aK^oara) rev vofAou ^ixatet. In the other case, 
the adjective does not belong to the substantive essentially, hyA as it were incidentally. 
Thus Mark viii. 17, tn ^iTotpufAlvviv txirt «-^v xa^la.v vftMV, i.e. Hvrt uveci ^t^M^Mfitivm, 
Acts xxvi. 24, fAtyakvi r'^^aiyn t^tif the voice, with which he spoke, was loud; not that 
his voice was naturally loud. 1 Cor. X. 3, ^ravrtg re aire ^Sftet Tvtufietnxev i(payev, 
Koi «*. r. a, vrifia trv. ivnve^f the meat and drink, of which they all partook, had a 
spiritual import. So also with /)r^posiViwi« and their case ; as in Matt. iii. 4, tix* 
TO tv^v/u,et avreu a^te r^tx^^v xa/t^^Xeu, the clothing, which he wore, was of comets hair. 
Compare John v. 36, Acts xiv. 10, Rom. ix. 3, 1 Cor. x. 18, xi. 5, 2 Cor. vii. 7, Eph. 
i. 15, ii. 11, Col. i. 4, 1 Tim. vi. 17. Heb. vii. 24, 2 Pet. i. 19. The distinction 
between this kind of construction, and that with the article repeated, is readily 
apparent. For example, to render e (ia^ikfug e fAiyag iri^etft, the King, who is great, 
is dead, would be nonsense. It should seem however that Winer and others have 
never seen the distinction clearly.^ In Luke xii. 12, the true reading is, un- 
questionably, re ya^ eiytev ^nvfcet : and in 1 John v. 20, many >ISS. read n ^eah n 
aieimg, as in cc. i. 2, ii. 25. The clause x»ru IvvufAn etw^ in 2 Tim, i. 8, belongs to 

1 In Heb. ix. 1 , if llyiev and xeo'fAtxev are both adjectives, it is the latter which 
must be taken substantively ; but, probably, it is the Rabbinical noun TO^D?1p» 
which signifies /t/rNt/t/re. See Middleton ad loc. and Buxtori's Lex, Talm, p. 2006. 
Otherwise the sense must be, Its sanctuary was xeffitxev, according to Obs, 3. 

« Middleton on the Gr. Article ; Pt. i. ch. viii. Winer, § 19. 2, 4. 

^ See Hermann, Hym. Horn. p. 4, and on Soph. Trach. 736. 

* Middleton, u6t«t/;Dra. 

* Middleton, ubi supra. Compare Winer, § 17. 3, and 19, 2. Alt, p. 277, tn Ad- 


the verb tuyxetxofroiBii^nf and care should be taken not to confound this and simili: 
examples with those which depend upon the principle under consideration. 

§ 33. — The Article as a Pronoun. (Buttm. § 126.) 

1. Of the Homeric use of the article, in the sense of the j^rot. 
oItos, there is one unequivocal example in the New Testament; 
but it occurs in a quotation from Aratus (Phoen. 5.) in Acts 

xvii. 28, rov yip 7£vor hfjiiv, 

2. In divisions with h /xev, o Sg, the pronominal sense is veij 
frequent ; as in x\cts xvii. 32, ol ptsv e%Keia}^ov, ol Se eiWov, x. t. I 
See also Matt. xiii. 23, xxii, 5, 6, Acts xxviii, 24, Rom. ii. 7,8, 
Gal. iv. 23, Phil. i. 16. Without 6 (juh preceding", o XJ, and, in 
the plural, ol Se, constantly occur. 'J'hus Matt. ii. 5, o Xg ?I!n) 
aurS. xxi. 29, o Ii atTtoKqi^cU siTre : and so passim. Compare 
also Matt. ii. 14, iv. 20, xv. 25, 27, 34, xix. 17, Mark in. 4,xii 
14, Luke V. 33, 34, John xix. 29, et alibi.' 

Obs. 1. In Matt, xxviii. 17, «/ is e?idently employed in the sense of ntig. TImb 
is a similar passage in Xen. Anab. i. 5. 13, S^rt XxtU ous lK,9rt9Xnx,^*h me) tim 
MfvAilyft, xeti r^ixt*^ i^* t» 0$rXa* oi ^i xeti 'iffrtwttf aTa^tvvrts* See also .^lian. V. H.lii> 
35, Lucian. Timon. p. 68.' 

Obs. 2. Instead of h ^t, it frequently happens that « /av is followed by some other 

word, as aXXos, ivioes^ &C. Thus in Matt. Xvi. 14, »i /te«y 'ludwfjyf 2t *HA./cy, inn 
}ii *U^tfitetv» Compare Matt.xii. 5. Sometimes Sf fiih — Ss Ti is substituted; as in Mitt. 
xxi. 35, S> fih thi^uv, h 'Si arixruvKv. 1 Cor xi. 21, Sg fch vtnZj Ss "il fAt^uu, So Matt 
XXV. 15, Luke xxiii. 33, Acts xxvii. 44, Rom. ix. 21, xiv. 5, 2 Cor. ii. 16. Also*,- 
fAtv, akXos yt. Thus Matt. xiii. 4, 5, & fith i-rurt ira^a rhv e^»9, &\Xa % la-i « 
vriT^udfi. 1 Cor. xii. 8, m /uXv J/W«i Xoyos ffoflecsf aA.X« ^ Xeyog yvM^tttg, irum » 
^ia-rtgy &kkM Si ;>^«^/V^aT« lafAaruv, aXXy Si Ut^ynfitarei ^vveifAtMv, aA-Xm Si »»2ifr{ic, 
aXXy Si %Mx^iffU{ vrvivficarejVj iri^M St yivfi yXuffffeivy aXXv St i^fAnniet yXen^g'Sf, Compare 
V. 28 ; where, in a like enumeration, otg fiiv ^^Srev is followed by Siv^t^ov, rpim, and 
i^ura. In Rom. xiv. 2, e St answers to Ss fiiv, but in this instance the article i has 
an adjunct in the participle ir^iuy.^ 

Obs, 3. Besides the above methods of marking partiiiou or division, other 
usages are adopted in the New Testament, which it ipay be proper to notice in this 

1. Of these the most remarkable is the form ug xu) iTg, with or without the 
article; as in Matt. xxiv. 40, 41, xx. 21, xxvii, 38, Mark x. 37, Gal. iv. 22. 
It is to be observed, however, that although in these instances the omissioa 
or insertion of the article is obviously a matter of indifference still JiT^is 
never employed except with reference to some one other person or thing; and 
where three or more are in question the article is omitted. Thus in Mark 

» Winer, § 20. 1,2. Alt. § 22, a. 9. 

* Scliol. ad Lucian. 1. c. ifAoU v o-uvra^i; avrt} vn tv /i^as rov iluyyixit/ M«r5. fvy 
y^dfrij T>» 0< 5i iiUrec^av' atri ^ao rov rtyig to oi xurat. See Kulnoel on Matt, 
xxviii. 17. 

5 Winer and Alt, ubi supra i Georg. Hierocr., p. 109. 


XV. Sf 20f i^t^tv tv r^ieixovra, xat tv i^njcgvret, xeu iy Xtutrtit. We find i iJf used 
for one of two in Luke xxiv. 18. Compare Mark xiv. 10. In cases where 
there is no division, the article is never inserted^ except where there is renewed 
mentiont or some kind of reference. See Matt. xxv. 18^ Rom. v. 15, 1 Cor. 
iv. 6, X. 17, xii. 11, Phil. ii. 2, 1 Thess. v. 11.* With respect to the form 
itself, some have regarded it as founded upon the Hebrew idiom, which will 
he found in £xod. xvii. 12, Levit. xii. 8,xv. 15, 1 Sam. x. 3, and elsewhere.* 
It is, however, closely allied to the expression i7; fih — tig ^h which occurs in 
Aristot. Ethic, vi. 1, Rhet. ii. 20.« 

2. In other places of the New Testament tig is followed by %rt»os or by alxxa^. 
Luke vii. 41, « us u^ukt invei^w ^tvrnKoa^tetj o %% trt^og ixrtfrnxotra. Rev. xvii. 10^ 
lis Urh, «XX0; au^u SxSc See also Luke xvi. 13, xvii. 34, 35, xviii. 10. 
There is a peculiarity in Matt. vi. 24, where the article is omitted before 
hos, and supplied before tripog. May not the preposition in the compound 
verb av^il^tritt account for the omission ? 

3. In Phil. i. 15, rms (mv, -rmg Vt answers the purpose of a division. 

Obs. 4. An example of the use of the article in the sense of a relative pronoun, 
which it frequently bears iu Homer and the Ionic and Doric writers, and sometimes 
in the Tragedians, has been erroneously supposed to exist in Acts xiii. 9, luvkgg, i 
xtu Uecvkog. The participle uv, or XtyifAivosf is here undoubtedly understood. A mure 
likely instance would have been the expression o h, which forms part of the inde- 
clinable title of Christ in Rev. i. 4. Here however the article is applied to nv, as if it 
were a participle of the perfect tense ; and it is a peculiarity which, like many others 
in the Apocalypse^ it is impossible to reconcile to the Greek usage. In these cases, 
however^ as in most instances where it is joined with a participle, its original rela- 
tive import is distinctly traced, and indicates the principle that the article is in fact 
a relative and not a demonstrative pronoun, of which the relation is explained by 
some adjunct annexed to it by means of the participle of existence. This relation 
may be more or less obscure according to circumstances ; but it has been seen that 
a reference is always at least implied to some object, which, though perhaps not pre- 
viously expressed, has occupied the mind of the writer. Some indeed have thotight 
that the accent is the only distinction between the relative and the article, at least 
in the Ionic writers ; but this is merely a distinction which must be at once rejected 
as arbitrary and unphilosophical.^ Its nature, as the subject of an assumptive propo- 
sition, explains the reason why it is prefixed only to nouns, adjectives, or their equi- 
valents, viz. participles, and verbs of the infinitive mood ; for it is plain that the 
word associated with it must be such, that the insertion of uv is admissible without 

forming a double proposition. Thus, if an assertion is made, that o Ig'rtf , the 

vacancy could not be filled up by ^i^t^aru: and the same is true, if, instead of an 
assertive proj)osition, He is, we take an assumptive one. He being. We can there- 
fore only say, « ^ikoffo(pcsj « tf**'^*?, « ^t^t^etrm.^ 

§ 34. — Pronouns. (Buttm. § 127.) 

1. Between oSrof and oSe, the distinction seems to he, that 
the former refers to what immediately precedes, and the latter 

* See Middleton on Phil. ii. 2, 1 John v. 7, 8. 
' Vorstius de Hebraism, c. 7, p. 180. 

* Winer, § 26. 2. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 45, 4. Fischer ad Leusden,de Dial., p. 35. 

* See the Lexicons of Schleusner and Passow under o, ft, vi, 

* Middleton, pt. i. ch. 2. 


to what yb//ott-,v. Thus, Matt. rii. 12, oirof ydp €<mv o yiiMsva 
ol 9rp(p^T«i, referring to the foregoing precept. Acts xv. 23, 
7^a\l/avT6f TfllSe, VIZ. the subjoined letter. This is, however, a 
far from being an invariable usage, that exceptions continually 
occur. In Luke x. 39, ty.^b refers to Marlha, mentioned in the 
preceding \CTse ; and in Acts iv. 11, oSror refers to Xpirm, 
not to ©60S-, which immediately precedes. 

In other connexions, oJto^ refers to a more distant 
object, oSe to a nearer one; but exeTvos- refers to what is 
remote or absent. Luke xvi. 25, aTreXa^es av radrfsii 
GOV ev Trj ^a;7) gov, Kal Aal^oLpos tol Kax.i ofjLolojs' nmiHi 
( Lazarus, the nearer object) 'jrapax.a'KBiTai, au Se o^mmu 
Acts XV. 1 1, TTKTTeuoiABv (yoz&Svai, Kay ov t^o^tov xixiin 
(scil. ri e'&vtj, v. 7). 

06«. 1 . Some have referred avrfi in Acts viii. 26 to the Hiibstantive tUf, but it 
belongs more probably to rdl^av. There is also another doubtful case in 1 Join 
V. 20, ovTos iffnv akvBtm Giog, xet) h i»m mmtas. It is here doubted whetha 
the reference is to God the Father or to Christ ; but since ti ^aAi aImuh is a term 
which St. John invariably uses of Christ, and the true grammatical constroctifli 
requires such a reference, there can be no solid reason for violating the rule. 

Oba. 2. As the demonstratire pronoun, so the relative sometinaes refers to a re- 
moter noun. Thus, in 1 Cor. i. 8, h must refer to eioV in v. 4. See also 2 The» 
ii. 9, Heb. v. 7, ix. 2, et alibi,^ 

2. The senses, in which the pronoun avros is commonly used, 
leaving been already noticed (§15. 2), it remains to subjoin 
tlie following observations on the demmistrative pronouns in 
general : — 

Obf, 3. When the verb is separated from its case by a parenthesis, or af^er a pro- 
]iosition beginning with a relative, the demonstrative pronoun is frequently retbut- 
(fatit. John XV. 2, «rav xXf}f/,a iv liu,o) /u-h <pi^9v xa^wav, ou^tt avro' xect «r«» vi x»^n 
<ffi^6Vf xaBeti^u ahro, ActS iv. 10, Iv rS hofAart 'Ifi^ov X^sa-rov, ov VfAug Wvecv^^vn^ i» 
TcvTof X. T. >. Compare Acts ii. 22, 23, 36, v. 30, 31, vii. 35, 40, x. 38, sqq., and 

Obs. 4. Frequently the pronoun is repeated for the sake of emphasis, as in Matt. 
vi. 4, xm ^arr,p ffov o (iXivruy iv rS x^v^tm, aires aTohwffu ffot iv rS <petv%^S. xxiv. l-3> 
'hi virefAtivus t/f riXos, euros ff&t^r.ffiroti. Mark vii. 15, rk ix^o^ivofjtivot 0.9^ avroV, Ixuni 
iffrt ra, xotvovvra rov uvB^ivrevt Compare V. 20, 1 Pet, V. 10.* 

Obt. 5. Before and after participles, the demonstrative pronoun is frequently re 
(lundant without a parenthesis; as in Matt. iv. 16, rets xet^fifitivois i* X'^^f- «*' "^^ 
Sayeirov, <pZf unrttXty avrots* V. 40, rZ BiXovri g-ot x^tBriveci, xeu rov x,*'*'***» ^ou Xft/Sfi*, 
aps avry xet) ro ifAuriov, Compare also Acts i. 21, 22, James i. 25, Rev. ii. 7, 17, 
\i. 4, Sometimes uvros is twice added; as in Matt. viii. 1, xaru^avrt Ti »vr^ ari 

I Winer, §J23. 1. Alt, Gram. N. T. v^ 41. 1. 
« Wilier, §;23. 3. 


*rov o^ovSi *HM>'«tJ^9ia'ecv ahrS o^Xoi v'o'/.XoL Mark v. 2, i^tX^evrt ahrZ \x rou 9rXei$Uf tli' 
Blots a^tmrntrtv ai/rS ay^^cj^og. Add Matt. viii. 5, 23, 28, xxvi. 71, Mark ix. 28. 
Obs. 6. With ihe infinitive also, the pronoun is in like nnanner pleonastic. Thus 

2 Cor. ii. 1, tx^na }H ifiavrei rovrCf to fch 9reiXtv sXSi7y iy Xvvrfi vr^og vfjias. Of a like 
character is the use of a pronoun before the particle "v*, or trt, when the following 
sentence is emphatic ; as ia Acts ix. 21, ut tovto iXny-vBu, ha IthfAtvovg avrehs a-yayn 
lU ravs ufX'H^^i' So XX. 29, xxiv. 14. The usage is especially prevalent in the writings 
of St. John and St. Paul. See John vi. 29, xv. 8, Rom. vi. 6, xiv. 9, 1 Cor. i. 12, 
XV. 50, 2 Cor. ii. 9, v. 14, x. 7, 11, Eph. vi. 22, Phil. i. 6, 25, 1 Tim. i. 9, 1 John 
i. 5, ii. 3, 6, iii. 8, 16, 19, iv. 13, 17. Compare 1 Pet. iii. 9.^ Sometimes the neu- 
ter plural vavTo, is used with reference to a single object ; as in John xv. 17, raura, 
ivTtXXofj^at vfiuVj 'IvK aya^uTt iXXn^evs* 3 John 4, fAuT^ari^av rovrotv ohx txfit ^et^av* 

Obs. 7. Instead of repeating the relative, the demonstrative pronoun is frequently 
used in continuation of a proposition beginning with a relative ; as in Acts iii. 13, « 
Qtos iholcfitffiv ^li^ffeivvy Sv vfjuus vret^tieixarty xa) n^yr,era<rBt atirov. 1 Cot. viii. 6, fifuv (7; Btof 
itecm^f i^ ov ra •ravret, xa) hfAtTg lis tthrov xa) lis Kv^tos ^Ifi^evs X^to'reSf h* ou roi vravra, 
xeu hfjuiis V avrev. So 1 Pet. ii. 22, 2 Pet. ii. 3, Rev. xvii. 2. Compare Ps. Ixxxviii. 
5, LXX. Very similar also is Rev. ii. 18, rahi xiyu o vios rod Biov, o tx^it revs ip- 
BuXfjiiOVs uvTov MS (pXeya ^ru^osj xa) oi 'jrohis ethrou ofjuotoi xaXxoXt^avM (tiV/). 

Obs. 8. The demonstrative pronoun even follows the relative in the same proposi- 
tion; as in Mark i. 7, ou obx tlfu txaves XvtroLi <roy Ifjijdvru reuv v^o^nfiturMV othrov, Mark 
vii. 25, ns sTp^t ro Bvyeir^tov etvriis ^vivfAOt axeiSa^rev, Acts XV. 17, Rev. viii. 2. The 
same construction obtains with other pronouns ; as in Mark xiii. 19, Bkiyptsy o'let ou 
yiyovt roiaurn ot^^ oto^ns xrifftats- Also with adverbs ; as in Mark vi. 55, o^ov nxovov 
ort ixii iffrt. So Rev. xii. 14, xvii. 9. To this head have also been referred, but 
incorrectly, Matt. iii. 12, Gal. iii. 1. For similar examples in the LXX, see Exod. 
iv. 17, Levit. xvii. 5, Josh. iii. 4, Judg. xviii. 5, 6, 1 Kings xiii. 10, 25, 2 Kings 
xix. 4, Nehem. viii. 12, ix. 19, Joel iii. 7, Baruch ii. 17, Judith v. 19, x. 2, xvi. 3, 

3 Esdr. iii. 5, iv. 54, vi. 32. 

Obs, 9. It is also to be remarked, that a demonstrative pronoun is often found at 
the beginning of a new clause, in which a relative would rather have been expected. 
Thus in Luke ii. 36, ^y ^Awoe ^^e^tins* etvrn ^0ofii(i7}Kv7et x, r. X. John i. 6, lyUire 
iivB^u^oSt ovo/juet avrei ^lunvvfis* Acts X. 36, ivayyiXi^ofAives it^nvv^ ^t» ^ififfou X^sffrev' 
ovros irri vavrm xv^tos* In this last example, however, as in Acts viii. 26, the 
clause may be considered as a parenthetical observation. Although the usage is 
common in Hebrew, it is also found ia the later Greek writers. See i^lian. V. H. 
xii. 18, Strabon. viii. 371, Philostr. Soph. i. 25.^ 

Obs, 10. By means of the demonstrative pronoun, two propositions, of which one 
contains the verb ii/a), and the other a relative, are sometimes contracted into one ; 
as in Luke xvi. 2, rl rouro oixoveu <rj^) irov^ i. e. ri Qo-ti) rovroy (ov) axovu. 2 Pet. iii. 1, 
ruvrfiv n^ti ^ivri^ecy vfjilv y^a,(pu WifToXhyy for avrti io'rt n ^ivri^ei i^iff-roXh, »jy y^ei<pea. 

Obs, 11. With respect to the use of these pronouns in the New Testament, it 
may also be observed that — 1. aures is sometimes put with x»), as et is or isque in 
Latin, in the sense of and indeed, and thai too ; as in Luke vii. 12, vlos fjtovoytvns rri 
fcfirfi avrov* xa) atirfi x'/^a, and she too a widow; i. e. in addition to her other suf- 
ferings. 1 Cor. vi. 6, a,^iX(pos ftiTu ec^iX<pou x^inroti, xa) rovro W) aTttrreuv. 8, ahiKUri 
xa) a^offTS^itrif xu) ravra ahiXipovs* Add 1 Cor. ii. 2, Kph. ii. 8, Phil. i. 28. And, 
2. The neuter accusatives rovro and ravra are used adverbially, with xara or ditx 

1 Winer, §§ 22. 4, 23. 4. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 38. 2. 
* Winer, ubi supra, 

3 Winer and Alt, ubi supra; Ast ad Plat. Polit. p. 551. Goltling ad Callim. p. 
19. Poppo ad Xen. Cyr. p. 478. Boraemanu ad Xen. Con v. p. 196. 


onderetood) as in Heb. x. 33, T«?r« /tclv,-— r«i7r0 ^, on ike one Jkand and en ike t&tr. 
Compare Herod, i. 30, iii. 132, Lucian. Nicor. 16. Ag^in, in 2 Pet i. 5> m «n 
r9UT9 ht and /or this very caused 

Obi, 12. In Hebrew the pronoun lometimes refers to a noun expressed a & 
succeedinj^ sentence ; and a like usage has been pointed out with »vris in two » 
sages of the New Testament. These are, Matt. xvii. 18, i^^Tifcn^it «my • 'Iws- 
Acts xii. 21, \%tifAfiy&fu *^of aurouf. In the first passage, however, tthr^ nuyn 
readily be referred to the dssmoniac as the dsmon, which are so frequently iBto" 
changed in the Gos|)el8, that no support can be drawn from the paraAel place i 
Mark ix. 25, to the proposed interpretation ; and in the latter^ tortus refen dim 
properly to the deputies from Tyre and Sidon, mentioned in the preceding ve»^ 
than to }mfMs in the following. 

Obs. 13. The pronoun »vt»s is sometimes interchanged with rv^ as in Matt, ml 
37, *U^w9»XnfA, * U^av^akhfJi; h kvoxrii^twa rm ^c^retff »mi X/S«)3«XmV« reifs «nmt 
fAtvws ^^9s etvrh, ^wattis w^sXfi«-« Wt^umyeiyuv rk viKva ^ov* Compare KcT. ni. 
23, 24. Thus also a general turn is given to the words of Elizabeth in her i wH^f 
to Mary, in Luke i. 45, xai fiaxa/ia n ^ivrtwaffa, »rt ta-^-tu TtXitMVis tms XiXoAi^ 
avTn^etfk Kvftov. Such transitions, which seem to originate iu the fervour 0ft 
writer, who is more intent upon the importance of his subject than the accurscjtf 
his language, are very common in Hebrew.* 

Obi. 14. The reflexive pronoun teturov is frequently put for the other penood 
pronouns compounded with ahros. Thus, for the 2 pers. sing, in John xviii. 34> if^ 
laurw ^v r$vro xiyuf, for the 1 pers. plur. in Acts xxiii. 14, civa^if»»Ti avttBt/utrin- 
fitv UuTovt : and for the 2 pers. plur. iu Phil. ii. 12, rhv laurSw rtaTn^ia^ x»Ti0yi{w^ 
See also Matt. iii. 9, xxii. 39, xxiii. 31, John xii, 8, Acts xiii. 46 Rom. viii.23, 
xiii. 9, 1 Cor. xi. 31, 2 Cor. i. 9, x. 12, 1 Tbess. ii. 8. So, in Latin Ovid. Epiit 
Heijpid. v. 46, MUcuimus lucrymaa mceitus uterque suas, 

Obt, 15. The reflexive pronoun is also put for oe,>XnXeiv, as iu Col. iii. 16 %lUruh 
Tit xa) vev^trovvTts iuvrovs* 1 Thess. v. 13, tt^uvtvirt iy iecvroTg, See also 1 Pet. if. 
8, 10.8 

3. The pronoun indefinite tU is either used alone, or with a 
substantive in the same case, or followed with a genitive 
(§ 41. 3), in the sense of sofne one, a certain one^ any one, some- 
thing, or any thing. Thus in Matt. v. 23, )c:cx6r ptvTja^Tjf on a 
a^i-'K(^6s GOV ^syjEi r\ Kara, aov, ix. 3, riyis rouv yqa^fx/xoiTecuv gf^ov h 
lai/ToTy. xii. 47, bitts Se ris auroj. Acts ix. 36, iv 'loTTTrri Sf rish 
fxabvirpia. Add Matt. xi. 27, xii. 19, xxi. 3, xxii. 46, Mark, 
viii. 26, xi. 13, Luke xxii. 35, Acts ix. 2, xvii. 20, xxvii. 8, 44, 
1 Cor. ix. 22, 2 Pet. iii. 16, et alibi, 

Obs, 16. The cases are constantly omitted before genitives takeu partUiveln. 
Thus in Matt, xxiii. 34, i| u,bTuv u-roxrivun xa) ffTav^uffiriy sett, Ttvas, John xvi. Vi 
iTa-flv ovv ix ruv fAu^nruy. Add Luke xxi. 16, Rev. ii. 10, xi. 9. Of the omission of 
Ttf in the nominative, see § 37. 7. Obs, 17. 

4. In the New Testament the use of the possessive pronouns 

» Winer, § 21. 2. Obs, 3. 
« Alt, Gr. N. T. § 37. 4. 

■ Winer, } 22. 5. Alt, 6 39. Georgi Hierocrit. i. 3. 30. Viger do Idiot r. 
115. n. 7, and Herm. and Zeun. ad he, ii'ussov. Ltx. in v. 


is far less common than that of the genitive of the personal 
pronouns ; and the position of these last is very frequently 
before the noun, even where there is no aipparent emphasis to 
account for the departure from ordinary usage. (See § 44, 6. 
Obs, 20.) The practice is particularly observable in St. Lulcc 
and St. Paul. See Luke vi. 47, xi. 17, xii. 18, 30, 35, xv. 30, 
xvi. 6, xix. 35, Rom. xiii. 11, 1 Cor. viii. 12, ix. 11, 27, xi. 24, 
Eph. ii. 10, Phil. ii. 2, Col. ii. 5, iv. 18, 1 Thess. i. 3, iii. 10, 13, 
2 Thess. ii. 17, iii. 5, 1 Tim. iv. 15, 2 Tim. i. 4, iii. 10, Tit. i. 15. 
It is often found also in St. John, and, though less frequently, in 
the other writers. Compare Matt. v. 16, vi. 4, 17, xix. 21, 
Mark ii. 9, John ii. 23, iii. 19, 21, 23, iv. 34, 47, ix. 11, 21, 26, 
xi. 32, 48, xii. 40, 1 John iii. 20, Rev. ii. 19, iii. 1, 2, 8, 15, x. 
9, xiv. 18, xviii. 5. 

Oht, 17. The possessive pronoun is sometimes expressed by means of a peri* 
plirasis, formed by tiie preposition xark with an accusative of the personal pronoun : 
as in Acts xvii. 28, mts r£v »«3' v/ias 4r«iifr*v. xviii. 15, m/mv r»v km^* y/uis, 
Eph. i. 15, «4i» xtA' IfiMi ^Uriu So iSUan, V. H. ii. 42. h *ar' »vrif i^trn. Dion. 
Hal. ii. 1, «/ »c3* hfMs XV^^*^ 

§ 35. — The Article with ProuQuns, tcas^ 8fc, (Blttm. 

§ 127. Text, 5, 6.) 

1. With the demonstrative pronouns oiros, ill, Ikuw, the 
noun, to which they are joined, takes the article in both 
numbers, because the identity of the noun and pronoun is 
assumed, and in no case can the sense be more definite and 
restricted. Matt. iii. 1, rx^s r,iJL£pais 6X6»W»y. 9, rwy Xibuy rourm. 
James iv. 3, rrivSc t^v groXiv. 

Obs, 1. A single MS. has fixi^us rxvrnv yuftuMt, in Luke vii. 44 : and the only 
other exceptions are cases of numerals and proper names. See } 27. 2. Obs, 7. 3. 
and §31.3. If, on the other hand, the identity is asserted, i. e. if the pronoun is the 
subject, and the noun the predicate, of a sentence, the article, unless the sense be 
otherwise restricted, is omitted : as in Rom. ix. 8, r«vr« rUf vw euS, These are tke 
children of God, Compare Luke i. 36, xxi. 22, John iv. 18, 54, Gal. iii. 7, iv. 24 
1 Thess. iv. 3.« 

Obs, 2. In Matthew, Mark, Luke, and St. Paul's Epistles, wroi stands before 
the noun, and in St. John after it, with some few exceptions : but Izuf^ usually 
follows the substantive, unless when a preposition occurs.' 

2. When Ttas or iwar is used in the singular to signify the 

* Winer, $ 22. 7. Alt, § 40. Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 441. 
^ Middleton on Gr. Art. ch. vii. { 5, 6. Winer, & 17. 9. 

Qersdorfs Beitrttge sur Sprach-characteristik der SchtiCUWAst ^xj^ ^. •\. 
p. 434. 


whole of any thing, the substantive takes the article; but when 
every individual of a species is intended, it is anarthrous, since 
no definite individual can, by the nature of the case, be meant 
Thus Matt. xxi. 10, gra(Ta ^ woXiy, the wh€>le city ; iii. 10, ih 
SevS^ov, every tree. Compare Matt. vi. 29, xiii. 47, Mark iv. 1, 
Luke ii. 1, iii. 5, John ii. 10, Acts iii. 23, 2 Tim. iii. 16. In 
!Eph. iv. 31, [TToiaac TTixpioi may be rendered every species of 
bitterness. So Acts xxiii. 1, 2 Cor. ix. 8, James i. 2, 
1 Pet. i. 15. 

Obs. 3. There can be little doubt that ra^a n cixolofch, in £ph. ii. 21, is the tne 
reading, though sanctioned by the smaller number of MSS., since the omissioaof 
the article would be a solcecism ; and in £ph. iii. 15, «'««'« vretT^sm is every /miij. 
Since 'It^ovikvfjtu is a neuter noun, 4 ^oXtg may possibly be understood in Matt. il3, 
though proper names are a constant reason of variation in the use of the artide 
(§ 31. 3). It is probable also that in Acts ii. 35, otx»s *l^f»h^ may be regarded as 
a single proper name* The article is also rejected by the same expression in Mitt 
X. 6, XV. 24, contrary to tlie correct usage, which is uevertheless adopted in Heb. 
viii. 8, 10. A similar diversity prevails in the LXX, and the Hebrew would cn^ 
rectly omit the article. Compare 1 Sam. vii. 2, 3, Nehem. iv. 16. 

Obt, 4. When a participle is used instead of a noun, the article is inserted after ti^ 
in the sense of each individual ; as in MaU. v. 22, 28, «•«? i i^yiZofAtvos, iris o ^xitm. 
See also Luke vi. 47, xviii. 14, John iii. 20, vi. 40, Act xi. 39, Rom. ix. 33, 1 Cor. 
ix. 25, Oal. iii. 15, 1 John ii. 23, et alibi. The reason is that the article is required 
to give the participle the force and nature of a substantive ; and the expressions are 
evidently equivalent to eras offns o^yi^trat^ o^rig (ixi^ti, &c. &c. See below § Ai} 
In Luke xi. 4, the case is somewhat different, since ipiXevn retains its participial 
character. Some copies, however, insert ry. 

Obi, 5. In the plural, crdvrts is almost always accompanied by the article in the 
New Testament.* When the noun has a distinct reference, the law of usage ij 
obvious ; and in those cases where it may be apparently indefinite, it will often 
happen that a whole class is intended, which will equally account for its insertion. 
Examples are Matt. ii. 4, ^avras rohg afx'«f«"f ^^^ y^otfAfiurus^ i. e, all who were 
members of the Sanhedrim ; xi. 13, cravrif ol ^^o^rirutf the Prophets of the Old Testa- 
ment ; Rom. i. 5, ^ratrireTs tByi(n,allihe nations of the world; Luke xiii. 27, v-drmu 
i^ydrett, all the workers, namely of the class indicated by the genitive t« aiu'uLtx 
which follows. Ou the other hand, the article is omitted in Rom. v. 12, «-«««; 
d^^^u'jrovfy all men, i. e. without exception or limitation; and it is also remarkable 
that, in a great majority of cases, the word without the article is av^^ot^ot. 

Obs. 6. The position of the article is commonly between 9*5? and the substantire. 
There are, however, some few exceptions in the New Testament, in which rij 

* Middleton, ubi supra ; and in his notes to the several passages cited. WineTj 
§ 17. 10. Gersdorfs BeitrUge, pp. 374. sqq. 

* Gcrsdorfs Beitriige, p. 386. He observes that the few exceptions arc, for the 
most part, suspected readings. There exists, however, no doubt respectin^^ Lukt 
xiii. 4, Acts xvii. 21, xix. 17, xxii. 15, Rom. v. 12, 18, 1 Thess. ii. 15, 1 Tim. ii. 4^ 
Tit. iii. 2. Matthiae's notice respecting the use of tus with the article is extremely 
brief, and he has not adduced a single example from any classical writer : but the 
different nsages are abundantly illustrated by Bishop Middleton and his recent 
Kditor, Mr. Rose. See Matt. Gr. Gr. § 265. 


follows, and still fewer lu which it is between the article and subsiantive. Of the 
latter usage, Acts xix. 7, XX. 18, Gal. v. 14, 1 Tim. i. 16, are perhaps the only 
instances: for the former, see Matt. xxv. 29, Luke vii. 35, John xvii. 10, Acts vi. 26, 
viii. 40, 1 Cor. vii. 17, xiii. 2, xv. 7, 2 Cor. i. 1, xiii. 2, 12, and elsewhere. In such 
phrases as aurot ireivrtst ravra. ^avrUf the article is regularly omitted ; as in Mark 
X. 20, Luke vii. 18, Rom. viii. 37.^ 

Obso 7. The construction of okog is precisely similar to that of tra;. A sub- 
stantive, being without reference, requires the article ; and vice versa, John vii. 23, 
ekov av^^u^oVf an entire man. Rom. viii. 36, aknv rhv tifAi^ecv, the whole day, 

3. It is seldom that 'ixoLisros is used as an adjective in the 
New Testament. When so employed, it is always without the 
article ; as in Luke vi. 44, gxacrrov ^evJ§ov, John xix. 23, kKXTTco 
(TTpocTicuTYi, Hcb. iii. 13, xaS* IxaffTojv rifjiipxy.^ In other Greek 
writers the article is sometimes inserted ; but in cases where 
the noun has a definite reference. It is only once (Matt. xxvi. 
18.) that laTva. occurs in the New Testament, and of course 
with the article. With roiovro^ the article is employed to 
designate a person or thing marked by some specific quality 
or appurtenance, which has been previously mentioned or 
implied. Thus Mark ix. 37, roiovrouv r&/v Tral^cov, such children 
as those before them. In 2 Cor. xii. 2, 3, the reference is to 
avSrqcuTToy as limited by the words ev XpiarS). When such an 
one, or any such, is intended, the article is omitted, as in 
Mark vi. 2, ix. 8, Acts vi. 24, 1 Cor. xi. 16, and elsewhere. 

4. In the employment of aXKos, ttoKus, atyroy, &c. the New ' 
Testament usage is similar to that of the classical Greek. 
Thus aXKos is simply another ; b aXKos, the other, the remaining 
one of two ; ol aXKQ^, the others, the rest. Compare Matt. iv. 21, 

V. 39, John XX. 25. 


Obs, 8. In John xviii. 15, some MSS. omit the article, and Gciesbach has 
marked it as possibly spurious ; but the weight of authority is greatly in favour of 
its being genuine. It is 'highly probable that there was some peculiar connexion 
between the two Apostles, Peter and John ; so that after the mention of the former, 
e aXkos fi.a^n'rhs would in early times be readily understood to designate the latter. 
The same expression recurs in John xx. 2, 3, 4, 8 ; nor does the addition in the first 
of these verses render the explanation above given unnecessary.^ 

Obs. 9. In many texts of the New Testament el ^eWe) is used in a sense equi- 
valent to ^dvrtSi so as to denote the bulk or generality of mankind, or the collective 
body of Christians ; as in Rom. v. 15, 19, compared with vv. 12, 18. See also Rom. 
xii. 5, 1 Cor. x. 17, ef alibi. It may mean also a definite multitudey as the many 
with whoni^the'jiisciples were acquainted^ in 2 Cor. ii. 17. In Heb. ix. 28, Bentley 

* Gersdorf, p. 447. 

^ Winer, who cites Orellius ad Isocr. Antid. p. 253, sqq. 

^ Middletou ad iocutn. 


would supply the article before ^oJjJh; but the conjeetme is devoid at cnei gf 
all authority, and as unnecessary to the lease of the ^ammge as in Matt. xx.S. 
xxvi. 28, Murk z. 45, Heb. ii. 10.^ 

Ob*. 10. With respect to mvrit it is sufficient to remarky that, whenever m &e 
New Testament it is joined to a substantive in the sense of ipwe, the artide it 
always inserted. Thus John zvi. 27, avrit « ^rmrn^. Horn. viii. 26, miri ri tm/a. 
1 Tliess. xi?. 16, avrit i xi^/iy. The exception in Luke zzii. 42, is a proper dsk 
In other writers, where the emphasis is not so distinctly marked, it is freqantij 

§ 36.— Of the Neuter Adjective. (Buttm. § 128.) 

Adjectives and participles are used in the neuter, singolir 
or plural, with the article, to express a collecUve whole, whki 
might equally be expressed by the masculine or a substantiTe. 

Thus 1 Cor. i. 27, rx ixcupi, rx ua^^rhj ra l^yjuqai, ri aym n. 
Koa-fjLou, the foolish, the weak, &c., portion of the world ; to when 
the Apostle opposes Toir ao(fois. 2 Thess. ii. 6, to xoltv^^ 
the restraining power, which is generally supposed to indicate the 
Roman Empire. Heb. vii. 7, to tkctrrov vvo tqv Kpslrrovof ivh- 
ygrrai, i. e. inferior's are blessed by their superiors. (Thucyd. E 
1 1, ri xpccTKJTa em rovs vToiestTrspous ^cn^g^'Syov.) 1 John v. 4, th 
TO ygyevvajptevov sx, rov @sov vtx^ tov KoaiAov. 

Obi. 1. Thus aUio the article is a frequent annexation to adjectives of thentote 
gender, when used to indicate an attribute or quality in its general and abitnct 
idea/ Examples are Luke vi. 45, r« A^ftS^v, ta iravfi^n, Rom, i. 19^ r§ y*MT». 
ii. 4, TO ;^^ii«'r0r. In the plural rk ii^ara. 

Obt, 2. Instead of agreeing with its substantive, a neuter adjective with u 
article is frequently followed by a substantive in the genitive^ to which it seniB 
to bear the relation of a part to its wliole. Thus 2 Cor.iv. 17, 4-0 iXtt^pwrns SAiVwfi 
i. e. \>.»(p^a. ^X/ypiS' Phil. iii. 8, «r« vTi^ix^v «•« ywJriAPj, i. e. uv-i^iy^^vg-ay y^Z^n. Heb. 
vi. 1 7, Ttf ufAtruBirov rns fievXiif ahrov, i. e. ufAira^trov ^vXjnv. It is less frequent thsttbe 
genitive singular of a masculine or feminine substantive is preceded by an adiectiTt 
in the neuter plural ; but there is an example in 2 Cor. iv. 2, ^ik »0vrTk w 

Obs. 3. In the same way the neuter plural of uvrig is followed by a genitife in 
1 Pet V. 9, T» ulrei ruv «r«^>j/te«T«ir, for ra ^oBr.fAxrx. Of the neuter article with 
a genitive see § 30. 4. Obs, 11. 4. 

Obs. 4. Adjectives are often put in the neuter singular or plural, with or without 
the article, for adverbs : Malt. v. 33, ^tirtTrt tr^Zrov «r«» fiaaktiecv red BuV. xxi. 29, 

* Middleton a<//oci/7/i. 

* Winer, § 17. 11. See KrUger ad Dion. Hal. p. 454. B.irnemann ad Xen. 
Anab. p. 61, Poppo's Index to Xen. Cyrop. in v., and compare Xen. Cyr L 4 7 t 
2, 29. Diog. Laert. ix. 7.6. J • • • 

» Winer, § 27. 4, and 34. Obs. 3. Alt, § 32. 1. Poppo ad Thucvd n lU 
Seidler ad Eur. Troad. p. 61. i ' l- ' 

^ Middleton classes this use of the article among the insertiont in reference * but 
it seems clearly to belong to the hypoiheticai division. ' 

5 Winer, §34.1. Alt, § 32. 1. 


vrri^y fitrafuXn^iis* Mark v. 43, ^tiffruXar^ avrtHts 9'aXXd* xii. 27, vfAUs ouw iftXu 
^rXftySrSc. Luke vii. 42, rig ovv uhruv ^Xtiioit avrov »ya9rnffiu John X. 40, o'Tov nv 'l«^ 

§ 37. — Of the Noun in connexion. Subject and Predicate, 

(BUTTM. § 129.) 

1. From the general rulo that a nominat. in the neut. pi. 
has the verb in the sing., which is nevertheless commonly ob- 
served (Mark iii. 4, iv. 4, vii. 28, Luke viii. 38, xiii. 19, et 
alibi), there arc frequent exceptions in the New Testament. 
Thus Matt. xii. 21, e&vo} IXwiovat, Mark v. 13, ra, 'Tn^itxara, bkj- 
SX&ov. John X. 8, TiULovoxv ra irpo^atra, James ii. 19, ra Sai^io- 
via TTiffreiovffi ytal (fpltyaovai. Nor are the exceptions confined to 
nouns which represent things which have life. Luke xxiv. 1 1 , 
l^avTj^av Ta prifxara. 1 Tim. V. 25, ra KaXa sqya irqcSrikd Bcrrr 
xai ra oKKoos ey^ovra y.pv^r,yat ov ^uvQCvrai, Rev. xvi. 20, opn ovy^ 

Obi, 1. Sometimes both constructions are united with the same noun. Thus 
Luke iv. 41, (^'i^;^fTo ^aifjtevtet X. <f. A.., on ^^ti^uv. John X. 27, <ra fr^0/3«r«e uxovttf xee) 
&xo>Mi^evffu So 1 Cor. x. 11, 2 Pet. iii. 10, Rev. i. 19.^ 

2. Properly the verb, which belongs to several subjects 
united by a conjunction, should be in the plural ; as in Luke 

ii. 48, TTarrip aou xdyu oSvvcufJisvoi s^oQToypcfv ere. viii. 19, sara^gye- 
vovTo irpof auTov rt fX'nrviq Kai ol a^gX^oi avrov. Acts XV. 35, Ylau- 
Xof xa! Bapvd^af SigT^ijSov iv *Ayrioy^Bi^. Frequently, however, it 
is governed by the subject nearest to it, if it be a singular or 
a neuter plural. Thus, Luke ii. 43, oux. gyvw 'lcoa7i(p xal ^ fxrirr,p 
avrou, 1 Cor. xiii. 13, vun Sg ixim Trlartf, eKirU, x. t, X. 2 Pet. 
iii. 10, y,ai 7? ra h avrri eqya xfitraxao^ffgrai. 

Obs, 2. The following examples, in which the verb which is expressed with the 
first subject may be considered as understood with the rest, are closely similar, if 
not exactly parallel* Matt. xii. 3, Luke vi. 3, i^tiva^iv ahros xui oi fAir* uirod evrif. 
John iv* 12, xai eturof jfir/i, xa) at vio) etvrev xcu r» ^^ifitfietrx avrav. Compare Luke 
viii. 22, xxii. 14, John ii. 12, Acts xxvi. 30, Rev. xxi. 22. So also in the second per- 
son in Acts xi. 14, tv o7s ^uB^a-fi ev xa) vrai o olxU o'ou. Although a like construction 
is employed iu Hebrew, the usage is not thence perhaps derived by the New Testa- 
ment writers, since it equally belongs to the Greek. Thus Platon. Conv. p. 173, A., 
tButv aurof Ts xai oi ;^0^fi/r«c/. So Arist. Av. 890, Alciphr. 1. 24. It will be observed 
that in these instances the verb generally precedes the subject. The syntax is curi- 
ously involved in Acts v. 29, u^ax^iBtis Si » Uir^ig xeu oi u^og-roXoi tivovf where the par- 
ticiple refers to Peter only, though the verb is in the plural. In Luke ii. 33, Winer 
observes a similar construction ; but h is there the contracted form of tt^avJ^ 

> Winer, § 47. 3. Alt, § 74. 5. 
« Winer, J 47. 2. Alt, § 74. 4, 5. 


^ r ... 

• I. ' "^ ■- --•-»«•-. -. •■.:iirLr:rr*» -r-i**-J :t 5. the verb usnallT follows is UJ 
S-".. : : . :. -•-. • .-• n. ■.!._- . rlr» -n;. ; • ;.'«.s si s-Tx^rsirsu. Com'|-areMA 
1 " • . .' x«. -■« I T.-r. 1. I"5. The r-le. intletjd, that the w 

J . r -::-„•*...: ▼ :.*: i* M-i tr : l-c-§ zo all the substantives alike, does a« 

- :: • i«: :«it-_- ».--*:-. J ..*rnc-i c"Jci_ Iv the b^at viittfrs. An example ii 

\:^ i- -i^:::: the rt, b in the plural occur in 

X r '' \\.. >. rXfTrr:- 'x'-- '^ '*-—-•»> tx ifJLxrm, So Mark i 
7. I../x. .\. \'2. .^.r.r. v::. 4;«. Rev. xviii. 4. For like exampk 
:;•. :"..L LXX =.: 1 Sir.:, ii. C-c, xiL IS. ]9, 1 Kings iii. 2,Jttilj 

• -. V, : i- -. :rs iTr :v: ;: =r:.-« t*:":*. i: =;t i:sfc«yjaent:y happens that a 

- .. t5 .-. .- :.*.-.. >. X. IS -':i^ i:- -. I Cor. xvi. 15. Add I Tzm. ii. 1a 
r-----.-i. ■ -. • :.5 -■-- -.i'.; ;i-»,-. i*« *...*M-r.t ii v.xTXf «. «-. A. In thislaitfl' 
k _ z . -w .-.::. r. * .i . l . • rzii .« i:.r— ~rcc:.j eir..^.ii:«rd. the change of number b* 

:.i ". ... ^. . = .1..7.. :> r.:.j:i.L-.r ei:.:jrtd «::h ic^rr;;. John XTL32.n» 

- .-.'-. its-- Ar? - .'. -i.-i.' >",- ii-zj-T.s-. xi. -2?. Mg^xi Im^xerss. ReV-V.^K? 
.-•■ ;•••-. ti-- . x^-i^s:. I- ..».= nii-i-c: tlr Hclzcv- ;^2^ often takes Ay^ 

»':.'. . . t. : :..r _»r .: t-t »^^__i: m ^ .■^^^' cz ^mrric sense, instead Jtt 
}•—"*-'••- >--rri ■■..■;r* ; r— »r. ^:2:c i^>T...^fcs iz. v*ezitL>tf asd other doues 1j» 

-.-.:::.-.•. v .-._.= - t. ... i: i...:.:-:: u ::: Gal. Hi. -Jf. «^jb ii« 'Iri«:s,-. jiii £*• 

'" ■'■' ' -■-■ ■■■■■ .■.-^.;'- :.! i'. i,rii »ju o-:.:. Ccl. i_i. H. ' E;.;.i;» xfcLv 

.•i-:.-. r.- - «' li. it-;..-- i. J.i Ji/r. 1*.J":. krXjf. £;.!iC'i--rf. S'^ch Comi'rebeiai« 

c\; ::»-....>.,- . -^ i.'.-i.i \.iA.. V. 1: . I -.ti-r;. i An^rg xx, iuxiTaf/.:s 1 Pc*ui«- 

A..- . ".r ..ji-. :.-.= 1-. .-. :t;s::i., i. *r.-j niA-.* i. ui ihcy ileit-nd rather i^^c 

•"•' ■■ ■■ •- ■ : M«M ^' •«...«»•? - *-• » • 

'• • -'■ --■* ■---: r ■.-.:.'.■ : -':=-« :.*: & *-;*tir:?;Te in the singular is ji'i-'""- 

■• ■" — • "-- -- \...:~ . '•»..r:-c :.:.-. zi'..?: e^-^.y i* 12— ilcritooil in the ^i-- 

r...L....:. 1 :. _» 1-...-V-. i.i.T. . . i^. .r.-i- r.^jua^i -i rj.-.r*c-s» i.V ri;» j?i. lt.:.»- 

- '. r; .-__i — .-. r.eT. -i:. ... i.-.o- i.r.r,- rr:".- ;=.!». So also ia Je.ex. \v:. - • 

L\\. . 

X • 

'w I. 

^'■-■""--t '■'? T. XJL* T.'.; T.'. r; ; .T";.'..":. *.•."— Tif. 

M-:.-. :. -.-i. ».T*:. r.i -J.-.-i. Polyb. ii:. -iy. I-. r:..- 

4. The c: i::e jliiral r.^::i- for i/i. bv means of whioh a 
Aviitor iissociatcs'.f. as it were, with those whom lie ai- 
clre>sos, is very c::v.::::n in >:. Paul's Epistles. See Eom. ii. >• 
L Cor. X. ]'2. Gai. ■:. 4. Tit. iii. o. rt j;try./e.>. So in many cases 
where the sin^^uLv.- .5 absolutely intenJeJ. as in John iii. 11. ^ 

See Ilaxma.':. Mackr.-.jht. Schxt ar..l >:.".z : 1 .>:>. 
^ \N pc.-. {;-;:. :. a. AlT.^o -;:. l. x,c a.>j Krj,-c.- u^ Dion. Ilal. p. 231 Ji- 
c. :.s all Achii, Tat. J : . ^vJ, oJJ. Wc«c.;:..: aa Iii. vi. >ij. 1,. .u3. 

BtUi. B. Tbe use of 


fi. Compare 2 Cor. i. 8, sqq., 
11 the jiliiral i] 


istea,l of the sliiKular, when a. writer 
terms ubat is mare immediately referable tu a Bingli: inili- 
, IB very eummon in inoit languages ; and a. due attention to thii idiom will 
to teconcile mBtiy apparent diacrejiaiicies in the New Tustntnetil. Compare, 
ilance. Malt. yiii. -'S with Mark ». 1, Luke viii. 26; Matt, xiv, 17, Mark vi. 
vith Juho vi. 8, 9 ; Matt. xv. 1 b with Mark vii. 17 j Malt. xuv. 1 with Mark 
. t Malt xxvi. 8 with John xii. 4 j Matt, ixvii. 44 with Luke xxiii. 39 ; Mall. 
4S, Markxv.SG, with John xix. 29; IJuhii t. 9 with John v. 34, 36.< The 
idiom occurs in Matt. ii. 20, nSni'iii ^a; «' Z^tTiiyrit ». r. X., where Herod 
1 tni'BDt ; thoi>t>h there may be a refi^rence to Eiud. iv. 19, wbete the pUual is 
riy employed. See also Malt. ix. 6, xaiv. 20, itlaik i. 2, John tri. 45, Acts 
D, el nlibi. 
|0i(. 9. Some writeTN' have imagined that the plural somelinies indicates u high 
e aftxcellmct, slier the manner of the Hebrew. The examples iiuoled in il- 
" ix. 3, 2Cor.xii.l,7, Heb. vii. 6, i>!.23, JamBBii.1. In all 
« pauages, liowever, with the excvptian perhaps of Htb. ii. 2.'!, there is no 
luppose that the writers intended to expreas themselves olhtrwisB Ihan iu 
a Reneral way j nor does it appear that the Hebrew usage in question is ever em- 
jiloyed without a reference to the name of Guil.* 

5. An adjective often stands as a, predicate in the neitt. sing. 
when the subject is masc. or Jem., or in the piura/. So, in 
listin, Cic. Otf. i. 4, Commune omnium ammanlium corijaitclio- 
nis appelilus. See also Vii'g. ^n. iv. 5G9, Ov, Amor. i. 9. 4, 
Stat. Thch. ii. 399.* 

Ola. lU. In like manner, liSi. and ^n^t. are used with subjects of uU gemlers ; as 
ill John viii. 54, ii, l-yi. l^^Z. ifiiari,, i iii«. ^u lAii. xtt,,. 1 Cut. vii. 19, n «;,. 

<«/..iI:c»r,.iI/. .;^.. 'SualsoW, asinGftl. iii. 19,W.ff. ; ^/ut; of Khiit en M« 
II He lav f vi. 3, i. yi; U^ur.i utm n, ^kSIi «•, 'iiUTit fi;».7£T>. Plato liaa the 
■uine furm in ApoL Sucr. in file : Im h*iti tI Jrsi, ti„Tit Smi, x- 1. X. Thu mascu- 
line i« also used in the same import ; as in Acts v. 36, iXytit iiyni tivh Wt», when.'. 
liowevur. leveral munviscripts and editions add piy; as iu Acta liii. 9. Hot the 
iweived text is purallul with Ei^ictet.Biich. 18, m> ii|i]i rin i<hu T/caTvriTnun-f.' 
OU. II. When Ihe demanstrativo pronoun is the subject, ii usually takes the 
gender of the predicate; as in 1 John v. S, xZrr, yi^ itTa ii iyiri Tti ar». Seu 
mUo vv. 4, 9, 14. Sometimes, however, it is in the neuter ) as in 1 Pet. ii. 19, nun 
yk( X't''' ^'"^ '" ^'"^ I'lutal ; as iu 1 Cor, vi. 11, tuvtk' thk in, far tw^u.' 

' For a similar usai^e in 

* In Ihuse parallitl pan 
Kvangelist la tbe individi 
mrtiei coucemed therein. 

■ Glnss. Phil. Sac. T. 1. p. 59. Haab's Heb. Gi 

* Winrr, u&i mt/m ; Gcsenii Lehrgeb. } 171. 1. 
' Wiiwr,i47. I. Alt, J 3J. 3 and 74. -i. Ast ad Plat. Polit. p. 4 13. IVel 

Kypke, and Klairet un Mult, vi- 34. ZumL'i's Luf. Gr. i ;il>d. 
L * WBIstelii and Kypke .m Acia v. 36, and G,.I. ii. b. 

Zumpt's Lat. Gr. { 694. _ 
' prominent part, which is attributed by onj 
ited it, is by anuthcr divided among all tliij 

1. { 49. 


Obt, 12. Precisely similar ii the iise of r« «•«»•« in the plural in 1 Cor.xr.3, 

If a «i • Biit rm ireirra tv irm^tf. Col. iii. 11, »XXtl vm irmvrm Mtu Uwmi "K^trrif, St 
Lucian de Diit Syriis^ T. ii. p. 892, xtu •* ^eitrm. Kt/A^^s n^^ dnmbabitwataliOmf 
to him, 

6. Personal pronouns arc more frequently made the subjects 
of verbs in the New Testament than in the Greek writers gen^ 
rally. For instance, in Mark xiii. 9, /SXeVsts Se vix^'is litynk. 

Rom. viii. 1, hpeiXofjLBv Se iptsiV ol ivvaroi x. r. X. Eph. V. 32, to 
IxvtyTTnpiOv tovto i^eyx e<rrlv' eyd Se Xeya x. t. X. For the most 
part, however, an emphasis or distinction is. marked by the 
pronoun, particularly when it follows its verb. Thus in Matt 
V. 48, e-yg^rSg o?v ufAzis r&KsXoi, &<r7rep o Trarrip v/jlcuv riXeiofkru 

Mark vi. 37, Sore avtois vfjiBis (pxyeTv. So Luke xvii. 8, John vn. 
36. See also Mark xiii. 23, Luke xxiii. 40, John i. 31, 1 Job 
iv. 19. 

Obt, 13. There are a few instances where, in the same sentence, the proooim ii 
omitted with one verb, and inserted with another ; as in Luke x. 23, fuutm^m u i^ 

titTv A vfAiis (iXi^trt, xeci ov» ti^ov xat axovfett & axevtri, xu) 9V* ^x«v«». In thisinstuet 
the pronoun bears a distinctive emphasis in the second clause, which is not so do* 
ceruible in 2 Cor. xi. 29, rit a^Bml, xa) thx at^^tw ; rig ^Kav^aJJZt^tUy ««i MX i)« 

Obi. 14. Where a pronoun would more regularly be employed, it frequently hap* 
pens that the noun itself, or the name of a person, is repeated, or his official desig- 
nation substituted. A remarkable instance of this usa^e is when Christ, instead of 
speaking of himself in the first person, emphatically calls himself Me Son of iSa; 
as in Matt. x. 23, eifAfit yd^ Xiyu vfiutf oh (An riXicfiTt rets 9reXus fou ^la-fiecnX, tatg it fAdt 
vlos rev av^^eu^ev. See also Luke ix. 26, xii. 8. Other examples are Mark ix. 41. 
iv rtp ivofAart (aou, ort Xptffrou Ifri* John vi. 40, ?ya vZg o B^tct^tjv Ttv vIoVf xeii srtrnsan 
US etvrev, ^xv ^'>>^* aiaviovj xa) lyai x. r. X. An intensity of expression, such as thfse 
passages seem to indicate, is not however always observable under similar circom* 
stances. There is no apparent cause for the repetition of the noun in Mark ix.40, 
Luke iii. 19, John x. 41. See also Mark i. 34, x. 46, xiii. 15, John xi. 22, ICor. 
i. 21, 2 Cor. iii. 7, Eph. iv. 16. A demonstrative pronoun accompanies the re- 
peated noun in Matt. iii. 24, car fieia-iXtU i<p' iavrh /cei^tVSs}, eu ^uvareu rr«Siiv» f 
fietvtXiia ixtlvn. It is in order to repeat the very words of the report which had 
reached the Pharisees, that Jesus is twice designated in John iv. 1, a^ sit tytm '» 
xv^tof on Uxovorav ol ia^t«ra7ot, ort ^Ivcrovs vktmag fAu^fireis ifottt *ai fia^vi^tt n 'iMtrW; 
X, T. X. With the Hebrews this mode of repeating the noun, instead of employing 
the pronoun, is particularly prevalent, and hence, in all probability, its frequent 
usage in the sacred writings, though it w not without example in the best Chreek 
writers. See Thucyd. vi. 105. Xen. Ephes. ii. 13. i^sch. Prom. 312. PW. 
Euthyphr. p. 31. Ed. Stalb. Altogether different are the passages in which there 
is an opposition or distinction ; as in Mark ii. 27, to o-ufifietrov W tov &9BpeMtoi Xyifi^ 
ovx AvS-^wres ^id rl cdfiBecrov, Rom. v. 12, ii* Uog dvB^uirov fi et/Aetpriae, ilg rof xitf^ 
lianXh, xui }tu riii afiot^rias o Beifecres^ 

1 Winer, § 22. 2. ^Alt, J 35, 7. Raphel. ad John x. 41. 


7. The noniin. is sometimes to be derived from a verb, which 
indicates a definite act or occvpation; as in 1 Cor. xv. 52, <TaX- 
ma^i yaq, sciL ffaXmy^ or ffoX'ffiyxriif. In citations also, the sub- 
ject nomin.y being well known, is constantly omitted; as in 
2 Cor. vi. 2, xlygi yiq, scil, o ©gor. Gal. iii. 16, ov \iyBi, sciL i 
ypafri. Heb. vii. 17, iJLocprvpBtyoiq, sciL to Trvsiffxa, viii. 5, "O/^a 
ydq, (pn<ri, scil, 6 ©eof. Compare 1 Tim. v. 18. The 3rd pers, 
plur. is also frequently used without a nominative, where h^poj- 
iroi may be supplied. For examples see Matt. i. 22, v. 1 1, vii. 
IG, Mark x. 13, Luke vi. 38, xii. 20, 48, xvi. 4, 9, John xv. 6, 
XX. 2, Eev. xi. 9. So in Latin, CatuU. iii. 9, Qui nunc it per 
iter tenebrosum Illic, unde negant redire quemquam, A passive 
form may be given to all these passages ; as, it shall be called, 
for men shall call ; and so on. 

Obg, 15. The frequent use of ku) iyinro at the hej^inuing of a sentence is imper- 
Bonal, hut derived from Ihe Hebrew. Other verbs are also sometimes used im per- 
sonally ; as in Matt. vii. 7, aWiirty xa) ^o^ritnrat vfuv' x^ovvrt, xai kfotynftreu vfuf» 

Oba. 16. In 1 John v. 16 the nominative to Wti is 6t«;, to be supplied from thj 
context;' and in Acts ii. 4, fAta rSv yXuffg-av must be understood before UdBifft* 

Obi, 17. In general and indefinite expressions the verb is often found without a 
nomiH; where rts may be supplied. Thus in John vii. 51, ^W itifits vfiuv x^int rov 
avB^aiTtff iuf fi^ uxtvci^ tta^* avreu ir^ort^of », r, X, unless one hears f &c. ; viii. 44, 
•rav XaX"^ ro ^pivias, If any of you speaks falsely ; 2 Cor. x. 10, eu fih WiffroXa)^ (pvnr), 
fia^tTtct xu) lff'^v^ec)f says home one ; Heb. X. 38, say i/toffriiy.inratf scil, rts, 

8. Nothing is more frequent in the New Testament than the 
omission of the verb substantive with adjectives and substantives, 
when the connexion between the subject and predicate renders 
the omission sufficiently apparent. Thus in Luke i. 45, ptaxa- 
^/a 71 'TTi^jr^va-aa-a^ scil, hri. Heb. V. 13, irais o i/.srB%cov yxKaxrof 
aTTsipos (l(TT») \6you ii}iaiO(r6yn^, 

Obs. 18. This omission is particularly frequent when the adjective is followed by 
a relative in the succeeding member of the sentence ; as in Rom. iv. 8, ftaxi^tos etfno% 
£ ov fin Xoyi^irreu Kv^tof afiufiriuv, James i. 12, fiaxd^tof oivfifj Sg v^ofAini ^ti^otSfMv, 
Compare Matt. V. 3, 6,sqq., Rom. xiv. 22. Also with the interrogative pronoun 
rU» Mark v. 9, ri ^oi c*ofia ; Luke iv. 36, rts i Xiyos •Ztot' So Matt, xxvii. 4, John 
xxi. 21, Acts X. 21, Rom. iii. 1, viii. 27, 1 Cor. v. 12, 2 Cor. vi« 14. To the same 
head may be referred the formula ri on in Markxi. 16, Acts v. 4. We have at full 
rt yiyonv ort in John xiv. 2. Likwise t^) fails with a verbal ; as in Mark ii. 22, 
Luke v. 33, oivov niov tig aaxohs xecivov; (sknTtof* 

Obs, 19. W^here a substantive, or its equivalent, is the predicate, the same usage 
prevails. Thus Rom. x. 4, riXog vo/aov {\ffri) X^iffres, 2 Cur. iii. 11, tl yu,^ to x«7«^- 
yovfitvov (?y) ^la, ^o^figf toXXm fiiZkXov to /aivov (IffTt) iv ^0^)}. See also Rom. xi. 11, 12, 
15, 16, £ph. iv. 4. 

» Winer, § 49. Alt, § 48. 3. Wolf ad Demosth. Leptin. p. 288. Wyttenbach 
ad Plutarch. Mor. T. ii. p. 105. 


Obt. 20. Tlie first and second persoiu are never omitted, ezeept where the pro- 
nouns lytt or rv render mistake impossible; as in John xiv.'ll, t^ Iv T^««r^,i«i 
iTtfrif^ SvS/m/. lieb. Y. 6, e-v hptvg tig riv tcitivet. Compare Mark xii. 26, andseeaboie, 
} 2S. Obs» 7. There is, however, a remarkable exception in the case of the tend 
person in Rev. zv. 4, trt ^vh o^tad «ri7. f7 ri/. (yompare Plat. Gorg. p. 487, D. Vej 
rare also are omissions of the third person plural. Winer's example from BA, 
Y. 12 is not in point ; for after a neuter plural the verb would have been in tlM8» 
gular. lu Luke ix. 28, wf is understood with the words m^ sf/ti^^MMw, vhkk 
form a parenthesis : for they can scarcely be construed with lywTs, Seebeiowf 
69. II. 3. Ob*. 2. More frequently, but still rarely, the imperative is wanting. T!im 
Rom. xii. 9, n aiyaxn mfmx^trsf, tcii, iwri. The ellipsis is repeated through sereol 
verses. See also Matt. xxi. 9, Luke i. 23. 

9. When other verbs are omitted, they are either to be re- 
peated, and sometimes with the subject also^ from a preceding 
sentence, or they will be readily suggested by the context 
The following are examples : Matt. xxvi. 5, Mark xiv. 2, lAh 

rri lo^Tri, scil, rovro yeveo'^M, Acts ix. 6, 6 Se K^u^ior vpos sdn% 
sciL eJwev, as in the preceding verse. Bom. ix. 16, apx m w 

rov SeXovTos- x. t. X. (Toyro £tt/.) 2 Cor. i. 6, grre S'Xi/So/xg&a, ^^ 
T^f ^ptoJv coJTnploLS (&X*/3o/xs&a). Cph. V. 24, wairsq yi IxxXW* 
vvoroiadhraLi ru X^iorw, oSra; a.\ yvyxTxBs rois ay^pat<riv (juvor%am' 
&ft/ffav). 2 Tim. i. 5, ^rir evaJxro-iv ev rri fxdiJifJLri aou, Tri^BiaiJMilit 

8t» xdxi Iv <To\ (evoixgy . To ihesc may be added Matt, xxiii. 25, 
xxvi. 5, Mark xiv. 29, Luke vii. 43, John ix. 3, xv. 4, Eom. 
ix. 32, xiv. 23, ICor.xi. 1, 2 Cor. ii. 10, v. 13, vii. 12, IJohn 
ii. 19, Rev. xix. 10.^ 

06«. 21. It has been thought that the sense requires the particular word, which 
is inclosed in brackets, to be supplied in the following passages. Acts x. 15, f«fff 
fraXiy Ik ^tvri^su ^^eg avrh (Xty;/). Rom. iv. 9, • fitaMt^iff/Aos i^ri 9-^y irMiri^if* i <*< 
rny ax^efivcTiaf (jri^ni) j I Cor. vi. 13, tx ^^a^fActra Tri xoiXif xa} n jcatXiet TMg finifum 
(r^oanKu), In the first case, however, \he ellipsis may be supplied by iyivtrot and in the 
two latter by Wri. Some would repeat yivu^Kofitv before the second Utm in 1 John iii> 
20. Thin particle, however, is in like manner doubled in Eph. ii. 1 ]^ 12; where it 
equally encumbers the sense : so that in both places its insertion is probably oving 
to the inattention of the writer, or the interpolation of a copyist. There is also a 
similar exuberance of the Latin ui in Cic. Kpist. Att. v. 3, Tantum tc oro, ut, qtn- 
niam meipsum semper amastiy ut eodem amcre sis. The repetition of ysvti^jttfitt, in 
the passage under consideration, would be fully as superfluous as the particle itself 

10. Instead of the nomin,, the prep, elf with an accus. is oc- 
casionally used for the predicate in the New Testament, after 
sTvai or ylveff^oti, in citations from the Old Testament, or expres- 
sions adopted from the Hebrew. Thus Matt. xix. 5, Mark 
X. 7, 1 Cor, vi. 16, Eph. v. 31, hojrcn ol ^vo eU (rxqxx [ji^isiv, i. c, 

* Winir in Append. } 66. 1; 2» 


cst^^ iaIoc (from Gen. ii. 24). Matt. xxi. 42, oiros lyev^j&t) eU 
xB(pd\riv ymias (from Ps. cxviii. 22). So also with Xoy/^Eff&ai in 
Bom. iv. 3, 22, IXoytV&T) auru els S/xaio<rvviov (from Gen. xv. 6). 
Compare Rom. ix. 8, 1 Cor. xv. 45, Heb. viii. 10, I Pet. ii. 7 : 
and, for similar forms in the Hebrew and LXX, Gen. ii. 7, 
viii. 20, xii. 2, xvii. 8, xxiv. 67, Deut. xxviii. 13, Ps.xciv. 22, 
Jercm. xxxi. 33, 1 Mace. i. 4, '33, 35. 

Ohs. 22. Although the above may be Hel raisins properly so called, this mode of 
explanation must be carefully confined within its proper limits. There are many 
passages in which the phrase flmi, or yiu^BaSf %1i rt is strictly Greek, either in the 
sense of to become something ^ i« e., to undergo a change, or to serve some futrpose. As 
an instance nf the former ssuse, in Acts v. 36, yUtv^at %U ovTiv is to become a nui* 
lityt to fait; and there is a precisely similar phrase, %}s ri fAviSiv ^»U9, in Eur. Hec 
622, Other examples are John xvi. 20, Rev. viii. 11. The latter sense is foimd 
in Rom. i. 15, ivvufiis etev Iffrt* us ^um^iav. So also 1 Cor. iv. 3, et alibi; and, in 
like manner, ^sop. Fab. xxiv. 2, tU fAul^ovei ^m ti^ikuav tvfiMt, In the same way 
Xuke ii. 34, 0^70; xt7rm i/V ^rocffn nit) etva^rao'tfj is to be explained ; and the verb 
Xeyi^t^Bat is SO constructed in Xen. Gyr. iii. 1. 33, %^ii^«r« 1/; a^yv^uv XeywBitra.^ 
In the later writers, indeed, anl tl.e Scholiasts particular!}', Xttfifiuvitv and 2i;^(#S«m 
are constructed with i/V and an accusative ; and the later Roman authors adopted a 
similar phraseology. Thus Tacit. Ann. vi. 13, Silentium ipsius in superbiam acci- 
piebatur.* The construction of esse with a dative, in such forms as avxtlio esse, 
honori esse, more appropriately affixes the import of the New Testament idiom. 
Matt. X. 41, Acts vii. 53, have been classed under the same head; but they are 
plainly irrelevant. See below, ^47.2. Obs, 5. The verb Xoyi^iv^eu is followed by 
tlti with a nommative in Rom. viii. 36, iXcyttr^r.fAiv it it^ifiara ff<pctyns» 

Obs, 23. Another construction which has been supi>osed to supply the place of 
the predicate after Cimi or yiyuffBai, is that of the preposition iv with a dative, to 
which the sense of the Hebrew ^ {Beth essentits) has been attributed.^ The pas- 
sages adduced in support of this opinion are Mark v. 25, ywn ng eu^m Iv fvnt alfiecrtS' 
John IX. 30, Iv rovry B^avfjMtrrev lirri* £ph. V. 9, x»^^ot r«v ^Srog Iv Teiffif ayoBf 
^vv^^Uri), I Tim. ii. 14, ywn AirartiBiTira U ^a^u^MU yiytvi. Rev. L 10, lytvSfAm iv 
9-vtvfAart, Now, with the exception of iv rovrt^, which may be rendered simply herein, 
or in this Yespect, all these examples obviously imply the being in a certain state or 
condition; and to say that iv ^a^u^fti, for instance, is equivalent to iroftifiecfis^ ig 
manifestly absurd. In proof that a construction, analogous to that of the ^ essen- 
titcy exists in Greek or Latin writers, the expressions \v ^o^oTs tTvxi and in magnis viris 
haberi have been cited from Euripides and Cicero ; which evidently mean to belong 
to the. number of. In order to meet the case, iv ffo^Z would have been used as equi- 
valent to fi^os. Compare Exod. xxxii. 22, Ps. Ixviii. 5, Hos. xiii. 9, in the Hebrew. 
As little can the force of the Hebrew ^ be imputed to the preposition U in Matt. 
Y> 37, ro ^i^tftrov ix rev ^rovn^ou iffrtv. It is not here meant to say that ro ^i^ifvov is 
evil in the abstract, but that it springs firom an evil principle, or the Evil One,* 

» Winer, ^ 29. 2. Obs, 1. Gesen. Lex. Heb. in v. ^TT- 

« Alt, Gram. N. T. J 25. Note 5. 

3 Gesen. Lehrb. J 228. Glass. Phil. Sacr. T. i. p. 31. Schleusner, Lex. in v. iv, 
Haab's Heb.-Gr. Gram. N. T. p. 337. 
* Winer, § 47. 3. Obs. 


§ ^.— Of the Vocative. 

In the New Testament tlic Vocative is used in simple ad- 
dresses (Matt. XV. 28, Mark xv. 18, Acts xi. 7, xxi. 20, xm 
11, XXV. 2G) ; in interrogations (Rom. ix. 20, James ii.20); 
and in exclamations (Matt. xvij. 17, Luke zxiv. 25, Bom.xL 
33) : and sometimes with, sometimes without S. 

Obt, 1. Frequently the nomin. is used for the vocal., as in Mark ix. 25, n^ 
ri uXuXtft Xytt ^«t Wiriw^m, Luke Tiii. 54, h ^ms, iyti^sy. So Mark t. 41, Eph.TlL 
Nt»r does this happen only in the authoritative addivss of superiors to inferion; M 
alxo in prayers and exclamations. Thus Matt. zi. 26, v«}, • vmrn^, Sri •U-mt !}«» 
tViiKiet ifAir^w^U fou, xxvii. 29, x«r(>i, «/3«0^iXivf. See also Mark z. 47, xr. 34,Iidb 
xii. 20, xviii. 11, 13, Ileb. i. 8, and compare Ps. xviii. 29, xxii. 1, LXX. 

Obs, 2. With the vocat, a characteristic or explanatory apposition is often adU 
in the nomin. ; as in Matt. i. 20, 'I«#vi^, vils Am^t. Mark xiv. 36, Koou m 1^ 
Gal. iv. 6, *A^^t rart^, Rom. ii. 1, Z £i>S^«Mri iris i x^ittv. Rev. xt. 3, xri,/, 

§ 39.— Object— Oblique Cases. (Buttm. § 130.) 

The insertion of the personal pronouns in the oblique cases 
is much more frequent than in classical Greek. Thus in 
Matt. vi. 17, cv Se vvi'jTiucoy SXei-vJ/at aov ttjv X6(patXr}v, xai to Tp 
acuJTTov aov vi'-J/ai. xix. 20, TrivTJt T^tUrat e(pv\si^aijj,nv ek veoTTiTos ikw, 
Mark x. 10, xa* hxyKoXiaxfAByos avra, ti^bU ras yXipous W avri, 
nvKfyyli avTi, Luke X. 35, lyu ev Ta> eTraviqx^^^oti fjLs diroSo!f(TU (nu 
John ii. 21, ouk eiriarBusv eauroy avroT^, Sia to avrov yi}fei<ncBiy sraywf. 

Compare. Gen. xvi. 3, xxi. 3, John xxiii. 2, xxiv. 1, Nehem. 
ix. 34, 1 Mace. i. G. 

06«. 1. On the other hand, the pronoun is sometimes, though rarely, omitted 
where its insertion might have been expected ; as in Mark vi. 5, ixiyon mff»**T»i 
\xi6uf vets X'^P^fi Ut^KTiuffiy *cit, ahrovi, £ph. V. 11, fAn ^wyftotvgtnTTg tms ifyts rn 
ffMTiust |UaXX«y 5i xoti iXiy;^»Ti, soil, ett/rei, 1 Tim. i. 12, ^t^vit ft,t hyurJiv; Bifuus 
(«c. ifAi) lit liaxofieiv, vi. 2, •! It ^ivrovt ix»^ts hmragy fin xaTtt^^tturinn, teil, 
ecvrcvg. Add Matt, xxvii. 2, Luke xii. 36, John xx. 22, Acts xiii. 3, 42, 2 Thess. iii. 
15, 2 Tim. ii. 11. In Matt. xxi. 7, the true reading is i^txa^tatv, and consequently 
it has been improperly placed under this head ; and in I Cur. x. 9, IWi^mm docit 
not refer to r»v X^i^rev, but signifies, in an absolute sense, they fried the (Hvine por 
itence. There is an anomaly in Eph. iii. 18, where xurris, i. e., riis Jiyawni rtiS 9ui, 
must be supplied from the preceding clause.' 

Obs, 2. Sometimes there is apparent negligence in the repetition of the same pro- 
noun with reference to different persons ; as in Mark viii. 22, ^i^sv^tv avrf (X^irrf) 
rtfipkivf »») tret^aitaXou^if aifrov, hec uvreu (rt/^Xtft;) ayptirut, 

» Winer, § 29, 1. Alt, § 25. 1. Georjr. Hierocr. i. 3. IJ. 
« Winer, § 22. 1, 4, 6. Alt, § 37. 2, 38. 1, 


§ 40. — Accusative. (Buttm. § 131.) 

1. Little need be said of the Accusative as far as regards its 
more appropriate use in designating the object, to which the 
action of a verb more immediately refers ; but many verbs 
which are not strictly transitive, and therefore in other lan- 
guages do not take an accusative, are followed by that case in 
Greek. The rules of government admit, indeed, of consider- 
able variety of construction; so that frequently it is almost a 
matter of indifference which of two or more forms is adopted, 
and it will always require a considerable degree of practice be- 
fore the nice distinctions, which regulate any particular expres- 
sion, will be duly appreciated. If, however, one class of verbs 
takes sometimes an accusative, and sometimes a genitive with 
or without a preposition ; and another class is found either 
with a dative or accusative, or a double accusative ; there is 
the same analogy to be met with in other languages, and in the 
English among the rest. We say, for instance, and with little 
or no variety of meaning, to taste a thing, and to taste of a 
thing ; to wrap one in a cloak, and to wrap a cloak about one ; 
but to hear a person^ and to hear of a person, are different. The 
use of prepositions, by which the different shades of significa- 
tion are rendered more distinct, will, however, be observed to 
be more frequent in the New Testament and the later writers, 
than in the more approved models of ancient Greece. 

Obs. I. Among those verbs with which, though in other languages, as the Latin 
for instance, they are followed by other cases, the Greeks employ iha ciccusative, are, 

1. vril^uv, to persuade: Matt, xxvii. 20, iwi/fl-ay rovs Sx^^vs, 'tvet alrnff^vrai rn 
Bet^ufilieiv* Acts xiii. 43, ictuBov uvrous Wtfcivuf TJf xa^trt rw Qtov. xviii. 4, 
%^u^% re ^Uuhttuvf Ku) "Ey^Xwxs* This verb is also construed with two accu- 
satives. See § 40. 6. Obs. 15. 

2. ife^amTv, to exhort ; Acts xxvii. 22, ^u^aivS vfjMs ih^vfAuv, This verb takes 
a dative of the person in ^sch. Dial. ii. 13. Here too belongs, perhaps, 

3. fiaffKamtv, to bewitch, i. e., to seduce; which has an accusative in Gal. iii. 1, 
rii vfjMs \^»ffxxn» It takes a dative in Philost. Epist. 13. 

4. ufi^i^ut, to insu//j or maltreat : Luke xii. 45, ^i^oiffjibtXu Tewru Xiyetf xut hfJMs 
vfi^i^uf. Acts xiv. 5, vfi^Uai »eti ki^ofiektig'eti ithrovs* Add Heb. X. 20, ro X¥tvfit,» 
TVS x«f'^'»» ivvp>piffus> This compound is followed in ^lian V. H. ix. 8, by a 
dative; and in Joseph. Ant. i. 4, by an accus, with i/V. The form vpt^iiut tig 
ri¥u does not occur in the New Testament ; but there is, what is precisely 
similar, in Mark iii. 29, Luke xii. 10, fixaf^nfuTv its ra 9tnufuc, ro &yiev. Else- 
where this verb takes a simple accusative ; as in Matt, xxvii. 39, i^Xetf^nfAwv 
avriv. So in Luke xxiii. 39, Acts xix. 37, Rev. xiii. 6, and elsewhere. Of 
Xoi'ie^ttv rtvetf and ovsthi^tiv rtvet, see § 45. 4. Obs, 5. 

5. i^iKiTv, to act injuriously: Matt. xx. 13, iTar|»ti ovx uhKu fft. Actsvii.26^27^ 


tyuri u^l»^^'r^ iXXnkavs ; o ^i uitttiiv rif xXn^iof »• t, X» Hev. vi« 6^ t» iXoMt m! 
r0y dtvev fjtn aitKntvit, See also § 40. 5. Obt, 9. 

6. i^i\{tv^ to benefit : Heb. iv. 2, «^» «^iXfiny • xiyts vns &Ketis ixufovs* Of the 
construction with a dative, and with two accusatives, nee §§ 45. 5. 06«.6.aiMl 
tf6t supra, 

7. fikeiirrnvf to injure : Mark xvi. 18, av ftn avrtvs fiXeiypu.^ 

2. It frequently happens that the action expressed by a verb 
has no immediate reference to the object which is put in the 
accusative^ and which is only so far aflFected thereby as the 
sense would be imperfect without it. Tlie following instances 
occur in the New Testament : — 

1. TT^offxt/vsTv Tiva. Luke xxiv. 52, itpoan.v^yioa'rTzs avroy. 

Add John iv. 22, 24, Rev. ix. 20. Much more fre- 
quently, however, this verb is joined with the dative. 
See § 45. 6. Both constructions are united in John iv. 
23. We have also yovt/^rereiv riva, in Mark i. 40, x. 17. 
Some manuscripts, however, read avr^ in both places. 
On the same principle hrpiTrea^ai, to reverence, which has 
a genitive in classical Greek, has an accusative in Malt, 
xxi. 37, evTpa7rri<jo\7ai tov vlov fxov. See also Heb. xii. 9. 

2. (p&aveiv, to anticipate ^ as in 1 Thess. iv, 15, ov m^ ^hi- 

(TcufAsv Tois xoijLcyj&gvTaf. 

3. Xav&avstv, to escajje notice ; as in Acts xxvi. 26, Xay^imi 
yaq aviov Ti rovruy ou W6i&o/w,ai o^Sev. 2 Pet. iii. 5, Xav- 
&ave« yaq olvtous rovro SeXovTotr. Sec also V. 8. 

4. emXElTreiv, to fail ; as in Heb. xi. 32, l^rtXe/xJ/si yiq ixc 
^ iriyoifjL£\ov o y^povos. So IsocT. ad Demon. § 5, evikliioi 
V av TiiAas ira.s ypovof. Compare Jerem. xxxiii. 17, 


5. Verbs of seeing ; as in Matt. ii. 2, B'lSofXBv avrov roy 
dtjripa. xviii. 10, oi iyy^Koi avrcjv ^"KsTTOvai to tt^o (Toj'jrov tov 
TTocrpis fjLov, Luke xxiii. 49, o^uaai ravrx. The emphatic 
accusative with elf or irpos^ which indicates peculiar at- 
tention, regard, or expectation, is found in John xiii. 22, 
i^XsTTOv ovv eh aXXiQXoi/s" ol fxacdrtroLtf dwopoufxevoi irzol rlvos 
Xeyg/. Acts i. 10, arevi^ovTes- s\s tov oi;§av6v. iii. 4, drEyiaas 
th avTov eJirs, BX6\|/ov els' ^ptar. It may be mentioned that 
the verb aTgv/^e/v is also constructed with a dative in 

Luke iv. 20, ttocvtcov gI oip&aXpioJ riCTocv arf vt'^ovTes" ocvTcb. We 

have in Lucian, De Merc, ConcL p. 455, irpos to 'jrqoaw 

» Winer, § 32. 1 . 
* Wttsteiu and Kypkc ad Heb. xi. 32. 


'Tto^ drsvll^eivy which is similar in form, though it does not 
bear the proverbial import of the expression jSXEVeiv eU 
TrpoaofTTov, in Matt. xxii. 16, Mark xii. 14. An accusative 
is also used after /SXe'weiv, when it signifies menial msiov, ' 
or consideration, as in 1 Cor. i. 26, fi\i7rBrs ttJv )cX^<t4v 
vfjLuv. Also in the sense, to be heedful, or cautious re- 
specting anything ; as in Mark xiii. 9, /SXeVere S^ vixois 
eavrovf. Phil. iii. 2, jSXe^gTg rous hvvols, ^bttbts rovs 
xaxovs l^yaras, fi'kiir^r^ t^v xaraTo/xaiv. In the same sense 
(fvXdffa^ffiai takes an accusative in Acts xxi. 25, (puXda- 
(T6(T&(Zi avTovs TO elSwXo&f Tov. 2 Tim. iv. 15, Sv xaJ ci 
(fv\i(j(rov. So in Xen. Mem. ii. 14, Diod. Sic. xx. 26, 
Lucian, Asin. 4. Both verbs are elsewhere followed by 
dTTo with a genitive. Thus in Mark viii. 15, q^oltb, /8Xe- 

W6T6 i^o rrts ^iiJ.ns rm ^ocpiffaiajv. xii. 38, /SXeVets a^o to/v 
ypa^jLixarictiy, Luke xii. 15, opare xal ^t/Xafjffed&e a^o T^f 

wXeove^/as. Compare Xen. Cyrop. ii. 3. 9. 

6. (peuysiVf and d7ro(pevyBtv, to flee from ; 1 Cor. vi. 18, 
(psvysre t^v Troqvslav. 1 Tim. vi. 11, ravra ^eyye. 2 Tim. 
ii. 22, Tar veajTspiKoif BnAuixias ^eDye. 2 Pet. ii. 20, 
d7ro(pvy6vref ri lAiicixxra. rov xo^/xot/. Also with a^o and 
a genitive ; as in Matt. iii. 7, ^fyelV aVo r^if /w,eXXojy(T7}f 
opyvis, Markxvi. 8, ^(fuyoy dmo toD ^yni^ziov, 1 Cor. x. 14, 
(peiysTE a^o rris BlSajKoXarpslaf. 2 Pet. i. 4, dTro^puyovTES 

rr,s (p^opois (where the genitive depends upon the com- 
pound verb). 

7. After oiAvieiv, the person or thing, which is sworn by, is 
put in the accusative in James v. 12, pt^ ofAviisre, fxriTs 
rov ovpavov, jjir^re rr^v yriv, /jiinrs aXXov Tivot opxov. So in 
Isai. Ixv. 16, LXX, Isocr. ad Demon. § 12, Diod. Sic. 
i. 29, Joseph, Ant. v. 1. 1. Hence Acts xix. 13, o/jx/^o; 
vfjLoi^ rov 'lojjoyv. See § 40, 6. Obs. 15. The more com- 
mon form, however, is ofMwsiv ev rivt, or bU rtya, as in 
Matt. V. 35, sqq., pt'i hixoaoLi oKur f^rirs h rS ouqaycjf, fjLiorB 
EV rri y^, (jlt^tb b\s ' IspoaoXufjiac, x. t. X. Add Matt, xxiii. 
16, sqq. xxvi. 74, Mark xiv. 7, Rev. x. 6 ; and compare 
Jerem. v. 2, 7, Ps. Ixii. 10, LXX. Another form, otxyvBiy 
ytocrd riyos, is found in Heb. vi. 13, 16. So 1 Sam. xxviii. 
16, Isai. xlv. 23, Ixii. 8, Amos. vi. 8, Zeph, i. 5, LXX. 
These forms are extremely rare even in the later Greek 


writers, and in the New Testament they arc doubtless 
of Hebrew origin. 
8. With evaefieXy there is an accusative of the person in 

Acts xvii. 23, Sv oJv dyyouyrEs £l;<r£j3cTT£, nrovroy lyw nctrvt 

yiWdo vfjuv. Compare Xen. Hell. i. /• 10. 

Obt, 2. Of Itt^tfittv rtva tho New Testament does not furninh an example. la 
Zeph. iii. 11, LXX, it is followed by uf with an accusative ; and the same constIu^ 
tioa is used with u/tm^cintf in Matt, xviii. 15, Uv )i &fiim^^^ glf 0% i ahxpif m 
M, T, X, So also in Luke xv. 18, 21, xviL 3, 4. Compare 1 Sam. six. 4, Jercm. 
xxxvii. 17, LXX.^ 

3. Many verbs which designate an affection or emotion of 
the mind, such as shame, fear^ compassion^ take an accusatife 
of the exciting cause of such emotion : as in Matt. ix. 27,}Oov r,/xois, vU Aa/S/S. xxi. 26, ^o/Sov/xe&a tov oj^Kov. Add 

Matt. xvii. 15, Mark viii. 38, x. 47, Luke ix. 26, Rom. i. 16, ix. 
15, xi. 32, xiii. 3, 2 Tim. i. 8. 

Obs, 3. The verb 0'«'X«7;^y<^t0-d«i, which is not used by any profane writer, 
belongs to the same class ; but, instead of an accusative, it is foUowed by a genitiw, 
by ivi with a dative or an accusative, and by iti^i with a genitive. Kxamples an 
Matt. ix. 36, l0-frX«7x'«'^^i «'«?' ««t*»». xiv. 14, WvXmyx^^^^n !«•' tuHrsvg, xviii. 27, 
0'9'A«>%M0'Sci; ^i xv^ttf TOV iiuXou Ixuvv, ^rtXi/rfy ttiniv, Mark vi. 34, SrvAc^j^vlrdf 
W ecvToTs. Another form i^ found in Test. xii. Patr. p. 642. rsrA.«>%fii^tf3ci 

Obs, 4. Probably the combined notion of fear and flight may hare g^ven rise to 
the double construction of ^efiti^^t in Matt. X. 28, ^^ ^ef^ti^St a^i trih avottruntrm 
ro vufiM* (po^n^nn Ti fieikkot rov ivveifAifov x, r. X. So in Luke xii. 4. That with in 
seems to be an Hebraism ; which is preserved by the LXX, in Levit. xxvi. 2, Jerem. 
i. 8, 17, X. 2. The Greeks said ^o(it7^Bai rm or ii'ri rttog. We find, however, pi^ 
»X6 rms in Xen. Cyrop. iii. 3. 58, vi. 3. 27.' 

Obs, 5. It happens sometimes, but rarely, in the Tew Testament, that neater 
verbs are followed by an accuiiative of the exciting object ; as in Luke vii. 9, 
iSatZ/tUM'fy ethriu John V. 28, fin havfiat^tri rovro, Rom. xvi. 19, ^»tpt* 4-0 1^* vfAtt. Gal* 
iv. 19, TtKvietfiov, avs ifi^n dihivot. The constructions mentioned under § 47. Obs. 11. are 
far more usual. In like manner the middle verb xovrtir^eu, to bewaii, is followed by 
an accusative in Luke viii. 52, ^xXatov Tt cravrtst xeu \xi<rrorr» mvTnv* See also Luke 
xxiii. 27. It is otherwise in Rev. i. 7, xo-^^wtki lit* airn vratrat »i fvXmi rtis yns* xviii. 
9, xXavfofreit avrhvi ftct) xoy^evrat «x avr^ oi ^etvtXils rvs yns* Thus we say in 
English, to lament or bewaii a person^ and to lament over him, 

4. Many verbs, both transitive and intransitive, take a noun 
of kindred meaning in the accusative, so that the verb seems to 

» Winer, § 32,1. Alt," § 30. Spanheim ad Arist. Plut. 129. Wetstein ad 
Acts xvii. 23. Schsefer ad Long. Past. p. 353. 
« Winer, J 32, 1. Alt, $ 30. b. 



stand in the place of some general term, which requires the 
object to be particularised. . Thus Matt. ii. 10, Ex^p^ntrxv 
X«/>av /^6yaXt)v, they experienced great joy ; xxvi. 10, eqyov xaXov 
s*tpyd(7ocvro, ihey have performed a good work; Mark iii. 28, 
j8Xa<T^ioptiat, oaas av /SXad^pnQo-^o-iv, the blasphemies, which they 
utter ; iv. 41, Luke ii. 9, £(po/Si9&t}crav ^o/3ov ptsVav, they felt great 
fear ; John v. 32, ^ iA»prvpi», riv lAo^rvpeX, the testimony which 
he bears ; vii. 24, t^v Sixa/«v xqia-ty xqivare, deliver a just judg^ 
ment ; 1 Tim. vi. 12, ofiAoKvyrio-xs t^v xaX^y o/xoXoy/av, thou hast 
made a good confession; Heb. viii. 10, ^ lia^mfi, h Sia&^croptai, 
the covenant, which I will ratify. Similar examples are Luke 
viii. 5, Eph. i. 19, 1 Tim. i. 18, 2 Tim. iv. 7, Rev. xvi. 9. 

Obs. 6. There is some little differeuce, in as much as ^>MMi is not used in the 
abttractt but the concrete sense, in Luke ii. 8, ^vXerrtfyrf; ^uXenuis rns fumrog, keeping 
/he nighify waichet, not keeping watch. Compare Xen. Anab. ii. 6. 10. 

Obt, 7. It will be remarked that an adjective, or some defining term, which 
might be rendered adverbially, is indicated by the .substantive ; as, for instance, 
thejf rejoiced greatly , they feared exceedingly, and the like ; for the substantive is 
sometimes put with the cognate verb in the dative ^ with an adverbial import, as in 
the dative of the manner (^ 47, 2. Obt* 3.) ; so as to express with greater emphasis 
the action indicated by the verb. Thus in Matt. xiii. 14, u»»^ ^«mri. Luke zxii. 
15, WtBvfAitf littBvfAn^ec John iii. 29, x'^f X'^k"' ^^^ ^^- ^7, aVi/A^ »TiiXn^ti/u^tt, 
V. 28, ^u^AYyiXiif 9fa^nyyiiy.aiJii%¥m ZXiii. 14, tivct^ifnart dva^%fAtiriffap,%f, James V. 17, 
fl'^ivx? ^(M^t^ar^. A word of the same meaning, but of a different root, is added 
in Matt.' XV. 4, Mark vii. 10, d«y«r^ rtXturartf, (Compare Gen. ii. 17, Exod. xxi« 
15, 17, LXX.) The same mode of expression frequenUy occurs in the LXX, 
where the original Hebrew has the infinitive absolute. See Gen. xxxi. 30, 1 Sam. 
xii. 25, xiv. 39, Isai. vi. 9, Ixvi. 10, Jerem. xlvi. 5, Lam. i. 8. Hence some have 
regarded it as altogether an Hebraism.^ It is however strictly classical.' Thus 
Soph. (£d«T. 65, t^if iutm. (Ed. C. 1625, Plat. Symp. p. 195, ^%»yu ^vyj. 
uElian. V. H. viii. 15, fi»w UUfi^t} An emphasis is produced by means of a 
preposition in Eph. iv. 16, ^m ^ra^ns *^«^vx^f *** ^in^its x^t^tuxofAtfu, In its 
import the passage is, however, plainly different from the preceding examples. 

Obt, 8. There are a variety of constructions with an accusative, such as those in 
which the nature of the contest in which a victory is obtained, the toay in which 
one goes, the qvality in which one excels, &c. is put in that case, which are rarely, 
if ever, employed in the New Testament. To express these and similar meanings 
a preposition is usually adopted ; as, for example, in Rom. iii. 4, Sirif viKnv^s U rtf 
n^hw^tu 9U xvi. 19, ^Xm )i vfJMt 0»^»vs pAf tifot tlf TO mya^ivj dKi^aiovgy* its ri kumv. 
Possibly the words iiiv ^ttkns^ns in Matt. iv. 15, may be regarded as an elliptical 
form of the accusative after verbs of motion ; of which there is an example in 
1 Sam. vi. 9, LXX, oUv i^wf avrnf srt^tu^trmp Compare Exod. xiii. 18. 

^ Vorstius de Hebraismis N. T. § 32. Leusden de Heb. N. T. p. 122. See also 
Kuinoel on Luke xxii. 15. Pott on James v. 17. 

* Winer, } 32, 2, and § 58, 3. Alt, Gram. JN. T. §§ 47. 1. 82, 1. Georg. Hierocrit. 
i. p 79, and Vindic. p. 199. Ast ad Plat, Epinom. p. 586. Schsfer ad Soph, 
ii. p 213. Matt. Gr, Gr. § 408.* 


5. In Grceic, not only the immediate object of an action, but 
the remoter object also is frequently put in the accusative. 
With the verbs signifying to doy and to say, for instance, tk 
thing done, and the word spoken^ are the immediate objects; 
and the person, to whom the thing is said or done, is the more 
remote ; both of which may be in the accusative ; or the latter 
only, if the former is expressed by an adverb. Thus with 
9roi6iv signifying to do good^ or ill ; as in Matt v. 44, xaXw 
^oigrrs TQVs fjita'ovyras vtxas. Mark xiv. Tt ivifatr^s aurovs eu 

Obi, 9. According to this analogy, those verbs in which the same idea is implied, 
are construed with two accusatives, of which one is generaUy either *r} or a nofda 
adjective, to be rendered in English by more, very, not at ali^ &c. Thus in Luke ir. 
36, /ubn^y fiktiyj^tcf mhriu Acts XXV. 10, *lwh$u§»s otXiv fi^xn^a* 1 Cor. xiv. 6, ri ifis 
a»^t>.r,^t. Gal. iv. 12, tliiiv fit fihxmrt. v. 2, vfjuig m^v siftXn^-tu Philem. 18, 
tl It n nytxn^i ri, x. <r. X. As involving the adverbs, the verbs mym^twMUf and 
KttMvv take a single accusative ; as in Luke vi. 33, lav &ymB§9'»/ti^$ T^vt tiymB^nt- 
ovvraf vfiteiS' Acts vii. 19, UaxArri roug ^atri^af nfuif, 1 Pet. iii* 13^ jmm tis i fUuUtetn 
ii/iis, t«y fiv tiya^w fUfAnra) yUn^^t ', 

. Ob9» 10. The remoter object is abo put in the dative, and sometimes in the acco- 
sative with nV. Thus in Matt. vii. 12, vrirrm, »Zf hx aw B-iXnrt 7vm stouifg-tf »/uni 
cSyS^a^iTtfi, ovrtt »ai vfJbtTg itoiurt aurtTf, Mark xiv. 6, xaXif ^^y^ is^ym^ars tig t/ti. 
Luke vi. 11, 2ifXaX0i/y {T^tff ukXi^Xsvg, rl &f ^•mvuxf t^ ^lti€«lv. John zv. 21, r«vr« 
^aifT» ^otfitrovftf iifjuv ^m ri Sttfia fAw. Acts iv. 15, ri Tun^ftiv T9tg dvB-^^iirMg rtvretti 
xvi. 28. ^n^tv ^^eilrif ffieturZ xetxif. Except indeed in the two examples above cited, 
the expression iZ and xax£g xoiut are in the New Testament alwa3-8 followed by a 
dative ; and even in Matt. v. 44^ some MSS. have ro7g f^ivwrn, as in Luke vi. 27. 
Both forms occur in the LXX. Compare Gen. 'xxxii. 9, 12, Zeph. iii. 20. In 
Philem. 18, also, some MSS. read riiixn^t vou Of U, inserted Hebraice, see § 46. 2. 

Obs. 11. An accusative follows xayJig iWiif in Luke vi. 26, olas ufMiy %rm.t xm>jmg 
vfjMg tiTttft vavng oi uv^^aftroif when men speak well of you. Hence Bxa^^nfAuv rn*, 
and the like. See above, Obs, 1. 4. The verbs tlxayuf and xaxaXsytTv have in the 
New Testament a peculiar sense, but they also take an accusative; as in Matt v. 
44, tvXaytTrt ravg xa.ra^v[4.mvg vfAMS- XV. 4, e xaxaXoym ^aA^a xai futnTt^m, Bmfmrm 
rtXiurdrat, We also meet with xiytiv ma, to speak nfoT respecting any one, in John 
vi. 71, viii. 27, 54, ix. 19, 1 Cor. i. 12, et alibi. In the same way diecre is used in 
Latin. See iElian. V. H. iii. 36.^ 

Obs. 12. An accusative of the person and of the thing is also found with — 

1. Verbs signifying to ask one about any thing ; as i^atrZv rtvei rt. Matt. xxi. 24, 
i^atrwtt vfJMs xotyi* xiycv 'ii>«t. So Mark iv. 10, John XVI. 23. Sometimes itui 
riitog is used; as in Luke ix. 45, ifo^oZtra l^otrnffat alrh iri^i rov fnfiutrag rwns, 

2. Verbs signifying to request, to desire; as airuv ma rt, Mark vi. 23, • U't 
fAi ectrncrr,gf %uffu eoi. So Luke xi. 11, 1 Pet. iii. 15. The person is some- 
times put in the genitive with ^a^d. Thus Matt. xx. 20, atrovg-i rt «•«#' •»• 
rciu, James i. 5, alrttret (jro^itcv) tra^a rcu h^\rog 6i«i; sei^tf a^rXSg, Com- 

» Winer, § 32. 1, 4. a. Alt, Gram. N.T. § 29. b. Valcknaer ad Herod, vii. 144. 


pare Xen. Anab. i. 3. 16. In Matt, xviii. 19, the thing requested is put m 
the genitive; but this is by an aitractton of the relative into the case of its 
antecedent. See § 59. 1. 

3. The verb (po^ri^ttvy to ioad, takes a double accusative in Luke xi. 46, (pe^rl^trt 
roli tif^^^ous ^o^ria %vff^a,ffT»Kr»» Opposed to this form is ]the expression 
dsre(po^TtXuv ^XaTc¥ rof yofjuav, to unlade a vessel of her freight. This is closely 
analogous to d^ai^ti^Bai nvd rt, to take any thing from one; but in the New 
Testament d^eu^ilv^m is followed by dxo with a, genitive, or by a genitive of 
the person which is governed by an accusative of the thing. Thus Matt. 
XXvi. 51. Mark xiv. 47, dfiiXtv avreHi ro urUv. Luke i. 25, a^tXc?* ra 0yt<^; 
fjtovm Luke xvit 3, h xu^iis (mv d(pat^%7Tau rtiv elxevofiiav air* ifMU. 

4. Two accusatives follow hld^xuvf to teach, in John xiv. 26, ixuus vfiZ; liialu 
vMrn* It takes, however, a genitive with ^i^t in 1 John ii. 27, ^iheuffxn liiia% 
irc^i rdvToiv. We find a dative of the person in Rev. ii. 14, Ma^xtv t£ 
BaXax, where another reading is U rf B»xdx, Were this reading correct, 
I^alak would be represented as the means through whom the instruction was 
communicated ; and so the manner of instruction is expressed in Col. iii. 16, 
fy fTAtf-fi ffi^ia hld^xovTif laurevs* Winer has a reference to 2 Chron. xvii. 9, 
which is rendered in the LXX lillaaxtv h ^lovhet. The preposition here mani- 
festly denotes place, at least in the Greek version ; as in Matt. iv. 23. tthdaxuv 
ly rails fvvayvyeui. The simple dative is perhaps an Hebraism. Compare Job 
xxi. 22. See § 47. 1. Obs. 2. 

5. With verbs signifying to put on, and to put off, as ivW«/, Ixlvffui, ^t^tlUxXttv. 
Matt, xxvii. 31, Mark XV. 17, 20, i^iivcetv uurcf rh* ^XetfAvhci, xa) Wthuffotv aurov 
ra ifidria ecvTov, Luke xxili. \l, ^t^tfidXatv ai/rev iffB^nret XafA^r^dv. So John 
xix. 2. That which is put on is expressed by a dative with iv in £ph. vi. 
14, 15, tti^i^oKTeifAivoi Ttiv ig'(pv» vfjujf h ikn^iie^, xa) vitt!i»iffeifii¥Oi roug ^oietf cy 
iTOifMiff/a rod tvxyyiXUv, See also Rev. iii. 5, iv. 4. The simple dative is 
used, as frequently in classical authors, in Rev. xvii. 4, n ywh n itt^ifitfiXfifAivfi 
Tof^v^et xa) xoxftUtf} 

6. Those verbs, which in the passive take a double nominative, as to call or 
name, to mahe, to choose, to appoint, take in the active a second accusative of 
a substantive or adjective, which expresses some quality of the object pre- 
dicated by the verb. Matt. iii. 3, tv^uag Ttoiun rag v^l^ovg avrou. xix. 4, 
upctv xa) BfiXv itatfiffiv avreug* 17, ri fjt,i kiyug dya^iv ; xxi. 13, vfiii; St avrov 
l^m^an ffx^Xatov Xr,ffrm. So Mark xii. 37, Luke vi. 13, 14, John vi. 15, 
XV. 15, Acts XX. 28, Heb. i. 2, I John i. 10, 

Obs. 13. Sometimes these verbs employ the infinitive uvat to connect the object 
with the predicate j as in Matt. xvi. 13, rtva /ii xiyovfftv oi avB^u^'ot uvau In like 
manner, au infinitive, as XafstTv, tx^**y &^* i^ redundant with verbs o( asking, and 
giving. Thus Acts iii. 3, rjoara iXitfAocrvvtit XafitTv. vii. 46, ^r^fccro tu^itr ffxnvMf*-a 
rZ etf *\etxt!t^, So donat habere in Virg. M\\. v. 262. Winer refers to this head 
James v. 10, It^ro^uyfAa Xd^in rtiug a^tfroXoug, which is evidently an apposition. 
See ^ 28. 

Obs, 14. The preposition tig is sometimes prefixed to the predicate accusative ; 
as in Acts vii. 21, «yf^^l^/'0Br« ahrh iavr^ tig vtiv, xiii. 22, tyit^iv ai/roTg rev Aa(i)^ iig 
^atrtXia. 47, ri^tixd fft ug (pug iSvA/y. This construction is derived, as in the similar 
substitution for the nominative (§ 37. 10), from the Hebrew ; and it is constantly 
retained in the LXX. See Gen. xliti. 18, 1 Sam. xv. 11, 2 Kings iv. 1, Isai. xlix. 
9, Judith v. 11. Those examples are altogether distinct, which have been pro- 

• Winer, § 32, 4, a. Alt, Gr.Gr. N. T. J 30, c. 


daeed as parallel from Greek writert $ as» for inttanee, from Heiod. i. 34, vnm 

rtt^t x^i«iHr«i u$ ^ixifMu Compare Eiirip. Troad. 1207; and, in the New To- 
tament, Phil. iv. 16, th rnv xAumt fjut Mfi-^Pmru See also § 46. 5.(^I>at* earn,); ud 
of Acts ?ii. 53, see } 47. 2. Obt. 5.^ 

Obi, 15. In classical Greek the verbs x^wrrm and AflrMt^Mrrs^v are followed either by 
two accusatives f or by a nmp/e aecutoHve of the person ; but in tha New Testament 
the person is put with i^i in the genitive. Thns ' Matt. xL 25, Luke x. 21, 
i^tx^v^at rmvrtc ««"« ^^^v *m evftrSt, Compare lAike zviii. 34^ xix. 42, John nl 
36, Col. i. 26 ; and Dent. vii. 20, LXX. It frequently happens indeed, both m 
the sacred and profane writers, that verbs are found 'with two aeeosatives, althoagh 
another construction may be equally or more common. To some which have bees 
abready noticed, the following^ from the New Testament may be added : — 

1. avmfAtfivnffxitu See § 42, 3. 1. 

2. Uavivv, to qualify : 2 Cor. iii. 6, Sg mm ixiweif n/trnt ^ttutivtvt xtunis )mc3«s«> 
Otherwise in Col. i. 12, tv^m^iertZtrts vf ir»r^ «^ /jMSMSr^m npuisuirv 

3. 0(x/^m, to conjure; Mark v. 7, i^xt^t nr«f Oio. So Acts xix. 13, I The& 
V. 27 ; and Gen. 'xxiv. 3, LXX. Bnt in Matt. zxvi. 63, Vie^mi^ n xmn ri 
^fv TOV ^UtTes* We have in Acts iii. 25, LXX, i^xiZttv iv rf Buf, Compare 
1 Kings ii. 42, 2 Kings xi. 4 ; Xen. Symp. iv. 10. See also Obu 2. 7. 

4. ^uBin, to persuade^ scil. by teaching : Acts xxviii. 23, ^uB^n athvavt rk rt«< em 
*\wv. Hence ^u^iir^xi r/, as in Heb. vi. 9, ^truefitBrn wt^) vftih r« x^rrm. 
For another construction, see Oba. 1.1. 

5. fTtfri^i/y, to give drink : Matt. x. 42, Mark ix. 41, Sf ym^ £9 irerie^ y/uks 9trr 
^m u^arasf x, r. X. 1 Cor. iii. 2, y«Xa vftMs Wirteet. But in Rev. xiv. 8, U 
rov omv rov Btlfitv ^iiririxt irafr» ISwf. Elsewhere with the accusative of tbe 
person only, as in Matt. xxv. 35, xxvii. 48. The same construction is used 
with y^atfAit^uf, which has two accusatives in Numb. zi. 4, Deut. viii. 16, 
LXX. Compare also Rom. xii. 20, 1 Cor. xiii. 3. 

6. xC'^'^f Heb. i. 9, t^^tei rt Btos tkattf xyeiXkuinaff, Rev. iii. 18, x»XX»i(ui 
tyx^tfv fovs l(p^x'kfiovs eov. With a dative in Acts x. 38, ?x^«rsv altrif 6t*; 
TvtvfAurt kyiM xat ^vfetfiit. So Mark vi. 1 3, iSXu^n iXxiijt iroXX^hg ^mmttm^.' 

7. A very common construction is the employment of the accusative as an 
adverb ; of which one of the most frequent instances is that o€<ru9rm in the 
neuter plural, in a/l thingt, in every respect : Acts xz. 35, irdvTM iiri^t^x ufuh 
oTt X. r» X. 1 Cor. ix. 25, 9roif ^i i ayatfit^o/etvf ^eivrx iyxfrnrtvi^eu. Phil. iii. 8, 
ra 9r«,>ra V^rtfAtu^nv* So vivra, r^e^ov, Sv r^aTtVy and the like ; Matt, zxiii. 37, 
Sf r^ivrov Wtevveiyu c^vtg ret voerelu txuvni uxo rat vrri^uytis* Add Acts i. II) 
Jude 11. So Gen. xxvi. 29, Exod. ii. 24, LXX. 

Obs, 16. Sometimes xara is supplied ; as in Acts xv. II, xaB^ Sv T^o^n xixuHh 
scil. levBriffaf, Rom. iii. 1, r/ cZi re ^rt^tecrev tw *Iov}ai»Vf {T^Xv, xutu vrdrra TMrth 
2 Thess. ii. 3, fiitit)s vfiZs i^wrxr^ffif xaru /iniivx r^e^ov. Possibly therefore xmea 
may generally be considered as tmderstood in these cases, of which r2 and •»%?, 
in any thingi in nothing, are also examples. Thus 2 Cor. vii. 14, it rt mMrii ivit 
ufjM9 xtxttuxnfiictf 9u xarfi^vvBfiv, Gal. iv. I, ovliv h»(pi^tt ^§v>^Um 

Obs. 1 7. We have also in the New Testament the following among other in- 
stances of this adverbial usage, including definitions of time, number, distance, &c- 
Matt. XX. 2, rtiv hfM^etv, by the day, daily ; I^uke ix. 14, xaraxXUart. amhs xXteUf, 
in rows ; xxii. 41, utriorvrdffSfi k'jr ewrm iiffii XtBev /SdX^y, distant about a stones thrw; 
John vi. 10, riv a^iBfiav t/ci) ^ivraxtff^^lXm. viii. 25, rh »^h on xett XecXS v/av, what 

» Winer, J 32, 4. b. « Winer, J 32. 4. a. 


I told you at firtt ; Acts z. 3, 1^*1) *^ay Indrfi* rns itfu^ttt, zviii. 3, e»nnvc«t6t rnv 
'''(x**f*f ^y trade. For to yiv«s, by birth ; and Suf^a, by name ; the dative is used in 
Acts zviii. 2, ivo/jburt ^AxuXetv, UoyrtKov r^ yivu. So also Mark vii. 26, Acts iv. 36. 
It should be observed however that in the New Testament and the later writers 
these notions were more usually ezpressed by means of the prepositions futrei, U, or 

§ 4\.— Genitive. (Buttm. § 132.) 

1. The relation or connexion indicated by the Genitive 
branches out into a variety of particulars, and frequently re- 
quires to be expressed in English either by some preposition^ 
or such other circumlocution as the nature of the context may 
suggest. In the New Testament and the later writers gene- 
rally, though it follows the ordinary usage in almost all its 
bearings, yet the insertion of a 'preposition is far more common, 
with a view to render the signification distinct. 

2. The gen, is found in the New Testament, as in Attic 
Greek, with verbs which signify to free^ keep off^ desist ; as 
well as with those expressive of separation, removal, and the 
like. Thus in Mark ii. 21, a'lpsi to ^rX'npeofjLa avrov to xa/vov to!) 
TrxKxiov, Luke xiv. 4, orocy iXBraara^cu rris oinovoixlas. Acts xv. 
29, airzyjca^oLi £lSa/Xo&i/rft;v. xxvii. 43, kx.olfXva'sv aJbrovs rou ^ouXr^' 
(Aotros, 1 Tim. i. 6, wv n^ls aa-roy^'naayv^s x. t. X, ix. 3, a^ej^gff- 
9'ai ^pcofjLciTajy, xi. 5, TTccpciSiarqi^ai iie(p5tapiJLS}fcov dy^pcuTTcoy rov 
voyv, xat aTTscTTg^yj/xgWv ttjs- aXyj&e/as-. 1 Pet. iv. 1, o ttoc^uv Iv 
a-aqicl TTSTTaurai afAaprlocf. So also with an infin, and gen. of 
the article; as in Luke iv. 42, xxr^ty^oy avroy rov y^ri vopeustj^at, 
Rom. XV. 22, Ivexo^rToptiiv roij iX&eTv Ttpo^ vyiOLs, Compare Luke 
xxiv. 16, Acts X. 47, xx. 27. 

Obs,\. The whole of this class of verbs, however, are far more commonly fol- 
lowed in the New Testament by a genitive governed by ix or «W. Take the fol- 
lowing examples from Matt. vi. 13, fluff m fifiZf ato rov irovn^ou, ix. 16, a7^tt to 9rX^- 
pafAot avTou uito roui/jMrtov, Mark vii. 6, fi xae^lee. auTMf itop^ot itixu d^*'ifiov. So Luke 
vii. 6, xii. 58, xiii. 15, Acts i. 4, ii. 40, v. 2, 3, x?. 20. Again, Acts xviii. 1, x'^^*^' 
BtU f» rm 'ASuvA/y. xix. 16, ix^uyttv U rou olxou. See also Rom. vii. 24, 1 Cor. x. 
14, 2 Tim. iv. 17, Tit. ii. 14, Heb. v. 7, 1 Pet. i. 18, Pet. iii. 10, Rev. xiv. 13. Add 
Matt.i. 21, Lukei. 74, xi. 4, xxiv. 13, Acts xviii. 2, Rom. v. 9, viii. 2, 21, 35, 
1 Cor. vii. 10, 27, Heb. vii. 26, James v. 20, 2 Pet. ii. 9, Rev. xx. 7. To this 
head may be added the expressions hovut uto rms (Acts xvi. 33, Rev. i. 5), and 
xa^u^i^uv KTo rms (2 Cor. vii. 1).* Compare Tobit iii. 14, Diod. Sic. i. 24, Appian. 
Syr. .59. In James v. 4, o fttff^os o uTiffri^niAhos a^ vfjcm, the recompence fraudu- 
lentty withheld by you, does not belong here. 

1 Winer, & 32, 6, Alt, Gr. N. T. § 30. 2. Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 366. 

> Winer, 9 30, 6. Alt, ^§ 27, 2 and 67, jS. Bornemann ad Xeu. A nab. p. 56. 


3. All kinds of partitive? are, from their very nature, fol- 
lowed hy the genitive ; and most of the cases which occur in 
other writers are found repeatedly in the New Testament. 
Thus with such adjectives as Sx/yoi, sroXXoI, yifjuiavs, &c., when 
the substantive is considered as the whole, and the adjective 
as a part: — Matt. iii. TfVoKKous tmv ^apitrala/v hlolI 2aSSoi/Ww. 
XV. 37, TO TTspia-ffcuov TftJv xXsLfffAoirajy. Luke xix. 8, ri rnJil(m t»i 
vjroiqXoyTcoy f^ou, Heb. xi. 21, t3 ax^ov ttj*- pdfiSou* With tu, as 
in Matt, xxvii. 47, river ruv gxerijr^Tcyy. Luke xiv. 15, nsrii 


Obs, 2. Hence the superlative is followed in the New Testament, as in classid 
Greek, by the genitive phiral of the substantive to which it belongs. Thus bl 
Cor. xv. 9, • tXflcxitf'rtf; rejy i^o9ro\i*f. Another construct iooy however, with it and 
a dative, occurs in Matt. ii. 6, cited from Micah v. 2, mm r^, BifJ^Ait/t, yn *I«v3«i w* 
^eifiuJg tka^iff'rfi u tv roTg hyifjtoffn *l§via. Somewhat akin to this exception from the 
usual form, is the similar use of the positive^ to which the addition of a nouD, indi- 
cating the class of persons or things to which it belongs, g^ves the force of a wpef' 
iative; as in Mark x. 43, fiiymg h vfuvt Luke i. 28, tv\»yt^Un rv U yv9tul^v,blemi 
among women, i. e. mont biessed of women. This has been reg^arded, and perhaps 
with justice, as a Hebraism, which the LXX have preserved in Cant. i. S »ja« » 
yvtitl^i. At the same time it is very similar to the Greek expressions £ a/a.* ia^ 
and the like, in which the positive is supposed to be put for the superlative;' not 
to mention that the exact form occurs in Find. Nem. iii. 138, tclvroi m*vs it ran- 
*»Ts. So in Latin, Liv. xxiii. 44, Magna inter paucos, for majcima. There are abo 
other passages, in which the positive has been thought to be put for the superlatife: 
as, for instance. Matt. v. 19, euros fiiyag Kki^Bnenratf where, /u,iyas is opposed to ixi- 
X^'fos in the preceding clause, xxii. 36, «•«« UnXn fiiyaXn iv r» vottat ; CCompare 
V. 38.) Luke ix. 48, ouras tfrect fAtyet;. X. 42, Maeia rnv ecya^r,v fAtoHet l|a£|ar«* 
1 Cur. vi. 4, rov; lle^ov^tvrifAUws h rn iKxXzffieCf rovrou; xaSt|i<rc. In these instances 
however, may be understood a great one, the great commandment, the good part the 
despised, xetr^ i^oxi^v, without having recourse to a superlative sense. 

Obs* 3. Ihe partitive use oi adverbs of time occurs in Matt, xxviii. 1, g-dt 9a&&iTin, 
at the dose of the Sabbath, 

Obs, 4. After names of places, the name of the country in which they lie is io 
the genitive; as in Matt. ii. 5, U Bn^XiifA rnt ^loutetlxt, iii. 1, U 'r^ ipnfctt rtis'lw- 
Ixiets. X. 23, 9'oXus rod 'I<r^ajjA.. Add Mark viii. 27, Luke iv. 25, Acts xiii. 13, 
xxiii. 3, xxvii. 5. 

Obs, 5, When the article occurs as a partitive pronoun in the formula • uh i Ii, 

the whole is usually put in the same case as the parts, e. g. Acts xxvii, 44, r»vs Xtr 
^ovgy ouf fiiv W) ffecuffu, ovg Sc str/ rivuv ruv et^o rov xXoiou, 

4, There are many verbs in which the idea of partition is 
contained or implied, as well as the adjective and substantive 
corresponding to such verbs, which govern the genitive. Thus 
verbs signifying to participate in any thing ; as pterf^^giv, /xera- 
Xaf/x/Sacvgiv, koivmvsTv rtvw, &c. Thus 1 Cor.x. 21, ou St/vaaS-g rfaurBlw 

» Matt. Gr. Gr. § 320. 3. Monk ad Plur. Alcest, 743. 


K^vpiou [Airiy^Btv, xcki r^a^rl^iQf Safptovia;v. 2 Tim. ii. 6, rov Komuyra. 
ysojpyov Sg? ruv xoLpTTuv fJisraXxfjifidveiv. Heb. ii. 14, iwei ovy ri 
Trouoix xsKoivmnKs (ratqKOf xaci oIimltos, xoei olvtos 'jrapatis'KvialoJs f^i- 
rea^s rcuv aifrwv, x. t. X. V. 13, ^rar 6 fAiriy^fijv yikoLKTos. vii. 13, 
^vKihi Iri^oLs pigrgV^^xsv, participated in, i. e. belonged to, an- 
other tribe. Add 1 Cor. ix. 10, Heb. v. 13, xii. 10. Of ad- 
jectives or substantives there are examples in 1 Cor. x. 16, 18, 

xofva;via rot; alfjLarof rov X^f^roD, Kotveovol rov ^uo'iaarnqiov, Heb. 
iii. 1, Kk-na-eouf eTrovqavlov ixiraypi. Add Heb. iv. 14, xii. 8, 
1 Pet. V. i. 

Oht, 6. In Acts xxiv. 25, fttrakafifidfuv is followed by an accu8ati?e, but in a 
sense which scarcely belongs to this head ; and the same phrase, fiuraXetfiuf xtufn^ 
to take an opportunity, is also found in Polyb. ii. 16. There is one instance in which 
fttri^in is constructed with the preposition Ix in 1 Cor. x. 17, U rtiS Uif &^tw fitri' 
X*f**' Once also »oiwn7v is followed by us with an accusative expressive of the 
object, in Phil. iv. 15, «v^tfAi» (mi txicXtiftet ixotvaivn^iv us kiye» ^a^uts »»* kv^tts* 
The more usual construction of this verb, however, is with the dative; as in Rom. 
Xy* 27, Si yk^ tils xnufAotTiXtiiS etifrSv ixMitmnfav ret iSvi}, ». r. A.* I Tim. V. 22, finSi 
»oiwHt KfAO^rtxis akkor^Ieusj i> e. fttiTiv xoiviv X^ra 9«i xtu reus aXA.iiX«y etfiet^rleus^ So 
also Phil. iv. 15, I Pet. iv. 13, 2 John ii. With the dative of the person the verb 
occurs in Rom. xii. 13, Gal. iv. 15. Compare Polyb. ii. 32. 8, ^lian, V. H. iii. 17, 
Herodian, iii. 10. 15. 

Obt, 7. Throughout the New Testament fMretit^iwi occurs only with the accusa- 
tive^ expressed or understood ; as in Luke iii. 11, « tx*tv }v« x*'*'^*'^ff f^^ret^iri rf ft,n 
t^wrt, Rom. i. 11, ?ya rt fttretH/ ^d^i^fiM ifiTv wtv/Mtrixev, 1 Thess. ii. 8, tuUxeSfttw 
fMret^veci vfuv eh fievet re tvxyyiXtef red Steu, akket xett rets ietvriiv ^v;^ets* So also 
Test. xii. Patr. cS fixev^art, /uir«Wf xett vfitiis rets rixvets vfuiv. See also the LXX in 
Job xxxi. 17, Wisd. vii. 13, 2 Mace. viii. 13. Other verbs of a similar import are 
followed by a genitive with it^e or \x, where an ellipsis of fii^es is manifest from 
Luke xxiv. 42, el }li Wihttxav etvr^ f;^Sv0f e^reZ fiti^est *^ ^*^ fittktf^ieu xu^ieu. So 
John xxi. 10, iviyxetrt ««*•' reiv eypet^ie**. Acts ii. 17, tx^tS are red wtvfietres fiteu, 
1 John iv. 13, Ix reu tntufietres etvrev iihexif hfiuvJ'^ 

Obt, 8. Sometimes tJvat and ylyvi^^xt govern a genitive in a partitive sense, im- 
plying to belong to $ as in Matt. vi. 13, vev 10-r/y h fiet^tku'et. Luke xx. 33, rives etCrSp 
ytnreu yvni ; Compare Rom. xiv. 8, 2 Tim. ii. 19. Thus also in Heb. x. 39, hfAus 
eSx Wfitv vTe^rekns^ we are not a portion of the drawing back, i. e. we do not belong to, 
we are not partakers with, those who draw back. xii. 1 1, Taf» *etituet ou hxu;^etfas 
tlveti, »kka kv^ns, i. e. partakes of, is attended with, sorrow. Again, in 1 Cor. i. 12, 
iii. 4, iyee ftU u[u Uavkevy x, r. X., 1 am the follower or disciple of Paul, The prep, 
ix is, however, more usually employed, when belonging to a sect or party is signified ; 
as in Matt, xxvii. 73, kkn^Zs vv f| mvrZif it. Compare Luke xxii. 58, John vi. 64, 
vlii. 23, xviii. 17^ 25, Col. iv. 9, et alibi. There is one instance, in which the gen, 
is accompanied by tr^esj where the expression signifies to be of advantage to. It oc- 
curs in Acts XXviii. 34, revre yet^ 9r^es rns vfttri^ets ^etrn^tets v^ei^u, 

Obs, 9. The gen. is also used with other verbs, when the reference is to a part 
only ; as in Acts xxvii. 36, T^e^ikm^vre r^efmi they took some nourishmentt 

* Winer, § 30, 5. • Winer, ubi supra, 



5. Of verbs signifying to enjoy ^ Wadai is followed by a geni- 
tive in Philem. 20> iyi cov omlt^r^y, may I find comfort in thee, 

Obs, 10. The verbs which denote etUimg and drinking, W^iuv, itimvf p^yut, Ac, 
take either a genitive or an accusative in the best Greek writers^^ but in the New 
Testament these verbs are more commonly fdUowed by a genitive with Asti or is.' 
Thus Matt. XV. 27, Mark vii. 28, r« xwA^tat UBiu ««r« rSiv y^tx,^m9, John iv. 13, wis 
i 9rntf \» rw Slmrtt rwrov, vi. 26, l^ytn rm i^ran* 1 Cor. xi. 28^ ttrmt U rm 
ikfTw *ur^&^a», »m) l» rdu ^tm^iw 9rnirm, Rev. ii. 17, "Ut^tt avr^ payCv £«*• rw fuoHU 
Griesbach, however, considers the words ^»yu¥ »iri, in this last example^ as ajgion; 
in which case it will belong to Obt, 9. Sometimes the verbs under consideratioB 
are found with an accusative ; as in Matt. xv. 2, 7r«y i^§f SrSfwriv. xxri. 17, fmyw 

fnrtt ». r. X. Add Matt. xii. 4, Mark i. 6, iii. 20, vii. 2, John vi. 58> I Cor. xi. 20, 
Rev. X. 10 ; and compare Diog. Laert. vi. 2. 6. There may be this difference be- 
tween the two forms, that irS/fiv n signifies to take food as an adequate means of 
nourishment, and W^/uv rn»s or W^iut Hk rtvt, to eat a portion ttf any thing. In fike 
manner we say, in English, to tat meat, to drink water ; and also to eat of tkitj it 
ta$te of that. 

Obt. 11. The construction of yivur^m seems to have been indifierently with the 
genitive or the accusative. Thus we have the figurative expression y$utr^^mdrm 
(Matt. xvi. 28, Mark ix. 1, John viii. 52, Heb. ii. 9) ; and hence TertulL c Ifu- 
don, iii. 149, Debitte mortis gtatavit. John ii. 9, m % lytv^wr* i A^x,*T^iM,XaH « 
tUt^ «Ty«v ytyt99if*iff. Compare Diod. Sic. i. 89, ^lian« V. H. i. 8. In Heb.Ti. 
45, both constructions occur in the very same sentence. 

6. The person or thing, from which any thing proceeds^ is fre- 
quently put in the genitive ; particularly, for instance, after 
verbs signifying to hear, to get information ; as in Acts i. 4, th 
kvayyeXiay^ ^v riKouaari (jlov. In the New Testament, however, 
this is more generally expressed by Trapa, Ix, or dTro. Thus in 
Matt. ii. 4, kirvv^ivsro map aurwv, *nov o X^uror yEVva^rai. Luke 
xxii. 7\, auroi yip mova-ocfAsv dvo rov (rro/xaTos* aurov. John xii. 
34, TifAsi^ mova'afAsv ix rod vo/xot;. 

Obst 12. In the same manner, ttftu and yiyvt^Bat, implying birth or origin^ aie fol* 
lowed in the New Testament by ix with a genitive ; as in Matt. i. 20, ytwpnSh U 
mtvfutres uyiw. John vii. 44, vfitTg tx vevr^it rev ^ta^Xev Ifri, Rom. i« 3, «v» ym- 
fiifov i» ^iri^fMtTos A«/3il. Gal. iv. 4, ytvo/Atvav Ix yvvatMg. Add Matt. xxi. 25, hdki 
ii. 4, John i. 47, iv. 22, vii. 52, xiii. 44, 1 Cor. zL 8, 1 John iv. 5, 6, 7, et oHbi* 

Obt. 13. The same usage also prevails in expressing the material of which say 
thing is made; as in Matt, xzvii. 29, John xix. 2, m^avn 1^ «»«9S«v9. Rev.xxi. 
21, itfk i7f i»affr»f rSv ^vXtivu* ^f 1^ Ivig fjM^yet^irtv, When, however, the authtr or 
caute of any thing is intended, the simple genitive is employed. Thus in 2 Cor. si. 

^ See Monk ad Eur. Alcest. 855. Mitchell ad Arist. Acharo. 134. 

* Winer excepts from this rule Heb. xiii. 10, ix0/(«(» Sv^uwrii^iov t| §v fMyuf ».r.A. 
Since, however, Bv^iaa^r^^uv, which is here used for the tacramentai table, with espe- 
cial reference to the sacred elements of bread and wine, the passage may readily be 
explained upon the same principles. 



26^ xuhf9$ts irtTttfiSf iuti Xif^rSf, dangert occationed by river 9 and robbers; (and so 
Heliod. ii. 4. 65, MviuvM S«A«^m.) Eph. iv. 18, ni^ii tw Btw, the Hfe which God 
givet ; I Tim i?. 1, $iW««>.i«if itu/iwim, doctrines suggested by devils. Also, though 
less frequently, when the 'genitive is to he taken passively ; as in Matt. zzv. 34, 
tbkoynfiifot rcv^ar^if. John vi. 45, ^thekKToirov 6f«p. Compare 1 Cor. ii. 13. Many 
good manuscripts read in 2 Pet. ii. 14, xtt^ita ytyufbvMfbUw *Xtdinltets (yulgo «rXi«- 
yi^W). Compare Philostr. Her. ii. 15, iii. 1, x. 1. The preposition y«r« is in- 
serted in 1 Thess. i. 4, nya^nfcivo* wro euu. So also in Acts x. 41, et alibi,^ 

Obs. 14. A somewhat similar idiom seems to ohtain in the expression /3«raiv 
ShtT§t, to dip into water, which occurs in Luke xvi. 24. As an example of the same 
kind Wetstein cites from Aratus, ^^rm etxitim:^ We find in Exod. xii. 22, LXX, 
/Satrrf/y ««*• ta? a1fiutr«s, to dip into, i. e., to stain with, blood. Compare Lev. xiv. 16. 
Here also may be referred Acts ix. 1, ifAtrtutv k^iixns »«) ^ivw^ where the genitive 
indicates the origin of the passion, which affected the breath. So Heliod. ^th. i. 2, 

Obs, 15. With respect to the analogous practice of expressing gva/t/tVf of persons 
or things by the gen, of substantives, which receive the sense of adjectives, the follow- 
ing are instances : — Luke xvi. 8, rev aUov§fMv rns alixiat, the unjust steward; Rom. i. 
26, 9'eiBn arifttmg, for artfita, Eph. i. 13, 14, r^ ^nvfMtri rns i*ayyiX.tas, tig axtkv' 
T^t^n Tnr 9r%^tvrom^wt, i. e., rif S«rfi^^iA.^iyy and fri^itrtf/uSf ?«'«». iv. 29, «r^«f tltUUftoif 
vns X(*i»Sy useful edijlcation. Add Acts ii. 19, urfAilm »»*vou, smoky vapour (Hos. 
xiii. 3, LXX, itrpas tutTwitni)* ix. 15, r»f?«r Ixkoynsf for licXtxrif, Rom. i. 4, tuZ/mm 
&yuiffwnt, Eph. ii. 2, rdls vU7s rnt ««ruSf/«;. I Pet. i. 14, rixvA v*»x»nt. The prin- 
cipal, not the quali/gingt noun is placed in the genitive in Rom. vi. 4, h xeutimrt {/uns* 
Gal. iii. 14, r^y tTttyytkiecv r»u ^rnufutret, i. e., vntvpM i^nyyt^-fAut/t, , 2 Thess. ii. 11, 
ht^ytiav ^Xsivvtt strong delusion, 1 Tim. vi. 17, M ^^vrtv Aln^irnn, A pronoun 
is sometimes added, which, though it relates to the entire idea included in both 
nouns, stands after that in the genitive; and, if an adjective, agrees with it in num- 
ber and gender. Thus in Acts v. 20, {r«yr« ra pnfJMra Tns T^omt raurnf. xiii. 26, • 
Xeyt riif mrn^iag ravrng, Rom. vii. 24,^r«v^«r«; «*•? ^avtirou r*urw, i. e., ^ctfMtrH 
vUreu ^avetrfi^o^w, Heb. i. 3, rf pvfiKTs vnt ivva/Mttg •vroZ, by his powerful word. 
Rev. xiii. 3, h irktiyn rtu Savarw avrw, its mortal wound. So Judith ix. 10, LXX, 
Ix x^tkittp a^irns psv. When the governing noun has the force of the adjective, the 
idbm is rather to be regarded as an Hebraism ; as in Luke i. 48, rn* raurthian rns 
SctfXnf, for ^JXny ratrtiimv. In Rom. vi. 6, ri ^Zfjut r?f ufm^rimf might perhaps be 
rendered the sinful body, or the body in which sin exists ; but the metaphor seems to 
indicate that Sin is represented, as it were, with a body, and that body nailed to 
the cross. It is clear that those passages cannot be referred to this head, in which 
one of the nouns is not qualified by the other, but exhibits some particular charac- 
teristic of it, as in Col. ii. 5, /3>.i«r«y ri ^rt^ut/net rns ut X^t^riv ^riffrufg vfiuHv, looking, 
not to your strong faith, but to the steadfastness qfyour faith. The sense would, in 
like manner, be inadequately conveyed by an adjective in 2 Cor. iv. 7, ha fi u^t^fieXh 
rns iu}m/AMtf ^ r»v 6f«t;, xa) /lii i| vfuif. Gal. ii. 14, eux i^^eitrou^s vr^ig rnf aXn^tm* 
r§v tvayytkiw, Eph. iv. 17, (Muxin vpig vr%^t*etruv Sy fjMrxtirnrt rau vcog eturSv, 1 Pet. 
1. 2, IxXixroTg |y Stytm^f/^ irftv/jMT»g, Again in 1 Cor. x. 16, to ^rwn^Mv rng tvkoyiag 
is not the blessed cup, but the cup of blessing (so called) ; in Eph. v. 2, Phil. iv. 18, 
•0ft,it liitJlietg, which is rendered in the English Testament a sweei'smelling savour^ is 
rather, perhaps, an odour arising from sweet incense, in allusion to the Levitical 
sacrifices (Exod. xxix. 18, Levit. i. 9, 13, ii.2, iii. 5, LXX, et alibi) ; and in Heb. 

» Winer, } 30. 2, 4. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 26. 2, 4. 
* Wetstein on Luke xvi. 24. See also Matt. Gr. Gr. i 375. Obs, 2. 



ix. 2, n vr^iiwts rUf Si^rm should probably be translated the 9eiiing on af bread; 
though it may also be convertible with the a^rt r«; ir^^Struvf , thew-hread, of the 
Evangelists (Matt. xii. 4, Mark ii. 26, Luke vi. 4).^ 


1. Words which express ideas of relation take the object of 
that relation in the genitive ; and the rule, with certain excep- 
tions^ is observed by the writers of the New Testament. To 
this class belong, 

1. Verbal adjectives whether used in an active or passive 
sense ; as in James i. 13, d^reipadTo^ xaxo/y. 2 Pet. ii. 14, 

2. Words which represent an action or affection of the 
mind ; as, for instance, adjectives denoting experience f 
ignorance, lust, zeal^ &c. Thus Acts xxi. 21, ^loXah-aj 
Toy vofjLov. xxvi. 3, yvdfO'T'ny €&a/v xal §9}r»)ptaT«i;v. 1 Cor. 
X. 6, iwAuiAviris xaKU'v, Heb. V. 13, ivetpos \oyou Sixtfio- 

2. Words which indicate fulness or want take a genitive 
expressive of that whereof anything is full or empty ; as, 

1 . Adjectives. Matt, xxiii. 28, /xe^roi vTroxqia-sofs^ xai dvo- 
txi(Ks. Luke V. 12, TrXr^pris Xiirpas. John i. 14, ^X'ipus 

yjipiTos xaJ aXTj&ctas-. Acts ix. 36, rnXvipfis dyoc^Siy b^wv mil 
sX£infjLo<7uvojv. Rom. xv. 14, /xetyroi eare dyx^wauvns. Add 
Matt. xiv. 10, xv. 37, Mark vi. 43, viii. 19, Lukeiv. 1, 
John xix. 29, xxii. 11, Acts vi. 3, 5, 8, vii. 55, ix. 36, 
xiii. 10, Rom. i. 29, xv. 14, James iii. 8, 17, 2 Pet. ii. 
14. Sometimes, however, the relation is expressed by 
alto or ix. Thus Matt, xxvii. 24, d^u>6s elixi utto toD 
aifj^oLTOf rod ^lytalou toutou. Acts xx. 26, xa&a^oj- a5ro rov 
alfAocTof. 1 Cor. ix. 19, eXsu^epof ofv Ix Triyra/v, Also by a 
dative, as in Rom. vi. 20, eXeu^sqoi ^re rri S«xaiO(xx/yn. 

Obs. 1. Hence the names of vessels take the gen. of that wiih which they arefilM; 
as in Matt. xiv. 13, Kt^afitov vletrof, a pitcher fuil of water. Compare Jerem. xlviii. 1, 
1 Sam. X. 3, LXX. Dion. Hal. iv. 2023. Theophr. Char. 17. Diog. Laert. vi. 1. 
4, vii. 1. 3. Atheu. i. p. 177.* 

2. Verbs. Matt. xxii. 10, egrXoid&oj o ya/xor dvacxBifji,iyojy. 
Mark viii. 4, tto^sv rourovs ^vyn^STai rts rSSg %oord<Ta,i igrw 

\ Winer, § 34. 2. 'Alt, § 23 3. Hermann ad Viger, p. 890. 
* Matt. Gr. Gr. § 353. c. Winer, J 30. 2. 


BTT* ep'niA,liis ; xv. 36, yiixlaas a^royyov o^ot/r, Luke iv. 28, 
69rXii(T&^(jav irivre^ bvfAov. xi. 39, to Sg sccj^ev vfjt,ojv ysf^u 
dqwayrif xal Tcowipias, XV. 17, Tfoaoi yi^iar^iOi toD Karros fMou 
Trsqio'o'siovaty apruy, eyw Sg XifxS dTroXKvyLai ; John ll. 7, 
ystxia-arB ris viqiat SSaro^. Acts ii. 28, rnXvipdo'tis t^s 
iv(ppo(JVYns. xxvii. 38, Kop^a^iyns r^o^^r. Add Matt, 
xxvii. 36, Luke i. 15, 53, v. 26, John vii. 13, Acts v. 28, 
xiii. 52, xix. 29, Rom. iii. 14, et alibi. Again Luke 
xxii. 35, xa« crrev avroXsy^Otz avsarsika vtias arsp ^ockav 
riou xal irvipas x«« vToSinfAoircjy, [jlyi rtyos varspi^aaLre ; ol dg 
eTttov, O^Sgvw. Acts xvii. 25, ov^s ^sq»<jr£V£rai TrpodhoiMsvof 
Tivor. Rom. iii. 23, Trivrss oj/xa^rov, xal v(mpovvrai t^S" 
So'^Tjf rov ®iov. James i. 5, el H ns ufJLwv XgiVgra* (jo(piaf, 
alrslrco x. r, X. 

Obt, 2. All or most of these verbs, however, are equally followed by a genitive 
with^ Ix or uro,^ Thus in Matt, zxiii. 25, i^»fBtf yifAw^n \\ mf^myns *») ikimimf 
Luke XV. 16, WtBCfAH ytfil^m rhv xoik/w tturou m*o rSf xtfttrietf, zvi. 21, lifiB'Vfutf 
XfifTttv^nym d^'i rmt ypt^^itjv, Johu zii. 3, fi atxia iirXfi^tiSfi i» riif e^/tfis. Heb. xii* 
15, v^rt^Sv eivi rns x^V^*^ ^*^ B<«v. Rev. six. 21, ^ifra ret o^net fX0(Ta0'Si}0'«y i* 
T*^y ftt^xMf xifri/v. We have likewise, *>.n^w* and ^rt^if^ivuf with a dative in 2 Cor. 
vii. 4. So in Ecclus. xi. 12, «rr«vx(<V ^*^*^^tvu. See also Rom. i. 29. 

Obt, 3. When followed by the prepositions iv or tif, the verbs v-t^t^fiutn and v^n' 
^uf^at, have the sense of making progrest, or falling short, respectively. Thus in 
1 Cor. i. 7, fMi vfrt^l^^tu h fAtiitn ;^«^iV/»a7/. XV. 58, «ri^irriuoy<rff u vif i^y»trcv Kv^iw 
srdtrcTi. 2 Gor. ix. 8, ^vvttr»< It i Stig va^uv ;^af vtt^i^ffiv^at tig vfiag, ha *i^i9ffivnr% 
iig *»9 t^yef ayetBit, So irk«vri^t^Btu^ and v'Xavrttv U rnif in 1 Cor. i. 5, 1 Tim. 
vi. 18. We find also irXn^ov^Sttt with a similar construction and import in Eph. iii. 
19, V. 18. This latter verb is also found with an accusative ; as in Col. i. 9, irXir- 
fttSfirt rtiv iviytatfif rov Btknfiarag mvrw. In Phil. i. 11, the MSS. vary between 
xm^it and xa^^iv,^ See below, § 48, 3. 

Obs, 4. The verb ^fr(rS«4, ioneed, lo require,' docs not occur in its primary acceptation 
in the New Testament. In the derived sense, to pray, it takes a genitive in Matt. 
ix. 38, Luke v. 12, Acts xxi. 39, xxvi. 3, and elsewhere ; (and thus also in James v. 
17, «r^««Y}i;^artf r»u fih ^il^at.') It has a gen^ of the person and an accus, of the thing 
in 2 Cor. viii. 4. We have also lit^Bai *ifi nvog, and yu^Bxi v^l^ rmg, to pray for 
a person, in Luke xxii. 32, Acts viii. 24. Compare Ps. xxlx. 8, Job ix. 15, LXX. 
So Rom. viii. 27, ivwyxi^u M^ etylt*9, James v. 16, ivx^^Bi itrJ^ ah>.n>.m. Add 
Rom. viii. 26, 34, Heb. vii. 25. 

3. Several other verbs are sometimes, though not universally, 
found with a genitive ; especially, 

1. Those which signify to remember and tofmtjet. Thus 
Luke xvii. 32. /xvooptovgwgrg rra yvyxixos Aur, John XV. 20, 
fAymi^ovsisre rov Xoyov, oS syw eiTToy ufJiXy, Heb. vi. 10, g^rtXa- 

' Schwejghaiiser ad Athen. xiii. p. 569. et in Addend, et Currigeud. p. 478. 
* Winer, i 30, 5. Alt, § '^7, I. 


^aiysade. Add Mark xiv. 72, Luke i. 72, Acts xi. I6> 
2 Pet. iii. 2, Heb. xi. 15, xiii. 2, 16, et alibi. 

Obt, 5. An iustanoe of the conttniction with wi^) occurs in Heb. zi. 22, rnt l{t)M 
rS* ulS* *U^tui>. l[Mnf*inwty made mention of the Exodua, Gompaie Tubit ,iT. 1. 
Sometimes also these verbs are construed with an accusative ; as in Matt. xvi. 9, 
§hXi fif9ifA$ftiftTt rcut irifTt &^§v$. Phil. iii. 13, rk ft^f iwiwm littXmf^mMf/ttHt. See 
alio 1 Thess. iL 9, 2 Tim. ii. 8, Rev. zviii. 5. lu a transitive sense, to remind^ U 
eaii to memory, these verbs usually take a double aeeut. (John ziT. 26. 1 Cor. 
iv. 17) ; but the thing to be recollected is in the gen» with srt^} in 2 Pet. i. 12, 'ium 
kfUKneat vfjtMf dH uwfUftf^Msv irtf} nvran, 

2. Those which signify to be careful, or careless about any 
thing : as in Luke x. 34, s9re/x£X9}di>i avrov. 1 Cor. ix. 10, 
fAri rwv /8oa/y (AiXei rof @b& ; 1 Tim. iii. 5^ sra^s- sxkkfiffias 
®eov eirifJiBKri(T6Tan ; iv, 14, fAri afMeXei rov iv o'ol Y/tpicixaros. 
Heb. ii. 3, TriKiKOLvms oifji.BK'n^ayTSf (rejmplxf. xii. 4, vli 

fjLov, ixri 6\iydfp6i vaiSuocf K^vplov, Frequently the con- 
struction is with vspl and a genitive. Thus Matt. xxii. 
16, Mark xii. 14, ou /ui^Xei aoi vepl ouSevos-. John x. 13, w 

fJiiXei otvrZ m^i ray Trpofiarajv. xil. 6, od^ 8t* vepl w 
Trroj^wv 6^^BKsv avro), 1 Pet. V. 7, 8ri avrof fjusXsi vspl vfAW. 
Compare Wisd. xii. 13, 1 Mace. xiv. 43. According to 
some/ there is an instance of /xiXsi with a nominative 
in Acts xviii. 17, ohih roiruv r^ raXKicuvi c/easXsv. Bj 
rendering ojjSgv, not at all^ it will equally suit the regular 
construction with a genitive.* 

3. Verbs signifying to long for anything, to covet ; as in 
Matt. V. 28, 6 fiXsTrcov yuva7x.a, TTpos ro e7rAvfjuTi(ya.i etbrhs. 
1 Thess. ii. 8, */x6Ǥ6/x6voi J/t^o/v. 1 Tim. iii. 1,6? ns ew- 
(Txoor^s- o^e'yeraj, xaXou ^pyou BTridufjifT. Add 1 Tim. vi. 10, 
Heb. xi. 16. 

Obt> 6. Under this head may be classed the expression mtv^t rnt and )n^ rmty 
employed in a figurative sense. Thus Plutarch, de Ira cohibenda, t. ii. p. 460, 
• fAn TtnSf /iriSi hypSv avrrit, scil, rifMifictf, Compare Xen. CEcon. xiii. 9, Joseph. B. . 
J. iv. 11. 4. We find however the accusative in Matt. v. 6, ^a»«^Mi •; mtfmns nm\ 
li^pSvTtt rhf ^ncMoffvvtiv,* So also Joseph. 6. J. i. 32. 2, ityp^e»s v§vftit «7/u«. Tbe 
verb h'^^n* is followed by a dative in Exod. xvii. 5, LXX, i^/^/^nriy « x«df Zlmvi, 

4. Verbs including an idea of superiority, inferiority, for- 
bearance, dominion^ and the like, often take the object 

* Compare Schleusner and Wahl with Bretschneider, in v. 

• Winer, § 30, 7. 

> Winer, ubi tuyra : Wetstein and EUner on Matt. v. 6. 


of comparison in the genitive. Thus in Matt. xvii. 17, 
u ygvea awicror, soos 'jrire dvs^ofAoti ufjiMV ; Acts xviii. 12, 
YaXXiotfvos dv&i;9r«T6i/ovTor ttjs" 'Aj^aias*. 1 Tim. ii. 12, 
yvyxixl Se StSajJcstv ouk emrpiiroj, ouil avbsvrsTv dviqo^. Add 

Matt. XX, 25, Luke iii. 1, Acts xviii. 14, 2 Cor. i. 24, 
xi. 1, 2 Tim. iv. 3, Heb. xiii. 22, &c. 

Obs. 7. To the same class may also be referred xarmet^x^ rnof, to be burdensome 
to any one, in 2 Cor. xi. 8, xii. 13, 14. The exceptions, however, to this usage are 
extremely numerous ; some of these verbs being found with a dative, or an accusa." 
the, or a preposition with its case. Thus Matt. ii. 22, *A^ikeus fitt^tXtvu t«r} rtit 
^lavhiMf. Luke i. 33, fieifftktvffU it) rfly oix»» *W^an>.* Acts vii. 10, fiyovfitftit !«** a7- 
yutmv, XX. 28, xaifABtintf rnv iit»Xii^M¥ Stw, 2 Cor. xii. 13, rt yag ifrn, S nrrn^nvi 
v*l^ rets y.«t9ra{ tKxkuffms ; Phil. iv. 7, v u^^vn t«u Bteiv, n iivn^i^wfftt 9r»vret uuf, 2 
Thess. i. 4, reus Bxiypt^n, aTg «Hx<«'^c (which may, however, be otherwise accounted 
for). 2 Pet. ii. 19, m yd^ rtg nrmrctt, r^urif xeu ^iUvKatrett,^ Rev. ii. 27, iruftetfu ath 
Tovf U fdfihcu ft^n^K. See also Matt. ii. 6, Luke xix. 14, 27, Rev. v. 10. The form 
^^trSflCi fy rm occurs in 1 Sam. ix. 17, x. 1, LXX. 

Oba, 8. In the opposite sense, io obey, only ixcwn is found with a genitive ; as in 
Luke X. 16, xvi. 29, 31, John viii. 47, Acts iv. 19, et aiibi.* Other verbs of tlie same 
import are universally construed with a dative. Thus in Matt. viii. 27, m aufcot xeti 
fl ^»X»ff^» V9r»x»icvffn alrS, Acts V. 29, vu^a^iiv ^f? 6fa> fAakXov ^ uv^^tittotg* xxvii. 
21, tht filv ^it^a^x'^ffctvrett ftot f/tti nviyiff^ai a^o vns K^nrnt* Gal. iii. 1, v. 7, rn «Xff- 
df/^ ftm «rf/Si0-Sa/. Add Mark i. 27, iv. 41, Luke viii. 25, xvii. 6, Acts v. 36, 37, 40, 
vi. 7, xxiii. 21, xxviii. 24, Rom. vi. 12, x. 16, Eph. vi. 1, Phil. ii. 12, 2 Thess. iii. 14^ 
Heb. V. 9, xi. 8, xiii. 17, James iii. 3, 1 Pet. iii. 6 ; and compare Gen. xvi. 3, xii. 40> 
Deut. XX. 12, xxi. 18, Dan. iii. 12, ^lian, V. H. i. 34, iii. 23, Polyb. iv. 17. 7. So 
with icflTiiSfry, as in John iii. 36, « $i a«ri/^My rSf ulS, etix Syptreu ^A»iy. Rom, ii. 8, 
isru^avfft filt rri uXti^tie^, irtt^ofitivotf ii r^ aitxitf. The adjective efrnBhf also takes 
the dative in Acts xxvi. 19, Rom. i. 30. In Rom. xvi. 17, where the proper con- 
struction would have been v^nxcu^etrt t^ rii^rif rns iihaxm us Sv Tx^tiaB^rt, the ante^ 
cedent rv^n is attracted into the case of the relative. See § 59. The LXX fre- 
quently construe v^teixovuv with a genitive. Compare Gen. xvi. 3, xxii. 18, Levit. 
xxvi. 27, Deut. xxi. 20, 2 Chron. xi. 13.» 

5. Verbs of accusing take the gen, of the thing on accouvt 
of which the charge is made, as in Acts xix. 40, kyKOL- 
Xeiff^an ffraicecos. More commonly, however, this gen, is 
accompanied with Sia or Trsql, as in Acts xxiii. 29, eyxa- 
Xovfjuevov Trepl l^viryiyioirctiy rov vitxov. When these take the 
gen. of the person, it is in conse'quence of their compo- 
sition with the pr^. xara. Otherwise they take the dat, 
of the person. See § 45. 4. 

6. Verbs of sense. The verb duoveiy is found with the 
genitive of the person in Matt. xvii. 5, xviii. 15, Luke 
ii. 46, John iii. 29, Acts ii. 6, x. 46, et alibi; and with 

» See Kypke ad loc. « Winer, § 30, 7. » Alt, Gram. N. T. } 29. 


the genitive of the thing heard, in Luke vi. 47, xv. 25, 
John V. 25> Acts xi. 7, et alibi. Other verbs of sense, 
however^ are followed by an accusative ; and so also 
oKouiiv itself in John viii. 43. 

Obt. 9. It should seem that this verb, when simply marking^ iAe aente ofkeanufi 
is followed, according to ordinary usage, by a genitive ; but when containing the 
additional idea of understanding, it takes the accusative ; and this consideration 
will readily explain the apparent discrepancy in Acts iz. 7, compared with zzii. 9. 
Thus also the verbs U^vfittT^Beuy ^vttiveuf to rfflecty to understand, are commonly in the 
New Testament followed by the accusative ; as in Matt. ii. 20, vmZrm. Tik mvrmi iid»- 
fiflBifrtf. ix. 4, ivtcri vfiuTf if ^vftUfBt ^tvti^ iv roTi; nrnfitMs ufimn ; Luke ii. 50, ««ni 
»u ^vnixttv ri fnfA»» xviii. 34, ahrni tliUv rwriv ^oitnxa** XXIV. 45, wtnAvm* vmf yfrnfrnf* 
The construction, however, with «rf^} and a genitive is found in Acts z. 19, nt*^ 
h^fMVfitifov iri^i Tdv i^eifiaros. Also with M and a dative in Mark vL 52, w ym^ nv> 
fixetf W) rals £(rotf. In like manner a»*utn sometimes occurs with vc^) and a grai- 
tive of the thmg. Thus Mark v. 27, Luke vii. 3, &»ouf»s wi^} r«v 'InrMlr. So in Aeti 
xxiii* 20, Tvt^civur^ttt fri^i avrov^ 

Obs. 10. It is not the preposition in a compound verb which regulates the case 
which it governs ; for some verbs govern a genitive, which are compounded with 
prepositions not otherwise followed by that case ; but the preposition iimiis orjiset 
the relation expressed by the verb. For instance, verbs compounded with Mm take 
the genitive of the person, against whom any thing is said or done. John v. 45, /ai 

xi. 18, fjtn xaretxMvx^ ta^v »Xa^y. James iv. 11, (An xxrttXaXuTt itXXnXmvy do wd speti 
against, i. e. calumniate, one another. Add John viii. 6, Acts xzv. 5, I Pet. ii. 12, 
iii. 16. The same import attaches to the preposition when separated from the ferb, 
as in Rom. viii. 33, rsg iyxaXi^u xara ixkiKrHf 6t0v; James iii. 14^^^ xmrmxmf 
X»^^* f^^^ ^tvh^h xara, rnt ikn^uetg, V. 9, fith ^rtm^trt xetr* &X.Xn?M9. Compare 1 
Mace. viii. 32, x. 61,63, xi. 25. Instead of the accusative of the thing charged 
against one, which is usual in classical writers, the genitive is employed in Acts xxr. 
11, £f ouroi xarnyo^ovfft fit«v. Of the same class is xara^^otuv mos, to think against,uf, 
to despise or slight, any one, in Matt. vi. 24, xviii. 10, Rom. ii. 4, 1 Cor. xi, 22, Heb. 
xii. 2, et alibi; xaretfia^rv^iTv r/ riytff , in Matt. xxvi. 62, xxvii. 13; x»rtiytXf9 vihs, 
in Matt. ix. 24, Mark v. 39 ; xetrx^rpfiuZv nvog, in 1 Tim. v. 11 ; xaretyiui^xuf rtmy 
in 1 John iii. 20, 21. Other examples will continually present themselves, as well 
as frequent instances in which like compounds take an accusative. Thus in 2 Cor. 
iii. 18, rriv h%etf Kv^Icu xxrotr^i^ofAivot. Col. ii. 18, fAi^%us vfias xurafi^a/itvirat. With 
respect to verbs compounded with other prepositions governing a genitive in the 
New Testament, it may be observed, without multiplying examples, that sometimes 
the preposition may be separated from the verb without altering its sense, as in 
Acts vii. 40, 9roiyif9v hf^Ti Biohs, oi ^^oto^iuffovrai tifiuv, i. e. ^o^iufovren «*«« fifMav. Some- 
times the genitive depends upon the relation expressed by the verb itself; as in 
Luke X. 35, WifittXinhri ahroZ ; and sometimes no regard is paid to the preposition, 
but another case is put for the genitive, as the sense of the verb may permit. Thus 
in Matt. v. 42, rh HXovru uto ffov ^etnlffxfffiott ftn et^ofr^dipnst i* ^* ^ ^*ot reject him* Of 
words governing a genitive, although compounded with prepositions which are not 
followed by that case, as fvv for instance, the following are examples: — ^Acts xiii. 1, 
*H^tiiiou ffv¥r^o^cs» xxiii. 20, fvnBifro rod i^ttrnfett ft, 1 Cor. ix. 23, 9^uy*§tf§n§s «vriv. 
Phil. ii. 25, ^vn»yh x») ffvffr^eiTuirnv /mv. 

» Winer, } 30, 7. Alt, } 27, 4. Kuinoel on Acts ix. 7. 


§ 43. — Of the Comparative. 

1. The ordinary syntax of the Comparative re(\\x\xe^ the 
things compared to be united in the same case by means of 
the particle 97, or the latter to be placed in the genitive. With- 
out dwelling upon these usages^ it will suffice to point out the 
more remarkable constructions of the comparative, which occur 
in the New Testament. 

2. When the substantive is the same on both sides of the 
comparison, its repetition in the genitive is frequently omitted, 
and the comparison is referred, for the sake of conciseness, to 
the person of whom the thing compared obtains. Thus in 

Matt. V. 20, iav ixri 7rept(ra'kV(Tri vi iiKatoffum ufMojv wXeTov tu/v yqaf/,- 
(Axriojv X. T. X., for rris iiKauocvvris^ rwv yqxfAfJLxreuv . John V. 36, 
lycJ Sg ey(fif tyjv f/,aprvplacv [/.ei}l^oj tov ^loudvvou, 1 Cor. i. 25, to 
fXMpov TOV @Bov co^dreqov rwv dv^quTTcuv kcTi, xaJ to a^&ever tov 
®eou i^i/^oTg§ov Tft'V dv^puTrajv so'tL 

Obi, 1. In this last example the genitives omitted are rns f octets and rod Irx^^ft 
or the opposite qualities to those in the former member. The same usage is found 
in the Hebrew of Isai. Ivi. 5. Compare 3 Esdr. iii. 5. So, in Latin, Juv. Sat. iii. 
74, Sermo promptus et Isaeo torreniior / for hcei termone, 

Obs, 2. The abbreviation is not confined io comparatives, but occurs after other 
words, as ofi»Ms for instance. Thus Jude 7, lo^ofia xa) Tofioffoi, »»i eu «ri^f auretg 
itoXttti rev o/ietov routois r^9«r«i> \»vro^nuff»ftitif i. e. r^ tovtmv T^ovcf* Rev. ix. 10, ix«(^ 
riy WAeis ofMtas fic«^*i»i5' xiii. 1 1^ tix* »t^»ru ^ve ofiteta et^tlea. 

Obs. 3. The particle n is omitted before numerals in Acts iv. 22, trZv yu^ h frXti«- 
wv rt^fo^eixovra. In Acts xxiv. 11, the true reading seems to be, av trXtlovg tl^i fMt 
fifAiptu hxaU: The Edd. insert tl. 

3. Sometimes the thing compared is put in the accusative 
with Trapci. Luke iii. 13, /x-i^Sev ^Xeov 'Trxpa, to itacTSTxy/JLivov u[mv 
vrpiatJBTs. Heb. i. 4, iix^opa/Tsqov Tcotp avTohs ovo/xa, where it will 
also be observed that ma,^ avTouf is concisely put for Traq' olvtcom 

ovofJLX. iii. 3, TrXg/ovof So^ios" oSror TroL^a Ma;(Taiv rS^louTXi. xi. 4, 
TrXgwva bufflay "A/SgX vapai Kaiv ^^offiQVgyxg. Also with virip, 
Luke xvi. 8, fpoyiiAwTsqoi Cireq Tovs v\ovs tov ^cotos. Heb. iv. 12, 
TOfJicuT£qos v'^sq voiffav fMxxdipay S/(TTo/w,ov. Compare Judg. xi. 25, 
XV. 2, xviii. 26, Ps. xix. 10. These prepositions in fact involve 
the idea of comparison : and thus, in Latin, Virg. Mn. i. 351, 
Scelere ante alios immanior omnes. 

4. Some verbs, used in a comparative sense, are followed by 
^, with /[xaXXov understood. This usage of ^oiXoy^ai is common 


in the best writers; and deXsiv has a similar import in 1 Cor. 
xiv. 19, 9eX« TrivTB Koyous iia rov vow //lou XoTJo^pct, ri tJLvqiovs Xo- 
7oi;f Iv yKcio'a'ri. The same omission occurs with Xuo'irtkit in 
Luke xvii. 2. Compare Tobit iii. 6, vi. 12. 

Obs, 4. The comparative is often used without an expressed object of eonparim, 
which is nevertheless implied in some additional circumstance which is passiiif; ii 
the mind. Thus John xiii. 27, S ^tut, ^•/vttv rdxmf more qmckfy than is ymer pn- 
sent purpoie. Acts xvii. 21, ^Ainfiut tU «v^^ tfri^w uituU^Wj A xJky^n t» umi kuma 
HMvirtfov, iomething more new than the iaiest news, i. e. one novelty alter another. 
In the next verse the particle in it inserted to qualify a disag^reeable expressios, 
and we may render its hi^thufiuftrri^vty tomewhai more mperMiitiome iJkut, from yow 
high philosophical notions, might be expected. Again, in Acts zviii. 26, Jknftfiietift 
alrSf l^i^vr* rffv rov 9i9v ohiif, more accuratehf than he had hitherto been acquainted wiA 
it, XXV. 10, «f Moi rv »dXXuf l^iytfttwxtts, i* e. xdXkmf A Iwtyntig-Huw ^•mus* xzvil 
13, 2rr0y *et^ikiy§fT» rfiv K^nrnh nearer than they had intendeeL Other examples an 
2 Cor. vii. 7, Phil. i. 12, ii. 28, 1 Tim. iii. 14, 2 Tinu i. 18, Heb. xiii. 19« 23, 2 Pel 
i. 19. Compare Theophr. Char. viii. 1, Eurip. Orest 1327, Arist. At. 254, Iiudaa 
Asin. 41, Plat. Euthyphr. 1. 

Obs, 5. There is no passage in the New Testament in which the sense is pieaieljr 
the same as if the positive were used ; for even in 2 Cor. ii. 4, irs^t^^^vi^ m^li 
rendered, nwre abundantly than you imagine. On the other hand, the positin it 
sometimes put for the comparative; as in Matt, xviii. 8, Mark ix. 43, muXUeuMi 
iUiX4uf ut 4^0 ^M^y x*'^*' *> ^v^^^^i ^ ^M XH'^ «• r. X. Luke xviii. 14, nmrifinthn 
)t)ix«iA>juiy«r, n Ixuwf, Compare Gen. xlix. 12, Ps. cxviii. 8, Lament, iv. 9, Hoaii. 
7, Jonah iv. 3, LXX. So, in Latin, Plant Rud. iv. 4. 70, Taciia mmiier eti^m 
semper, quam ioquens. We have also the positive with trm^ik^ in Luke xiii. 2, kpa^ 
TttXii ^a^» 9ravTeis. This has been referred to an analogy with the Hebrew me of 
the particle TD) i" Exod., xviii. 11, Numb. xii. 3, Judith xiii. 18, and dsewheie. 


But similar examples occur in Greek. Thus Dion. H. £p. ad Pomp. ii. 3, hn^ifiit n 
xet) AnTTfl *»f^ fivTivovf fT»{«v hdXtKrov. Philostr. V. Apol. p. 110, 9rm^» ^dwrmf ^kx»r 
•vf ftiyof, Eph. iii. 8, r^ IXa^t^rovi^cf ^rufran rSf hyiMv, In the same way vn^ ii 
used in 1 Sam. i. 8, xv. 28, 2 Sam. xiii. 15, LXX. And thus prte in Cicero*, pre 
nobis beatus. To this head belongs Luke xv. 7, x^t*^ '^^i^ ^^^ i»> ^^Mc^rwXf /urm- 
ovvrt, H i^r) Unv9i»»vreit¥fia hx»ins. Compare Gen. xxxviii. 26, LXX.^ So, as soni 
have supposed, Matt. xxvi. 24, Mark xiv. 21, »«Xm ?» mvr^, ti •»» iystniSny whieh 
may, however, be rendered, // were well/or him, &c. 

Obs. 6. The comparative is put for the superlative ; as in Matt. xi. 11, Luke fit 
28, h fuK^ort^of U rji (ia^ikuf riv ot/^xwv fiiliatf avrou Urn, i. e. /utt^m^ rm tklm, 
or'fUK^oretrot, Matt, xviii. 1, Mark ix. 34, Luke ix. 46, 48, rit &^m ftu{^ leri; for 
/MyiffTOf, So Diog. L. vi. 1. 4, i^vrfi^tis r) ftaxet^wrt^w if «yS^«'«if, tpn, ivrvx<«w 
droBanTv. To the above may be added 1 Cor. viii. 13, fudj^tn Ii rtirttv h dyin. 
2 Cor. xii. 15, tl tuu 9r%^ta9cT%^»ts vfiat iyavHv, ^rr»v ayavZfjMt. The case isdiffi^rest, 
where iravratv is connected with the comparative ; as in Matt. xiii. 32, ^smti^ 
iravratf rif ff9ri^(A»r»>v, Mark iv. 32, Teirr»tt rSv Xttxdfttv ftttj^^f. John X. 29, ^tH^ 
varrif. 1 Cor. XV. 19, iXuniri^oi ^'avrvv »vB^V9rm W(aU. Eph. iii. 8, rf \X.tfxtrr»rutf 

i Winer, } 36. Alt, J 34. Georg. Hierocrit. i. 3. 29. Dorvill. ad Char. p. 538. 
Weiske de Pleonasm, p. 153. Wyttenbach ad Plut, Moral, i. p. 238. Ast adPlat. 
Phadr. p. 395. 


wJLrrm rw kyiiu In these cases «r«yr«y gives a superlative sense ; bnt at the same 
time, the comparative has its proper sense and government. So Athen. iii. 15, ^rnrrmif 
Mt^«r£f ^^tktfuirt^et, Dio Chrysost. iii. p. 108., 44, av'eivrtn irt^etfvrtft* Liban. 
iii. p. 17. itTMrtn »r**ei'n^n, 

Obs, 7. The use of the superlative for the comparative is occasionally met with 
in the substitution of the adjective st^Sr^t for ^^irt^cg. Thus in John i. 15, T^Srig 
fuu {«. Acts i. 1, r«y ir^Srtv xiy»f, the farmer narrative , 'namely, the Gk)spel of St. 
Luke. Also the adverb ^(£r§v for «r^«rf^Mr, as in John xv. 18, i/«^ ^r^Zm vfuif fAtfAU 
msiy. Compare also Matt. v. 24, viii. 21, Heb. viii. 7. Another example, accord- 
ingto avery widely received interpretation, is Lukeii. 2, aZm h &it§yfm^ ^^urn lyinrt 
iiyiffunvnrH ^s lu^ims Kv^nfUu^ before Ofremut was Governor of Syria, The true 
meaning, however, seems to be, that the census in question, though decreed by the 
Emperor some years previously,^rs/ took effect under the presidency of Cyrenius.' 

§ 44. — The Genitive in some particular connexions. 

1. The gen, frequently denotes the object, with respect to 
which the governing noun denotes some circumstance of action, 
speech, ot' sentiment. Thus in Matt. xiii. 18, t^v wa/^a/SoXiv rov 
pvrilqwros, the Parable relative to the sower ; John xvii. 2, E^oy- 
ffiav ^ioTis cipKos, power over all flesh ; Rom. xiii. 3, $6/3of rSjy 
dyabm %^m, terror with respect to good works ; 1 Pet. i. 2, 
payriaiMV alfAaros, sprinkling with, or, by means of, blood. So 
with verbs : as in 2 Pet. iii. 9, ou pgaSyvg* o Kupiof rris g^ayyeX/ajs, 
with respect to his promise. And with adjectives ; as in Luke 
xxiv. 25, /S^aSgTs- Tr) xoL^igL T<w TrKmusiy, slow with regard to 
believing. See also Eph. ii. 12, iii. 6, James ii. 5. 

Obt, I. An analogous usage is that of the genitive with substantives or verbs, in 
cases where irt^i is otherwise used ; as in Matt. iv. 24, axofi avrtfv, the fame of him, 
or concerning him; for which we have ^x^f **V *^^'*'*^> ^^ Luke iv. 37. Thus again 
in Acts vii. 19, i»axMft rm ^ari^ecg nfiSt rod ^ttuv ixStru, x. r. A.., ill-treated them 
in regard to the exposition : xx. 3, ynufjuvi rou v^6fT^i(pmy an intention of returning, i. e. 
in respect to returning. See also Matt. xiv. 1, Acts iii. 12, xxvii. 1, 1 Cor. ii. 2, 
vii. 37. 

Obt. 2. A remoter relation, which requires to be more fully developed, exists 
in the following : Mark i. 4, /3««rri0/Me fitravoUgf baptism which inculcates repen' 
iance; Luke xi. 29, ^n/AU** 'Jatm, the sign which Jonah affords; Rom. vii. 2* 
Tw w/uv r«v uv^ig, the law which binds to the husband; viii. 36, ir^o^etra ^tpayUg, 
aheep destined for slaughter ; Phil. iv. 9. « ^tig rng ti^^nig, the God who gives peace ; 
Col. i. 20, red eSfABtreg r»v fretv^tlu, the blood shed upon the cross ; ii. 19, aS^tiffif tw 
dfltftf, an increase required by God ; 2 Thess. iii. 5, rhf t^rcff^nv rou X^/rrdtf, patience 
similar to that of Christ ; James ii. 4, x^srai ^utkayt^/Miw ^ovn^Sv, judges who decide 
upon evil principles. To the same head may be referred the expression ^Ung Btw 
(Mark xi. 22), utraxt^ X^i^eiS (2 Cor. x. 5), and the like. Thus also Rom. i. 5, 
viretMh *ifTins, obedience upon a principle of faith. Pet. i 22, rn vceaxt^ rng 

^ See Interpp. eul loc. 



JiXnBueis, the obedience required by the Gotpei, For adJitional ioKtances, see Matt 
X. ], xii. 31, xxiT. 15, John v. 29, vii. 35, Acts iii. 16, xiv. 9, Roxn. iii. 22,ix.21, 

1 Cor. ix. 12, 2 Cor. v. 19, Gal. ii. 16, iii. 22, Eph. ii. 3, Phil. i. 27, iii. 9, CoLi 
23, Heb. yi. 2, James ii. 1, Jude 11, sfev. xiv. 12, xr. 2. The LXX.utetk 
genitive in similar relations in Numb. xxvi. 9, Job xxi. 4, Obad. 2, £cclut.iii. 14, 
Wisd. viii. 3, 1 Mace. iii. 14. Compare Thucyd. i. 129« Heliod. ii. 4. 6^ 
Theodoret, iv. 1140. 

Obt, 3. There are also a class of expressions, which admit of different expUaA* 
tions in different contexts. Thus iya^n Buu may mean either ihe lone tohkk wm 
owet to God, j(John v. 42, 1 John ii. 5, 15, v. 3), or the love of God towards mmdad^ 
(Rom. V. 5, viii. 35, 2 Cor. v. 14). Similarly in Pausan. riii* 7, S^ut Smv, otrfAiif, 
or in the name of, the Gode. The Latins likewise employed the genitive in a twih 
fold application after certain words, as observed in A. Gell. ix. 1*2, Metus fwp 
et injuria at que alia queedam id genut, tic utroque vertum diet pottuni: iiam mctai 
hostium rede dicitur, et cum timent hostes, et cum timentur.^ 

Obs, 4. It may be doubted whether the expression ro gv»yy%yjM too yL^ttr^^ whidi 
repeatedly occurs, is to be rendered the Goipei concerning Christ , or the Gmfd 
preached by Christ. In support of the former acceptation, Winer remarks, thtt it 
appears to be abridged, as it were, from the more complete form in Rom. L 3^1^ 
tvayyi^jov 610? «ri^i rev vt&u uhrov. He refers also to the similar expression, r« uvf 
ytXto* Tfif fiet^tXii»s, in Matt. iv. 23, ix. 35. On the other hand, however, timyyijm 
fMu is plainly the Gotpel preached by* me (St, Paul) in Rom. ii. 16, xvi. 25, 2Tbl 
ii. 8. Both significations may therefore be included. 

2. The genitive is constantly employed, to mark the objed 
or cause of any feeling or affection of the body or mind. l\m 
Acts iv. 9, Im euEqysijigc av^QcuTrou, beneficence towards the man; 

2 Cor. i. 5, Tra^Yifxacra rov Xqia-rou, svffcrings for the sake of 
Christ ; Eph. iii. 1, 6 Sefr/xior rou \piarov, a prisoner in the cause 
of Christ ; Philem. 13, tots' Se(T/w.o7s- tou euayyaXtou, bonds for the 
sake of the Gospel; Heb. xi. 26, rov ovsi^kt/jlov tou Xpimot 
reproach on account of Christ, Compare Col. i. 24, 2 Tim. i. 8, 
Philem. 9, Heb. xiii. 13. So with adjectives ; Heb. iii. 12, 
xa/jSta TTovinpai oLiriorlas, a heart which is wicked by reason of 
unbelief. The Latins have a similar idiom ; as in Virg. iEn. 
xi. 73, Lceia laborum,^ 

Obs. 5. There are also passages in the New Testament as well as in other auihvt, 
in which the genitive is used, where the ohject may more properly be othenme 
expressed. Thus Luke vi. 12, t»j ^^9<rivx^ 'rov Stovj in prayer to God • instead of tin 
more regular form ^^ig rov ei^v, which occurs in Rom. xv. 30. So also Jofepki 
Ant. IX. 9, iTi ytneriv xa) tKiruetv toZ QioZ. The Latins said, in like maimer supatiat 
deorum (Sail. Cat.). Very similar are the expressions vlfru Stov, v^ecxon XMrtVikt, 
which have been already noticed. Thus also the possessive pronouns are sometimw 
put objectively; as in Luke xiii. 19, 1 Cur. xi. 24, roVro ^enTrt tig Tti* t^q» mfmrnrnm, 

» Winer, § 30, 1. Alt, § 26. 1, 2. Dorvill. ad Char. p. 498 
Eur. Suppl. 838. Ast ad Plat. Legg. p. 72. 
* Winer, § 30, 1. 4. Monk ad Kur. Alcest. 751. 

Marklaod 1^ 


in remembrance of me f Rom. xi. 31, ral vfuri^v ixits, the mercy extended to you; 
1 Cor. XV. 31, r«y vfttri^eif Kavxvftf h tx»»» »«y boaitiiig of you, Winer adds 2 Tim. 
iv. 6, « xa/^tff *rifis ifAns »v»Xv^ms t^'t^mxt, which is not a case in point. The Latins 
have the same usage ; as, for example, in Terent. Phorm. v. 8. 27, Neque negligentia 
tna, neque id odio fecit tuo ; i. e. erga te> 

Obs, 6. Instead of a genitive, the dative with in is put after a verb expressive of 
a mental affection in 2 Cor. v. 2, ly rwrif rriya^djuf y. 

06«. 7. The word %vox«s is properly constructed with a dative in Matt. y. 21, 22^ 
tf§%ds t^rat Tfi x^ifftt, rtf ^tnih^icf. In the latter of these two verses it is also followed 
by iff with an accusative, and manifestly in the same sense. It is found with the 
genitive, x^i/Mtn or some like word being understood, in Matt. xxvi. 66, Mark xiv. 
64, Ucx*t BetveL'Tou, Mark iii. 19, h$x*s etlmUv x^Utus, So also in 1 Cor. xi. 27, Heb. 
ii. 15, James ii. 10. 

3. Words which imply a comparison with respect to value, 
as a^iosy dyd^ios, Matt. iii. 8, 1 Cor. vi. 2, et passim, are likewise 
followed by a genitive; and thence all words which have 
reference to buying, selling, valuing, exchange 9 &c. Matt. x. 
29, ov^i ivo o'Tpoubta daaaqiov 'TToSK^'iroLi ; xvi. 26, t! ^oIjo^l av^^uTTos 
dyraXKciyfAOL rvis A^vy^r^s avrov ; XX. 13, ov%l ifivapiov avix,^ojyinaais 
fMi ; xxvi. 9, 'f^vvaro yip rovro to /xt5§ov 'Trqx^Tivai ttoXXov. Acts 
Xxii. 28, 67^ voKKov xefixXxiov riv TroXire/av ravriny exTTjdflc/xiov. 
1 Cor. vi. 20, iyopxa^yirs yap ri/x^f. Rev. vi. 6, x»°Tvt§ airov 
ir^vaqlov, xai Tp{i5 y^filvixes xpi^vif imaqiov, 

Obt, 8. Upon the same principle the genitive is put after words which denote a 
dittinction or difference ; as after Itet^i^ufin Matt. x. 3\, irokXSv ffr^ovBiMv^ta^i^irt 
vfnuf, xii. 12, vivif oZv^tet<p%^u HfB^v^os *^o^eirou\ 1 Cor. XV. 41, utrn^ yot^ affvi^tt 
ism^i^ti iy ^o%^» Add Matt. vi. 26, Luke xii. 7, 24, Gal. iv. 1.^ 

Obs, 9. Frequently the preposition U or uvrl is inserted ; as in Matt. xx. 2, ^vfi^sf 
pnfut fitrk rSv l^yetrSt ix ^nvei^iov, 28, iovveu rhf ^tfxhv ul/rou Xur^ov etvri ^rtXXSv, 
ZXvii. 7, nyo^MUf i^ aurS* (^d^yu^taiv) tm ay^ov rav xttxfitiafs. Acts i. 18, ixrn^ctrt 
yQu^ln Ix rw fitff^ov rn( aitxluf* |Heb. xii. 2, uvri rns ir^axttfiumt tti/r^ X'^^f v^'ifitun 
^TMV^iv, So in Joel iii, 3, LXX, ra x»^ttvia i«r«vX0t;y kvr) rov oi>ov» Epist. Jerem. 
V. 25, i» ^tiftit Tifih ny^affiiw t^riv. Compare Palseph. de Incred. xlvi. 3. 4. 

4. With active verbs which signify to take, to seize, &c. the 
part by which any thing is taken is put in the genitive, while 
the whole is put in the accusative ; as in Mark ix. 27, Kpar*n<JOLi 
QLVTov Trisyjsipos, Acts iii. 6, Triiaas avrov rvis is^la^ xetqos. Com- 
pare Ezek. vii. 3, LXX, Plutarch, Apophthegm, p. 180, Lucian. 
Pise. 12. At the same time the more unusual construction 
with a genitive only is also found. Thus in Luke viii. 5 1, 
xqarrKTXf ttJs" xbi^o^ avrris, John xxi. 10, iveyxars &vo rajv 6y\/acpianf, 
£y l5r«a(jaT6 vyv (though this may be an instance oixittraction). 
Heb. vi. 18, xpocrmxs rvis TrpoxBifxiyriS cX^/Sof. 

» Alt, Gram. N. T. 6 27. 6. Wetstein on Matt. vi. 26. 


Obt. 10. The more proper form is x^aruv mm, as in Matt. xiv. 3, zvii. 28, U$A 
iii. 21; e/ tUibi, Compare also John vii. 30, 32, x, 39. Sometimes l» is prefixed to 
this genitive, as in Acts xxviii. 4, M^tfta/Mvp Ix rtif x**C^' Compare Hexod. if. 
10, Xen. Mem. iii. 10. 13. 

Obs. 1 1. Analogous to this usage is that of Xmft^n^SM and some of its oonu 
pounds, with &*rurSai, and txt^^^h signifying, in the middle voice, to take hold •/. 
Thus Matt. xiv. 31, « 'Inr*?;, Uri/»*; rnv x^^> i«riX«j3ir« mvr»v, xvii. 7, w^m^xSm 
i *lfi0»Sfs ^^ttr§ avrSv, Luke i. 54, «yrfA.«/3fr« *Ir^«nX ititiiig mvrtS. XZ. 20, 26f 
WiXmfiur^eu Xoyw, to toy hold o/one*t wards, L e. with a view to make them a subject 
of accusation or blame ; Heb. vi. 9, i;^0^iy« fmrn^ieit, things Us^img hold ^ i. e. eoo- 
nected with, salvation. Other examples will be found in Matt. vL 24, viii. 15, ii. 
20,21,29, Marki.41,v.30,vi. 46, viii. 23, Luke ix. 47, xvi. 13, zxii. 51, Adi 
XX. 35, xxiii. 19, 1 Thess. v. 14, 1 Tim. vi. 2, Tit. i. 9 ; and in Qen. xxxix. 12, Job 
L 19, xxxiii. 34, LXX. In the sense of &9rrw^aty we find ^tyut with a genitive is 
Heb. xi. 28, xii. 20. It is to be remarked however, that the verb WiXm/jk^^tnt^vk 
also found with the accusative ; but in a sense which indicates the fareibie seixurt 
of the entire person ; as in Acts xvi. 19, WtXa^fUft rot UmSj^tf »«< m 2/X«v, tbuutm 
i/f rh* &y»^»f Wi rovs &^orras, xviii. 17, iv'iXafiifttfu ZwrSfv*!*, 'irtnrTst Ifur^So 
r«tf finfiMT»t, The verb ^mt^Beu also takes an accusative in 1 Cor. iii. 19. It ii 
by no meaus agreed that fr^«rXa/M/3«yt0'S«i, as employed in Matt* xvi. 22, is used is 
the sense which belongs to the class of words under consideration. 

05ff. 12. The verb rvyx'^un, signifying to obtain, is found in the New Testament 
with a genitive only ; as in Luke xx. 35, Kare^Bitnt rtv tuSvot l»i/v«v rv^iiir. See 
Acts xxiv. 3, xxvii. 3, 2 Tim. ii. 10, Heb. xi. 35 ; and in the LXX, Job iiL 21, 
xvii. 1, |Frov. xxx. 23. So the compound WiruyxAnn, in Rom. xi. 7, Heb. vi.' 15| 
xi. 33. In Luke i. 9, }Myx»n$v takes a genitive: in Acts i. 17, 2 Pet. i. l,a 
accusative. Except in Gal. iv. 30, (where it is used absolutely), MXnf^Mfua'vk 
followed by an accusative of the thing which is inherited. Thus in Matt v. 5, 
alrci »>.9i^ovofiw«v^i rrif ynv» Compare Matt. xix. 29, xxv. 34, Luke xviii. 18, 1 Cor. 
XV. 50, Oal. V. 21, Heb. i. 4, 14, et alibi. So in Prov. iii. 35, LXX, ^^y »Xii^«m^ 
Such indeed is the general construction in the LXX, and also with the accusative 
of the person, as in Gren. xv. 4, xX^ovofAwu fit, he shall be my heir* The Ister 
writers, in general, adopted this usage. ^ 

5. The genitive of place and time, and of the former more 
especially, is very rare in the New Testament. Examples of 
the latter are wktos, in Matt. ii. 14, xxvii. 64, xxviii. 14, John 
vii. 50, 1 Thess. v. 7, et alibi ; rifjiiqccs kqu vvktos, in Mark v. 5, 
Luke xviii. 7, 2 Thess. ii. 9, 1 Tim. v. 5, et alibi ; ^(jshmjws, in 
Mark xiii. 18. Add /xs^ovvxrio:; ^ oKiKrpo^cuvias, in Marl 
xiii. 35. 

Obs. 13. Both time and place, in answer to the quentions wJken and where, SR 
usually expressed by the preposition U, as in Matt. iii. 1, Iv ^mt nitXf&ut buinuh 
xiii* 4, h TM r^ti^tn. John v. 7 , h u, sc. x^cvcu, Rom. xiii. 13, U ^^i^^ , So also, in 
the sense of within in John ii. 19, 20, U r^itrif tifci^tuf. Again, Acts ix. 10, 19, » 
^etfAorxtf, xix. I, U Ka^if^M, 2 Tim. iv. 13, 20, U T^ofuh, U M/Xi}r«. Both construc- 
tions are united in Matt. xxiv. 20, vr^oa-iuxi^B'i Tt ha fin yUnras n ^v^ vftih ;Ki^pMf) 

^ Winer, § 30, 5. Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 129. 


06«. 14. To the head of genitives of time^ Winer^ refers Rom. ii. 5, Sifti^a l^yns 
the day in which ike divine torcUh will be displayed ; Jude 6, x^iVi; /AtyeiXnt hfA^ast 
the Judgment which thai/ be executed upon the great day; but such examples belong 
rather to Obs, 2> supra. He adds Heb. vi. 1, n-if rns d^nt rod X^u-tou Kiycvf m- 
atruciion at the beginning of a Christian life. It may be reasonably doubted if this 
be a correct interpretation of the passage.^ 

6. A few instances occur in the New Testament of two geni* 
lives being governed by one substantive in different relations ; 
one of such genitives being usually^ though not invariably, that 
of the person, and the other that of the thing. Thus in Acts 
V. 32, ^pbErc l(5[i*vi avrov fjidprvpes to/v prii/,ara/v rourouv, we are 
his witnesses with respect to these things; Phil. ii. 30, to 
vcri^iiA fJLOU rris XiirovpyioLs, 2 Pet. iii. 2, rris ruv a7ro(jr6\a/y 

Obt, 15. This last example seems to be elliptical, and the sense may be thus 
8up{4ied from the preceding clause, rm UrsXtif rtif ^r^su^nfAvns v«r« rZf avrseriXMu 
Compare Jude 17. Similar instances in Latin authors, are Gic, Off. ii. 22, Cujutque 
CMMtodia iuee rei tit libera. Epist. Fam. i. 9. 54, Crasti defensionem Gabinii. In 
English one of these genitives takes a different form. Thus we say, Scott's Edition 
o/Ssotft, or, Scott* s Edition of the works of Swift, which would come under the next 

Obs, 16. Although two genitives, and even three or more, frequently come together, 
of which one governs the other, and that again a third, and so on ; yet they present, 
&r the most part, more of harshness than obscurity. Examples are 2 Cor. ii. 4, 
r«» ^atrifffMv rou ivctyytXUu rns ^o%fn rw X^tffreiv, Eph. i. 6, tig t^atfav rns ^\nt fnt 
xAt*'''*i «^<r«i;. Col. i. 14, %U Ti}y fioffiktiav rov vUv rns dyd^ns ahrcZ. ii. 12, %m rns 
wl^TMt rtis in^ytieis rw 6t0t7. 2 Thess. ii. 14, %ls *t^t*oinftv ^ol^ns rev Kv^iw hfj^Zv, Heb. 
V. 12, ru ffrtt^uet rns «f%W ruv Xoyinif rtv 6itft/. Rev. xiv. 8, \k rw olvou rau S-vfCiu rtis 
4r«fyi/«f ctlirtif. Add Rom, ii. 4, £ph. i. 19, iv. 13, Col. i. 20, ii. 18, 1 Thess. i. 3, 
2 Thess. i. 9, Rev. xvi. 19, xviii. 3, 14, xix. 15, xxi. 6. It will be seen that one of 
these genitives has generally the force of an adjective. See above ( 41. Obs. 15. 
A like concourse of genitives is sometimes, though less frequently, observable in 
Hebrew; as, for instance, in Job xii. 24, ilsai. x. 12. ^ 

On the subject of the genitive the following remarks may also be added: — 

Obs. 1 7. Genitives are found, where a preposition with its case would rather be 
expected. Such are Matt. i. 11, 12, ^irMXi^/a Ba&oXeiv«s» the carrying away to 
Babylon ; x. 5, tig iliv iBvuv, i. e. n aytt tig ra i^vvi' So Gen. iii. 24, LXX, fi eicg rod 
^uXou rh Wg» Jerem. ii. 18, ^ Shig Klyvvrw, Compare Numb. xxi. 33. See 
however, Obs. 2, supra. 

Obs. 18. A circumlocution by means of a preposition and its case is sometimes 
used, not indeed instead of a genitive, but to express more accurately, what a 
genitive might have rendered ambiguous. Thus in Mark iv. 19, ^ rSv XtiTaiv 
i*i^v/Atet might perhaps have been substituted for n trt^i <ra Xu^rei WtBv/nia, but the 
latter does not so much mean lust of of her things, as lust which has relation to other 
things. The same form of expression occurs in Heliod. i^th. i. 23,45, iTiBvfiia Tt^t 

» Winer, J 30, 2. 8. * Kuinoel ad loc. * Qeseniut, § 17. Obs. 2. 


Tfiv Xet^'tMXuKv, Arist. Rhet. ii. 12, «/ ri^i r« ^S/ui Wt^fum. Again in 2 Cor. Tin.7, 
rti il vfMtf kyi*^ removes the ambiguity which would have existed in vj vpw 
«y«rff. See below § 65. So Acts zxiii. 21, r«y k^ri ^»u WayytXJat, Dion. H. p. 
2235. 13, r«Xiry U vm reL^ivrm tuni^mg iXiff, Plat Polit. ii. p. 363. A^ TMs St^ wtfnn 
%vi§»t/ifi^uf. See also Arrian. Ind. xxix. 5, Polyaen. v. 1 1, Died. Sic. i. 8, t. 39< 
Very different, again, from raite^ti/MtTx X^irrtv is 1 Pet. i. 11, «*« gSg X^tg^w waSt* 
^r«,'which means the tufferingt, which, according to the Prophets, were iofaUvfm 
Chritl, Other instances are Acts xvii. 28, Rom. iz. 11, xi. 21, Eph. ii. 21, Tit 
iii. 5, 1 Pet. ii. 9, t. 2, 2 Pet. ii. 7. It may be added that the form of the titles to 
the 4 Gospels, T* xxrk yLar^tun, &c. 'EvayyiXfv^ of which the correct import 
is the Gospel written btf Matthew^ &c. prevents any ambiguity similar to thst 
which is noticed at § 65. 06«. So Polyb. iii. 6, iti ita<P ^Avfifiav irpa^ugy ike erpfyilt 
performed by Ann^nd, 

Obi, 19. Certain nouns, by which the genitive is governed, are commonl/ 
wanting ; as (;/«;, in Matt. iz. 21, *la»M^f r«y vu Zifithuw. So also in Matt. iv. 21, 
Mark iL 14, Luke vL 16, John vi. 71, zxi. 2, 15, Acts i. 13, ziii. 22, ei aiibi. Other 
words thus omitted are yuvny iratrn^, fAn'r^^^ a)tX^»V. Thus Matt. i. 6, U r«f fw 
Oi^Uvf tciL yuveciKog, Mark xv. 47, Met^U 'Im^i, «ctV. fitirn^. (Compare Matt, zzfii. 
56, Mark xv. 40,) Luke vi. 16, Acts i. 13, ^Uu^mg *l»tuifiav, tcii. kltxpig, (Compare 
Jude 1,) Acts vii. 16, 'EfifM^ rw lvxtfh*cii, itmr^ig. (Compare Cten. zzxiii. 19.) 
These last omissions are of rare occurrence ; but there are parallel examples in 
^lian, V. 11, xiii. 30, n 'AXi^«y2^«(;, tubaud, fjunrn^* Alciphr. £p. ii. 2, Tifiwtfmrm 
• "Mtir^oltiftVf tubaud, khk^og, Steph. Byzant. ^IxXm* n iriXsg ««■• /\<ift>«?\ tv rm 
'hui^av, tcit, ^»r(»g. Either •?xf/0/, inmatet, or some word of like import, is wanting 
in Rom. xvi. 10, rovg l» rSv *A(t9'T»fi»vX»Vf tho$e of the household of Ari%tt^mht8* So 
also in 1 Cor. i. 11, 1'rl rSv Xkcng, Another word which is frequently understood ii 
•ixogf or l£/A». Thus Mark v. 35, kxi v$v k^te'inaytiytv^ tci/, tS^x«y» So John zviiL 
28, a^o rod K»tei<px. In Luke ii. 49, iv rosg T»v itecr^og fi»v, where some supply 
^fiyueift, it is better to understand tlxotg] or t^fiotrt in the plural. Compare Jdm 
xix. 27. The classical phrase e<V ^^0c occurs in Acts ii. 27, 31. Some, however, 
here supply ;^tr^« from Ps. xxxvii. 33, Hos. xiii. 14. 

Obs, 20. In the New Testament the position of nouns in regimen, which most 
frequently occurs, is that of the genitive after the governing noun ; though it is 
not unusual to find it between the governing noun and its article. See examples 
under § 30. Obs. 1. There are a very few cases in which the article of the principal 
noun is repeated : as in Matt. xxvi. 28, vo eufAoi (A9v vl rln< xttmig 'ita^Kng, John xix. 
25, JAa^U h rcu KXura, Compare Matt. iv. 21, x. 2, Mark iii. 17, 1 Cor. i. 18. The 
genitive precedes the governing noun, 

1 . When it belongs to several substantives ; as in Acts iii. 7, ami; mi fimeug tuu 

2. When it is emphatic, and especially where there is an antithesis. Thus Acts 
xiii. 23, rourau o Biog aero rou o-xi^/AetTog Hyti^t WTn^tt, 1 Cor. iii. 9, i^gHytip 
IfffAVi runoyoi' Btov ytei^ym, eiou olxohtfin Xfrt, Phil. ii. 25, gu^Tsarmmv /hm^ 
v(aZti Ii urig'TtXov. See also Matt. i. 18, Rom. iii. 29, xiii. 4, 1 Cor. vi. 15, 
ix. 11, Gal. iii. 15, iv. 28, Eph. ii. 8, 10, vi. 9, Heb. vii. 12, x. 36, James 
i. 26, 1 Pet. iii. 21. 

3. When it contains the leading idea of the proposition: as in Rom. xi. 13, 
IBvuv dri^'ToXog, 1 Tim. vi. 17, iri irXovrav ainXarnTi. Tit. i. 7, Bi§u m««mjm». 
It may here be observed also, that, in St. Paul's Epistles more especially the 
genitive is frequently separated by some intervening word from the noun 
upon which it depends. Thus 1 Cor. x. 27, u Vi ng xaXtT vftSig rUf dw'term* 


Eph. ii. 3, rizva (puffti o^yns- I Thess, ii. 13, koyaf axans *af ' w/aw* rtv ©«»«;, i. e. 
X470V Biov fra^' iifiMv dzouofAtvov. Compare Luke vii. 36, xiii. 11, xx. 36, 
John iv. 39, Phil. ii. 10, 1 Tim. iii. 6, Heb. viii. 5. Similar instances are 
found in profane writers. Thus Plutarch. Timol. 20^ t)s tlrs rSv tr^artvc 

§ 45.— Dative. (Buttm. § 133.) 

1 . Where there is 'relation to an object, the general rule is 
that the person or thing, to or for whom or which the action 
takes place, is put in the dative; and the principle, -with certain 
qualifications, prevails in the writings of the New Testament. 

2. Thus the verbs signifying to give, to yield, to tell^ are 
properly followed by the dative ; as in Luke xi. 6, x^^aov i/.oi 
rp^Tf aprovs. Gal. iv. 5, ols ov^i Trqo^ &pav eii^a/Aev. Of SiSovaj and 
ei^eTv so governed examples abound ; but it' may be well to 
observe that h is sometimes added, as in Acts iv. 12, SaSo/AEvov 
Ev Tor$" dvbpdfirois, i. e. given among men. So 2 Cor. viii. 1, t^v 
yjxpiy TOO @Bou SeSo/xsvwv ev rai^ cxxXoojiixtf. 

Obs. 1. We have ^a^uht^ovat with the (lat. of the person ; as in Matt. v. 25, 
fAn*9rs ffi vret^aiat o dvTi%z9s rjr x^ir^. When, however, the object is punishment or 
misery f this verb is followed by tJs and an accusative ; as in Matt. v. 17, 21, xxiv. 9, 
Rom. i. 28, 2 Cor. iv. 11.' Both are united in 1 Cor. v. 5, xa^xlouvui rov rataZrav rSf 

Obs, 2. Many verbs signifying to announce^ &c., which properly govern a dative, 
are found in the New Testament with ug or ^^eg and an accusative. Thus Luke 
xxiv. 47, xfi^tf^^^tiyett fitireivoixv us 9recvrec rk t^vm. 1 Thess. ii. 9, Ixn^u^ecfiiv ilg vfjtMS ro 
ihayyiXtn veio 610?. So Pausan. viii. 5. 8, Is a^tayras \%fiyyi>^^n ro rokfififitet. The 
verb iuecyytXi^tg'^ett takes the dative of the person, when it signifies to bring glad 
tiSngs, as in Luke i. 19, ii. 10, Rev. x. 7 ; or, to preach the Gospel, as in Luke iv. 1 S, 
Rom. i. 15, 1 Pet. iv. 6. More usually it bears the sense of conveying evangelical 
instruction, with an accusative of the person evangelised ; as in Luke iii. 18, Acts 
viii. 25, xvi. 10, Gal. i. 9, 1 Pet. i. 12. So Hippol. de Antichr. § 26, ihityyiXilifjutvos 
rets rSv ayiuf ^u^aS' If> however, the thing preached is put in the accusative, the 
person is still in the dative; as in Acts viii. 35, xvii. 18, 1 Cor. xv. 1, and elsewhere. 
Compare Heliod. ^th. ii. 16, Joseph. Ant. v. 1.5, B. J. iii. 9. 6, Kuseb. V. Constant, 
iii. 36. It is construed with Iv and a dative in Gal. i. 16, 'Iva tvuyyaXi^M/Aai atfrov 
Iv rots iBytff49, i. e. among the gentiles; and with kV and an accusative in 1 Pet. 
i. 25.« 

3. After verbs signifying to command^ permit, exhort, &c. 
the dat. is used. Thus Matt. viii. 21, e^iT§ev|/ov yioi agieX&erv. 

> Winer, § 30. 3. Alt, § 28. Kruger ad Xen. Anab. ii. 5. 38. Jacobs ad 
Lucian. Tox. p. 46. 

« Winer, §31,2. 

' Winer, § 31. 1, 32. 1. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 29. 6. Lol.eck ad Phryn. p. 268. 
Abresch. Obss. Misc. x. 2. p. 213. 


XV. 35, IxgXet/^fi To7y 05^X01$ ava«'8ff6iv IttI t-wv <y^v. XXI. 6, ^oiiq(t«v 
Tgy Ka^if TT^ocTfra^ev avrois. Add Mark i. 27, viii. 6, 1 Tim 
iv. 6, Philem. 8. The same construction obtains with el^-erv in 
the same sense in Matt, xxiii. 3, Trivra, ovv, oaa av Biiroja-n Cfuy 
'mpsiv, TfipsTrB xcti Troisirs. These verbs, however, are equally 
constructed with an accusative and an infinitive ; as in Mark 
vi. 27, e^era^gv Evep^&rfvajt rr,v xe^aX^v a^Tou. viii. 7, eY'zre 'Jraqat^s7v2i 
K(zl avrx. Luke xviii. 40, SKiXsvaBV ahrov dy(^^riy(xi. Acts X. 47, 
Trpoa-ETal^sv avrovs ^aTrrKT^riyai, 

Ott. 3. It is from their analogy with verbs of this class, that thosej signifying to 
rule, or govern, sometimes take the dative. See above § 42. 3, 4, On the other 
hand, va^ot,K,ak%'iM, ret^ar^vvtiv, vovBtriiv, &c. take only the accusative. See Luke iii. 
18, Acts xi. 23, xiii. 50, xx. 31, Rom. xv. 14, 1 Cor. iv. 14, 1 Thess. v. 12, 14, rf 

Obt. 4. Another construction of these words is with 'ivet, o^eas, &c. Thus Matt. 
IV. 3, iiVe, ?ya el Xi^ei cZrct a^rot yifuvreu* viii. 34, «ras^cxaXf^ay, ^v'ets fittrafi^ ecTo rm 
i^iatv etiiTut. Mark vi. 56, ^et^txukevv avToVf ?va xMv rov x^et^vrt^ou tsu s/scarUu mSnw 

4. Verbs signifying to reproach, to blame, to rebuke, to accuse, 
take the dative of the person or thing reproved, with or without 
the accusative of the charge. Matt. viii. 26, sTriTipt^ffg to7s 
dyifjLoif Ka,i rr) &aXa<Tff'y).5f Luke Xxiii. 40, 6 etfooj- sTrsTt/jix aura. 
Acts XIX. 38, eyx,a.'Ksirco(7acv aXXo^Xotr. Heb. viii. 8, fjLSfJL(p6fjLevof 
avTOis Xiyei,^ So 2 Mace. ii. 7, jw.E/uiv|/aVsvoj" olvtois BiTrav, Com- 
pare Ecclus. xli. 7, Arrian. Epict. ii. 23. 

Obs» 5. When signifying to charge strictly, irtrtfjcav falls under a preceding rule; 
and in this sense it occurs with a dative in Matt. xii. 16, Mark iii. 12, viii. 30, Luke 
iv. 41, et alibi. The verb l9ncrXK(rfSiy takes a dative in 1 Tim. v. 1, v^trfivrif^ /in 
lcnrXnlr,s. So also in Xen. CEcon. xiii. 12, Herodian. iii. 3. 13, Polyb. v. 25. 3, 
Joseph. Ant. xii. 4. 2« 8. As in classical Greek, however, we have koi^o^gTv with an 
accusative in John ix. 28, iXoiVo^nrav oZv ahriv. Acts xxiii. 4, rov a^tt^ia rov 6i0v 
X6tio^%7i ; So in Deut. xxxiii. 8, LXX; but with a dative in Kxod. xvii. 2. With 
lU or fr^0f and an accusative, it signifies to rail against one, in Gen. xlix. 23, Exod. 
xvii. 2, Numb. xx. 3. Also 0yt/^/^t<v takes an accus, in Matt. v. 11, Rom. xv. 3. 
In Matt. xxvi. 44, likewise, the best MSS. read &>vu%^ov tthroK^ 

5. There are many verbs in which a relation is more dis- 
tinctly expressed ; such as those which signify to help, and 
to injure. Among these ^orAsiv governs a dative in Matt. xv. 
25, Kvpiz, ^o-n^Bi fjioi. So Mark ix. 22, Acts xvi. 9, Mark ix. 25. 
We have also in 2 Cor. viii. 10, tqvto yiq vfjiTv (7vfji(pipst. 

Obs. 6. The verb up\i7v, however, is always construed in the New Testament 
* See Wetstein ad Ipc, * Reitz ad Lucian. T. ii. p. 787. 


with an accusative. See 6 40. 1, 6, So also kvfieuw^tu in Acts viii. 3, imZxtg » 

Obi, 7. Adjectives also which signify any thing use/ui or injurious, are properly con- 
structed with the dative ; as in Phil. iii. 1, Ifio) jtih cvk »*v»»g«y, vfiTf Tt &ir<paXis. 2Tino. 
ii. 21, tux^wrof rf hr^orif* iv. 1 1, Wi ydf /mi tSx^n^Tos us haxoviaf. Tit. iii. 8, vmird 
Iffn ra xm^xt xeti tu<pixtfia r»7s uv^^tiitcis. Sometimes with a preposition ; as in 2 Tim. 
ii. 14, us »vlif x4^^'f*»V' (Compare Wisd. xiii. 11.) iii. 16, «•«*•« y^ec(ph Biornv^rosi 
xtti u<piXtfMs vr^cf h'Set^xuXieiv, «. r. X. A genitive is sometimes used; as in 1 Cor. 
Vli. 35, rovro }ii v'^og r» v/jmv durm ffVfi(pt^ov Xiyu, Add 1 Cor. X. 33. 

6. Verbs signifying to obey, to disobey^ ^e/&e(T&aI, iTrei^^iy, 
mrxKoieiVy take the dative, as observed above, in § 42. 06*. 8. 
So iovXsueiy, to serve ; as in Matt. vi. 24, ov Si/ya(T&s ©ew ^ovX^vbiv 
xoit lAafA^fxcov^. Rom. ix. 12, /xe/^wv iovXBvast ra> sXaa-aon. Also 
^laKovBiv and XsirovpysTv, Acts xix. 22, Svo tojv ^iockovovvtcov avtcb, 
Som. XV. 27, of e/Xoi/ffi Iv TotV crap}tix,o7s XgiTot/^yTJcra; avrois. We 

have, however, in 1 Pet. iv. 10, els savrous adro iiacycovovvref. 
The verb Xarpsisiv, likewise, which in the New Testament 
always denotes religious worship, regularly takes the dative. 
Thus in Matt. iv. 18, Luke iv. 8, Ky^tov tov ©eov a-ou tt^ogkv 
y/io^is, Kui aura) fJLovo) Xarqsvasi^. Acts vii. 42, 'jrxpi^coxsv avrous 
XarpBveiv rri arparl^ tou ov^dvou. Eom, i. 25, sXdrpsvactv rri 
xTiVsi Trapoi tov xTiVavra. Add Luke i. 74, Acts vii. 7, xxiv. 14, 
xxvi. 7, xxvii. 23, Rom. i. 9, Phil. iii. 3, Heb. viii. 5, xiii. 10, Rev. 
vii. 15, xxii. 3, et alibi. 

Obi, 8. It will he observed that, for a like reason probably, x^a^xwuv^ though in 
the example above cited and elsewhere it properly governs an accmative (§ 40. Obs, 
1. 2.), is in the New Testament and the later Greek writers more commonly followed 
by a dative ; as in Matt. ii. 2, 8, 11, x^a^xvvtia'eti airif. So Matt. iv. 9, viii. 2, xiv. 
33, xviii. 26, xxviii. 9, 17, John iv. 21, 23, ix. 38, Acts vii. 43, 1 Cor. xiv. 25, Heb. 
i. 6, Rev. iv. 10, vii. 11, and elsewhere. Compare Gen. xxiii. 7, LXX, Polyb. v. 
86. 10, ^lian. H. An. x. 24, Joseph. Ant. vi. 7. 5.^ Analogous expressions are 
ycw^iriTv rm (Matt. xvii. 14,), ofieXeyiTv vm (Heb. xiii. 15). See below § 46. 2. 
Obs. 3. In Luke iv. 7, Rev. iii. 9, xv. 4, the form ^^offxvn7it Ua^tiiv r$vos seems to be 
an Hebraism, which the LXX have also retained in 2 Kings xviii. 22. We have also 
in Matt, xxvii. 29, y»vu9CirnveivTis tfitT^eerBtv etvrcv. 

Obs, 9. With one exception, i^i^xuv governs a dative in the New Testament. 

Thus Matt. xiv. 6, tl^tffi tm *H^ti^r,, Rom. viii. 8, ol U ^et^xi tvns 8<^ a^iffut ov ^vvuvrett. 
See also Rom. xv. 1. sqq. 1 Cor. vii. 32, sqq. 2 Tim. ii. 4. We have in Acts vi. 5, 
fl^iffiv i Xoy»s hu9rm v»vtos row ^Xv^oug. This is an Hebraism, and occurs in Gen. 
xxxiv. 18, xli. 37, 2 Sam. iii. 36, 1 Mace. viii. 21. Compare also 1 John iii. 22. 

Obs. 10. The verb tvhxiTv is seldom found in profane vnriters, and then only with 
& dative ; as in Polyb. Exec. p. 1213, Diod. Sic. iv. 23. In the New Testament 
the more common form is luhxiTv eV rtvt (Matt. iii. 17, 1 Cor. x. 5) ; and it occurs 
with a simple accus, in Heb. x. 6, 8. Both forms are derived from the Hebrew, 

^ Winer, §31.1. Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 463. Kypke ad Matt. ii. 8. 


and thence adopted »>y the LXX. See 1 Chroii. xsix. 3, Ps. xliv. 3, li. 18, 19, cii 
15, cxHx. 4, Isai. Ixii. 4, Mai. ii. 17.^ 

7. There are various modes of rendering the dative, by 
means of which a reference of some kind or other may be ex- 
pressed, after most words. Thus Acts xviii. 3, avvslx^To r2 
'jrysvfjLari, was earnest in his mind, (Compare v. 25, xx. 22, 
Eph. V. 23.) Rom. iv. 19, ^y\ acr&cvioffas T73 7ri(rrsh i- C «^ to his 
failh: vi. 20, lXsi/&g§ot ^ts rrj SixatocnJvY), free in respect of 
righteousness, (See § 42. 2. 1.) 1 Cor. ix. 21, txri cuv ayo^xos ©fa;, 
aXX' 6vvo/Aoy yipiar^, being not without a law in relation to God, 
but under a law in obedience to Christ, Gal. i, 22, ^/xtjv oiy^fO'^i- 
(A,Bvo^ TO) itpoo'clfTtco TOis eKKKfiffiat^, I was personally unknown to the 
Churches, Phil. iii. 5, TTcpiro^xri oTcrd-nix.Bposy with respect to cir- 
cumcision, circumcised on the eighth day. Some read Trspirofxi 
in the nominative, but of this the tenor of the passage, in 
which eycu slfjit is understood throughout, will not admit. Col. 

ii. 5, el yiq X(fl tyi aaqKi aTrsiixi, dWdi roj irveUfJiari <7uv vfjuiv bI(jlI. 
Add Matt. xiii. 14, dyd'TrXfipovrai auTois ri 7rpo(pinr£ix, with reference 
to them ; where however another reading is ett' avroCs. To this 
head belongs also Luke xx. 38, ^avrer yiq olvtS) ^cuaiv, all are 
still alive with reference to God, inasmuch as he can restore 
the dead to life. And precisely analogous are the expressions, 

dTTo^civBTy TY) afJLxpri^, vexpov aiv(xi t/j ocfjixpri^ (Rom. vi. 2, 10, II.), 
ocTro^xveXv rcb yofjico (Rom. vii. 4, Gal. ii. 19.). Compare also 
1 Pet. ii. 24. The meaning is somewhat different in Rom. 
xiv. 7. See Obs. 13. 1. In Luke xviii. 31, to) via) tou aybpunov, 
which some refer to y£y/)a/>tjw.£va, is more properly construed 
with TeXEcr&^ffETai. 

Obs, 11. It is, however, comparatively rare, that such references as the above are 
expressed in the New Testament by a simple dative ; a preposition being more 
generally employed : as in Rom. iv. 20, tU rhv Irctyyt^.iav rou Biov oh 'huxol^n 7% 
attffriet, £ph. V. 32, \yu Ti y.iyu tig X^iffrovj xa) us rhv t»K\n<rietVy tfith reference to 
Christ and the Church. Compare Acts ii. 25, Heb. i. 7, 8. Sometimes a second 
dative is added ; as in 2 Cor. xii. 7, i^o^n f^ot ffKoXe^ Tjj ffa^jci^ a thorn for tnyfleih. 
Compare Gen. xlvii. 24, LXX.® 

Obs. 12. Similarly the dative is found with verbs and adjectives, where in English 
the preposition /or is used. Thus in Matt. xv. 32, T^o(rfx.ivo'j(ri /u,oi. xviii. 8, 9 x*Xn 


I iffrh X. r. A. XXvi. 4, xxXov nv (thru, u ovx lyivMti' Acts ix. 5, zxvi. 14, 0-xXm«» tu 
jtff xivr^ec Xaxri^uv, I Cor. xi. 6, ai^x^ov yvvxixt ro xs;^a<rBcct. 2 Tim. iy, 8 ««•«»!<>«< 

* Parkhurst's Lexicon in v. Raphel. ad Matt. iii. 17. 

* Winer, § 31, 3. and Obs, 4. Alt, § 29, 5. Lobeck ad Soph. Aj. 30S. Borne- 
mann ad Xen. Conviv. p. 214. Ast ad Plat, Legg. p. 278. 


fAdi rns ^ncetioffuvfis ffri^eivos* It is no less usual^ however, to meet with a preposition 
and an accusative ; as in Matt. v. 13, us ev^h itrxvn- Sph. iv. 29, ayet^os vr^og tixo- 
^ofAtiv' 2 Tim. iv. II, io-rt yoi^ f^ot iv^^nffros tig ^setxovietv. Sometimes the construction 
is with the accusative and an infinitive ; as in Matt. xvii. 4, xukof iffrn fifitas ah 
uvuu xix. 24, ivKotun^ov iffrt xufAtiXov ^m r^vrnfAATos p»(pi^as ^nX^iiv^ v 9r\ovffto9 
X. r. X. 1 Cor. xi. 13, tr^fifTtfy iffrt yvvBuxu axa.rotxoiXvtrov ru SiS ^^o<rivx!t<f^oti t This 
example, however, may he explained by the dativus commodi (§ 46. 5.). 

Obi, 13. Certain other relations expressed by the dative are closely allied to the 
preceding. For example, 

1. A purpose, will, opinion, or custom, according to which an action takes place, 
is put in this case. Thus Acts ii. 23, rri u^iffAtv^ fiovX^ xat cr^eyvacu rod Siov 
(xhr«9. v. 4, oi/x' f^'^^ov (Tot XfAin^ i. e. at thy disposal, xv. 1, lav fitri ^tpirifji/- 
vil9'Bi TM iBtt Muvff-suSf ev ^vyac^i ffuBUvai* Rom. xiv. 4, ffu rU «T o x^ivuf 
aXker^iov oixirvv ] tm t^iia/ xu^lu ffr^xti ^ ^t^rrUy i. e. according to the will or 
judgment of his own master ', and so in the following verses. 2 Pet. i. 21, 
eh ya^ ^ikr.fiun avB^^ei-rov ^ye%S»j crori 'r^o^nnlu. Compare Tobit ill. 3, 
2 Mace. vi. 1, Xtn. Cyr. i. 2. 4, Sext. Emp. ii. 6, Strabon. xv. p. 715.* 
A preposition is inserted in I Cor. xi. 13, h hfut uvroTs x^tvan. Both con* 
structions are united in 1 Cor. xiv. 11, s^a/Axi tu XaXovvn (ioi^fia^os, xu) o XaxHif 
iv i/Ao) fid^fiu^of, i. e. in my judgment.' 

2. In definitions of time and place, or when an action has reference to some 
one, with respect to some^ feeling or qualification ; se participle expressive 
thereof is sometimes, but rarely, employed in the dative. The two follow- 
ing are examples : Luke i. 36, euros fithv ixros le'rh eti/r^ rv xaXov/Atvyi ffrii^a, 
James iv. 17, e/^^n eZv x«Xoy ^rotuVf xai fMi ^otovvrt^ a,fjt,a,^rta eturS iffrtf, i. e. 
if one knows, &c. Another form occurs in Acts xxiv. \\, eb ^Xuous M /aos 
vfAifiui 9) hxu^uo, a(p'' ris X. r. X. To this head may probably be referred Matt, 
viii. 1, Ketretfieivri Ti aurZ x. r. X., when he came down; Acts xxii. 6, iyivtre ^t 
fioi vo^ivofjt,lveo X. r. X., as I proceeded. Compare Matt. viii. 23, 28, ix. 27, 
Mark v. 2, Acts xxii. 17, et alibi. But see § 61. 2. Obs, 2. 

3. Substantives, derived from verbs governing a dtUive are often followed by the 
same case : as in 2 Cor. ix. 12, tvx^oiffriuv rZ BiS. Heb. x. 25, xoc^us iBos rwtv. 
So Plat. Legg. ii. 4, re n^es nfiuv. Upon the same principle we have in Luke 
iv. 16, Acts xvii. 2, xetra re stupes ethru,^ 

8. The direction of an action towards an object, whether 
such direction be real or imaginary, is frequently expressed by 
the dative ; as in Matt. viii. 28, virmrviaav avrcb ^vo iatfjLon^o- 
fjLsvoi. (Compare v. 34.) xiv. 11, Tjveyxe rri fjLinrpl ochrris, xxi. 5, 
6 ^<zcri\£vs GOV E^%er(xi cot. Acts ii. 33, rri Se^i^ ovv rov ®sov 
j5\|/ft;&6is-. V. 4, ovyc ey\/EV(Jcu dv^pa/TTOi^, dWa. @ecp. 

Obs, 11. It will be observed that in the preceding verse the verb -^'^vhiaBxt 
governs the accusative in precisely the same sense ; and such is the true classical 
construction of the verb. It takes a dative however in Ps. xviii. 49, Iviii. 36, 
Ixxviii. 38, LXX. In Acts xxi. \^,oiyovrts, ^ot^ £ l^iimr^ufm, Myotf-o/vi, it is impossible 
to suppose with Beza and others, that the dative is put, by attraction, for the ac- 

1 Winer, ^ 31. 3. b. Wyttenbach ad Plat. Phaed. p. 101 . D. 
^ Doederlein ad Soph. CEd. C. p. 529. Jacobs ad Athen. p. 183. 
B Winer, ubi supra ; Stalbaum ad Plat £uth. p. 101. Ast ad Plat. Polit.p. 451. 
Legg. p. 36 


cusative; not to mention a similar construction in Xen.'.Kphes. iii. 6. tiyiftnt 
Aj8^0X0^t|. Kpiph. Vit. p. 340. D. Hyecytv avrov 'AS«y««'i« rS vcevva. 

Obi, 15. The ordinary construction with us or x^ig is perhaps more frequent. 
Thus in Matt. ii. 11) ixS^yrtf i/; rh* ot»iecv, iii.l4, cy tfxv *t^f f** i ^^* ^f ^*^hc^ us^ 
t^fifMv. vi. 26, 1/ji.likiypetTt tig rk xirum, viii. 32, &^fAnft XMtt n etytXn us fjn* SsXc#- 
tttu xii. 18) %U Sv iC^oxfi0-t*» xiv. 19) avet^Xi-^at Us vn eu^avef. Luke ii. 41, Wt^vnrt 
tis ^li^cvffetXfifA rn U^rvi rev «ra0%a. (In this example some suppose that direction is 
also indicated by the dative ; but rji l0«t^ marks the time, a/ or during the/eatt.) 
Acts xxiii. 10) ayttv tls rii* xu^tfitlioX^v* 2 Cor. xiii. 7, iSx^fi^tu x^og v'iw Stov, Col. iiL 9, 
fith ^/'tt^<0'St us ixXnXavs* We find ypivho'^ett 9r^is rtw in Xen. Anab. i. 3, 5.^ 
' Obs. 16. Hence many verbs have a like government, which are compounded with 
M and 9r^es, or even with prepositions which never govern a dative, when they 
express direction to an object. It is unnecessary to multiply examples^ but it may 
he observed that some of the best MSS. read tar^oTs in Luke viiit. 43, ug ietr^ 
9r^o9»m\tiffAffa Sxov rov (isov. Probably the received text may have arisen from the 
ordinary construction of the verb x(off»t»Xi^»tn in profane writers. Compare Xen. 
Cyrop. ii. 4. 9, iElian. V. H. xiv. 32.* 


1. In a less obvious sense, the dative is found with verbs 
which signify to meet with. Thus in Luke viii. 19, ovk ^JvavTo 

Obs. 1. So also Ivrt/Txavtiy r/y/, which in the New Testament si^ifies to make 
application to any one^ either by way of petition or complaint. Thus in Acts zzr. 
24) frf^2 Av xav re 9rkn^os rSv *lovhaluv ivirv^^ov fi.9i, x. r, X., Rom. xi. 2, IvTwyxthu rS 
0tS zetTot rov *l(rp»^x. Compare Wisd. viii. 21, xvi. 28, Polyb. iv. 76, Theophr. 
Char. i. 2. 

2. The dative is also used with verbs which imply inter- 
course or companionship ; as in Acts xxiv. 26, a;fA.l\si avroj. 

Obs, 2. It is this dative which follows words compounded with o-vv and ifuv. 
Among the numberless instances of the former composition a few will suffice. Matt. 
ix. lOt^vmviKuvro rS^Ififfov, Luke xxiv. 15, ffvnvro^tvtra avroTs. Acts xvi. 18, ws,' 
Tuv <piXoffe^uv ffunfiecXXov ahrek . Rom. viii. 16, avToro xvtvfAO, rufjLf/LaoTvpu tZ xnuumri 
flfAMV, XV. 30) ffvyayatvierao'^eti ftoi U rods x^oaiv%a7s» 1 Cor. iv. 8, ?ya xeu iifAus vmui 
trvfA(iMffi\tv<fUfjctv. Phil. iv. 3, alrtns iv rai ihuyyikieo ffvv^^Xnfoiv (aoi.^ Add Acts X.27, 
e-vvofAiXuv avru. But, in a different sense, Luke xxiv. \Ayttvroi cjfA't\6v* v^os icXXnXsvii 
they conversed together. Under this head must be classed 2 Cor. vi. 14, fch yiftrBt 
irtQe?^vyovvTts utiffrols, which may perhaps be explained as an abbreviation of ^ 
ymff^t iri^e^vyovvriSf rovrtfrivj ofAa^vyovvrts axiffTotg* 

Obs. 3. In the New Testament the verb o/AoXoyuv never signifies to assent or con- 
sent, as in profane writers ; but in the sense of to affirm or declare, it is followed by 
a dative (Matt. vii. 23, xiv. 7) ; and also in the sense of to make acknowledgment or 
to give praise (Heb. xiii. 15); in which latter acceptation the compound verb i|«*#* 

^ Winer, § 31. 2. Alt, § 29. b. Ast ad Plat. Legg. p. 553. Enirelhardt ad 
Plat. Menex, p. 260. 

« Winer, §31.2. and note to p. 1 73. ' » Alt,' Gr. N. T. 6 29. 2. 
« Winer, § 31. Obs. 5. 


XayiTe-Beii is more usual; as in Matt.xi. 25, Luke x.21, Rom. xiv. 11, xv. 19. When 
it signifies to confess or acknowledge, the object is put in the accusative ; as in John 
ix. 22j Acts xxiii. 8, xxiv. 13, Rom. x. 9, I Tim. vi. 12, 1 John i. 9, iv. 2, 3, 
2 John 7. There seems to be a more emphatic signification in the form o/Aokoyuv 
fv i/Aoi (Matt. X. 32, Luke xii. 8), which is probably an Hebraism.* Compare Ps. 
xliv. 8, LXX. Some, indeed, suppose that nothing more is implied than if the 
dative were employed without the preposition ; but this will scarcely be admitted, 
although such pleonasms frequently occur. We have an instance, with reference to 
this very verb; since ofAoXoyiTv ^rofAetn Sind i/AoXoyiTv ive-rofitari are equivalent expres- 
sions in Rom. x. 9, 10. Many other examples will have been already observed ; to 
which may be added Matt. xvii. 12, Wain^av Iv alru o^a ri^ixyjerecv, (Compare Mark 
ix. 13.) Luke xxiii. 31, tl if r^ vy^i l^vXv ravra ^osotj^iv, U rZ l^ft^Z ri yivmren. Acts 
xiii. 15, tl t^Tt y.oyos \v vfuv ^et^xxXi^ctofg ^r^og 70v XuoVf kiytri. 1 Cor. ii. 6, 9'e(piuf 
Xukoufjut* U ro7s Ti>.iio7s' ix. 15, Ivet euru yUrtrett iv ifioi. 2 Cor. iv. 3, ty to7( a'ToXkv- 
fiitets irrt xtxetXvfAfitycv, Gal. i. 16, avoK»y.v'^m rh vlh avrou if ifiol* 1 John IV. 9 
i<payi^M^fi h ayaiffi rov Stov if hf^tf. Although a similar redundancy is sometimes 
observable in the Greek writers generally, and more particularly in those of a later 
date, yet it is more in keeping with the Hebrew idiom. Compare Gen. xl. 14, Dan. 
xi. 7, Judith vi. 2, vii. 24.« 

Obi* 4. Instead of the accusative of the object, Wiq preposition Iv with a dative fol- 
lows the verb i»\iytffBah more Hebraico, in Acts xv. 7, o 0tos if hfuf iltxi^etroj i. e., 
rifA»s, me (Peter). Some, indeed, would render b fijuTf, one among us ; and others 
join fv hfAif Btos, our God. These interpretations are not only very harsh, but the 
Hebrew form is precisely thus rendered in 1 Chron. xxviii. 4, LXX, ilikt^etre tv i/ne) 
tJfai ^et^ikU. So in 1 Sam. xvi. 9, 2 Chron. vi. 5, Nehem. ix. 7.^ 

3. It seems to be the idea of companionship y which explains 
the use of the dative in the following instances : — 

1 . After the verb iKoKov^sh, to follow ; as in Matt. iv. 20, 
22, 25, 'hx.oKov'bmav aurcb. So also in Matt. viii. 19, 22, 
ix. 9, 19, Mark ix. 38, Luke ix. 23, John i. 38, 41, 44, 
and elsewhere. 

Obi, 5. Hence this verb is sometimes accompanied with /Atrec and a genitive, as 
in Luke ix. 49, obz axekovBtT /iir hfAZf, Kev. xiv. 13, r« V% t^yx ecliruf ixeXovB^sT fitir'' 
ahrZf. When direction only is implied, the form is rather as in Matt. x. 38, uxoXou- 
Si? h^Uat fAou» So also in Matt. xvi. 23, v^rayt h^Uv (mv, Luke ix. 23, i? ns SsXii 
h^iffv fMv i>J^i7ff X, r. X. In Mark viii. 34, the manuscripts vary between- Axokw^uf 
and ixBtif.* 

2. With verbs signifying to converse ; as in Matt. xii. 46, 
^oiToyvref avTu XaXricrai. Add Mark xvi. 19, John iv. 26, 
and compare Gen. xxix. 9, LXX. We have, in the 
same sense, John iv. '27, f^sTa ywaixos IXaXe*, and, ri XaKsT 
fjLerd, avTriS, ix. 3i, o XaXo/v iA,ira, cov* xiv. 30, XaX'haaf 

fjieO* vfj^wv. Compare also Matt. xvii. 3, Mark ix. 4, 
Luke ix. 30, xxii. 4, Acts xxv. 12. Again, Acts xvii. 2, 
iiBlisysro avTOiS, xviii. 19, SieXgj^&o] toTs* I ot/Scc/oiS". 2 Cor. 

* See Kuinoel ad /oc. * Winer. § 31. 5. 

* Alt, Gram. N. T. § 30. 1. a. See Vorstius de Hebr. N. T. p. 622. 

* Alt, Gram. N. T. § 29. 6. 


xii. 19, 9ritX.v SoxttT; Sn mtv aToh.r,yi!ifj.iirx. To tliis 
head must also be referred Epli. v. 10, Xa^owTc! 
A'a.y^i, which the English Testament wrongly trans- 
lates, xpeakitKj to yourselves. 
3. With words which signify to contend ; as in Matt. v. 40, 
T6J StX^vTi <7oi KBi&«vai, lo ovB that Koitld go to law with 

Obi. G. In IhB New Teatament a prepnaition is, with perhaps Ihia Biogle eicep- 
fion, constantly amplnyed. Examples ate, John vi. 52, Jfca^wo iIi irjij ikXi- 
Xtut. 1 Cor. ri. 1, a-jSj-mt 'i^t^t r^k ts. Irtfi: 6, ihxfis jBiri iSiXptS e(i'htu 
Compare Gen. xxvi. 21, Judg. i»i. 23, Jobnxi. 13, lU, Jeiem. ii.g,36, 
LaiD. iu.3fi, Hos. ii. 3, Mie. vi. 11. Thus, also, Eph. ii. 12, oS. !vr» n/^'t ■ »*■ 
<r(sr nV^ **' raji^n. Rer. ii. 1G, viAi^nm fiir' aurvi, xii. 7, ivakifmiiu miri ni 
^ainrif . To this head may also be lererred the verb iixXjyl^irSai, lo rcanw tr 
diipule, which is followed by i, or tjm. Matt. xvi. 7, 1,i1.j.;{:«t, I, Uut«s. limit 
ix. 33, ^! i, tH ai <r(i, l^KTi^. Ii).,rlt,f3i ; a>ld MaiSc ji. G, Luke iU. la, v. ii, 
lii. 17, XX. 14. 

Oil. 7. There aro many colleclive noun!, such as rrjaWf, rast, !«virir, a-xSaw, anl' 
the like, which, as indicating compani'mship, are put in the dative 
ellipsis of rill : and a similai coastruction seems to obtain in Col. ii. 14, IliXi/tf^u ij' 
jcx9' ii/iZt ■x^ufif^^'i n'l Ssy/isrit. Few passages have more severely perplexed tt 
commi'ntatois, by some of whom it is renilercd, with the English Testament, ion 
wriliHfi a/ oriliaanreii, which can never be exlractcd from the uciginal ; by olhen, III 
writleu /me ciMiltlag in ardmancei (comparing Eph. ii. IS); and by others Bfoii 
among whom is ffiner, rus iiy/tarir is marie to depend upon l|K\i'Vaf. The In 
meauiog is, iaving cBnttlled the bond together with ill ordinamtt; and this is COI 
finneil by the reading of a few mdnuscripts which have riii •rUs 1, So Clem. Bon 
llum. ii. T» sifuv rli m7( Wikirin. The same ellipsis, which is also found in H*^ 
brew, also occurs in Rev. viii. 4, a>i,Sti i Kxitris ■rSt Su^x/eztui tiuc rfiriuj^wi 
iyla-i, lagelher leith Ihe prayeri oftht jnind,' 

4. Words which signify resemblance, equality, fitness, and' 
Ihc contrary, whether adjectives, verbs, or adverbs, and tbose 
mity, govern a dative. Matt. vii. 24j 
. 12, "(Tour iifjA\ airolis jwoincray. Luke 
Eph. V. 3, KaSnij- wgsTTei 371011. Phil,< 
,0V Sav^T^. Heb. vi. 7, 
,mes i. 6, hix^ xXiSuy] SaX^o-imr. 

amsi idtm, with a. dative, which includes a 
expressed by a particle of comparisi 
■!i Ifnftifiiiii, U it one anil llie tame Ihi 

I Midillolon (on the Gr. Art.) on Col. ii. ^A. Noldius, p. 576. See also Mj 
knight, llusenmuUer, and other Inlerjip. ail /oc. 
• Wker, } 2i, 4. 

also w 






riy ,^vSp 

vii. 32 



ii. 27, 

■o-Sehi^e VSCQ 


Tamv E 


V E«/*0, 

. J 

£77 mare t^j 

0e?, X 

. E77 




f j.^ 

of iT,, and where (he sen 


1 Cur. XI 


J«'j WT, 




OU, 9. The eiceptions to the lule with respect lo the class of words denoting 
limi/itmie, &c. nro vecy rare in the Nevr Ti!&tainent. Once only S/umi ia found with 
a genilire in John vlii. 55, lit/ni i/uui if^Zi, ^litrrii. Among those, however, which 
denote prof in fjy, iyyii takes b genitiTe in John iii. 33, vi. 19, el alibi; and bo <r;LH- 
rln, in John ir. S. The verb ijyi^uj ia followed more frequently by if; or iri, as in 
Hatl. xxi. 2l, iyyiii, d, 'Ii(eriku/i.ii. Luke I. 0, \l,llyyiin> if' ifiS, I, Biu,XiU nZ 
eisv. Compare Luke xix. 29, xxiv. 28~ It occurs also with fiixfi ani] a genitive 
in Phil. il. 30, fiixfi »syar«, H^yyuri. We have also in Luke ix. 62, ifSiTii u'c rii, 
Bw(*i,'«. v,Z &„!. So also in vv. .15. 

a. The (lalivus commndi will te recognised in tlie folloivinn; 
passages: — Matt. iii. IG, dn^y^r,<r^i auToi oi oJgavoi, i. d. in his 
behalf, ot j'fi honour of him. Mark ix. 5, sroiiiTwpiev o-xinar rqiis, 

DOl (tl2V, X3i MitlCTEl Hl'oLV, KoX ' HX't^ ll.ia^ . LuliC i. 54, JiVTJoSilliai 

sXeolis tS 'AffpadiA. (Compare Psal. xcviii. 3, LXX.) xii. 21, 

&»aao^i'^a;v hvT^. 2 Cor. V. 13, e'lre yap h'^ioTiitJUii, 0^' t"ri 
fftulppnmviJkiv, ifiJiv. Phil. i. 27, ovyii^\wtr£i tS ffiffrei, i« defence 
of the faiih. Heb. x. 34, yivaisxavTEr ejjeiv taf-rorr xjeiVrovse 
vTictp^it IV ToTf ovgavoTf. 

Oi». 10. Here also belongs ^sffujiTi mi, to give Itilintong ia favaur ef nay one 
(Luke iv. 22, Jolm iii. 2(1, Rom. x. 2. Cooiiiare Xen. Mem. i. 2. 21) i and, on the 
other hand, ihe dalivia incommodi, in Malt, xxiii. 31, /trfTu^tTri iauTaTi, ye bear wit- 
neti asiii»il youritlvei. Compare James v. ti. Another example ia Heb. v. 6, im- 
tTumivms ixuTiit TM uSir t«u Siiiii ebJ ^apsSuyiMriZnTat. 

Obi. 1 1. Not unfcequeotly ia adcantase or diiadvanlagt expreaseil by a preposition 
and il* case Thus in Luke Tii. 30, « ,!/"*•" ♦*" jS^u^i' rcH BuZ liSiTBrii lij Uonhi, 
I, t. lo their ovn de'rimtKi. ix. \3, iytfiti/^u ii< vi^Tx -rit kait rsiTti ^(tiftXTa, i. e. 
fur llitir imariiAmml . Acts ixvi. 1, irirpriTiiS m irif risimu xlyiir, in ynur own 
defence. PhiL i. 7, .«3»f IfT. !;«a«> l^al «ur. p^mT, ir\ rirrm if^j, lo your credit. 

1 ThesK. ii 5, rJ fliayyiXin liftcit of* lyuiSn iJ( "/"( i' >.•)-* /wvii, rfirf no/ henrfit i/uu.' 

OU. 12. A pronoun in the ilal. earn, is Bometimes inserted, where il mi^jht have 

been omitted without injury lo Ihe Bcnie ; but instances in the New TcslumeDt 

[are and doubtful. Siich ate Matl. xxi. 2, XiiniiTit kyaytti /«.. 5, i Z<"iXtis 

lfX,t™ ™. w("" '■ '■■ *■■ ^^'' "■ "'' '«■/*■' '" '■■X'- *■' "^ifii"" fr' «i™r 

6. InEtcad of referring a thing to a substantive, as in the 
genitive of possession, the dative is sometimes employed in re- 
lation to an adjcctivCj or to the action espressed in the verb ; as 
in Matt, xxvii. 7, vryopaaaTi Tov aygov th ratpm roTi ^imis. Luke 
T. 20, aipEoivrai a^i at afj.apTiai. (Compare L,ukc vii. 48.) 
also Mark iii. 28. Again, Lake vii. 12, vios tj.ovoysi'ns rri f^ur^l. 
Compare Judg. xi. ^4, 1 Chron, iii. 1, Tobit iii. 15, Eeclus. 

r, §31, I. ; 

cub. ud Luciaii. Tui. p. 138. 


iv. 11. Some add Mark ii. 18, ol Se ffol fxa^nral ov vn<Trsvov(ri ; 
but here crol is the nom. plur, of the possessive aof.^ 

Obs, 13. Probably this relation is also the basis of the construction of iTya/j y'ly 
vsff^Mj viru^^iiv, &c., with the dative. Thus Matt. xix. 27, Tt &o» itrreu ifiuv, Wkai 
shal/ we have^ or obtain 9 Luke i. 7, »lx ^y itvro7s rixttv, they had no child, 14,frr» 
%tc^» rot xa) etynXXia^is. viii* 42^ ^uyoiTin^ /Aovayivfis r,v ahrtf, ix. 13, «v» titni hfut 
vXtltv n vrivTt &^r9t xeti ^V9 /;^St/ff. xiv. 10, ioreu ffoi Vclsfit* Rom. xii. 19, \fi9i ixilxif 
ffts, toil, itrri. This last example is a citation from Deut. xxxii. 35, where, be it ob- 
served, the same idiom obtains in the Hebrew. 

Obs* 14. So likewise xosvog is constructed with the dative ; as in Acts iv. 32, h ««- 
rats acretvTtt xotva. Whence the phrase in Matt. viii. 29, vl hfc7v xeu «■«/; Compare 
Luke viii. 28) John ii. 4. It occurs also in Judg. xi. 12, 2 Sam. xvi. 10, LXX. 


Th6 dative occupies the place of the Latin ablative in most 
of its applications. Thus it expresses — 

1. The means whereby y or the instrument wheretoiihy any 
thing is done; as in Matt. iii. 12, to Ss iyjupov xaraxalf 
crsi TTv^i a<r^i(jrci), Mark xv. 19, %rv7[rov ocvrov t-wv xg^aXiv 
xaXifjicc, Liuke iii. 16, eyu yiXy v^o^ri ^(Z'TrrH^af vfjuSif, John 
xxi, 8, 10, Tw TrKotaqlo) ^X&ov. (Compare Matt. xiv. 13, 
Acts xxviii. 11.) 19, anfjLocivoJv ttoioj docyxraj So^iaei toi 
©60V. Add Acts iv. 12, Eom. vii. 25, Eph. iv. 28, v. 
18, Ileb. i. 3. 

Obs, 1. Hence the constniction of ;^^>j(rSai with a dative ; as in 1 Cor. ix. 12, m 
iX^WoifAi^tz. T^ V^outrtet rauryi* 2 Cor. i. 17) finri ei^a rri lXM(pQlec ix^viffeifAftv ; Add Ads 
xxvii. 3, 17, i Cor. ix. 15, 2 Cor. iii. 12, 1 Tim. i. 8, v. 23. Compare Gen. xii. 16, 
xxvi. 29, Prov. x. 26, xxv. 13, LXX. In 1 Cor. vii. 31, 0/ x^afj^ivot rot xicftM rtkn 
is the reading of some manuscripts.^ 

Obs, 2. There is an analogous use of the dative, where a mean or instrument is 
not directly signified, in Rom. i. 20, rk yk^ ao^arx xhrov xira xrltrtts xofffAou rug ncuir 
fjMfft uovfAivx xa^e^aren, known from his works. This sense is, however, more usually 
indicated by a preposition; as in Matt. vii. 16, 20, xiro ruv xx^<ru¥ etlrZv Wtymnt^ 
avravf, xii. 33, ix rou xa^^ov ro yiv^eof ytvaxTxirxu Luke xii. 57, ri Tii xeu m,<^ \xvnn 
oh x^lviTi TO Vixaiov ; Indeed the instrument or means are much more rarely ex- 
l)ressed in the New Testament by a simple dative, than by that or some other case 
with a preposition. Thus in Matt. ii. 16, htirxt^^n M rZv /Aoyuv, iii. 11, 1^ fM 
^irrtZfii vfAXi h vhxri, iv. 1, ^it^n^nvat v<ro rou hx(ioXov» xii. 27, tt iyo* h BuX^i/SwA. 
ixfieiKXat rk 'hxifMvtx, ol uios vfAuv h rlu ixfixXXovfft ', 37 j ix yk^ rSv Xoyoar vov %ixauihini 
xa) Ix rav Xoyuf irov xxrxhtxxff^^ffi^, xxi v. 15, 70 pn^\v ^ik Aainn>. rou «>a^iir«tf. XXvi. 
52, «» fAKx^k'f k'ToXovvrai. Add Mark viii. 31, xvi. 11, John i. 3, xiii. 35, Acts iv. 7, 
xviii. 19, Rom. iii. 20, 1 Cor. v. 4, Heb. i. 1, 2, Rev. ii. 27. 

1 Winer, § 31. 6. Ast ad Plat. Polit. p. 431, « Winer, § 31, 4. 


2. The manner of an action is expressed by the dative, as 

in Acts ii. 6, ^xo^ov zls tuaaros rri JSips o/aXexTCJ XaXovvraJv 
aiiTuv, vii. 60, sKqcc^s ^wvtj /xeyaX'ip. xxiii. 1, syco Triari 
fff v6iSoQ/T6« aya&Yi TTEiroXlrsufAat rcb ©ew. 1 Cor. xi. 5, tt^o^- 
evy(pfjt,ivn axarxxoLKuTrrci) rr) xs^aXri. Col. ii. 11, Iv ^ xa/ 

Obi, 3, Hence the dative is freqtieutly used adverbially; as, for instance, in 
Rom. viii. 13, vrnu/jMrt, in a spiritual manner j or spiritually; since it is evidently 
opposed to Mtra ffei^zetf carnally.^ So in 1 Cor. xiv. 2, ^nv/jtetrt XaXiT fAurrri^nt, Gal. 
iii. 3, ivet^a/Atfot TvivfAarif vvv ffa^x) WiriXiiff^i ; i. 6. vrnufAetrtxZ; and ffee^xtxus* Add 
Gal. V. 5, 25, ei alibi. So the dative feminine of adjectives; as in Matt. xiv. 13, 
n»»\au^ffet9 etifVM vrt^ri avo rvv ToX.tuv, Acts xvi. 37, ^il^etvrtf tifiZf ^tifMa-iet, XX. 20, 
hialleu vfiZf ^nfitofiet xeu xetr olxouf, 1 Cor. xii. 11, hat^evv thia izei^TM* Under each 
of these cases, however, a preposition is equally employed. Thus in Mark vi. 31, 
32, xai^ thiau 2 Cor. i. 12, ty kirXornrt xai uXix^ntia, 6c0(/, »vx 2v vo^ia ra^xtKrij u>.}^ 
it xA^trt et«t;, »nffr^u<pnfAiv h rif xofffjuv, vii. 9, *lvot iy fin^iit T^vtiiaei^tirt t| hftMv, Heb. 
XK 37, iy (pivef fiwxjxl^ett atrsSav^y. Rev. ii. 22, rk rixva eturtis uiroxrtfS iv Bavdrtji, 

Obs, 4. To this head are also to be referred the verbs ^tptrarut and ^c^iviv^eu, 
which, in their figurative sense, are accompanied either by a dat., or by an adverb^ 
X3it by a prep, and its case, signifying the line or manner of conduct. For example, 
Ulark vii. 5, ol fiteiBtirai vw cv vti^t^retrau^i xuru rhv frff^aWiv rSv ^r^itrf^vri^uv. Acts 
ix. 31, iro^tuifAvtot rZ (pi^ea rov Ku^iou, So Luke i. 6, Rom. vi. 4, xiii. 13, 2 Cor. xvi. 
18, £ph. ii. 10, Col. i. 10, 1 Pet. iv. 3, 2 Pet. iii. 3. Of the same class are Rom. 
IV. 12, voTs fvctj^cvfft Ttiif J^^n^t rns Vt^rtats rov 'A^udfi. Phd* ii. 16, rei etv<rS (rrarxjClv 
Kavni. Compare 1 Sam. xv. 20, 2 Sam. xv. 1 1, Prov. xxviii. 26, Tobit iv. 5, 1 Mace. 
vi. 23.« 

Obs, 5. In Acts vii. 53, t/V 'htatra.yks may be put for U liarayaTsf indicating the 
manner of delivery. Compare Gal. iii. 19, Heb. ii. 2. If so, it is a Hebraism ; 
but see § 63. 4. Obs, 10. 

Obs, 6. Frequently the dative signifies mth respect to : as in Matt. xi. 29, retruvos 
rp xafii^, humble in respect to my heart. So in Luke i. 51, vin^yi<puwvs hetwlct xa^ius 
ahrSif, Acts vii. 51, a^i^irfAnrtt rn xa^ltt xeu roTg urU, Add Acts xviii. 2, 1 Cor. 
vii. 34, xiv. 20, 2 Cor. xi. 6, Eph. iv. 18, Phil. ii. 8, Heb. v. 11, xii. 3. In some 
few instances a preposition is employed ; as in Luke xii. 21, lU Btev ^XeurZv. Pos- 
sibly such forms as ko-nTos v^ ©k? (Acts vii. 20), ^vmrk t» esf (2 Cor. x. 3), may 
belong to this head.'^ See § 13. 2. Obs, 6. 

Obs, 7. A quality wherein any one is proficient or deficient is commonly put in the 
dative; as in Luke ii. 52, 'r^oixo^ri ffo^iety xa) yikixia, xei) x^V^* ^a^k QiZ xa) kv^^M' 
ifeif, 1 Thess. iii. 12, ^i^t^aiureu ryi ayairjj. Tit. il. 2, vyiamrrits r^ 9riffrttj r"^ kykcrrif 
rji v^rofMf^, Frequently, however, iv is inserted, or an accusative substituted with 
xeirk expressed or understood. Luke i. 7, 18, ii. 36^ vr^o^t^xus h hf^i^Bt$s, Rom. 
iii. 9, VI eZv a'^9c;^0/utSa ; xv. 13, us ro ^i^tff^ivin vfAug ey t»5 \X9r1l1, 1 Cor. xv. 41, 
k^rh^ y»^ kvvi^of ^ut^i^u \v J«|jj. Gal. i. 14, ^^cixonrrov U «r« 'lov^aio'fM}, Phil. iv. 
13, 9'kfr» t^;^vat. Tit. i. 13, iv« vyiotUu^n ly ry mffru. 

Obs, 8. The dative expresses the relation of measure or magnitude ; as in Matt. 
xii. 1 2, 9eo^u ovy hettpi^ti uvB^u^ns ^r^o^rou, 

Obs, 9. Tlie dat, of the measure, and sometimes the accus,, is joined with the 

* Middleton on the Gr. Article, note in loco. 
« Winer, § 31, 1. « Winer, J 31, 3. Alt, § 29, 5. 


comparative; as in <Matt. vi. 30, ei tttpiuSf vyxS f»!aXXn. vii. 11, VM'ff fiiXXm, 
2 Cor. viii. 22, vraXu vr curator i^cv, 1 Pet. i. 7, ^ctXit rtfitmrt^»9, (Griesbach reads, 
in one word, croXtfT/fAWTi^of.) The comparative is also stren^hened by trt, as 
in Ileb. Tii. 15, ^tft^^irt^of iru Hence it has been conjectured that tn fiuXm is 
the true reading in I John iii. 20 ; for which, liowever, there is no authority, and 
the common text is not without parallel. In Phil. i. 9, tn ftZxXov xeu /iUxkn has 
been regarded as a Hebraism ; but the same phraseology is found in Xen. Cyr. iiL 
2. 18, Achil. Tat. vi. 13, Diou. Hal. iv. p. 2228, 6. So magis magisque in Cic. 
Epist. ii. 18. Two comparatives are also united by SirM and t^twtm. Thus in 
Heb* i. 4j vcfouTiu x^i/ttatv ytvifitif9s vin ayyiXttVf tvM ^M^o^Tt^oy «. «*. X. Some- 
times voffovvtt is omitted in the first member; as in Heb. viii. 6, hm^&^ifvt^ 
Ttrivxt Xsirev^yiaSf cffv xa,) x^tirroves i^rt iia^xns fAWtrm, The comparative is 
omitted after efuy which will bear the sense of tn, in Heb. z. 25, tut) t0s»ut(u fuiXkn, 
off'tu fikiiTirt \yyiZ,9wicv r^y nfii^ay. There is a double omission to be supplied, as io 
the brackets, in Mark vii. 36, ocov It ahros uvraTs (ftaXX-ov) inavixXgTOy QTomrtv) /mU- 

3. The dat, expresses the cause or occasion of an action ; 
as in Rom. xi. 20, t*^ aTncrrt^ l^ex!Kd'j^ri(7aLv, by reason of 
unbelief, 30, i5Xe75&a]T6 rri rovrofv dvsAelgcy on account 
of their disobedience. 2 Cor. i. 15, raurri rri ^evoAiim 
l^ovXoixrivy under this persuasion, Heb. ii. 15, oo-oi (fa^ 
hoLvxTov Sii 7ra\T0f rou^^riv evoy(fii 5<rotv ^ouXsias, through 
fear of death, ^ Yet here also a preposition and its case 
are more commonly used in the New Testament. Thus 
Matt. vi. 7, Soxoyff* yip Iv rri Trokvkoyigc ocvruv EiaocKov^'ntsw' 
rsci, by virtue of their much speaking, xiii. 21, yevofjims 
Sg hxt-^ecij^ 7) ^lOjyiMif Sta tov Xoyov, sv^us (TKay^xKi^srai. 
xiv. 9, Sia TOL/s- opx.ous Koci rouf fft/vavaxeijULEvoi/s- ixfXet/o'e io- 
S'/ivj:/, XIX. 3, el s^sariv dv^pcoTTco a.'SoKv<Ja.t t^v yvvsiixx 
avTQv KOLTo. TToifjav alrixv ; 8, IS/lcucrvif Trpos rr^y oxX-nporm^- 
S/av i5pta/v i^gT^8v|/sv i>iMy oiTToXvaoLi tols yvyouKas vfjLojy. Add 

Luke xxii. 45, xxiv. 41, 2 Cor. ix. 15. 

Obs. 10. To this use of the dative belongs the phrase a^xtTg-^ui rm, to he eon- 
tented with any thing. Luke iii. 14. a^xutr^i rolg eypaivlois vfita/v. 1 Tina. vi. 8, ixi^a 
2s har^o<Pas xa) (rxi'^a.fffJt.a.TBi,, ravraig u^xiff^ma'Cft.tBec.' 

Obs. 11. In like manner the dative sometimes expresses the cause or object of any 
passion or emotion of the mind : as in Matt. v. 22, opyi^i/^tvos rS ah&\^Si, Rom.zii. 1*2, 
<r^ fiXiri^/ ;^a/^avT«?. 1 Pet, iv. 12, fjt,vi l,mZ,i(r^% r^ Iv vfiTv irv^ue-n. The construction, 
however, is more frequently with i^$, or if. Thus Matt^xviii. 13, x'^k^ <«"' «»^f 
Mark xii. 17, l^ctvfcuff-ay «?r' avrSi^ 1 Cor. xv. 19, fjX^txorts iv Xpt^-Tu. (Compare 
.2 Cor. i. 10.) Phil. i. 18, iv rovru x^'^^' 20, iv ovhvt aKrx^^v^nffoftMt, So Luke i. 14, 
iv. 22, Rom. vi. 21, xv. 12, Rev. xii. 17. Sometimes an accusative is placed after 
this class of verbs. See J 40. 3. There is a peculiar construction in Rev. xiii. 4, 
l^avfAartv o\n h yn oTiffu rod ^n^iov, where the sense seems to be, to follow iwM 

Obs. 12. When an affection or disposition of the mind is represented as the wotivt 

1 Winer, § 31, 36. Ast ad Plat. Polit, p» 392. 


of an action^ the dative is Rometimcs employed ; as in 2 Cor. viii. 22, ^aXkaxis 
trtrov^ciTev oitra, vvv) Si ^oXv virovhitiori^evy ti^ot^n^n «r«A.X^ rri th vfitas, from, his great 
cotifidence in you ; Phil. ii. 3, t^ ret^uya<p^affvv^ uXX^Xovs fiyou/*ivot u^s^ix^^'ras lavreHy, 
from a tense of humi/iiy, A preposition, however, and particularly 3;« with an 
accusative^ is more frequently employed. Thus Matt, xxvii. 18, ^Su ya^ on 'iut 
^StfVtfy ira^(^at*Ky aurov. John xix. 38, xtx^uftfAtvos hot roy ^ofiev ruv ^Uv^etiuv, Phil. i. 15, 
Sqq. nvis fch Ktti %ta, <p^ovov xttl s^iv, rmg 3i »eu ^t' iv'^oKtecvj rh X^irrov »n^6ffff6urtv* ct fiXv 
l^ i^t^iietf, ol })\ t^ uyivrns* 

Obt, 13. To this head is to be referred the verb «r«rr««iiv, which in the New 
Testament is constructed, not only with a simple dative (Mark xvi. 13, \A, John v. 
38, 46, vi. 30, x. 37, 38, Acts v. 14, 2 Tim. i. 12, &c.)'; but also with iVJ and a dative 
(Matt, xxvii. 42, Luke xxiv. 25, Acts xiii. 12, Rom. ix. 33, x. 11, 1 Tim. i. 16, 
l^Pet. ii. 6, &c.) ; with W) and an accusative (Acts ix. 42, xi. 17, xxii. 19, Rom. iv. 
5, &c.) ; with us and an accusative (Matt, xviii. 6, John ii. 11, xiv. 1, 29, Acts x. 
43» Rom. x. 14, Gal. ii. 16, 1 Pet. i. 8, 21, &c.) ; and with h and a dative (Mark i. 
15, 'Acts xiii, 39). Many commentators would distinguish between the import of 
the simple dative, and the cases governed by prepositions ; attributing to the verb in 
the first instance the sense of giving credit to a person or thing ; and, in the latter, 
of believing in Christ as the Messiah^ including a sincere reception of the Gospel, and 
obedience to its doctrines. An examination of the preceding references will show 
that no such distinction obtains ; and that the context is the only guide in which 
of the above acceptations the word is applied. The construction is, in fact, 
arbitrary; but in the New Testament and the later Greek, the use of prepositions 
is far more frequent in all cases where the simple dative is more commonly found 
in other writers.^ 

Obs, 14. When the cause and the means are mentioned together, the former is 
put in the dative, and the latter is expressed by hot with a genitive* Thus in Eph. 
ii. 8, T« xi^iri \<m ffiffu^fiivoi J/a Tiji 'TiffriutfJ^ 

Obs, 15. The time when an action is performed is sometimes expressed by a 
dative ; as in Matt. xvi. 21, r^rplri^ ytfii^a iys^^riveu. Mark vi. 21, 'H^euhs roTs ytviffleis 
ttvrw Strsrytfy itroUi. Luke viii. 29, ^oXkaTg xt^ovoti rvvt}^'rtixtt kvtov. xii. 20, ravrvi rn 
vuxrs. Acts xxi. 26, r^ ix^fAiv^ tifiti^tt. Continuance of time is once so expressed in 
Acts viii. 11, ^let TO txavZ x^ovat raTg fixyttccts l^iffretxiveci a,vrovS'^ The place where 
any thing occurs is invariably marked by the preposition |y. Thus in John ii. 1, 
11, ly KetfoiTtis Tetkikettag* iv. 21, ovn U ru o^u rovruj ovrt h 'U^offeXvfAots* See also 

§ 44. 5. Obs, 14. 


§ 48. — The Passive Voice, (Buttm. § 134.) 

1. The nature of active verbs has been sufficiently developed 
with reference to the cases which they govern ; and properly 
the passive takes as its subject the immediate object of the 
active. In Greek, however, the remoter object may become 
the subject of the passive; and if the active governs two 
accusatives, or a dative of the person and an accusative of the 

1 Alt, Gram. N. T. §.29. « Winer, § 31, 1. « Winer, § 31, 3. b. 


thing, the passive frequently retains the accusative of the 
thing, and the person becomes the subject nominative. 

2. Passives are frequently constructed with a dative, instead 
of vvQ and a genitive ; as in Matt. v. 21, sppe^n toTs- d^atiotf. 
Many indeed would render this expression, in the strict sense 
of the dative, as in Gal. iii. 16, ru 'A^paifx, lpprA'n(r(xy ou evay- 
yeX/ai. 2 Sam. v. 6, LXX, eppe^n ru Aa/S/S, The generality of 
commentators,^ however, prefer the other interpretation ; to 
which there are parallel examples in the later writers ; as, for 
instance, in Dion. Hal. ii. p. 103, uf eYpnral /jloi ^^orspov. See 
also Lucian. Pise. vii. 22, Strabon, xvii. 806, Procop. Hist. 
Ecc. 16. Again, Luke xxiii. 15, ovisv a?<ov hoLvdrov itrrl TTBvpay 
/uifvov auTu, which the English Testament improperly renders 
done unto him. The true syntax is supported by Xen. Hell. 

ii. 2. 17, dyx/JLvncrcu tfxlv ra rovrco ^rsTT^aypteva. Arist. Eccl. 73, xau 

fXTjv ra y ctXX' i5ptTv opu 'TTBWDOLy^ji.iyoL* Other examples are liukc 

xxiv. 35, lyvcy cr&iQ avrois. Acts vii. 12, oiyByvcijpia^'n^laxjiitf lois 
uSeK^oiS Qivrov, xvi. 9, o^ayioc Sia rm yvytros af(flbin toj Ylavku, 
XX. 9, xaraf e^£)/x6voj" vit\(t> fia^si. 1 Tim. iii. .16, oi(p^n ayyiXw, 
James iii. 7, Traaa. yiq ^v(sis b'/ipicijv SajM»a^£rat xat ^^idfJiaaTat 
rri (pi(7Bi rri av&^a/^/vip. So also most probably v. 18, KapTro^ris 

^ixatoaivn^ h s'lqrivri aTTsi^srai rols TToiovGiy slpvyiny. Add 2 Pet. iii. 
14, (jTTovodaaTs a(J7riXoi ycoci di^ufj/firoi avrco ei^^e&Tjvai. Compare 

Dion. Hal. xi. p. 70, Diog. L. viii. 1, 5, Philostr. Her. iv. 2.* 

3. Those verbs which govern a double accusative in the 
active, retain in the passive the accusative of the thing ; as in 
Mark xvi. 5, eTJov vsav/ffxov ^e^i/Se/SXnpte'vov aroKfiv Xez/xoiv. Acts 
xviii. 25, ovros riv x%rv)%'ni/.k)fos t-^v 'o^ov rov xuptov. 2 Thess. ii. 15, 
xpareXre risTrtxpociorrsif, as" eSiSa^^&'joTe. 2 Tim. iv. 3, xvoj&cJ/xevoi twv 
axoyjv. Rev. i. 13, 7r£^is}^cu(jfxivQV *Rpos rois ixxaTois ^ouvnv y^var,Tf. 
Here also belongs Luke xii. 47, ^xpin'^eTai ^oXXis-, [scil. TrXyryds. 
Compare Lucian. Tox. 61, Dion. H. p. 2162, 8. 

Obs. 1. Nor is this construction limited to the case of two accusatives in the active; 
hut those verhs also, which take in the active a dative of the person, and even when 
such dative is used for the genitive, retain in the passive an accusative of the thing; 
the dative of the person becoming the subject nominative. Thus Gal. ii. 7, «»<> 
vivfjtat TO tvecyyi>.iov rvis uK^ofivffrias. And SO in Rom. iii. 2, 1 Cor. ix. 17, 1 Thess. ii. 
4, Tit. i. 3. So again, for clxv<ris ^t^Uurat fAot, we have in Acts xxviii. 20, rhv iXvfo 
recvrtiv ^t^tKitfiat, And in Heb. V. 2, aCrog ^rt^ixureti oia'i^ivueiv. Other examples are 
Acts xxi. 3, av»<pav'iyTis Tfi* Ktlcr^ov. 2 Cor. iii. 18, t^v udTtif ilxivet fAtTaiMP^ov/uB*' 
1 Tim, vi. 5, 2 Tim. iii. 8, '^mpBa^fiivot rev vovv. Hence too, perhaps. Col. i. 9,iF« 

^ See Kuinoel ad ioc, * Wetstein and Kypke ad ioc. ' Winer, 5 31»6' 


^XtipetB^firt Tfiv Wlyitctim rev ^tk^fitarog etvrou. See above § 40. 2. Obs, 3. Instead 
of the accusative in the above construction the dative is also sometimes used ; as 
in Acts vii. 22, WathvBn ^da-ri aoipta. See also § 40. 5. Obs. 12. We have, besides, 
in Luke i. 4, fri^i Sv zarfi*^^Btis Xoyuv,^ 

Obs, 2. To vn^rtutiv ri simply, must be referred 2 Thess. i. 10, Wto'Ttv^n ro fMt^rv^i" 
ev fifiuiv* 1 Tim. iii. IG, in^nv^fi iv xeff-fitv. To the active construction with a dot, 
and accus, belong Matt. xi. 5, Luke vii. 22, irrar;^^/ ivayyt^Jiovrat. Heb. xi. 2, 
ifiet^rv^n^9iffuv ei ^^tfffivri^ou Also Heb. vii. 11, Xetos yot^ lit* aurri vtvofAoBirtir»f the 
people were placed under the Law with reference to this priesthood. The active form 
^fM^truv nvd ri occurs in Psal. cxviii. 33, LXX ; and the regular construction of the 
passive in Deut. xvii. 10, oa'ti »» vofAoBirn^y ffoi? 

§ A^.—The Middle Voice. (Buttm. § 135.) 

1 . By the middle voice the action of a verb is represented 
as returning upon the subject; or, as it is grammatically 
termed, its usage is either directly or indirectly reflective, 
lliis signification, however, is variously modified. 

2. In its most simple form, the subject of the action becomes 
also the immediate and proper object of it, so that the middle 
voice is precisely equivalent to the active followed by the pro- 
nouns EfjLocvroy, asocvrov, &c. 

Obs, 1. There are but few instances of this its most direct and proper application. 
With the exception of a few personal actions, the active is commonly used with its 
appropriate pronoun to indicate it. Thus in Matt. viii. 4, ff-tuvrov liT^ov. John viii. 
22, a^oxnnt Xuvr'ov, Examples, however, of the true middle sense are Matt, xxvii. 5, 
«W>^ar0, he hanged himself, Mark vii. 4, (haxr'nrmrut, Luke xxii. 30, za^i^nffBt, 
1 Pet. iv. 1, l^xiffota^i. To this head may probably, but not necessarily, be referred 
Matt. viii. 30, fioa^KOfAivvt xxvi. 46, iytl^tff^t. Acts xxvii. 28, xmufi.i^»y and some 
others, which also admit of a passive signification. 

Obs, 2. It often happens that the middle sense may be equally and more appro- 
priately expressed by an intransitive verb ; as in Matt. v. 22, i^yi%iff^»iy to provoke 
oneself to anger ^ i, e, to be angry : Luke v. 4, tetvif^uty to make oneself rest, i. e. to 
cease : xii.l5, (pvXeiffgtff^ou, to protect oneself i.e. to beware : Acts xxvL 26, ir</St0'S«/, 
to persuade oneself i. e. to believe; xxviii. 25, d^a>.vs^^eii, to dismiss oneself i.e. to 
depart : Heb. xii. 25, dro^T^i(ptaBeu, to turn oneself auKiy, i. e. to reject or despise. 
Add 2 Thess. iii. 6, trriA-Xiff^ou, to avoid ; 2 Cor. x. 5, itul^iir^ttt, to be arro- 
gant: 15, uv^dvtff^xi J to increase ; and some others. In some few cases this new 
sense becomes transitive. Thus in Matt. xxi. 26, (pofiov/it^a rov ox^»*» Mark vi. 20, 
\(pe^t7r» rev ^lateitvm, 

3. More frequently the action of the verb is reflected upon 
the remoter object, so that the middle is equivalent to the active 
in connexion with the dative pronoun lavrca, and, if the verb 

» Winer, §. 32. 5. Alt, § 30. d. 

« Winer, § 40, 1. Alt, § 50, 1. Wesseling adDiod. Sic. xix. 58. 


governs an accusative, it is retained. Thus in Mark vi. 23, 
atrsiv ri, to ask for something ; and in v. 24, aWsia^ai n, to ajik 
something for oneself. Also in Luke x. 11, asropta^r/rsffS'ai xomp- 
rov, to wipe off the dust from ourselves ; Acts xx. 28, TrBpiTratm' 
^ai, to purchase for oneself (In 1 Tim. iii. 13, Ixvrols is 
redundant.) Eph. v. 16, l^ayo^a^effSai, to redeem for onesej; 
2 Thess. iii. 14, avifjisiovff^ai, to mark for oneself; 1 Pet. i. 9, 
xo/Ai^gff&aj, to carry off for oneself 

Obi, 3. Here also the signification may frequently be expressed by an appropn&fe 
verb ; as in Phil. i. 22, Heb. xi. 25, ai^tiff-^eii, to take for oneself^ i. e. to ckoote. 
Thus also ^vXeiffff-tff'^ui, to observe (Matt. xix. 20) ; and in another sense, to guard 
against^ to avoid (2 Tim. iv. 15). 

Obs. 4. Hence the middle is used when the passive object has any relation to the 
subject of the verb ; as in Matt. vi. 17, aXti^PecI ^ou rtiv xi^aXnv. Mark vii. 3, mv/ew 
ruyftn vi^puvTM rag x**?*?- Acts xviii. 18, xu^eifu*»i rhf »«f«Xw. Rom. ix. 17, Uns 
ivhi^offAut iv gai r^y ^vta/^iv [l»v. In this last exampl^, however, the pronoun is redan- 
dant, or the middle has an active sense. Compare Heb. vi. 17» and see $22. 5. 

4. The middle voice also denotes an action which is done 
at the command or sufferance of the subject ; so that the 
notion is expressed in English by to cause or to stiffer. We 
have, for instance, in Luke ii. 5, agro7§a(pe(T&oti, to cause oneself 
to he enrolled; (Compare v. i.) 1 Cor. vi. 7, aSixsTtrSai, to 
submit oneself to injustice ; xi. 6, xslpsT^ai, to cause oneself to 
be shaven. Perhaps also gregire'/Avsa&a*, in Acts xv. 1, 24, 1 Cor. 
vii. 18. 

Obs, 5. In this case also the middle sense may be otherwise expressed; as in Matt. 
V. 4, 'hnnt^iff^ati to cause monetf to be lent to oneself, i. e. to borrow ; xx. 1, 7, 
fitffBovff^ai, to cause to let to oneself, i. e. to hire ; Luke xxiv. 21, Xt;r^dt/0-Sa/, to cause 
to release, i.e. to redeem or ransom, 

Obs, 6. In some verbs the middle passes into a reciprocal sense, so as to include 
two or more parties ; as in Luke xxii. 5, John ix. 22, ffv^ri^nr^oti, to make a bargain 
together: xii. 20, (iovy-tuiff^ai, to consult together ; 2 Cor. xiii. ] 1 , 9ra^aKaX(7rBMty to 
afford mutual consolation ; 2 Tim. ii. 24, fidxto'^eih io contenrl together. The 
reciprocal sense is less distinct, but still discernible, in the verbs irr^a,Ttui9^xi and 
ayuvilia^ai, in 1 Cor. ix. 7, 25.^ 

Of the anomalous interchange of the active, passive, ^^vA 
middle voices, see above, § 22. 

§ 50,— Of the Tenses, (Buttm. § 137, 138.) 

1. Although the import of the Tenses may occasionally have 
been in some small degree influenced by their native idiom, yet 

1 W uer, § 39, 2, 3, 4. Alt, §51.1. Kuster et Dresig. de Verb. Med. 


for the most part, and indeed almost universally, the writers of 
the New Testament have adhered to the ordinary Greek usage. 
The aorist^ for instance^ is employed to mark past time indefi- 
nitely, without reference to any other action, and is accordingly 
the tense appropriated to history and narratives. Thus in John 
i. 46, oy %ypQL>\^^ ^ufjy^s h r2 yofxco, ei5§i9xa/utgv, the aorist %ypA>\^i 
represents the writing of Moses as a simple historical fact ; but 
ihe perfect svpinxaixey not only indicates the act of finding as 
pastf but its consequences as remaining, — we have found him, 
and stiU know where he is. Again, in Matt. iv. 4, yiypaTraci, it 
has been toritten as a permanent record ; Acts ix. 13, oiKmo» 
aTro voKKwy ?rspt rov dyipo^ Tourovj i<ya Kani k'lroiinoB, I have heard, 
and still retain the knowledge, what evils he did ; Gal. ii. 7, 
VBTTiarevfjion to suxyyiXioy, I have been entrusted with the ministry 
of the Gospel, which I still exercise. 

2. The imperfect differs from the aorist, as denoting, 

1. An action, not transient, but continuing during a past 
time, when or while something else took place ; as in 
Mark iii. 1 1, ri weufxara. roi xKcc^apra^ orav aurov k^iupBi, 
vposimTTTBv aura). Gal. i. 14, riyioi'jocrs yiq t-wv Iac^v ava- 
arpo^Yiv 'JTore ev tw 'loz^SalV/xo;, on xaS"' vTTBp^o'K'nv eSiwx6v rr,"^ 
IxxXtjj/av X. T. X., namely, during my adherence to Juda^ 
ism. Add Matt. xiii. 25, Luke xiv. 7, xxiv. 32, John 
V. 16, xii. 6, et alibi. 

2. An action continued, or frequently repeated ; as in 
Matt. xiii. 34, yfif^is iroL^oL^oKr^s oz/x bKoXu avTois, Mark 
xiv. 12, Sre to iciayjx, eSi/ov, on the day when they 
annually slew the paschal lamb ; xv. 6, xaTa Sg Io^tw 
dTriXvsv auroTf ha, SeV/utiov. (In the parallel place of Matt, 
xxvii. 15, it is eW&et a9roXi5etv.) Add Acts xiii. 11, Rom. 
XV. 22, 1 Cor. X. 4, xiii. 11, and elsewhere. 

3. An action begun, but not completed ; attempted or con- 
templated, but not executed; as in Matt. iii. 14, o Sg 
'Iwavvtjj- S*gxflJXi/ev aj^Tov, sought to prevent him ; Luke i. 
59, IxaXotry at/To, wished to name it ; v. 6, iieppriywro to 
S/xrt/oy, began to break ; Gal. i. 13, s'prop^ovy avrm, en- 
deavoured to destroy it. 

Obi. 1, The difference between the aorist and imperfect is distinctly marked in 
Luke viii. 23, irXtovTW' Tt uvrSf it<pvwuffi' xai Karifim kmXuyl/ itg rrtv XifAvtiv, »a) trvn- 
9'Xi}^0t/yr0, xa) ixtfhunvov. Compare James ii. 22.^ 

» Winer, § 41. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 52. Stallbaum ad Plat. Phsed. p. 29. Jacob 
ad Liician. Tox. p. 53. Reisig ad Soph. CEd. Col. p. 254. 



3. The plusquam-perfectum denotes an action which was 
already completed before, or during, the performance of another 
past action, to which it has reference either in itself or its con- 
sequences ; as in Matt. vii. 25, rg&sixcXift/ro yap s^l riiy wir^, 
for it had been founded upon a rock before the floods came, 
which it was consequently able to resist. See also Mark xv. 10, 
xvi. 9, Acts xiv. 23, Gal. i. 22, 1 John ii. 19. 

4. Of the several forms of the future, the 3 /ut. passive, or 
paulo post futurum, marks 2^ future action, which depends, as it 
were, upon the passing of another action. It is thus closely 
allied to the futurum exactum of the Latins. The only place 
in which it occurs in the New Testament is Luke xix. 40, atv 

5. The other futures express not simply sl future action, but 
a supposed or possible case, or such as might or could happen 
under certain circumstances. Thus in Luke xviii. 22, vanrx 
ta-oL ^iy/is TTduXvioov, kolI iiiios TrruxoXs, Kai e^eii* ^(ravpov h ovpcau* 
Rom. iii. 6, pcoj ysvoiro* sirel isws x^ivgi* o ©gw tov xo(rpu>y ; x. 14, 
'TTus oZ^ e7rmaXi(Joyrcti bU ov ovk evlarsuffotv y x. t. X. Jaraes ii. 10, II, 
o(STtf yaq oXov tov vo/xov rvipria-Biy tttoliobi Xa Iv Ivl, yeyovs virTtn 
^MO'/fis* 8i Sg ov iJLoiyjiV(jH$, ^ovsuo'sts Sg, ysyovas TcapoL^dms yofjLov* So 
when purpose is spoken of; as in 1 Pet. iii. 13, koX tU o xaxutrm 
vfAoif, sav ToD dya^ov ynyiinrai yg'wj(T&g ; And who is he that would 
harm you, if, ^-c. 

' Obs, 2. Heuce also ihefut. is^iised in questions where the conjunctive might be 
used; as in Rom. vi. 1, ri tZv l^ot/etv; \xtiAiv»viJuiv t^ afAo^rie^, ?y« h ^ei^tt 9rXutin\ 
fin yivetro. Are we to continue in tin f or, would you have us continue in tin? So 
again in y. 15, where some manuscripts read afMt^rwatfitv* Compare Matt, xviii. 21, 
xix. IG, Luke iii. 10, and elsewhere. See also § 54. 1. Obi. 3. 

Obg» 3. The future is frequently used for the imperative ; as in Matt. ▼, 48, inr/i 
«Zf v/itTs rikim. In Hebrew the same idiom is very prevalent, and it is preserved 
in several citations from the Old Testament. Thus in Matt. v. 21, av ^tnu^uf. 27, 
oh fAoi^ivffus. 33, ov» ivno^xviffuf. Acts xxiii. 5, &^avTu rw k»0v 9m ovk iput *»3u*s- 
Rom. vii. 7, ehx icn^vfAnffttf. See also Rom. xiii. 9. 

Obs. 4. Besides their proper import the tenses also frequently signify to be wonU; 
as indicating a general habit, or an action continually repeated. 

1. Imperfect: as in Luke iv. 15, l^/^^ty |y reuf ffvitetyuyatt aurtif, he %oa» in the 
habit of teaching : Acts ii. 44, ^uvrts ^s ol ^umvovns n^ctv i^t to auro, »m ux" 
a^uvrec xotvu, x. r. X. 

2. Perfect: John xiv. 25, raZra, Xikaktixu vfuv, ^ra^* v/tTv ftivaif* 2 Tim. iv. 8, 
ffr%(pa,*oi, Sv a^rohuffu fAct o Kv^ioft xet) 9ruft rot9 nyec^rnxofft riiv ivrt^oivtmf munS* 

3. Aorist: Matt. iii. 17, vlog fMu uyuvmroe, iv Z ivhexfi^et, xxiii. 2, Wl nf 
Motffiats xaBii^ag Izei^iO'eiv et y^afAfAarug, Add Luke i. 51, John viii. 29, Ephes. 
v. 29, Heb. x. 5, James i. 11, 24, 1 Pet. i. 24. 

4. Future : Luke i. 37, ohx nhwarnffu vra^u rZ Bif tZ* piifAet, where, however, the 


particular reference is future : Rev. hr. 9^ «<r«y W«v0'i rk ^Stt ^^au ». r. A., 
m^ouvTcu at i?x«ri »«) Tt^^a^tf sr^t^fiurt^tt^ luu 9r^6^tcuTmff»v^t^ ». r. X*^ The dif- 
ferent tenses with this signification are frequently interchanged. 
Oht, 5. There are indeed a variety of circumstances under which the different 

tenses are put for each other in classical Greek ; and the like usage prevails in the 

^ew Testament. 

Thus 1. The present is put for the aorist^ when in an animated narration the 
past is represented as present^ and in Latin the prasens hittorieum wotdd he 
used. Thus in Mark v. 15, t^^cfrai x^ig vn *lnffovtf »«m ^iu^ouvt rh ^aufMMtXfi' 
fiUfaf, Johni. 29, rj ixau^uv fiki^ru i ^iMmitns rif 'lifr«i;y, xai kiytu 46, tv^i^xu 
^iXtirvrcg rov N«S«y«nX, xeu Xiyu aurf. ix. 1 3, tiytua'tv avrot ir^og rtivg ^et^i^euwsy 
*rh 9rov\ Ttffkov, Hence the preteni and the aorUt are frequently united in the 
same sentence, as in Matt. ii. 13, aitaxat^nfeivruv uvrSvitiav, &yyiXas Kv^iou^i- 
nrtu xetr ova^ r^ ^l»i^<p, Mark ii. 4, ixiffriyn^n* r^y ^riynv, txait fiv, xat 
l^t^v^avrtf x'^ktjn riv x^d^^rav. So John xi. 29, Acts x. 10, Rev. vi. 15. 
Add Mark iv. 38, v. 19, 38, vi. 1, 30, John i. 5, 40, 44, v. 14, xix. 9, xx. 6, 
xxi. 9, Rev. v. 9, viii. 11, ix. 10, xii. 2, xix. 10, et cUUti. TYm perfect is also 
used with the present in Acts xxv. 11, ti fih ya^ ahxZ, xtH SS^^n ^avdrw xi- 
ir^a^^ rSfX, r, X. Rev. xix. 3, xui ^svrt^ov tl^fixem, 'AXX*)X0(;ia' xai o xaXfog ethrns 
Ava^vu X, r. X. In which cases it will be observed, however, that the use 
of the present is not altogether without design ; being intended to mark the 
action, which it indicates, with greater emphasis. Here also it may be added 
that the present is sometimes employed in a secondary proposition, in an 
imperfect sense ; as in Mark v. 14, ihiVf ri Ivri re ytyoth, tuhat tvae the matter* 
John iv. 1 , ifxov^xf ol ^a^i^Motf on *lnffevt xXuatag ftetBfiras xoitT xai Bairril^tt , 
wot making and baptising. Add Mark viii. 23, Luke xix. 3, John i. 19, ii. 9, 
vi. 64, Acts V. 13, xli. 3, xix, 34, xxviii. 1, and elsewhere. So^lian. V. H. 
li. 13, \X,ftvtivVi liffrif 9PCTI aSraf » ^x^cirns i^riK 

2. To the verb nxat is attached the signification of the perfect, J am come^ I am 
here : as in Luke xv. 27, o uhtX^is vou »$xt/. John iv. 47, »xov0-as en *lnvevs 
•iKii \x rn9 *levleua$» The perfect, however, is used in Mark viii. 3, nns ethruv 
fuix^iBiv lixet^i. A somewhat analogous use of the present is not unusual in 
the sacred writers, when that tense includes, as it were, in itself the past and 
the present, so as to indicate a state of uninterrupted duration. Thus in 
Luke i. 34, xSs io'TUt reure, sxt) &v^(ei ou ytvei^ttet ; XV. 31, fl^tr xavrtrt pttr iftev 
iT. John viii. 58, at^J* 'A^^auft, ym^^eu, lyt* tlfti XV. 27, ««•* a^x^t finr i/iou 
i#ri. Acts xxvi. 31, evSiv Bavdrou &^ie9 T^u^^tu 1 John iii. 8, At* d^x^s ^ 
^c/StfXtff ofca^dvu. So Jerem. i. 5, LXX, x^e rev f*t lektUuI vt l» xeiXie^j i^ri- 
trretfiat ri. 

3. Frequently the present is used instead of ihe future ; more especially when 
some future event is represented in prophetic language to be as certain as if 
it were already present. Thus in Matt. iii. 10, «•«» hf\h fAn vretevv xet^xov 
»«Xm» ixxevrtreu^ xa) %U irv^ fidkXirxu XXvi. 2, /itra lue hfM^oti ro xmx^ 
yinrtUy xa) i viet rev ait^^^iteu frx^amareu us re ^reiu^a/B^ven. John Vlli. 33,VTi 
fux^h X^evev fitH' vfiSv tifAi, xa) vxdyea x^et rev 9rifit^a*rd fit* In Latin there 
18 a similar usage; as in Terent. Eun. ii. 3. 46, Cras est mihi judicium. C»3. 
B. G. vi. 29y sese cmfestim subsequi dixit. Hence the present and the future 
are frequently combined; as in Mark ix. 31, euMi rev av^^uxev xa^a'hiherat tU 
;^ir^«f a9^^M9emj xa) a^rexrtyevffn avrev, x. r, X. Of the parallel places, Matt. 

* Winer, § 41. and 56. 1, 2. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 56. 3. Hermann de emend, rat. 
Gr. Gr. p. 186. et ad Viger. p. 746. Poppo ad Thucyd. p. 158. Matt. Gr. Gr. § 502. 

K 2 


xxiv. 40, and Luke xvii. 34, the former hai the verb in the present irafrnXMu- 
fimurm, and the \aiier irm^tiXtip^fmrtu in the future. The verb C/u,togo^ 
doeg not occur in the New Teitament : but tbeTerb l^«^uu ii very conttantly 
employed in a future acceptation ; as for instance, in the title « i^^^tfUMf, 
applied to Christ in Matt. xi. 3, Luke vii. 19, 20, Heb. z. 37, et oHbi, Sec 
also Matt. xvii. 11, xxi. 5, Mark x. 30, Luke xviii. 30, John iv. 21, t. 25, 
xvi. 13, Acti xviii. 21, 1 Thess. i. 10. Re?, i. 8, ii. 5, 16. There are many 
other passaj^es aliio, in which a future sense is at least included, although 
the commencement of the action or event may be properly indicated by the 
present tense. Thus in John iii. 36, i tr/rriMvy ut Tip vliv tx^ X*^* mwmtj 
i. e., the title of the believer to eternal life co-exists with his faith ; and this 
importof the passage is rather confirmed, than refuted, by the change of teose 
in the subsequent clause, i II k^nJm r^ viSf wm S^tT»i ^imiv, &XX' n i^yn ri 
Bttlti fAiMi W mi/riv. Oil the Other hand, the pretent is strictly proper in the 
following examples : — John x. 32, %m «>«!«» t^y*f Xi3«^f7f /tf ; xiiL 6, m^ji, n 
ftsv ttTrui rtiiis vrSims ; 27, t vrtiltf 9rcif»n rax**** Acts iii. 6, • ^ f;^«, tmW 
9ti %l^fAu 2 Cor. xiii. 1, r^irov roZrc l^'^cfuti. In I Cor. xv> 35, atav iyu^tmt 
ct »i«g0/; the reference is not to the resurrection as si/aci^ but as a gidyeetof 

4. An instance of the fuiurey employed in the sense of the presemi, has been 
adduced from Rom. iii. 30, i^uTt^ tit i 6s«f , is ^tKttm^tt trt^nr^fuiv «. t. X., com- 
pared with V. 27, JLayt^ifiti^a oZv virrti ^iKOMurBrnt avS^ivv**. So also in Gal. 
ii. 16. The full effect of justification, however, is still future ; and it does 
not appear that this tense is ever used, without at least including a /a/urr 
notion. See likewise Rom. ii. 13. In 1 Cor. xv. 29, some manuscripts read 

5. The imperfect is sometimes put — 1. for the aoriit, especially when a narratire 
is related by an eye-witness. Thus in Acts xv. 22, oS rr^aTnyth vri^tffr^it^ii 
rk ifteiria, WtXtvov pajS^/^iiy. Compare also Mark iv. 10 with vii. 17.''2. 
When there is reference to something said before, the imperfect Sv is some- 
times used for the present, as in John i. 15, avros ht «* U9r»v, So also villi 
some verbs impersonal, as in Col. iii. 18, ml yuneuxiSt Inro^eiffffieBt rdts tiun 
&vl^eifftv, ui avnx.iv h Yiv^iv, Some manuscripts have xa^xiy, for xaSqxw, in 
Acts xxii. 22. This is different from the use of l^ti, and some other imper- 
fects, which, like the Latin oporiebai, denote that something should be, or 
s!.ould have been, which is not : as in Matt. xxv. 27, T^u <n fiaXiT* ri a^yv^ui 
fAov ro7s T^aTi^iraiS' (Compare Matt, xviii. 33, Acts xxvii. 21, 2 Cor. ii. 3.) 
So Matt. xxvi. 9, rihvvaro yae roZro ro /iv^ov ^^a^tivat ttXkoVj xai ^oBtivai Kcrttj^ui. 
Also u^ukovf in 2 Cor. xii. 1 If iyat ya^ ei<puXay u(p* vftli a-uvia-rae-Bai.^ See also § 
51.6, Obs. 6. And 3. Sometimes the imperfect has the sense of the plusqwm- 
perfect ; as in Acts iv. 13, i^tytvuo'xov avrovg, ort trvv ry ^Ineov neav. This is 
more commonly the case after the particles tl or ay. See the examples ia 
§ 51. Obs, 6. infra ; and these will also show that the usage ,is not confined 
to the verb tlfi,), which has no plusquam-perfect, as some have supposed.* 

6. The perfect is used for the ;?re«fn/, when an action, commenced in past time, 
is still continued ; as in John v. 45, t^rtv o xamyoom vfieHvy Mw^-n; , tig Sv vfiii* 
nkTixart, in whom ye trust ; i.e., have placed your trust. Again, John xx. 

» Winer, § 41. 2. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 54. Hermann ad-Viger. pp. 211, sqq. 
* Winer, 541.6. Zeune ad Vi^er. p. 212, sqq. 
« Winer, § 41. 2. Stallbaum ad Plat. Symp. p. 74. 

« Winer, § 41. 3. Alt. Gram. N.T. § 54, b. 2, 3. Poppo ad Thucyd, p. 155. 
Kuinoel ad John i. 15. 


29, ort Ui^uzas ftt, BttffjM, ^rt^i^rtvzeif, where the origin of present helief is in- 
dicated. Add Matt. ix. 2, Mark ii. 5, John v. 42, viii. 40, 52, ix. 37, 2 Cor. 
i. 10, 1 Tim. V. 5, vi. 17. As the perfect is properly employed to indicate 
the rapid execution of an action, so, like the pre tent, it is put for Hh^ future^ 
when an event is so vividly present to the mind of the writer or speaker, that 
he seems to regard it as already past. Thus in John iv. 38, aWoi xntoxtu,- 
tuto't, K»i vfAus ils vh xoxev ahruv tifftXtiXvB^etTt, V. 24, « rtfy Jidyov [mv uKouaif 
txi* K"^* «i«y/0y, xat tif x^ifn ovx ?^ir«/, xeu fAirufiifinxtf ix rev ^»wrcu us rnv 
^«iqy, where the certainty of the event is indicated first hy the present, and 
then by the j)erfect. (Compare 1 John iii. 14.) Some refer to thiti head 
John XIV. 7, ««*' u^Tt yivuffxirt avrovf xa) iet^dxart xurov^ but here the perfect 
has its proper sense, and so in Demosth. adv. Lept. p. 597, A. Sv hfAus ovn 
yiwffxo/iiv, ei/Tt \aioax»fAvt, With %l or tay preceding, the perfect answers to 
i\iQfuturum exactum in Latin ; as in Rom. xiv. 23, o II ^Mx^tvefittves^iav ^«>*i| 
xaraxix^iTeti. Lastly, the perfect is used for the piusquam-per/ect in Luke i. 
22, Wiyitstffety on ottu^Im f«^««iy. So also in John xx. 18. The infinitive and 
participle of the same verb in Luke xxiv. 23, John iv. 45, may serve equally 
for the one tense or the other. Neither from John xii. 7 can any positive 
conclusion be drawn.* 

7. Sometimes the plusquam-perf, is used for the imper/. or aorist ; as in Matt. 
Xll. 46, %rt %\ »vr»v kakovv70s ToTf e')(^\oiSy ^eivy n ft^rtip xoti oS uhik^oi ecvreu tttrrn" 
xueretv i^or, ^nreuvrtg avru Xakii^en. John ii. 9, ig ^t iyiuf»ra o d^sr^tx^vis 
ri v'^at^ cTvo* ytytftiftivavj xut ovx ^ii 9ro^iv hm, «. <r. X. Perhaps also John 
XX. 9. 

8. The aorist is used, 1. for the present, even where it cannot be rendered to be 
wont J as in John vii. 26, fjun^an dXn^'St 'iyw^uit ol &^xov^tSi ^f* »vtos iirrtv 
dXfi^Ss X^ivros i This is particularly the case with the verb iypa^pet, with 
reference to a letter then under the writer's pen; as in 1 Cor. v. 9, 11, ix. 15, 
Fhilem. 19, 21. The purport of an Epistle is also expressed by i^tfiuyJ/» in 
Acts xxiii. 30, Philem. 12, and by ftfiovknBfiv in 2 John 12. On the other 
hand, it is y^dipu in 1 Cor. iv. 14, xiv. 37, 2 Cor. xiii. 10, and ehewhere; 
and y(d(p» and ty^uyJ/A are used indifferently in 1 Juhn ii. 12, sqq. Thus 
also the Latins use scripsi. In the same manner as the perfect, so also the 
aoritt is used, 2. for the future, to denote the rapid completion or indubitable 
occurrence of an action or event. Thus in John xiii. 31, yt7y i'^o^do'^ti c vtog 
rtiu iy^fMTfou, x*i o 610; tholida^n U uvru, where the future le^dg-u immediately 
follows in the next verse, xv. 6, luv fii! ng fciivr, ly ifia), ifiXn^n t^M, xeti l^ir* 
^v^fi. The remaining verbs in the same sentence are in the present ; for 
the same event, in respect to the Divine counsels, may be equally repre- 
sented as past, present, and to come ; and hence in Hebrew the prater is 
commonly used in prophetic annunciations; in conformity with which the 
aorist is probably employed in Luke i. 68, 69, though it may there, and in 
V. 78, have its proper meaning. Compare also Jude 14, Rev. xxii. 1. In 
Mark iii. 21, i^ivrttf which has been improperly rendered in a future sense, 
retains its usual signification ; and the conjunctive aorist after particles of 
time is considered elsewhere (^ 55). Manuscripts vary in Rev. x. 7, between 
irtXifffin and rtXterfiti- 

Obs, 6. Although the peculiar signification of the tenses is more clearly marked 

* Winer, § 41, 4. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 55. Poppo ad Thucyd. p. 16. Viger de 
Idiom, pp. 213, sqq. Ast ad Plat. Pul. p. 470. Stolz on John xiv. 7. 


in the indicatire and the participle, itill the other moods are equally used with 
reference to the distinctive import of each respectiTely. The im^iiive prtutUt ftr 
instance, which serves equally for the imperfect, is used \o indicate an action em^ 
mmcedf continued, or repeated; as in Luke ▼. 7, ^^t^urS-mt, to begin io Mk. Thm 
also the imperaHve perfect enjoins that an adion ia not only to be completed, but 
to remain m; as in Luke xiii. 12, yvtaif itiroX^vrm rnt «e-B^9ti»s r«»y be permtamUj 
mnd effeetuaity cured. Compare Mark iv. 39. At the tame time these niceties in 
not always very strictly observed even by the best writers ; and the aorist in paiti- 
cular is frequently found, where the perfect or imperfect should seem to be moe 
proper. Often, indeed, it is optional^ whether an action is considered with refierenee 
to its completion, duration, or repetition; and the tense will accordingly be sdscisd 
according to the views of the writer. Thus, for instanoey in Liuke i. IS^ bneraXmt 
and in Luke iv. 43, m^i^ruXfixtf may seem to indicate a precisely simiiar^meaning; 
but the Evangelist in the former case viewed the commission with respect to iti 
delivery only, and in the latter with respect to its enttmited eaeercUt. la lib 
manner, in Luke i. 25, ^trctti^t does not necessarily mean precisely the sasM thi^ 
M IfTtfiVi in V. 49, though in reality either might have been subttitated for the 
other. The writer, moreover, will frequently be found to have taken enphonyibr 
his guide, rather than the strict requisites of the language ; and sometimes there if 
a change of signification. In the New Testament this intermingling of tenses ii 
exceedingly common ; and though a trifling shade of difference may ocnsionslly 
be apparent in the sense of each, they are for the most part precisely eqahrakit 
Examples have indeed been already given in which the distinct import is uneqei- 
vocally marked, and to these numerous others might be added ; such as Luke viL 
16, John xiii. 3, Heb. vii. 14, et alia. On the other hand, among] a variety of in- 
stances it will suffice to adduce Matt. iii. 3, Mark i. 3, irtt/itdran^ rnv On Ea^ 
tvfitiets 9roiUTi rat r^ifious etvrou. Luke i. 47, fAtyaXvtgt h ^v^jn ft^wt riv Rv^wf, luu 
i\yet>Xiari <ro ^vivfjuL ficv Ifr) rZ 6f^. iv. 18, ^j^^M'C /«i tvetyyiXt^g^tu irrm^mc in- 
ffraXxi fit lutrafffiett rovg ^vvTtr^tfifAitws rnv xet^lav, John i. 1 5, ^Imeiwfis ftm^T»0U rtfi 
avTov, xet) xsx^ayi, iii. 19, re (pSis iXttkuhf tit riv xofffMt, »«< nyai^nrttv ti tLtiftt^i fiX' 
Xov re ffxires^ n ta <pa>;. Acts xxii. 15, J» lea^etxett ftcts tfxevvetf, 1 John i. 1, S ixnum- 
fiiitf S ieiffaxeifAiv raTf ^xXfAoii fifiMVf S Ihaa'dfAifia, xet) eu X*^V^ n/tMv lyptiXM^fi^»f» Now 
although an interchange of tenses is often found in classical Greek, yet the abore 
examples indicate a practice so arbitrary, that it should rather perhaps be refened 
to the Hebrew idiom, according to which certain tenses, especially the perfect and 
future^ are promiscuously employed, and some of the above are in fact citations 
from the Old Testament But of the New Testament writings^ the book of the 
Revelation abounds in combinations of this nature, which it would be vain to ac- 
count for upon any grammatical principles whatsoever. Thus we have in Rev. ii. 3, 
t^eiffravasy xet) vvre/ieym txtiSi xa) xtxe^tetx»t, iii. 3, t7Xn(peis xai ifxciMrag, xii. 4, « 
ev^et etvrev ffu^u re r^irev ruv eiffri'^uv rev eu^utev, xtu tliecXtv avrovs us Tn* yn*' It 
should be remembered, however, that the text of this book is in a very corrupt state, 
not to mention that the writer was so evidently absorbed with his subject, as to be 
comparatively heedless of strict grammatical rules and rhetorical niceties.^ 

Obs. 7. Fur the reason alleged in the preceding Obt», it may be difficult to a£Brm 
that the aorist is ever put fur the perfect; and yet many passages have been ad- 
duced in support of the opinion. Such are, Mark xi. 17, ut4,us l^»nig-aT$ uMf rrf 

» Winer, § 41. Obs. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 53. Gataker de N. T. stylo ; c. vi. p. 
60. Glass. Phil. Sacr. cc. 43. sqq. Georg. Hiero;*rit. i. 3. 33. Eichhom'i Intro- 
duction to the N. T. ii. p. 378. 


Xmn Xif^rHv, Luke i. 4, iTtu^n^i^ ^oWoi Wi^ii^wav «. r. X, — tio^t xdfitoi xeth^tis fl'«J 
y^^aim ii. 48^ ri»veft '^i Wotn^as hfiuv »ur£s ; ziv* 18, ay^ov tiyo^ewu, xix. 42, nZv 
Is 'u^ufin afftf 9^fi»XfjM9 tf'tfv. Add John xii. 49, xvii. 4, Rom. xiv. 9, Phil. iii. 12, 
Heb. zi. 16, Rev. ii. 8. la all these passages, the action may be referred to some 
point of time, in which all doubt as to its completeness was effectually removed, 
though its consequences may still be permanent. It is far more clear that the 
aorist is sometimes used for the plusquam-perfect ; but even then a similar explanop 
tion will in some degree account for the negligence of the writer. Thus, after rela- 
tives, in Luke xix. 15, iTsn (pvtfifitiveu »vt^ rohs iovkoug rovrovs) olg t^uKt ri i^yvptaVf 7yc 
yv^ rii rt hisr^ayfitaritiffurt. John iv. 1, us tZv tyvot • xv^togf art Uxov^a* «/ ^tt^tffeu$tj 
»• 7. A,, xi. 30, •V9eat %\ iXtjXt/^ci ^If^tiui tig rrif xatfAn^t aAX' h tv r^ TdXMt o^ov tntW" 
ruriy aurf h Md^^x, Acts i. 2, IvruXdfAtvos ritg ei^wroXaiSj ovg f^tXilieiro. Add Matt, 
xxviii. 16, Luke xxiv. 1, John ii. 22, iv. 45, xiii. 12, xix. 23, Acts ix. 35. Perhaps 
also Luke v. 4, xi. 1, John vii. 10, et aiibi. Again, in narrations, where a past 
occurrence is introduced after the proper order of time ; as in Matt. xiv. 3, « yk^ 
'B^ii^iK x^avneas r^y *latMvm, thn^tM avrhj xai t^iro iv (puXetx^f had bound him and 
thrown him into prison. John xviii. 24, a^ri^ruXiv adroit i "Avvetg hhfUfof ic^s Kai«- 
f«y, had tent him, i. e. previously to what is related in v. 14. But it should here 
he remarked that there are many places, in which a strict attention to the order of 
events would require a plusquam-perfectymy where the aorist is nevertheless to be 
rendered in its legitimate sense. Thus in Matt. xxvi. 48, h 9ra^»ithovs avrov Uvxtv 
ttiruf trn/Auof, the meaning is simply he gave them a sign, though the order of time 
is more accurately marked by h^axu in Mark xiv. 44. Again, in Matt, xxvii. 37, 
tuu itrS^DJMty iifuw r?f xnpetktis etvriiv rnv ettrietv aurov yty^af*fiivfiv, the Evangelist 
merely records an historical fact, without studiously observing the exact period of 
the transaction ; and in Mark iii. 16, ixi^nxt tu llfjutu ovofiu nir^ou, it would be still 
less philosophical to interpret Mark*s general statement by a reference to the time 
piore particularly indicated in John i. 43. Once more, the seizure of Jesus took 
place, according to the two first Evangelists (Matt. xxvi. 50, Mark xiv. 46), before 
Peter cut off the ear of Malchus ; but this is no reason for changing the simple his- 
torical import of John xviii. 12, ^t/nka^v rov ^Ititrovv x») t^ffecv. The aorist is also 
employed in its proper sense, and not, as sometimes thought, in that of the phtS' 
quam-perfectum, in Matt, xxviii. 17, Mark xvi. 1, John iv. 44, v. 13, Acts iv. 4, vii. 
5, viii. 2, XX. 12.^ 

§ 51. — Of the Indicative, 

1 . The Indicative is used in Greek, when any thing is repre- 
sented as actually existing or taking place, and not as merely 
possible or probable ; and it is often found, both in the New 
Testament and other writers, where in Latin the conjunctive 
would be employed. 

2. After relatives or relative particles, the fut. indie, occurs 
in subsidiary propositions, whether the preceding verb be past 
or present, to denote not merely what is likely or desirable, but 

1 Winer, § 41, 5. Alt. Gram. N. T. ( 56. Wyttenbach ad Plut. Mor. T. i. p. 
231. Zumpt's Lat. Gram. § 203. Obs, 2. Poppo ad Thucyd. i. p. 157. 


what will certainly happen. Thus in Mark xi. 18, i^Tiroc/v vm 
a^Toy oiwoKia'ova'iy, Lukc xi. 6^ ovk €X^> ^ *it%poA'naoi9 adrS>, xii. 

17, OVK excj vov (rvm^cj rovs xaqvovf fxov. 1 Cor. vii. 34, ^ yatpuj- 
aoto'x i/.epifj.y^ Toi rou KoafjLov, wws dqiaei rSf dvipt. So after nega- 
tive propositions, with a relative ; as in Phil. ii. 20, ov^sva yip 
ey^cj Ijov^yj^ov, So'Tiy yvfialcjf ra Trsp) vijlojv fjLspifJLvno'ei*^ 

3. The sermo obliquus, in which a person's words or senti- 
ments are indirectly cited, is not common in the New Tes- 
tament. There are some few instances, however, in which, 
with respect to positive assertions or actual events indirectly 
stated, the indicative is used, both in compound and singk 
propositions. Of the former may be cited Matt. xvii. 10, t/ 
oJv o\ ypo^fjL/jLareif Xiyovaiv, on *HXiav SeT IX&eTv vqojTov ; Luke xviil. 
9, gTwe wpoy Tivay tou9 TTsvoiboraf 1^' layTory on eia-1 Hkquoi. See 

also John xiii. 24, Acts xii. 18, where some have the opt. The 
two members are connected into one in Mark v. 29, %yvu t5 
a-af/xoLn or* Yarcci, Luke viii. 47, Si' riv aWiav ^xl/aro aurou dviiyysikpf 
avrS), Acts xxii. 24, 7va B'lriyvS Si' m alriccv ovtms tTretpdvovv avTa. 
For similar constructions in the later Greek writers see ^lian. 
V. H. xi. 9, Diog. L. ii. 5. 15, Dion. Hal. iv. p. 2243, 7, 
Philostr. Her. v. 2, Pausan. vi. 9. 1.* 

Obs, 1. The opt. in the sermo obliquus does not occur, except in a few various 
readings, in the New Testament. It should be observed also, that direct citatioDi 
are frequently preceded by on. See § 67. 

4. After interrogatives, whether the enquiry be direct or 
indirect, respecting absolute and unconditional occurrences, the 
indie, is employed ; as in Matt. vi. 28, xaraiw,a&£T6 rd, xql^oL rov 
dypov, mus aCf^dyei (where the growth is actual, but the Latin would 
be, quomodo crescant), Mark viii. 23, iTmoMra, avroy eYrt /8x.gV«. 
John vii. 27, ov^eU yivcutrxsi tto^bv Ijtiv. x. 6, ovx gyvo/dav Tiva rn, 
a eKscksi avro'is, 1 Thess. i. fl, q\^oltb, oloi lyevoQ^oopLEv Iv vf/Xv. In 
John xi. 47, ri woiovf^Bv ; signifies, what are we doing ? not, 
what are we to do ? So in 1 Cor. x. 22, ^ ^fit^a^TjXoiJ/xgv tov 
Ki;§iov ; are we profwking ? not, shall we provoke ? Compare 
also Matt. vii. 9, xii. 11, Mark xiii. 33, 35, John iii. 8, ix. 21, 
25, 29, 30, Acts x. 18, xix. 2, xx. 18, 1 Cor. iii. 10, Eph.i. 

18, V. 10, 15, Col. iv. 6, 1. Tim. iii. \5^ et alibi,* See also 
§ 53. 4. 

» Alt. Gram. N. T. § 57. 2. 

* Winer, § 42, 5. Jacob ad Lucian. Alex. p. 64. Tox. p. 116. 
> Winer, § 42, 4. a. Alt. § 58, 1. Viger de Id. p. 505. StaUbaum ad PUt. 
Euthyphr. p. 46. 


5. In conditional propositions the Indicative is used in the 
following cases : — 

1. When the condition is simple and absolute, without 
any expression of uncertainty, the Indicative is used 
with £i in the first part of the proposition, followed by 
the indicative, or the imperative, in the conclusion : and 
in every tense, except the imperfect, according to 
circumstances. Thus in Matt. viii. 31, si U^aiX'Ksis rtfAcif, 

E^iT^ev^ov rtfMV aweX&eTv ely t-wv iycXtjv to/v j^o/^cyv. xii. 26, 
el b Sarava^ tov Saravav Ix/SaXXer, 6^' eotvroy i/Ag^ij&tj. 
xix. 10, £i Qvrcus hrlv ri aelriac toD iv^pofTov (Jt^eri rrit yt/vai- 
xhf, ov avix^kpei yai^'ino'ai, xxvi. 33, si xal vivres ajtccviakiff' 
diQjovTai h aol, kyd ovSsTrore (niacviaXi<T^ri<TO[JLxt, So John xi. 

12, xviii. 23, Acts xvi. 15, xix. 39, Rom. iv. 2, 1 Cor. 
XV. 16, 2 Cor. ii. 5, v. 16, James ii. 11. Add Matt. iv. 
3, 6, xi. 14, xvii. 4, xix. 17, xxvii. 42, Mark ix. 22, 
Luke xi. 20, John vii. 4, xiii. 32, xv. 20, xx, 15, Acts v. 
39, xviii. 8, Rom. vi. 5, viii. 11, 25, xi. 17, 18, 1 Cor. vi. 
2, vii. 9, 12, 15, ix. 17, 2 Cor, xiii. 5, Col. ii. 5, iii. 1, 
Philem. 18, 2 Pet. ii. 20, 1 John iv. 11.* 

Obs, 2. The same rule holds in many passages where tl has unnecessarily been 
taken in the sense of Wu, Thus, for instance, in Matt. vi. 30, ii Ii r»f x^^f^^ rcS 
ay^av i Btog curvg afA^tUvvfftff eh fTtfXX^ fAotXXov vfieiff iXtyoKTiffroij John xiil. 14, it cSv 
iya^ ifi^^u ufiSf rtvs Tohust fieii vftiii o^iixtri k. <r. X. So Acts xi. 17, Rom. t. 15, 17, 
viii. 17, 1 Cor. ix. 11, Heb. ii. 2.« 

2. When it is indicated that an action or event would have 
taken place under certain circumstances, which have 
not occurred, ihe indicative of a past time is used twice; 
first with ei, and in the conclusion with av. In the first 
part of the proposition any past tense may be used, 
according to the nature of the case, with the exception 
of the perfect^ but in the conclusion the imperfect only 
is employed with reference io eveni^ relatively future ; 
and the aorist, or, more rarely, the plusquam-perfect, 
with reference to the past. Thus in J^uke vii. 39, oiros, 
El 3v 7rpo^inT%f, eylvMo-Ksy av x. r. X., were he a prophet, he 
would know, &c. The imperfect, in the first instance 
correctly marks a present action continued from the 
past; and in the second, an action relatively future. 

> Winer, $ 42, 2. ' Alt. Gram. N. T. } 63, 6. Note. 


On the other hand« the aarist desi^ates past time in 

Matt. xi. 21, eI Iv Tiqca nai 2iSa;yi lyivoyro al iufd/JLiis ^ 
yByofJLBVQti EV vijuy, Trikau av Iv (raxKO) xat <rgo8S fABrevivioaf, 
if the miracles had been done« they would have repented. 
Similar examples are John viii. 42^ el 6 @eor varitp utiw 
viv, rryxTTaire ay l/ut£, ye would love me ; Heb. iv. 8, eI 7^ 
OLtnohs ^\viaovs x»ri7ravasVy owl av TTspl aXXijs* iXoeXst pure 
Tqivra, Tiyi^i^as, if Joshua had given them rest, then God 
would not speak respecting another day ; i. e. in the 
words just quoted from the Old Testament. Compare 
also Matt. xii. 7> xxiii. 30> xxiv. 43, liuke x. 13, xm 
6, John iv. 10, v. 46, viii. 39, ix. 41, xiv. 28, xv. 19, 
xviii. 30, 36, Acts xviii. 14, Bom. ix. 29, 1 Cor. ii. 8, xi. 
31, Gal. iii. 21, iv. 13, Hebr. viii. 7. 

v«. 3. Instead of the indicative with ii, the participle is used in Luke xix. 23, 
\yea tXS«y ffvv toxv av i^r^a^a ttifro, if 1 had come, 1 thouid^ &c. The p/tipeffeet if 
employed in John xi. 21, xv^/i, u n$ Si^iy c ahxpis fuv §v» Af iTt^vnmi. Compare 
V. 32. Seo also John xiv. 7, Gal. i. 10, 1 John ii. 19; and compare Diog. L. iii. 
26, JEsoji. F. xxxi. 1, Lucian. Fug^t. I. 

06«. 4. In the conclusion &v is frequently omitted, especially with jiv, and in- 
personals ; as in Mark xiv. 21, »»Xo* h^ifrff u au»lytfn^» Again, with an infinitiTe, 
instead of u with an indicative, in 2 Pet. ii. 21, »furrcf nv avr^tt f^n l^nymnmt, 
K» r. X. it were better for them not to have known ; i« e. if they had not known. Com- 
pare Xen. Anab. vii. 7. 40, Mem. ii. 7. 10, Diog. L. L 2. 17. In such cases the 
particle il does not so much represent a conceivab/e case, as a rca/ assumption, or 
a result which is represented as [certain : to which head belong John ix. 33, u /m 
?y ovTos Tit^ot 6(^, ouK fi^vvecTo xonTv ovTiif, were he not from God, he were edile to do 
nothing, xv. 22, tl fMi ^A.^0y, xeu ikeikfio'a aurusj &fitct^rt»v auK itx^** ^^» H, cv» tUx^i 
i^ovriuf ovhtfMAv x«sr' ifAovj tl fitt >iy ffat ^tio/AUav ava/B^tf, ActS xxvi. 32, airfXiXwr^tt 
fiivvaro av^puxog ouros) tl f/th iTiKtxXtiro Kaiffapet, Also, with an abbreviated con- 
struction, in Rom. vii. 7, rti* afAo^riaf ov» tyvaiVf tl fiih ha fo/jboW <rvv Tt yap iwi^fiua 
ovK tyvuitj tl fith fofiag iktytiT Oux IxiBvfJurtfftis, In like manner, in Latin, the in- 
dicative is found after a conjunctive with »i or nioi; as in Flor. £pit. iv. 1. Peradum 
erat bellum sine sanguine^ si Pompeium opprimere potuisset. 

Obt, 5. There is a very irregular usage of the present in the former part of a 
proposition in 2 Cor. xi. 4, tl ftiv ya^ i \^x,^fAtit9s &XX$f *lfi^owt xn^w^Uy KmXSt <fM^i#Sf. 
It is found also in Diog. L. ii. 8. 4, tl rovra ^avXof i^rtf, oux uf if rsu$ rSv ^un Ufnus 
iyinro. Perhaps the true reading, though found but in one MS., is eifij^te'StA 

6. When no condition is implied, all the tenses of the in- 
dicative, and especially the imperfect and the aorist, are em- 
ployed with av, either after relatives, to indicate uncertainty 
and indefinitenessy or generally to imply that an event might or 
would have happened under certain circumstances. Thus in 

* Winer, § 43, 2. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 58. Hermann ad Viger. pp. 819, sqq^et 
ad £ur. Hec. 1087. Poppo ad Xen. C3r. i. 6. 10. 


Mark vi. 56, iTov av sKTSTropsvsro g/s* kuimls, o<to< av ^wrovTo aifrpv^ 
lawl^ovroj wherever he went, into this village or that, as many as 
touched hirriy whatever their number, were cured. The meaning 
is the same, though more definitely expressed, in Matt. xiv. 
36, o(To* ^4'avTo, iadi^viooLv, Again in Acts iv. 35, SigS/Xoro lx,iarca, 
xa&oTi iv Tif xpzioLv zlyjcv, according as each might need ; where- 
as^ without h, the necessities of each must have been definitely 
fixed. With the aorist, in Heb. x. 2, ouk av Iwat'^avro vpoff^eqo- 
fAevaif they would not have ceased to be offered, i. e. unless they 
were of no avail. See also 1 Cor. xii. 2, and compare Gen. ii. 
19, Levit. V. 3, LXX, Agathocl. xxxii. 12, cxvii. 12, cclxxxvii. 
13. In Mark xi. 24, the present is so used. 

Obs. 6. It may here be proper to point out the different modes of expressing a 
wish by fiouXoifimf av, ffiov>Jft,n9 av, and ifiouXcfAtiv respectively. The distinction 
between the two former are marked by MatthisB ; but the simple imperfect implies 
a e&ndiiumal wish, modified by circumstances, as in Acts xxv. 22, ifiovXofinv ko* avros 
vZ avB^et^ou axov^at* A direct wish would have been expressed by ^iku or fiavXofiat 
(Rom. i. 13, xvi. 19, 1 Cor. xvi. 7, 1 Tim. ii. 8) ; and the possibility or probability 
of a future hearing by fi»ux»ift,ttv &v. The imperfect expresses a decided wish with a 
doubt of its practicability ; J unshed and still wish, i. e. I could have wished, if 
possible. Precisely similar are Rom. ix. 3, nv^^ofniv ya^ avrit iyat avaBif»a tTvaif 
». r. X., Gal. iv. 20, H^tXav "Si 9ra^uvai r^U vfjuig a^ri, i. e. if circumstances permitted. 
This import of the imperfect is, in fact, closely allied with the usage noticed above, 
under § 50. Obs* 5. 5.^ 

§ 52. — Of the Imperative, 

1. In prohibitions with y^vi, the imperative of the present is 
commonly used, as in Mark ix. 39, i^'n xcoXu^re dCfrov, John v. 28, 

Obs. 1. Frequently, the con/uTtc/tve aorist is substituted for the imperat.: as in 
Mark x. 19, fiM fitotx^v^ifs' fith favivo'i^i* x. r, X. Acts xviii. 9,^^ (po^tlv, aXXa TmXh, »a) 
fA,h ftoMrnffifS' The difference between the two forms, if any, must be slight, as they 
are intermixed in the same sentence ; but the former has been thought to check 
perseverance in an act begun or meditated, and the latter to convey a more general 
prohibition. The future with ov is sometimes put for the imperative with fih, as in 
Matt. V. 21, 0v ^eviva'Uf. See above, § 50. 4. Obs, 3. 

2. The imperative sometimes indicates, not so much a com- 
mand^ as a permission, exhortation, entreaty, caution^ or the like. 
Thus in Matt. viii. 31, o\ Zl ^oLifAons TrapBKoiXovv aOrhy, Xsyovrss, 
*Ew/Tg64'OV iiMV oTrsK^siy ely ttjv dyiXfiv to/v j^oi^wv* xaJ sT'^riy ocvrois, 

'TsraygTs. Here sTrlrpB-^ov marks a request, and uTriy&rE grants 
it. Compare Luke viii. 32. 

* Winer, § 42, a. 2, AH. Gram. N. T. § 56. 2. a. 


Oba, 2. The precative secse of the imperative will also be found in the Uris 
Prayer (Matt. vi. 9, iqq.)i ^nd its hortative sense in the sennom on the Mount. (Matt. 
vi. I, et passim.) It is simply permistive in 1 Cor. vii. 15, fi )s • a-^ieTt xM^i^ifn, 
X««(<C<'^«. xiv. 38, %\ Vi rti &y9§u, myuurtt. Compare 2 Sam. zviii. 23, 2 Kingi ii. 
7, Jerem. xxvi. 14. So, in Latin, Ter. Euo. iii. 5. 48, Ubi nos iaverimus,timkiy 
/avaio, Permiuion and caution are united in £ph. ir. 26, i^ytZtrBt, *tu ftn i^Mn^rwin, 
you are permitted to be angry, provided it be without sin. Sometimes a degree of 
irony or sarcasm seems to be implied io the permission ; as in the proYerhial fonn 
addressed by Christ to Judas in John xiii. 27, S vMjf, ir«f«r«y va^ut. So in the 
address to the disciples in Matt. xxvi. 45, ttm^iiiUrt ri X^nrott tieep on, i. e. if jou 
can, in this hour of peril. Com|)are also 1 Cor. xi. 6. Closely allied totheis 
examples is the sort of unwilling concession implied in Matt, zziii. 32, mU ipUt 
xXn^fart ro fiir^ov t£v ^rari^env ufuivifili ye up then, &c. : i. e. if ye will, ye mmL 
Compare 1 Kings xxii. 22, Pro v. vL 22. SoVirg. JRn.vt. 3S\. /,s€quere U§- 
linm, Kc. 

3. Two imperatives are sometimes united, either with or 
without xal, so that the first expresses, as it were, condition or 
limitation in regard to the second: as in John vii. 52, epsumm 
xai Ke, search, and you will see. 1 Cor. xv. 34, iKynyi^ars iixam, 
Koi fxii aixxprivsrs. 1 Tim. vi. 12, iywnl^ov rov xarXov 'aydy>a riif 
m(rTBMSy BViKa^ov rr^s alojyiov ^w^j-. So Barucfa. ii. 21, LXX. 
kKivolts tov dffx,ov, KCLi epyciiaa(7^e rw fiaffiXu, xai Ka^ia-are ixi riv yw. 
Epiphan. ii. p. 368, e^g rovs toD @eov Xcyyofs- Kocra yl^vxm aw, 
xai X^Biav /^ri g^s 'Ewifavioy. 

Obs. 3. The same mode of writing is very common in Hebrew ; and not 
unknown in Latin : as, for example, in the maxim, Divide et impera. lu such 
cases the second imperative is, in fact, equivalent to a future : which is used with the 
same import in Luke x. 28, roZre tronT, zu) ^wn. So Lucian. D. D. ii. 2, /SmTm, Ui 
oyj/ti. Somewhat analogous are the following passages ; but, though the imperatne 
may be rendered conditionally, the connexion between the two parts are suffidentlT 
apparent withoul swerving from the original construction: John ii. 19, Xv0-cn nr 
vaov rovrov, xet) h r^irh hfit^etTs jyi^u aitrov, Eph. V. 14, tyu^ai, i k»Biv^m9, xai iaUrw. 
tK Tuv vtK^aivj xet) Wd^vffit trot i Xoarog* James iv. 7, nurUrnri reu ^i»fia?iM, xeu ^f^rv< 

Obs. 4. The distinctive import of the tenses is for the most part observed in those 
of the imperative ; the present denoting continued Gt frequently repeated action, and 
the aorisl that which is complete or transient. See \ 50. Obs. 6. Examples of the 
former are Matt. vi. 19, (An ^nvavap^xn hfuit Bn^xu^ols ««•/ rtis yns. Rom. xi. 20, « 
tf^^ftiXo^^'dyit, aWa. ^ofiou. Heb. xii. 14, th^vTiv ^uuKtrt. Add Matt. ix. 2, xiv. 27, Mark 
viii. 15, ix. 7, xiii. 11, xiv. 38, Luke ix. 3, xxii. 40, xxiii. 23, John i. 44, vi. 27 43, 
vii. 24, xxi. 16, Acts v. 20, Horn. xii. 14, 20, xiii. 3, 8, 1 Cor. vii. 3, ix. 24, x. ?] 14, 
24, 25, xvi. 13, Eph. ii. 11, iv. 25, 26, vi. 4, Phil. ii. 12, iv. 3, 9, 1 Tim. iv. 11, 13, 
v. 7, 19, vi. 11, 2 Tim. ii. 1, iii. 14, Tit. i. 13, iu. 1, Hebr. xiii. 2, 7, 16, James 15, 
ii. 12, iii. 14, iv, 11, 1 Pet. iv. 12, 2 Pet. iii. 17. On the other hand, we have the 
aorist in Matt. viii. 8, «XX« fiSvov i/Vi X«y«. Mark i. 41, xiyti ebivM, etPiw, xmSm^lf 
S„T/. John ii. 7, ytfii^etrt T«f v^^letf ii^ares. Acts XXiii. 23, iTotfctUecTi frsxTmns 
"itaxsirUvs. So Matt. xiv. 8, Mark i. 44, iii. 5, vi. 11, ix. 22, x. 21, xiii. 28, xiv. 15. 
36, 44, XV. 30, Luke ix. 5, 13, xv. 19, xvi. 6, xviii. 3, 22, xxiii. 21, xxiv. 39, John 
ii. 8, iv. 10, 21, 35, vi. 10, xi. 39, 44, xiii. 29, xviii. 11, 31, xx. 27, xxi. 6, Acts L 24, 


iii. 4, Y. 8, vii. 33, viii. 19, 22, ix. 1 1, x. 5, xii. 8, xvi. 9, xxi. 39. xxii. 13, Rom. xiii. 
7, 1 Cor. vi. 20, xvi. 1,11, Eph. vi. 13, 17, Tit. iii. 13, Philem. 17, Heb. xii. 12, 13, 
James iL 5, 18, iii, 8, 9, 13, 1 Pet. iv. 1, v. 8. The distinction, however, is by no 
means uniformly observed ; but the aorist is frequently used to indicate an action, 
which cannot be considered as terminated on the instant. Thus in Matt x. 11, 
\xu fAtimrt, ws a* i|iX^»jTt. Mark xvi. 15, xn^v^rt to thetyyiXm «•«*■«» rj xriffu, John 
xiv. 15, rxs l»TflX«f ras If^eis Tfipvo'etrt. 1 John V. 21, rtxvU, ^vXttlgxrt \etvrovi kwl rZv 
f/^Xory. Compare John xv. 4, Acts xvi. 15, 1 Cor. vi. 20, 1 Tim. vi. 20, 2 Tim. i. 8, 
14, ii, 3, iv. 2, Hebr. iii. 11, James v. 7, 1 Pet. i. 13, ii. 2, v. 2. Sometimes the 
aorist and present are united in precisely the same signification ; as in Rom. vi. 13, 
fM^ vrx^trrxvtTi ra ftiXn vfjuiv o^Xa ethixletf rn a/JM^ri^, akXa va^xffTfiffurt iavrovs rS 
Bif. XV. 11, utvtTrt rov Ku^iov, xxt i^Ktnfart uhriv. Elsewhere, when united, the 
distinct import of these tenses is duly preserved ; as in Mark ii. 9^ a^U ffou riv x^«/3- 
fiar»f, xui ^tfi^arti, John i. 40, (^;^f0'^i, xetil^trt, ii. 16, a^un recvra hrivBiv* /An 
itsaTrs t«v Jtxov rou ^xr^of fjuv o!xov IfA^o^iou, So Lucian. D. M. X. 14, xx) ffv xxohv 
7«|y fX<v^t^/«y fifihxfiMs, xWx kx) ix* rxvrx^ 

§ 53. — Of the Optative and Conjunctive, (Buttm. § 139.) 
The optative is the mood which indicates that which passes 
in thought, and not in reality. In independent propositions it 
is used in the New Testament, as in other writers, without ^av, 
to express a wish that any thing may take place. Thus in 
Acts i. 20, T^v k7ri(T)co7rriv olvtov \ct^oi ireqof, (Some copies have 
Xd/Sgro;.) viii. 20, to dqyvqLov aov <yvv (jol e'lfi slf aTfcyXgiav. Rom. 
XV. 5, o Se ©6or Sa5yj vfJLiv ro qlvto ^poveiy, 1 Thess. iii. 11, o ©eof 
xareu^ivxi t^v oSov rifxSJv Trpos vfxois' x. t. X. 1 Pet. i. 2, 2 Pet. 
i. 2, xeiptf fjf^'iv x»i 8l§»iv7} ?r\7i^uv^eln. Add 2 Cor. ix. 1 0, 2 Thess. 
ii. 17, iii. 5, 1 Pet. v. 10, Philem. 20. In 2 Tim. ii. 7, iv. 14, 
many good manuscripts have ^a/crsi in the future, which is equally 
adapted to the sense. Of negative propositions with /m,^, the 
formula pt^ yEvotTo, in Luke xx. 16, Rom. vi. 1, 16, vii. 7> is an 
example.' So 2 Tim. iv. 16, pt^ olOtoXs Xoyij&g/ai. Compare 
Mark xi. 14. 

Obs, 1. In classical writers the particle i/ often accompanies the optative in the 
sense of utinam ,* instead of which, in relation to things past, the aorist indicative is 
sometimes used. Of this there seems to he an instance in Luke xii. 40, tv^ tixBov 
fietXuf Uf rhv ynv xx) ri ^iXu ; f< l(hnxw^^fi. Oh ! that H had been already kindled! 
To this head Luke xix. 42, xxii. 42, have also been referred ; but the former is pro- 
bably, and the latter, certainly, a case of aposiopesis. See § 69. III. 4. 

Obs, 2. There is another mode of expressing a wish by tty at<piXoii, with an infini- 
tiYO ; instead of which the later writers use S(ptkov, in its proper number and person 
indeed, but as it were adverbially, with the indicative, and the same usage is found 
in the New Testament. Thus in I Cor. iv. 8, xx) oiptXov yt ifixff-tXtvffxrt, and truly J 
wish that ye did reign. 2 Cor. xi. 1, o(ptXov xnixt^Bi /aov, would that ye could bear with 
me. See also Gal. v. 12, Rev. iii. 15, and compare Exod. xvi. 3, Numb. xiv. 2, 
zx. 3, Job xiv, 13, Ps. cxix. 5, LXX. 

» Winer, § 44. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 59. 

« Winer, § 42. a. 5. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 60. 


2. It is not often that the optative is used with av in the Nev 
Testament in independent sentences ; and then only with inttf- 
rogative particles. When thus employed, therefore, it hu 
reference to some supposed contingency, or conjectural circum- 
stance^ passing in the enquirer's mind ; and indicates uncer- 
tainty or indecision as to the reply. Thus in Luke 162, 
EvsvEt/ov rSf irotrp\j ro^ ti av &eXoi itakEiff^eu avTov ; tchat he wouU 
wish him to be named^ if he were consulted : John xiii. 2i 
TTu^iff^ai rU av EtVi ; who it could he ? Acts ii. 12, ifniripomf n' 
av dsXoi ToDro £?>«! ; they doubted what this could mean, i. e.,if 
it were explained, viii. 31^ irws yap av Scnrai/x^iv, eav ixii x. r. X.; 
XX vi. 29, Bu!iaifAriV av ru ®eS) oe ysvitrbai x. r. X. Compare I^le 
vi. 11, ix. 46, Acts v. 24, x. 17, xvii. 18. The distinction be- 
tween the optative and indicative is accurately marked in Acts 
xxi. 33, BTTuv^ivero, rU av eno, xai ri eart te^toi^xa/^ ; who he migbt 
be, and what he had done ?^ So Xen. Ephes. v. 12, Iredow^xoifl, 
TivEf TE ^(Torv, xai Ti fioiikoivro. See also Heliod. ^thiop. i. 25. 
46, ii. 15. 81, Polysen. ix. 25. 

Oht,2. Although some hypothetical circumstance may have suggested itidfto 
the writer's or speaker's mind, such is not necessarily the case ; and hence it ariin« 
perhaps, that the omission of «y with the optative in interrogations, whether diicd 
or indirect, is by no means imcommon: as in Luke i. 29, ^ttXtyiT^xTt, «'«r««if ui • 
a^truc/AOf cvreg. Acts Xvii. 11, &veiftfiv6VTts retf y^et^as, ti %X6t ToSra oSTmf. Add Lake 
iii. }5, viii. 9, xv. 2f), xviii. 36, xxii. 23, Acts xvii. 27, xxv. 20^ xxvii. 12. Corn- 
par^ Herod, i. 46, iii. 28.' Xen. Cyr. i. 4. 6, Anab. i. 8. 15^ Diog. Laeitrii. 

3. The conjunctive mood expresses \he possibility of an action, 
with reference to external circumstances ; and thus from its 
very nature is more generally employed in dependent proposi- 
tions. It is used in exhortations and admonitions ; and chiefly 
in the first person plural : as in Matt. xvii. 4, Xiuke ix. 33, 
7roi7i(rcuf/.£v cu^e rpits oKTivas, John xiv. 31, eyei^sa^Sy ayetf/Asv gvrsir 
Sev. 1 Cor. XV, 32, (pdyoufjiBv koi viatixsy, avqiov ya^ u'jrQ^mtnioyJsi' 
Add Luke viii. 22, John xix. 24, Rom. iii. 8, 1 Thess. v. 6. 

Obs. 4. Many good manuscripts have ihe future indie, instead of the comjtmetirt 
in James iv. 1, ^ri/Ai^n n ety^toy ^ro^ivffufAi^tt x, r. A. So also in P]lil. iii. 15. Alike 
variation occurs in 1 Cor. xiv. 15, Heb. vi. 3 ; but in these instances the/v/Mv is 

Obi* 5. All the persons of the conjunctive are also used with Ymb, so as to mitigate 
the force of a direct imperative. Thus in Mark ▼. 23, r« ^uyiLr^tiv fuv \0x^rm ^X^* 
<W ik^m iTi^r.i avrri reis X*^|?*ft ««*«; ff-^SJJ. 2 Cor. viil. 7, i»« xet.) ip Tavrf rp XH*'' 

* Winer, § 43. 4. « Winer, § 42. 4. c. 


wtfimviirf. Probably an EUipBis of hifiui ^6u, veat^uxaTJi ri, or something similar 
suggested by the context, is required to complete the sense. Compare 1 Tim. i. 3. 
The imperatitfe import of the form is clearly marked by its interchange with that 
mood in Eph. v. 33> txa^ras t^v leturtiv yvveuKx •urtts uyuvrarvt ttg ieturof « 3i yvvfi, 
Tm ft^rett rn &>^». Here i^eirti may be supplied. Other examples are John i. 8, 
•v» $y \»tiv»t ri ^Sg, &XX* iy« fiu^ru^n^if iri^i rev ^tiris, i. e.y he was sent or commis- 
sioned to hear witnea. Gal. ii. 10, /ACftf r«y prrtix*'* ?y« fivfifMnvtfiuv, soil, veifiKuXttn 
Aftas»^ With these are not to be confounded such cases as Mark xiv. 49, John i. 19^ 
iz. 3, xiii. 18, xv. 25, Kev. xiv. 13, et nmilia. See §. 67. 

4. In^ questions of indecision or doubt, the conjunctive is used 
also without av, and with or without an interrogative particle : 
as in Mark xii. 14, SoJiuigv, A pt>i Saz/xsv ; are we to give, or are we 
not to give ? Again in Matt, xxiii. 33, mois ^vynr^ diro rr^s 
Kplasws rris ysEvvfi^ ; How are ye to escape ? xxvi. 54, ittos ov 

Obt. 6 . In such questions, and in others with the idea shouid, the future indie, is 
more commonly used. Thus in Matt. xi. 15, rm It ifjudM^v rnv ytvtav rnvrnv, John 
VI* 5, trtfSfy ay»^ei^6fiU9 &^rou$ ; Rom. vi. 2, unng avt^avtfitv r«} ufitet^rstf, irug ^ti ^rco- 
fUf Iftthr^, vii. 7, viii. 31, ix. 14, 30, ri tt* \^»v/Aiit ; 1 Cor. vi. 15, &^af tZv ra fAi\n 
TtSX^i^TWt 9r»m^v 9rc^inis fiti^n't xv. 29, ri frotf,^6v^i> «i fiet^rt^efittvdi vti^ tSv vtx^Sv, 

Ob$* 7. The conjunct, is also used without a cofyunction and without &f after SiXc/v. 
Thus in Luke ix. 54, ^i\ttt tltta/Aiit veZ^ xarafiftrnt ; 1 Cor. iv. 21, ri SiXin ; U fu^f 
ixBu it^dg vfuis ; Similarly in Matt. vii. 4, &(pts ixfiaXatro xd^C^ts i^orav i(pSakfiov ^ev. 
Instead of the conjunctive , the best manuscripts have the future in this construction 
in Matt. xiii. 28,'^fXfif »vv &9rt?^^o¥rts ^vXktl«fitt¥ avrei ; Matt. xxvi. 17, ^w ^iktisiru^ 
ftd^ftif r«i ^yuf ri vd^x'^* ^ome commentators would also restore the future forms 
ia the parallel places of Mark xiv. 12, Luke xxii. 9, considering the first persons 
singular, being doubtful cases, to be futures also : as in Matt. xx. 32, rl diXiri v-otn^v 
ifuf. Compare Matt, xxvii. 17, 21, Mark x. 51, xv. 9, 12, John xviii. 39. This 
■eems questionable. The future is used, however, in Exod. xxv.40, LXX, Sf^« iretti- 
fUS M»r» riv rvvtv x. r. XJ* 

5. In negative propositions the cow;wnc/eW is used with oi 
/uu-w instead of ihe future ; as in Matt. v. 18, lura tv ^ (jlIx Ksqaloc 
ov ixii 9ra§gX&r) oLtto rov vdfjLov* xvi. 28, ov fjuin ysvffcjvrai S^avirov, 
xxiv. 2, ov fJifi a^6&^ cu^e \i^09 bttI XiSov, os ov f/^ii KOLTa\v^T,(yerai, 

Obi, 8. This usage is not unfrequent with the conj.aor. 1. active, from which it is 
excluded by Dawet* rule. (Buttm. ( 139.. £. Obs. \.noie>) Thus in Luke x. \9ftuliv 
VfMtf oh fjuii dhxn^fi. John xiii. S,ovfitfi viypi^s T6V{ ^etetg fitv tig rof alZvet, But it would 
scarcely be expected that the New Testament writers would strictly observe a canon, 
which is by no means firmly established by the usage even of the best writers. 

1 Winer, §§ 42. 4; 44. 4. Alt. Gram. N. T. §§ 59. 3 ; 61, 1. 
* Winer et Alt, ubi supra : Lipsius de usu Indie, in N. T, § 2. Fritzsche ad Matt. 
pp. 467, 761. Valcknaer ad Kur. Hipp, 782. 


§ 54. — Cotiditional Propositions. (Bdttm. § 139. A.) 

1. When it is intended to express possibility witli reference 
to some condition determinately announced^ the conjunctive is 
employed with iav in the first part of the proposition^ and the 
conclusion is made with the future or some other tense of the 
Indicative, or with the imperative. Thus in Matt. v. 13, lii 
TO i\xs /xa;§d(vdr)y ly rivt oXiadiiasrai. viii. 2^ icvqiE, eiv S'eX^s'^ ^uw- 
ffal pt€ xa&a§i(Tafi. John vii. 37, eav rif ^i>)/fe, epy^ic^ctf Trpos /jle, nat 
TrivETM. ix. 31, lav ri9 Sgocrg/S^s ri, rourou aKOvei, Add Matt. i?. 

9, V. 23, ix. 21, X. 13, xviii. 13, 15, 16, 17, Mark iii. 27, John 
vii. 17.. viii. 31, xv. 6, 7, xx. 23, Rom. ii. 25, vii. 2, xiv. 23, 1 
Cor. vi. 4, vii. 11, 28, 36, viii. 10, ix. 16, 2 Cor. v. 1, 1 Tim.L 
8, ii. 15, 2 Tim. ii. 5. 

06<. 1. It will be observed that the past tenses of the imdiaUive are compantiTdy 
rare, and that these, as well as the present, have in fact a fuiure acceptation. See 
below, § 56. 1. Compare also Lucian. D. M. vi. 6, Diog. L. vi. 2. 6, x. 31. 41. 

2. When the condition and consequence are alike problema- 
tical, the optative is used with eI in the first clause^ and with 
av in the second. The New Testament affords no example of 
this rule, from which, however, there are deviations in the best 
writers, according to the particular nature of the proposition. 
If, in tlie latter part of the sentence, something is determinately 
asserted, though the former conveys only a possible case, the 
indicative appears in the conclusion ; and thus it is in Acts 
xxiv. 19, ois JsT E9r! (jov TrapeTvxi, xal xarioyopeTv, eY ri ep^oigy vpos 
/W.6. Compare Acts xxvii. 12, 39, 1 Cor. xv. 37. In 1 Pet iii. 
17, the manuscripts vary between ^i\si and S'ixoi, of which 
either is equally adapted to the sense. See above, § 51. 5. 1.' 

Obs, 2. Sometimes tl and tav occur in two consecutive clauses ; as in Luke ziii. 9, 
Kei¥ fitiv ^amffn Kot^cttv — 1/ II /Afiyit iKKi^^Uf alrnv* Acts V. 38, l«y ^ i| at^fttrtn % 
fiovXh avrtiy KetruXv^nfftvetr tl Vi \k Qiov Icrh, ol ^CfetffBi «. r. X. The difiVrent import 
of the moods is, in each case, sufficiently apparent. Compare Xen. Cyr. i?. 1. 15, 
Plat. Phaed. 42, Isocr. Archid. 44, Lucian. D. M. vi. 3, Dio Chrys. Or. Ixii. 
p. 621.2 

Obs, 3. Signifying whether, tl is used with the indicative, in Matt. xix. 3, )dy*mt 
ulfTUf tl i^tcriv uvB^e^^M u^roXv^at rn^ yuvalxa altreiv Kara ^u^eif aiTtav, Mark iii. ii 
vra^trr.povv avrev, 11 re7s <ra(l^otin Bt^ecrivcu airoy. Here the conjunctive with imt mi^t 


» Winer, § 42, 2. b. c. Alt. Gram. N. T. 67. Reitz ad Lucian. p. 591. Her- 
...ann ad Viger. pp. 831, sqq. Passov. Lex. in vv. 1/, l«». 

* Winer and Alt, ubi supra, Jacobs ad Anthol. pp. 49. 104. Poppo ad Xen. 
Cyr. p. 209. Hermann ad Soph. Aj. 491. Jacob ad Lucian. Tux. p. 143. 


have been expected. Add Acts xix. 2, 1 Cor. i. 16, vii. 16, 2 Cor. xiii. 5, et alihi. 
With the optative, in Acts xvii. 11, etfax^Uofrts ras ypec<pecsj u ix^* ru.Zr» tlrttt^ 
Compare Acts vii. 1 . In thig sense \aLi is not found. 

Obt. 4. Although %\ with the conjunctive cannot be positively traced to the Attics, 
' it was undoubtedly joined with that mood by the lonians and Dorians, and thence 
retained by the later writers. In the New Testament we have in Luke ix. 13, au» 
fiV)» hftTf vrXtttv i «rc>rf &^Tot ««i ivo i;^S(/f;, u finrt ir«^tf/Scyrif ay«^eiffatfAif, 1 Cor. 
XIV. 5, l*T6s tl /A9I inpfifinvr,. Rev. xi. 5, i? ng etvrtvs SiA.*i etiixnireUf 9rv^ i»ir«^fvcr«i 
»• r. X. There are, however, variations of the MSS. in every instance. For a like 
example see Gen. xliii. 3, 4, LXX. On the other hand, we have idv with the tWt- 
eaiive, but still with vaiiations of the manuscripts, in 1 John v. 15, f«y »tl»/Au on 
mMvu fifMtv, X* r. X. Many copies also have the indicative in Luke xi. 12, John viii. 
36, and a few in Rom. xiv. 8, xv. 2, Gal. i. 8. The same syntax is sometimes found 
in Herodotus, and frequently in the later authors. Compare Exod. viii. 21, Basil. 
i. p. 175, Theodoret. iii. p. 267. 

Of propositions beginning ^Yith a pronoun relative, (Buttm. 
§ 139. B.), see § 59. 

§ 55. — Propositions beginning with Particles of time. 

(BuTTM. § 139. C.) 

1. In the Greek writers, org, ogrorg, kiss), liralii, c&f, &c., are 
used with the optative, and otolm^ oTrora^, Iwm, l^giSiv, with the 
conjunctive. Of the usage with the optative there is no ex- 
ample in the New Testament ; but the former particles are 
continually employed with a present j aorist, or future indica- 
tive, when an action present, past^ or future is definitely and 
positively expressed. Thus in Matt. vii. 28, org crwereXsaiv 5 

'IiQffoSr rovf \oryovs roirovf, kl^e'Tr'Kri'JcrovrG ol oy(^\ot swi rri ^iSa^ri 
auTOv, xviii. 32, watjav r^v o^siXriy gxg/vyjv a$Sxa aoi, kirel Traps- 
xxkBCoir fJLE. XXviii. 9, ur is sTTopsvovTo x. T. \. Luke vi. 3, o^Sg 
toDto dviyycore, o Iwo/ioffg Aa/SlS, o^drg sTsivaffsv cLvros ; xvii. 22, 
IX.g{;(7ovr9( TifjLEpoii, ore eTn^vf^incrsrB /xtav to/v -JOpt-g^wv rov vlov rov av- 
^poSvov JSgTv. John V. 25, epx^ratt £§«, xai vt/v hriv, org ol ysxpol 
aKoviToyroti T^f (puvriS rod vlov rov @eov. ix. 4, g^j^gra* yv^, org ou- 
Sgtf iuyarai sqyij^sff^ai. Acts xiii. 46, eireiSri is dwctf^sTo^s avroy, 
arps((i6(Asba sU roi g&vo}. 2 Cor. iii. 15, tivUx dvayivcuaxsroii Mw<r5r, 
xaiXuiXfAa sirl T-yiv xapiiav avrm XETrat. Heb. li. 14, g^gl oSv ri 
vaiilx XEXoiycaxfiKs x. t. X. ix. 17, g^g* t^n itors \a%vsi, ors ^ri o 
Sia&g/xgvof. See also Matt. ix. 25, xi. 1, Mark ii. 25, ix. 21, xiv 
12, Luke i. 23, iv. 25, vii. 1, 12, xv. 25, John iv. 21, 23, 40, ix. 
5, xvi. 25, xvii. 12, Acts xv. 24, xvi. 4, 1 Cor. xiii. 11, Heb. 
^ iv. 6. 

2. The conjunctive is used to express an action which takes 
place frequently or usually during present or future time \ so 


that its appropriate particles may generally be rendered by 
while, as long as, as often as, &c. : as in the following pass- 
ages : — Matt. V. 11, fjuxKoipm sore, ora,y ovsiiltTCJtriif vtxois xai iiuifiKn. 
vi. % orav ovv voiYiS sK&nfjLoovynv, y^r^ <yoLKvl<n^Sy as often as ; and 
so in vv. 5, 6^ 16. Luke xi. 21, Srav 6 la^vpo^ KoAcavXifftjUvof ^ 
Xdffffri X. r. X., as long cw, &c. John viii. 44, oTav XaKri ro %|/€iJ- 
io9, Ix ro/v liiuv XaKsT, whenever, &c. ix. 5, qtov Iv to; itiafAM «, 
(fojs el/xi rotf xoijfjLov, whilst^ &c. 1 Cor. xi. 25> tovto voisTre, hai' 
xff av vivnr€f eU riv kfAriv xyitJummM, Add Matt. XV. 2^ Mark xi 
25, Luke vi. 22, xi. 34, 36, 1 Cor. iii. 4, xi. 26, Rev. xi 6. 

06<. 1. Sometimes only a simple future is expressed; and if it be the aohtiem- 
jtmctive, ih^futurum exactum. Thus in Matt. ii. 8, la'Ay Ik ui^^irt, A^rmyyuXmri fm, 
when you shall have found him, Mark ziii. 7, «r«y ^ ituov^nTt ifXiftMts, tekm fr 
shall hear of wars. Luke xvii. 10, %v»f ^roin^nri veirrA, Xiytrt, x. v*. X. 1 Gor.xif 
34, T» it A,«/ira, is eiv tX.Bt>, iutra^t/Mit. 2 Cor. iii. 16, fivfxa ^ «v SflTM'v^c^^ff sr^ig Ki* 
^i«y, vi^taifitrat to xei\vft,f*M, See also Matt. ix. 5, xxi. 40, Mark iv. 15, viii. 38, xn. 
23, Luke ix. 26, xL 22, John ii. 10, iv. 25, vii. 27, viu. 28, xiii; 19, xiv. 29, xv. 26, 
xvi. 13, Acts xxiii. 35, Rom. xi. 27, 1 Cor. xv. 27, 28, Phil. ii. 23, 1 John ii. 2a 

Oh*, 2. Instead of the conjunctive, X\ie future is used in Rev. iv. 9, »«} trm» ^mmihi 
rk ^iv« Vtlttf xai rt/ihv »• r. A. Some manuscripts also read in Matt. x. 19^ m^ntv- 
^ev^i>, and in Luke xiii. 28, Sypt^^t,^ 

Ob», 3. The usage of ?rf, \^u, &c., with a conjunctive is very doubtful in the beii 
writers, though not unusual with Homer. In the New Testament we find in Lnk 
xiii. 35, on fIcttiTt, In Rom. xi. 22, the expression is elliptical. See } 69. m. 
Much more unusual are oretv, 'ixuleiv, with an indicative; but we have in Mark iii. 
11, ret ^nifMcra rei aKd^u^ret, oV«y avrev iBui^i4, ^r^offi^t^rrtv »vtS, A few manil' 
scripts also have the indicative in Mark xi. 25, xiii. 4, Luke xi. 2, 21, Roro. ii. H 
1 Cor. iii. 4. The same construction is sometimes found in the later Greek writers.* 

3. Of the remaining particles of time, leas, or Sous o8, axc** °^' 
tAExpis o8, until, are employed with an indicative^ imperf, or 
aorist, when an action is spoken of as lasting to a point of 
time already past. Thus in Matt. i. 25, ovx, eylvajo-Key avrhy tas 
oi srsxs Tov vlov avrris tov ^pcyroroxov. 11. 9, 6 ctarrtp itQorjyei aw- 
rovSy tojs eX^uv sVttj sTrdvoj od ?iv to Trcciiiov, Luke xvii, 27, 
voj^iov, ETTtvov, syoifjiouv, lyapt/^ovTo, &xqi v^s r^^Li^oLs elc^xS-e Na/e «V 

r^v xi^wTov. x\nd so in Matt. xiii. 33, xxiv. 39, John ix. 18, 
Acts vii. 18, xxi. 26. 

06«. 4. When it signifies «<;Ai/«/, %ui is also construed with an indicative; as in 
Matt. v. 25, la-Bi tvvoaiv rZ eivrthlxu ffov rei^v, tag orou it iv rri ohS fcgT* ecvTov. John ix. 
4, Ipyei^tir^xi) lug tifj^i^a, Iffrtv, So Heb. ill* 13. 

Obt. 5. With the optative these particles do not occur. "With the conjunetire, 
with or without ay, they determine the limit of present or future actions ; as in 

» Winer, §§ 42, 3. 43, 5. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 64, 1. Hermann ad Viger. pp. 
792, 915. 
* Jacobs. Obss. Cr. in AnthoK p. 30. Passov. Lex. in v. «r«». 


Matt. xii. 20, xTmv rv^ofn^ov w ^^M%t, tuf &v l»/3«A*} tig v7x»t ftiv x^Un, Mark xiii. 30, 

4r^«#ftf^/waM« Luke iz. 27, «v (mi ytv^^rrut ^avarev, Xvs av Tiaifft rhv fix^iXiiav rov &tov. 
Compare Luke zii. 50, xiii. 8, xv. 4, 8, xvii. 8, xxii. 16, xxiv. 49, Rom. xi. 25, 1 Oor. 
XV. 25, Gal. iii. 19, Eph. iv. 13, 2 Thess. ii. 7, Heb. x. 13, James v. 7, 2 Pet. i. 19, 
Rev. ii. 25, xv. 8, xx. 3, 5. Instead of the conjunctive, the future indicative is the 
reading of some manuscripts in Matt. xxvi. 36, Rev. vi. 11, xvii. 17. 

Obt, 6. The prea* indie, occurs in the formula tug t^ofitm, in Luke xix. 13, John 
xxi. 22, 23, 1 Tim. iv. 13 ; and both the present and future indicative with tus vort 
in direct interrogations ; as in Matt. xvii. 17, ttg Wri t^ofiat fitS* v/aHv ; itat froVs 
JkfU^&fuu vfuSv ; John X. 24, tatf vtar% vhv ypv^hv hfjJUv ecipug ; Rev. vi. 10, hiK ffan «v 

Obt. 7. With *^v the indicative does not occur in the New Testament ; but with 
.«i4he optative, as indicating a circumstance passing in the speaker's thoughts, this 
particle occurs in Acts xxv. 16, «frix^/S*}y, 0ti ovx Unv sS»s *Vtjfutiois ;^a^i|M'S«/ rtfu 
Mf^^tMTn tig eitrtiXueiv, fT^/y n i xetrtiyo^ovfiivts xttTct vt^WMstw txet revs xetrnyi^ovsi vovtcv 
7f itifX»yi»s X»fiu 9*1^4 rw iyxXnfietrot* Some manuscripts read txv ^^^ A.«j3*i, others 
tx*t* With the conjunctive it is chiefly used oi future actions or in negative proposi- 
tions ; as in Luke ii. 26, ^y »vr^ xtx^fifAan^fAtvov fjm thuv ^eivetroVf vtfuv n ^ r^v X^i^rov 
Kif^MV. xxii. 34, ov fivi ^ttni^tt o^fn^ov akixru^j gr^tv ti r^tg a^rtt^ima^ f*M itHveu ft,u In 
qffirmaiive propositions the infinitive is used, as in the parallel place of Matt. xxvi. 
34, sr^tv aTAxro^et ftnri^eu, rr^ts a^u^fw*! fiu. So in John iv. 49, xetra^^tf it^h &ir»^ar- 
9Uf ri prailiev fiou. Compare Acts ii. 20. The infinitive is also used with respect to 
actions realiy pott, where the indicative is more regular in the better writers ; as in 
Matt. i. 18, fr^iv ^ ^t/yiXSiTy xuroutt tu^i^n •» ytt^rfi %x6u^a. Acts vii. 2, % 6fof u<p^ 
Tfl 'Afi^inkfit, irpif *} xttrtixn^ett ethrw iv Xetppdv, Here also belongs John viii. 58, ^^tv 
*AfifakfA ytvi^Bmt, iyeif tlfu, since the present, as denoting eternal existence, includes 
the pait. Compare Herod, ii. 2, iv. 167, iElian. V. H. x. 16.^ 

§ 56. — Prepositions expressing any aim or purpose. 

(BuTTM. § 139. E.) 

1. Of the particles which mark an aim or purpose, ha, and 
iTTMs are found with the conjunct, in the New Testament ; and 
their usage will be found to conform with that of the best 
writers. The general rule requires a conjunctive after verbs 
of present ox future time, and an optative after verbs of past 
time. There is no instance of the latter usage in the Greek 
Testament, although there are many passages, in wliich it 
would have been appropriate; as, for instance, in John iii. 16, 
vii. 32, Acts xvii. 15, Eph. iv. 10, Heb. xi. 35, and elsewhere; 
nor is it common in the LXX or the later writers, by whom 
indeed the optative was very sparingly employed. After a 
present, the conjunctive appears in Matt. vi. 2, waitip ol vTroxpiral 
^oioUaiv, i^ois So^a<T&ft;(Tiv v'TCo rm dv^p&fTrafv. Add Matt. vi. 5, 

» Winer, }§ 42, 3 5 45, 6^ Alt. Gram. N. T. § 64, 2. Hermann ad Viger. p. 792, 
Reitx ad Lucian. iv. 501. 

L 2 


Mark iv. 21, Rom. xi. 25, Phil. i. 9, 1 Tim. i. 18, v. 21, 2 Tim. 
ii. 4, 10, Heb. ix. 15, I John i. 3. Here the conjunctive indi- 
cates an object, of which the attainment is assumed to be cer- 
tain ; and so also after the future j or an imperative, which, 
from its very nature, has a future reference. Thus in Matt 

ii. 8, dvayysl'Kacri yi^oiy ottcus Kuyu IX&civ TtpoixuvAcfcj avra,*, Mark 
X. 17 y ri TToiiia'co, tvoe J^enfiv alcjvioy xXYtpoyofjiintTOJ y 1 Tim. iv. IS, 
Iv roirois Tordt, *iva. oov ri TrqoJtovvi ^avepai r^ Iv iraitTiy. See also Matt 

ix. 38, Mark v. 12, Luke x. 2, Acts viii. 19, 24, xxi. 24, xxir, 
26, Rom. iii. 8, 1 Tim. v. 7, 16, 20, vi. 1, James v. 16.* 

Obs. 1. The deviations from the above rule in the New Testament ^laybel^ 
counted for as in other writers. They are the following :— 

1 . When the verb, which depends upon the caf^junctiom, denotes an adioi, 
which either in itself or its consequences is continued to the present timcithe 
conjunctive is frequently used after a patt tense. Thus in Luke L 3, 8^ 
»kfA6) y^ayl^eitf <»« i^Tsyf^s ». r, X. John XV. 11, vmurm XtXaXnun v/th, mi 
X^i* ^ *f^*l ^* ifiuv/Miff, Acts ix. 17, i *v^t0t itwi^^mXni fA%, e^ens tnafijJ^f' 
So 1 Tim. i. 16, John iii. 5. Add Luke xvi. 26, Rom. v'u 4, 1 Tim. l 21; 
Tit. i. 5, ii. 14, 1 John iii. 8, v. 13,20; and compare Xen* Mem. i. LS^Fbt 
Crit. p. 43. b, iElian. V. H. xii. 3. 30. 

2. The conjunctive is also used after past tenses, when the result, which it d- 
presses, is announced by the writer or speaker as certain and definite; ii ii 
Mark vi. 41, {htltv r67$ fMtBnrtuf ethrw, Ivn itu^n^ifesw avrstgm Acts w, 26, ly* 
ytv etvrovsy "va, fih A,i^«M'S««'/y. So Mark viii. 6, xii. 2, Acts ix. 2],xxr.2& 
Closely analogous is the usage in narrations, in which the writer transporti 
himself, as it were, to the time when each event took place, and represents 
it as present. Hence the use of the conjunctive regularly in Thocydidei; 
and so likewise in Matt. xix. 13, ir^tetifix^n tvrtf ^mVin, 7y« rks x^^t'^^ 
etvreTg, Acts xxvii. 42, rS¥ ii er^urMTSf fitvkh iyivtTc, Jwec rthf iietuin^ «r»* 
xviUea^u Compare Matt. xii. 14, John xviii. 28. Hence the conjunct, it al» 
used after the prcesens hisloricum in Mark xii. 13, airoeTixx§vet rnag Im ctm 
Ay^tvffu^t kiyai, 

3. With reference to a prayer or wish, the optative is found after a premii i> 
£ph. i. 16, fitniav vfjMv toiovfAtvag (iTi ruf ^^«etux'^* f^u, Ipa e Stig hin vfuf etu^ 
ao<pias. So again in Eph. iii. 16. In both places, however, manymana- 
scripts give ^ for J<w»j ; and as the prayer is decisive, not contingent j tlie 
former is preferable. 

Obs. 2. The particle ?v» is sometimes joined in classical Greek with an indicative 
of a past tense, to indicate that something should have happened, which has not; aod 
a like usage with the present indicative occurs in 1 Cor. iv. 6, 7»« /MiBnri r« m W{ 
yiy^a^rrut (ppavity, Vv« fih tig vt\^ rod Uig (puffiovff^t. So again, in Gal. iv. 17, Jwi*?- 
^19 tifjMgy ov KctxZg' «xxa iKKXuffo,! tiftug ^ix^u^iv, Ifu ecvTous ^nkeu^rt. Here there is i 
caution against something which may be done. Both passages, however, are coo- 
tested ; and in 1 Cor. iv. 6, there are various readings ^vet^Te^t and ^oemeBt, of 
which the former would coincide with the general rule. 

Obs, 3. From the close relation between the future and the conjunctive, it migU 
be expected that the particles of design would be joined with that tense. In clai- 

* Winer, § 42, b. 1. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 62, 1. a. Hermann ad Viger. p. ^' 
Devar. de partic. Gr. pp. 174, 253. 


sical Greek this usage is very general with o^us ; and though in the New Tesfa- 
ment it only occurs with Im, it will be remarked that the latter particle is far more 
commonly employed by later writers than the former. Thus in 1 Cor. ix. 18, rig tiZt 
ft0i \ffvn 9 fciffBes ; 7va tvetyyiXi^ofitvos ahavcavov ^n^v ro tvetyyiXioy, In John xvii. 2^ 
Horn. V. 21, 1 Cor. xiii. 3, 1 Pet. iii. 1, Rev. xiii. 16, and elsewhere, the readings 
▼ary. A future indicative is united with the conjunctive in £ph. vi. 2, ri/A» riit 
9'ttTi^et ^6U xec) r^y fAnri^ef "f» tZ cot yUnrat, xai Hfffi fiax^o^^ovtos (Ti rns yiis* Com- 
pare Rev. xxii. 14.^ 

2. The particle /x^, in conjunction with Tva and oTreo^, follows 
in the main the preceding rules. It is most rarely, therefore, 
found, except with a conjunctive ; as in Matt vi. 18, au Sg vio<r- 

xeiofv oiXei'^al cov tyjv xs(f(xXriV, ottco^ fAVi ^xvrir x. t. X. John xi. 
50, <TutM(pipsi rif/AV, 7va elf ay^pcoTTos a^o&avy) vTTsq rov Xaot), xai fxn 

tkov TO 6&voy dcTToXTiTaci, Add Matt. V. 29, 30, xxvi. 5, Luke viii. 
10, xvi. 26, John iii. 16, Acts xx. 16, 1 Cor. i. 10, 29. 

Oba. 4. The same observation will apply to /bcn> fitnitvsj /Anton^ finrti, where h» 
may be considered as understood ; as in Matt. v. 25, Mt thoZv rif etvTtiUf, /Att^ari 
" tn ira^aief o avrihiKOi rS x^ir^, 1 Cor. ix. 27, v^m^m^u fiou to ^ZfMt^ fitn^atf ahoxt/Mi 
yiw/ieu» See also Matt. vii. 6, xiii. 15, xv. 32, Mark xiv. 2, Luke xii. 58, 2 Cor. ii. 
7, xii. 6. With the optative after a pretent in Acts xxvii. 42, ^uXn lyinra, 7y» rohg 
ii^fiMTag ivrtxTttvannf fin rig iKxtXvfA^^ug ^M^vyet, Many good manuscripts, how- 
ever, read %ia(pvyif. According to the best authorities, a conjunctive and future are 
united in Mark iv. 12, fin'roTt Wi^r^typaj^iy »et$ xipiBn^^rui etvrtTg ret afAct^rnfiMTK, 
Fuigo o^f ^^. 

Obs, 5. After verbs denoting /<?ar or caution j the same usage prevails. Thus in 
Blatt. xxiv. 4, fixifriTt, fin rtg vfMtg «rA«yn^*}. 2 Cor. xi. 3, (ptfiovfAeu ii, ftn^rig ^S«^n 
Ttt fonfiara vfia/v. Add Luke xxi. 8, Acts xiii. 40, xxiiL 10, xxvii. 17, 29, 1 Cor. viii. 
9, X. 12, 2 Cor. xii. 20, Heb. xii. 15. These verbs are also followed by the indica- 
tive present, perfect, and future. For example, in Luke xi. 35, ^xo^ru euv, fih to ^£f 
%9 #«! ^xoTog Wrh, whether the tight in you is darkness. Gal. iv. 11, (pofiov/Mit vfitZg, ^• 
tr^g tlxn xtxovietxa tig iffiag, that I have laboured. Col. ii. 8, /SXctrf ri, fin Ttg vfiag i^rmt 
i g-vXetyvyZv x, r. A.., that no one shall hereafter tpoil you* See also Heb. iii. 12; and 
compare, for the preeteri/e, Job i. 4, LXX, Diog. L. vi. 1. 4, Lucian. Pise. 15, He* 
liod. ^th. i. 10. 3. Sometimes the verb of fearing is omitted, as in Matt. xxv. 9, 
fin^oTt ehx a^xi^ti tifx7v xa) vfuv, scii, ^ofiovfAi^u. Compare Rom. xi. 21, Gal. ii. 2, 
1 Thess. iii. 5. In the two last passages the subjunctive and indicative are com- 
bined, with the import of each mood distinctly preserved.^ 

Of some other particles with these moods, see § 67. 

§ 57,— Of the Infinitive. (Buttm. § 140—142.) 

1. As distinguished from the participle, which designates a 
quality of a person or thing independent of the action ex- 

^ Winer and Alt, uli supra, Hermann ad Vig;er. pp. 850 sqq. Schaefer ad 
Demosth. iv. 273. Fisch. ad Well. ii. p. 251, iii. 6. p. 286. Abresch. Misc. 
Obss. p. 14. Diluc. Thucyd. p. 793. Lipsius de indie, in N. T. usu, } 6. 

* Wiuer, § 60, 2. Hermann ad Soph. Aj. 272, Bornemann ad Xen. Sympos. 
p. 70. 


pressed by the leading verb, the Infinitive denotes the ol^eet 
or completion of some action otherwise incomplete. It is 
therefore used after all verbs which imply a purpose ; as &€X«,, fxiWco, giw&a, &c. Thus in Matt, xxvii. 15, euSl^i 
aTTokuBiv. Mark x. 4, l^€T§£>}/g ypd^oLi, Luke i. 1, kv^y^cifFnam 
ayarx^xff^ai Si^lT^ffiv. John i. 44, i5&gX^(TSv l^sXS'grv. Acts v. 36, 
ri fxeWere 7rpi<T(T€iv ; 39, oh SjJva^&e Kara\v<rai avro, X. 48, t§o«- 
roL^'&y aurovs ^aTTTia^rivai, ' xxvii. 22, TroL^ouvSJ vtjuas e JS'i/pcsTy. Gral. 

i. 10, ^oor&J dpetrxm. Add Matt. xv. 35, Mark viii. 6, Luke vi. 
42, Acts ii. 29, ix. 26, xxvii. 43, 2 Cor. x. 2, Phil. iv. 11, 
1 Thess. i. 8, v. 12, 1 Tim. i. 3, ii. 8, 2 Tim. iv. 9, Heb.ix. 
5. xi. 24, James iii. 10, Jude 9, Rev. i. 12, ix. 6. 

Obs, 1 . Many of these verbs, instead of the simple infin., taJie the mfim. with the 
article in the genitive ; as in Acts xxi. 12, vx^ttcakdufiuv hfAus rtiu /M,n d9»fitu»u9 mint, 
xxiii. 20, tf't/vtSfyrfl rev l^tiTn^eii «*!. The conjunction ?mb also is often found with these 
verbs ; as in Matt, xviii. 6, ^v/Kpi^u avr^^ 7y« »^ifia^^ f^iixas ovtxif lir) m t^kx^Om 
eturou. xxvii. 20^ %9r%wav rovs ex^^vg, Ifa eur^^tvreii riv Ba^«j8^«v. Mark yi. 8, «v#ty- 
yuXi> eivroTff <W fitrlih etl^wif, John ii. 25, 6v x^iiw iT;^iy, ?mb r)s fjutfru^nrif. Compue 
also Matt. xx. 21, xxvi. 4, Mark vii. 26, John xv. 1, 30, 1 Cor. i. 10, 

Obs, 2. In some instances the infin, act, seems to be put for the pattnes u 
in 1 Thess. iv. 9, vt^i TH rnt ftXah^^tets w XfiM^ ^X*^* y^m^uv p/mV. Comptie 
chap. V. 1.' 

Obs, 3. Some verbs, of complete meaning in themselves, but not sufBcieiitly 
defined to express a purpose, are followed by an infinitive. Such are those whi^ 
signify to give, to choosey the verbs of motion, to go, to send, &c. ; and other verbi 
and phrases which require a more exact definition. Examples are Matt. v. 32, 
9r0/£? avrhv fitei;^a^Beti, xi. 7, ri i^^k^trt B'tdcei^^ai ; xiii. 11, vfuv ^thorai ywtu. 
Mark iii. 14, 'Iva a^a<rriXkip etvrovs Kti^vff^uv. Luke XV. 15, ifrift,yf/tv aurov tig tous «9f'*f 
uhrou /SffVxt/y ^oi^ovs, John xiii. 24, vtvti oZv reurtu vruBtcBxi, Acts v. 31, rwrn i 6m; 
tiy^axrt, '^ovveti fAtreivowv ry *J(r^ariX. xviii. 27, ty^ot^ttv rcli eLb%'k<pe'ti ei^o^i^etc'^tti *orit' 
1 Cor. i. 19, otf y»^ avri^rtiXi fits fia^ri^ttv, x. 7, iKaBi/tv i Xecog petytTt, £plLL4, 
ili\i^etro hfitZg uvoti kyiovg. Add Matt. ii. 2, XX. 28, xxvii. 34, Mark vii, 4, Lukei. 17, 
19, 76, ii. 1, ix. 16, Col. i. 21, 2 Tim. i, 18, 2 Pet. iii. 42, Rev. xii. 2, xvi. 9; and 
compare Gen. xi. 5, xxxi. 19, xiii. 5, 47, Exod. ii. 5, 2 Chron. xxvi. 15, Ruth iii 
7, Nehem. viii. 14, LXX, Diog. L. ii. 6, 7, Lucian. Asin. 43, Necyom. 12, Apollod. 
i. 16, Died. Sic. xx. 69, Plat. Phaed. p. 69. A. In these cases also Vy*, Sm or w, 
is sometimes used ; as in John xi. 37, ovk vihuvnro oSrog Tomrect, ?»« xeu evreg m 
a.'Pto^a.v'n ; Rom. vi. 6, wv) Ti »»rfi^y^Br) avro rod vofitov, £<rri 'hovXtvuv, ». t. A,. 1 Cor. 
iv. 9, esof hfAas u^ihiltv, ug Wi^avnrUvg, on Si«rjo» iytMfifnt rS xoa-fAOit, See also 
John iv. 15, 2 Cor. iii. 7. 

2. The Infinitive is put after adjectives ; as in Matt, iii. 11, 
oS QVY. el/xi Ixavor ri vi!roSrifj(.aira ^acrrdcroci, Luke xv. 21, ovKsri sW 
a^/os- xXTj&^vai vlof aov. Acts xi. 17, Syvarof Kcu\v(ra,i tov 0fov. 
1 Cor. vii. 39, sXsu^ipa, lari ya/xoQ&^vai. Heb. X. 4, iSt/vaTov a^i- 
^elv a/xapTwtf. 1 Pet. i. 5, a-ajrnqlccv sroifxriv aTTOKoXv^^riyat, See 

1 Alt, Gram. N. T. 6 67, a. «. 


also Mark i. 7, 1 Cor. xv. 9, 2 Tim. ii. 2, Heb. vi. 18, xi. 
and compare Prov. xxx. 18, Wisd. i. 16, LXX. 

Obt, 4. Here also a Conjunction is sometimes substituted ; as in John i. 27, «vx 
ti/bti SJ^osi *iytt Xu^M ». r. A. The infin, act, is used for the pa»», in Heb. v. 11, Wi^- 
fAnnvTH Tkiytn,^ 

Obs. 5. The }it/?ii. also follows, without the gen, of the article, after substantives 
which produce the action of the verb ; as in Luke viii. 8, o tx*** *''*'» a»»duy, aMviri. 
Acts ix. 4, Ix*' Viov^itti ^riff-ui ^avretf. See also Luke ix. 1, 1 Cor. ix. 5, Eph. iii. 8, 
Heb. iv. 1. 

3. The in/in, is put after particles; as ci<rrsy in Matt. viii. 
24, ffEKT/xos" fji^iyoLS eyivsro, ojurB to flrXoTov xaXi^reo'S'ai v'TTo to/v KvyLX' 
Tcjv, Mark iv. 32, froisT KkdHov^ £<rrs ivvacffdai, x. r. X. Luke ix. 52, 
E>^XS'oy Eii- KufJLinv, ciare sroifjLoiffM otvrS), Actsxiv. 1, XaXoQdai ovrofff 
cia-re 7ri<rrBv<rat vo\v grXrf&or . So Matt. viii. 28, Mark i. 45, Luke 
xii. 1, 1 Cor. V. 1, Phil. i. 13, 

Obt. 6. Once only in the New Testament the infinitive occurs with dtgf except in 
the phrase tig iros mm (Heb. vii. 9,) ; viz. in Acts xx. 24, ov^ %xc* rh '4^ux^^ f^^ 
Tifuttv ifJMurefy uf rtXuSiffeu rov ^^ofiav fMU /Aira p^et^eis* It is probably omitted, as 
occasionally in the best writers, in Col. iv. 6, o Xoyes vfAuv ir»»rort iv x^V^h ^AMTin^rv- 
fMffi i^vtat va/f %u Ut ixd^TM a^ox^hiff^ai. Compare Eph. iv. 24. The particle 
art is once also followed by an infin, in Acts xvii. 10, ^lu^i Srtfuret u^uts x»i ir«A,Xii^ 
(k^W fiixT^in Ut^Beu T0¥ 9rXovv, This passage, however, must be classed with the 
anacolutha. See § 69, ii. 

4. With the neuter of the article^ the infin. supplies the 
place of a substantive in all cases. Thus it is used, 

1. As the subject in the Nominative : Rom. xiv. 21, xaXov 
TO fj^'h ^aysTv xgea, x. t. X. 1 Cor. vii. '26, xaXov uy^pdivco 
TO Qvrojs grvai. Phil. i. 21, lixol yap to ^^v, Hpiarof xai ro 
a9ro^<3tve7v, xiplof. So Gal. iv. 18, Phil. i. 29, et alibi. 

Obt. 7, Frequently the article is omitted ; as in Matt. xii. 10, i< t^t^rt roTg r«/ft- 
fia^i di^«irivciy ; Rom. xiii. 5, J/« Avayxri y^ora^nff^eu. \ Cor. vii. 9, x^tl^^n yd^ Urt 
yafin^eu, ti vru^ov^Bat, Add Matt. XV. 26, xix. 10, Eph. v. 12, James i. 27. In 
1 Thess. iv. 3, sqq. it is partly inserted, and partly omitted. 

2. In the genitive : after nouns, as the latter of two sub- 
stantives, and after verbs^ adjectivesy and prepositions 
governing a genitive ; as in Matt. vi. 8, oTSs w§o rov ufAcis 
alrriffai avrov, Luke i. 9, eXap^e roif ^v/Aiaiffaci, xxii. 6, 
l^riTet sifKaiqidv rov TrocpoLSovvai atvroy. Acts xiv. 9, wiaTiv 
sy^ Toy crw&^vai. XX. 3, yya/fAin rov v'jro<7rpe(peiv, xxiii. 15, 
EToi/xo/ i<r/x8v Tov dv5\eiv avrov. Kom. xv. 23, siriTro^iay rov 
iX&sTv Trqos v^xas. 1 Cor. ix. 6, ovk sx^l^sv e^ovtrlav rov /x^ 

» Winer, } 45. 3. Alt, § 67. », /3, &c„ Ast ad Plat. Legg. p. 117. 
* Alt, Gr. N. T. § 70., 


B^ycit^ea^on, 2 Cor. vii. 12, grveXHv ToD ^(ZVBpoj^riyon rif 
<rwovSr,y vy^uM. Phil. iii. 21, xari tw ivipysiatv tou Si;iraff&« 
ai;Tov. Heb. ii. 15, Sii 'siyros rov ^^v. James iv. 15, am 
ToD \iysiv CfjLcif. See also Luke i. 57, ii. 21, xxiv. 25, 
John i. 49, Acts xv. 23, 1 Cor. x. 13, xvi. 4, 2 Cor, viii. 
11, Heb. V. 12, 1 Pet. iv. 17; and compare Gen. xii. 
20, XXV. 24, xlvii. 29, Ruth ii. 10, Neh. x. 29, Ezek. 
xxi. 11, Judith ix. 14, 1 Mace. v. 39, LXX. Of the 
usage with verbs oi preventing, see § 41, svpra; add 
Acts xiv. 18, 1 Pet. iii. 10 ; and compare Gen. xxix. 35, 
3 Esdras ii. 24, v. 69, 70, Susan. 9. 

Obs, 8. The infin, with rov is also used to indicate a purpose with an ellipsu, 
perhaps, of innet or *i^) ; and sometimes the idea of with retpect to ({ 44. 1.) will 
explaia the usage. Thus in Mark iv. 3, 1 ^^xSiy « ^iru^iv tw r^u^eti, in order to tow: 
Luke iv. 10, roTf etyyix»ts tthrou UrtXuTctt vrt^t ^0?, t»v iut^vXa^eu rf, with respect to 
their aire of thee : zxii. 31, V^i^rn^urd v/aZs r»v ^meiffeu is ro9 c-TTtv, xxiv. 29, ti^ifXSi 
rou fAilifttt ew »UToTs, Acts vii. 19, s«««ar^f revg vetri^ets ftfJ^f, t«v «*«/!?» 'ix^Bgra ra ^i^ 
aurSv in regard to the exposition : xx. 30, XaXourrtg ht^r^ttfc/btifay tw ivTMnrff rm 
fAtt^nrat oviffu »urSv. xxvii. 1, ig \»(iBti rw »9roT>.iTv, when it was decided in 
respect o( sailing : Heb. x. 7, ^jmw rtIS vem^eu ri BiXnfAoi ^ou, James v« 17, it^99%3^w 
rtv fjtn /3(f^«i. See also Luke ii. 27, v. 1) ix. 51, Acts iii. 2, xv. 20, xyiii. 10, xxi. 12, 
xxvi. 18, Rom. vi. 6, 1 Cor. vii. 37. On the other hand, where the insertion of nt 
might be expected, as, for instance, where a purpose is indicated, it is frequently 
omitted; as in John xiv. 2, ^o^tvofiat iroifiuiaai rittov vfuv, £pli. iii. 16, 7y« 2«ii ufuf 
ivvdfiu x^arettuinvai^ xetretxtjcai rov X^t^rov iv rats xa^'iiettf uficoHv, Occasionally tm 
infinitive* staud together, of which one has tav, and the other is without it ; as ia 
Luke i. 72, 79. See the entire context. 

Ohs, 9. But although most of the numberless passages, which come under this 
head in the New Testament, may perhaps be satisfactorily explained on the above 
principles, and be assimilated with others of a like nature in profane writers, still 
there are many which cannot be so interpreted. Such are Acts iii. 12, hfuv riintl- 
^CTi, a/s i^tet ^vvtifiti ^txoiy)xo^t rod irt^tvretriiv avrov ; Rom. i. 24, ^ec^ttetxtv mvroift ui 
dxaSa^ffietv^ rov artfAa^io-fiect ra ^tifietret etvruv. In the former example some would 
' resolve fri^omxoff'i into ^oivruTg ove-t; but it is better to take rov ori^nracrtiv os a simple 
infinitive ; and in the latter the infinitive must be rendered, as in many places, by 
so as; in order that. Compare Luke xxi. 22, Rom. viii. 12, xi. 8, 1 Cor. x. 13. The 
fact is, that the use of rov with the infinitive is extremely lax in the New Testament: 
and even much more so than in the later Greek writers, who are less observant of 
its strict import than their predecessors. See Isocr. ^gin. p. 932, Strabon. xv. 
717, Heliod. JRiYi. ii. 8. 88, Dion. H. iv. 2109, Arrian. Alex. ii. 21. In the LXX 
the practice is equally vague ; so that a like uncertainty, in the construction of the 
Hebrew infinitive with 7, may havJe had some influence in producing it. For 

examples of regular usage in the LXX, see Gen. i. 14, iii. 6, viii. 12, xxv. 16, 
xxxviii. 9, xliii. 17, Judges v. 16, ix. 15, 52, x. 1, xi. 12, xv. 12, xvi. 5, xix. 3, 8, 15, 
XX. 4, Ruth i. 1, 7, ii. 9, 15, iv. 10, 1 Sam. ii. 28, ix. 13, 14, xv. 27, 1 Kings i. 35, 
xiiL 17, Nehem. i. 6, Joel iii. 12, Judith xv. 8, 1 Mace. iii. 20, 31, 39, 52, v. 2, 9, 
20, 48, vi. 15, 26, ix. 69. Of irregular usage, see Josh. xxii. 26, Ruth i. 16, 1 Kings 
viii. 18, xiii. 16, xvi. 19, Joel ii. 21, Judith xiii. 12, 20, 1 Mace. vi. 27, 59. It 


may also be well to compare Gen. xxiv. 21, xxvii. 1, xxxi. 20, xxxiv. 17, xxxvi. 7, 
xxxvii. 18, xxxix 10, Exod. ii. 18, vii. 14, vlii. 29, ix. 17, xiv. 5, Josh, xxiii. 13, Judg. 
ii. 17, 21, 22, viii. 1, ix. 24, 37, xii. 6, xvi. 6, xviii. 9, xxi. 3, 7, Ruth i. 12, 18, iii. 
3, iv. 4, 7, 15, 1 Sam. vii. 8, xii. 23, xiv. 34, xv. 26, 2 Sam. iii. 10, 1 Kings ii. 3, 
iii. 11, xii. 24, Ps. xxvi. 13, Judith ii. 13, v. 4, vii. 13, 3 Esdr. i. 33, iv. 41, v. 67. 
We have only to add that in Luke xvi. 1, Acts x. 25, the best MSS. omit the article ; 
and in Kev. xii. 7, vov ^roXiihn^ut has been properly corrected into froA.(/A*}«'«y. 

3. In the dative the infinitive denotes cause in 2 Cor. ii. 
13, ovx. ecry(/ix(K oivB<ftv rco Tm^vixctri [xou, rco /xri &vpsiv ijlb 
T/tov, because I did not find Titus. Compare Lucian 
Abdic. 5, Agath. v. 16, Diog. L. x. 17, Joseph. Ant. iv. 
10, 1. Like the genitive it implies purpose in 1 Thess. 
iii. 3, fra^a.x,a\i(7eict vfxa.s, rco ixriSiva aaivgd&a* Iv rais SXt-vJ/sffr. 
A few MSS. have tgu, and others to. Compare, how- 
ever, Achil. Tat. ii. 163. With a preposition, it occurs 
in Matt. xiii. 25, Iv rco xa^sv^siv rovs ky^^co'Kovsy while men 
slept : Luke i 22, s^auf^xi^oy Iv tw x^ov/^e/v avrov, because 
he tarried : Acts iii. 26, euXoyovvra vfjLois Iv rw airo(yrpe(piiv 
exxcrrov diro rcov Trovinqiojv vfjiojv, by your conversion. See 
also Matt. xiii. 4, Luke i. 8, v. 1, ix. 36, xi. 37, xiv. 1, 
Acts viii. 6, Gal. iv. 18, et alibi, 

4. In the accusative, as the object of a verb, the infin. 
with the article is used in Luke vii. 21, rv(p\oif groXXoiV 
IXs^pitJxro TO ^XsTTsiv, 1 Cor. xiv. 39, ^rjXoyTg to Trqo^inrzuiiv, 
xal ro XxXsL^f yXcocaocis f^ri KcoXvsrB, Phil. ii. 6, ou^ xpTTxyfjiov 
Tiynffxro ro eivxi Utra ©sof. Add Acts iv. 18, Rom. xiv. 13, 
2 Cor. ii. 1, viii. 10. With prepositions, in Matt. vi. 1, 
Trpo^ to &5a&Svai xvrois, xiii. 5, Sia to per) %%zi)i fix^os y^r. 
John ii. 24, S«i to a^Tov yivcu(Txsiv Trxvra^, 1 Cor. xi. 25, 
/XETa TO Ssi^v^crai. 2 Cor. vii. 3, eIs- to crvvxTro^avsTv xal 
avX^yp, Sec also Matt. v. 28, xxvi. 32, Mark i. 14, v. 4, 
Luke xii. 5, Acts viii. 1 1, xii. 20, xviii. 2, xxvii. 9, 
1 Cor. X. 6, 2 Cor. iii. 13, viii. 6, Phil. i. 7, 10, 1 Thess. 
ii. 9. 

Oht, 10. A verbal noun with u% or 9*^0; is frequently used by St. Paul instead of 
this Infinitive. Thus in 2 Cor. iv. 6, v^i (purtcfAov rns yvu^ius, Eph. iv. 12, Mf 
Ttv »»ra^ri^fMt rSv uyiaiv, tU t^yov ^inxcuxS) »> t, X. Heb. xi. 11, ^dffu ^vvaf*n tig 

1 Winer, 5 45, 4. 5. 6. Alt, Gram. N. T. J 69. Georg. Vind. p.325. Valcknaer 
ad Kur. Hipp. 48. Ast ad Plat. Legg. p. 56. Schsefer ad Demosth. ii. 16, sqq. et 
V. 378. 



1. The infinitive is used to designate the object after verbs 
which signify to say, to affirm, to deny, to hope^ to believe, to 
think, to mean, to seem. Sec, which in Latin also are followed 
by an infinitive. Thus in Luke vi. 34, groc/)' Sv IXsr/^grg asroXi- 
/Sstv. xxiv. 23^ 'Kiyoutrai xoti oirrafflav iyyi^^ouv ecupatKsvai. Acts iu. 
13, xqlvavros exeivou dvdKueiv, XV. 11 > VKTrei^/Lcev cra/S'^ysi. Heb. 
xi. 25, IXopievof a-uyxocKouxeiffiai rco \a^ rov ®sov. See also Luke 
xxiii. 8, Rom. xv. 24, 1 Cor. xvi. 7, 2 Cor. v. 11, Phil. ii. 19, 
23, 1 John ii. 6. So after xiv^wBveiv, and verbs oi fearing ; as 
in Matt. ii. 22, l(poj3oQSoQ IxeT a^EX&eTv. Acts xix. 27, rovro xirfw- 
vciet ^/^.Tv TO tripos ely a^eX.6y/Aoy £X.&€Tv. Compare Luke ix. 45, 
Acts xix. 40. Of the more usual construction of verbs of fear- 
ing, see § 56. 2. Obs, 5. 

2. If the second verb has a subject of its own, this is either 
put in the accusative, or the clause is formed by the conjunc- 
tion in. Thus with an accusative in Acts xvi. 15, xExpixari lu 

itiorri^t TO) K^vpici) stvoti. Rom. XV, 8, Xiyoj oe iiQffoiJy Xqitrroy Sioxowv 
yeysvricr^ai rajf TrepiTOfAris, 1 Cor. vii. 26, vo/xi^a; ovv tovto xoXw 
vTraipxeiv. Add Luke ii. 44, Acts vii. 25, xiv. 19, xxi. 4, 21, 
Phil. iii. 8. With on, in Matt. ix. 18, XEyo/v, in ^ ^vydrnq fuou 
apri eTeX6i>ry)(76v. Luke Xxiv. 21, ^/xelV Se -nKmS^o^^y Sri avros hw 
X. T. X. Acts ix. 26, /X79 marzvowis or* Icrrl fjuodb'nr'ns. Add Mark 
vi. 14, Acts xxiv. 26, Rom. vi. 8, 1 John v. 2. 

Obs. 1 . After verbs which contain a negation the particle fAn is frequently added 
to this infinitive; as in Luke xx. 27, o\ dfriXiyovris amffraftv fAti uteu» xxii. 34, r^ 

3. If the subject of the injin. is the same with the subject of 
the preceding finite verb, it is usually omitted with the infini- 
tive ; and being understood to be in the nominative, the adjec- 
tives and participles dependent upon^ it are put in that case. 
Thus in Rom. i. 22, (pdaKovres ^tyon ffo(poi. xv. 24, bKhIS^cj Sianro- 

psuof^svof ^eoia'aa-^ai vfxais. 2 Cor. X. 2, iiofxai to f^r^ 'Trapdy ^ailfh' 
aoci. 2 Pet. iii. 14, aTtov^ifJOLTs a^r^iXot xat dfJLaff^viro^ eups^r,y(zi. 

Obs. 2. For the sake of emphasis, the subject is sometimes repeated iu the accu' 
sative; as in Phil. iii. 13, iyu IfAitvrh oh Xoyi^o/Aat xariiX^ifiiveit,' So in Xen. Cvr. Y. 
1. 20, vofAit^oifAi yap ifjMurov iaixivai x. r. X. Compare Xen. Anab. vii. 1. 30, Mem. il 
6. 35, Diod. Sic. i. 50, Anacr. Od. xlv. 8, Philostr. ApoU. i. 12. 


» Alt, Gram. N. T. } 67. b. Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 753. 


4. On the other hand^ if the subject is the same with the 
object of the preceding clause^ all defining adjectives, &c., 
should be in the case of the words to which they refer. 

Obs, 3. Still, especially where emphasis is intended, the accusative is often found 
with the infinitive. Thus in Matt, xviii. 8, xakov <ro$ Urtv tl^tXhTv tig rh ^unv ;^«Xav 
^ xvXAdv K, T. A,* Acts XXV. 27, akoyov y»^ fioi ^oKtT, vrifivavra ii^fiicv /mi km rag xetT 

mwou tttrtetg ffi/Auitett. 

5. Again, if the Infin. has a different subject from that in 
the preceding clause, it is put, together with its definitions, 
regularly in the acaisative. To the instances which have 
been already given may be added Luke xxiv. 23, ol Xiyoutny 
avroy ^^v. Acts ii. 24, ovk ^v ivvarov x^areur&ai avrov vtt avrov. 

Add Acts xxvi. 26, 1 Cor. vii. 10, 2 Pet. i. 15. 

Obt. 4. If the leading verb govern any other case than the accusative, the usual 
construction is not necessarily preserved. For instance, the accusative does not ac- 
company the infinitive in 2 Pet. ii. 21, K^iTrrev Sy avroTg fih WiymitUeu vnv Shov rng 
hxautrtnfig, n Wiyvov^tv i^ri^r^iypeii x. <r. A. Here ul/rovg and Xtiyittuvrag would be 
regular. Lastly, ffvft,^»Uu and other impersonals are often found with an accusa- 
tive and infinitive in classical writers ; and so we have in Acts xxi. 35, ^un^n (ia^rti' 
^wiai avriv. Thus iyinro in its impersonal sense, if happened, it came to peat, is 
very frequently so constructed, especially in the Acts. See Mark ii. 23, Acts iv. 5, 
ix. 3, 32, 37, 43j xi. 26, xiv. 1, xv. 16, xiz. 1, xxi. 1, 5, xxii. 6, 17, xxvii. 44, xxviii. 
8, 17, et (dibi. This usage, which has been regarded as a Hebraism, is also com- 
mon in the LXX and Josephus. Compare Gen. xlii. 38, 2 Mace. iii. 2, iv. 30, Jo- 
seph. Ant. vii. 14. 7, and elsewhere; and also, among the Greeks, Diod. Sic. i. 50, 
iii. 22. 39, Theogn. v. 639.i 

6. The subject is sometimes wanting in dependent proposi- 
tions, and construed, by attraction, in another case with the 
verb of the preceding proposition. This especially, though 
not exclusively, happens with verbs of knowing, seeing, &c., 
followed by Tva, on, tcus, Trd&sv, nr, &c. Thus Matt. xxv. 24, 
gyvwv (JE, irt (ryiKnpos ef h'^^coiros, Mark i. 24, Luke iv. 34, oTSi 
as, rU SI, John v. 42, aXX' syvo/xa vfxaif, on rr,v ocyiTtm rot; ©got) 
ot/x gp^grs Iv \cLvroi%. 1 Cor. xvi. 1 5, ©rSarg ty)v o\xicx,v Srg^ava, or* 
sffrh X. r. X. See also Mark xi. 32, Luke xiii. 27, xix. 3, John 
iv. 35, vii. 27, viii. 54, ix. 19, xi. 31, Acts iii. 10, Rev. xvii. 8. 
The same idiom is also common in Latin. Thus Ter. Eun. v. 
8. 5, Scin' me, in quibus sim gaudiis ? Adelph. v. 4. 20, lUum 
optant, ut vivat,^ 

Oba, 5. In some cases the place of the transposed subject is supplied by a pronoun 

1 Winer, § 45, 1. 2. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 68. Poppo ad Xen. Cyr. 1. 4. 4. Stall- 
baum ad Plat. Symp. 3. 

* Kustei ad Arist. Plut. 55. Valcknaer ad Eur. Phoen. p. 355. 


in the second clause ; as in Acts ix. 20, Uif^vm rev ^inewv, ^n wvis l^rn i viif rm 
Stou. If the verb in the first member be in the passive voice, the nominative ctsB 
is retained. Thus 1 Cor. xv. 12, X^i^rig xri^uff^trau, Sn i» vik^Sv lynyt^reu* Tbe 
case is somewhat different, when the latter clause contains an explanation, u it 
were, of what is implied in the former. So 2 Cor. xiii. 5, n ov» l^tyneifxtrt tMarmS} 
on X^t^rif Iv vfitv \ffrn ; 2 Thess. ii. 4, ti^ohil»vurr» \ttUTOv, oti er9-) BlU^^ 

Obs* 6. There are a few passages of the New Testament in which the hfit, is 
undersfood to be put for the Imperative. The older 6rammarians in such osn 
supply lis or fitifAvn^o. Sometimes the imperative and infinitive are combined, and 
as the usage is by no means uncommon, especially in the Greek poets, there seem 
to be no valid reason for assigning other interpretations, which are equally hank 
and unnecessary. Thus in Luke ix. 3, fin^v aj^trt ug ttip Hiv, fctiTt dvi )</« x****^ 
tx^n. (Some would supply u^rt,) Rom. xii. 15, x'^k"* f^*^^ ;^«/(0W«ry, xmi *Xuu 
/toir« KXatirruv. Here also several imperatives precede and follow, and the eboN 
is supposed to be a proverb quoted ad iiteram. Again, Phil. iii. 16, vf »yrf ^rtexM* 
xetwfi, where it is proposed to refer ^ratx^tf to ^^tfiw^iv in the preceding verse. Hw 
case is clearly different in such passages as Matt. v. 39, xiya^ vfM /nh aiwtm^ f» 
^rtvti^S. In Rev. x. 9, mauy manuscripts read 2o$ for ^wtm. On the other hand, 
^a^inyxm in Luke xxii. 42, which some take in a precative sense, depends upon 
fiaukUf and the couclusion is xuXag ?;^ti understood. * Such passages as 2 Cor. ii. 
10, 1 Thess. iii. 11, 12, 2 Thcss. ii. 17, iii. 5, 1 Pet. v. 10, are nothing to the par- 
pose; for the verbs are all optatives. See § 53. l.> 

Ob8» 7. Some Jinite verbs, as pxuv, ISiXfiv, ff^e^nBivtu, &c., when followed by an 
infinitive, may sometimes, but not always, be rendered by an cuiverb. Thus in Luke 
XX. 11, 12, ^^offi^trd ^ifAypatf which is in the parallel places of Matt. xxi. 36, Mark 
xii. 4, tuXtv ixtfcyptr The same idea is expressed by the participle in Luke xix. 11, 
^^oa-Buf U9rt. So Gen. xxxviii. 5, LXX, ^r^o^^ii^a in irtxtt ulow. Again in Matt. tI 
5, (p$XoZ(ri zr^offtuxiff^en. John viii. 44, rkt Wi^vfiias Tov ^recTpog vfc£v ^iXsn imuu 
See also Matt, xxiii. 6, 7, Mark xii. 38, Luko xx. 46, John vi. 21, Acts xii. 3 ; and 
compare Gen. iv. 2, LXX, >5^1ian V. H. xiv. 37. Perhaps also Mark xiv. 8, «^ii- 
X«/3t fjbv^iffeti uuav ro cufjjoi^ she has anointed by anticipation. To the same head, but 
less appropriately, have been referred 1 Thess. ii. 2, iTeifpn^ixo'ufiitBec U ri 0ti nfun 
X»Xf)(reii) we have been emboldened to speak, not we spoke boldly. Tit. iii. 12, rr«w3«- 
ff-flv iXSsrv, hasten to come, not come quickly. Nor is it quite clear that ^/Xi?* in Matt, 
vi. 5, is adequately rendered by the adverb gladly? 

Obs. 8. It is by no means necessary that the tense of the Injiniiive should corre- 
spond with that of the principal verb; but the usual distinction prevails in this, as 
in the other moods. In expressing an action frequently repeated^ or continued in 
itself or its consequences to the present time, the present of the Infinitive is employed, 
whatever be the tense or import of the preceding verb; whereas in the narration of 
past events, in speaking of what is transient or momentary, or oi future actions whidi 
ar considered as certainly impending, the aorist is used. Examples of the present 
are Matt. vi. 24, eu ^vveiff^i Biu %ov>.ivuv xa) fitt.ftfji.uva,, John vii. 17, i«ev rn SfXn T* 
^ikrsfia (tVToZ 9ro4i7y. ix. 4, ifAi }ii i^yci^to-^en, 'ius riy-i^et ia-riv. See also Mark ii. 19, 
iv, 32, Luke xvi. 13, et alibi* With reference to past actions, the aorist occurs in 
Mark ii. 4, juuvi IwdyAvot t^offiyytircci etvru ha rov ox>'OV, a^iffriyet^av t«» rrtynv* V. 3, 
ovlus nhvvare uvrhlyiffat. So Luke xviii. 13, xxiv. 46, John vi. 21, 1 Thess. iu 18, and 

» Alt, Gram. N. T. § 80. 1. Notes 1. 2. 

2 Winer, § 47, 7. Alt, § 71. Georg. Hierocrit. i. 58. Bos, Ellips. p. 597. Her 
mann ad Viger. p. 745. Kuinoel on Luke xxii. 42. Ast ad Plat. Polit. p. 522. 

' Winer, § 58, 4. Wetsteiu on Matt. vi. 5, Kuinoel on John vi. 21. Fassov. 
Lex. in vv. ^iXt<v and i^iKv, 


elsewhere. Oi' transient events in Matt. xix. 3, f/?|s0'ri» av^^ei^M unXv^eu rh yuvxTxa 
murau, with reference to the act of divorce, Mark xiv. 7, orav S«A»jri, ^uvtt^^t avrehs 
tZ 9'6tnffau Add Mark ii. 27, xiv. 31, John iii. 4, ix. 27, xi. 37, xii. 21, Acts iv. 16, 
2 Cor. X. 12, Eph. iii. 18, 1 Thess. ii. 8, Rev. ii. 21. O^ future actions, chiefly after 
verhs of commanding, thinking, hoping, and the like, in Matt. xii. 38, ^iXofiiv avi 9«u 
^9lfi.u»f /^fTy. Mark xiv. 11, iTrnyytiX.mvri avriu a^yv^tav ^uvM» Acts X. 48, iTfiMiret^tv 
mvrcvs ^arrtf^iimt. So Luke vi. 34, Acts ii. 30, iii. 18, vii. 5, Rom. xv. 24, 1 Cor. 
xvi. 7, Phil. ii. 19, 1 Tim. iii. 14. Hence the aorist after ireiftos in Acts xxi. 13, 
2 Cor. X. 6, xii. 14, 1 Pet. i. 5, iv. 5. Compare Dion. Hal. viii. 17, Joseph. Ant. vi. 
9. 2, xii. 4. 2. These niceties, however, are by no means universally observed. Thus 
the present indicates a transitory act, Matt. iii. 23, irSs Ivvxreu ^amms 2arav«y tx- 
j8«A.Xfiv; See also John xvi. 19, 1 Cor. vii. 36, Phil. i. 17. On the other hand, the 
aorist denotes a permanent act in Luke xix. 5, v^nfu^ev iv rf «/xa/ c«u hifjut fitTveu. Com- 
pare Matt. v. 14, Luke xiv. 28, xvii. 25, xx. 22, John v. 44. At the same time be 
it observed, that iu all these passages the action may have been referred in the 
writer's mind to some particular point, with reference to which it may be considered 
as complete. Both the pres, and aor, are sometimes combined; as in Matt. v. 13^ 
us suSif U^vti tri, u fih (iXti^tivxt i^u, xet) xarcuraruf^at. And here at least the two 
tenses are distinctly preserved. The future infn. has its proper import in Heb. iii, 
18, tU* Ii ufMffi fjth ufftXtvfiff^ai ; Also the perfect in Acts xvi. 27, ¥ofjt,l%m Xxxi^iw 
yitm rwi h^fiUug, that they had escaped effectually and permanently. See also Acts 
xxvi, 32, xxvii. 9, 13, Rom. xv. 8, 2 Ptt. ii. 21.i 

§ 59. — Construction with the Pronoun Relative, 

(BUTTM. § 143.) 

1. Before proceeding to the participle, it is right to advert 
to the syntax of the Relative, of which the construction with 
the part, is but an abbreviation ; and it may be observed that 
the Attraction, by which a relative is placed in the case of its 
antecedent insiesid of that required by the v^rft following, may be 
said to be the usual construction of the New Testament. Thus 
Matt, xviii. 19, crg§i Travros" Trpiyfj^aro^, ov iav aWri<Tcuvrai, Liuke 
ii. 20, km crajiv, oh ^xoL'crav x«i eTSov. John ii. 22, Imanuaftv ra> 
Xoyo), (3 siTTfiv, Tit. iii. 6, Trvziyt^oLros uylou, o5 l^e'xeev. James ii. 
5, xknqovofxov^ TYif SxaiXiloLS, y^s sTTTiyy^'iT^zro, Add Mark xiv. 72, 
Luke V. 9, John xv. 20, xxi. 10, Acts ii. 22, iii. 21, 25, vii. 17, 
45, X. 39, xvii. 31, xxii. 10, Eph. i. 8, James ii. 5, 1 Pet. iv. 11, 
Jude 15, Eev. xviii. 6. 

Obs, 1. The usage is more rare in Matthew and Mark, and there are also other 
exceptions ; as in Heb. viii. 2, r^s cxnims r^f »kti^tyiis, ^y tTvltv i xu^tos. Various 
readings also occur in Mark xiii. 19, John iv. 5, xvii. 11, Acts vii. 17, Tit. iii. .1. 
The syntax is peculiarly remarkable, where a verb of cognate signification with the 
preceding noun follows ; as in 2 Cor. i. 4, ^m rns *a,^a,xy.^ffius, ^s ^u^ecxecXovfitt^et, 
Eph. ii* 5, uya^rnv, h hy»9enfftif tifMis* iv. 1, rvg x>.nffMs, ns cxX^Snrf. 

> Winer, § 45, 8. Alt, § 72. Lobeck ad Phryn., pp. 745, sqq. 


O&ff. 2. If the aniteedeni be a d em o mtt r mii we ptonoun, it is generally omitted, and 
the Telati^e takes its case ; as in Mark xr. 12, ri •Sv Bixgn «-M«rM Jv xlytn fia^iiM 
r£f 'UtMsn I Luke ix. 36, •Oif) A^yyUXmw m)c9, Z9 Im^mtjf. John Ti. 29, U 
wtmv^nrt tig •' itwi^ruXif fsiTMf. Rom. ¥i. 21, \p* §Sf mv i^nu0^v9t^^^m Add Loke 
▼. 25, John xviL 9, Acts Yiii« 24, zxi. 24, xzvL 16, Bom. xir. 22, zv. 18, 1 Cor.Ti. 
1, X. 29, 2 Cor. ii. 3, ▼. 10, xiu 17, Eph. iii. 20, Heb. t. 8. Sometiiiies, bat raielf, 
the demonstrative pronoun is simply omitted ; as in John ziii. 29, myi^m^n £f xfun 
txfuf. So Xen. Cyr. Ti. 2. 1 , m^yytiXm§ «» Um«. Compare also CoL ii. 10. Betk 
constructions are found in Rom. x. 14, m'Sf tSv WuutXi^mTau tie Sv mSnc \Mi9r%mm»\ «« 
K wifTtyffM^n 0v •VM, H*w9m9 ; A like omissioD occurs also in the case of lelstiie 
adverbs. Thus in Matt. xxv. 24, wmmym Z^v •» Xtnti^t^mf, for hcu^n Jhtm. Matk 
▼. 40, tU9'9^v$Tmt •*•» nv ri ^tuiUf. So John xi. 32, xx. 19.^ 

2. On the oilier hand, the relative being put in the case 
required by the verb, the substantive is put in the same case, 
either before or after it. Thus, before it, in Matt. xxL 42, Luke 
XX. 17) 1 Pet. ii. 7, XQoy, Sv aveSoxc/xaffay 0/ oficoSopu>t;vrEf, oSrw 
syEvridv) sU xefakiiv yafvias. Luke xii. 48, wcivTi is, a ^(&n sroXu^ 
«'oXt/ i^nm^riTSTxi TTxp' avToV' 1 Cor. X. 16, Tov SipTov, oy nXufAa^ 
ouy) Koiycuvix rov OLiyMTOs rod ^pi^rrou iariv ; So Hippocr. Morb. 
IV. 11, Tois crriyif. Sis uvofAatra, airai rcb fTcjfJuari x. t. X. Terent 
Eun. iv. 3. 11, Eunuchum, quern dedisti nobis, quas turbos 
dedit ? 

Obt, 3. Here also should probably be referred Luke i. 72, fcvn^Bnvmt isoBnMm iym 
etvrw, e^xev St Hft^fft x. r. X., unless xara, be understood before a^x«n^ 

3. It is generally, when the clause with the relative pre- 
cedes, containing the principal thought, that the antecedent 
is put in the same case after it. Thus Mark vi. 16, Sv pyw 

a^gxe^aX/cra 'Icoaivyinvy ovrof ejtiv. Rom. vi. 17, vTrvx-ovactTe eU 01 
waqsio^YiTS rdwov SiSaj^^i*. Philem. 10, TrctpaxaXcj <T£ Trepl rov eijuw 
rijivov, ov lyBVMfiaQc h rois ^Eayi^ois /xou, ^Ovno'iyjov, So, in Liatin, 
Cic. Tusc. i. 18. 41, Quam quisque novit art em, in hac se exer- 

Obi, 4. Some place here Acts xxi. 16 ; but see above, § 45. 8. There are some 
examples, in which the relative precedes, where the case remains the same as it 
would have been according to the regular grammatical construction. Thus in 
Matt. vii. 2, tv Z {jAtpu f/>iToiiTi, dvTifjt.tTan^wtTeu vuuv. xxiv. 44, n £pec ov l»xun* i 

Obs. 5. Clauses, which should be connected by means of a relative, are sometimes 
blended, by its omission, into an independent proposition. Thus in 1 John iii. II, 
ayarufAiv (iXkr,kovr oh xa^ats K«rv Ix row ^ovn^ou «», i. e. x»Btits Keiit, Sg Ix r»u itttn^ 

Winer, § 23. 2, and 24. 1. Alt, § 41. 3, and 42. 1. Hermann ad Vijrer o 891 
« Winer, § 24 2. Alt Gram. N. T. 2. §§ 30, 3. 42, 2. Georg. HiSjoc'rit. i. 3. 
22. Kumoel ad Luc. 1. 72. ^ 


^9, Wd/fig't. So, in Latin, Virg. Mn* i. 18, Urbs aniiqua ftdt ; Tyrii tenuere coloni. 
And V. 534, Est iocut ,* Hetperiam Grmi cogmomine dicunt. Somewhat similar is 
Rev. i* 2, r^ eiyotvhffotvri ifiMS, xai Xoucxvrt fi/iaf if I rSv itfjua^iay ii/iSv U vv alfMtri 
etvvWf »a) Wtinnv huMg ^airiXus, etvrcf h ^i^a xeii ro tt^arog us rot/g aiuvetg. More pro- 
perly, however, this is an example of anacoluthon. See J 69. ii. 4. ^ 

4. When another noun is added by way of explanation, the 
relative sometimes agrees with that which j^recede*; as in 1 Cor. 
iv. 17} Ti)Ui6&eov, OS gcTTi rsKyoy [jlov ayaTnoTov. Eph. i. 22, rrj gx- 
xXvjeri^, T^ris s(rri ro (roifxa avrov. Col. i. 24, rov (jol/fxacrof avrov, o 
eariv ti exxXaj^/a. iii. 14, t-^v ayagjrojv, ^Ttr eo'ri ffuyisofxos rv^s reXei- 

o'mros. (Some manuscripts here read os, and others 3.) More 
generally, however, the concord is with the subsequent noun; 
as in Mark xv. 16, r'hs ctvXris, S kan Trqairdipiov. Eph. iii. 13, 
Iv TOLif &X/\J/efft fjLov uTTsp vfxojv, rjTif s(rrl So^os ifyuuv. Add Gal. iii. 
16, Eph. i. 14, vi. 17, Col. i. 27, 1 Tim. iii. 15. So also in Phil. 
i. 28, where v^ris refers to the constancy of the Philippians, re- 
ferred to in the preceding context. 

06f. 6. Sometimes also the neuter pronoun S is used with reference neither to the 
antecedent nor subsequent noun, but to the word ftifca understood ; as in Mark xv. 
22, (pi^ou^n auTO¥ i'r) ToXyo^et T09fov, o iffTt fuB^t^fAmtvofitvoif, K^aviov To^rog. So John i. 
39, 42, 43, Heb. vii. 3.' Frequently also the oblique cases are used with preposi- 
tions in the place of adverbs or conjunctions ; the noun, which would have been 
attracted into the case of the relative, being omitted. Thus we have in Matt. i. 
25, %6ig evf sciL x^^^ovf until, Luke i. 20, et passim^ av)^' Zv, because* vii. 45, a^* hi 
teU. S^etg, since, xii. 1, tv o7g, scii. xi^^^*f9 meanwhiie; et alia hujuscemodi.^ 

Obs. 7. St. Paul frequently connects two or more sentences together by means of 
reiativeSf both when they refer to different antecedents, and when the sarAe subject 
is continued throughout. As instances, in which different subjects are thus con- 
nected, see Eph. iii. 11, 12, Col. i. 4, 29. An accumulation of relatives, be- 
longing to the same subject, is found in Eph. i. 3-14, ii. 21, 22, Col. i. 13-15. 
Compare also 1 Pet. i. 3-12.*^ 

Obs» 8. There is a transposition of the relative iu Acts i. 2, Urukufuvtg roTg u^otrro' 
x$tg ttk itvttifiaTog etyieu, eug t|sAs^ar0. This structure was evidently designed to mark 
the connexion of ^i« wivfiarog ayUu with UTitXafAivog, not with V^tX^uro, No such 
transposition, as some have supposed, exists in John ix. 40, Acts iii. 24.' 

Obs. 9. With reference to definite persons or things, the relative is followed by 
an indicative ; as in 1 Thess. i. 9, avrei ya^ 9rt^i hfAm d^rayyixxwaty, otolay tf^a^tv 
tX«fjbtf v^ig vftMg, See also above, § 51, 4. If the person or thing be indefinite, the 
opt, or conj, may be employed ; the former without ay, in speaking of past time, and 
the latter with av, when something is affirmed of present ot future time. The New 
Testament usage fails with respect to the optative; nor is the rule strictly observed 

1 Alt, Gram. N. T. § 42, 5. 

« Winer, § 24, 5, 06*. 1. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 42, 3. Hermann ad Vig. p. 708. 
Herndorf ad Plat. Phaedr. p. 279. 

* Winer, § 24, 3, Obs, 3. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 42, 4. 7. 

* Winer, \ 24. 3, Obs. 2. Alt, § 42. 6. 

' Alt, Gram. N. T. § 42. 8. See Iso Kuinoel on Acts i. 2. 


with respect to the conjunctive^ more particularly with respect to the omission or 
insertion of the particle uv. Examples are, Matt. viii. 20, oux, ^X^* ^*^ '^^^ »E^a>^» 
xX/v*}. X. 11, f/V h 2* av 9roXn ilffiX^irn, ». r, X. zxi. 22, 9'eif'rec, ca-et «v utTn^uTt n 
rn ^^»ffiux,^ 9ri9riuov7is, Xri-ypt^Bi. Mark xiv. 9, Srotf uv *fl^v^^^ to ivctyyiXuif twti, 
». T. X. Acts ii. 39, cffovs «» *^aff»»\iftiTeit Kv^sdf. viii. 19, y iaw ifr/Sol w X'^i^' 
Compare Matt. vi. 25, x. 19, Mark vi. 36, ix. 18, Luke xii. 11, Rom. viii. 26, x. 13, 
xvi. 2, James iv. 4. After a prceierite, but still in a future sense, in Acts i?. 21, 
ftTiXi/rav u.vT9Vi<i ^)}3ty iv^iVxtfvrf;, r«, vui xcXd^Mfrat etUTavg, See also Mark iii« 6, 
Luke xix. 48.^ That the future is here also used for the conjunctive, see abo?p, 

§ 60. — Construction with the Participle. (Buttm. § 144.) 

1. The participle indicates a state of ftein^, and its case is 
determined by its relation to the agent or object of the verb. 
If the agent of the verb is the subject of the part., the latter 
is of course in the Nom, case ; as in Acts xvi. 34, dvciygyiii 
avrovs sU rov oixov ocurov, 'jrxpe^nKB rqxirsi^av. But if it refers to 
the object of the verb, the part, agrees with it in gender, 
number, and case. Although the usage of the part, would in 
general give a sense altogether distinct from that of the in- 
jfinitive, still after many verbs, of which the object might be 
designated by an in/in., and which in Latin take the accusative 
with the infin,, a part, is used. 

2. With reference to a subject preceding, a, parliciple m2Lj 
exhibit a variety of subsisting relations, which may generally 
be expressed by conjunct io7is. For example, 

1. As a dejinition of time, it may be rendered by when, 
while, &c. Thus in Acts v. 4, ovxl /xe'vov, aot gptgvg ; while 
it remained, &c. 1 Thess. iii. 1, S»o, fjLnKETt trrfyovTEf, 
EvSoyirnxfAsy x(ZTa'K5i(p^riv(xi Iv 'A&ogvais" fAovoi, when I could 
no longer control my anxiety. So again in v. 5. 

Ohs, 1. Very fiequently a finite verb is used in such cases instead of a p€wt.i and 
conuected with the principal action by *«/, So Matt. xvii. 20, l^tTrt t£ Sau «««••, 
M£T^j3>]Si IvrtvBtv iKti" Kx) fiira.(^n(nrau xviii. 21, ^ratrdxig afcaprno'ti tig lul i ihk^ii 
fiavy xett u<pvt<ru alru ; For Xiyovruv ti/auv, and afAot^rwavrt etiiX(pZ, 

2. In assigning a cause, it may be resolved into since, 
because, with a finite verb. Thus in Acts iv. 21, ol ll 

7rpo(ra'7rei7<'/i(jaiiAsvoi oi.7ri\vaa.y xvrovs, /xrjSev supi(rxoyrsf to, 
TTwf ycoKda-covToci ocvrovs, when they had threatened, and, 
because they found nothing; Col. i. 3, e^xapiorovfAEv 

^ Winer, § 42, 4. Alt, § 65. Hermann ad Viger. pp. 901, sqq. 



TO) ®BQ), aKoi/cravTES" t^v Tr/ffTiv vfjL&'V, because we have 
heard, &c. 

3. In restrictions, for althovgh : as in John xii. 37, roa-avra, 
Sg aurou an/xs'ia irkTroinKoro^ siAirpoa^ev avrwv, oux eiricrsvov 
eU auTov, although he had done, &c. 1 Cor. ix. 19, 
e\Bvdspo$ ofy ek wdvrojv^ itxaiv EfjLocvTov BSovKaxTiz, Add John 
xxi. 11, 1 Tim. i. 7, Philem. 8, James iii. 4, 1 Pet. 
ii. 19; and compare Lucian. D. M. xxvi. 1, Philost. 
ApoU. ii. 25. 

Obt, 2. In this case, the participle is sometimes accompanied by xa) or x»tn^. 
Thus in Luke xviii. 7, o 3s 610; »u fin frosti^tt ix^ittturiv rup ixkixrSt avrou, xai fiaK»»^y 
ftM9 W avraTs ; though he linger : Heb. v. 8, stalnp &v uiof, tfix^tv uip* Sv iV«J9$ r»iir 
v«'«Mfiy. So Rom. vii. 3, Phil. iii. 4, Heb. vii. 5, 2 Pet. i. 12/ et alibi. Compare 
Died. Sic. iii. 7, xvii. 39. 

4. In expressing a condition, if: as in 1 Tim. iii. 10, 
iiaKOvstrojo-ay, aveyxXajroi oyrE^, provided they are blame- 
less : vi. 8, sxoyres iiarpo(paf xat (rKsirccafMarcx, rovroi^ 
apxs(T&>5<T0i[xg&«. So also 1 Tim. iv. 4, 2 Pet. i, 4, 8, 
et alibi,^ 

5. In expressing a mean; as in Rom. vii. 8, d(popfjiriv 

Xa^ovaoL ^ afxaqria: S/a rrit gvToX^f, KareiqyiaoLro ev e/xoi 
Tracray stti^uijliolv. So again in v. 8. 

3. A future participle is used after verbs of motion to ex- 
press the object of the verb ; as in Acts viii. 27, os lXn\vdei 

vpotTKVvr^aav sW IsqovaaXrifx. 

Obt, 3. If the action of the participle and the verb are contemporary, the present 
participle is used. Thus in Acts xv. 27, a^rt^TaXxxfuv *Iov^av xxi lixxv u9fayyix- 
Xavrxf Tx xhrx, (A single MS. has x^rxyyt'kovit'rxs.^ Rom. xv. 25, yt/y} Be 9eo^t6»(Axt 
tig 'U^ou^xXh/*, iixxovHf ToTs xyiats* 

Obs, 4. Instead of the part,j xxt and a finite verb is often used ', as in John i. 47, 
i^X^** »«) Hf. xiv. 3, i^x^ftxt, xxi irx^xXn^ofiLxt v/axs tig i/iuvrtf, 

Obs, 5, When a matter is represented merely as the opinion ot assertion of ihe 
person making the allegation, the participle is frequently preceded by the particle 
£$» Thus in Luke xvi. 1, eZros Bk/SXiiSi} xifriu, ms hxaxd^TiXav rot utx^x^itrx xifTov, 
xxiii. 14, itfd^nfiyxxTt /mi tov xv^^anrav rovTOVy is xtoffr^iipovrx riv Xxcu Also when a 
motive is alleged for any thing done with reference to another ; as in 1 Pet. ii. 13, 
v*6rxynri fix^tku, us u^t^ixovri* hyt/iinv is 3/ xvrdu ^ifiTo/iivdis x, r. X. Sometimes 
the participle m is omitted ; as in Acts xvii. 22, hmlxtfAwicri^oos y/*xs ^tu^u, scil, 
SfTusj 1 Pet. ii. 12, xxruXxXouiriv vfiSv is xaxtiTauiv, scil, Struv. Examples of this 
usage are not very frequent in the New Testament. 

4. Some verbs govern a part, either in the norn. or some 

» Winer, 6 46, 9, Alt, § 73, 7. Schsefer. Melet. crit. . 57. 



case^ which is to be expressed by the conjunction that, or by 
tOyfor, of, &c. Such are, 

1. Verbs of sense; to heaxy to see, &c. Thus in Matt viii. 
14, 81^8 TTiv 9'8yd6/>av cLvrw fie^yifjiimy xat wpi(T<nucay. 

Mark xvi. 5, eJiov yeayloKoy KoA^fjueyoTf. Luke iv. 23, Ust 
'nKovffxiABv 78vopb6va. So Acts vil. 12, Rev. v. 11; and 
with the genitive in Acts ii. 11^ aKovo/jLsv XoeTsjouvran airm. 
Sometimes aKovetv is followed by 8ri, as in Matt. iv. 12, 
daodaas in *Iafaivyns va^sSodv). See also GraL L 18, et 


2. Verbs signifying to know : Luke viii. 4&, iyu yiq eym 
iuvayny l^8X3'ot)(rav a^* iym). Acts xxiv. YQ, hi ifoKKSn hm 
ovra (76 x^irJiv rS ?5v8« roircf hriffraf/^vo^. Also with on, 
as in Mark ii. 8, l^jyvovf on ovroff SjaXoy/^ovToM. Heb. xii 
17, Jots yaq irt asTE^oxt/xacxdiQ. 

069. 6. The verb fiav^ann has been supposed to be thus constructed in 1 Tim.r. 
13, SiftM ^f »«} et^ye^ fAmtBuvovfi 9rt^ttfx,ifuf»t rug 9t»Mf, heing idUe thew Uarn to ft 
about Jrcm house to house. But, in this construction, /AenSdvuv alwaj^ signifies i» 
perceive; as in Herod, i. 3, Lucian. D. D. xvi. 2. When it signaBe^ io learm, Hit 
followed by an infinitive, as in v. 4, of this same chapter. Hence the meaaio; 
is, ffoing cAout from house to house they team to be idle; Ctm being understood: and 
this seems to accord most fitly with the ensuing clause. So Xeo. Anab* iii 2. 25, 

3. Verbs also which signify to observe, to Jlnd, &c. are, 
in like manner, constructed with a participle. Thus in 
Matt. i. 18, evge&o) h yaarpl zy^oucra. Mark vii. 30, d^ 
TO Sai/xoviov HfiKvikv^os. Compare Luke, xvii. 18, Joho 
xi. 17. 

Obs, 7. Verbs which signify to remember^ take trt or iw;. So Matt. v. 23, fo 
/KViftf'S)]; on e aii\<pcs ffou ^x** ^^ ftartl fou. Luke xxiv. 6, fAytn^htiTg, ut iXmXmtv rm' 

Obs, 8. After the above verbs, instead of the participle, the infinitive is someiines 
found; as in Luke iv. 41, K^it^etv rov X^t^rof ecvriv Jvat, 1 Cor. xi. 18 «mmki 
(TX'^fiMrec iv ifi,U tixei^x*^^* Heb. xi. 3, vooufiu xarnfri^^eti revs ettHvecg pfifiutTt St^ 

4. Many neuter verbs also, signifying to persevere, to 
desist, &c., are constructed with a participle. Thus in 
Matt. xi. 1, Ire'Xecrev o ^Incrovs iiariaa-Mv tois iwiats. 
Luke vii. 45, ov iisXive xacra(piXov(T(i yuov tqvs voSacs. Acts 
V. 42, ovx E'jravovro SiSaVxovTef. xii. 16, IsrIpievE xpwen. 
2 Thess. iii. 13, fxri kKKaxYiaTire xaXo7ro»ot5vTes'. Add Acts 
vi. 13, xxi. 32; and compare Eev. iv. 8. 

Obs, 9. The part, alv is omitted after an adjective in Acts xxvii. 33, iUtru (Stnt) 


Obs, 10. The verb &^t^^eti, which in the Greek writers often takes the participle, 
is always in the New Testament followed by the infinitive. 

Obs, 1 1 . In may cases the governing verb may be expressed by an adverb in 
English ; as in Matt. xvii. 25, ^fu^^a^tv avrev Jiiyuf, Jint addressed him : Heh. 
xiii. 2, Vx«^#y rmf ^tvUafrtf ayyixousi have entertained angels unawares. 

Obs. 12. To this class belongs »akiif ^oiuf, which is followed by a participle in 
Acts X. 33, g-tf xaXais ivroinfug ^a^ayuofitvos, you have done well to come. Compare 
Phil. iy. 14, 2 Pet. i. 19) 3 John 6. Also many verbs which express an emotion of 
the mind ; as joy, fear, gratitude, &c. Thus in Acts xvi. 34, riyttXXuifetTe vravtaii 
vtvrtfrtvititt v^ 6i^. 1 Cor. xiv. 18, ev;^a^M'r« rf 6i^ fuu, y>Mfffeut XttXSf. 2 Pet. ii« 
10, ^9|af oh r^ifjfu^t (iXecff^fifjuovvrtg. Elsewhere with on, as in Luke x. 20, fin xo/^crs, 
ATI rk ^mvftara vfuv v^oraetftrtu*^ 

5. Various circumstances, either preparatory, accessory, or 
collateral to the principal action, may be expressed by a par- 
ticiple ; and in the New Testament, the following observations 
may deserve attention. 

Obs. 13. Several participles are frequently used in one proposition, without the 
intervention of a copula ; as in Matt, xxviii. 2, &yy%Xos xttra^f S| ou^avov, ^(oo'tXBitv 
AvetKuXt^i ro9 XjBoy. Luke ix. 16, Xafiam il rous ^im Sfrous J^eii rovs ^uo l^ButtSf ava- 
fixi^pas us rov ov^avop, ivXoynaiv ecvrovg. Add Mark i. 41, viii. 6, Luke v. 12, 19, xvL 
23, xxiii. 48, Acts v. 5, xxi. 2, xxv. 6. Compare Xen. Ephes. iii. 5, Plat. Rep. ii. 
p. 366. A, Gorg. p. 471. B, Strab. iii. 165, Polyeen. v. 33. 4, Lucian. Asin. 18, Alex. 
19, Alciph. iii. 43. Sometimes one or more participles are be/ore the leading verb, 
and others after it; as in Mark vi. 2, roXkoi aKovovng V^i^Xnt^ovro, xiyoitrts, x. r. X. 
Luke iv. 35, fi^av eturov TO ietifAoviov tig ro fjuiffov tl^X'Biv k^ avrov, fLtiSiv (iXti^aif auro¥» 
Add Luke X. 30, Acts xiv. 19, Heb. xii. 1, 2; and compare Lucian. Philops. 24, 
Feregr. 25. It should seem that the omission or insertion of the copula indicates 
respectively a somewhat closer or less immediate connexion with the action of the 
<m/e verb. See Mark v. 25 — 27.* 

Obs* 14. A ^sentence is frequently carried forward by means of participles f more 
especially when the idea expressed by the participles is collateral with that expressed 
by the verb* At the same time, though fnite verbs might have been employed 
throughout, the participles will generally support their appropriate character, or the 
places admit of another explanation. Thus in Rom. v. 10, ^oXXm fMixXo¥ xaruXXayiv 
rts ctt^fofAt^a* oh fiovov 3i, uXXa Ktti xav;^Mfnvot x, r. X. Here xetux'^fit^^M may either 
be connected with xaraXXetylyris, or the auxiliary l^fitv supplied (06<. 16). So 
2 Cor. viL 5, ovitfitav c«^*}xiy avsffiv n ffei^^ tifiSv^ &XX* iv iru>Ti B^XtfiefAtvoi. £ph. V. 18, 
trXu^oucSi b ^viufAart, XeiXevtrtf \etvTo7s x. r. X, Here this and the succeeding 
participles depend upon vXvi^ovg'Bt. 2 Pet. ii. 1, ^f/tu^^iheio'xaXot, o'tr$vtf ^ra^tt^ei^ou^tv 
eu^img a^ttXiias, xa) rof etyo^eiffetvra, al/rohs itcfform a^vovfMvoi, Ivayovrtt ixvrots rax**^* 
u^ttXimv, St. Paul indeed constantly arranges participle after participle in this 
manner ; for instances of which, see 2 Cor. iv. 7, 10, Eph. v. 19, 22, 1 Ti^ess. ii, 
14, 16, 2 Tim. i. 9, 10, Tit. ii. 12, 13. With respect to other passages, which have 

> Winer, § 46, 1. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 73, 1. Glass. Phil. [Sacr. p. 358. Her- 
mann ad Viger. p. 771. 

» Winer, § 46, 3. Heindorf ad Plat. Protag. p. 562. Stallbaum ad Plat. 
£uthyphr. p. 27. Apol. p. 46. Bornemann ad Xen. Anab. iii. 1. 13. Boisso- 
nade ad Aristsen. p. 257. Jacob ad Lucian Toxar. p. 43. Hermann' ad Soph. 
CBd. C. p. 43. 



nnr.F.K aRAHMAR 

been (efuited to tliii henJ, M»tk xii, 5, scenn to be r//ipiU-ai i 2 Cof. r. 6,inii 
tmaealullktai ! in 2 Cue. ir. 13, S^"'"' >lepeaJi> upon nm^iftir, trora whidi il it 
Kparated by ■ ppjentheii* ; 2 Cur. v. 12 ii a case in point : in 2 Cor. liU. 3, itii 
not neceuary to s-jpjily ii/m, but the canatiuctHia is muS^ftrmi iaBrtif alum; Jo 
2 Cor. Tiii. 'iO, rri\>.i/tnai nkn to mi'ri/t<t.ii/tu ; in Heb. vi. 8, iKfifprm ii not put 
fur i*^lfli, but irri must be supplied with iiini/tt! aic! marafxt tyyiii and in 2 Peb 
iii. S, runrrSrm U aa e|Hthet of yi.' 

Obt. 15. Frequently the verb anil Hie participle mi^ht be interchanged vitboul 
afli;ctm|>the >en>e. Hiiii in Acta i. 33, milX^! irmrii ■rafxytf'fm.Ms taight ban 
been r»(iyiini uxfc *t™t. In like manner the Apostle mif^lit have written in 
1 Tim. i. 12, <r.rT» /•• iytitilf^m,, iSin sU ).u»ib>. 

Oh; IG. Participla, for the most part nf the pmeni bsnse, are bequieatl; jcind 
with a verb MiJit/anlive, and employed bb Jinile verbs. It nia.y be that an Mm oF 
omfinuiHM il thus conveyed ; though in all [irubabiUty the idiom is nofbing omn 
than a simple circumlocultoa. Thus in Mark J. 4, iyiHT-s 'iwiii'm ^*«-tI^. uii- 
25, (> i^ri^f r»E ivftni itnrai Urirrnm, followed in the next clause by the Sail 
lerli r*>ji^ IV. 43, xirii h rftriixifi'H ™ E"'*-"'" -riS euS. Luk« i. HI, 
', I »M, <retli»£, ri, Zux-iiU,. iv. 31, hUitt,..Mmit. XUV.32, a^l A ■■gl.'.i^ 
MKii/tin h ir a/url Acts viii. 28, ft n Imerfi^t, zoi uiSif/iOM i«0 nvJI^arfi >«» 
■■1 ilnyi'TM.!. Add Matt. vii. 29, xix. 22, Hark ii. IS, iz. 4, x. 22, xiv. 54, Lola 
i. 20, T. 19. Sametimea tbe parf(R/i/e ia used alone, with the auxiliorj rctb un- 
derstood : U in Acts xsiv. 5, iC(imt yiif rh Stif^ TtZru, acil. Ir/tU. Rom. il. i% 

tittiTMi,, Kil. IfTJ. 2 Pet. i. 17, XnHiit y£( rufi S»£ n/uir, wi/. ni. To this beid. 
bowevar, are not to be lefericd a variety of [tassagcB, in which the vtrb tutiimuiit 
is to be taken iudependeall; i such as Mark v. 5, 1> Ti7r )i»i//i>a«-i> nr, x;!!^, » 
HwraxiTTM- UutU Ai'Sw. Luko ji. B, m^ixi S«. ■> tj x^W '? ■i''?. «y(«eHwTij,Mi 
f .A^roTH jt. r. A. Tii. 8, iyi^ s.S;»Tu i;^, ii^ >|.«;« ratti^ytt. Sen ab« Ibit 
x.32,xiv. 4,49, Jameai,17; and compare Jerem. ii. G, v. 5, 11. Neither ii It 
neeeaaary lo supply the verb lubilanlive in proverbi, vinximi, and cilatioM ; U in 
1 Cor. iii. 19, Heb. i. 7, 2 Pet. ii. 22. In Qal. iii. 5, nSn ruiT, not Url, mart be 

Oil. 17. The rerb ix" lorms a circumlocutian by means of the participle in Lub 
xiv. |9, ifuTK ri, i:t:i ^1 irgt^nviro. Ijut the expceasion ia usually re^rded u * 
Lnlutitai. Thus Matt. Eptgr. ii. 80, Erciaaliim kateai tne, rago. 

Oil. 18. Sometimes a parliciple stands in connexiun with o finite tense oFlhn 
same verb; probably with a view to emphasis; as in Malt. xiii. 14, |S;ii<'t>iB 
gxii^iTi, .<] li ^t, n*Ti. Acts vii. 34, aiw tHtr. Heb. vl. 14, H ^> ti}.,yS, ,i)jyin n. 
HI t^hShv* T>.>i9ia£ n. A like usage is found in the best Greek writers. Set 
also Anian. Ind. iv. 15, Lucion. D. M. iv. 3, xxviii. 1. Since, bowever, the oUne 
passages aie eiclusively Old Testament citations (Gen. xxii. 16, Exod. iii. 7, Isdi. 
vi. 0), and the construction correspDuda with the Hebrew infinitiva abeolule. it 
may piobably be more accurately teferted to that source. The LXX abound* with 
similar axomples. See Gen. xiiii. 18, xxvii. 28, XKXVii. 8, 10, xliii. G, Judg. i. 2S. 
iv. 9, vii. 19, xi. 2S, xv. IG, Kuth ii. iG, 1 Sam. liv. 28, 1 Mace v. 40, <•/ atHi.' 

Obi, I'J. It has already been neea that parlieipiei, when they ha»e the ariirli. 

Winer, } 46, 2. Alt, Gram. N. T. } 73, G. Hermann ad Vimr n 776. 
madXen. Conviv. p. 146. l>oed«riin. ad Soph. CEil. C. p 593, 

r, } 46, 8. Alt, j 73, -i. Aat ad Piat. Polit. p. 597. Boissunade iJ 

^60. el ad Nitet. p. 81. 

r,H6.7. All, i 73, 3. Georg. Vind. 196. Lubeck ad Soph. Aj. p. ru. 


are equivalent to subsiantives (§ 28. 4) ; and in this case it is to be observed that, 
like substantives, they may have a gen. dependent upon them : as in 1 Cor. vii. 
35^ rovrt ^s ^^is ro vfuiv tcvrSv fvfjb^t^n ^iyu. So Heb. xii. 10. In this acceptation 
they are also followed by the cases which their verbs govern. Thug in Gal. i. 23^ i 
}Mxvf hftMs ^0Ti, our former persecutor. Compare Luke viii. 3, xxi. 4, John i. 33, 

Obs, 20. When not employed as a substantive, the participle with the article is 
to be rendered by is qui; or, in English, one who, those who. Thus in Matt. xiv. 
21, «li iff^ioms, those who had eaten : James v. 11, fjMxet^I^o/Atv rol/s Intoftiw^ras , those 
who endure : Rev* xv. 2, cTSdy ravs vixmreti i» rod ^u^iw, those who had prevailed over 
the beast, 

Obs, 21. It will be remarked that, in the above examples, participles of the present 
tense are employed, for the most part, in a prteterite signification ; and it has been 
affirmed by many grammarians, that, in the New Testament and the LXX, the 
present participle is used indiscriminately, according to the Hebrew idiom, to express 
either a past, present, or future action. To a certain extent, this is unquestionably 
true ; but the assertion is still to be received with considerable limitation. Fre- 
quently indeed the present is used in the sense of the imperfect, and connected with 
a past tense ; but it is chiefly in narrations, and when something is represented to 
bave taken place cotemporaneously with the action indicated by the principal verb. 
Thus in Acts vii. 26, &^^n avreTg fAa^afAUois, XXV. 2, {ragcxaXdt/y xhroDf uirotifAtfU 
X*f** '^^'*'* f^^^^j *• '"'* ^* Heb. xi. 22, *l0tg^ti(p nkturSv XfMfifAonuvu 1 Pet. i. 10, vi^ 
^S ^•Hrn^tOi V^t^nrriffetv »k) i^n^tuvn^etv ^^o^nrat, i^iwZvns, x, r. X. Rev. XV. 1, ithov 
myyixavs Writ txo^ras vXny»i irrei. Add Matt. xiv. 21, Luke V. 18, Acts xviii. 15, 
xxi. 16, Heb. xi. 21, 22, et alibi. The participle uv, since ufii has no perfect 
/9ar/u»/)/(f, is particularly common in a /7a«/ sense. So Luke xxiv. 44, John i. 18, 
49, V. 13, ix. 25, xi. 31, xxi. 11, Acts vii. 2, xi. 1, xviii 24, 2 Cor. viii. 9. For the 
fkture Wm present is used, when d^ future event is, from its certainty or proximity, 
mentally regarded as present, or when that which is newly commenced is to be con^ 
timted. Such a case is Matt. xxvi. 28, rouro ro aTfiu fioo, ro «rt^} 9'okXm ixxovo/itvoff 
imless perhaps the allusion is to the symbols of bread and wine then actually present 
before them. Compare Luke xxii. 19, 1 Cor. xi. 24. A future sense is, however, 
distinctly marked in Acts xxi. 3, xeir^;^Btif*ii> tig Tv^ov* IxtTo-t ya^ ^v ro ^"koin &*o^o^rt- 
ZofAttn rh yi/Mv, 2 Pet. iii. 11, rouroiv ouv 9ceitrott Xvo/aUuv, In 2 Pet. ii. 4, the MSS. 
vary between m^ouftkwyi and rtrfi^fifiivoos. The present participle is employed in its 
proper acceptation in Rom. iv. 4, Gal. vi. 13, £ph. iv. 28, James iii. 6, v. 11, 

et alibi. 

Obs, 22. Between the aorist and perfect there is the usual distinction, that the 
former denotes an act complete but transient ; and the latter a permanent result. 
The difference is marked in Acts ix. 21, ob^ oZros hm t vro^^riffets «v 'It^ov^axhfit roug 
IsttxatXovfUwvs r-o ovofMt rouro^ xtti Sh% tig rovro iknXu^tt, Ivet ^ihtfAUoug auroug etyeiy^ M 
roug »fX'H"^ » Compare also John xix. 35, Acts xxii. 3, Rom. viii. 11, xvi, 22, Heb. 
ii, 9 1 Pet. i. 23, ii. 4, Rev. ix. 1. It is generally supposed to be in conformity 
with the Hebrew idiom that the part. perf. pass, is used in the sense of the Latin 
future in dus ; as in Gal. ii. 11, iV< xetnyifoifffAiitog h, because he was to be blamed, 
i. e. worthy of blame. Compare Rev. xxi. 8. Similar instances, however, have been 
adduced from the later Greek writers.* 

» Winer, § 46, 6. Alt, J 73, 4. a. Schajfer ad Greg. Cor. p. 139. 
« Winer, § 46, 5. Alt, Grani. N. T. J 73, 4. 5. Eisner ad Gal. ii. 11. 


§ 61. — Ccmis Absoluti. (Buttm. § 145.) 

1. If instead of depending upon the principal verb^ the 
participle has a subject of its own^ it is properly put with this 
subject absolutely in the genitive ; being chiefly used to indicate 
a time J or assign a cause. Thus in Matt. ii. 1^ rov Se 'IfKrou 
y6yva)&gvTor, iSov, tJ^iyoi airo avaroXft/v ^ra^gyevovro x. r. X., when 
Jesus was born, &c. Acts xxiv. 10> dweKqi^vi Se o TlavXofy nv- 
axvros aur^ rov rrysi^ovos Xeysiv. There are, however, many 
instances in the New Testament where the genitive absolute is 
used, when the subject is the same with that of the principal 
proposition; as in Mark x. \7, iKicopBu^txhov avrov sis iXw, 
v^aiSqaixm cTr Bvvipoirtji avroy. So Mark xi. 27>, Luke xvii. 12, 
xviii. 40, xxii. 10, 53, xxiv. 5, Acts xxi. 17. For examples of 
either usage in the LXX. and later Greek writers^ see Gen. 
xliv. 4, Exod. iv. 21, xiv. 18, Polyb. iv. 49. 1, Plutarch ii. 
p. 845, Heliod. Mth. ii. 30, 113.^ 
2. Instead of the gen. is frequently used, 

1. The nominative absolute, which stands without ti finite 
verb, and the sentence passes into another constrac- 
tion, of a different form from that which it had been the 
writer's first intention to adopt. Matt. xii. 36, srav pi/uut 
ipyov, lav KaXri'Kojaiv ol oiv^qcoTroi, dTroSdaovcri ^epl avrov. 
Luke xiii, 4, IxeIvoj, e(p' oSs eVecrev o TTupyos, ^okbTts on oJtkw 
X. r. X, ; John vii. 38, 6 cruTetJa/v eh e/lue, ^ora/xoi pBv- 
(jouffi X. T. X.* Acts vii. 40, 6 yip Ma;w(T7jf oirotf o&x 
ol'Sa/xev, r[ yiyoviv avrcp. Add Matt. x. 32, Mark ix. 

20, Luke xii. 10, Acts xx. 3, Rom. viii. 3, Gal. i. 20, 
Rev. ii. 26, iii. 12, 21, et alibi; and compare Dio 
Chrysost. ix. 124, Philostr. V. ApoU. vii. 16." 

Obs. I. The nom, is used absolutely in an exclamation in Kom. vii. 24, tsXm- 
«r«^0; \yit h^^a^Qt \ To this head Winer refers Mark xii. 40, Luke xii. 20^ Phil, 
iii. 19. The first and last of those passages, however, are cases of anacoiutkon 
($ 69. ii.) ; and in Luke xii. 20, the nom, is put for the voc. Some MSS. indeed 
read of^^^y. 

2. The dative absolute^ as in Matt. viii. 1, Kara^ivn U 
(xvraj aTTo rov opovs, woXoi5&a)jfl{v avrcp 05^X0* ^oXXo/. So 
in vv. 5, 23, ix. 27, xxi. 23. 

1 Winer, § 30, 8. Obs. Poppo ad Thucyd. p. 119. Schaefer ad ApoU. Rhod. 
ii. p. 171. 

"* Some would repeat tmru from the last sentence, as the verb to which Kn^nvm 
is refera\)le ; but this impedes the sense. See Lampe and Kuiuoel ad ioc, 

» Winer, J 28, 3. 


Obs, 2. It has been urged, however, and with some appearance of reason, that 
these are not to be taken as eases absolute, but that the second pronoun is redvri' 
damty as in Matt iv. 16, John xy. 2, et alibu So also in Xen. Gyr. i. 3. 15, vu^dffo- 
fMu Tf TaiTTf, ttya^St lvrvimi» x^artcrot «y lve*tu$) ^ofifubx^^* abvS} See § 45. 7. 
Obs. 13. 2. 

3, The accusative absolute; as in Acts xxvi. 2, viynyLOLi 

SfAauTOV ixAKapioy^ fAekkofy aTTokoyeTa^ai sm aov arifJiepoy' fjLcH- 
Xiarat yv(i<rrnv ovra cte vayrcuy xotri ^lovSa'iovs e&o/v re xou 
!^nmijuirc0y, because you are well informed, &c. 

Obs. 3. To this head has also been referred Luke xxiv. 46, odrvs fiu 9r»4uv riv 
X^i^T9ff Jtmi xn^tfx^fiMei f sri r^ ivofian abrw furavoMP xai of^tr/y dfjM^rtm its ^eivra ret 
iSni, d^^/nvop dvro'IipovfaX^fi. But dp^dfiivcv should rather be taken as an tm- 
personal participle, applied in the nominative absolute, like fro^fx^V) ^c^y^ tiot, 
ireifif, &C. It may then be rendered, a beginning being made, or so as to begin ; and 
the very same expression is used in the same manner in Herod, iii. 91. Compare 
also Joseph. B. J. i. 11. 2, and 24. 7. Some have also explained Eph. i. 18, as an 
accusative absolute, but it is an apposition ; or 'Ivei ^mh is to be repeated from the 
preceding verse.* 

I 62.— Of the Particles. (Buttm. § 146.) 

1. The Particles are Conjunctions, Adverbs, and Prepositions. 
With respect to the first it may be observed, that, as the same 
thought may frequently be diflFerently expressed, it is advisable 
to be cautious in assigning to one conjunction the sense of 
another^ without a due consideration of the manner in which 
the sentence is expressed. The alleged interchange of these 
parts of speech with each other will thus frequently appear to 
be without foundation; and their usage in the New Testament 
be found to depend, with very few exceptions, upon strict 
grammatical principles. From the variety of modes by which 
the thoughts of the mind, expressed in words and sentences^ 
may be connected or separated^ the conjunctions admit of 
various combinations, in which their appropriate meaning is 
nevertheless sujQSciently discernible. The most remarkable 
usages will be seen in § 67. 

2, It is unnecessary to adduce examples of each individual 
adverb employed in the New Testament. Their use and their 
meaning, except in some of the more remote significations, are 
the same as in classical Greek; nor is the neuter of the adjective, 

» Winer, § 31, 6. Obs. 3. Alt, ^ 29. 7. Kuinoel ad Matt. viii. 1. 
« Winer, § 32, 7. Alt, § 30. 4. Hermann ad Viger. p. 341. Rnphel. and 
Kuinoel on Luke xxiv. 46. 


which the later writers so frequently employ in an adverbial 
sense, particularly conspicuous, Adverhs, formed from wrfjce- 
lives by means of the ternninalion wi, prevail to a much 
greater extent, as they do also in the LXX and the laicc 
writers generally. It may also be remarked, with respect to 
the particle iv, that the peculiar niceties of its construction are 
only to be found in the more perfect specimens of the lan- 
guage ; and its use throughout the New Testament is exceed- 
ingly limited, In treating of the moods, its import and 
application have been abundantly illustrated. Certain idioms, 
which have an adverbial signification, have also been considered 
in their proper places: such as those effected by adjectiFca 
expressive of time (§ 25, Oij. 14.)i by (pSavii, ?.=<»&av«, &c. (§60. 
Obs. 11.); and by_^7ij'(c verbs followed by an infinitive {§ 5S. 
Oha. 7.). Sec also § 63. 3, Obs. 6. A few additional observa- 
tions remain to be made. 

3. The following adverbial prepositions govern a gen. in the 
New Testament. — ^Aveu, without, 1 Pet. iii. 10, — axS' ^^^ t^'X^'- 
oiplace and time, as far as, until; Matt. xiii. 30, Acts xi. 5, 
Bom. V. 13, XV. 19. Hence the Elliptical phrase ax/"' «<'' ""'•'t 
whilst, in Mark xiii. 30, Acts vii. 18, xxvii. 33, Gal. iu. 19. 
Heb. iii. 13. — iyyus, near, John iii, 23, vi. 19, Heb. vi. 8, viii. 
13. — £piwg(Kj5£v, before, with reference io place, in Matt. v. 24,- 
in the presence of. Matt. vi. 1. See also Matt, xxiii. 13, xxvii. 
II, Lukexiv. 2, Acts sviii, 17. It denotes jojccerfeHce, cither 
of time or dignity, probably the former, in John i. 16, 27, 30, 
sixwfDa'bn IMOU yiyaiiv.^ — hatrt, ivavriov, tywwi'ov, before, in the 
presence of, Mark ii. 12, Luke i. S, vii. 7, xs. 26, Acts vii. 10, 
viii. 32, 1 Cor. i. 29. — e»ex« or evexev, ow account of, Luke iv. 18. 
Acts XXV. 31, Rom. viii. 36. In the same sense, yjiptv is some- 
times used; as in Gal. iii. 19. — ivdvu, above; oT place, price. 
and dignity, Matt, xxi, 7, Mark xiv. 6, Luke xix. 17, 18. — tui, 
as far as, of place, Mait. xxiv. 21, 31, xxvi. 58, Actsxi. 22, xvii 
15, 23 ; and viilil, of time. Matt. ii. 15, xxvi. 27, xsvii. 45, 64. 
Hence the phrase ewi o5, scil. xpo*"") i" Matt. i. 25, and 
elsewhere. — osriu&tv, behind. Matt. xv. 23, Luke xxiii. 26.- 
ojri'™, behind, q/ter, of place, in Matt. iv. 10, 19. x. 38, Lukol 
xxi. 8, Acts v. 37, Rev. i. 10; afler, of time, in Malt. iii. 11,1 
John i. 15, 27, 30. Compare Nchcm. xiii. 19, Dan. ii, 10, | 

' Stii Ljuniie, Tiltmaii, Kniiiurl, aad othec iDler]i]i. aJ luc. 


XiXX. — TrXna-lov, near^ John iv. 5. So in Deut. xi. 30, Josh. 
XV. 46, XIX. 45, LXX. 

Obt* 1. With reference to place, the adverb *i»is is seldom used except by the later 
writers. The LXX usually add a prep* ; as in Gen. xxxviii. 1. W ^^U ecvS^Anrov 
vn», Levit. xxiii. 14, tM$ us rhv yif^i^av. So in Luke xxiv. 50, ttug gig Bfi^aviav, 
Compare 1 Mace. ii. 58, Polyb. ii. 52. 7, Diod. Sic. i. 27. Sometimes, however, in 
the LXX, it governs a gen, ; as in Isai. xxxviii. 1, %us ^etvcirov. So in £xod. xvi. 
28, Numb. xiv. 1 1, 2 Sam. vii. 18, and elsewhere.^ 

4. Besides adverbs which govern a genitive there are two, 
ifxa and TTxqoLTT'k'na-lov, which govern a dative. Matt. xiii. 29, a/x» 
auroTs. Phil. ii. 27, irapavXindiov SavaTw, 

Obs» 2. The former of these is joined with the preposition ^hv in 1 Thess. iv. 17, 
Y. 10. Elsewhere it is a simple adverb ; as in Acts xxiv. 26, xxvii. 40, Rom. iii. 
12, Col. iv. 3, 1 Tim. v. 13, Philem. 22. . 

5. The adverbs of place Ijcei*, vov, ottov, which properly in- 
dicate rest, are not unfrequently joined in the New Tes- 
tament with verbs of motion; as in Matt. ii. 22, l<po^7i&a) Ixsi 
aweX&en/, for IxeTffe. John iii. 8, wo? uTrdyei, for ttoT, which does 
not occur in the New Testament. Again in John viii. 21, 
oTTov eyu vTrayoj. xxi. 18, oY(7bi <ts o^oi; ov SeXeif, where sKsTaB is 
understood; and so in Matt. xxv. 24. See above § 59. 1. 
Obs. 2. Add Matt. xvii. 20, Luke xii. 18, xxi. 2, John vii. 3, 
viii. 14, xviii. 3, Rom. xv. 24, Heb. vi. 20. 

Obs, 3. In John xi. 34, irou rtBtUart auriv, the adverb bears its proper import. 
On the other hand Uu^g is once used in the place of UiT in Acts xxii. 5, S^p »ai 
Tovf i»tTnovras, So in Hippocrates: «i Ixu^g «/xf0»ri;.* 

Obs. 4. As adjectives are sometimes used for adverbs, so it has been supposed, on 
the other hand, that adverbs are put for adjectives; as in Matt. i. 18, rou }l*ltiff»u 
"X-^i^Tw 4 yirmffts wrt^s nf, xix. 10, ti ovrus iffrh h uiria. And SO in Matt. xxiv. 
39, Rom. iv. 18, 1 Pet. ii. 15. In these passages, however, oSrug i^ri is merely a 
phrase of equal import with oSrats tx^h which occurs in Acts vii. 1, xii. 15, et 
alibi* Tet more unreasonable is it to render fAaXXo* as an adjective, greater, 
instead of construing it with the verb, in Matt, xxvii. 24, fMtXXoy Bi^v^s ymreu* 
See also Acts xxii. 2, Phil. i. 12.'' 

§ 63. — Of the Prepositions, (Buttm. § 147.) 

1. A Preposition is a particle which is intended to designate 
the relations existing between one thing and another, or rather 
to represent the relative situation and condition of things, which 
the different cases are of themselves incompetent to express. 

' Passov. Lex. in v. 

« Winer, § 58, 7. Alt, 82. 7. Loheck ad Phryn. pp. 43, 127. Hermann ad 
Vi|;er. p. 790. Stallbaum ad Plat. Euthyphr. pp. 95, sqq. 

3 Winer, § 58, 2. Alt, § 82, 9. Ast ad Plai. p. 371. Reitz ad Lucian. T. vii. 
p. 137. Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 426. 

Tbc many important relations, which each ease is adapted to 
indicate, have been already pointed out ; and it lias been seen 
that many or moat of them, by the later writera more particu- 
larly, are often more distinctly marked through the medium of 
a preposition. Such j/T'poxition most, in Uie rery nature ol 
things, have an obvious analogy with ihc Jundamenla/ import 
of the ease which it governs ; and nothing vb more unphilou)- 
phical than the notion that prepositions and ca^es may be 
combined with each other aii libitum. Now it seems that the 
original idea involved in every jjreposition is that of place, mi 
that they severally indicate cither a state of rest or a state of 
motion. Referred to the same basis, the cases used to esprcss 
motion to ox from a place are the accusalive and the genititt 
respectively ; whilst that which is fixed and stationary belongs 
to the dative; and it is according as the signification of eadi 
preposition is more extended and varied, that they are con- 
structed, some with one case only, others with tico, and othen 
with all the three. Hence, though one preposition and ita 
case may sometimes occur where another might have been ei- 
pccted, it will generally be found to be an anomaly in appea^ 
ance rather than reality. An instance in point is Lube iL 13, 
6 itariip h i^ wf*»ou Sam UTtSfict Syiov Tor* olitouviv xvtw. The 
parallel place has 5 « Tsti wf!r»i'r(Matt. vii 11); but in wiitiBg 
ii, ivpnini/, the mind of St, Luke connected tlie expression more 
immediately with Saiati. 

Oil. I. To trace out the vuioiu tea»a ol the prrpotilioiu a tlie busineai of tin 
Lexicognipbcr, but a few examples from the Nen Tettament must be gna a 
illmliatioD oF theii caii&tiuctiaQ, as coaoected with the fuodaineiital impurt of CM^ 
It will be of eaune unnecessaiy to reproduce those usages, so frequent in the statl 
writings, by which verba, which in the earlier Greek authors govern the ainiple cue, 
are tulloweil by a pTepoiilioa. It was natural that forejgaeta sbould endesTOUi la 
espress any parliculai related with the greatest perspicuity ; and the auuuHE i 
which they have dooe bo by the conitaat emptoyment o( prepositiona, has bets 
abundantly exemplified in the remarks upon the Kveral cases. 

2. Of those prepositions, which govern only one case, ain', 
ivo, he, wgo, take the genitive.' 

Obi. 2. 'ArrJ, M nlum/ar, intltad a/, ilenolea the txehtrngt of one object Tw i» 
other, and thefefbte, as iuTottiog the idea of remmmi /ram a place, take* ■ gritliim^ 
expnisdve of taeottneit, prkt, rrlribulion. &e. Matt, it 22, 'A{x>Aa*i fSanXMb fcri 
■ll(*iK.. V. 38, i-pSaX^, in-; ifSxkfuS, xai iJ.Wi irri ISifr,,. xx. •*», )<m i^ 
4>xA> -^" '^^i" '"• •'"•>^'- Ra<"- >"■ >^- '»">■>■ ""^ *"> «»: i^Mm- 

' Wuuct, $ m. Alt, Uram. M. T. } 77. Wohl and Fmsot. Lmk. in ¥*• ^ 


Heb. xii. 16, ivr) fi^m^s ftuat airdora rk vr^urtroxut nhrw. So Matt. xtii. 27, Mark 
X, 45, Luke xi. 11, 1 Cor. xi. 15, 1 Thess. v. 15, Heb. xii. 2, James iv. 1 5, 1 Pet. iii. 9. 
\^tlL tbis notion of exchange are connected the forms k^y Sv, becouie^ wherefore ^ in 
liuke i. 20, xii. 3, Acts xii. 23, and elsewhere ; and &rr) vavrw, therefore, in Eph. v. 
31. There is considerable doubt as to the import of the expression x'^i" »*^^ X^*' 
Tf in John i. 16. Some would render it grace added in the place of grace already 
l^en ; i. e. an uninterrupted supply of grace ; but perhaps the best interpretation 
is that which repeats avrou after ^ei^irof, so that the sense will be, fPi Christians 
have received a needful supply of grace instead of, and answerable to, the full mea* 
sore of the grace of Christ. ^ 

Obs, 3. *A9rl,flrom, denoting the separation of one object from another with which 
it was externally connected ; as in Matt, xxvii. 2, «in»vXM-i rh XiS«» k^i vtif ^v^ecg. 
It indicates therefore departure from a, person, place, or vieinity ; as in Matt. iii. 16, 
kn^ kvri r«3 tHUvrH* vii. 23, £«r«;^«^ir<rf k^ I/mv, ^iii. 1, xave^vrt k^o rtS Sf»»s, 
sir. 29, iuiretfikf kito rov *X»Uv, i. e»firom shipyard. Acts XV. 38, k^o^rktra k^ au- 
tSp k*o Uetfi/^yXiast which would be incorrectly rendered, departed from them in Pam- 
phglia; since not only a separation from them, but a departure from Pamphylia is also 
intended. Also distance from a place ; as in John i. 18, lyyvg rSf *It^ofoXu/im, is 
Mto 0Taimt ^«««rivri. Freedom from, or deprivation of, an object is also indicated ; 
as in Matt. i. 21, ^igu rot Xa«y aurou atra rm kfut^ruif tthrm, Luke V. 34, Iff^t vyihg 
mwi iHs /Aoartyof gav. Connected with these local significations are such expressions 
as the following : — ^Mark vii. 4, afro kyo^ks, after market. Acts xvL 33, %x»twiv kiri 
tS* irXtiySf, Rom. xv. 15, k<ro fii^ovst in P^rt, partly. Transferred to the sense of 
time, it refers to a period, since which any thing has happened ; as in Matt. ii. 16, 
Luke iL 36, John xi. 53, Acts x. 30, Rom. i. 20. Hence the phrases afr* k^ris, ori' 
ginallyy in Matt. xix. 4 ; kp* «Z, soil. xv*^y ^^' *^^* '^^* ^if^H^ff ^ Luke xxiii. 25, 
Acts XX. 18, xxiv. 11, 2 Pet iii. 4, et alibi. In a general acceptation it denotes 
origin, source, cause, means, &c. Matt. iii. 4, Hvlv/ui ««ro r^tx''* MifinXM. vii. 16, 
Atti r£v »a^m mbrtit liriyMvtf'irSc tturwf, xiv. 26, d^ro rw ^ofiou t»»a^f. xvi. 21, 
^sXJLk fr«0i7» d^ri rm vr^ig^uri^^n. Luke xxi. 30, kp* lavrSv yn£g»irt. Acts x. 17, 
mTtwraXfiift diri rov K«^y*}Xi0tf. xi. 19, ^mg^et^Urts atra i^s ^Xt^ptttf, in consequence 
tffthe calamily, xvii. 2, htXiytro mhrHs diti rSt y^a^Su See also Matt. xi. 19, xii. 
38, Rom. i. 7, ziu. 1, 1 Cor. i. 3, 30, iv. 5, 2 Cor. i. 2, Phil. i. 28, James i. 17, Rev. 
xii. 6 ; and compare Gen. xxxvi. 7, Judith ii. 20, LXX, Plat. Phed. p. 83. B, Lucian. 
D. D. vi. 5. Analogous to this is the use of ara in designating the inhabitants or 
natives of a place, or the members of a party ; as in Matt. ii. 1, fiAyu d^ dfovoXm, 
Eastern magi. xxi. 11, vr^o^nrns i ««*« Na^o^sr. Acts xvii. 13, oi diro rns ^wgaXa- 
9i»ns 'Uuimu. Add Matt. xv. 1, xxvii. 57, Mark xv. 43, Luke xxiii. 51, John i. 45, 
xi. 1, xxi. 2, Heb. xiii. 24 ; and compare Polyb. v. 70. 8, Plut. Brut. § 2. Somewhat 
similar is 2 Tim. i. 3, x'^** ^X** ^f ^Vi V >^^^<v« 't** vr^oyomv, the Qod of my fore- 
fathers. Compare Polyb. v. 55. 9. 

Obs. 4. '£», or Vi,from or out of, differs from ««•« in referring to such objects as 
proceed from the interior of another object ; as in Matt. viii. 28, U rm ftm/AtUif S^i^ 
xif^^vou It also denotes removal from any intimate connexion i as in Rom. vii. 24, 
Ttf /At ^igtrat i» vou gttfiMros rw B^etfkrdv r»6r§v. Less correctly, but not unfirequently, 
it is scarcely distinguishable from dtri, and the two are occasionally indeed em- 
ployed indifferently. Compare Matt. iii. 16, xiv. 29, with Acts viii. 39, xxvii. 29. 
The forms U ^t^t^trov, abundantly (Mark vi. 51), U Itwrt^w, secondly (Matt. xxvi. 42), 
and »» fUr^av, moderately (John iii. 34), are cognate with dtro (m^ovs. It will not 
therefore be expected that any line can be drawn between the two prepositions in 

^ See Campbell and Kuinoel ad loc. 


their secondary import. Thus with reference to time, i» signifies after , sinettjml 
after. Matt. xix. 20, U uimrif fjbMt, Acts ix. 33, 1^ Itmv i»Tti, So also the phiua 
l| «^;^'iff, l» T0V htTMv, U r«vr«v, i( tJ, in John vL 64^ 66» xiii. 4, e/ oiibL In ag;eii6 
ral sense, it denotes origin, whether natural or spiritual^ foacsr, wtaieriaif wuau, ftd 
Matt. iii. 9, U riv X/B»t9 T§vr§n lyu^m rUfm, Mark xii. 30, mymw^iruf Ku^m rm 9m 
r«v IJi §Xnf riff »m^iatf r«v. John ii. 15, iruneat f^ayixXft i» 0^§i9un, So Johnm 
44, Acts xix. 25, Rom. ii. 29, 1 Cor. ix. 14, 2 Cor. ii. 2. Add Matt i. 3, 5,6,ziL 
33, xiii. 47, xxvii. 7, '29, Luke xii. 15, xvi. 9, John vii. 22, Acts zzviii. 3, Rom. 1 4, 
Ti. 17, xiv. 23, 2 Cor. ix. 2, Gal. vi. 8, Eph. ii. 8, t. 30, vi. 6, 1 Thess. ii. 3, 1 Tin. 
i. 5, 1 John ii. 16, iii. 8, 10, ReT. viii. 11. Somewhat peculiar is Rot. xt. 2, Mfi 
IX rn§ti with which compare the Latin, vietoriam ferre ex aiiquuf lAf, viii. 8. It 
denotes also connexion with a sect or party ; as Acts x. 45, ti in. wt^trt/uk emi 
XV. 23, mitX^ttf T»Tf i| tSv«v. Rom. iT. 14, m U m^«v. Tit. ii. 8, « l^ iMtrrms, kH* 
ywfMis* The significations of ad, in, cum, which hare been assigned to it, are ei* 
tirely inadmissible. In Matt. xx. 21, U }4mIv is e dextra, not ad dextram; for in t 
designation of relative place the mind passes /rom one object to another. So in 2 
Cor. ii. 4, \k ^tXXnt ^xi^its ^y^'^^'h ^^^ import is, that the Apostle wrote to tbn 
out of his state of distress, though undoubtedly he was in that state ; and in 1 Tub. 
i. 5, iymim U »a^tt^as »a(>iiat is love proceeding /rom a pure hearty not hve togetlw 
with purity of heart,^ 

Obt, 5. n^« signifies before, with reference to place; and thence denotes prifnfjf 
of time, and, in general^ tuperioritjf and preference. Of place, in Matt. xL 10, cm- 
eriXXtt rot AyyiXif f^ou ir^o ir^§et!nr»u ftsv* Acts V. 23, iS^t^t y ^uXMuks l^rStratt ir^ «m 
SvfUt, Add Mark i. 2, Luke i. 78, ix. 52, x. i. Acts xii. 6, 14, xiv. 13 ; and compin 
Heliod. ^tb. i. 11.30. Of /im«, in John xvii. 24, ir^i s««-«^x?f xUfuo, Adsr. 
36, ir^o yk^ rtvrm tUv fifAt^ifv dvierfi 0iv}as. Add Matt. ▼. 12, viii. 29, John x. 8. 
Of superiority, in James v. 12, ir^o irdfrm )), fih i/Afutrt. See also 1 Pet. iv. 8 ,- ssd 
compare Herodian. v. 4. 21. Sometimes there is a trajectioa in the use of this 
preposition ; as in John xii. 1, ir^i i^ hfAi^Sif r«u ^aexftf *ix day a before the pauovtr} 
2 Cor. xii. 2, ?r^o iruv hKurievA^tnf, fourteen years ago. So in Amos i. 1, LXX, e^ 
^vo irSv roZ ffuvfiov. Joseph. Ant. xv. 1. 4, ir^o hfA%^at futit Trig I^^tHs, See also Amoi 
iv. 7, 2 Mace. xv. 36, Joseph, c. Apioo, ii. 2. 

3. The prepositions Iv and cuv govern the dative only.' 

Obs, 6. *Ey, in, denotes the place in, upon, at, or near which an object remains, ssd 
is therefore joined with the case of rest, the dative ; as in Matt. iv. 16, § Xmis • m^v- 
fi%fO{ U exoru. ix. 35, h^ei^XMv it reus ff'tnaytiytus* Xlil. 4, Mtr§i»ovv<r€tt if *U^9»emXifi' 
John iv. 20, U rovrof rta S^u ir^ixivneetv, Heb. i. 3, XxdBset* iv ^/^. Rev. iiL 21, 
KciBiffett U rZ ^^otof. See also Matt. i. 18, xii. 40, xvi. 27, Mark xii. 38, Luke vii. 52, 
John X. 23, xi. 20, Acts vii. 44, Rom. viii. 34, Heb. viii. 5, x. 12, Rev. iii. 4, 5, xi. 
12. Hence, with reference to persons, it siji^nifies among; as in Luke xvi. 15, t« i» 
uv^^i^oK i/yJ/fiXev. Acts ii. 29, 4-0 fcvtifAa. ctlrov Urn \v hfHv, XXV. 6, ^MT^i^^r^s if c»* 
T»ts» From this primary sense the following analogies are readily deduciUe:^ 
(1) Business in which one is employed; as in Rom. i. 9, Z kar^tuM «» tZ tvayytxlv, 
1 Tim. iv. 15, iv rovrots taiu (2) Society to which one belongs, or matters in which 
one has a share ; as in Matt, xiuii. 30, xonmoi iv rZ uifAurt rSv ir^e^nrSv, Acts riii. 
21, ovx iffri ffot fis^is iv ru Xoyeo rovru. (3) Agency or ministry, aud also an instr»- 
tncnf, in rases of intimate connexion betvecn the act and the aji^ency ; as in Matt. 

1 See Schleusner and Wahl in v. 
•■i Wetstein, Kypke, and Kuinoel ad 1. c. 

» Winer, § JJ, a. b. Alt, Gram. N. T. 6 78. Poppo ad Xen. Cyrop. p. U'J. 
lieindoii ad Jflat. Cratyl. p. 71. 


V, 13, ty t/w uXtfhfftreth whereuntk shall it be sailed, i. e. how shall the savour be 
again Jixed in it. vii. 2, Iv £ fiir^at fur^iiri, with what measure^ within which the 
substance to be measured is contained, ye mete, ix. 34, Iv rif a^x*^"^* '''^^ ^Mfiovfuv 
ixfiaXXu vet lett/Aotm, by the prince of the devils abiding in him. Add Matt. vii. 6, 
Luke xxii. 49, James iii. 9, 1 Pet. ii. 16, Rev. vi. 8, xiv. 15, xvii. 16 ; and compare 
Gen. xli. 36, xlviii. 22, Exod. xiv. 21, xvi. 3, xvii. 5, 13, xix. 13, Josh. x. 35, Judg. 
iv. 16, vi. 34, XV. 13, 15, xvi. 7, xx. 16, 48, 1 Kings xii. 18, Ezr. i. 50, Nehem. i. 
10, 3 Esdr. i. 38, Judith u. 17, 19, v. 9, vi. 4, vii. 27, 1 Mace. iv. 15, v. 44, vi. 31, 
LXX, Aristot. Probl. xxx. 5, Hippocr. Aph. ii. 36. (4) State or condition of the 
mind, innate qualities or endowments, and other cognate ideas ; as in Matt. xvi. 27, 
%^%^6«u U rrf ^«|tf rou iretr^og uvrov. Luke i* 17, it^oiktug^trut U irvtvfAttrt xet) ^uvdfiu 
'HXlov, 1 Cor. ii. 4, Xoyog fMV »b» (^v) ly ^n6o7f dv^^ej^r/vtn ^o<piaf yJoytts, aAX' h tcTo^ 
}ii{fi innvfAarof Keu luvei/LUvg. £ph. iv. 15, a^nhudfrtg Iv dyeliry* Add Matt. vi. 7, 
xvii. 21, xxii. 37, John xiii. 35, xvii. 10, Acts iv. 9, 10, xi. 14, xvii. 28, 31, Rom. v. 
9, 1 Cor. vi. 2, xiv. 6, 21, Gal. iii. 12, Eph. iv. 14, vi. 10, Heb. i. 2, xiii. 9, James i. 
25, et alibi. Some have supposed this signification to have been derived from that 
of the Hebrew prefix ^, which is constantly so employed ; but the same usage is 

found in the best Greek writers.^ Hence it is that a noun in the dative with cy 
frequently supplies the place of an adjective ; as in Luke iv. 32, iv ilou^ta h i Xoyot 
murw, 2 Cor. xii. 2, oTia, Hv^^at^rov h X^wrZ, a Christian, So in Gal. i. 22, Eph. ii. 
21, 22, iii. 21, 1 Tim. ii. 7, 2 Tim. i. 13, Tit. iii. 5, 2 Pet. ii. 13. Sometimes tlie 
same mode of expression is to be taken adverbially; as in Matt. xxii. 16, tv aXn- 
Sti^, truly f sincerely, Mark xiv. 1, Iv ^oXtf, craftily. Col. iv. 5, iv f»pia, wisely. 
Add John vii. 4, Acts xvii. 31, xxvi. 7, Eph. vi. 24, Heb. ix. 19, James i. 21, Rev. 
acviii. 1. Compare Judith i. 11, Ecclus. xviii. 9. An adverb is interchanged with 
this form in John vii. 10, ov pavt^Sg, aXX^ is iv x^v^rrS. With reference to time, iv 
indicates the period in, at, during , or within which anything is done; as in Matt. ii. 
1, iy fi/jbi^eus 'H^Hou rau fixviXiis, Mark XV. 29, ty r^aiv hfti^eug olxchofiSv, John v. 
7, h f(scil. xioftjf) t^ofieuy while 1 am coming, 1 Cor. xv. 51, aXXaywifAt^x h &ro- 
fUf, h fiv^ i^4aXfuv, iv r^ ir;^arti ^dXiriyyt, in an instant, at the last trump. Add 
Matt. iii. 1, xii. 2, Mark x. 37, xiii. 24, Luke xii. 1, xxii. 28, John ii. 19, 20, vii. 11, 
xxiii. 23, Acts viii. 33, xvii. 31, 1 John i. 28, Rev. xv. 1, xviii. 10; and compare 
Dan. xi. 20, Isai. xvi. 14, Diod. Sic. xx. 85, iElian. V. H. i. 6. 

Obs, 7. The primary import of ty and s/; is so opposite, that the use of the 
former instead of the latter, as advocated by many commentators,' seems to be very 
doubtful ; and indeed it will be found that the verbs implying motion, with which 
h is sometimes found, generally involve the idea of rest also.'* Thus in Matt xiv. 
3, i^tv xMv, xai f SfT0 cy ^vXaxf, cast him into prison, and retained him there : and 
a similar reason will obtain in Matt. ix. 31, Mark i. 16, Luke i. 17, vii. 17, xxiii. 
42, John V. 4, Rom. i. 23, 2 Cor. xiv. 11, Rev. i. 9, xi. 11, and elsewhere. In 
many passages, which have been referred hither, the preposition is employed in its 
strictly appropriate sense ; as in Mark v. 30, i^tfr^x^iis iv rf ix^Vt turning round 
sanong the multitude. Compare Matt. iii. 9, x. 16, Acts xx. 19, Rom. xi. 17, 
1 Thess. V. 12, et alibi. Many other passages also, which have been rendered 
without a due regard to the proper force of this preposition, may be easily ex- 

^ Gtesen. Lex. and Noldii Concord, in v. Passov. Lex. in v. tv, Poppo ad Tnu- 
eyd.i. 178. 

* Glass. Phil. Sacr. p. 451. Georg. Hierocrit. i. 3. 18. Schleusner and Bret- 
Schneider in v. Kuinoel and Rosenmuller passim, 

^ Winer and Alt, ubi supra: Schulthess in the New Theological Annals, for 
March, 1827, p. 226. Beyer de prcepp, tig aud iv in A^. T, permutatione. 


plained upon similar principles. Some of these have been classed under theb 
respectiye heads, to which may be added Luke ii. 27,' %X#C9 b t^ ryuyMr^not 
he came by the epirit, hot in the ifiriit L e. in a state of ins^ratioii, ftc. So ii 
Luke iv. 1, et poMtim. Again, John if. 37, It vvvry, m this ineiemce: Acts m 
d3| ly r^ TMrciMvrii avrw h M^i^tt mirtS i^Sny during ike time of hie hmm&atm: 
Rom. ii. 20^ rnv /tif^mnv iHs ymnats mi) tiit AXi^t/me iv rf m/c^ the ejpUm ^ 
true knowledge laid down in the Law* 1 Cor. iv. 6, 7mk h nfuv /c^Surt, thai fe meg 
learn in vt, i. e. by the example exhibited in our conduct. Here alap may be men- 
tioned the phrase yivte^eu h i«vrf > to be in one*e right nnnd, as dislingaished hm. 
USiTy tlf UvTtfy, to come to one*e teneee. Compare Luke xv. 17, Acta xii. 1). Is 
1 Cor. iv. 21, Heb. ix. 25, b seems to have nearly the import of m, Cooysn 
Xen. Cyrop. ii. 3. 14.* 

Obt. 8. 2vy, with, together witk^ in d icates wfuofi, compamionak^ ; as in Matt nr. 
27, iMfiifoftm &» T§ l/Mv ev9 r/»^, Mark viii. 34, 9^»exa)armfce9e§ m «%X«9 #» m 
fuc^tirmf murtS, Luke xxiv. 21, rvy irart rterMs, heeidee all these tkinge. Acts v. 17, 
•I ffvv avrSft hie aitendanttf or coUeaguet ; xxii. 9, «j eut Ifui SprMt, my rnwfffiinsi 
Sometimes the idea of anietance is included ; as in Acts ziv. A, W ^9 ^m em m 
*luihau7s »t }ti ew ro7t &^§ff'rix.§tf, 1 Cor. V. 4, ein r^ iuvufitu t»v Kjf^ttv, XV. 10, Mmtyi 
%\, &XXm fi x'^*f ^'*' ^**<^ ^ ^^ ^f***' ^^ Luke i. 56, rh nir^ means ai her home; ind 
is equivalent to the French, ehex elle. 

4. With the accusative alone^ bU, and, in the New Testa- 
ment, dviy are used.* 

Obt, 9. Elf, to, into, indicates motion to an object ; and in this its primary Ueel 
sense it occurs in Matt. ii. 11, ix^ovrts tls rhv oUiav, iii. 10, tig v'u^ fimXXvnu, Lob 
viii. 8, 7ff't0'fy tlf rh ynf» Acts iv. 3, SStvfv tU rn^nen. And so in Matt. ii. 13, 14, 20, 
21, 22, iv. 1, 5, 8, et alibi. This idea of direction to an object is clearly presored 
in the use of the preposition after verbs of tpealcing, and whenever the aim or purport 
of an action is intended. Thus in Matt, xviii. 15, Uy a/Mt^rnry tU e^t i «)iXf«f n0> 
xxvi. 10, *i^yc¥ xakttv u^yavetro lis ifci, Mark iii. 29» Sg T &v fiXM^(pfifAti^y tig ri ^wfui 
ri elym, Luke Xxii. 65, xeu trtfet itoXXk fiX(W(ptifjbovvrti tXtyev tig tcu*r99, John T. 45^ 
lU •» vfAUf fiXtrixetri* 2 Cor. ii. 4, t^v uyuvtiv ^y tx** «V vfieif. Gal. iii. 27, tig Xfmm | 
l/Saw-r/VSfjTt. Add Matt, xviii. 6, Luke xii. 10, xv. 18, 21, Acts vi. II, i. 27, v. 8, 
1 Cor. viii. 11, xvi. 1, 1 Pet. iv. 9 ; and compare Herodian. vi. 7, 1 1, vii. 10, Polyb. 
X. 3. 17. Heuce it may frequently be rendered in respect to ; as in Acts ii. 26, 
Aa/3iJ ya^ Xiyti its etvrov, XXV. 20, ave^ovfitvos tls rtiv srigJ rturou t^tfrno'tv, Rom. iv. 20, 
us riiv WayytXietv rod 0iou cl htx^i^n r*i uin^riec. Add Matt. vi. 34, Luke vii. 30, 
xii. 21, 2 Cor. ix. 13, Eph. v. 32, Heb. vii. 14; and compare 2 Sam. xi. 4, LXX. 
Died. Sic xi. 50. Pausan. vi. 2, 4, x. 24. Motion is also clearly indicated in the 
following senses: Matt. xiii. 30, Iwart ahr'd %U yt^fiag, into bund/ee: xxviL30, iff 
vervfftvtris us etvrov, vpon him : Mark xv. 38, lexU^n us "^e, itito two parts ; Luke x. 
36, ifATTitrovros us fovs X'^ffrasy amongst thieves : John xi. 32, csri^cv gig r§vg r Sites ot 
his feet y\ivX with a motion forwards. The design intended, and the event produced, 
are also expressed by this preposition ; as in Matt. xii. 41, fx.trtfifie'ecf tig ri xwuyfta 
'lArvft' xxvii. 7, nyo^uffav rev ay^ov tig Tu(^)f vols ^tms» Mark. i. 4, xmiWatv ^tmem* 
fttruvoias us a<pifftv afia^'riuv, With reference to time, tis denotes of course & future 
period, until; as in Matt, x, 22, xxiv. 13, v^ofhtims tis riXcs, xxi. 19, %ig Wv mlm%, 

» Hermann ad Viger. p. 858. Krebs. Obss. p. 26. 

« Winer, § 53, a. Alt, Gvara. N. T. § 79, Hermann ad Soph. Aj. p. 80. Gataker 
de N. T. Stylo, p. 180. Wahl de part, ti et praep. tis ap. N. T. script, usu et 
potestate, p. 59. Passov. Lex. in vv. tig and avei. 


fur ever : Luke i. 50^ tU ytvtas ytnZv, Acts iv. 3, %U rnv au^m. It is used with a 
genitive, subaud, »iK«v or hifjutrec, in Acts ii. 27, 31. See § 44, 6. Obs. 19. Also 
ivith the name of a person, whose house is intended, in Acts xyi. 40, tUtikBtt tig rnv 
AvlimVf into L^dia^t houte* So, in Latin> Ter. £un. iii. 5. 64, Easma ad me, 

Obt, 10. It is not that nV is used for iv, but the idea of rett and motion is com- 
bined, when us is constructed with verbs which convey the former meaning ; as in 
Matt. ii. 23, tutmfMMtv tig ^Jktv, where many MSS. insert, and it should seem 
correctly, ixS^y, as in Matt iv. 13. Compare also John xx. 19, 26. More direct 
examples, in which, however, the idea of previous motion is included, are Mark ii. 1, 
•If M»«y l^Ti, where tUiixBtv tit Kattt^veuvfA immediately precedes, xiii. 3, xaBfifimu 
Ui r§ i^6s. Acts ii. 31, §if »«riXf4<pSti h ^up^h uhrtu us ^ou* xviii. 21, StT^i irtitTtts 
4^y U^rhf rnf t^«/«tyifir Totn^at tig *li^woXufA»* xxi* 13, AflrtfSayiTy us 'It^aufecXfi/* \r»ifiuts 
Hx^* See also Mark v. 14, Luke i. 20, xi. 7, John ix. 7, xx. 7, Acts vii. 4, viii. 23, 
40, xix. 22 ; and compare Orph. Argon. 599. ^liao. V. U. vii. 12. Other passages, 
which have been referred to this head, do not belong to it ; as Mark i« 9, i/3a«^iVSir 
us rw *l»^titn9, he was baptized by immersion into the Jordan, v. 34, virayt ug u^vrnt 
ad salutem : and so in Luke vii. 50, et aiibi passim. Compare 1 Kings xx. 13, 
2 Kings XV. 9, LXX. In John i. 18, • m tls vw xixtrn, is probably a Hebraism ; 
and the expression in Acts vii. 53, its "hMr^yks ayyi>M9 is clearly parallel with 
Gal. iiL 19, Imrttyifrtt V ayyiXMv, but upon what grammatical principle, it is 
difficult to determine. Compare also Heb. ii. 2 ; and see § 47, 2. Obs. 5. 

Obs, 11. 'Ay^, in, through, is sometimes joined with a dative in other writers, bat 
with an accusative only in the New Testament. Thus in Matt. xiii. 25, ieiru^t 
ZiZ»*t» &9ii i*ien Tou wirou, in the midst of, i. e. amongst, the wheat : 1 Cor. xiv. 27, 
&9» f*i^»g, in turn. See also Mark vii. 31, 1 Cor. vi. 5, Rev. vii. 17. With a numeral 
expressed or understood, it implies distribution; as in Matt. xx. 9, 10, lxa/3«v iva 
)ifMB^My, a penny each : Luke ix. 3, «»« ^t/« x^'^mag l%ciy, two coeUs apiece. Com- 
pare Mark vi. 40, I^ke ix. 14, x. 1. It is used adverbially without a case in Rev. 
zzi. 21, »ft^ Ug iMtteregy each one severai/g. These are the only forms in which the 
prepontion appears. 


1. The Prepositions governing two cases are Sii, Kara, v^eq, 
and, in the New Testament, /xera, vsqt, and vn6. They govern 
the genitive and the accusative. 

Obs, 1. Ata, through, takes (1.) the genitive, inasmuch as, in a iocai sense, the idea 
of passing through includes that oi proceeding from, and passing out, Mark xL 16, 
eu» H^itv het Tig huiyxfi ffxivog %ia rov U^tlu. 1 Cor. iii. 15, ethrog Ti fu^wtrat, •urug }ti 
is W 9ev^ig. Heb. ix. 11, ^m rng fjAi^ovog ^xmng nViiXdtv tig ra Siyut* Hence, with 
reference to time, it denotes a period throughout, or after which an event took place ; 
as in Luke v. 5, ^/ oXng rng tvhrig KotrtMMrig, 6vhh iyM^/Aiv, Gal. ii. 1, tirurec, het 
htutrtff^tifttv irm, reiXjv uvilinf tig *li^o^eku/jM, See also Matt. xxvi. 61, Mark ii. 1, 
Acts i. 3, xxiv. 17, Heb. ii. 15. In a general sense, it denotes any cause whatso- 
ever, whether principal, ministerial, or instrumental, through the medium of which 
an action passes to its accomplishment. Thus in Matt. i. 22, ro ffiSlv viri r»u Ku^Uu 
)i« r»u 9r^o^fir»v, John i. 3, jra»T« V abrou iyinrt. Acts iii. 16, n trieng fi J/ utnrw. 
1 Cor. iii. 5, h«»ovu, It JSv ivrtertv^etTi. xvi. 3, Ji' i<r<«'T«X«y rovrtvg ^ifi^pt/, by means 
of letters of recommendation, not with letters : 2 Pet. i. 3, rov xaXUatr§g npMg ha 'hSins 
xai a^%rm, by his glorious goodness. This last passage is rendered by Schleusner 
qui vos ad religionem Christianam adduxit eo consiUo, «/ contequamini feUcitatems 


which cannot be correct, since the genitive never denotes ^ final cause.^ For other 
examples see Mark vi. 2, xvi. 20, Luke i. 70, John i, 1 7, Actn if. 16, v. 12, fiii. 13^ 
XV. 23, xviii. 9, xix. 26, xxi. 19, Rom. i. 5, iii. 20, iv. 13, ▼. 1, 2, 1 1, xL 35, 1 Cor. i. 9^ 
vi. 14, Gal. i. 1, Ueb. ii. 10. Sometimes a^«iii7ivc with ^d is used adverbkUijf! as in 
lleb. xii. 1, h* vir0fi0tnt, patiently. Compare Luke viii. 4^ Acts xr. 27, Ronu ^25^ 
Ileb. xiii. 22, 1 Pet v. 12. (2.) With an ocesM/tve, litL denotei the impaimtdi 
the^so/ cause ; and signifies on aeeomnt rf^ hecaute of $ as in Matt, xxvii. 18,^ 
^%Un va^tUiKea ecurit. Mark ii. 27, ri wmfifiam Xi «••» ^wB^t^^'w lyinn, «j% i 
&fB^»Mr»f i*ti ri ^afifiarov. Compare, for the impuUiva cause, Mark ii, 4, John xl 42i 
xii. 9, 30, Rom. iii. 25, iv. 23, 24, xi. 28, xiii. 5, 1 Cor. zL 23, Heb. iu 9. In km 
cases the etnue and the mean* are so closely allied, that )i« may be rendered if 
meant of; as in 1 Cor. vii. 5, Ty« ^ii «^f«t{f( i/^it i ^armpmt ^m rjfv mm^ua ap« 
Compare Xen. Mem. iiL 3. 15, .^schin. Dial. Soar. i. 2, Diog. L. viL I. 12, Loogi 
Past. ii. p. 62.« 

Obs, 2. Kara, down^ or down upon, signifies descent from a higher place ; and then- 
fore takes (1.) a genitive ; as in Matt. viii. 32, &^fi>nei trar» if AyiXn 'rSv x*^f^ ^"^ ^ 
K^nfAwv %U rjfv ^aXaeetn, Mark xiv. 3, tutrixiit muT§S tutret rns »t^MX,nf) down wfm 
his head; the flask being held over it. Compare 1 Cor. zi. 4. Bj an easy traju* 
ition it indicates hottUity ; as in John xviii. 29, rint xaTfiya^m* ^i^rt Mark rm 
ittB^ti^w Tovr«u; what accutalion do ye bring down upon him; i. e., against him? 
See also Matt. v. 11, 23, x. 35, xii. 14,30, Mark ix. 40, John xix. 11, Ads xix. 16. 
XXV. 3, Jude 15; and compare Numb. xii. 1, xxi. 5, Job iv. 18, zxxi. 36, \yisd.iT. 
16, 2 Mace. ii. 27, LXX, Polyb. ix. 3. 10, iElian. V. H. ii, 6, x. 6. Hence, pn^ 
haps, its use in adjurations; as in Matt. xxvi. 63, l|«^»/i{[M rt uark vuBtw, Compsre 
1 Cor. XV. 15, Heb. vi. 13. So likewise in 2 Chrou. xxxvi. 13, Jerem. xlix. 13, 
Judith i. 12, LXX. Another sense is that of diffusion s as in Luke iv. 14,fv« 
Xlnk^i %af Sxm rns m^ix'^^^is, throughout the whole district. Add Luke xxiii. 5, Ada 
ix. 31. (2.) Since the notion throughout may be referred, not only to the point/ivn 
which an object proceeds, but to that also to which it tends, this local sense belongs 
to Kara with au accusative ; as in Luke viii. 39, ««S' oXnv r^v vcoXm xMmm, Ads 
V. 15, xara rag rXariias iKipi^ttv rolfg aa-^tnTs, along the streets. So Luke ix. 6, X. 4, 
Acts viii. 1,3, xi. 1. Nearly equivalent is the sense in Luke x. 33, d^siWv nX^t ult 
avrov, came to him* Compare Acts xvi. 7. With reference to time it denotes the 
period through which an action passes ; as in Matt. i. 19, xar* Svu^, during a dream. 
So Gen. xx.6, xxi. 1 1, LXX, Herodian. ii. 7. 6, Alciphr. iii. 59, ^lian. V. H. i. 13. 
Again in Heb. iii. 8, Kara rnv n/ii^at r$u vruffaa-fAov. It denotes a/, on, or about * as 
in Matt, xxvii. 15, xaS' Uorfiv, at the feast ; Acts xiii. 27, »eir» ^Zv e'tcfifi»T0f, on even 
Sabbatht Rom. ix. 9, xara riv xai^ev r$vr»f tXtveofAXi, at or about this time. Hence 
the formula xara xat^h, at a proper or seasonable time, in due time^ in Rom. v. 6 and 
elsewhere. From these significations the transition is easy to those of correspond- 
ence, conformity, similarity, and other cognate senses. Thus in Matt. xvi. 27 •«■•- 
%uffu iKacroj xara rhv T^a^tv avrov, Luke i. 9, Kara ri tBog rns Itfietriiets, ii. 22 wcra 
rov vo/btov Mu^luf, John ii. 6, xara rov xuBa^to'fiov r£v ^lov^awv. Rom. iii. 5 xmri 
avB^urof xiyat. Gal. iv. 28, xara ^Uaax. Compare Job i. 8, ix. 32, xii. 3 xlil 
15, Ecclus. X. 2, xxxvi. 23; and Lucian. Pise. 6. 12, Plat. Apol. I, Arrian. 
Exp. iii. 27. To these may be added Matt. xix. 3, xara. va^-ecv aWim,9 for even 
reason; Rom. viii. 27, xara ©««», according to God's will or appointment, PhiL iv. U 
0v *«3* Uri^fi^tv xiyat, with respect to want, i.e., as if I were in want. See also Matt. 

* See Vitringa in Diss. iii. Lib. i. c. 7. p. 224. Suicer. Tbes. i. p. 706 Pott and 
Wolf ad I.e. * 

* Winer, §§ 51 . i. 53, c. Alt, Gram. N. T. } 80, 1. Brunck ad Arist. Thesm. 4i4. 
Wyttenbach ad Plat, Op. Mor. ii. p. 2. 


ii. 16, ix. 29, xxiii. 3, Luke i. 18, ii. 29, zxiii. 56^ Acts iii. 17, xviii. 14, xxvi. 5, 
Rom. viii. I, ix. 5, xi. 28, xv. 5, 1 Cor. iii. 3, 2 Cor. vii. 9, 10, Gal. i. 11, iii. 15, 
Eph. IV. 24, 1 Tim. v. 21, 2 Tim. i. 1, 9, Tit. iii. 5, 1 Pet. i. 15, iv. 14. Thus it it 
that Kara with an accusative frequently supplies the place of an adjective or adverb ; 
as in Acts xviii. 15, to/Aov rov xuB-* v[jms, your law; Rom. vii. 13, xetjy virt^fiekiiv a/A»^ 
vt/Xiff exceedingly fin/ul; xi. 21, rSv xara (pva-tv »X^^»y, the natural branchet. Com- 
pare Luke X. 31, Acts xiv. 20^ xxv. 23^ xxvii. 2, Rom. i. 15, et alibi. Lastly, with 
reference to time and place, and also with numerals, kard implies distribution ; as in 
Luke ii. 41, xar* tros, yearly, from year to year ; viii. 1, 4, xotrd vo>jv, from city to 
city ; John xxi. 25, »aS* Sy, singly, one by one. See also Matt. xxiv. 7, xxvi. 55, 
Luke xi. 3, xiii. 8, 22, Acts xv. 21, xx. 20, xxi. 19, xxii. 19, 1 Cor. xiv. 27, 31, 
Eph. V. 33, Tit. i. 5, Heb. ix. 5, 25 ; and compare I Sam. vii. 16, 2 Chron. ix. 24, 
^ech. xiv. 16, LXX.^ 

Obs, 3. 'T^\^, above, over, does not occur in the New Testament in its primitive 
ioca/ sense; from which it is readily applied, (1.) with a genitive, to what is 
done instead of, in behalf of, in defence of, on account of, any object. Thus in Mark 
ix. 40, OS yd^ ou» tart xecB-'' vfMv, vTi^ v/mHv iffrlv. John Xviii. 14, ffuii^i^u %f» ay^^«^- 
9en »9eoXiw^At V9r\^ rov katiu. Acts v. 41, x^'i'*'^*St on utrl^ r$u ivo/netr^g utfrou xarfS^ 
iBfiffaf arifieur^nvas* Rom. V. 6, X^iarof v^ri^ etai^v atrtSayt. 2 Cor. V* 20) U9r\^ 
Xft^rav ir^tff^iV9ft,ii, Add Matt. v. 44, Luke ix. 50, xxii. 19, 20, John xi. 4, 50, Acts 
ix. 16, xxvi. 1, Rom. v. 7, 8, viii. 31, xiv. 15, xv. 8, 9, 1 Cor. xv. 3, 2 Cor. i. 6, 
V. 14, 15, 1 Thess. v. 10, 1 Tim. il 1, 6, Tit. ii. 14, Philem. 13, Heb. v. 1, 3, vii. 
27, 1 Pet. ii. 21, I John iii. 16. It indicates a motive in Phil. ii. 13, iirt^ rns 
tlihixias* Sometimes also it may be rendered concerning ; as in Rom. ix. 27, 'H^atag 
K^^ii vsrc^ r»v 'Itf'gaiiX. 2 Cor. i. 8, ou StXtf^iy vfjuag ayvoitv virif rtig Bki^ptatg fifAMVm 
See also 2 Cor. viii. 23, 2 Thess. ii. 1 ; and compare 2 Sam. xviii. 5, Tobit vi. 15, 
LtXX. In the same sense the Latin super is used in Virg. ^n. i. 754, Multa 
super Priamo rogitans, (2.) With an accusative, M^ denotes the place of dignity to 
which any one is raised ; as in Matt. x. 24, oitx t^ri fia^nrtis M^ riv ^i^xetXav, 
Compare Eph. i. 22, Phil. ii. 9, Philem. 16. Closely analogous is its comparative 
import : as in Mattt z. 37, « ^/X**y vrecri^a n frnrifu v^ri^ I/aI, oux Wri fAou a^Mg, Acts 
xxvi. 13, v9r\^ r^y J^fA^perfiret rov nktou irtptkdfiyf/av /At (pSg, So in 1 Cor. iv. 6, Gal. 
i. 14, Eph. iii. 20. Hence the use of this preposition with comparative adjectives ; 
of which see § 43. 3. There is an apparent confusion of ideas in 2 Cor. xii. 13, r/ 
yMP Wriv, S firrnBnrt v^\^ rag Xctireig ixxXnvieig, The direction of the action must 
clearly be considered as inverted ; and thus, though the expression is certainly ex- 
traordinary, it may be accounted for. Two manuscripts read vret^u,^ Of vvti^, used 
adverbially, see § 65. Obs* 5. 

2. In the New Testament /msri, 9r6§i, and iJgro are also found 
with two cases only, though in other writers they take three 
cases after them. 

Obs. 4. Mfr«, with, denotes society^ companionship ; but, whereas irvv with a dative 
indicates that which is, as it were, united with another object, fttiroL with (1.) a geni' 
five, denotes a somewhat looser connexion of various descriptions. Thus in Matt, 
viii. 11, avaxXt^fovren fttr^ 'A/3^««/£. xii. 3, ethrog Ka) ol fAtr* tthrou, his companions} 
xiii. 20, furd Xi"^!^* Xecfi(ieiy»tv etvrov, Luke XX. 28, cl hec/AtfAtvfixertg fAtr IfAou, Xxiv. 5, 
vi l^nrtlrt rov ^Hvra fAird ruv nx^m', Acts V. 26, nyetytv aurovg, ol fiiru fiieig. xvii. 11, 

1 Winer, §§ 51, k. 53, d. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 80, 2. Raphelius ad Rom. xv. 5. 
Wetstein and Kypke on Gal. iv. 28. Blomfield's JRach, Theb. 421. 

« Winer, §51,1. 53, e. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 80, 3. Raphelius ad Rom. viii. 31. 
Wetstein ad 2 Thess. ii.l. 




i%i^m Tflv xiytr /^rra ififnt v^s^v/tiutA 1 Cor* vi, 6^ A3t^^r /utk o^A^t ffiKf 
xvi. 11, i>iix>,ia' >~; avni^iTs »> a3iXf^>< KeV. ii. IG, «-iAv<nV»^ir' ■' 
8, imJjBSu ^t'hJt.E, in Ai> (raw, lu 1 he expression Jf«i ^it« nut, (a t« o/ll 
lone pBTtf teiiA atg (mi, U incluifcd the notion of wupport, attittaitce- (UatL L 23, if 
30, xxviiL 20, aid eltewhan); and, on the otbei houd, of op^tilio', in N*tt.iS.4| 
tt\tt NvHwVai itmrrintria !■ tS iji^rii ^iri t5( riri^c TMiirnt, «a) naraiifinr 
Althougll there i> a marked diifereiice in the import of ruv and piri, it is neierlb- 
less certain that they sre frequently interchanged. See ^ 65. OA*. 4, ('J.) &■ »• 
ruto/rri with fii» indicatei n situation be/iin/i an object, as in Reb. ix. 3, ^in ri 
itJnfH ■■rarifsr/u, tehiad the teamd veil. With this single exception, thi* ca 
struction in the New Tealsment always indicates time, in the sease of a/ltr; » ^ I 
Matt. i. 13, /iir« -nt ^iTniirfn Ba^Xvuf, a/ir«- fAe removal to Babgion. iiii.1, 1 
/US' ■/•(jiK ^. John xiii. 7, ^it> tbItb, a/Jer (Am* l>iug', i. e. afiec what I u 
doing, Sec dIbo Matt. xzir. 29,xxt. 19, Maikvili. 31.' 

Obi, 5. lit;!, ai<iH(, in a /sea/ tenie. in which it Is not found in the NcirTait- ■ 
meal, with (1.) a genitive, coUTeys the idea of lurroaniUng an object ; and thioo^ I 
in a general seme, it signifies ctnanting, leilk reipecl lo. Thus in Matt, ii, 8, iar f 
^ l£inlnn *■•(] nS roili'm. tI. 2S, n;] Eil^wirit n /uf.^tSri. iX. 36, ttviayx'i'i' 
rifi itiri:,. xx.2i,iyK>iitTnrii>ntlrZ,ii,iiiX^r. Add Blark t. 16, John Tit,!?, 
1 Cor. vii. 37. Hence 3 John 2, wifl triimif in a/I retptctt. Here alM belong 
the phrase, ri ritl r^m, seil, r(iyfi*irm, in Luke xxiv. 19, Acts i. 3, Eph. «i. 2^, •> 
alibi, CIosEly allied, though not exactly paiallel, are the places in whidi r\f ^ 
Tendered iecauK nf. For example, Lulu) lix. 37, mUCi tU eu> vn^t rarSt !• i^ 
iinafam. John x. 33, rifi nuXiV l(yni ti Ai9i>!>/i!r fi. It signifies /er 4he lakt 4, 
in Mall. xxvi. SS, r> iHfii fuu ii tti(1 mXt^i Ixxori/um. Compaio Marli tit, ^(> i 
1 John IT. 10. (2.J With au accutalive, 71;! indicates the place nhicb any thing ■>'- 
roundi ; as in Matt. iil. 4, Cxi Z""" tffiaTnit iri;) nt orput miTiS, MuV ill. B, ■ 
«;) Ti!;ir, itil. >ETiiJ<»tn(. In a lemporal sense, it signifies abeitl ; as in Ad) x, ', 
rtfi Sfnj Iethi, idmul the ttxtk iom: So Matt xx. 3, 5, 6, 9, Mark vi. 48, Acts la. 
S, Hence, generally, abail, vnth reipecl Ib; as in 1 Tim. i. 19, vi^ rii, nVn l>a>' J 
aywat. Compare MofVit. 19, Lukex. 40,41, 1 Tim. vi. 4.21, 2 Tim. iH.B, 1^.117,7 

Oil. E. 'tri, properly under, has a /oe«/ reference, with (I.) affemlit<t,to tl 
proceeds jVain tenealk an object ; but in the Neir Testament it is used onljiii ib'l 
applied teane to express Ihe e^ciml or inilmmtnlal cmae, by which sny thing is 1^ I 
feeted; and, for the most part, afterverif paMitre,or new/crf in it/»i»i'iv seose. Thnvl 
in Malt. i. 22, tJ ^nSir fri r.: Eu,fw a 16, (.m/xSo ilirJ tS. fUy^,. iii. G, I^mcf I 
;«T« ^ oSrtS. Add Matt. iv. 1, viii. Z4, xvii. 12, Rom. xiii. 1, 2 Pet. iL 7. Cob- I 
pare Luciau. M.Feiegrin. 19,PhiloBtr. V. Apull. i. 38,Pulynn. v. 2. 15. A heiditim I 
might perhaps he given, though it is not neceHsary, in 2 Pet. i. 1 7, pmS$ iiiji;3u(W I 
tiirZ niitli iri rHi /ii'yii?LKrftrmi ti^t^. (2.) Lsca/ direction louiardi the unieff^m 
of an object is proptcly indicated by iri with an accusative ; as in MatL t, IS, ^rc I 

correctly, and but rarely in good writen, it marks a place of m/; as in MatkirS!, 1 
i^i -ni r*,k^ ^r£ KittitKmZf. iobai.49,Sm.iri'rnfnx'it tlii, ,,. Jnde6,i« 
^i^i TirKtn*'!- Compare Luciau D. D, viii. 2, Msof. Fab. xxxri. 3. By an tMfM 
traaiilion, it dsnotei lu^'eclioa; as in Malt viii. 9, itSfurit t!fu in i^Hv/ai, Ij^M 
tir' i/unT» R-^BTU'TS;. Rom. iii. 9, if^ i/utftlar iTim. vi. 14, *v }m; im in •i^ 
Si)A' iiri x't"- ^BB "'^o ^"''B "■■ ^> ^°'°- ''"■ 1^1 ^ ^"r- i'- ^i)' CbI- iii- 1% i3r i* 
2, 1 Tim. vi. 1. It is once used of lisir, ugnifying abaul, in Acts v. 2l, iri rii Vl 
9;», ninu/ dayhreak. CumpDie Jon. iv. 11, LXX, ,,3!lian, V. H, xitr. 37. So. i>V 
Latin, Liv. xivii. 15, Sub fucii arlum.^ 



'. 1. Of the other prepositions which govern three cases, aV?! 
p not used by the New Testament writers. It therefore re- 
Eiins to consider kn], irapa, and npis. 

'Et!, Bignifyiag primarily upM, aiuverB with (1) u fftmliv! to ibe qtieH- 
f It may be also rendered al or near. Thus in Mall. iv. G, itI ^ii^ui 
^li^rii-i. xxi. 19, Hi., taii:, ^Ix, l:ri T^t SiZ. xxvi. 12, ^;.>SF>'rJ ^>^« It! tsS r<^ 
^T.e. xivii. 19, .<(dx/>i»^A^.;;iTi T.;; jJii^T-K- in Mark xii. Sfi, Luke h. 37. 
iri rai ^Tsu sliuuld be rendered, (R (Ac p/iw Or ttnlitir, which Irtals of ikt lamitig 
huih. This WHS the usual mode ot Kabbinical citation, of which tliHe an otlier 
exsmjiles hi Mark ii. 2G, Kom, xi, S. With reference to lime, it indicutee an egioch 
al or Rear which an event took place; as io Matt. i. 11, ii-l the /iimxirUs SuliiiJMm, 
nt^al the lime of iKe Babgloman capliiiil^. Luke iv. 27, Ir! 'T.luritSii', in Ike lime of 
Elitha. See also Acta li. 28, Heb. 1.2; and compoie 3 Eidr. ii. IG.Arrion. Exp. 
iii. 73, Allan. V. H. xiii. 17. Hence the following applied lenies ace easily de- 
ducibte :— Uatl. ii. 22, ^urAtiu i<ri nc 'UataSa,, Tilgni over Judaa. Malt, xviii. IC, 
Irl rripjtrH Sm /ui^tu^i, upon Ike leilimmif. Joho it. 2, ra ni^ia, e Im'ii is-l th> 
■rSiwi, Miroc/n ivAicA he per/omud upon rAe ■lai. Acti vi. 3, ajf ittTarTrin^ir It! 
1-HC :t;;iiici Tsirrnii over Ikit buiiaeu. viii. 27, *i >j> it) rUt yiZ'Si o^ei Ihe treature, 
!. e. n Ireaiurer. (Compare Polyb. T. 72. 8, Died. Sic. xiil. 47, Heiodian. ii. 25.) 
Rom. i. 10, iri »> T^Wiir^"' /»■ itifi.tttt, \a iny prayers. 1 Cor. vi. 1, x{/ht3si iri 
•riir iiU^i, before heathen judgit. 2 Cor. vii. 14, n xiiiix,lTi i/ti-' n i'! Ti'tiu, my 
boailing over sr cancerning Tilui. Kev. xi. G, l^n'm i!x»vi< Iri »> u^ut, 'ever 
the Kaves. See also Matt, xzviii. 14, Maik xlii. -i. Acts xii. 20, xiiii. 3D, ixir. 19, 
uv. 9, 26, ixvi. 2, 2 Cor. siii. 1, Gal. iii. 16, Eph. iv. 6, 1 Tim. v. 19, vi. 13, Rer. 
ix.ll. Sometimes there is an aiSvertial lente; as in Mark xii. 3^, Acts x. 34, 
lir' ii;iii3ii'af, in tmiA, trvly. (2) The place upon which any thing rttlt is desig- 
nated by li-i with a lialivej as in Malt. xiv. 8, h'l fui Hi iiri rliiau Tn> iipji- 
Ail 'i^i„«,. xxiv. 33, iryi, Ifnv ixl 3i(~,, close at the door. Mark vi. 39, 
eIheiX/iei li-i T^ ^'frfi. It include! the iilea of hatlililg in Luke xii. 52, IroTm 
i-;u( In Ivr!, m) !m irl tjvi. Accuamlalion a sametimea ilgnified; a* in Matt. 
XXT. 20, <iUUi rin-i Tii;LA>ra Uiftnrs li/ ai-nli. Add Luke iii, 20, xv. 26, Eph. 
vi. le, Phil. ii. 27, Col. iii. 13, Heb. Tiii. 1 i and compare Xen. Cjr. iv. 5. 38, 
L.ticiaii, D. D. i. 3. In a general lense, it indicates the gnund or foundaiiaa, 
or the Bbjecl and furparl, of an action ; as in Matt. xix. 9, ii ii iwthirj tn> yvrtuitic 

^dfti : fur tehal purpoie are j/au tvmef Mark vi. 52, all yif rwnmit ItI riTc Sfrtit, 
in coniegueiice of the iniEBcle of the loaves. Acts ii. 3B, JhiTTirSRm XtX t» tii^iiTi 
'IWiS Xj*Ti5. 1X1. 3, wiiffvttit.%,lit\m Iri »^ "UfV '■* l'»i''i'i^rii, frtm canjidtnce in 
rie Lorrf. This is particularly the case afrer vetlis of rejaieing, grieving, and others 
denoting any mcnlo/ emotion i as in Matt, xviii. 13, x*'V '■*' "^f- Mark iii. S, 
■vAXinriil/iiKt l<r; 1^ n^ni >ia;3;BE a^T^F. See also } 47. 3. Oil. 11, It is also 
used to express a CBnStion or ilipti/alian ; as in 1 Cor. ix. 10, It' Ua-/3i ifiilii I i(t- 
■Tfrnt ifrrfi^t, under the hope of a harvest. Compare Diod. Sic. ii. 25, Lucian, D. 
D. L 4, I^ltyb. i, 59. 7. In defiaiticus of lime it iodieales a cimlinaeil ot repealed 
set i OS in John iv. 27, Iwi rtirv, u> Ihe mean iime. 2 Cur. iii. 14, W. th iny^u 
tS[ iTB].ai!( iiaSvaiM, ('un'n; or al Ihe reading, Phil. i. 3, Irl lirtf i^ fuila i^, 
la every remembrmte, i. e. loAerttver I remtmber gov. Sometimes it must ba ren. 
dered afler ; SB in Acfs xl, 19, iri Zrifa'tf, a/ler the death of Stephen. Ileb. ix. 17 


MViaji. V. H. ». 5. (1) With BO « 
MfHio or foiiHir'ri an uLJect; ai in Halt, ii 
itmnXiSmai Iri ran XffrtM. Luke iv. 23 

with verlw of rot, the idea, of maliaii ia Iraijuently included ; as in JoLd i. 32, n 
/in^H' I^uiiiir'atTiV. CombiaitiK a Doliaa athmlUilg, it Bhoultl be rendered ly 
us in Mntt. x. 21, iir»ii#nr»T>i thw Is-i r»U(. Compare Luke xii. 53. ti 
generally, it iobeIu the end at olijecl, loumrdi which any atiton oi /teliiig is dindrL I 
Thus in Motl. iii. 7, i(x>i<^"n '"' *^ iirr<rft» ■!««, ii> arifcr fa receiva Ait 
xiv. 14, lr*':U(>;t:n'r3ii !«■' avTiiir, ir had coaipatiiim upon Ihewt. Matk iic 12, t^ki* J 
rai 1« fit iiii, nS >>3(^r«v wiVi rtftraici It Ike Sun of Man- That, too, oi 
power ii exerdied, ia marked bj irl with un aeeiriaiivc ; at id Slalt xn.SI, Ul 
i;C}w Ii rirrif. Luke xii. 1 4, n'l ^i HT>«-if i Jiuvni n ^i;iir«i> i^' i/^i : 2 ThB>-a 
ii. 4, infMi(ifum i<ri rami Ktyi/Htti Siii * fi',3u'/u. Compare £xod, ii. 19, .' 
Flat. Tim. p. 336, Diod. Sic. i. 91. Of lime it msrkl the space over which an 
eztvndi ituir. Thus in Luhs i*. 25, UXiirSw i •^fani kr* IVn t^b w ^ 
So in Luke xviii. 4, Ads »iii. 31, xi. 11. «»iii. 6, 1 Cor. viL 39, Hob. i 
Compare Puljrb. i. 39. 13, iv, 63. 8. The fofms l.l Tflt. Ihrice, in Acta i. It 
It! mxi, /or a /ony xAi/f, in Aels XKviii. 6, are analogous. Sometimes, man IA- 
nilively, ai in Mark »V. 1, i«; i-i s-™', in the mormiig. Acta is, 3, ia-J rii >%>, x 
Ihr mornu'.' 

Obi. 2. Un;!, n/ orTVom, (1) vben constnied with a. genilhie, has a locul nlit' 
ence to the <>inn>fy trom which an object cnmes; oa in Mark xiv. 43, a«^}^u«- 
'louliti n(i »• ifxiifitn, Compuio Mark xii. 2, Luke viii. 49. Ileoce it demla 
Iho origin or •ow™ of aa;/ lAing ; as in Juhn i. 6.*ir« i*i,r«\~iM( r.^ Bui 
Acb xniL 30. t/ iiToyituru n;x »> 'imiuHt. Su Matt. ni. 42, Luke ii. 1, Hois, 
xi. 27, Aelivii. 16. 2Tioi.i. IS. More paiticulatly it decoles the wurce liuni ■hKh 
information is derived, and is therefore employed after verbs of in^'rin^ Aanij, 
Itl/hig, &t. Thus in Matt. ii. 4, irutAinr. wt(' a^i^r, Hark viii. 11, fm^ 
«■«{■ iLbriU n/tun. Phil. iy. 18, hi^fuw "{' 'E«^(.I,V.i, ra rag' i^,. Sea f JU 
G. This lost passage nffurds an Enamjile of another cognate sense, iu which Iblt' 
preposition iadicates that which is cannecltd with, oi 
above formula lu wa^i rmi, the batmen or prnptrly 
euline, si' ri^i rms, one's nnnfj^ioni or kiiumia, in Mark iii. 21. It will be 
served that iu the New Testament, as well as in other prose writings, 
usually pceilxed Id the names of aoimaled eiisteaees. (2.) Wiih %, dali 
denotes ahsciule praxiaiili/, and is to be leudeted icilk, at, or near. Thus I 
xiii. 2S, ijiiiii ra(' ii«7( ixrii ih\^t>, /ienig taUh ui, or, in our aeighhourhood. J«lu 
xix. ZA, iinmiru ircfa rf rTavfS. Acts ix. 43, ^rroj vrtfii vix x!/ta,n, 1 Ox. ni. 
2, nSim <r>>' iavT^, itf Aunr. Compare Lucian, D. D, xxvi. 3. Frequently K n 
applied in a IrapiaU Sense ; as iu Matt, xix. IG, rufa stS^nif reUrt ■}»•» vn 
TOfii 31 01^ Txrrs iin«T(i im. Luke i. 30, iZfii x^" ff^ » Bi^. So in Luku ii. 
S2, Rum. ii. II, el a/ihi. In similar ex]ireBiiuns it may iDDietiiiies be rendeial h- 
firre, i. e. in the prcKnee of, oi in the jwigmeat ofi OS in Rom. xi. 2o, ru* iavnTclpi- 
>vui. I Cor.iii.l9,Ar,ji,Tj5M»|»»,^(i«m.{<jTf Bi^ iM-,, See bIm Luke 
i. 37, I Coc. vii. 24, 2 Pet. ii. 11, iii. 8. (3.) Beibre an aceusaHvz, wa^ iaaicitn 
motion bgihe lule, aUng, or ia lie oidiiil) nf a place ; as in Mutt, i v. 13, ri;.nw 
tr'^ii riii Bii>:^trat. Luke viii. 41, iri»» Ts;a rali riiai. It is ulso used alteiKrlit 
uf ••ell, an idi^a uf mo/tun being in some surt included; as in IVIatt. xiii. 1, i^Ulm 
li^3nT> ri^i ti, SdXMm. See also Matt. liii. 4, xr. 3U, xviii. 29, Mark ii. 13, ir. 

Alt, Gram. N. T. J 81, 1. Wetateia Bod Kjiik* 





Lufte V. I, 2, »iii. 5, Arts i». 35, v. 2, 10, From the notion ot pamwg iy or n/u-.ff, 
certain ileiived senses. It is used, for in!,taniw, wlitu uiiu thin); in 
tfared to, or nirpBSses, another; as in Luke »iii. 2, 4, i/aajniVipi TitfB irayTat. 
L 25, UifTfiiira. TiF JcTi'rii r^i ts> iTr'r.rra. Su Rom. xii. 3, lir. 3, HeU. i. 9. 
i its LUG after i;onipB.ratiTes ; is in Luke iii. 13, ^gKi ir),i» rK(a ti imnrxy 
i/^7, riitriTL. AddHeb. i.4,ii. 7, iii. 3, xii. 24; and see } 4.1.3. It ulni Mg- 
btiide or except; as in 1 Cor. iii. II, 3i/ti*i« yif S>.».tt »J}i« )«««. Sir™ 
iiHt. 2 Cor. zi. 34, Tiera^iium fa^i /iiat, Ihirlg-mne. Litiuwite 
: as in Acti xviii. 13, ra^i rii >i^>, amtrory tu Iht lean. Compare 
'. I8,3ii.2J, it). 17, 6al.i. S. Heb. xi, 11. In 1 Cor. iii. IG, 17, ™;i 
ignifies therefore, i. e. by the tide of IhU circumilance, or a/on^ uiVA (hii cir- 
nee. Compare PlutBrch, V. Ciimilt. 28.' 

3. XlfiF, 'o, kii/d, indicates that nhieli [noiteedi /ram one pluce tv another; 
hence with (1.) a ^mi'Ii'i'e, it frequently dcnoti^E that which ii of advanlnge lo 
'at I ss, for iaatance, in the phrase rfii rnu Him, lo be ef advoKlage lo any one. 
Herod, i. 75, Thucyd, iii. 18, it. S20. It occurs with this case once unly 
laghoul the New Testament, in Acts ixvii. 34, nm yi( '{ir iHs ifUTi(xs Tim- 
vif^u. (2.) With a dalive it signifin al or near; as in John xsiiL IS, .Irri- 
i« TH Biff, xic, 12, Siu(u iia iyyit.ivt, tta <r;i; t^ Kifa>,^, kbi Kra ir;ii tut 
Rev. i. 13, Tijii^wr^iiay ir^t Ti7r /txrcCs X^m xi'"'- (^"'I'ace Xeo. Cyr. 
17, Polyb. i. SO. 1. It follows a verb ol' v«lio« in Luke xix. 37, lyyi^nrM 11 
i<h r(is Tfl iiETii^ru Tti l^ivs. Perhaps it should be rendered, At he drea 
the city, btiag at Ike faot of llie mount. Another reading is ritt xxrillariu 
.} The primoiy impDit of t;<i appears in irs conKlruction with Ba accnm/itiEr,- as 
Malt. iii. S| i%nrafiii'ri trfii xbrit. JohnxK. 10, Bin>.Si> <-;•( iaiirtii, lo Ihtir own 
1 Thesa. ii. 6, USJtTti «•;» fl>ci!,- sf' u^h>. In its various gecomlnty appli- 
this direclintal meaning is easily sppiLrent, as when it follows verbs of tpeat- 
jmyaig, promidng, contenting, conlendiag, &c. Thus in Matt. iii. 19, iirt rfit 
Mark IT. 4l,lXi)i» v;j{ ii.i.i>,in. viii. 16, iii\ty!ZstTi 9^is iLXXii-anf. Liiku 
isri *;» '\^xk/t T« intrifs «fui>. XVlii, 7, ^trki rfii bCtii, John V- 4S, 
iru i^St rgi, tii Tvriga. Acts viii. 24, hiSnn <r;>i Tt> (i>;ii>. xii. 21, iJir- 
[■yifsi <Tfsc liriiic. xxiii. 22, teuts lu^iifSF vf'c /«. It also designates the cm' 
ebjecl towards which an action is directed ; as in Acts iii. ID. i a-;it tai Ikm/tiri- 
■.a^lUMt. 1 Cor. K. 11, iy^n 7;>i i>g>;9i.r><i> n/iHt. That which is of concern 
imporloHce to any oue is so indicated; as in tho expiesaion, r! Tfii k/iXi ; ^l^lialil 
Ht T See Matt, xxiii. 4, John xxi. 22, 23 ; and campare Polyb. v. 36. 6, Diod. 
72. HenCD snch periphraitt as those in Lnke xix. 32, ti nfii iif«nrr, lAingi 
tohicA lenH la peace, i. e. peace itself. Acts xxviii. ID, ri rfii n> xt'""! necenariti. 
hlivt tabilonlieei aod ailjeclivet it is constantly used in its appropiiate sigDificaliunj 
SB in Luke xxiii. 12, li I^Sgf Atu tfi, Ix^Tii,. Jolin iv. 35, Aitta,' ir;Jt Sfv/tn. 
xi. 4, irSir.™ *j='t 9rf«T». 'Add Acts ix. !?, «iii. 31, svii, 15, xxir. 16, Rom. ir. 2, 
V. 1, 1 Cor. Ti. I, 2 Cor. Tii. 4. In some of thcsa places the prepOBitlon may be 
itaiti^ in reiptcl lo I and it has a comparative import in It um. viii. IS, »;< n^ 
■ri itsAiiiMn nS >v> *■<;» 7{ii rh' /liUjivitt li^i sma\uf9ii>ai lit i/iSi. Compare 
Xen.Anab. iv. 5. 21, vii. 7. 24, Mem.i, 2. J2, PUt. Hipp. M. 2. It also some- 
times impliei a motive, as in Matt. xix. 8, rfii nr MJ-BfjiujIi'i" u^fi, ivilh rrferenct 
lo, or berauie nf, goar hardneu of heart. In definitions of lime it signifies loiearJi^ 
as in Luke Siiv. 29, r^is [rri^tti irri, A period ut bhort duiatiun is indicated liy 
the phrase ir[« »){i., or T(it ifir, which occurs in Luke viii. 13, John v. 13, Gal. 
ii. fi, el alibi. There ate occasional inslanceB in which a-jii is found with an accu- 

Win«, 55 51,b.52, d. 53, g. Alt, }31,3. Huindort ad Plat. Phted. p. 216. 
Bchsfer ad Uion. Hal. p. 117. 

M/i» afr«t vetbi implying red ; but Iho idea of moljon ia geiUraUf, niaii|>fcn| 
iilwaj*, incliidtd; as ia Mstl. iii, 10, H- U »i n ^'t* r^S, ri, f!Z'' rZ, luV »« 
Cuai|iare Matt. ziii. se, ixvi. IS. S.i, lUaik it. I, ix. 10, Luke xsii. 56, Aelg>. Ilf 
t Car. xti. 6, 7, ID, and elianhere. So Diod. Sic. i. 77, Oioff. L. i. 37.' 

Ott. 4. Although seretal of the prrf«$itiaii; in theit priroaiy BigniEettioui 
«x(ireuiideMiiiitTeT]fdiatiiiet from each other; stiU the difFereacB ia intEciMlf 
perceplibU to rendBc tba iovestigatioa of their vaiiotu relations > desir&ble purmb 
Tliiia thu torn prrpeiiliaiu, which more directly eipress (he general idea of molial 
/rom a place, Atri, U, raf^ and urt, and which are ecmsequeiitly coiiitnieted nW 
a genilivt, exhibit that idea in different poiala o€ coanecion. It hu bun ma 
that iri should mark tha lepaiation of one object ftocu another upon which il \if, 
or tpilh which it was in coalact ; whereas i* denotes egress from trtHan, e^ 
cemoTBl ftom ^ near proximily, and Sri erection from bmeath. A ntareraka 
iiiJrna/r noion haa aUo been shown (n call fDrlhe iiae of ^rut sad >v> re^acbnl^ 
It ii uut to be imagined howevur tbat these Diceties were always acmotflf 
ubteiveil, aaJ, from the peculiar posilioa and charocler of tfae New Teslanol 
wiitera. it might be expected that tbey would not only multiply the lue of piqno* 
lioDi with a view lo eniure peTBpicuity uf expression, but eniiptoy them ti^nt 
any ilrict regard to their more intricate Bhmlea of meaning, mace especially lb* 
derived ones. The miaute distinctiou between ir;i[ and tU ia constantly onfi 
looked by the best writcn; and tbey aie octusUy interchanged in FUlem. 1^ 

iyius. See also 1 llieu. ii. G; and compare I'ausan, vii. C. 1, Arrian. Atex.ii.U| 
Diod. Sic. Vi 3D. Little, therefore, will it excite luiprise, that ditleientpreponluM 
are employed by different writers in the same sense. Thoa Iri niMaiBtlilt 
sxif. 16, is parallel with i>f ra S;ii in Mark xiii. 14: and kT^m «i^ ri).i^ !•£> 
n^iMi in Malt. xivl. ZS, with rJ vtnfw « uiri^ luSt Ux;*t^trm, Semetintt 
ttfrain, the same preposition is employed, but with a different cose. Ulna ia Xilli 
xiiv. 2, ti ft>< ipi3f lU >.I9h M XiSo, which is in Mack liii. 2, I.-; 3.;9y. Bnibl 
Ret. xi». D i and compare Gen. ilii. 26, Exod. viii. 3, »ii, 7, LXX, Diog. L. it. S,i 
Nor, indei-d, is it alwnjB material which case is employed. In the Above tyitirl^ 
for inatance, both UI xiSf and Wi XlSn are equally correct; but the idea, which 
should popecly be presented to the mind hy the former ia llint of one stone ^liy # 
reil upon another, whereas the latter aiiggests the notion of one stone pjaeed f* 

0U.5. The adoerhial use of prepmilioaa in the New Testament is vrrynih 
It has already been seen that iti is once so uaed ; besides which onotlier cxamfll 
oeeur« in 2 Cor. si. 23, Si^»h. Xjm^ i.V, ; i,i; iyi. To complete the ioua) 
bowevei, %Mxiaiit may be coniidered aa understood. Here also it may be remsriul 
that pripotiliotit are often uaed before adrerbi ss if Ihey were nount, oTCOOilnBet 
with them into one word, so aa to regnlale or qualify their import. Thus we bin 
in Matt. iv. 17, ivi rin. v. 32, ncfinri,- xxiii. 39, J^ S(ri, Acts i. 16, Iti ^ 
xxviii. 23, j<ri o^i^. Rom, vi. 10, if^r*^ 2 Cor. viii. 1 0, jW <ri;Kr.. xi.5,J»Xte 
2 Pet. ii. 3, ifxraXi/. So in 1 Sam. xii. ^0, LXX, «ri SrirAt: Sea also Matt. ' 
21, xxvi. 64, John i. 52, Acts xxvi. 29, 2 Cor. ix. S, xii. 11, 2 Pet. iii. S. Of 
same nature aie •■( Hfri in Malt. xi. 12, and Sftm a-^I in Matt. xx. 1. Such 
preisioDS, however, ere rarely met with, except in the later Greek. An odtcAilt 
import is also fieqaently annexed to a prepoiiitiun with its case- Several cxantnltl 
have been already given in tlie preceJiug sections ; lo nliicli may be added 

' Winer,^ 51, f. 52, e. 53, h. Alt, J 81. 5. Lobeik ad Pliryn. p. 10. 
on Acts xxvii. 3-1. Passov. Lex. in v. 
' Winer, jr)4. 1,2, 3. 

XXiu 42, a, is iiivljHi, U Tf'iTui. Acts xix. 20, ^ttri ufirn. Rom. vii. 13, u9' 

" 2Cor.»m.l3,IE,V.VBT.i. Kph. iii. 20, ;,i( 1, fie,»«S(wliicli bItom 
iiiLder the pieceiling cxomplcs.) 1 Thesi. iii. b, i.V xiiii. Heb. vil. 12, i£ xn^iii;.' 
iposilion with vcrii, prepotiiiana are always uiad adccrhial/y, to tn 
to qiulifjr in some Boit the mcuiing uf the simple verb, by the adtlitiun of some 
titcuaiiUntBi o! lime, place, criter, inltmilff, ai oihemise. These various lelatiuna 
and madifiuUoiis are, or ought to be, explained in the Xjnicon. With respect to the 
goveiameDt of compotuid i«rb&, it is to be obieired that Ihe; are frequently falluwed 
(ij the case Kquired by the prepasitioa with which thej are compounded. Thus a 
^■iliEe is put after verbs eompDunded with ifrg and i*, Matt.x.l4, lZ!(x,i/n"i rts 
Luke xiti. 12, ■I't^.ixwrai ni liiScnUt em. ACtec vetbs compounded irith 
bi, rfit. and tin, a dalice is put ; aa in Malt, xix, 5, ir^grtiULiiSflriTii i^ yotxai!. 
Hark liv. 3!, <,^xx>i^,^ .„. Luke i. 35, inrmin, ,«. XT. 2, nneaL, ai^rM. 
Those wmpounded with a-i;i take «n accuialive : as in Matt. iv. 23, ■rifisyit %i.r:i 
viitTafjijiUii,t. Luke ii.9, m^^aii-^tt aitsii. Eumetimes ths prcjuonVion is repealed 
before the gorerneil doud, particularly ^iri, uVj in, ItI, and 9fic. Malt.rii. 23, i.<ri- 
■"5, unt^irr, iJ( K«!rif.«i.>. xx»i, 39, iirin, W) a-fwinr. 
Uaik (. 7, T^afHU-nSiInTXi irfit vil' ywiuitB suriu. xiv. 43, trs^n^iviTiii ■xm^A twi 
l!(XII^iH>. Luke i. 76, v^rg;il!r>i ir;i i-forsJirai; airoi;. vL 1, S/anjiiiirSai Siii ™> tvr- 
^/iBi, CoLii. 13, ruti^ugruVt ri<> »t^. Instead uf repeating the same prr/KwiViifn, 
anolhtr of similar import is often emplnyed; iLs in Slatt, vij. 4, jfii ii/3ij^k ti 
riZ ilfdnX/tii. Xir. 19, diu^iijrli; ii'f Ti> lirjicri*. iviL 3,/<it' uiriu ^nX- 
M&rk iii. 13, sHf^aw i.'f ri iJK. xV. 46, <-;iriHf)^> A.'S» I<t1 t^. Sii^st. 
Bee also Luke vi. 34, xix. i, John xv. 2&, Acts xvii. 23, 1 Cor. ivi. 7, 2 Cor. viit. 
18,Phil. i, 2J, I'Hm.i. 3, 1 Pel. iii. II. It wiU be readily observable, however, 
that these diSerent couBlrudions are cot always equivalent. Some of them may 
indeed be regarded as fixed idioms; as, fur instance, that of iiirfirrii with a simple 
geoilive, and of i,'c after verbs compounded with that pniposition. The single 
exception in Acts iiii. 2, is peculiar. It sometimes even happens that a coustruc- 
oppoaiie to IhKt indicated by the verb may be necessary ; either viilA or n'ilhout 
a preposition. Thus in Mark iii. 16, itifin aVt 711' ii'Wc. Luke x. 11, rii umijiir 
';^i9s i/i:,. Acts lui. 4, ^•rii-Aiivai .;,- -ri,, Ki:<r;», Sca also Luke ix. 54, 
John vi. 31, Acts xiv. 26, xx. 15, xivii. 1, Rom. vi. 2, 10, GaL ii. 19. In such 
the direct object of the verb is wanting ; but it is sometimes expressed ; as 
In Luke ii. 4, iwilin ira ryis TnkiTjiiits ili i-nr 'liaixi'ar, Somelimes the import of the 
pieposition is suok, and the compound governs the case oE the simple verb ; as in 
S Cor. u. 33, iiifiiyn rrit x^e^f li^S. Compare Lake ix. 34, Acts xvi. 4.' 

Obi.7. A prepaiilitia is sometimes seporated from its case; but chiefly by the 
particle Ji. Thus in Matt. iii. 1, It 9i tiTc iftifr.,i Uilrius, Luke i. 24, ^sra !i t'^u'tx; 

Obi. 8, It is usual to repeat the prepotiiitm before two or more nouns in the 

me case, when a distiuct idea ii expressed by each ; as iu Lake xiiv. 27, i^ifuns 

ri Murivc xiu dvi rirrm rir x-fif i|»i. It is the same whore four terms are 

lited in two bands ; as in Lnka liii. 29, Sliurit dri dutnlJii xa) lns/cSt, xai liW 

fhff' ■*' 'ifou. More particularly when ilxI is repeated with each nouo, or when 

n ul couples them; as in Acts xlvl. 29, *ie1 ir i>.iyf titi !• rsXX^. Compare 

Aristot. Eth. Nicom.iv. 1, vli. 4, Diod. Sic. xix. 8e,xx. 15, Pauiau, iv. 1). 2. Also 

' Winer, J 54, 06«. I, 2. and {53, Alt, Oram. N, T. 5 83, B. Lohock ad Phryu, 
. 45. auq. Stun, de Dial. Maced. et Alexamlr. pp. 209 stiq. 
' ■"■ ■, i 56. Alt, Gram. N. T. } 76. Tiltmann de vi I'nepp. in rerh. comp. in 
,. „. .. ,. u .. j„ |^_^., paaia,^ Stallhaura 


when coonecfeil by the di*Jtmetiv€ particles 1} or mXXtL Ads Tin, 34^ rt^i Ufrw, 
fs flTf^i \rtptv ri¥9si Rom. iv. 10^ irSf tZv iXtyi^Bni iv m^t^ft^ itrtf n fv in^t^'i*] 
§VK IV iri^tTtfA%i axx* U ax($^verm. See also 1 Cor. xiv. 6, 2 Cor. ix. 7, 12; 
1 Thess. i. 5, 8 ; and compare Paiitan. Tii. 10. 1, Aleiphr. i. 31. At fhe same tine 
the rule is not strictly followed ; but^ where the objects are perfectly distinct, tbe 
prepoiiition is not uniformly repeated. Thus io Luke zzi. 26, •a'«^f»;^«W«w tn^fiw 
KV§ ^ifiou »mi rfsf^KMf vSv iirt^tft^ttif rjf •lM§»fM9ifm John iv. 23^ ifitnofm^nd 
«Xif3i/f. Actsxxvi. 18, Wi^vfl^mt kvi ^»ir»vt iJf ^f, xm) Tiif V^tt^MS rwJannvn 
rifStiv, See also Acts Tii. 38 ; and compare Aristot. £tb. Nie. tIL 11.1, x. 9.1, 
Diod. Sic V. 31, Diog. L. procsm. 6, Strabon. zwi. 776. D, Chrysosi. xxiii. p. 277. 
It is also to be obsenred that the prepontion is seldom xqpeated before a rtkm^ 
which is in the same case with its aniecedtnt* Thus in Lnke i. 25, iv n/Uffusi ms in- 
'hv ». r. X. So Acts xiii. 2, 39. Compare Xen. Anab. ▼. 7. 17, Cout. iv. 1, Flit 
Legg. ii. 5, x. 15, xii. 7, Phsd. 21, Pansan. iz. 39. 4, Dim. Hal. L 69. There m 
a few cases where the prepontitm is repeated ; as iu John \w, 53, U i«fivii f^*^ 
iv n iTtiv. Acts vii. 4, Hf tni* yn* rmvrwt t*s ^ vf^ut »v» »«9'M»i7rf. So Demosth.idT. 
Timoth. p. 705, B, Iv rtts xt^***Si ^^ "^f yiy^tiitTM ». r. X. See also Aristot. H.Ad. 
V. 30, Diog. I>. viii. 2. 11. In the Ghreek classics the preposition is seldom lepetted 
in comparisons with ms or JHfin^, but in the New Testament always ; as in Acts xL 
15, Iff'i«rt0't r« mtvfjM ri Hyuv Iw^ mirwt, aifirt^ tuu \^* hftSit It &^x^ ^ ^ ^*^' ^' 
19, 2 Cor. viii. 7, Gal. iii. 16, Philem. 14, Heb. iv. 10. The case insomevhit 
different in Phil. ii. 22, itt *mr^ tUmv, ^vv \fUt VUiXut^kt?- 

Obt» 9. It frequently happens that the same preposition is employed with a 
different case, and in a different sense, in the same sentence ; as in Heb. iL 10, V 
0v ra irttfTitf xet) ^i* oZ ret ir»fT«, on account of wohom, and by whom, are ail thagt. 
Of a like nature is Heb. xi. 29, Itifin^ei* rtiv l^u^^kv ^dXtta-^mif, tig 2m IfifUs* On tbe 
other hand, a different preposition accompanies the same noun in order to express 
a different relation ; as in Rom. iii. 22, hiuturvfti Smu 2ui vUtu*s 'ifio'av X«imv ui 
^eivTus xa) W* 9reivra.( rovf inartvotrms, xi. 36, l^ al/rou x»s 3/ murav, xmi tig «v7*f rk 
^dura,. Gal. i. 1, aireirr okof «ux k^ avB^Mirut, «uVt ^/ at^f^irou. See also 1 Cor. Tiii. 
6, xii. 8, '2 Cor. iii. 1 1, Eph. iv. 6, Col. i. 16, 2 Pet. iii. 5. The same mode uf ex- 
pression is also found in classical Greek ; particularly in the later writers. Thus ia 
Ileliod, ii. 25, ^^o vravretf xtu XtI ^a^n. Philostr. V. ApoU. iii. 25, 4-0^; i*-) ^atXirx} 
rt xeu iv SftXcrrff. Acta Ignat. ^/ oZ xcu fbiS* oS rajf ^arpi n Sd^M.' 

^m,— Of the Negative Particles. (Buttm. § 148.) 

1. Of the two simple negative particles, ov and ptri, the 
former conveys a direct and absolute denial ; the latter that 
which is merely mental or conditional. Accordingly ov is 
used : — 

1. With single verbs, substantives, or adjectives, which, 
with the negative, form only one idea, and that very 
frequently directly opposite to the import of the word 
itself. Thus in Matt. xxiv. 22, ou Troiaa <Tut^|, 710 Jlesh; 

^ Winer, § 54 
247. Ast ad Plat 
Herm. ad Vig. p. 854. 

* Winer, 6 54. 1, 6. 

, 7. Stallbaum ad Plat. Sympos. p. 104, ad Gorp. pp. 38. 112. 
t. Legg. ii. 5. Schacfer ad Dion, de Comp. y. p. 325, Melet. p. 124- 


Liilic XV. 13, //et' o^ waXiaf vipiipas, iifler n few drnjs ; 
x\i. 9, otit Eu&e'wf, at a dUtavt period ; Acls xvii. 4, 12, 
oi^K oXi'yoi, many; xix. 35, ou yituoxci, is ignorant ; xx. 
12, D^ lAer^'utis, exceedingly; Rom. i, 13, ou &e'Xu, I am 
mwillmg. See also Gal. iv. 27, Eph. v. 4, Hcb. xi. 
35, 1 Pet. i. 8, et alibi. Here also belongs the citation 
from Deut. sxxii. 21, in Rom. x. 19, iyi!i vaqa^-nKaiaai 
i>lAas ITT DUX e&vti. Compare Rom. ix, "25, 1 Pet. ii. 10. 

2. In propositions, where any thing is directly denied ; 
as in Matt. v. 16, oix ^X&qv xaraXutrai. xiii. 28, ^i^eit 
oZv aOTEXSovTEf CTuXXe'laifAEv aiiTa ; o Se eipn, Ov. xxi. 27, 
eiirov, oiJk oVSafiEv. John i. 21, mpurviaay aurov, 'HXi'ai ei" 
iTu; Kai X-Eyei, Oux tif*/. 'O ^^oipi^TJii ei du; xai airex^i'Sii, 
Oi5. This is the case, where the negation is positive, 
even in conditional sentences ; as in 1 Cor. ii. 8, il yag 

tyvwo-av, ovK av Toy xipiov trif So£i)i Esrai/JWiTav. 

3. In tho sermo ohliquiis, and when on is used with a finite 
verb, as after verbs implying hiowledge, bell-f, &c., ou 
is still used, where the statement involves a direct 
negation; as in Matt. xvi. 11, ■jrij au nHri,oTt au^f^l 
aprau eTttuv vixTt i Lllhe viii. 47, iSouD-a Ii vi yuori on ouk 
eJlB&e. John iv. 17, Ka\us sTvaS, on avSpas ovK ix^- '"■ 
31, aiSa«.EV 8ti apmq^ciXSJv o @elt ova auoi/Ei. Acts xxvi. 
26, Xav&avEn 7*/= *^tov ti rojrtjv ai '^nih'^ oJSe'v. Tlie 
usage, however, in these cases is somewhat arbitrary ; 
since the proposition may generally be treated as a 
mental conception. Thus in Acts xsv. 24, ewi^o£vtc( 
(xt) Scrv ^y<i a^Tsv fXflxSTi. 

On the other hand, y,i5 is used in all independent sen- 
tences, containing a wish, prohibilion, petition, or the like, 
with an imperative, conjunctive, or optative. Thus in Matt, 
i. 20, $o|3n3'^i. V, 17, f*^ tajAiafiTt on ^X&ov KaraXtJirai tov 
vof*ov. vi. 19, /xs) Snoai'/ji^eTE JfiTv Srnraygoii iwi TTjf ynf- Mark 
id. 14, pirixETi EX SDU Ei( Tcv siaJva fxnSeis' xa^^sv f sfyoi. Luke xx. 
16, ii.71 yi-HUTo. Acts i. 20, fAn eutw 5 xaToixaJv ev aurii. Rom. xiv. 
,16, ij.n ^'Ka.iTipniJ.ita^iii o?v iiftZt to aya5ov. Sometimes the verb 
is not expressed, as in John xiii. 9, Kfi/>i6, piw Taut woSaf m.w 
ir, sell. n'-J-vjf. Compare Eph. v. 15, Col. iii. 2, James i. 22, 
et alibi. It is not used in probitions with ?\. future indicative 
in the New Testament. 


tribute in ■ peiilive, and tho Uttar 

. Hi*- 

■■ fV* 

I simply ilCDies the belii!T»t*ii IJuliility to eondetnaattoii ; whereas I fH Ttmin 
iiidlcatM ■ ivppOKi, nut a dtfimlt, iDdiridiia.!, and jun «niirirs»«ii reftn to liu 
lusuDied cause of his condemiiatioa. At the same time >u nrSrnintu would biie 
been equally conecl ; since, admitting the sappottd Tact to he tiue, the caun 
might be poBitirely slated, and so it is iu 1 John y. 10, S /in nimij^t t£ 6ii, ^:>n'i 
rmliwiT aMi, Sri ti wi<rixriBitt< a. r. X. Tho twa pOTticlea ace rrequently Ihua uoM 
in the later writers, ami nut always viUi the distinction accurately ptAdieil. Sm 
LueLan. Tjran, 15, D. M. xvL 2, Adv. indoct. 5. Slraho ili. 138. xr. 712, Wu- 
torch. Apopth. p. 183, Scxl. Empir. Hypotyp. iii. 1, 3, Adr. Math. i. 3, 68, ii. R 
nimer. Ont. zxiii. IS, Agatb. ii. 23, JoMph. AnL xti. 9. 3. 

3. Since a conception of the mind is implied in tlieiiseof 
the particle ij.v, it ia properly found in the following construt- 
tiona :' — 

o. After the causal particles "va, Swwi, &c, Matf. vi. 18, 
onus li'fi ^av^f X. T. X. Acts XX. 16, ofrajr [A,ri •ycwrai avra 
Xgovor/ii^wai. Rom. vii. 25, "va: /xn ym ^roig' ixuroit Ipqiiiijjit. 
XV. 20, "m friM iw' ahkirpinv &=M,tXiov otjcoSDwaJ. 2 Cor. ill. 5, 
Utrrs (ATI Swaa&ai x. t. ?,,. See also Luke viii, 10, 1 Cor- 
i. 17, ii. 5, iv. 6, 2 Cor. ii. 3, 5, 1 1, iv. 7, et alibi. Of, after verbs of fearing, see § 56. 2. 06j. 5. 

U I 

i. As a simple interrogative particle, where a negative 
reply is anticipated ; as in Matt. vii. ^,(i.-r> Jj^gy iirilan' 
auT^ ; IiuliC xvii. 9, /xn X"'/"* 'X^' '''? SotJ^ti Ixeivm ; «) 
SaKw. >See also Matt. ix. 15, Mark ii. 19, iv. .21, John 
iii. 4, iv. 12, 33, vii. 35, Acts x. 47, Rom. iii. 3, 5, xi. I. 
Where an afGrmatlve reply is expected, oj or oukiU 
used ; as in Matt. vii. 22, ou rSi aSi SvopiatTt wgoE(p«"v- 
aa/jL^v; Add Matt, v, 26, xiii. 27, Luke xii. 6, James 
ji. 5, Sometimes ou is found, where u.i might perhaps 
he expected ; as in Acta xxi. 38. So also in Luke xvij. 
18, which should doubtless be read interrogatively. Both 
particles have their appropriate import in Luke vi. 39, 
(i-riri ^i/va-rat rufXhs Ti/^Xov oSnyi's'' ; ou'x' a/ipoTs^oi ei* /Jo- 
3t/vov wemvvTai. By ou t/,ii the negative is strengthened, 
and involves in fact an energetic affirmative ; aa in Luke 
XVlli. 7, 5 Se ©eor ou /^^ stdi'Mo-ei ttSv ekSijhiiiv twv Ix^Exrari 

; John xviii. 11, 

p ^oT-np'OV, 

S S^S^; 

; Compare Matt. xxvi. 29. When (*n m 

' Winer, J^ 59, 1— ;. Cl, 3. AH, Gram. N. T. 5 B3, 1. 84, 2. Anton. Prop- it 
diacrim. pactt. ,1, et ni. Sthsfer. Mvlut. Cr. pp. 71. 91. Stallbaiun ad Plat. 
Phceil. pp. 43. 144. Hermann, ad Saph. a:d. T. Sl>S. Aj, 76. ScheeTur ad Demoilh. 
in sUv. Ix. Fiitiiche ad Mutt. ilw. 41, Tmbox . ■Lei..\i\ii .i. « y.i. 

are used, tlic former alono is intcrrogativr, and llic 
latlcr belongs to tlie verb; as in Itom. x. 18, U), jaii 
oux jjxoiwav ; (An duk 'iyvia 'la^a.-n'K; Add 1 Cor. ix. 4, 5, 
xi. 2d ; and compare Judg. xiv, 3, Jerem, vHi. 4, LXX, 
Ignat. Ep. ad Trail. 5. 

c. After the conditional particles ei, tav, whence ei ^^, 
except. Thus in Matt. v. 20, iav fj.ii •xspiso'ttia-^ h Sutaio- 
ainn iifj-Hv X. t. ?., Mark vi. 5, e! U.m oXiyois ippwrrran 
tffi&Eir T«r x^i^ns. Luke ix. 13, oux e'laiv vimh TrKeiat ^ 
wore apToi xai Sua 'i^^uis, ei li-^ii irofw^iirii ayap a<iiiii),ei. 
John sv. 24, c! ri ejY* «.^ iwol-naa. Compare Mark xii, 
19, John ST. 4, 2 Cor. xiii. 5, Gal. i. 7, James ii. 17. 
Here also belongs the elliptical phrase eI Se (i.-nyi. 
Matt. ix. 17, otJSt ^xW'ivaii o'vov ve'ov tir aoxiir 5raXaio:ji- 
£( Se /t^T£, x. r. X. Add Matt. vi. 1, Luke x. 6, xiii. 9, 
xiv. 32, John xiv. 11, Bev- ii. 5. It is not, however, to 
be denied that ov is very frequently found after eI. But 
it will be seen that, in such cases, the two particles have 
no connexion, and oJ either coalesces ivith tlie verb so 
as to form a single and opposite idea, or conveys a di- 
rect and absolute negation to the entire period. In- 
stances of the former alternative are Matt. xxvi. 24, ei 
avx. EyEKv^&n, if he were unborn; 42, eI ou ZitaTai, if it is 
iinpossible ; John v. 47, ej oJ mivrtiitrt, if ye disbelieve. 
When it combines with the whole clause, it is not a 
eoiidilion which is represented by ?!, but a positive 
denial or exception indicated by ou. Thus in Luke xi. 
8, £1 xai ou SsioEi ou'tS dvdarxi, though hf will not rise vp 
to (five him ; 1 Cor, ix. 2, e! aK\ais oux eI/a! d7riara\as, 
dy.\ii ye vi/.iv i'lfii. To one or other of the above cases 
may also be referred Luke xii, 20, xiv, 26, xvi. 11, 12, 
31, xviii. 4, John i. 25, x. 37, 1 Cor. xi. 6, xv. 13, sqq. 
29, 32, xvi. 22, Rev. xx. 15. Compare Diog. L. i. 8. 
5, ii."5. 16, Sext. Empir. adv, Math. xii. .'j, .lEsop. F. 
vii. 4, Aristid. Orat. i. 56. 

d. After relatives used in a conditional or indejinite sense, 
and with the article, when, with its adjective or jiar- 
Ciciple, it may be resolved by a relative. Thus in Matt. 

X. 28, fjiVi f^iSjiS^TE awd tSjv rwv vJ-i/X'''' ^'-'^ SuVo^e'vWv dlto~ 
XTcTtai. xi. 6, fA,aK%piis liTTir, os idv (i-ri o-xavSaXifl'S'Ti ev EfAOi. 
xii. 30, S fi,^ amdyuv f/.er' ett,riv, anapwi^n. Markvi il, 


tm ov (xii SfJwvTai I'fxSf. «. r. X. JoTin T. 23, o ^il tiai^i 
TM v'tot, oil rifj.^ tJi vctriftt. Co!, ii. 18, S ^ij £vpz>» «ijJs- 
THMw, Til. i> 1 1. SiSo^xsmf s |Ma iiT. So with the /mMi- 
dple only ; as in Matt. ix. 36, w^i^ra ft.^ e^wrai ■rvmin. 
Comijarc Matt. iii. 10, xiii, 19, xviii. 13, xxii. 24, m. 
2y, Markxi.'23, LukeviiL18,ix.5. X. 10. Johnxu.-tti 
XV. % Acts iii. 23, Rom. xiv. 3, 1 Cor. tH. 29, Col. i. 

23, 2 ThesB. i. H, 2 Pet. i. 9, Rev. iii. 15. It frequenll; 
happens, however, that, to maiotain a negative assertion 
with greater assurance, el is employed in a rdatife 
sentence. Thus in Matt. x. 26, i>v9it -/«5 ewn xEdXi'ft- 

Sec also Luke xxi. 6, Acts xix. 35, 1 Cor. iv. 7, Heb. 
xii. 7. So Lucian, Sacrif. 1, oix aTSa, e" ns wtw iMrnfM 

e. With participles in a conditional sense ; as in X.ukc li. 

24, /*n fiJfimo*, if he finds none; John vii. 15, «»r ufr:!. 
yfafi-iJ^Tx oi^E, f*)) fMfiai&»jKwt ; though he ha* ttner 
learnt; (So Philostr. Apoll. iii. 23, ypx:pt, ^^ AwSit 
7f B(Aft«Ta.) 1 Cor. X. 33, xayu mivTst srasiv ap{T«6i, un 
^riTut TO ifiaiAToS CToptft^ov, while I seek not. Compare 
Luke xii. 47, John vii. 49, Rom. viii. 4, x. 20, 1 Cor, iv. 
18, vii. 37, ix. 21, 2 Cor. iv. 18, Phil. iii. 9. On the 
other hand, av with participles denies simply and uaecm- 
diliovally, whether (hey depend upon the preceding 
verb, or are used absolutely. Thus in Acts vii. 5, duk 
ovTor auTw TEjtvai/. 1 Cor. iv. 14, oiJjt ivrgE'srani CfjLxs yeifu 
raSra. Add Gal. iv. 27, Phil. iii. 3, Col. ii. 19, Heh. »L 
35, I Pet. ii. 10; and compare Strab. xvii. pp. 796. S2i 
Diod. Sic. xix. 97. Philostr. Apoll. vii. 32, ^lian V. H. 
X. 11, Lucian. Philos. 5, M, Percgr. 34. 

y. With ail Infinitive, when dependent on anotlier verb, 
or employed substanliiiely with or without the arlUU. 
Thus in Matt. v. 34, iyu 11 Xiyw Cimi fAn oixiuai akat. 
xiii. 5, Sia TO ii.-n ex^'v ^«&or yns. xxii, 23, oj ^.pyovrEi ii.% 
tXmt «v«ffTa<r.y. ActS iv. 20 " ' ' * 

e!'Sof*e( xai woyirajiMy, /Aii XaXcTv. Rom. xi. 8, at^'^iiy.yMi 

ToS fi'5 ^^sVeh, xai aJT» ToiJ /iij angi/eiv. xiv. 21, x^ov ri 

(A^ 5'"'/'"' xff'a, that is, 2( is Kell if one never cats meat. 
So Matt. ii. 12, Luke xx. 27, Act. iv. 17, 18, v. 28, xix. 
31, xxvii. 21, Rom. vii. 3, xi. 10, xiii. 3, xiv. 13, xf. 1, 


1 Cor. V. 9, vii. Jl, ix. 18, 2 Cor. ii. 1, 1 Thess. ii. 9 

2 Thess. ii. 2, iii. 8^ James iv. 2. 

• Obt. 2. It is perhaps more difficult to explain the occasional use of ^ for »u, thaa 
that of «« for ^. In a few passages the latter bceurs where the negative is so 
jilainly direci, that the former would rather be expected : as in Acts ix. 9, h nfjbl^ets 
v^us fih /SXiiTAfy. Rom. i. 18^ 9ruu» rk fjuh xa^nfcovra, (Compare Eph. v. 3.) 1 Tim. v. 
TSf Tti fifi ^9f rei, Probahly the continual occurrence of this negative, especially with 
fmrtieiptet, may have caused some little negligence with respect to it ; not to men- 
tion, that in antitheses, and with a view to peculiar emphasis, it is constantly 
employed to convey an absolute denial. Thus in 1 Cor. i. 28^ i^cXf|«T« « 610; rk fih 
JW«,Ty» Tei Stret xara^y^^, 2 Cor. iii. 14, ro ettfro xtiXvfiftM ftms, fin itvatxaXu^rofAtfov, 
iti 16) ftii fxomt^Tuv fiftSv rk fikitrifjutvetj uXKa rk ftii fiyurcfittai, Ti. 9, if *aihiui(Aifot, 
M^ ftk ^vfcrwfuvM* (Compare ch. iv. 8, 9.) An emphasis seems to lie in the 
turn of expression in 2 Cor. v. 21, t«v yk^ /An ytovru ufAet^riaf uvt^ n^iSv af/ut^riaf 
Woin^tVf who cannot be supposed to have known sin ; for rlv ou yvovret would imply 
ndtfaing moi^ than rot ayfoafrm. Compare Rom. iv. 19. Both negatives are united 
in I Pet* i. 8^ Sv w» u^r%t iyaran' tig t*, tt^ts /mi e^rtg, kXXk flri^Tlv«*rif, tiyak» 
Xuif^t, For this change in the expression there is no apparent cause ; but it has 
an exact parallel in Lucian. adv. indoct. 5. xvfit^v^v ovx tl^ats xou l^r^nvuv, fm 

Obs. 3. Two negatives sometimes destroy eAch other ; as in Acts iv. 20, ou 
hnofn^ai ya^ nftuf, S gt^fcw nee) tixawetfjuti^, /mi XoXinr, we are not €d>le not /o dec/are, 
i. e. we must declare. Here the negatives belong to different verbs ; and it happens 
much more frequently, that two negatives, joined to the same verb, render the 
negative stronger. Thus in Mark v. 37, eux Apnxtv auVtm ahrZ ^vnexaKovSiifeu, 
John XV. 5,.x*r^i# IfMuw it/yarSi ^um euiiv. See also Mark i. 43, xv. 4, Luke iv. 2, 
zx. 40> John vi. ^3, Acts viii. 39, xxv. 24, Rom. xiii. 8, 1 Cor. yi. lOj viii. 2, 2 Cor. 
xi. 8. The expression is sometimes yet further strengthened by an accumulation of 
negatives ; as in Luke xxiii. 53, w olix h Mnt evhU xtifitves%^ Of the construction 
of m /»^, see above ( 53, 5* 

§ 67. '^Of some other particles. (Buttm. § 149.) 

*D,s, as^ like, is a particle of resemblance, answering to ovratf, so ; 
for which, however, it is never substituted, as some have 
supposed. The sense must be thus fiUed up in Mark xiii. 
34, (ovrcas lariv Tixi^os), ojs av^qctiTCos x« r. X. In Heb. iii. 
11, iv. 3, it is wherefore ; and this meaning it bears in 
Arrian. Exped. ii. 16. 5, v. 15. 5. After verbs of saying 
and krwwing, it is the same with or*, that ; as in Luke 
viii, 47, dvriyyeiXBv aura), atS li&ai Treipaxprii^a. Acts x. 28, 
vfAeTf l7r/(TTa(T&e us aiifjurov hri x. t. X. With superlatives 
it expresses intensity , as in Acts xvii. 15, atf r%Y}ar%t as 
quickly as possible ; and with adjectives, admiration; as 
in Bom. x. 15, us upxtot ol ttoSbs rm Bvacyy&^a^ofxivcav glgifivaiv, 

> Winer, § 59, 8. Alt, } 83, 3. Ast ad Plat. Polit. p. 541. Hermann, ad Viger. 


Add Rom. xi. 33, 1 Tlicss. ii. 10; and compare Cebel. 
Tab. iv. Ct. With numerals it ei^ifies ahtmt ; as in Mark 
y. 13, iis Siax'^'O'. about or nearly two thousajtd. Sec also 
Markviii. 9, John i. 40, vi. 19, xxi. 8, Acts i- 15, t.7, 
xiii. 18, 20 ; and corapaic Buth i. 4, 1 Sam. xi. 1, LXX, 
Polyb. i. 10. ."). 

"Onait is much less frequently employed in the NewTcsta- 
ment, as well as in the later Greek writers, than in thoEe 
of the earlier and purer ages, lis uses arc precisely sinii- 
lar to those of "ki, and, like that particle, it sometimes in- 
dicates tlio cFtnt ; as in Alalt. ii. 23, xiiL 35, et aUbi, 
Some refer alao Acts xiii. 10 to this head. As an advert). 
how, it occurs in Luke xxiv. 20. The adverbial sense, 
though possible, is not necessary in Matt. xxii. 15, i 
59, Mark iii. 6. 

'Iva, in order that, properly indicates purpose, as in Matt, six- 
13, JohnxvL l.Eph. v. 2G, 27, et alibi. Its use, how- 
ever, in the New Testament is very extensive ; and, as 
in the later writers generally, it is frequently used after 
verbs of myi7)g, commanding, Stc, and other verba and 
adjectives, which are more properly followed by on. Thus 
in Matt. iv. 3, ei^rt Ivx o! XiSoi oCtoi o^toi •/"ftivTaii. v. 29, 
30, uf/A^igji yap am i»a iTtokfira-i k. t. X. vii. 12, sr^vm oJ> 
o<Ta, ai hiXiiTt 1ix TToiuaiv vuXv x. r. X. viii. 8, oux ci/Ai iKbmc 
Ita u-tu vTrh t-ht aTsyn* ctirs'K^'^s. IiUkc i. 43, Tta^et /a.i» nvrv, 
"ta fx5»j yj lAVTn^ Tou xo/n'of (X9U vpot fif. See also Matt. lii 
16, xiv. 36, xvi. 20, xviii. G, 14, Mark ix. 12, Luke vii. 6, 
John ii. 25, vi. 62, xv. 16. Hence it is sometimes simply 
exegelical; as in John xvii. 3, a.v-m Sf isr'ly m aioivior ^am, ha 
yitcaimaiai iri. There arc also many passages, in which '» 
denotes event, result, coiisegiieTice; as in Matt. i. 22, and 
elsewhere, when a prophecy is mentioned. See also Lokc 
xi. 50, John ix. 2, 3, 39, Rom. v. 20, xi. 31, 1 Cor. xi. 15, 
1 Pet. V. 0, 1 John ii. 19, et alibi. This import of 7va has, it 
is true, been strongly contested ; but the arguments against 
it are by no means convincing ; for, althougli it was cer- 
tainly designed, for example, that a prophecy shoald be 
fulfilled, (and hence, indeed, the connexion between the 
two meanings,) it can scarcely be said that the prediction 
was made simply in order that it might bo accomplished; 
and the same remark may be applied to the other passages 

al)Ove cited.' As a parlide of time, Iva occurs in John xii. 
23, xiii. 1, and elsewhere ^ and the elliptical form "vx n in 
Matt. ix. 4, xxvii. 46, Luke xiii. 7, Acts iv. 25, 1 Cor. x. 
29. See § G8. 

jrt, SO that, with itijin. chiefly. See § 57. 3. 

■J, (/lo/, is properly used after verbs of saying, knowing, and 
siich others aa take the accusative with the injlnitire in 
Latin. See Matt. ii. 16, v. 5, 1 Cor. v. 6, Heb. viii. % 10, 
(■( passim. An ellipsis of sonic such verb as J^i-yu, orSa, 
will accordingly explain what ia called the relative use of 
on, and must of those passages where it has been rendered 
so that, when, although, &c. See Matt, v. 45, vi. 5, 13, xi. 
29, Luke xi. 48, xii. 24, xxiii. 40, John vii. 35, Acts i. 17. 
X. 14, Bom. is. 20, xiv. 11, 1 Cor. xi. 15, I John iii. 20. 
Another sense assigned to this particle is because, but it 
hero depends upon Sii touto expressed or understood, and 
is therefore still declarative. Compare Matt. xiii. 13, xxiii. 
,13, John viii. 43, 44, 47, 1 John iii. 14, 20. Hence also 
in interrogations, rl is sometimes expressed, and at others 
understood. Compare Mark ix. 1 1, 28, John xiv. 22, Acts 
v. 4, 9. In Luke vii, 47, on ■nycLTmae vo'Ku indicates the 
sign, not t)ie cause of the woman's forgiveness. The 
greatness of her love evinced her sense of the great mercy 
she had received. Lastly, J ti is frequently used in quoting 
the words of another, even when the sermo obliquus is not 
employed; as in Matt. ii. 23, to pTi&lv 5ia rat trfo^pnTSy, 
"Oti NaJ^iugaiOJ- H\r,'^-nirita.l. John i. 20, (u/ioXoyjiiEV, "Oti 
ou* £i;x(' E7W 5 XpioToi. So also in Matt, xxvi- 72, 74, 
xxvii. 43, 47, Mark i. 15, vi. 35, xii. 6, Luke xvii. 10, 
John i. 32, iv. 17, 39, Acts v. 23, 25, James i. 13. Com- 
pare Epitt. Ench. 14,' 

, if. See §§ 51 and 56. Both in the classics and in the New 
Testament it may frequently be rendered although; as in 
2 Cor. xiii. 4, xai yap eJ iinaupcli^-n a* asTjcyuxs, i>Xci ^^ U 
Suva^iEws ©toS. More frequently, however, we find sJ xal, 
though, even though; as in Matt. xxvi. 33, eI kai vdvnt 
ffxavSa^io-S^o-ovrai h ffol, ey* ouSiicon axaySaXia-d^nfJUti, See 

' Winet, 6 57, G. Friliclie ad Mnlth, EscorB. i. Luck^'s Comroent. on Jobn. ii. 
U4. Tholuck on Juha xv. )C, Kom. v. -2U. Alt, Grnm. N. T. i 85, 4. Hctmami. 
Winer, ^ 57, 4. Alf, Qmin, N. T. j 8i, 7. Kuinoel ni Luc, »ii, 47, Acts i. 
\Z. FoMUT. Lex. in T. £«. WatiLiiiv. rraw. 

192 A GREEK GRAlflf AR 

also Luke xi. 8, xvii. 2, xviii. 4, Rom. xi. 17, 1 Cor. ix. 2. 
Sometimes it indicates tho event, and may be rendered 
that or whether ; as in Mark xv. 44^ ibstufjLoo'ay si iiin rsi- 
vr,Ks, John ix. 25, eI a.fjLxqru\os iariv, oJx o7i». Also, as an 
interrogative particle it denotes whether. Thus in Matt 
xii. 10, sTrnpcirmdOLv oUfrov Xiyovrsf, El el^sairi tois o'ifi^^i ^e^i- 
9rE(/etv; Luke xiii. 23, s\ oXiyoi ol (rw^<Sp&Eyoi ; Add Matt 
xxvii. 49, Mark iii. 2, viii. 23, Luke vi. 7, xxii. 49, xxiii. 6, 
Acts i. 6, vii. 1, x. 18, xvii. 11, xix. 2, xxi. 37, xxiL 25, I 
Cor. i. 16, vii. 16; and compare Gen. xvii. 17, xliii 6, 1 
Kings xiii. 14, 2 Kings xx. 20, Ruth i. 19, Job v. 5^ LXX. 
This use of el in direct questions is not found in the earlier 
Greek writers.' 

Oht, In oaihs and solemn assertions, the particle i/ has sometimes the foree of t 
negative; as in Mark viii. 12, «/t«y xiytt ifuv, ti l§B4^*vas vy ymSi Ttukj nfaim. 
(Compare Matt. zii. 39, xvi. 4, Luke xi. 29.) Heb. iii. 11, iv. 3, «y £fu^a i» tj 
i^yii (Aou, i/ i/ViXii/r0yra/ tig rn* xarai^retuen fMv, This 18 an Hebrnitm^ and occon 
Deut. i. 35, 1 Sam. iii. 17, 2 Sam. iii. 35, Ps. Izxxyiii. 35, zciy. 11^ cxzzii. 44. The 
form is in fact elliptical, and is given in full in Ezod. kiF. 16, ^«r l^, ti M n Bvy^t- 
rifts ftitBnf»freti, Very similar is Aristoph. Equit. 2, i»9 ftn ^ \»^vyt^ wUmn fim- 
ffoftai. So iu Latin, Cic. Epist. Fam. ix. 15. 7, moriar, si Imibeo, On the other 
hand, Uv f^n is sometimes used in the LXX as an affirmaiive; but it is very injudi- 
cious to explain such passages as Mark iv. 22, x. 30, 2 Thess. if. 3, by this idiom. 
The latter involve an ellipsis, which is readily supplied from the context; and in 
the former, the relative is followed by im according to common usage.* 

IgrgJ, e^siStj. See § 55. 1. 

civ, ^v, oTav, oiroTOLVy sTTBt^dv, See § 55. 2. and § 56. 

^, or, and, after a comparative, than, requires no illustration. 
It is never used for xai, as some have thought it to be; 
though, in the very nature of things, the employment of 
cither particle, in a variety of passages, may be indifferent, 
and therefore equivalent. See Luke xx. 2 (compare Matt 
xxi. 23), Acts i. 7, Eph. v. 3, et alibi. In I Cor. xi. 27, 
xai is a various reading: and other instances in which 
the particles have been interchanged by the copyists, are 
John viii. 14, 1 Cor. xiii. 1. Sometimes the two particles 
73 xat, or even, are united; as in Luke xviii. II, Rom. ii. 
15, 2 Cor. i. 13. In a double question, ^ introduces the 
second member, either with or without an interrogative 

* Winer, §61,2. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 84. Burnemann. ad Xen, Apol. Socr. 5. p. 
39. Wahl de tl et u; in N. T. usu. 

« Winer, § 59, «. Obs, Alt, Grum. N. T. § 83, 6. Bos Ellips. Or. p. 803. Wahl 
Lex, iu V. i«y. 


particle io the preceding clause. Tims in Lute xs, 4, 

TO ^uiTTio-fAI 'lataiMV (^ Ovpxwv r)V, ^ e^ di^ptUTTdiv ; 1 Cor. 
i. 13, /*^ IlaiJXor eoTaii^wSii iJfftp J/x5», ^ tie to ovo/Aa IlauXoy 
i^fliffriVSrire ; Soe also Mark iv. 30, Luko xiv. 31, xv. 8, 

, XX. 2, Horn. ii. 4, 1 Cor. ix. 5, Gal. i. 10, James iii. I'i. 
Where there is only a simple question, the former mem- 
her may be coasidered as suppressed; as in Matt. xx. 15, 
5 oi!« e^eini fAai ^otnoai o S'tXw iv roTi ifAiTs; So in Matt vii. 
9, xii. 29, Rom. vii. 1, xi. % 1 Cor. x. 22, si. 14, 2 Cor. 
siii. 5. Once only iS is repeated, namely, in 1 Cor. xiv. 36, 
3 o^' i5/A(Sv J-oyov Tou 0£o5 e§i)>.&eyi ^ fie 4!fA»s fiomor xit^v- 
TBOEv; Of ^Toi, with n following, there is an example in 
Honi. vi. 16.' 

(i, and, has tlie same uses in the New Testament which ob- 
tain in other writers. Thus it is used, though its coa- 
junclive force is still apparent, as a particle of time : — 
Mark xv. 25, ^v U wga TgiT»), xai tarxvpiafniv adrai. Add 
Matt, xxvi. 2, 45, Luke v, 17, six. 43, xxiii. 44, Acts v. 7. 
So Plat. Symp. p. 220. C. nSu ^y (<,6(TTif*^gj'«, txi iv&fwn-oi 
^a&avovTo. In comparative sentences: — Acts vii. 51, ui oi 
vraripEt C(i,u\, xai v/isis, i, e. ovtoi xxi Sf/.t'is EWoiwo-are. See 
also Malt. vi. 10, John vi. 57, xx. 21, and elsewhere; and 
so Thucyd. viii. 1 , iy tSo^sv aurais, xxl iToiouv raoTa. In 
questions, where it marks a strong emphasis: — ^Mark x. 
26, xai tU SovaTa. ff«&viva.; 2 Cor. ii. 2, xa; ri. l-rr.. 5 eiJ- 
(pjaivwv piE ; Also before imperatives ; as in Luke xii. 29, 
xal vfj-iTi pt»j ^nTEm Ti (paynTi, x. t. X. It is frequently ex- 
planatory, and may be rendered even, -namely ; as in the 
expressions, Ssor xal jrarig, &soj xai irurnp. See above, 
§ 29. Thus also Matt. xiii. 41, ouh-^e^aumt wavra Ta irxav- 
SaXa xai Touj sroioSvTay t^v avofAi'av. John x. 12, o /xiiSiutoj-, 
xni DUX i» voi/xr,i. In Buch explanations, however, xai often 
adds something stronger to what precedes ; as in 1 Cor. 
ii. 2, ou yag s'x^iva ToiJ EiSt'tai ti iv ijf*iV, ei w-ti Tr,iroSv X^mrov, 
xai ToiiraK ioTaugw/ii'voi. It has, moreover, thu sense of 
ah'o, liken ise ; as in Mark xii. 22, ia%dTn wavTiuv ani&ave 
xai'^ yuvn. Luke xii. 35, eKEixai ■}> xap^lx ifjuuv earai. But, 
besides these ordinary usages of xai, there are others, 
whiehj though not perhaps wholly unexampled in pure 

' Winer, j S7, 3. Alt, vlii lupra, Pnssov. Lex. iu vac. ■. 


Greek, seem r&thcr to have ori^oated with the antithetic 
import of the Hebrew 1. Thus it frequently signifies but. 
and yet; as in Matt, vi. 26, ri ■jttreivi ai aTteipovsn, e^l Jifi- 

^ou5iv, xai S warflp C/x^y Tft'ipd auri. xi. 1 7, ■nu\Ti<ra4t£y iiiii, 

Malt. i. 25, vii. 26, x. 29, 39, xii. 5, 35, 30. 43, John iii, 
14, 32, viii. 49, ix. 30, xx. 29. On the other hand, it 
may sometimes be rendered nor; as in Matt. x. 26, John 
xii. 40, Rom. ii. 27, 2 Cor. xii. 21, et alibi. Its frequent 
use after iyiyiTo, it came to pass, is also a Hebraism, Sec 
Matt. ix. 10, Luke v. 17, vL 1 , viii. 1, Acts v. 7; and com- 
pare Deut. ii. 16, 17, Josh, xvij, 13, Judg. xiii. 20, 1 Sam. 
xUi. 22. 

With respect to the repetition of the copula, the double 
xai is found in Luke xsii. 33, Ki/;ii, it-ira. aov erotfjiis i'lfu ul 
Eir ^uXiiKT,y Kxl ill SavaToK •xa^eCea^cci. So in John ix. 37. 
Acts xxvi. 29, Rom. \i. 33, et alibi. Instead of which, -a 
is followed by »a,l, in Luke ii. 16, Acts xx. 21, et sayiui. 
In Acts xxvi. 16, re is doubled. Sometimes also, kh" i* 
combined with other particles ; but it is only necessary to 
notice xat Se, and besides, which frequently occurs in the 
New Testament ivith the intervention of one or more 
words between them, as in other writers. Thus in Jobii 
vi. 51, iyw I'l/j.! aprar o ^aJV Estv TiJ ^xyTp ex toi/to:' tou a^rw. 
i^-nasrai e'ls to'v alana.' xai o a-prot !g, Sv byu Sunco, i tragS, tia 
tirri'v. See also John xv. 27, Acts iii. 24, 2 PeL i. 5, I 
John i. 3. In some of these places little or nothing seems 
to be added to the import of xai' alone' 

It is by no means easy to ascertain the precise differ- 
ence which exists between the import and application of 
(he two particles xa! and rs. In general the former seems 
to connect words or sentences, and nothing more; whereas 
the latter indicates some additional idea, besides that of 
more conjunction. Sec Acts xxi. 28, xxii, S, 28, el alihi. 
This distinction, however, is not based on very satisfactory 

eeled by Ihe copula ,«;, n]„y &eqiieiitit hi 
48,r™,^<«llM3«,, for s.5i« f™-).. 

Pmsow, Schleusaer, and Brel- 


I, Ijiff^ii !■] I^X3» i« «S /i;iu, ht wUhdrtv) Kmllg. Soid. z. 20, i.r- 

"»» ™f S'^W/y. Col.ii. 5. x<"'(« ««' Hxiwm, joifaUg it/lo/dms. 

Two citntionfl fhim Ibe Old Testament probably belong here ; oiis frum Amos ix. 
11, in Acto XV. 16, /un rxira i,MiT(i4,ii mal itutii^ifii n> rinini As^l riit •rirrir 
3IWM, / m// uydM £>iVt/ ■>;>; and the uttur frum Pa. ciiii. 9, in 2 Cor. k. 9, !»>;■ 
vtfip, (ut') flwjiik rhV vinti, ht hath ^ven abiiHdanUS' Ind^d the usage) though 
unquestlDiiably found ia Greek writers, ia probably to be [efeiTed in the New Teg- 
taroent to the B»btew, whence it baa frequently pameJ into Ihe LXX. Thua in 
Judg. kiii. 10, Wix'^u Kiu i1{i/>i. See bIso 1 Sam. irii. 4B, xsv. 42, Fs. cvi. 13, 
Jerem. lii. 15, Dan. x. 18. Elsewlipre, however, the Hebrew idiom is tendered by 
an adverb ; as in Geo. iifi. IS, cai riXa i(iJii. Compare Oen. xxx. 31, Job six. 3, 
F». xzxiii. 3, Hob. i. 6. The rule doet not hold in Matt, xiiii. 3, ii<, /A rr^af^Ti, 

Ak is an adversative particle, though far less strongly disjunc- 
tive than BtXXa, and frequently serving merely as a con- 
necting copula. See Matt. i. 18, v. 31, xxv. 19, 38, Mark 
i. G, Luke xxiii. 2, Rom. vi. 18, 1 Cor. xv. 1. Hence with 
xai, after an interval of one or more words, it may be ren- 
dered also; Rs in John viii. 17, xv. 27, Acta lii. 24, v. 32, 
2 Pet. i. 5. In pursuing, resuming, illustratingt or modi- 
fying a discourse. Si is employed; as in Mark xv. 25, 
John vi. 10, 1 Cor. xv. 56, 2 Cor. x. 2, Gal. ii. 4, Heb. 
vii. 4, and elsewkei'e; though in the latter case /AaWov Si 
is more usual ; as in Matt, xxv. 9. Particular illuslra- 
tions of a general proposition are also introduced by this 
particle; as in Matt, xxiii, 5. Its disjunctive import is 
marked when opposed to t/.iv, and in such passages as 
Matt. v. 32, xxiii. IJ, Acts xi. 17, xii. 9, 1 Cor. vii. 2, 
2 Cor. vi. 14, et septus. There is no necessity to affix an 
illative force to the particle in Luke vii. 6, xiii. 7, Acts vi. 
2, Rom. viii. 8, xii. 6, 1 Cor. viii. 9, xi. 28, Eph. ii. 4, 
1 John iv. 18, and elsevhere; nor a causal import in Mark 
xvi. 8, Luke iv. 38, I Cor. iv. 7, x. 11, 2 Cor. i. 21, x. 13, 
1 Thess. ii. 16, 1 Tim. iii. 5, and similar passages.' 

Mev is commonly followed by Se, not only when an ojjposition, 
but when a mutual relation between two propositions is 
indicated; as in Matt. iii. 11, ix. 37, xiii. 2, Acta xxv. 11, 
et sapius. Frequently, however, there is no correspond- 
ing Se. Thus in Acts i. 1, tov tx.h wgaiTOv ^oyiv «, t. X. ; 
and this, it may be remarked, is the usual mode in which 

' Winer, (, 58, 4. 5. Alt, { B2, 2. 3. Kuinoel on Luke vi. 48. Glass, Phil. 
Sacr. p. 272, aqq. Vorstiu* d« Hebraism, p. £90. Leuaden, p. 1 15. 
• Winer, nil lupra. 


authors refer to what they have previously written. See 
the commencement of each successive book in Xenophon s 
Anabasis. Again, in Acts iii. 21, ov (X/)i<rrov) SeT ovpam 
fjih iU^aa^ai ixp^ xpiyofv aironaraa^iateas TrivTOfv, Here an 
antithesis^ but afterwards, &c,, may be suppressed; and 
a sentence with Ss may generally in such case be supplied 
by the mind. Compare Acts xix. 4, xxvi. 4, Rom. i. 8, 
iii. 2, vii. 12, 1 Cor. xi. 18, 2 Cor. xii. 12, Col. ii. 23, Heb. 
vi. 16, vii. 18. Instead of Sg, an equivalent particle is 
sometimes used after /x£v. Thus xai, in Luke viii. 5, 
sqq. ; re, in Acts xiii. 4 ; eTrsira, in James iii. 17. It 
has been thought that pblvroi and Ie are opposed to eadi 
other in James ii. 8, 9. This is very questionable ; since 
pbivrot is elsewhere an adversative particle; as in John 
iv. 27, vii. 13, xii. 42, xx. 5, xxi. 4, et alibi. The particle 
fxsv cannot stand at the beginning of a period ; but the 
compound fjnyovvys is so placed in Luke xi. 28, Rom. ix. 
20, X. 18.' 
ovre and fxriTs, ovl^ and fjLiniE. The appropriate use of these 
compound particles depends upon the respective nature 
of Se and re. Hence ot/rs and fAnrs may be considered 
merely as connecting negative particles^ employed in 
couplets; but ovie and /xr/Sg strengthen the negation, so 
that clause rises above clause, or word above word, at 
each successive repetition of the particle. If used alone, 
oi/Se or /xtjSe must be rendered not even, not so much as. 
Thus in Matt. v. 29, Xsyco Sg vimv, on oC^e ^oXofj^cuy Iv 9roia^ 
rri So^r) avrov TTcpic^xK^ro ats ev rovrcov. In such cases, in- 
deed, a preceding ov or /w.^ is necessarily implied. Re- 
peated negatives, therefore, are thus regularly arranged:— 
ovre — ot/re, pi^oTe — /xyire. Matt. vi. 20, owov ovre a^is ovri 
fipuois d(p»vi}^£i. xi. 18, ^X&e yap 'I&;avvyjj* /lc>5t£ gj-Siam 

pt^Tg TTivwv. See also Luke xiv. 35, John v. 37, viii. 

19, ix. 3, Acts XV. 10, xxiii. 12, xxiv. 12, xxv. 8, xxvii. 

20, Eom. viii. o8, 39. 1 Cor. xi. 11, 1 Thess. ii. 5, 
Rev. ix. 20. Sometimes ou or /xi precedes, so as to 
indicate an entire negation, which is subsequently 
divided into portions; as in Matt. v. 34, pcrj hixcxrn 

o'Xcus, (Jt.YiTe ev ru ouqacvo), fJL-nrs ev Trj yrj, x. t. X. xii. 3*2, 

» Winer, § G4, 2. e. Heindorf ad Plat. Phued. p. 133. Ast ad Legg. p. 230. 


fjiiWovTi. So in Luke ix. 3, 1 Tim, i. 7, James v. 12. 
Occasionally also tIJre or (x^t5 is referred to a simple 
ah or /i^, which has the import of oute or lArin; as in 
John i. 25, e! au avx il a Xgiaroi, ovrs 'HXi'at, lure o 

■^poipiim. So in Eph. ir. 27, Bcr. v. 4, vii. 1, ix. 20, 
21, XX. 4. 

Ill— oiSe, «.^— fwSl. Matt. vi. 26, o5 aTnlpova-i^, oiU Sfpi'- 
^ouffiv, ouSe e'jvxyovaiv bis o-vibTinxs. x. 9, i*.vi xr^ano&e 
Xpvaiv, //.wSf apyv^oy, mwSe x^Xxdb, k. t, X. So Matt. V, 
15, vi. 25. 28, vii. 6, 18, x. 14, xii. 19, xxiii. 9, Mark 
xiii. 15, 32, xiv. 68, Luke vi. 44, xiv. 12, xvii. 23. 
John i. 13, iv. 15, xiii. 16, xiv. 17, Acts iv. 18, ix. 9, 
Rom. ii. 28, vi. 12, ix. U. xiv. 21, 2 Cor. iv. 2, Col. 
ii. 21, 1 Tim. i. 4. Sometimes there is no incipient 
oi or ii.ri, as in Mark viii. 26, /iwSe fls t^v kuia-tiv cUi\~ 
bris, finSs tiB^s Tjvi iv rri xufj.-^. There are a few in- 
stances in which ovn or ix-nrs follows odSs and p-nSi. 
Thus in Acts xxiii. 8, l.aSiovmiiai \iyovs-i u.'h Efvai ava- 
ffraaiv, n^iSt iyyEXov /a^te -Tnivixa. In audi cases it 
should seem that there arc two references; that of 
ixyill to /in, and that of fi^re to the second /ii com- 
prised in 1/.11II: and the explanation is confirmed by 
the fact that, in the present instance, dfj-fin^x in the 
next clause evidently indicates only two articles of 
Lelief, namely, a resurrection, and the existence of 
immaterial spirits, which arc subdivided into angels 
and spirits. Compare Gal. i. 12, 1 Thess. ii. 3, 
Some passages also occut with oKra or ^ijte, where 
ouSe or AiiiSt would rather be expected; as in Mark 
iii. 20, uirre iJ.ii cuvus&ai avTWs ft^Ts aproi (pstysTv. V. 3, 
xai oiJTe aXiisian ouSeI? liSuvoiro arJTov Snaai. Luke xii. 
26, i\ oil oBte iXax'»-Tov Suyad&E, x, r. \. In 1 Cor, iii. 
2, some manuscripts read adli, and the correctness of 
the text may probably be questioned in the generality 
of such cases. Sometimes, however, it seems to be 
immaterial whether ou^l or oSre, jauSe or p.-rne wore 
employed. Thus in Matt, xxiv. 20, a-goiEtx^"^* ^^ Tvi 
lj.-h ■yeniTBi M ipw/ii i)/*£v XEinaJvoi, (auSe ev ffajSfSaTo;. Sec 
also Matt. xxii. 29, xxv. 13, 2 Pet. i. 8, 1 John iii. 18; 
and compare Matt. x. 9 with Luke ix. 3. 


Instead of a repetition of o3te, the second membEr 
of the sentence has sometimes an affirmative eojmla; 
as in John iv. II, o?te a>Tr.-nu.!t 'i%ett, xai to lppi»^ Ur> 
0^U. 3 John 10, =Zre avrU iK>li-X.^-ra.i raU iSeXfow, 
xai TotT gouXowEvoiT KUjXfi/ei. Compare Aristot. Rhet, 
ii. 16. Lucian. D. M. xiv. 1. Phiiost. V. Apoll. ii.Si 
This copula is sometimes to be understood negalitely: 
as in James iii. 14, a*'" xaraxaux'^'^E x«i ■J'lijJtffS*. See 
also Matt. xiii. 15, Mark iv. 12. Jolin xii. 40, Acts 
xxviii. 27, 2 Cor. xii. 21. Gal. iii. 28; and coropaw 
Diod. Sic. ii. 48, Sext. Emp. adv. Math. ii. 20.' 
'AxXa is used simply as a disjunclive particle, implying conUa- 
dh-tinclion or opposition i and hence it ia used in a seriet 
of questions involving distinct or opposite ideas ; as in 
Matt. xi. 7, Ti' I|mX&£t6 us TTiv \pviu.nv &EaCTDt»&au; naXajwi 
vna ayifj-ov aaXtvifisvov ; ccXXa ri (^^X&eTs iHeTv ; a^hpuUti !• 
r^CcXocKoTV i«,aTioif rnf*pifo-pif'»!n ; ixXXec ti' t^^XSert iSfiV; iff)* 
(pBTDv ; vai xiyu £ii-~v, xxl vipi^ffiTs^fi'i wqotp-nTfiri. Compare 
Lute xvii. 7, 8, Heb. iii. 16. Hence also its use in inlro- 
ducing an objection, or a scries of objections ; as in Rom, 
X. 16, sqq., 1 Cor. xv. 35. Compare Xen. Cyrop. i. 3, 11, 
Mem. i. 2. 9, It is found in the conclusion, after conifi- 
tional particles, to mark an opposition, or s^rperadtUtion to 
the subject of a former clause; as in Rom. vi. 5, » ftf 
ffUI/Aurai yfyova/isv tw hyLOiwi^iXTt toS SivaToo auroiJ, aXXa x» 
tTis afxaraceti/s e^ofifSa, surety aho, on the other hand, mt 
shall he, &c, See also 1 Cor. iv. 15, 2 Cor. iv. 16, xi. 6, 
Col. ii. 5; and compare Lucian. Pise. 24, .^Uan. H. An. 
xi. 31. Sometimes the condition is wanting, as in Mark 
xiv. 36, 'nxphr/M TO ^iTn^iov djr' cfioD toSto" aXX' ov ti r/ii 
^cKu, iXXii TI tjL Let this cup pass from me, if it be possible; 
yet not as I will, &c. Certain other particles are often 
joined with aXXa, as 7E, at least, ju.nn5v •ye, ncvertheles"- 
See Luke xxiv. 21, 1 Cor. ix. 2, Phil. iii. S, et alibi In 
exhortations and entreaties, aXXa is used with an impera- 
tive, though the thought to which oXXi is opposed may 
not bo expressed. Tims in Acts x. 20, aXX' avitrrxt xarj- 
^^5i. Add Matt. ix. 18, Mark ix. 22, xvi. 7, Acts xxvi. 
16; and compare Xen. Cyr. i. 5. 13, ii. 2. 4, v. 5, 24, Ar- 



rian. Alex. T. 26. Preceded ty a negative, it may some- 
times be rendered except ; as in Matt. xx. 23, oix eonv 
ijjioy SoSvai, dx\' ols Tiraifutimxt, except to those. So in 
Herod, i. 193, ^euvrai oi QiHtv iXmu, oKk' eh twv imiiiij.aiw 
vaitiiins. Compare Mark ix. 8 with Matt. xvii. 8. At 
the same time, aXKa is not convertible with ti i*,^. but 
some word must be supplied or repeated ; and so So&'w- 
oETai will complete the sense in Matt. 1. c. Nor indeed 
is aKKa cvcr put for other particles, as 7*5, Bl, oSv, &c. ; 
but in all the passages which have been adduced in sup- 
port of such an alleged interchange, its adversative import 
is clearly apparent; as, for instance, in Rom. v. 14, 15, vii. 
7, I Cor. ii. 9, xv. 10, 2 Cor. viii. 7, Eph. v. 24, et alibi. 
Sometimes av%i is omitted in ihe reply to a negative ques- 
tion before dwi. Thus in John viii. 48, ij.r, in ix twv ap- 
X«rwv iTiavtvatt ill avrov ; iw' ox'-o' o3toi x. t, X. So in 
1 Cor. X, 20. In connexion, oJlX' v signify but rather, but 
only; as in Lulce xii. 51, SaxerTE an lipwny TrapeyivoiiTn Soij- 
vai iv T») 77] ; oujtij X^yw i/M-iv, aKX' i Sigf^epiafiLiv. See also 
1 Cor. iii. 5, 2 Cor. i. 13. \\'liere the opposition between 
the clauses of a sentence is sufficiently apparent, dWx is 
sometimes left out ; as in John iv. 22, £i*t~t vq'iaxu^teXrs 
avK ol'SjiTE' viiMts n^'^axi^mvtj.ev o aigs^LEv. So in John ii. 10, 
Heb. iv. 15.' See also 5 63. T. 2. 2. 

Oln. It h:is heea laid dova us n rule by iiime fommeaUtorB, that ia maay sen- 
tenres, which cuntaiu a nef-allTe fulluwed by iXJ.i. Ihe denial is nthir eompacaliva 
than absolute; but it mwit olinyB ba bome in miad that, id all such catts, a 
iirgativa clausB i> employed »ilh a Ti«W lo lante the Dppowd affirmaliQii mure em- 
ph«lictilly prominent. Thus in Matt. i. 20, ti y«{ i/uT, Im » >.^\,Z<r„, i>.xi « 
oiit/uc, the lensB is aearucly exi'iessvd liy naying, il it not ao tnucli you kAo apeak, 
ss Ike Haly GAotl; since the refBrBnce ia not to Ihe acl of iptakaij], but iu lliu «- 
tpired matlrr of Ihe Apustle's speech. Had the jnipoit oF the wardi huea •simply 
cumparative, the tneauinf; vDuld liave bijen quulifled by />»» in the nejjalive, or by 
fiixkt' in Ihe nffiimalivo clause. Cumpare Matt.sxL21, xxvii. 24, John », la, 
Acts xix. 26, Eph. iv. 2S, Phil. ii. 12, tl irpiu: Again, in Acta v, 4, •£■ j<^i;» 
ittSfirus, ixxk fliy, the s'la sgainit man ahtiiiks into nothing when compared with 
its mngnitiide in relation tu Ood. Su in the cognate fDim io Uatl. ix. 13, Ia»> 
SiXK »: IU 3iwi'a>, thougli unqQestiunabty connj'aiative, the leatinient of mercy i» 
represented oi, in a manner, supencding Ihe eSicacy o[ saciiGee. Other examples 
of & like nature «re, Mark ix. 3?, John »i. 27, vi.. 16, xii. 44, 1 Cor. i. 17, »ii. 10, 
I. 24, xiv. 22, XV. 10, Eph. vl 12, 1 Thsss. iT. 8.' 

' Winer, ^ 57, 4. Alt, Gram. N. T. } 35, I." Bas Ellipi. p. 75-2. Schweighani. 
w1 Airian. Epict. p. 839. Pusaov. Lei, in r. ikl^i. 

' Winer, § 59, 7. Ait, Gram. N. T. i 83, 3. Glaia. Phil, Sicr. T. I. p. 418. 
Bus Ellipf. in v. /<»i<. Kuino^ ad Hall. x. 20, John vi. 27. 


Vap.Joi; is a rauxa/ particle ; but the proposition of which i 
assigns the cause is sometimes omitted ; as, for instancej 
in questions, which nevertheless imply a reason for s 
thing previously understood or expressed. Thus in Malt 
xxvii. 23, Ti yif KzNoy teaman ; as if he had said. Your it 
mamljbr his erncijixion is tmjust ; for tchat evil halh k 
done? Sec also Matt. ix. 5, Mark xv. 14, John vi, 4] 
Acts xix. 35; and compare Arist. Aeham. 594, Diog. I 
vi, I, Also in answers, whether positive or negative: I 
in John ix. 30, li yap tovtcii ^avp^aa-rov Eanw, x. t. X., Vvha 
the speaker, in his earnestness, lias omitted some si ' 
clause as. / heed not your cavils, for the wonder is, i 
Acts xvi. 37, xai vSv XaSga ^^t5i ix^iiWovaiv ; ov yap' a) 
eX^itTss avTui e^ayeTiuaav. Compare 1 Cor. ix. 9, It 
1 Thess. ii. -20, James iv. 14. The particle is frequentl 
used to introduce a causal parenthesis ; as in Mark v. 4 
1 Cor. XV. 5, Eph. vi, 1, et alibi. Nor, in this case, do 
it always refer to what immediately precedes, but to soma 
thing more remote, and even at a considerable dista 
Sec Mark xi. 13, xij. 12, xvi. 4, and in St, Paul's Epistle* 
passim. Hence it is frequently employed to mark thl 
connexion or continuation of a discourse; as in Matt. i. 1^ 
Luke ix, 44, 2 Cor. ix. 1, and eheithere. From the frc^ 
qucnt omission of a clause, to which yap more immediately 
refers, it has been supposed to acquire a variety of mca 
ings, which do not correctly belong to it. Thus it h 
been rendered but, in 2 Cor. xii. 19, ra St sranTn Cxip t 
i/z-at oixoSof*?! (\a\ay ^O/Soyjiai yap x. t. \. The SCUM 
may he thus supplied : — I speak with a view to your e^- 
fication ; and I have reason to do so : Jbr I year, &c. Nw 
in Lnke xii. 58, is it now, consequently ; but the precept is 
given as a reason why they should seek reconciliation with 
God, even as they would guard against the vengeance dt 
a human advcrsarj-. If it be translated allhough in John 
iv. 44, it is with reference to some cause, which, thougll 
not immediately apparent, was doubtless passing in ike 
writer's mind ; and so in all cases it is necessary, and 
generally easy, to affix a causal import to this con- 

' Winer, f 37, 4. G. 


OJ», therefore, is an inferential particle; as in Malt. vii. 11, x. 
16, 2G, xvii. 10, xxvi. 54, xxvii. 22. It is. however, lie- 
quently used for the mere purpose of transition from one 
subject, or part of a subject, to another; or of resuming 
an argument which has been interrupted by a parenthesis 
or digression. See Mark iii, 31, Lulce xxii. 36, John 
xviii. ly, xix. 24, 1 Cor. viii. 4, si. 18, xiv. 23, Eph. iv. 1. 
Some would render it but, in Matt. xii. 12, Acts ii. 30, 
viii, 4, xxvi, 22, Ilom. xi. 19, and ehewhere ; unA for, in 
Matt. X. 32. 1 Cor. iii. 5, vii. 26, xi, 20. There is no rea- 
son iu any instance to depart from the ordinary accepta- 
tion of the word.' 
See 5 55. Obs. 7. 

*Apa is an inferential particle, signifying therefore, cansequenthj ; 
and it properly stands after one or more words in the sen- 
tence; as in Bom. viii. 1, ovVe» a^% vi/v x3txk^iu,z x. t. X. 

I Cor. V. 10, £T61 OpElVsTe Dt^a £K TOf XOO^lOU tSfiKhiil. In 

tlic New Testament, however, it is more commonly at the 
beginning of a sentence, and is frequently joined with wv 
or ft, producing an emphatic asseveration, founded on an 
inference. Thus in Matt, vii- 20, 'i^ar/i a«o Toiv xagwalv 
avTav i^tyya^iahe avrovi. Rom. vii. 25, afta oZi avTot cyu 
X. T. \. viii. 12, xqa o2v SpeiXirai £!T/*ev x. t. \. 2 Cor, v. 
15, ^pa. ol WvTEi a7ri9-»vDv. See also Matt. xvii. 26, Acts 
xi. 18, Rom. V. IS, vii. 3, Eph, ii. 19, 2 Thess. ii. 15, Heb. 
iv. 9. It is found also frequently in the conclusion of con- 
ditional propositions; as in Matt. xii. 28, ei U iyai iv Trrnj- 
(j-ati @iov ii^iXKoi TO. SaifioH*, apa sf &oiocv e^' iJfxar ri ^atri- 
KiU ToS ©EoS. So in Luke xi. 20, I Cor. xv. 14, Gal. ii. 
21, iii. 29, v. 11. Heb. xii. 8. After e! it may be rendered 
if perliaps; as in Mark xi. 13, Jx&ev, eI apa. eupnati ti b 
oLt^. Acts viii. 22, %i-lSs%ri tw ©eoS, ti. Sl^% «(pe5)iir£Tai joi 
r, ETi'voin TSr KagSi'ai ifou. XVii. 27, \^tC\v tov ©esv, ei £;« ^s 
■4.*iXafii5Efiv aiJrav. Compara Numb. xxii. 6, II, LXX. 
As an interrogative particle, apa (with a circumflex) oc- 
curs singly, and with the same combinations. Thus in 
Matt, xviii. 1, ti'( apst wei'^wv ejn'v; Luke xviii. 8, irX^Sv 
a i/ioj- T9ti av^quTTou (X&^v ipa Ei/jTidEi T-nv wiotiv eti tSs T'ni; 
Acts vii. 1, £1 a^x zst-uTO, avTU! t.%ii ; viii. 30, agai yt yi^aiiJUiii 



Si avayivtiaxeis ; Gal. ii. 17, si ie Bu^t^fAsv ifJLapruXfii, apa 

XqioTos aiJM^rlas iiixovos ; And with a negative in Acts 
xxi. 38, oi5x aqx (TV efo A'lyvwrios x. t. X.;* 
W0&6V, W0T6, 'jTorepoy, wou, 'jruf. These interrogative particles, of 
>vhich the appropriate use is confined to direct questions, 
are equally employed in indirect questions in the New 
Testament. Thus in Matt ii. 4, emv^dyero ira^ awrm^ 
^rot; X^itfTof vevvarai. Xxiv. 8, uick jpin% ^tote Tavrat ec^rsu ; 
Mark xi. 18, l^ifSroc/v vSs aurov ofiroKitTovcrtv. John vii. 27j 
roi/TOV oXiafMBV, wo&sv hrh' o ^s X^iffTOf, Srav ep^**'*'*'* oiJ^tif 
yiyv<jxet ^rodev s^tiv* Acts XV. 36, l7<ffXE\)/cf/4ed<z rotes' aScX- 
^iry, TTus Bxovffi. As an emphatic negative^ 9ro3%y occurs 
in Mark viii. 4, xii. 37. So ^ro/f, in Matt. xii. 29, 34, John 
ix. 16, Bom. iii. 6, vi. 2, x.-14, et alibi. Once only, and in 
an indirect question, Trorepoy occurs ; viz. in John vii. 17, 
yvfli<T6Tai wspl rr,f SiSaj^^j", Tforspov ex toi; ©sow eariVy ^ tyw «» 
iixavrov "Kakw ; Of the relative particles, osnod'ev does not 
occur in the New Testament ; huor^ is found once in Luke 
vi. 3 ; i'JFctJs also once, as an interrogative, in Luke xxiv. 
20; and Scrot; in John viii. 21, and elsewhere. The inter- 
rogative particle sometimes stands at the end of the sen- 
tence, or before the principal word in the question. Thus 
in Luke xvii. 17, o\ Ss Ivveot vov; 1 Pet. iv. 18, 6 dtrs^Tis xal 

§ 68. — Of some particular Locutions. (Buttm. § 150.) 

Many of those idiomatic forms of speech which occur in 
other writers are not found, and are scarcely to be looked for, 
in those of the New Testament ; but these last have neverthe- 
less some forms peculiar to themselves. Of the one kind or 
the other the following may be noticed: — 
oTor sipti or oTo5- r el/x*. This phrase is properly roiovrof ElfjLt. It 
is very questionable, whether instead of an infinitive, on 
and a verb may follow ; though some have so understood 
Rom. ix. 6, ouy^ oiov Se on EXTriTTTWKEy o \6yo^ rov @eov. The 
passage should probably be rendered, Not as though the 
word of God, &c.' 

1 Winer, ^ 57, 4. 61, 2. AU, Gram. N. T. § 84, 1. Stallbaum ad Plat. Eu- 
thyplir. p. 3*2. Passov. Lex. in v. 
* Alt. Gram. N. T. § 84, 6. 
' See Kosenmuller ad loc. cit. 


Ti', nx Ti', &c. The neuter ri is frequently used adverbially tor 
Siffi t!; why, wherefore? Thus in Matt. vi. 28, -mpl uU- 
l/.iiTif t/ u-spiy-vaTE ; viii. 26, ti' SeiMi' irm, oK^yiw^'J^Tat ; Add 
Matt. xi. 7, XIX. 17, xx. 6, and elsewhere. In the same 
sense Tva ti is also used, as in Matt. ix. 4, i*« n' iu.i'is h^u- 
u.iia^i -Ttivrtfi \ The expression is elliptical for "nix. ti yi- 
voiro, Mni %that may he done, i. e.^b/ what purpose 9 It is 
also written in one word, ivaTi'. Compare Matt, xxvii. 46, 
Luke xiii. 7, Acts iv. 25, 1 Cor. x. 29. The LXX also 
employ the term, which is likewise found in the Greek 
writers, especially those of later date. See Gen. x. 6, xii. 
19, Exod. V. 4, Job iii. 12, Jerem. xiv. 9, Arist. Nub. 190, 
Eccles. 718, Plat. Apol. 14. Arrian. Epict. i. 24, Joseph. 
B. J. vi. 24. 

There are other combinations in which W is found ; as 
riykp; what then f 'm^om.\\\. 3, et alibi ; ti' oJv, in Rom. 
iii, 9, vi. 15, et alibi; and the elliptical expression W on 
(i. e. TI yiyoyev on ; What if it that ? How happens it 
that?) in Mark li. 16, Luke ii. 49, Acts v. 4, 9. See also 
Gen. xi. 7, 1 Sam. xx. 2, 2 Sam. xvii. 11, LXX. 

As a predicate, with Itrri following, ti is sometimes ac- 
companied by the substantive in the neuter plural ; as in 
Luke XV. 26, ivvv^d^iro rl ("■» mS-ia ; John ^-i. 9, raoTa ti' 
BOTH Eis ronntnavs ', Acts xvii. 20, ti' av hi\at ravrcc utai. 

T( xir&' eTr, iva etr txamas. These are two forms by which dis- 
tribution is marked in the New Testament, which can be 
reduced to no nile. One of these, «T( xa&' ils, which is 
clearly a soltecism for elt xa&' iva, one by one, occurs in 
Mark xiv. 19, John viii. 9. We have also S xa&' tTi in 
Bom. xii. 5. It may possitly have arisen out of the 
Greek phrase tv xa&' h, which occurs, though with various 
readings, in Rev. iv, 8. The other form, otvi th ixaaros, 
occurs in Rev. xxi. 21.' 

iiJo, Su'o. By an Hebraism, a numeral is doubled to express 
distribution; as in Mark vi. 7, ^^?«to airavs ifn-airriwuv 
Sm Suo, to send them tu-o and two together, i. e. in p.ih's, 
This was expressed in Greek by the preposition dvi, and 
so we find it in Luke x. 1, ia-tWEiXEV aCToitf dtx Si^. Sec 
also § 63. Obs. 11. This Hebrew mode of reduplication 

' Winer, § 38, 3. All, { 4G, 1. Inteiiip. sil Luciau. Saloc. 9. Paaaov. Lex, in 

is not, however, confined to numerals, but is adopted wilK J 
. nouns generally. Thus in Mark vi. 39, iwerd^ir 
jtXTvai tiavTas ayftWDai* av/^Trovm, by companies. So Exod. 
viii. 14, LXX. avmyarfay adrovs &*ijAWViaf B-n/j^uyla!. Both 
the Hebrew and Greek forms are united in Mark vi. 40, 
iyim^tiv wgaaiai srgnsiai, ovat lndToy xi! dvi w*vr^XMTa, in 
rows by liiindreth iind by Jiflip/i- The same is also ex- 
pressed by an accusative, with nari understood, in Lulic 
ix. 14, xo-rcatKl^XTi aiirait xXiaiaj av» nevT-nxoyrx. A copula 
is inserted between the repeated nouns in 2 Cor. iv. 16, 
fiijiipgt xa! ^}c, day by day. 

ivxiiai. Exces,i is marked by the adverb i-Trivai prefixed to a 
mimeral, whith it does not govern in the yetiitive accord- 
ing tn the regular syntax, tut which is put in the case 
rc(|uired by the verb. Thus in Mark xiv. 5, ■nSuyan yaj 
toSto w/Ji&Bvai iwava/ rpiaxoaiuv Srvaigioiv (where the genilivt 
is governed by irqxiv,mi). 1 Cor. xv. 6, Si'p^-n indva t£vti- 
xor.'oir dhx<pa7s. In the LXX iwovw always follows the tik- 
tneral, to which it is united by the copula xacl, in exact 
conformity with the Hebrew. See Exod. xxx. 14, xxxviii. 
26, Levit. sxvii, 7. The New Testament usage is rather 
built upon that of the Greeks, who occasionally omit i5, 
in joining sXaTi-av or stJ^e'sv with a numeral. Compare 
Thucyd. vi. 95, Fausan. viii. 21. 1.' 

TO Tax Eivaii. Instead of the neuter singular, the neuter plural 
seems to be used (which is not unusual, when there is no 
immediate subject of reference) in Phil. ii. 6, oii^ apinytAai 
•nyntra-va ro eiv«i ura @fZ. The expression, however, is pe- 
culiar, bearing some resemblance to the adverbial usaifo 
of the neuter plural in Horn. II. E. 71, Od. A. 431, 0. 
519, See also Thucyd. iii. 14, Soph. (Ed. T. lI82,vElian. 
V. H. viii. 38, Philostr. V. Apoll. viii. '26. It is, howe 

aye. The verb aye is found in the singular with the vocative, 
or rather the nominative for the vocative, in the plural, in 
James iv. 13, aye \vi, o'l y-iyoyTn. v. I, aye nCu, oi «Xw/o-i'oi. 
It will be observed, however, that ays is hero used as a 
kind of interjection; so that nothing perhaps can be in- 
ferred from the usage, which prevails also in the best 

' Winer, 



■ Greek writeri^. and equally before nouns in tlic singular 

■^ and the plural. See Horn. IL A, SO'i, Z. 376, Xen. Cyrop. 

iv. 2. 47, V. 3. 4, Dion. Hal. vii. p. 456, Aristid. T. I. p. 
415, So also the Latins use age. 
iya/jLix EiTTi, oKj/iSTi. It may be observed of ovofiz euti, that it 
is joined not only with the dative, but with the genitive 
of the person or thing, the Dame itself being' put in the 
nominative. The following are examples of both forms ; — 
Liulce i. 5, TO isvo^m auTSt (^iv) 'E^o-ajSer. 26, ■^ 'iyai^x (iov) 
Na^ajt'r. 27, avSgi, u) o»0|i*« 'lajoj}^' xai to ovo/ia t^j wa^- 
&EV0O, Magi3(i. In like manner the name follows Kx^sTa^cu 
or KtVff^A' in the nominative; as in Matt. x. I, liVcaiv □ 
?.pyoAifvot IlErgor. Luke ix, 10, TtiXswi xaXouftsynr Br,&so;i3a. 
Evidently oyjof is to be repeated in Luke xix. 29, e'ls to oj:or 
TO KaXoiJ/AEvov 'EXaiftiv. So also in Acts i. 12. Even where 
the accusative would properly have been employed, the 
nominative is sometimes found. Thus John xiii. 13, fnu- 
vEi« ti.1, SiSaoxaXor. Similar examples occur in the 
LXX and the ecclesiastical writers; as 1 Sara. is. 9, ^m 
Wfa^Ti-rnt ixi\n a Xa'ai ciATtpoa^tv b /3>.£9Tuv. Theodorct. iii. 
241, T^'v Stw !reo(r«yt.g<'«v. Add iv. 454. 1304. There is 
also, it may be remarked, another mode, in which persons 
are indicated by name, where the name is put in apposi- 
tion with the preceding noun, and ovofiaTi is added in the 
dative. Luke i. 5, Upivs ns ovo^iaTi Xax^P'^'- -^cts xxi. 
10, w^ofnTJit iv6iAa.ri "Aya^os. Compare Acts ix. 11, 12, 
xviii. 2, xix. 24, xxvii. I, xxviii. 7.' 
tiU>J\u. A/uitire is frequently made up of yLtWia and an infi- 
mtive of the present, aorisl, ar future, corresponding with 
the Latin /itiH/tw mm, and to be expressed in Engbsh by 
about to do, intending, is to be, &c. Thus in Matt. ii. 13, 
n.iXKsi ^firiiv TO 7r«i5io>, is about to seek, or intends to seek; 
xi. 14, aoTor EffTiv 'Hxixr a fJ-iJ^Xwy ip^ta^ai, vIlQ loas tit 
come/ Luke vii. 2, ^/^iWe rsKior^v, kos about to die, i, e, 
was at the point of death ; Acts xi. 28, >,i'/*ov /*fyav //.iyxeiy 
E«ff&«i, simply that there would be. Add Matt. xvi. 27, 
Luke xix. II, xxiv, 21, John iv. 47, vi. 15, Acts iii. 3, xvi. 
27, xsi. 27, Gal. iii. 23, llev. i. 16, ii. 10, iii. 2, 10, 16, et 


at tre^t Tim. This remarkable expression demands attention. 
In Mark iv. 10, oi w=gl a^Toy is siinply his compamons. 
Generally the person named is included ; and so in Acts 
xiii. 13, xxi. 8, oi ■^ipi tov IlaiJXav, Paul and his companions. 
Compare Ezck. xxxviii, 6, xxxix. 4, LXX. But some- 
times the form is even bo employed as to mean the prin- 
cipal person ; and thus it occurs in John xi. 
19, ia( 'Bcqi Map&av Kai Mipia», where Martha and Manj 
only are intended. (In some manuscripts the words rif 
flTf^i are omitted.) Compare .iEsch. Dial. Socr. xii. 20.' 

§69. — Some peculiar Constructions. (Buttm. § 151.) 
I. Attraction. 

1. This is a mode of construction, by which the parts of a 
proposition, which are logically distinct, are grammatically 
united. The two principal forms of this syntax have been 
already considered. See §§ 58, 6, and 59. 1. To this head 
may also be referred the combination of two distinct questions 
into one proposition, as in Mark xv. 24, ^^t^J.o^T£^ x\^§ov is" af- 
Tuv ric Ti' dejT]. Compare Luke xix. 15. Somewhat of the same 
nature is nom. iii. 7 , ti sti xiyai ois x/j-apiioKas m/m'vo^zi ; xal ^l.i 
{xxbui ^aapr)ij,i3U{i.iia, x«i y.a!bais ^xai rtyss nt'-a.t ^iyeiv), on 7eiK- 
mufiEv Tx xaxi, "v« s^^T) T« dya^d; the question being combined 
mth the parenthesis. 

2. It is also by attraction that two dependent clauses are 
thrown together, instead of being kept distinct ; as in Acts xi. 
17, eyiu Se tiV wftsiv evyar'ai xaiXiisxt Toy ©£D» ; for wcrrs fj.i t'yai 
Svvxriv. In Latin writers combinations of this nature ape not 
unusual. Thus in Cic. Orat. pro Rose. Ara. 49, Quirt eensti 
hunc ipsuvi Roscium quo studio esse ? See also Cic. N. D. 

II. Anacoluthon. 

I. It frequently happens that the construction, with which 

a proposition begins is abandoned ; and, either for the sake 

of perspicuity, emphasis, or elegance, the sentence proceeds in 

a difierent manner from that in which it set out. Writings 



Bil Soph. Ant. 

Winer, m Appead. } £3, Alt, $ 86, 4. Hemiann. nd Viget. p. 74S. EiCuidl 


of deep thought and profound argument, such as the Pauline 
Epistles, abound with such irregularities. They are also 
found, however, in other parts of the New Testament ; and, 
though in many cases they may be attributable to the inad- 
vertence of a writer carried away by the engrossing interest of 
his subject, they frequently impart not only grace, but strength 
and vigour to the language, and were doubtless intended to 
fix the attention of the reader. 

2. Sometimes in the New Testament an accusative stands 
alone at the beginning of a sentence, in such a manner that 
the writer seems, after a parenthesis, to have quitted the con- 
struction with which he had begun, and from negligence or 
forgetfulnesB to have slipped into another. These are not 
accusatives absolute, but are to be rendered by quod atlijiet 
ad. Thus in Luke xxi. 6, to:ot«, £ ^saipiiji, iXiuanTa\ TiiJ^ifai 
X. T. X. Acts X. 36, Tov Koyov, ov a.-tliiTn'ke tois v'i:>Ts^li7pxri\, vfj.i\! 
oiaaje to p/Aoi k. t. \. Perhaps, however, tov x6y^v may depend 
upon oiSaTE, and p7ifj.a he taken in apposition with ?,oyov, as 'Iji- 
(raSv, in the next verse, is again in explanatory apposition with 
both. A more apposite example is Rom. viii. 3, to yap aSiivarov 
Tou >o^(.ou, Ev ^ ■jirS'fvEi Sii TVS o'agKO!', 5 @£Qs xartjupvE rw a/**gTiny 

Obi. 1 . The aeuter prDnoun I is a\io lomttimea put ahntnUli/ at Ihe beginniii); 
of B sentence, ptobabl; with the pcepositina jiari uaderatood, in Ihe seme of qmiil 
allintt ail. Thus in Rosa. li. 10, ■ ]^ iriSan, tS s^^ti's ariSdii. Ipaim;- S 3i li, 
;n tv ^<V- Q"'' ■>■ 2C| • >' >" Z' if *'('•• '> "'■^■' ^- ^" U''^ QKinnei Ihc Latilia 

3. When the leading proposition has been interrupted by a 
parenthesis, and the subject is resumed at the end of the di- 
gression, there is frequently no grammatical connexion between 
the first and last parts of the discourse. Thus in Gal, ii. G, 

01 SoxoujTfi ol-Sev wfoafliva&Evro. Here, instead of completing the 
construction with the passive verb wgoffaveTt'^«, it is thrown 
into an active form after the parenthesis. 

Obt. 1. It may here be neceiisiicy ti> observe Ihut great cautien is neceisuiy in 
asceitaining the liioits, and eicD Ihe realitjr of parentheaea in the New TeEtament. 
Editoni have Erequentty marked them, nhece they do not eii»t; and thuie a lo 
great difleience of ojnnion with resi>ect to Iheic cutnmeDcement and termination in 
iTKny paaanges, that Ttllmann has rejected the signs, by which Ihey arc distiit- 
guished, iioiD his editJoii. At the same time it ia often, if Dot always, essential 

' Winer, i 32, 7. Ilecmana, ad Viger. p. 341. 


to an author's perspicuity, that, where real parentheses occur^ they should be aceu- 
rately defined ; more especially as, in the writings of St. Paul, they are not only 
very numerous, but sometimes lung and intricate. Now parentheses are, for the 
most part, of two kinds, and exist either when the words of the writer are mterted 
between those of a speech which he recites (Matt. L 21, 23, Luke xxiiL 51), or vhen 
a proposition is interrupted by the introduction of explanatory matter (Rom. vii. 1^ 

1 Cor. vii. 10, et a/ibi). Sometimes, however, it is immaterial whether a clause be 
regarded as parenthetical, or as a continuation of the period. See, for instance, 
Mark xv. 42, John iv. 9, ix. 7, xix. 23, Rom. iv. 11, 1 Cor. xvi. 5, 2 Cor. v. 7. 
When a parenthesis is short, it is inserted between two clauses grammatically con- 
nected, either with or without a connecting (mrticle, such as "it, ti, yk^, ixkky mI. 
Thus iu Matt. ix. 6, 1f» li tiinn ». r. X. {rirt Xiyu r^ ^ecpeckvrix^), 'Eyt^Bus a^sf «• 
riff nXtftif' Mark vii. 26, i>S«t;r« irf§^i9^0i tr^tfj t§v( irt^r au*rtS- (5> ik « ytmi *EXXr 
91$,) John i. 39, $1 H iiv§9 «vrf , *Pafifii (« kiytrtu i^fittinv0/u.t»§v, AtiufxetXi), vvu ftitut ; 
So Acts i. 15, Rom. vii. 1, 1 Cor. viii. 3, Eph. ii. 5, Col. iv. 1 0. See also Mark xr. 
42, Luke xxiii. 51, John xix. 31, Acts xii. 3, xiii. 8^ Rom. i. 20, 1 Cor. xv. 52, 2 Cor. 
vi. 2, X. 10, xi. 21 , 23, xii. 2, Gal. ii. 8, Kph. v. 9, 1 Tim. ii. 7, Heb. vii. 11, 19, 20, 
ix. 26, X. 7, 23, xiii. 17, Rev. ii. 9. Of Luke ix. 28, see § 37. Ob», 20. Sometimes 
a parenthesis of this kind is of considerable length, as in Rom. i. 2 — 6 ; and within 
this parenthesis itself it will be seen that shorter ones are inserted after vi»Z avnv 
and ttv^iBv fifiZv. More usually, however, after a parenthesis of more than ordinary 
dimensions, the conclusion of the interrupted clause is repeated, with or without 
variation. Thus in John vi. 24, § «x^«f ^'^i' «^' v}^mft»f aA.X« •Ik »i» sxi?, (^ixxm )i 
nXSi 9>.§m^m ». r. X.), on tZf tT^iir § «;^X«i ». r. X. 1 Cor. viii. 1, 9*1^4 ^ ^iit ttUikf 
Burtt9 §!^fiitf (in irdtrif «. r. X.), «'i«i rtis fi^eift^f rZf itUtXo^vTMv at^a/iAtv ovt «. r. X. 
1 John i. 1 , « a»fi«0a/if y, 2 Itt^elxafnt ^t^) rod Aiytu rns K^t^St (x«u ^ ^e^nt x. t. X.), m^- 
«a/Miy, na) aKtiKoautt, airayyixXofAtf vfttv. In Ephes. iii. 1^ the sentence is interrupted 
by a lon^ parenthesis of twelve verses, and resumed in v. 14. Compare also Rom. 
v. 12 — 18, 2 Cor. v. 6 — 8. When the construction is varied without a repetition of 
so much of what has gone before, as to make the resumed clause complete iu itself, 
it is then a proper Anacotuthon} 

4. Anacolutha frequently occur without a parenthesis, the 
incipient construction being entirely relinquished, and the 
sentence proceeding in another form; as in Mark vi. 11, o(joj 

av /XT} ^ii^Cfj^^roLi vtxoLs, SKTroqevofJiSvoi ixeT&sv ex,Tiycc^aTS rov %ovy sU 
t^OL^rvpioy oLVTOis, Acts xxiii. "60, /moivfS'gtffyjs" Se pioi ttjs- lin^ovKriS 
gis" Tov ecvS§a fxiXXsiv eVej&art, for fJL5XKov(7ris, Rom. ii. 7, to7s fxh 
i^ouviv aiofvioy (a9roScJff£<)' toIV Je Sf/xor x,xi opyy), scil. acroJoS'TjffgTai. 

2 Cor. viii. 23, elVe vTrsp Tirov (\iyst Tis), elVe aSeX^ol rifjLwv (ovo- 
pta^ovrai). So again, where the true reading el Se <rv seems to 
have been altered into TSe, ai by some copyist, to whom the 
anacoluthon was unintelligible, in Rom. ii. 17, eI ^l ah 'Ioi;SaTof 
sTrovotxac^ri, x. t. X. — o^v iiioiaKCi/v £T6§ov, afai/rov ou ^iSacrxfir. Sec 
also § 59. 3. Obs, 5. Such constructions are particularly fre- 
quent with participles, which appear in a case different from 

* Winer, Append. § G4. I. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 87. Tracts cle parenthesis ly 
Wolle, Uirt, Spitzner, and Lindner. 


that which the syntax requires ; as in Mark xii. 38, ^kimre ajso 

Tat o'lttUs Twi "/yifSit, K. T. X. Acts XV. 22, rdrt eSo^e «» aa-oiTTa- 
Xoif WE/A^/ai ivSjar, ■yga^iavTE* Sia x^i^ir avrZt raSe. (Compare 
Thucyd. iii. 36, Xcn. Cyrop. i. 4. 26, Lys. in Eratosth. 7.) 
Sph. iv. 1, 7»p«xa^,eij Di/v ini-as d^ims •Tfi^i^oiTvtim.i, aviyjiixtwi akX-n- 
Xm h a.ya.n'^, (rwofSa^^ovrw k. t. >,. See also 2 Cor, ix. 10, II, 
12, 13, Col i. 10, iii. 16, et alibi. Probably also in Col. ii. 2, 
av(i.^i0a.a5iiTis is the true reading. There is a doubt respecting 
2 Cor. i. 7. Sometimes also a construction, beginning with a 
participle, passes into another with a finite verb; as in Eph. 
i. 20, eyeiqas adriv tit vtKpcuv, xal EXaSiasv ev ic^ijc aiiioii. Col. i. 
26, TO n.i/tTTwpav TO iivoitexpi/ii,f/,ho» dwi rut aialviuv, vvy'i Se e^bve- 
qiiSn. Add John v. 44, Col. i. 5, ii. 14, Heb. viii. 10, 2 John 
2; and compare Xen. Cyr. ii. 3. 17, t. 4. 29, viii. 2. 24, Pan- 
Ban. iv. 13. 6.' 
Obi. 3. The consfruclion is sometimeB allogether broken off ; as in Mark xi. 31, 

5. Another species of irregularity in construction consists in 
a sudden transition from the indirect to the direct method of 
speech; as in Luke v. 14, wstpnyyiAsv aurZ ^wSsvi sl'TiiTif aXX' 
d'sA^ai)/ Sei^ov aixvTov rai UpiX. By some grammarians the varia- 
tion in the form of address is accounted for by an ellipsis of 
the verb 'iipm. On the other hand, the direcl form sometimes 
passes into the indirect ; as in John xiii. 29, tSoKot™, 'in Xe^ei 
ttUToi o 'I'Tjaoii, 'Ayoqaaoy Siv xfEiiv ej;o«.ev eir t^v iopTJiv w Torr 
•muypis Ivx ti SS. Acts xxiii. 23, iJinv, 'Kraifj-airaTi i^Tpxriuras 
SiBKOffiour, KT^vri Ts wapaarria-ai. In some cases an izitermixture 
of the sermo directtis et obUqvus is found ; as in Acts i. 4, ^ap- 
■nyyiiKst aZravs 'Xip'fikniv tw iwavycKmv toS a-aTgbt, ■nv xnaiijari See also Acts xiv. 22, xvii. 3, xxiii. 22. So in 1 Mace, 
xvi. 21, aTiriyyiiKev 'IwawTi, ori d^arXfro o TCirr-h^ auTou, ncti Sti aw£- 
ffTaXxe xai ue a;TcxT£i'vai. Compare also Gen. xii. 13, 19, LXX. 

Oit. 4. Closely &DalDgous ia the chsuge wliich sumi^tiineR uccura a! \he Euliject 
or person of the Tetbi as ia 1 Cor. vii. 13, yuiit, im t'x.f Siifa sirirTav, nol airii 
ecnuisnii alxiir fur' aurnc, /n iparai mlirii. FceqUEDtly also a change oi uunibvr 
taken place ; as in Gal, vi. 1, invt ti nm^Tiwi zxts;tiXiti tSi raiiZTn, ncrZt nao- 
■rit, juti usi ri rufxrB^!. Here ths tranBitioa makes a genu-ial caution more cloBely 
applicable to each individual. Othitr invtances of change fiom Bingulsr to plncul, 
and «!ce vend, are Rom. xii. 16, 20, 1 Cor. a. G, 7, Gal. ir. 6, 7, James ii. 16. 


G. Two equivalent constructions are frequcnily united in the 
same proposition. Thus in Mark vi. 1 , •xvp-nytsiK^-u axnm, Tm 
f*»lS[v aigarfliv fir oSbv, oXX' i^ToStSw^voff ffavSa^jit (^jivai), xai (tn 
svSuflaff&at Soj x'^^'af- Another reading is ivSiItmir&e. which 
would effect a triple variation of expression ; of which the two 
first forms are oblique, and the last direct. Again, in Muk 
xii. 38, ru\ SiXwrwu iv ijnKitif wepinanXv, xai io^aa-f-ai/t h xtHi 
ayopttTs. Kom. xii. 4, Tap«x«XoJ ouv i5/t£f KapaaTijo-ati ri aiiLan 

(*tT»(Wf$oua58 K. T. \. i Cor. Jciv. 5, &sXw Se wavrai v/jiit JiaXiT* 
y\ili'3aais, iJ-aWav Se, iva Tfo^flTewiTE. Add Ronj. xii. 14, sqq., 
2 Cor. vi. 9, Eph. v. 27, 33. PhiL ii. 22 ; and compare also 
Gen. xxxi. 33, xxxv. 3, Josh, xxiii. 16, Judg, xvi. 24, Nehem. 
X. 30, 3 Eadr. iv. 48, viii. 22, 80, Judith xv. 4, LXX, Thucjd. 
viii. 78, Xcn. Mem. ii. 7- 8, Pausan. i. 19. 5, r. 1. 2, viii. 23, 
X. l,Heliod. ^th. i. 6.' 

7. I'his is also perhaps the place to mention that change of 
construction, which is called Ilypallage, when an adjeetivt or 
other word, which logienlly belongs to one connexion, is gram- 
matically united with another. Thus in 2 Cor. iii. 7, i Suxdvi's 
To5 &o:vaTou t* yf/iu-itctiriy, EvTETuwaifiEJH Iv ^iSoir, where in fact the 
letteis, not the ministry, were engraven on stones. Again. 2 
Cor. V. I, VI iflyno! iit*.an oix/a; Toy OKmovs, for tou iwiyeiov. 2 Tim. 
ii. 6, Toy KoTtiunTa yiiuqyai SeF wgiiTov riv KOfvav (jLiTaXaLfj.Qayeit, for 
TOB ™» xagwiry fiETB^aw^itVEiv SeXovtii ytupyov Ssr wgwTOv Koa-ijit.* 

0£f. 3. H«re alio may be mentioimd lh« Gguce called Anitplotit, wheiebj !«« 
lally interchnogvd ; as in H«b. ix. 2, n rfiBtrtt *w> ilffw. 

thii head.' 

ipropeily peftr >i 

1 Rom. iK.31,li 

III. Ellipsis. 
1. Properly speaking, Ellipsis is the omission, not of a word 
contained in, or suggested by, the preceding context, but of 
some word or phrase spontaneously supplied Viy the mind. 
either from llie fact of its customary omission in particulsr 
instances, or from the obvious demands of the sense. 

' Winer, Append. J Ci. III. All. Gram. N. T. Jj 80, 50. HerTnann. ad Vimr. 
pp. 207. 218. b46, KHphelius and Kypke on Ai;ts i. 4. Wolf ad UemoBtb. Lent. 
p. 3R3. Diiker ad Thucjd. iv. 37. Ant ad Plat. Legg. p. ISO. Ueiadorf ad PUt. 
Protag. p. S!0. 

' Winer, Append, f 65. 4. 7 
ermaDD. ad Vigti. p. 891. 
' Herraann ad VigKr. p. 89 

Alt Gram. N. T. $ 92, 

Lobrck ad Sopb. Aj.7. 
JEKh, Agam. 1.13. I3G0. Tboluck 


Obs. 1. Many abbreviated forms may be regarded as mere idioms, in which ihe 
words vifjbi^aj x^^^f f^'^Sj yvvii, &c., are at once supplied without hesitation. They 
occur at every step; as in Matt. i. 6, « rod Ou^iov, soil, ywv. iv. 21, o red Zt/SsWat;, 
»ctV. vies. vi. 34, fi Kv^iev, 8cil. fifii^ec. X. 42, '4'U;^^ev, seil. tllareg. xxiii. 15, <r«» 
^tt^av, sciL ynv, Joha iv. 31, ry fAiral^v, toil, xgflvy. XX. 12, h XtVKoig, tcil» tfAefriets. 
Acts ii. 33, r« h^/ec, soil, x^'?'*- ^^'^' ^ ^» ''5 *'»''«y<^»i, *«V. fifAi^a. In like manner the 
word omitted is easily found in Luke iii. 5, ^(treti ra, trxeXia, us il^iHav, scil. o^ev. xiv. 
18, aire fJuZfy scil, <paiy9}s, 2 Gor. viii. 15, o re ^ekv, o re eXiyeVf scil. %xuv* James iii. 
11, [Ann n trtiyh Ik rm ttirns ottJs fi^vu re yXvxv xas re 9tix^ef } 9ciL vhej^, 

Obs, 2. In less obvious instances the word omitted must be obtained from the 
sense ; and there are ellipses of the verb, the subject, and the object, but not of the 
predicate, which requires from its very nature to be accurately defined. Examples 
of such ellipses will be found in § 37. 7, 8, 9 ; to which may be added such verbs as 
nXtvrfv and liuyuv (Matt. ii. 19, Tit. iii. 3), 9rpeffix^4y (Matt. vi. 1), x^evuv and avet' 
yuv (Matt. vii. 7, xxv. 11), ffvXXetfifieivuv (Luke i. 24), ^^eff(pi^uv (Luke v. 14), trvfi' 
fiecXXtiv (Acts iv. 15), ffrfuvvvitv (Acts ix. 34), et alia, with which the accusatives of 
the object, /S/^y, vevv, ^v^ett, vievj Bvo'ietv, keyevg, xXivifv, &c., are sometimes found, and 
with which the notion of these nouns is so intimately combined, that their absence 
can scarcely be considered as elliptical. With respect to the predicate also, al- 
though a complete ellipsis is impossible, a partial one may obtain; as, for instance, 
in Luke xii. 47, ixtTves e ^ovXes ^u^furtrat treXXxs^ soil, ^Xnydg. See also 2 Cor. xi. 
24 ; and compare Xen. Anab. v. 8. 12, ^lian. V. H. x. 21, Liban. iv. p. 862. 

Obs. 3. From the fact that, in the later writers, prepositions are far more largely 
introduced after verbs, which are commonly followed by a simple case. Grammarians 
have supposed an ellipsis ; as, for instance, of avr) with a genitive after verbs of 
buying and selling. The simple genitive has already the signification, which the 
addition of the preposition may render more prominent, but which it does not com- 
municate. Various forms with the article also, as ra xar* e^e, re eWSsy, and the 
like ; and participles and adjectives which stand in the place of substantives, might 
probably be rendered more explicit by the addition of a noun ; but they are still 
only abbreviated expressions, hot elliptical. So with respect to conjunctions, such 
expressions as ri SsXtrs trei^o'ea v/jut i (Matt. xx. 32) are explained by an omission of 
iW ; and t}, in the sense of rather than, by fitaXXev understood ; as in Luke xv. 7, 
xviii. 14, 1 Cor. xiv. 19, Gal. i. 10. The omission, however, if real, is rather to be 
considered as a grammatical idiom than a figure.^ 

2. Besides the Ellipsis properly so called, there are various 
concise modes of expression, which are closely allied to it. 
Thus a word or words, employed only once, must often be 
taken twice. There is a striking instance, in which the words 
to be repeated are inserted between brackets, in Rom. ii. 28, 
ov yip 6V to) (favsp^ ('lofSarof), 'loi/Salos" e<jriy, ovoe ri h rcb ^ayspco 
QitBpiroi^ri), 'ffspirofAio (6<ttiv)' aXX' o ev to; KquTrrSf 'lofSocIbr ('lov- 
SaTof 6(Tri), Kocl (ri 'xreqtrofjt.^ eo-rl) we^tTopto) xa.p^la.s x. r. X. So 
again the sense must be thus supplied in Rom. v. 16, x«I ovk 
ofs St' Ivor a/w«a§TaJ(TavT65" (Icmv o SavaTOS", ovroo St' Ivos ^maiovvros) 
TO ^dpr^yi^x* to /mev yap x,pifxa I? evoy (jnapocitrut^aroi) b\s xardxpifAot 

» Winer, Append. } 66. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 93. Hermann, ad Viger. pp. 869, 
sqq. Bauer Philol. Thucyd. Paul. pp. 162, sqq L. Bos. de Ellips. pa««tm. lu- 
terpp. ad N. T. in U. cc. 



K. T. X. Also in V. 18, ro Kpi/xa and to y^i^ta/m must be sup- 
plied after wapasTTw/xoiTtK and iixaiuiKKTiif respectively. See 
also Rom. xiii. 7. Of a similar nature are the abbreviated 
expressions noticed above in § 43, 2, 

Obt. 4. A mrb, or pait of a cUuie, if frequently to be supplied Cioin the pmcJi*) 
or suUt^utiU cantvxl, because, tbuugh omitleil, it wai obviouely ptiiuuit to the miHl 
of tbe writer. Thus in MhtIi i>v. 2S, xm) ■; r,^,^>^rS4r«,Ta,, ixx' ^j> i>v- 

H t Hiun i!m-ii, 'TwiXjifi^w 1ti (icJ. Mirl, rkwii iyariru wnr), f «' trliTn ix"- 
»r.. See alio John iv. 4, Rum. ix. 31, xi. IS, 1 Cor. xi. I, 2 Coi. iu. 13. idd 
Mirk xii. 5, Rom. V. 3, 11, viii. 23, is, 10, 1 Cor.»ii. 3, 4, xlv. 27, x». 37. 2 Cor.i. 
B, ii. 10, T. 13, vii. 1 1, viii. 19, Eph. iv. 2S, ». 24. Phil. iii. 13, 2 11111. 1. 5, 1 Prt.iT. 
II, Rev. lix. 10, «ii. 9. Sometimes theia is no omisHion, where it might be K- 
[>acted ; as in John »v. IS, lix "/"^' ^ i£i*iE«»9ii iW ij^iJ lZiXj^( tfm. 

Obi. 5, II may albu bo ubsecired here, that the verbs lo toy are often omilled 
before «, St<, &c. Thus in Acts ri». 22, Ja-.imij.'Jj.i-ii rsc ■4-''X'f «■"■ i*«*i'"- 

Compare 2 Cor. i. '/4, «iii. 12, Phil. It. 17, 2 Tbeag, iii. 9. The same aba ocam 
in other coses, wheTe the aensB is tufficieott; Impliei] ia what precedes ; as m Jaba 
xiii. IS, lyii iTlit iSi lZi>.ila/"n, iu.' In i y;af i rXnfiiSi], tvU. auTut irsltvin. Bee tea 
Hsrk xiv. 49, iv. 8, John i. B, ix. 3, xv. 25. 

3. Sometimes the sense requires that a word or words shooM 
be supplied, which are directly the reverse of those in a pre- 
ceding clause. Thus in I Cor. vii. 19, r, ste^ito^m ouih iim, xai 
M aKqo^uinix oCSbv e^'tiv, dWx r-nfmats Ivto>,»v ©eo5, scil. iat'i ii. 
xiv. 34, oil yaf ETiTETgawrai ayroeTr Xo:?i.srv, a>.^' i!iroTa(atf£i7-&«i, Jfl7. 
KEXtiJovTai. 1 Tim. iv. 3, xwXliovtwv 7a,i*eiv, a-TEj^Ea&aj 0eaiiiaT6n 
(scil. KiKBvivTU)/). In Acta xxvii. 43 a similar form is complete. 
It does not seem that James i. 9, 10, belongs here. 

oil. 6. Tlie same verb in even empluyeil in Ivo ilifterent acceptations; as ioLDlii 
xix. 43, Hafmi: ri Eu Tx TiiM rail it ml, where iltsf i^m sigaiHes both to lettl nil 
the grouml, and lo daih againil the graund. In this last ssDse it occurs in Pi. 
cxxxviii. 9, Hos. X. 14, LXX. 

Oil. 7. Somowhal anHlojions tn (his is the figure called Zeugma, by which ■ nti 
is grammatically connected with two substantives, but in sense only with ens of 
them; an in Luke i. li'l, in^x^" ^^ '>'• '^i/^" butiu ra^sj^^n^ui xa) n yxSnu mini. 
wheiu in^x^ '^^ be Btrii:tly applied only tu STi/tit, und Uu'Sn, or some like wnA 
must be supplied with yxSima. So again in Luke xiiv. 27, i^i/j,int iri lUrUt 
mJ iri rdtrnt *5b irfj^B™, scil. i^sffi^iut. 1 Cur, iii. 2, j.i(;U( i^( iririrr, •• 

Obt. S. To this head also belongs the coialnHilio pragnani, wheu a verb deriiu 
an additional farce from a preposition, with which it is improperly constructed. 
Thus in Luke i*. 38, iwuTit i« rnt tetayoiiyiii, aruing and depatliiigyram Ihe ly- 
gigue. Acts xxiiL 24, Iu inmii-wi 7(» «n^ita, ia conducl him in softly. 2 Tun. 
ii. 26, funj^urfi ic t^i nZ tm^kiiu <r,iyliss, theg ikouid ncovtr from their llupt/'t- 
lion, and be delivered /rom lAe .nor* o/ lAe Devil. See olso Acts xx. 30, Oal, ?, 4, 
2 Tim. iv, 18, 1 Pet. iii. 20 ; and compare Xen. Anab. 3. 1 1, Polyb. vi. 58. 5.' 

' IViner, Appeml. % 66, 1. 7. &.\t,QiftTO,15.T.^47,4, Hermann, ad Viger.p. 


4. Under the head of E/Hpsis should perhaps be classed the 
Buppresaioii of the whole or part of a sentence, which the emo- 
tion, op energy, or studied conciseneBS of a writer may lead him 
to omit. This is called Jiposiopcah ; and the import of a clause 
thus suppressed, which in conversation is collected from the 
tone, manner, or gesture of the speaker, ia indicated in writing 
by the tenor of the discourse. Thus in Lultc xix. 42, t! 'iy^aii 
XXI rrii ra. Tr^at Eigiivnv aav' juv Se inqtifin a,n\ h^'haX{j.m irov. xxii. 
42, El (SoiJXsi wagEVEyKEtv TO worTj^iov ToiJTo' w'Xtjv fiJh K. T. X. There 
is another example, according to those manuscripts which omit 
the words fi.r, Seo^axa'^'Ev, in Acts xxiii. 9. 

Oil. 9. Iq coDJitianal satitencB?, after the formula li !i t^iyi, the alternative is 
generally suppressed; as in, ^frnx'tt tbi !iM.*ri>,ii iftZr flip miri i/i- 

tix 'ix'Ti. So in Mutt. ix. 17, Mack ii. 21, 22, Luke x. 6, Rev. iL 5, and elfiewheTe. 
There is a douljls apasiopesis in Luk? xiii. 9, aai /il> raiirf iitfrii — ■! H finyi, — tls 
ft fiixxn l>ig<^ii( hStri. In the fiiat clause xaxSi Ij^ii maj' be Bupplied, and in the 
last the alteinBtiiB iti suppressed. 

IV. Pleonasm. 

1. The opposite of Ellipsis is Plemnim, or the insertion of 
a word which is not absolutely necessary to the sense, and 
therefore redimdanl. Its object seems to have been to define 
more closely the proper meaning of a word, which had departed 
in any degree from its original import; but, at the same time, 
without increasing its force. A good example of this is Tit. i. 
12, "Sior auTm ■srpa^-nTus. 

Obi.l. Hence the use uf M iriih verbs of aitimilaliiiff, reputing, and the like; as 
in Matt, xiv, 5, ui r^sfnTm il^n turrit. Luke nv. \9, trtlirin fa lit ttu rwi furSSur 
»!>. 1 Car. it. I, ifiZi iityi^Mai if uTH^lTif. Hence also the addition of the ■an^- 
tire particle after verbs of denying and pTevtnling; the formulm i'f XxarTtt, I'l rii. 
Set.; and the pi-epmilioM repeated after compound verbs, SeBjil5,4-, 38, 2. 06». 
3 ; and 65. Obi. 6. 

2, The next degree o^ pleonasm is the use of two equivalent 
terras, with a view perhaps of giving energy to the style, but 
still altogether or nearly synonymous ; in whicli ease the re- 
dundancy may consist either in a simple word, or in one of 
the elements of a compound one. Thus in Matt. v. 20, ii* /am 

V Tciit yqa/jLixaTftuv. X. 38, axo- 
xxvi- 42, w*Xi* U Icvripov. 58. ajra fAaxpo^iv. 


xxvii. 51, oLTTo avft/&6v. Luke xiv. 10, Trpooayi^^t dvdfrsqov, xix. 
4, vqo^qcifxuiv e/uiT/>0(T&sv. John ix. 34, l^ifiaKov avrov e$(w. xi. 7, 
eTTsira fjuri toDto. Acts xiii. 24, wpo TrqoacuTrou rm elaciov avrov. 
(An Hebraism. Compare Gen. xxxv. 18, Numb. xix. 4, LXX.) 
xviii. 21, 9raXiv iyxKxi^^co. 1 Cor. xiv. 5, ^ktos el /ut-w. 2 Cor. 
iv. 19, ft^f on. Gral. iv. 9, waXiv avft;&6v. 2 Tim. iv. 9, aTrou^aaoy 
6X&6iv rct.%i(»)s* Heb. vi. 6, vaXiv iyaxaivi!^eiv» Rcv. ix. 7, ri 
ofjt^oici/fji^xra ruv oiKptSuv ofjLota ^iwoif. 

Obs, 2. It is usual also to represent the verbs S.^iff^eti, ^txtTv, roXfcZv, Irtxti^uh 
SiXtiy, and some others, as frequently redundant ; though perhaps they generaliy 
give some accession to the verb with which they are connected. Examples are* 
Matt. iii. 9, /in ^o^fin Xiyttv iv tavrols, Luke i. 1, 9ro\.>>6] iinx.^i^^fo'etv ifecra^etffBeu lin- 
ytifftf, John V. 35, ^SiXii^'art ayaXXta^Btivai ir^og £^av tv rtf (penri etvTov. xiii. 5, lio\»:t 
nvrritv rove vrciai ruf fAu^nrSif* xxi. 12, ovht)f \roXfMi i^trd^eu etifrov. Compare Matt. 
XX. 25 with Mark x. 42. See also Luke xxii. 24, John vii. 17, Acts xi. 15, Rom. v. 
7, 1 Cor. iii. 18, vii. 40, x. 12, xL 16, xiv. 37, 2 Tim. iii. 12, Heb. iv. 1, xiii. 18. 

Obs, 3. Frequently verbs take an accusative of the cognate noun, as in 2 Cor. viii. 
24, rttv tyi*t^49 rtis etyavtns ofim tif uvrovf ivlu^eiffBt, See above, § 40. 4. If, how- 
ever, any additional idea is conveyed by the noun, the usage cannot be termed 
strictly pleonastic ; and the same remark applies to a large class of compounds : 
such as in Matt. v. 35, iivreTohev r£v ^ohuv* Luke xxii. 1 1, riji olxe^to'^reT*! Ttii oWtas, 
Compare Hom. P. 247, T. 235. 

Obs, 4. The frequent redundancy of the copula »«2 in the second member of a 
proposition seems to have arisen from a confusion of two constructions. Thus in 
Luke ii. 21, on iTXnff^riffKv hf^i^ett oktu^ xmi e»X)/S)7 %, r, X., the two forms iTXnff^.ffai 
xcc) iKXrt^n and on i-rX^tr^rKrxv ixkn^t) appear to be intermixed. Of the pleonastic 
use of the relative prououn see J 34. 2. 

3. From Pleonasm, properly so called, are to be separated 
the following cases : — 

1. Words repeated for the sake of emphasis, or in expres- 
sions of vehement emotion; as in Matt. xxv. 11, xvpis, 

xupts, avot^ov rifjJiy, 1 Cor. vi. 11, aXXa ocTreXoua-oca^s, dXki 
riyixa^nrs, dXXa E^iKxtou^nre, xiv. 26, OTav <yvvepyrn(rh, 
'iKocaros vi/.cjv xJ/aXpiov ex^t, SiSap^oiv ex^'^ y'Kuia'<rex,v By^^i, aTTo- 
KdXvyl/iv ex^i, l^pcr/vs/av ex^'* ^^^ ^^^o Matt. vii. 21, John 
xix. 10, Acts ix. 4, xxvi. 14, Phil. i. 9, iii. 2, Col. i. 28. 

Obs, 5, Of a similar character is the accumulation of synonymes which are in- 
tended to add force and even variety to the sentiment. Such are Mark xii. 30, iya- 
^nffiis Kv^tov rov &iov aov i| oAjj; t^j xa^S/aj <foUy xeu i^ oKfii Tns '4't^'is trov, xeu i^ oXns 
Ttjs havolxs (Fov, xoc) i^ oXns tyis lo^vog ffov, Rom. ii. 4, n rov ctXovrou rtis •YpyivromrH 
etvrovf xeci rr,$ avox,^;, xa.) rtjs f/,KX^o^uf/,iecs xara^pov&Tg ; £ph. i. 21, v^ipdvej Kraat]; »»• 
X>}S xa) i^avcias xa.) 'hvvoifAtus xa) xv^tornros. Phil, iv. 9, ei xa) \fAa^iTty xat ^aaiXei^irt, 
xa) hxovffocn xa) it'hiri iv iftol. Col. iii. 16, "^aXfAols xet) vfitvoif xeu M^eug ^viVLuanxxts 
^^ovns. Add Acts ii. 23, Rom. ii. 8, 10, 19, ix. 33, x. 15, 1 Cor. xiv' 21, Gal. i. 12, 
V. 20, Eph. v. 19, Phil. i. 2, 16, Col. i. 16, 1 Tim. iii. 15, 2 Tim. iii. 14. Tit. i. 4, 
1 Pet. iii. 1 1 . Two or more emblems of equivalent import are in like manner em- 



ployed for the purpose of illustration in figurative discourse; as in Rom. xi. 6, ei ^ 
n et^a^x^ ofyieCf *eu re (pv^eifAa' xttt tl h ^i^» etyia^ »eci oS xXdiei* Thit frequent use of 
a continuous series of expressions entirely or nearly synonymous is very charac- 
teristic of the Hebrews, and thence doubtless its prevalence in the New Testament, 
though it is not without example in the Greek writers. Perhaps a redundancy may 
sometimes be attributed to the writer's inattention to the mere elegancies of style ; 
as in Rev. xiii^ 2, ffrofAet alreu wf ffTofAct kiovTBf, Compare Rev. ix. 2, xiv. 2. There 
is a parallel example in Athen. v. 21, ikovtrg h reTs ^XavuMSt tn itifMrSf h rk /3«X«- 

2. The expression of a sentiment both in an affirmative 
and a negative form ; as in John i. 20, (w/uioXoyioffs, xaJ 
oux -w^vajtraro. Acts xviii. 9, XaXs*, xal /ut^ aKutrTiCt^s, 
Rom. ix. 1, aXTj&g/av xlyo;, oJ vJ/gySojUiai. Compare Luke 
i. 20, John i. 3, Acts xiii. 11, Rom. ii. 8, Eph. v. 15, 
Col. i. 23, 1 John ii. 27 ; and see above, § 25. Obs. 12. 
Entirely distinct from this usage are such passages as 
Rom. xi. 20, pt^ i54/r}Xo(p§ov6*, iWoi ^o/SoD. 1 Pet. iii. 11, 

IxxXivaro; i'TCo xaxoi), xat 'Tcoiriaircx) aya&ov.^ 

3. Periphrasis, and circumstantiality of expression ; as 
when a particular instrument is designated, or a pre- 
liminary action introduced. Thus in Matt. v. 2, xar/, 
avai^oLS to (jto/jlo, avrov, eSiSo^txsv avrous. xxvi. 51, kxrelvas 
T-wv X^'^poc, dTTEO'TratTs T^y yi*d%9i^(x.y Qcvrov. Acts i. 16, viv 
^^oetWe S/a <Tro/xaTOf ^a^iS. xi. 30, dTToarslKxyrsf S»a 
XBipos Boiqvoi^Qi, Acts XV. 3, X«/Siv 7reqieTBfji,sv avrov, 

1 Cor. Vi. 1.5, aipOC^ OVV TO, fxi'Kin ToU X^tffTOl), TToirtO'co TTopvnf 

pieXo} ; Add Matt. ii. 23, ix. 9, xvii. 8, Luke xv. 18, 20, 
Acts ii. 14, iii. 18, 21, iv. 25, xiv. 3, xv. 7, 23, et alibi. 
In such periphrastic forms, however, there is sometimes 
a marked and even powerfiil emphasis ; as in Luke ii. 

30, eTSov 01 o^SaX/ULoi /xov to aurripiov gov. Compare 
1 John i. 1. 

Oha, 6. Circumlocutions occur in the New Testament with the following substan- 
tives : — 
t^yev, £ph. iv. \ 2, l^yov ^t»»eviaSi Sot itetKtfm, In 1 Thess. i. 3, *i^yo9 ^iffrtufj and 

xo^os ayoi^ni are not pleonastic expressions, but strongly emphatic. 
xett^es, 1 Thess. ii. 17, t^os xeci^of ei^as, So in Hor. Sat. i. I. 9, HorcB momento* 
«i^«Xi7* Acts xviii. 6, to etif/,tt u/lcZv l^) rhv xt(paXhv vfiel/f. Perhaps, however, the 

word cannot be considered as altogether pleonastic, since the consequences of 

' W^iner, Append. § 67. Alt. Gram. N. T. §§ 95, 96. Tittmann. de Synonym. 
N. T. and Weiske and Maius de Pleonasm, passim. Hermann, ad Viger. pp. 885. 
sqq. Glass. Phil. Sacr. i. p. 641, sqq. Bauer Philol. Thuc. Paul. pp. 202, sqq. 
Wyss. Dialectol. Sacr. p. 165. Geor^. Hierocrit. i. 3. 44. Poppo ad Thucyd, i. pp. 
197, sqq. Lowth de Sacr. Poesi Hebr. xix. pp. 360, sqq. Vorstius de Hebraeism. 
N. T. pp. 605, sqq. 


guilt are usually imprecated upon the head, with reference perhaps to Lerit. 

xvi. 2 ] . Neither perhaps is »t^Xii to be regarded as a perfect pleonasm in 

Matt. Tiii. 20, Luke ix. 58. 
kiyn, 2 Cor. xi. 7, it Xo^y «XffSi/«f. 1 Thess. ii. 5, iv ^iy^f jcsXaMtag, 
•Izoi* John ii. 16, ot»n lfAvt§^i§vt for \iAvi^t§f. Though possibly Ifjufti^uv may be used 

in the sense of merchandise, which is more usually in the plural tfA^i^ut, 
•u/Mt. John iii. 18, ro Svofut rtv fiovoyivavf uUu r§v 6f«(7. Acts iii. 16, lir) «^ vltru 

rod ifOfiarof ulrov, rwrof i<m^iMff% rl Sfg/but avr§v. Rom* Z. 12, «*«; yat^f Is h 

tTixetkifffiroit re ovefiut Kv^tov, (rt/Bnnretu 
irnu/Ltec, Eph. iv. 23. otvunovv^xt re/ ^nv/Mtrt r»v »««;, for vot. 
irovg and xe/^. Matt* xvii. 22, fittxXu o vllt rod uv^^m^ov ^et^ec^t^oo'^ctt ttg X'^i'^ svS^ 

ir»>V4 Mark vi. 2, ^uvotfitTf ruavrat ^m rm X**Z'*^ avrou ytvovreu, Luke i. 71, 

rA>rfi^/«y ix xu^og irdvrttv riv fu^oufTW fifjuif, 79, xecTtu^uveu revs KtShtts hfuii ui 

Shh ti^mnS' John iii. 35, ireivra 2i3mjmv iv ry x**i^ avrou. Acts v. 9, oi x»Us rSh 

^uypeivrtitf rov ati^a irou Ivti r^ Si/^f • Rom. iii. 15, iSijiXs ol ^iiits ttvrSv i»;^i»t alfu. 

2 Cor. xi. 33, l^i^uyof rut ;^er^«; avrou, 
9a^» ^P^* V* 29, ovhiis ya^ r^t iavrou 9a^*a Ifit^^tv, 
0OifJM, Rom. xii. 1, tra^axakHi ouv ufias ira^aovn^as ra r«v/K«<r« v/ubSv Svr/air ^r». 

Eph. V. 28, ovreuf o<pukoufi9 ot av^^tf aya^^v rag lauraHv yvvaTxocs tfS ra ittovif 

UiOf, Mark iii. 28, ^dyra a<pt^ntnrat rd a/jbo^r^/jMra rots ulots rSw &9B^aixotv, (Com- 

pare Matt. xii. 31.) Eph. iii. 5, ro /iv^rri^toff S U Iri^eus ytvseus ova iyr^tf^n 

ro7f urns r£f dy^^uctw. 
^Myit. Matt. iii. 3, John i. 23, fnvn ^oZvros So r^ ^^/*V» ^or /3mvi». Compare IsaL 

xl. 3. 
(pv0ts» James iii. 7, ^Z^a ^vo-ts B^ti^wv n xeti vtnnSiv, X^^irSv rt »«u ivocXiotv, htfid^ru 

xa) ^{hdfAairrat rn (putru TJJ dv^^u^ivif* 
'Xju^a. Luke iii. 1, rrig ^Iru^aias xat T^ax^fvirihos X'^f'^S' 
•v^y;^>7. Luke ii. 35, (rod Vi xurtis rhv "^^v^hv ^tiXivtrirat pefA<pecia. ix. 36, o ydp uiof nu 

dv^^u^ov ohx riX^t''4^vxds dv^^u^uv d^oXiffaif dXXd ffutfocu 

V. Asyndeta. 

1. Each simple sentence, of which a compound proposition 
consists, may include various combinations of the several parts 
of speech dependent upon each other according to the rules 
of government, which have been stated and exemphfied. 
The position of the adjective, of nouns in regimen, and other 
cognate relationships, have been investigated (§§ 30. 44. Obs. 
20, &c.) ; and, with respect to the rest, it may be observed, 
that the adverb should be near the word which it qualifies, the 
jjreposition annexed to the no^n which it governs, and the verb, 
if not at the end of the clause, in that prominent situation 
which eff^t, or emphasis, requires. 

Obs. 1 . Still it happens that adverbs in particular, and sometimes other words, 
are separated from their immediate connexion, either to mark an antithesis (Acts viii. 
48, 2 Cor. ii. 4, Gal, iii. 15), to produce an emphasis (2 Cor. vii. 16, 1 Pet. ii. 1\ 
or from the inattention of the writer to the mere accuracies of style. Among the 
numerous examples of such negligence, it will suffice to notice Luke zviii. 18, John 


vi. 66, vii. 38, lii. 18, Ada xiy!. 2J, Rom, i. ll,vlii. 18, liL. 3, I Cor. U. 11, t, 1, 
Gal. iii. 1, 23. Heb. il. 32, xUi. 11. Nor are Bimllar instances tare \a the best 
writers.' Indeed the BTraagenient of woida miiat naturally depend upon the |<ecu- 
liac bent ot tlie writer's taste oi geniui, aod in an argumentative or didactic style 
will be far removed from the regular aud obvious nriler of Himple narrative. A 
much graalar freedom will accordinKly be found to prevail in the aniroated and 
energetic writings of St. Paul, than in the enlmer and raotf. sedate compoBitions of 
the Evangelists. The omission of conjuncliona is mute particularly a predominant 
feature in his Epistles ; and their absence is the means of increasing their force 
and spirit in a very sensihla degree. Similar aigndela are oof wanting, however, in 
the other parts of the New TestamEUt, 

2. Asyndela may be resolred into four claases — conjunctii-e, 
disjunctive, explanatory, and causal. Examples of the first 
class arc, 1 Cor. iii. 12, si Si ra eotoijioSojxeT ewi tov &£/ae'Xiov tou- 
Tov, xpuirov, agyupoY, Xi&oi/i ■ttjj.iotjs, ^uKx, %opT!))i, xa\xii.-nt. 1 Tim. 
IV. 13, wjoffsjje Til avayvwsEi, t^ •jrapa.yikyiiist, t^ SioatrxoiXiji. neb, 
xi. 37, £Xi&ja&7i(7«v, I'TTiiic^itcav, h-TCHpia^vtaxy, Iv fov^ /jcai^xipxs 
BWE&anDV K. T. \. See alao Mark xvi. 17, Rom. i. 29. ii. 19, 

1 Cor. iv. 8, xiii. 4, 2 Cor. vii. 2, Phil. iii. 5, 1 Thess. v, 14, 

2 Tim, iii, 2, iv. 2, James v, 6, 1 Pet, ii, 17, v. 10; and com- 
pare Demosth- Phil. iv. p. 54, A, Plat. Gorg, p. 517, D, Polit. 
X. p. 598, C, Heliod. ^th. i. 5, Lucian. D. M. xxvi. 2. So, 
in Latin, Terent. Eun, v. 7, Ego ille agreHis, steims, fristis, 
parens, Iruculentus, tetiax. (2.) Of the second class are, Mark 
ii, 27, TO ax^^arm Sia Toy avSptusrov lycsna, ou% o avS^wTos 5i« to 
ffa^jSctTOV. 1 Cor. XV. 42, oStw x.a> •^ ivao-Taair Tiiv VExpwV (ra-ei- 
pnm Ev (pSopf, eyslptrai iv aip^a^pai^' x. t. X, JaDies i. 10, 'i<7^ai 
•ffit avSoaiwof Tayjit e'lt to aKoyuai, jS^aSui tlr To \xK^aixt. Add 
Mark ii. 27, 1 Cor. vii. 12, Eph. ii. B. To one or other of the 
above classes may be referred such addresses as these in Mark 
xvi. G, 'Iti^iguk ^liTiirs, Tov carav^c^fj-ivav •nyep^, oux eariv S^i, 
Acts XXV. 12, Kai'oag* i'jrixix.X'tiactr fvi Ka!aapx ^o^iia-^. (3.) A 
clause added to explain or define another moro exactly is fre- 
quently without a copula; as in 2 Cor. vii. 5, ev vocmtI &?u;3o;i*e»oi 
(ifTfiev)- E|«aEv fiax^i, EOfti&Ev ipi0ot- Compare 2 Pet. ii. 18, 19. 
(4.) Causal asi/vdeta are John xix. 12, lav toutov airoXuirrif, ofix 
El fiXoi To5 K.itiaapos. 1 Cor. vii, 15, si S^ 5 a'aitrms xi^pi^irai, 
jfwgi^Eii&iii" oO ZeSai'XtiiTai o iSEXfoy ^ w aoEX^n iv ToTr roioi/Toii. So 
1 Cor. vii. 4, Rev. xvi. 6, xxii. 10,' 

' Winer in Append, 4 65. Alt, } 91. Qersdoirs BeitrBge, i. 1. Poppo ad Thu- 
cyd. i. p. 2>I9. KrUger ad [}ion. pp. 139. 314. 

' Winer in Append, f 66. 8. Alt, ^ 94. b. Qlaw. Phil. Sacr. i. p. 312. Bauer. 
Rbet, Paulm. T, u, p, ^91. Stallbaum ad Plat, Grit, p. 144. Protsg. p. 52. 


VI. Hendiadys. 

When two substantives, of which one denotes some quality 
or accessory of the other, are joined together by a copula, tliis 
last is frequently to be rendered by an adj., or in the gen.; 
and the figure is called Hendiadys (?v Sta St/o7v). Thus we 
have in Luke xxi. 15, a-rofAo. xa\ cro^/av, wise words, or words of 
wisdom. Acts i. 25, SfaxdviW xai dvoa^oXTif, i. e. iiacKoylas avo- 
aroXiKYis* xiv. 13, raipovs xce! ariiMfxara, i. e. Totvpov^ sa'Tefxixivovs. 
2 Tim. i. 10, ^a;^v xal d^baqa-lay, for ^o/iv a<pdapToy, 2 Pet i. 

3, ^Mr^v xai ei/jeiSc/av, and So^oif xotJ a/)gT?f. So in Latin, Virg. 
Georg. ii. 192, Pateris libamus et auro, i. e. pateris aureis. 

Obi. 1. la Matt. iii. 11, ««m irufi is omitted in many manuscripts; but if the 
words are genuine, the passage is another example of thin figure. Compare Acts 
iL 3. Chrysostom unites xonml^ and xXint rin &^tmv, in Acts ii. 42, into a kenditt- 
djfi ; but it should seem that the latter refers alone to the Eucharist, and the former 
implies Chriitian fellowship generally. The figure is only employed where one 
tubtt* indicates a property of the other; so that Phil. i. 11, and 25, are not ctses 
in point.^ 

Ob». 2. The case is similar when a copula joins two verbs, of which one is to be 
expressed adverbially ; as in Luke vi. 48, J^xa-v^i »«i IfldBuM, for ^a^ius Uum^u 
See § 67. 

§ 70. — Rhetorical Figures. 

To the peculiarities of grammatical construction, noticed in 
the foregoing section, it may not be amiss to add some of the 
principal Rhetorical figures, which are employed by the writers 
of the New Testament. 

I. Metonymy. 

1. This figure consists in the substitution of one name or 
appellation for another ; as the cause for the effect^ and, vice 
versa, the effect for the cause. Thus Christ is put for his doc- 
trine in Rom. xvi. 9, cryvsgyov ^/xo/v ev ^piOTco, our assistant in 
preaching the Gospel. Compare 1 Cor. iv. 15, Eph. iv. 20. 
Again, the Holy Ghost is put for his effects, or his gifts. John 
vi. 63, ra. prifjuara, a eyci XaXo/ ufMv, 'jrv£viJid far*, xa« ^curt £(TTi\, 
i. e. proceed from the Spirit of God, and lead to eternal life. 
1 Thess. V. 19, to irv^vfxx txri a^ivwrs, where the Spirit is repre- 
sented as Sijire, from its enhghtening and purifying influences. 

> Glass. Phil. Sacr. p. 18. Alt. Gr. N. T. § 97. Kuinoel on Acts xiv. 13. Pott 
on 2 Pet. i. 3. 


Compare Bom. xii. 11, 2 Tim. i. 6. Similarly the author is 
put for his work (Luke xvi. 29, xxiv. 27, Acts xv. 21, xxi. 21, 
2 Cor. iii. 15) ; the tongue for lan^'(.)Aa.xk xvi. 17, 1 Cor. 
xiv. 19) ; the hand for hand-writing (1 Cor. xvi. 21, Col, iv. 
18) ; the sword for death or persecution (Matt. x. 34, Rom. viii, 
35). On tlio other hand, the effect is sometimes put for the 
cause; as in John xi. 25, iyu t'ii.i n avx/jra^is xal ii ^w^. Rom. 
vili. 6, t!) yaq lfpinfj,cc T^r accpxhi, Javaror' TO Se (ppivnij.ix rati 'Bynj- 
(taTor, ^u^ xai ei^^vm. 1 John v. 4, aErrj ettiv v h'xi n vixMiTaffai 
Tov xoir^ov, 11 a-io-TiT ^w.wv. See also Mark xii. 44, Luke ii. 30, 
viii. 43, XV. 12, John iii. 19, Rom. i. 16, vii. 7, 1 Cor. i. 30, 
Eph. ii. M, Col. iii. 4; and compare Luke xi. 14 with Matt. 
ix. 32. 

2. Sometimes there is a metonymy of the subject for its ad- 
junct, or of the adjunct for its subject. Instances of the former 
are, when the iking containing indicates that which is contained 
in it; as in Matt. iii. 5, i^iTroq^utTo vfas a^Tov'Iegoai^ufAo:, where 
the inhahitant.1 of Jerusalem are meant; or when the object is 
put for something connected with it; as in 2 Cor. v. 21, tov h,^ 
•yvivra iij.apTiai vnep ■ni/.ut a/AaqTiav s-!ca'vnaf, made him sin for us, 
i. e. a sin-offering. Compare Exod. xxix. 14, Levit. x. 17, 
Isai. liii. 10, in the Hebrew. Again, to exemplify the other 
variety, the thing contained is put for that containing it; as 
in Matt. ii. 11, ^-nffavpaX are cabinets or caskets; and in Matt, 
viii. 12, xxii. 13, o-kotoi eSoItepov ia the place of outer darkness, 
OT hell. The «i*/r«cf is put for the concrete; as in Rom. iii. 
30, 'nepmf/.m xal axfo^uoriav, the circumcised and uncircumcised. 
Eph. v. 8, 7rir£ ffxoToj, ytv Se (pair. Once unenlightened, but now 
enlightened. Compare Rom. siii. 12. Also the sign is put for 
the thing signified; as in Eph. iii. 14, Kd/ATtru ra yavard fiov, I 
betid the knee, i. e. t worship. Gal. ii. 9, h^ias iSiuxoiv, gave 
their hands, i. c. in token otfelloccshtp, 

Obs. 1. The u9P^e is cluael/ analogauE, by wliich an action is fcequeatly, in 
Scripture, tegarileil as clone, whvn it ia laid ur permitted to be done, or when it is 
foielulcl. Thus in Matt. vi. 13, fa i!rMiiy*<fi ifiMt 'U riifxrftii, /cad ua nol, i. e. 
suffer us not to be led, into lemplalion. xvi. 19, i \k> incrit za! >.i,'r>)i jtJ rir ^c, 
vhatSBeBir i/t tkall declare to be baand or lauad. Acts x. 1 5, il i %ui ua3i;iri, /nii 
tu («'hi>, call not lliau defiled. Cumpsie Gan. nil. 13, Jereln. i. 10, if. 10, Eick, xiii, 
19, XX. 25, Hoi. vi. b, SometimsB also an EKtion is Bsid to be done, when an oCca- 
fitun of doing it is given ; as in Acts i. tB, InniffoTa x^'"* p^^ehared a Jieid, i. e. 
flimiiihcd the purchaie-mancy. Rom. xiT, L5, ^g l*iii» ia-iU-ui, da nol cause his 
Ualruclioa. See also I Coi. vii. 16.' 

' Ksrabicb. Institut. Ilermeaeut. Satr. c. 4. Jahn's Enchiridion, iii. 2. 


Obi, 2. Here also may be introduced the ^gvae Catachrent^ by which an idea is 
attached to an object, with which it is not compatible ; as in Luke viii. 23, xetri^ 
XmXM^I^ kn/Mv tls rhf klftftsvy xtu ^uHTkn^avtr^f where ^vnrXti^svtTo is referred to the 
creWf instead of the ihip. 

II. Hyperbole. 

This figure, which is common in all languages^ is the exag- 
geration of a circumstance beyond its real magnitude^ in order 
to fix the attention more closely to its true import. Luke xix. 
40^ eaiv oSroi <TieiJirino'CiiJ<yiv, ol X/d'oi KBKpd^oyroLi. John xxi. 25, oiil 
avroy oTfjiou rov KOfffAov yjM^ri(ja.i ri ypa(p6f/0€yac ^ifi'Kla.. Other ex- 
amples are Luke ii. 37, Acts ii. 5, 1 Cor. xiii. 1, Gal. i. 8, iv. 
14, Heb. xi. 12.^ 

Ob», 1. The opposite figure is called LUota; of which an instance occurs in 
Matt. xvii. 20, %etv ixi"^* Tt^rtf its xoxxof ^ivaTtMf. 

III. Synecdoche, 

By this figure a part is put for the whole, or the whole for a 
part; and a genus for a species, or a species for a genus. Thus 
in Acts ii. 41, xxvii. 37, yl^vxh indicates the entire man; and in 
Matt, iv, 8, Rom. iv. 13, xcjptof, the world, is Judeea only. In 
like manner, ^ olKovi/.ivn signifies the Roman empire in Acts 
xvii. 6, xxiv. 5, Rev. iii. 10 ; and probably Judcea in Luke ii. 
1, iv. 5, Acts xi. 28. Again, in Mark xvi. 15, the general term 
wa<Ta xTtW means only all mankind; and in Matt. vi. 11, the 
specific name apros, bread, includes all the necessaries of life. 
Thus also a certain and definite number is frequently put for 
an uncertain and indefinite one; as in Matt. xii. 14, 'rrapoLKoni,- 
^dvei ^e&' gac/Tou sTrri trzpaL ^vei/.aara, where litra,, as commonly 
among the Jews, is used of any number whatsoever. Com- 
pare Gen. iv. 15, Ruth iv. 15, 1 Sam. ii. 5, Ps. cxix. 164, 
Prov. xxiv. 16, Isai. iv. 1, Jerem. xv. 9, et alibi. Again, Matt. 
xix. 29, Luke viii. 8, lyLo.roMroiTr'Ka.oloyx XoivJ/eTai. See also 1 Cor. 
xiv. 19, Rev. i. 4, et passim, 

IV. Ant an aclasis. 

A word is sometimes used in two different senses, or modifi- 
cations of its primary sense, in the same sentence ; and the 
figure is called Antanaclasis, Thus in Matt. viii. 22, aOis tqvs 
veycpovs ^as-J/af* rouf Ixuruv vsKqouf, let those spiritually dead bury 

^ Glass. Phil. Sacr. T. ii. pp. !i5. %^7 . ^^^v Tmxi^Vvti* da laterp. S.S. p. 206. 


ihosc naturally dead. Rom. xiv. 13, fiKxin wv aJ.x^Xiur Kpnu-, iXKi TouTO Jtgi'vctTfi /taXXov, k. t. X., where x/ii*eiv signifies 

first to censure, then to resolve. See also I Cor. iii, 17, 
James i. 9. 

V. Paranomasla. 

1. Paronomasia, or the employment of two or more words 
of similar form or sound in close connexion, is a figure of very 
frequent occurrence in the Hebrew writers ; and, though somc- 
tiuit-s apparently unpremeditated, it is more generally the re- 
sult of design. The New Testament has also several examples 
of this figure, especially in the Epistles of St. Paul. 

2. The most simple form oi parariomasia is that of two words 
alike in sound, but unconnected in sense ; as in Matt. xxiv. 7, 
Luke xxi. 11, tVovrai XifAoi xxl XoifAoi. Heb. v. 8, f/Ao^EV d^' Sy 
tW3e. Add Acts xvii. 25 ; and compare Herod, i. 107, Jerem. 
xxvii. 6, xxxii. 24, LXX. Sometimes several pairs of words 
follow each other in the same sentence ; as in Horn. i. 29, 31, 

3. The more elegant kind of paranomaxia is that in which 
the words are not only similar in sound, but give an emphatic 
or ajdithetic import to the sense. Thus Rom. xii. 3, fA.ii v-ntp- 
(^Diviiv nap Ser l^poviiV, 2 Cor. iv. 8, awo^DUf^Evoi, a?A' dvh i^ol- 
'KofoviJ.evai. V. 4, oli ^eXufj-iv iitSia^iStai, aX\' iTlEiSi/irag'dai. Phil. 
iii. 2, iSXewets tw xaTiT^/iJiV ■rifj.eit yap eomev n 7tepivoii.ii, x, t. X. 
See also John xv. 2, Acts viii. 30, Rom. v. 19, 1 Cor. xi. 29, 
31, 2 Thess. iii. 11, Heb. x. 3! ; and compare Dan. xiii. 54, 55, 
58, 59, Wisd. xiv. 5, 3 Eadr. 5, LXX. Similar instances are 
found in classical writers. Thus Thucyd. ii. 62, f^ri (pgovr/ian 
(tov3v, aK\i nni KXTa,(pqo\irtU.ari. Plat. Phsed. 74, sfAorgoTros te xaj 
5(*oTf;o(f)of yiv£ff3ai. Compare Diod. Sic, si. 57, Xcn. Anab. v. 
8. 21, ^schin. c. Ctesiph. 78, Lys. in Philon. 26, Diog. L. ii. 
8. 4, V. 1. 11, vi. 2. 4. So in Latin, Terent. Hecyr. Prol. 1, 
Orator ad vos renio oriiatu prologl, sinite exorator sim. 

Oba, 1. Aaothac esse of the same wori], or one of its ilerifiiliies, occaaionally form 
a land of pnranomaiia ; as io Matt. xxi. 41, sitxciic xam, aiirsis. 2 Cor. 
Tiii. 22, I> nMM riKXim tn«h,rc,. ix. 8, 1, Tstrt rd,T,Ti <rijx, «ine;.UKy tx'>r„. 
Add 1 C^T. ii. 13, vl. 2, 2 Cor. x. 12. So Xen. Anab. ii. 5. 7, tritii yif riira tiT, 
SiiTc in^Kfl mi vsrri^n ^imn irn ii 3i9i nfixTaSri. Bee also Aaab. i. 9. 2, Hem. iii. 
12, 68, iv. i. 4, Diog. L. ii. 8. A, Alciphr. iii. 10. 

Obi. 2. In order Io effWct a paranomaiia, unusual forma of words are frequently 
employi'd ; and oceaaionslly a. new word seams to have been coined eiiiressly for 


Obi, 3. If rendered into Hebrew, the words of St. Paul would have somewhat the 
character of a paranomaiia in 1 Cor. i. 23, fifittf Ik xn^v^^ofAtv Hft^re* hrrau^ufum, 

X^i^rov Bmu ^tneifut xeu 0tou ff»^/ett. Accordingly it has been thought that the pas- 
sage was written with a view to the similarity of the words 7^tt^> ^ crosSf and 

/^ttf!3D) ^ itumbling-block ; ^^210* /ooliah, and /^tt^, wisdom. A concealed para- 

: • T T V V 

nomatia has also been pointed out in Gal. i. 6 ; nor is it impossible that in the di^ 
courses of Christ, who taught the Jews in the Syio-Chaldaic dialect, there may 
have been instances of this figure, which could not have been preserved in the 
Greek idiom. At all events, it must be confessed that the search after such matter 
is not likely to yield any very profitable result.^ 

§ 71. — Metrical Lines in the New Testament. 

1. That St. Paul at least was not altogether unacquainted 
with the beauties of Grecian literature is evident from the fact 
that he has quoted three metrical lines, or parts of lines, from 
the Greek poets. The first, which occurs in his address to the 
Athenians (Acts xvii. 28), is half an hexameter line from Arat 
Phoen. 5. It will not be amiss to give the line in full : — 

Tou ya,p Kou ysvos BfffjLEV' 6 S' TiTTios dv^qo^Trotfft 

An Iambic senarius (Trim, Acat.) from the Thais of Menan- 
der is cited in 1 Cor. xv. 33, 

^^Eipovaiv ri^n x^'yJffS"' hf/.i'Kixi xocycxL 

And lastly, an entire hexameter of Epimenides of Crete is 
found in Tit. i. 12. 

2. As a mere matter of curiosity, it may be added that two 
metrical lines have been pointed out, which fall accidentally 
into the prose of two other writers in the New Testament. 
One is an Iambic senarius beginning with an anapaest; and 
the other a Dactylic hexameter, of which the first syllable of 
the second foot is lengthened by the arsis. They occur in 

John iv. 35, TerqxfJLinvov e^Tt, y^df SrsqicrfjCof ''^^yc^Toct. 
James i. 17, YJoiaa ^oa-if aya&yi, xal ttxv ^ufonfxcx, teXsiov. 

See Quintil. Inst. Orat. ix. 4. 52.* 

* Winer in Append. § 62. 1, 2. Glass. Phil. Sacr. i. p. 1335. sqq. C. B. Mi- 
chaelis de Paran. Sacra, Bbttcher de Paran. Sfc. Pauio Ap. frequentatis. Wetsteia 
on Heb. v. 8. Kriiger ad Xen. Anab. i. 9. 2. Schaefer ad Soph. Elect. 742. Eich- 
horn's Introd. N. T. i. p. 521. Eisner. Diss. ii. {Paulus et Jesaias inter te com- 

* Winer in Append. § 68. Jacob, ad Lucian. Alex. p. 52. 


The Numerals refer to the Pages. 

Abbbeviatbd forms of proper names, 
12 — of verbs in /j.t, 30 

u4bsfr(tet nouns in apposition, 47 — with 
article, 65 

AhstrMtum pro concreto^ 47, 219 

Abundantia cattbut, 14 

Accusative in t instead of «, 13 — of 
nouns in vs and v, and tis pure, t6. 
Obs, 2 and 4— of proper names in 
agj ib. § 7. Obs. 3 — plur. of nouns 
in tvsy ib, § 8. Obs, 3 — with verbs 
which in Latin take other cases, 
87, sqq. — with neuter verbs, 90, 
Obs. 5 — with cognate verb, 91, 
214 — with tv, xnxuf vrettTv, 92 — 
with tig for nominative, 84, 93— 
double after certain verbs, 92, sqq. 
— used adverbially, 94, Obs, 16 and 
17 — abso/ute, 166 — to be rendered 
by quod aitinet cul, 207 

Active verbs for middle, 33 — with re- 
flexive pronoun for middlet 127 

Adjective, compound and ending in log 
not always common, 18 — agreeing 
with subsf, in sense, not in gender, 
42 — with collective nouns, ib, — re- 
peated in the negative, 46 — instead 
of subit., ib, — instead of adverb, ib, 
— neuter, 78, 81 — before a genitive, 
100— with the article, 60, 64, 78— 
verbal adj,^ 27 — new forms of, 28 

Adjuration, forms of, 192 

Adverb, 167 — with gen., 168 — with dat., 
169 — for adj., ib, — with article, 65 
— of time, with gen,, 96 

^olicaor, 1,28, 06». 2 

Affinity between Hebrew and Aramaic, 2 

Affirmation and negation combined, 215 

Affirmative interrogation, 24 

Alexander the Great, effects of his con- 
quests upon the Greek language, 4 

Alexandrian orthography, 9 

Anacohtihon, 206 

Anomaly in declension, 14 — in gender, 
t6. — in the signification of verbs, 31 

Antanaclasis, 220 * 

Antecedent attracted into the case of the 
relative, 158 

Antiptosis, 210 

Aorist 1 of verbs in ettvtj, 27, Obs. 4 — un- 
usual forms of aor. 1 employed in 
the New Testament, 36 — Alexan- 
drian form of aor, 2 in «, 27—3 
plur. aor. 2 in a^etv, 29, Obs, 6 

Aorist, perfect, and imperfect, their dif- 
ference, \29^ aor. pass, as middle^ 
34 — aor, 1 conj. with elt fjbh, 143 — 
aor, infin. after XrotfAos, 157 — a<tr, 
signifying to be wont, 130 — for pre- 
sent and/M/., 1 33— forj^er/. ^ndiplusq, 
perf., 134 — aor, part,, use of, 165 

Apotiopesis, 213 

Apostrophus, 11 

Apposition, 47, sqq. — when the article is 
employed, 57, 63 

Aramaic forms in the New Testament, 3 

Article, its nature, 49, 71 — its adjunct, 
ib, — its use in renewed mention 
and x«t' i^ox^h 50 — with monadic 
nouns, 51 — in expressions of time, 
as possessive pron,, and in proverbial 
allocutions, ib. — ^with natural ob- 
jects, 52 — with nouns implying 
relationship, 53 — ^when existence is 
assumed, 56 — after verbs signifying 
to call or name, ib, — in apposition, 
57, 63 — its hypothetic or inclusive 
use, 57 — in universal propositions^ 
ib. — with subject, not with predicate 
58 — with both subject ajid predicate, 
ib. — after tlfiii, 59 — its exclusive use, 
60 — with adj, and part., 60, 164— 



by way of definition, 64 — ^with at- 
iriltuiiveSfSl — in regimen , 62 — with 
gen, employed as an adj,, 63 — in 
divisions, ib. — with certain words 
understood^ 64 —used abioluteiy, ib. 
— with adverbiy preps.j &c., 65 — 
nith abitract nouns^ ib. — with pro- 
per names, 67 — its use in Homer, 
67, 70 — as a pronoun, ib. — for pron, 
relative^ 71 — with tihrati «3i» lxut»s> 
75— with «•«;, ib. — ^with JiA.«f, 77 — 
with neut, adj., 78 — ^with injin,, 150, 
sqq. — omitted with inJin., 151 

Article omitted after propositions, Sl^-in 
enumerations^ with ordinal numbers, 
and mperlativeM, 52 — with^eit. abs,, 
53 — when existence is afiBrmed or 
denied, 56 — after verbs of appoint- 
ing, chooiing, &c., 57 — after verbs of 
having, partaking, &c., 66 — wrongly 
supposed to be inserted or omitted 
ad libitum with certain words, 53, 
sqq. — position of the art, in concord, 
6a— with ^at, 76 

Asyndeta, 217 

Atticisms in the New Testament, 9 

Attic accus. in », 13, Obs, 1 

Attic future in /«, 26 

Attic reduplication, 26, Ohs. 7 

Attraction, 206 — with the infin., 155, sqq. 
— ^with the relative, 158, sqq. 

Augtnent, 25 — temp, for syll., ib. — syll. 
for temp., 26 — double and triple, ib. 
— double in compound verbs, ib, — 
in verbs beginning with ty, ib. — 
omitted in the plusq.-perf., 25 

Basis of the New Testament Greek, 8 — 
of Granville Sharpe's Canon, 6 1 

Canon of Granville Sharpe, 61 — of 

Dawes, 143, note 
Casus absoluti, 166 
Catachresis, 220 
Circumlocution, 215 
Cities, proper names of, 17 
Clause omitted, 212 
Collective nouns, their syntax, 42 — with 

plural verb, 80 — with verb both in 

the sing, and plur.f ib. — with dative, 


Common or Hellenic dialecty 5 — ^its mixed 
character^ ib. 

Comparative, new forms of, 19 — ^fonned 
by ^«A.X«v^ ib. — syntax of, 105— 
with gen* omitted, tb. — formed by 
vtt^ei and tfff'i^, ib, — instead of m- 
perl., 106 — followed by rirrm, ib. 
—with elaiive, 123, 06«. 9— with in, 

Comparison of ad^jeciives, 18 

Compound adjectives, number of their 
terminations, ib. 

Compound verba, with double augment, 
26— syntax of, 104 

Conciseness of expression, 211 

Concord, position of the article in, 68— 
of the yen., 112, Obs. 20 

Cotyunctionay seldom interchanged, 167 

Conjunctive, with ami for imperative, 139 
— its imperative signification, 142— 
interchanged with imperat, 143- 
with Iw, ib. — with ?»«, •«••»,-, afters 
jWM/ tense, 148, Ob*. 1 — ^withiwhOi 
trt, for in/in., 150 — ^after Tw* (ui,Um 
fAn, 149— after p^, pvwrmi &c., i6. 
Obs. 4 — without ar, in doubtful pro- 
positions, 143 — with ou fjih, ih^ 
after StXa;, i^.— with %rat, ir'tra, 
&c., 145— with ^Tt, 146— with Uu 

lus ev, ecx^is ou, ib with «-^I», 147 

—with Uv, 144--with ,J, 145, Obt. 
4— with pronoun relat., 119— with 
fiVf 185 

Construction, rules of, 216— changed. 
206, 209— interrupted, 207— mixed 

Construct io pragnans, 212, Obs. 8 
ContractioUi 11 

Controversy respecting the Greek idiom 

of the New Testament, 7 
Convertible propositions, use of the article 

in. 58 
Copula omitted, 45, 163 
Correlatives, syntax of, 62, sqq. 
Crases, 11 

Dative, its use, 113— expressing a refer- 
ence, 116, and 117, Obs. 3— ren- 
dered by /or, 116, Obs. 12— and by 
according to, 117— implying diree- 



/ton, t6.— denoting comparitorty 118 
— redundant, 121, 167 — instead of 
gen, J 121 — inKtead oi gen, with virtf, 
126 — of means and instrument , 122 
— oi manner y 123 — used txdverbially, 
66^ 123 — to be rendered with respect 
to, 123 — indicating defect or profi- 
ciency, ib. — denoting measure or 
magnitude, ib, — denoting cause, 124 
— with comparatives, ib. — with refer- 
ence to time and ptace, 125 — with 
collective nouns, 120-^ absolute, 166 
— with adverbs, 169 — with tv, as an 
adj\ or adv,, 173 — ^with verb of cog- 
nate signification, 91 — ^with verbs of 
giving, commanding, blaming, he/ping, 
injuring, 113, 114 — with adj. signi- 
fying hurtful and useful, 115 — ^with 
verbs denoting intercourse and com- 
panionship, 118 — with verbs com- 
pounded with ffw and »fMu, 118, Obs, 
2 — with verbs signifying to converse, 
to contend, and those denoting re- 
semblance or equcUitg, 119, 120 — 
with tivoLt and yiynv^m, 122. (6.) 
and Obs. 13 — with xfi'f^'^h 122, 
§ 47, 06*. 1— with I etlris, 120, Obs. 
8— with xoim, 122 — dat, of farti' 
ciple in definitions of time and 
place, 117 

Dativus commodi et incommodi, 121 

Declension, 12, sqq. — of HebreuhGreek 
proper names, 15 

Defective nouns, 1 7 

Degrees of comparison, 18 

Demonstrative pronoun. See Pronoun, 

Deponent verbs, 34 

Dialect, the Galilaan, 3, Obs. 1 — the 
common or Hellenic, 5 — dialectic 
varieties in the New Testament, 9, 
Obs. 2 

Distribution, indicated in the Hebrew 

manner, 203 
Divisions, mode of marking them, 70, 

Obs. 3 
Dorisms in the New Testament, 9 
Double accusative, 92, sqq. 
Dual number, 13, } 6. Obs. 5 
Duplicate forms of words having the 

same signification, 40 

Elision, 11 

Ellipsis, 210— of the subst. with the art. 
and the gen,, 66, 112, 211— of the 
verb, the subject, or object, 211 — 
partial e//. of the predicate, ib. — 
omission of part of a sentence, 212 

Elliptical form of adjuration, 192 

Emphasis, 20, 23, 72, 82 

Enumerations, causing the omission of 
the article, 52 

Female proper names, declension of, 16 

Festivals, proper names of, 17 

Figurative expressions, denoting emphasis 
or intensity, 20, Obs, 7 

Final letters, 10 

Formation of the tenses, 26 

Forms of the later Greek idiom, 40 — of 
subst., (6. --of adj., 41 

Future tense, use of, 130 — Attic fut. in 
Mtf, 26 — fut. conjunct., 30, Obs. 5 — 
unused forms oifut. 1 act., 35, Obs, 
9— future formed by fAiXXM, 205 — 
fut, instead of con)unct., 130, 146 — 
instead of imperat,, ib. — ^with av, for 
imperat., 139 — fut. indie, in doubtful 
propositions, 143 — signifying /o be 
wont, 131— after Bix^, 143— with 
1v», 147 — instead of present, 132 — 
part. fut. with verbs oi motion, 161 

Galileean Dialect, 3, Obs. 1 

Gender, anomalies in, 14 — non-agree- 
ment between aty. and stdfst. in, 42 

Genealogy in St. Matthew^ s Gospel, ex- 
hibiting the Hebrew use of the 
article, 67 

Genitive of nouns in ^a, 12 — of proper 
names in as, ib. — of nouns in ug and 
V, 13 — its superlative import, 19 — 
used as an apposition, 48 — with to 
and ra, 65 — with r« uvra, 78 — 
with rtf, 96 — with partitives and 
superlatives, ib. — with words imply- 
ing partition, ib. — with adverbs of 
time, t6.— denoting cause or origin, 
98 — ^instead of an ac^'., ib. — with 
verbals, 100 — with words denoting 
fulness or want, ib. — with the 
names of vessels, 100, Obs. 1— 



omitted after comparatives, 105 — 
and after 3>»«i«f, 105, Obs. 2— -to be 
rendered with retpect to, 107 — with 
wt^) understood, 107, 152— omployed 
in two senses, 108 — expressive of 
the object of mental emotion, ib, — 
gen^ of potsemve pron. piit objee^ 
/tor/y, ib. — gen, of price or vaim, 
109 — of time and place, 110 — in- 
stead of prepont. and its case, 111, 
Ob$, 17 — expressed by tt circumlo- 
cution, HI, Obs. 18— with noun 
understood, 112, Obs. 19— its posi- 
tion in regimen, 1 12, Obt* 20 — gen* 
of article with in/in,, 150, sqq. — 
with adverbs, 168 — gen, a6«., 166 — 
art, omitted with gen, abs,, 52 — 
gen, with verbs of freeing and de- 
tisting, 95 — with uhu and yiyvt^^M, 
97 — ^with verbs signifying toremem^ 
ber, to forget, 101 — with those which 
signify to be careful or careleu, to 
covet, to command, 102 — with verbs 
signifying to seize, 109 — two geni' 
tives in diflPerent relations. 111 — 
several in succession. 111, Obs, 15 
and 16 

God, name of, used to form a superla- 
tive, 19 

Gospels, titles of the, 112 

Greek language, Jewish repugnance to, 
2 — universally spokeu after the 
conquests of Alexander the Ghreat, 
4 — Greek idiom of the New Testa- 
ment, 6 — sources of its illustration, 
6, Obs, 4 — controversy respecting 
it, 7 (5), and Obs. 5 — its basis, 8 — 
its Oriental character, ib. 

Hebraisms, 20, 21, 25, 44, 59, 62, 67, 
73, 74, 76, 80, 81, 82, 84, 85, 89, 
91, 93, 96, 99, 106, 115, 119, 124, 
133, 140, 152, 155, 164, 165, 163, 

Hebrew and Aramaan, their affinity, 1 

Hebrew-Greek proper names, declension 
of, 15 

Hebrew Hiphil, verbs having its signifi- 
cation, 32 

Hebrew ittdeclmMe noumty 18 

Hebrew super/oHves, 19 

Hellenic or comunon diaiect, 5 

HeUenute, 5, 06s. 1 

Hendiadgt, 218 

Hiatus, 10 

HgpaUage, 210 

Hyperbole, 220 

Hgpotheiic use of the article, 57 

Imperative, with fitii, 139, 185— its pw- 
mistive and hortative sense, t^w— im- 
plying sareasm, 140 — two imperar 
tives, of which one limits the other, 

Imperfect, its use, 129 — distinction be- 
tween it and the aorist, 129, Obs. 1 
^-signifying to be wont, 130 — ^in- 
stead of the aor,y pres., and plusq, 
perf, 132 

Impersonal verbs, 83 

Indeclinable noune, 17 — indecl, Hebrew 
names, 16, 18 

Indicative, its use, 135 — ^with relatiret 
and relative particles, 135, 159— in 
the sermo^ obliquus^ 1 36 — after inter- 
rogaiives, ib. — in conditional propo- 
sitions, 137— -with »;, 137, 144- 
with «», 138— with Up, 145, OAi. 4 
— with CTt, evert, 145 — with »r«», 
146 — with IMS, tetf 0v, eixv^ *^» *^*'" 
indie, pres. with V»«, 148 

Infinitive, its nature, 149 — after verbi 
implying an object, 150 — with neih 
ter art,, 150, sqq. — with or/, omitted, 
151, Obs. 7^act. for pass., 150, 151, 
Obs. 2 and 4 — after eulj,, 150 — after 
subst,, 151 — with w^Tt, MS, and •«•«, 
ib. — redundant, 93 — with s-jJ*, 147, 
Obs, 7— with fiii, 188 — with ^«, 
after verbs of denying, 154, Obt. 1 
— denoting an object after certain 
verbs, 154 — after verbs of ^'rtj^, of 
motion, &c., 150, Obs, 3 — after verbs 
o{ fearing, 154 — its subject in the 
accus., or in a clause formed with 
en, ib, — its subject omitted, 154, 
155 — its subject repeated emphati- 
cally, ib, — its subject in the occ«i.. 



when different from that of the 
leading verb, 155 (5.) — attracted 
into the accus^ 155 (6.) — instead of 
the imperat,, 156— with Jinite verb, 
used adverbially, 156, Ob$, 7 — in- 
stead of the part,y 162, Obi, 8 — it^ru 
aor. after trotfAog, 157, 06«. 8 
Interchange of letters, 9 — of pronouns, 
74 — .of tenses, 131-— of prepositions, 
. 173, 175, 182— of «^ and ^i», 189 
Interrogations i affirmative and negative, 

Interrogative pronoun risj 23 
Intransitive verbs for transitive, 31 
lonisms in the New Testament, 10, 12 
Irregular verbs ^ list of, 36, sqq. 

Jews, their repugnance to any thing 
foreign, 2 — ^to the Greek language, 

Language of Palestine in the time of 
Jesus Christ, 1 

Later tvriters, their peculiar ortho- 
graphy, 10 — altered the forms of 
words, 40 

Letters, interchange of, 9 

Litotes, 220 

Metuures and monies, not named after 
niunerals, 22 

Metaplasmus, 14 

Metonymy J 218 

Metrical Lines, 222 

Middle voice, instead of active, 35 — ^with 
reflexive pronoun, ib» — instead of 
passive, 36 — its true import, 127 — 
directly reflexive, ib, — ^rendered by 
an appropriate verb in English, 127) 
128, Obs. 2, 3, and 5 — indirectly re- 
flexive, 127 — signifying to get a 
thij^f done, 128-^enotiDg recipro- 
city, ib. 

Monadic nouns, with the article, 51, 

Moods, 135, sqq. — indicative, 135, § 51 
— imperative, 139, § 52 — conj\ and 
opt., 141, § 53 to b^— infinitive, 149, 
} 57, 58 

Moveable final letters, 10 

Name o/Qon in Hebrew superlatives, 19 
Nanus of countries, in the genitive, 96 
Names of deities, compounded with 

«^;^iiy, declension of, 1 2 
Names of natural objects with the article, 

Negative interrogations^ 24 
Negative particles, 184 — ^two negatives 

either destroy or strengthen the 

negation, 189 — accumulation of 

negatives, t6. — /An redundant after 

verbs oi denying, 154 
Neuter adjective, its use, 78 — ^instead of 

adverb, 78, Obs. 4 
Neuter pronoun, with reference to subst, 

in the abstract, 44 — added per exe- 

gesin, ib. — with ptifia understood, 

Neuters in tcs, contract forms of, 14— 

in fMt, their use by the later writers, 

Neuters plural in «, from masc, in «;, 14 

—with verb in the sing,, 79 
New Testament, its Greek idiom, 6 — ^its 

dialectic varieties, 9, Obs, 2 
Nominative for vocative, 13, 86 — in appo- 

sition with the voc, 86 — repeated, 

82 — omitted, 83 — expressed by t/f 

with an accus,, 84 — nom, abs,, 166 
Noun J government of, 42, sqq., § 25 — to 

be supplied in an opposite sense, 105 
Nouns, indeclinable and defective, 1 7 
Numerals,20 — with «»«, 175 — ^with »ara, 


Object, ellipsis of, 211 
Oblique cases, 8S— -of personal pronouns, ib. 
Oblique discourse. See Sermo (Aliquus 
Optative, in the sermo obliquus, 136— • 
expressive of a wish, without «y, 
141--with •;, 141, 144, Ub—with 
and without «y, in interrogations, 
142 — with ^(49, 147 — with pron, 
rel., 159, Obs, 9— with ^^, 185 
Ordinals, inclusive use of, 22 — with plu» 
ral noun, 43 — with art, omitted, 52 
Orthography, the Alexandrian, 9— of the 
later Greek writers, 10 

Paranomasia, 221 — concealed, 222 



/l9rfii(A«t<i, their iialure and design, 307 
— numeToiu in SI. Paul, 208— p™». 
dmoHMl. mduiidaat aUtt tlwm, 72 

■e and use, 160 — nm- 
dewd by a eooj unction, 160, IBl— 
with u) or >■.'<-.;, 161, Oil. 2— 
witb verba otmnlion, IGl — vilh Jit, 
161, 06t. 5— nvilh veiba of 
162 — with verba signify lug lo 

^.Siiti., I6'2, Oln. e— with fBi..i, 
and i.m^i,ut, 163, Ott. 11~afler 
ma^, wm:^ 163, Oil. 12— pari. i. 
omitted, 162, Oi«.9-pnr/. inslead 
of indie, witli u', 138, 06). 3— in- 
stead af^Vcuerb, 16-I, OU. lb— 
with iijui and Ix- initvad of /ntfc 
*erb, 164. Ob,. 16 and 17— with 
tenie of ita owa verb, 164, Obi. 18 
— used with the arl. as a mbtl., 60, 
164— readend by i< qui. Ifift- wilh 
a proa, ilrmonil. redundaal, 72, Obi. 
3— uaiHl imperif,na/itf, 167, Oii. 3 

Parlinlti, n^gatiTe, IB4, } 66 — vaiious, 

Farlilivn, in r«^imffl, 63 — rollowed by 
ajm., 96 

AuiivtMrAi for aelive or uredfr, 3J — 
with dal. instend of gen. with iri., 
ISe-v-fullowed by an occat., ih. 

Paula poil-fulunim. 130 

PerficI lew, inntead of priirni, ful., 
and flmif. pttf., 133 — ptrf. pan. aa 
nidd/t, 34, O&i. 

Periphroilic/ormi, 75 

/Vi-»oB, the 3 pi. plu«q. perf. in im>, ?8, 
Obi. 1—3 pi, imperot. in rmrmt, 28, 
Oijr. 3—2 sing. pais, in n,, 28, OAi. 
4-^4n i,, 29, 04.. 5— 3 pi. imprr/. 
and oor. 2 in usy, 29, Oii. 6—3 pi. 
jwr/. «/. in ,., 39. Oi., 7—3 pi. 
prei. of verbs in ^, in nri, 3D, Obi. 

— third peri, plur 

Plural, iagtead of n'*;., 81 — denetiiig 

rxeilliHoe, ib. 
lutqumH-ptrftelvm, withoat the aug- 

Predifote and jii^'i 
farmed by a 
14 — omitted 

Prepotihoni, their ptiroary import, lfi9— 1 
governing r fen, only, 170, iqq-— * J 
dal. only, 1 72, aqq. — an accvi. un^, T 
174 — a gm. and aceua., 17 
«A«r rasea, 179 — pnrpi. muliipM | 
bytha New Teatament write™, 1" 
— if inteicbanged, ib. — used o*> 
bial/g, ib. Oil. Q — compounded ir 
adterbi, ib — with verb; 183— re- 
peated after compound verbs, ii.— 
repealed, omitted, or changed inc«- 
tain connexions. 184 — arl. umitled 
after prepi., 51 — arl. with pr^., 
65, Obi. li—f /iip*itotprrp„m 

Prtienl, instead of aoriil, perfect, « 
/Mare, 131 

Prnuwi demanilralive, redundant, 7!, 
167— repeated nn^'AalieaAy, 72, Ok 
4— instead uf relafii-e; 73, Of. 7, 9, 
and 10— repeated with rtlalive, 73, 
Qbt. S— in the predicate, 81, Hit. 
\\—arl. used aa a pramMHi, 70 

Pnnoim perional, 74— as the subject lo 
verbs, 82 — emi>loyed lo mark «a 
rmpliaiii, ib. — inserted and omittri 
in the same connexion, 82,0ii.n 
^uae nf the oblique caaea. SG 

Prcmun punitive, 74 — espresBed by > 
ptriphrBiii,7b, Obi, 17 

Pranom relative, instead of inlermgalta^ 
24— with verb Sybil, omitted, 83, 
Obs. 18— ita allraclieH, 157, sqq- 

3, Oil. 5 


the eubbequeat noun, 1S9 — accu- 
mulation of relalinet, ib. Obi. 7— 
transposition of relative', ib. Obi. 8 
—pran. rrl. with the aplaliee. A, 
Oil. 9 

Proper nomei, abbreviated, 12, Ok. 3 
Htbtem-Grrek, their decleturioDj IS I 
—with the arlicle, 67 



Reciprocating propositionsj their effect 
upon the use of the article, 58 

Reciprocity, indicated by the repetition 
of the numeral us, 22 

Redup/icaiion, 25 — the Attic redupi., 26, 
Obt. 7 

Regimen, the art* in, 62— of partitives, 
63, Obs. 3 — ^its effect upon the posi- 
tion of the article, 68 

Relative* See Pronoun, 

Revelation, Book of, its corrupt text, 134 

Rhetorical figures, 218 

Rules of construction, 216 

Sacred Hellenism. See Greek idiom of 
the New Testament 

Sermo directus changed to the indirect, 
and vice versd, 209 — the two forms 
intermixed, ib. 

Sermo obliquus, its use with the optat,, 

Sharpe (Mr. 6.)^ his ocmon, 61, sqq. 

Singular, used in a collective sense, 81, 
Obs, 6 — combined with the plur,, 
ib, Obs, 7 — interchanged with the 
plur,, 209 

Style, different in different writers, 217 

Subject and predicate, syntax of, 79, sqq. 
— subject omitted, 211 — several sub- 
jects to the same verb, 79 — subject 
of the verb changed, 209 

Substantive, instead ofadj\, 47 — omitted, 
211. See also Declension 

Superlative, new forms of, 19 — Hebrew 
forms of, ib. — formed by a gen., ib. 
— formed by the name of God, 1 9, 
Obs, 6 — with the art. omitted, 47 

Syllabic augment instead of temporal, 26 

Synecdoche, 220 

Synonymes, accumulation of, 214 

Temporal augment instead of syllabic, 25 
Tenses, their formation, 26— signifying 
to be wont, 130 — ^interchanged with 
each other, 131 — their distinctive 
import in the imperative, 140 — ^iii 
the infinitive, 156 — ^in the participle, 
165 — confused use of them in the 
New Testament, 134 
Termination of words altered by the later 
writers, 40 — substantives, ib, — ae^ec^ 
tives, 41 
Time, in the dot. with h, 110, Obs. 13 
Transitive verbs for intransitive, 32 

Ferbai adjectives, 27 — ^new forms of, 28, 
Obs. 2 — ^with genitive, 100 

Ferbai noun, instead of the infin, with 
the art., 153, Obs, 10 

Ferbs, anomalie»4b their sigpiification, 
31 — ^in the sense of the Hebrew 
Hiphil, 32 — deponent, 34 — ^with seve- 
ral subjects, 79 — impersonal verbs, 
83 — compound verbs, 183 — verb 
with cognate accus, or dat,, 91 — 
omitted, 84 — to be supplied from 
another clause, 212 — used in two 
senses, ib. — implying permission or 
declaration, 219. See also Genitive, 
Dative, Accusative 

Ferb substantive omitted, 83 

Ferbs in fu, contracted and abbreviated 
forms of, 30 

Focative, 86 

Words to be repeated, 211 — to be sup- 
plied in an opposite sense, 212 — 
repeated emphatically, 214 

Zeugma, 212 


A, «, termination of the gen, of proper 

names in at, 12, Obs. 2 
aya^n 6101/, 108, Obs, 3 
&yt, with plur, noun, as an interjection, 

&yuv neuxJia*, 66 
aitxuf, with accus., 87 

itt^a ^i^tn, 66 

&irki 9, Obs 2 

-ahtt, aorist of verbs in, 27, Obs, 4 

alrCfv rnd ri, 92 

aUns eut^fHv ] 9, Obs. S 

Axakov^ut, constr., 119 

ijMvtiv, constr., 98, 103, 104 



AkXk, in reply to negatire questions, 199 
— used comparaliveijf, ib, — «XX« yh 
lixx' a, 198 

AxXtf with the artic/Cf 77 

ifut, with dat,, 169 

ifM ^^t, 182 

kfiM^»fU9 wlf ma, 90, 06c. 2 

-«y, for Mif in 3 p/. pey/. act., 29, 06«. 7 

£y with indie, 138 — with the opt, in m- 
terrogaiions, 142— omitted, 138 

Jifk, 175 — with numeral^, ib. — used ad' 
verbiiiity, ib. 

dvayup, tcU. rn* nun, 33, Obi, 2 

avk ut XxM^rof, 203 

tiv»fufA9n^»ut, with two accus.j 94, 06«. 15 

d9fi( or &tB^at^»s, instead of rUt or the 
profi. demonttr, 25, 06s. 1 1 — ^redun- 
dant, 46 

Af^^m9t0t, with the tar^ used irrrgularly, 
57, note 

dfy£f, 159, 06«. 6, 171, Obs. 2 

tif$Mtf i<p>j^»dtuf, 66, 06«. 1 

kfoiytt, with (foM6/e and /rip/e augment, 
26, Obs. 6—»f»iytif, scii. di/^«», 21 1 

dfri, 170 

4{<r'^e'^/, 182 

«t' d^X'th ^71 

dirukiis ifi^viuv, 99, 06<. 14 

«T», 171—- » «^fl, »6. 

ATtfSaytrv a/ia^TteCf and like phrases, 116 

AT0 /Jbi^ovg, 171, 06«. 3 and 4 

UTO Ti^VCt, 182 

uTo it^ui, to. 

uTo rirty ib. 

urrtff^ai, with gen., 110, Obs. 11 

4Ma, 201 — a^a, »6. — acetyl, ib. — «^a «y», 

upyos, 18 

a^i0-»civ, with (/a/., 115, Obs. 9 
M^^a^fytfv, used impersona/itf, 167 
a^tra^f/;; 27, 06«. 3 
ia^uv, declension of nouns compounded 

with, 12 
u^iff^oLt, with dot., 124 — withtn/?n., 163 

— ^redundant, 214 
-«f, contract form of neuters in, 14, 

06«. 3 
"otat, termination of 3 pi. pres, of verbs 

in (jLt, 30 
MTsy/^iiv, constr., 88 

ml^awnff 33 

«vr0f, its various significations, 22— «m- 
phaiicy 23 — instead of etirh,^-— 
twice repeated, 72 — interchanged 
with g'u, 74 — its reference implied, 
* 43 — redundant^ 167 — *«< etvnf,7'2, 
Obs. 11 — i av^os, 77— with rfa/, 
120, Ob: 8 

k^eu^uf^eu, constr., 93^ 06«. 12, 3 

a^istfTtu, 31 

kf 0S, sciL x^i96V, 171 

ixi*f «v, with indie. f 146 

/i<^ilMf, 10 

/3«irri4y vhcrag, 99 

fim^/uuvttf, with accus., 87 

^«r«f, gender of, 1 4 

fiut^riit, 28 

/SXmrrAiv, with occsm., 88 — with two (W- 

cus., 92 
/3x«#-^if/t*ir» i?p Ti»«, 88— T/y«, 92 
jSXcirfiy, constr., 88 
fiwk^fMu, its augment, 25, 06«. 2-H^vXii, 

29, 06«. 5 fiovXafteu, with ^uUA«> 

understood, 105 — fievXoifAnv a?, l^ 

kofitiv, i^ouXofjunf av, 139 

ya^, elliptical use of, 200 — its reference 
remote, ib, 

yivteti ymuv, 19 

ytvtff^at, constr., 98 

yiynff^ai, partitive use of, 97 — with dat^ 
122, Obs, l4r^yUttrSat tig »«?", "f 
rt, 85, Obs. 22— U T4», 85, Obs. 23 
— f» r/>«, 98, Obs, 12 — b iflwri) 
174, Obs. 7 

yow^rtrfjv, constr., 88, 115 

yvvaTxa t%uv, 54 

yvih, ellipsis of, 64, 112, 211 

Ti, 195 

lufk, with the article, 77 
'htlv^cu, constr., 101 
liofAai ffov, ellipsis of, 143 

Si;^i0-^ai, constr., 85, Obs, 22 

^tk, with ^^n., 175 — with accus.., ib.^ 

with gen. used adverbia/ly, ib. 
hkyuif, scil. jSitfv, 211 



^teutouTvf with (lat,, 115 

^iotkayi^tf^eu, constr., 120^ Obs. 6 
^i^ei^xttVf constr.j 93 

^i^^etyfjuetf 10 - • 

it»fiv ^i^ivtu, 66 

^n/'Jv, 29, Obs. 8— constr., 102 
hittiVf its supposed redundancy, 214 
huXiutn, with dai„ 115 
Ivvafjuaty its augment, 25^ 06«. 2 — ^v^etcmi, 
^(/yti, 28, 06«. 4 

^UO, 2\-^V0y %VOf 203 

3dioy, 30, Obs. 3 

^Af/KA, understood, 112, Obs. 19 

^<r)7, 30, Obs. 5 

iay, with the conjunctive, 144 — ^with i/, 
in the foregoing clause, 144^ Obs. 2 
— with the indie, 145, Obs. 4 

ttft/rtff/, applied generally, 74, O65. 14 
and 15 

lyyi^iif, constr., 121 

iyivtro, used impersonally with the infin., 
155 — »ai lytHTfi, 83, 06*. 15 

-f/, termination of 2 «tn^. /)rM. and fiti* 
pass., 29, 06«. 5 

$;, 191— with •nfl&c, 137— followed by 
av in the conclusion, t6. — instead 
of Wii, 137, Obs. 2— with the opt., 
signifying utinam, 141 — ^with opt, in 
conditional propositions, 144 — ^with 
iay in the next clause, 144, Obs. 2 — 
with the conjunct., 145, Obs. 4 — 
used with a negative import in ad- 
jurations, 192 

ti, whether, 192 — with indie, 144, Obs. 3 
— with opt., ib. 

tl &^a, 201 

II %\ fitnyt, 187, 213 

ii Kou, 191 

u}Ln^a, 25 

ilfAi, 31 — its effect upon the article, 59 — 
in what persons omitted, 84, Obs. 
20 — with part, instead of finite 
verb, 164, Obs. 16 

Jv«; Ti, 24, Obs. 10; 81, Obs. 10— ?» rm, 
85, Obs. 23— 7» rms, 98 ; 06». 12— 
fttrei rnof, 178 — i7»«i, its partitive 
use, 97, 06f. 8— with c£a/., 122, 
06*. 13 

(Tsra, iT'Ttfy, 27, 06«. 2 

sTf, instead of r}f,,20 — ^instead of ir^Srtf, 
ib. — with the article, 71, Obs. 2 — 
followed by aXXeg or In^ff, »6. — tJg 
ns, 24 — i7j? »«} J>, 70— iTf »«S' iTf, 

tU, 174 — ^with gen, subaud. oi»»f, 175— 
if used instead of iy, 175, Obs, 10— 
with accus, in the predicate, 93 — 
indicating direction, 118, Obs, 15 

nt etimag alantoiv, tig ytnag ytvuiv, 19, 

'tt^av, termination of 3 pi, plusq. per/., 28 

U or \l, 171 

Xxx^rog, with ar/., 77 — ^with plural verb, 
80, Obs. 5 

i» 3f vrt^tft;, i» r^irov, 171 

Usm;, 71 — with art,, 7b 

UiiVi, instead of ixtT, 169, 06«. 3 

i» fiir^au, ix ^t^t^^au, 171 

l»9rd\at, 182 • , ' 

ikax*^TOTt(ag, 19 

7Xf0f, its gender, 15, Obs. 3 

IxS-tTy fiV l«i/T0y, 174, Obs, 7 

U, 172— if interchanged with nV, 173, 
06«. 7 — with verbs of motion, ib, — 
instead of ^hv, ib. — redundant with 
dat., 119, Obs, 3 

if fifitv, instead of n/iZg, 119, Obs. 4 

?w, for Ivwn, 31 

<i'»X*fi constr., 109, Obs. 7 

Ivr^iiTf^SdM, constr., 88 

Urvyxintv, constr., 101, 118 

Ivravtit, with numerals, signifying excess, 

tire), liTf/^, with indie, 145 
%tura, after /uiy, 196 
ciT^y, iiTf/^y, with conjunc, 145 
It), with gen., 179 — used adverbially, 

ib. — ^with clat,, ib, — with accus,, 

iinXtivuv, constr., 88 
l^iv-kwuf, with dat,, 114 
W)^0Xv^ 180 
't^trtfAfv, with (/a/., 114 
M T()g, 180, 182 
iiti^etvtif, 10 

i^iX"^^'*> ^^ redundant, 214 
Irra, instead of Wrdxtg, 21 



t^y^ft in cireamlocutiont, 215 

(l^ttf, from tfH, 13, Ob». 1 

Ux*f^h in a future acceptatioD, 132, 

06«.5, 4 
l^0trf9 tihL Th 92 

l#Sii«y rtf rtftft t» Ttv»t, 98, Obs* 10 
}mf»i/», with simple aogment, 30, Obt, 4 
fr<, with comparatiTet, 124, 06f. 9 
trtfMtf with our. ti{^n., 157, Ob», 8 
IP, augment iu Terbt beginning with, 

25, 06«. 3 
ttmyytXiZ^^^en, constr.. 113 
timyyiXt$if Xftrrso, 108 
iv^MiTy, constr., 115, Obs, 10 
ivXtf^iry, constr., 92, Obt, 11 
fv ff'tfiiTv, 93 (5.), and Obi. 10 
iv(i^xu9f to obtain, 33 
-itff, occ. pi, of nouns in, 13, Obt, 3 
ivaifii7i, constr., 89 

l(h09^*h <^^^^t'i 101 

i^«i«'«|, 182 

Ixc^*') with gen.f 110, 06«. 11 

tx»ti with jNir/. iot finite verb, 164, Cl6«. 

lf«f, its use in the later writers, 169 — htf 

oZy 159 
Xvs, *ius ev, with indie,, 146— with con- 
junct., 146, Obs. 5 
'(ms a^Ti^ 182 
lf«f i^afjMi, 147, 06*. 6 
Ifor; TTort, in interrogations, t6. 

^p, 29, Obs, 8 

It, omitted with numerali in a compari- 
son, 1 05, Obs. 3 — never the same as 
xa), 192 — in interrogations, t6. — 
n xai, ib. 

iixM, used in a perfect sense, 131 

fifittTs, instead of iyu, 80 

fijbii^ct, ellipsis of, 211 

UfAtlV, 31, II. \ 

viv, for ^ffav, ib. 

«»/««, with indie, 145 

-ns pure, accus. of nouns in, 14, Obs. 4 

5^S«, 31,11. 1 

ftfft/%iot^ ccyuvf 66 

Piroi, 193 

iiru, 31, II. 2 

rf^it, 31, I. 1 

^{>M, with fjbmXXM nndentood, 105— if 
ever redundant, 214 — ^followed by 
cojy, oxfut. indie., 143, Obt, 7 

Sf «f , with or without the artick^ 54— Sti, 
t»oc., 13 

*)^ry, with^m., 110, Obs, 11 

Siy«, ellipsis of, 211 

^v^ia, ellipsis of, 211 

tiitt instead of ftron. possess., 22 

'UfiX^, 17 

'UforiXoff, *I«e«M-aXJ^, 18, Obs, 2 

y»i/(M, 31 

^ifi^ovf, declined, 15 

i»«Mt/y, with two acctt»,f 94 

<!»«, with cofyunct,^ 143, 147 — ^with coiy. 
instead of tii/Eit., 150, 06«. 3— with 
pres. and fut, indie., 148— instead 
of »Tt, denoting event, 190 — ^as a 
particle of time, ib, — Iva fui, with 
conjunc, 149 

7y«ri, 203 

Xrrnfju, its different aignifications, 33, 

-Mv, Attic futures in, 26 

^It^ris, declined, 15 

xa^a^i^tiv etto nvog, 95, Obs. 1 
x»i, its Hebrew usages, 194 — after iyinr*, 
ib. — doubled, ib. — redundant, 214 
— with verb instead of part., 160, 
161 — xa) Tt, 194 — difference be- 
tween xeii and <ri, ib, — xa* or xoiVi^ 
mihpart., 161, Obs. 2 
Mc) iyinro, 83, 06«. 15 
xm^os, in circumlocutions, 215 
xaxoXoyitv, constr., 92, Obs. 11 
xetxus ronTf, constr., 92 (5.), and 06*. 10 
xaXus itonTv, with part., 163, Obs, 12 

XeCflfCVt49, 9 

xa^Va, dat. used adverbially, 66, 06«. 2 

x«ra, with.^«n., 176 — with acats,, ib,— 
with ace. instead of adj. or adv., 177 
—with numerals, implying distribu- 
tion, ib. — understood, 73, 94 

xiiraiyt$v,) sdl. rqy mi/y, 33 

xaret xeti^iv, 1 76 

xarava^xav mag, 103 

xt^xkfi, in circumlocutions, 215 



xfi^v^mft couait.f 113 

xtv^wivtn, with infin.j 154 

xXtiVf »kiTf, \3, Obs, 1 

xXfifovofiCf, with accus; 110 

ftXifiaws, 9 

xkivfif ellipsis of, 211 

Mtvh imktxTos, 5 

Mtfos, with e^a/., 122, Obt, 14 

xtfivArytTy, constr., 97, Obs, 6 

»^«rirv riytf, 110, Obt, 10 

*^»uit9,scxL ^u^»v^ 211 

X^JitTM, &99K,fV^TUVi coustf., 94, 06«..15 

xi/^Mf, irt'M or without the article, 54 

>Myx»niv, with ^e«., 110, 06*. 12 

>Mfi^nn, with i/V and accu«., 85, 06«. 22 

Xfls/t/SaMtf-Sa*, with ^wi., 110, 06». 11 

XtfrSaM/y, constr., 88, 163 

Xar^it/iiy, with efo/., 1 15 

Xl^iiy riVM, 92, O^. 11 

xi^tfvrffj omitted, 212 

Xurov^y%7f, with dio/., 115 

Ait//f or Asvi, declension, 15 

Xnvhi its gender, 15, 06«. 3 

XtfA«ty its gender, t6. 

X-oyiJ^ur^eu, constr., 85, ObM, 22 

Xoyos^ in circumlocutions, 216 

>.«i^0^sry, with accuS; 114, 06«. 5 

Xevuf itco rntSf 95 

Xofialn^^eti, with acctr«., 115, 06«. 6 

-/Mty class of noun ending in, 40 
fMiXXn, comparative formed by, 19-— 

understood, 105 
Mave^^tist declension of, 16, Obs, 1 
Mog/a, "Ma^Mf^i 16} Obs. 2 
fMt^Tv^§7f rm, 121, 06«* 10 
fiii^ort^dSj 19, 06«. 3 
/u/Xii, constr., 102, Obs, 5 
fAiXXit,/ut, formed with, 205 
filv, followed by i\, K%i, n, &c., 
(Antiwyt, ftiirrct, 196 
/M^ty understood, 97, Obs, 7 
fi^trelf with ffen,y 177 — with accus., 178 
furecitHfeu, constr., 97, Obs, 7 
fitraXafblidvtn, constr., 97, Obs. 6 
fiura mas itvcu, 178 
fAirixm, constr., 97, Obs, 6 

(tix^tf cv, with indie,, 1 46-— with coiy'vncl., 

146, Obs. 5 
fifi, with imperat,, 139, 185 — ^with" coH' 
junct,, 149, 185 — ^with conj, instead 
of imper., 139, Obs. 1 — ^with opt., 
185— with infin,, 188, 3/.-^after 
verbs oi denying, 154, Obs, 1, 213— 
after 7y» or Sir«;, 186 — as interro- 
gative particle, i6, — after i« or Ur, 
187 — after relatives, ib, — with a4f. 
or part., ib.' — difference between fi^ 
and ov, 184—^^ and ou united, 185 
— interchanged, 189 — fth tb in in- 
terrogations, 186^^,f«-4,f, fi^ir^t, 
lAnrt$, with conjunctive, 149 

/Ml yivoiTo, 141 

frnTif, in the predicate, 81, Obs, 10 

fiiec (ra^^rm, 20, Obs, 2 

Utifffis, declined, 16 

», Attic termination of accus. for », 13, 

06f . 1 
y l^iXKU^rsKov, 10 
y«t;y, 14 

ytf/MSfrsry, constr., 126 
vofMs, with and without the article, 55 

Uff^tOV, 10 

yatv, 14, 06f. 1 

li^s, «?r«f, and ixiTy^f, their difference, 71 
Silv ^xAfffffit) 53 

Its, one of two, 71, Obs, 1 
01, instead of rtm, 70, 06«. 1 

07»0f, understood, 112, Oha. 19 — in cir- 
cumlocutions, 216 
clU r' i;^, 202 
«i tragA rivtf;, 180 
04 iri^/ TiM, 206 

01 fr0AX0i, instead of A'ayri;, 77, Obs, 9 
3^X0f, with the art,, 77, Obs. 7 

i fAvt, 3i, put partitiveiyy 96, Obs, 5 

fih, Sf fuf, followed by &XX«f, trt^os, 

&c., 70, Obs, 2 
iftwM, constr., 89 
tfMtcs, with gen,, 121, 06f . 9 
IfMXoyuit, constr., 118, Obs, 3 
ifMu, constr. of verbs comp. with, 118, 

Ohs, 2 
Svtt^^eu, with gen,^ 98 




ituHiiutj witK accM».t 114 

Im/mb, in circomlocutiong, 2\$'^Sf§/U 
iMTh Mtimri, ftc., 205 

IfTiffywith eot^ftmei^ 147— denoting eveni, 
190— ^4»f /M^ with Got^UHCi., 149 

ff jM^NVy with two oceiff., 94» 0&<. 15 

"4^09% ttrmiiuUioB of 3 jti, imp^rfi and 
oor. 8, 29, Obi, 6 

2« l^f^ andentood, 4$ 

t0m% its tanMinaiiona, 18 

J)««r, irirmt, with eoMfimeitf 145-«-with 
Miff., 146, 05«. 3 

ir%, lih^9 with tiM(tc.| 145<-<with con- 
fimcUf 146 

Iri, with eonj, instead of imfku, 1 55— with 
ir^n,, 151, 06«. 6 — after verb« sig- 
niiying tQ remember, 162, 06«. 7-- 
Qsed ai a reloUve, 191— denoting 
the tign, not the etmee, of an event, 
ib, — ^used in citations, ib, — ^redund- 
ant, 84, OhM. 21 

6u, with single words, 184— in direct de- 
nials, 185 — after verba of knowmgtf 
&c., with irty ib, — after c/, 187— 
with relatives, 188-«with ptu^" 
eipiee, i6.— instead of f^h, 189— dif- 
ference between ev and fm, 184— 
9v and ftfi united, 185— ^v, and ov 
fAtii in intenogations, 186 — «v ^j^, 
with cojv uffc/., 143 (5.), and Obi, 2 

eli^, fAvihl, and cun, /inrtf 196, sqq. 

cv^f, in the predicate, 81, Obi, 10 

9h^f, 10, Obi. 3 

d^, 201 

eh ^as, 21 (3.), and Obs, 5 

«Vr«, OVTMgf 


curttt itrri, 169 

S^iXoVf with tnditc. in wishei, 141 

iipXt^xdfU* &fOM9, 66 

1^^^I4, 29, OAff. 5 

«y »»< Sy »«j i^X'/^^^^f* 18, 06«. 3 

froT;, understood, 64, Obi, 6 

itavlox'^av, 9 

fra^a, with ^e»«, 180— 01 ^ret^d nvds, rii 
ven^A rn^Si »6.— ^with dat,^ i^.— with 
aficui,, t^.— its comparative import, 
105, 106, Obi, 5 

irec^aliiovKif constr., 113 

irm^aikiv, with accut*^ 87 

fr»^etMM}Ji n, ellipsis of, 143 

flr«fi(irXif0'i0v, with dot., 169 

ftifi with plural noun» 43^ Obe* 3— with 
the tortus, 75 — ^with the art, and a 
partidpie, 76, Obe. 4 — ^its position 
with the or/., ib. Obs. 6 — m rcms, 
t6. 06«. 5— T« w«*r«, in the predi- 
cate, 82^ Obe. 12— wiWwy, after 
comparatives, 106, Obe, 6 

swrji^, understood, 1121, Obe. 19 
fn/Swi^ with occttf., 87— with two occm^ 

9ru9pf, 29, 06s. 8— constr., 102 
wi^2, with j«it., 178 — ^with aeetu,, tftw- 

MflTifirfM, 206 

tn^nrmruf, constr., 123, Obg. 4 

in^trnunPf constr., 101, 05a. 3 

r/fr«i, 28, 06«. 4 

ir/yf«y, constr., 98, 05it« 10 

irirrtuuf, constr., 125, Obe. 13 — rifni- 
iff^Ti, 127 f Obe. 2 

irXn^cvr^M, constc.« 101 

irXwf, 14 

^Xwr/luv, irkaerlZi^Bai U nti, 101 

vnvfMty in circunolocutions, 216 — used 
adverbiaily ia the dat., 66, Obi. 2 

mvfut elyiov, with or without the arttc/e, 51 

«'0^w, 9eirty ir»ri^ovy wow, «r«f, 202 

irouTfj instead ot^atuir^eu, 33, Obi, 3 

9r9Xut, without xoi, 46, Obe, ll—with the 
article, 77 

voriiuv, with two aceue., 94 

^»vs, in circumlocutions, 216 

a-^Jr, with opt,, cof^., and ui/?ii., 147 

sf^i, 172 

?rg0f, with ffen,, 181— with dai,, 1*.— with 
accui,, t6.— in periphrases, ib. — in- 
dicating direction, 118, Obi* 15 

*^»9%X*n, ieU, Tw vovf, 33, 211 

ir^0f xeu^h, 181 

«'^0^*i;ysri', with acctfs.,88 — ^with rfo/.,115 

ff'^^/^i/y, icii. ^uria*, 211 

ifu^tf^at, coustr., 93 

-^«, 5'««« of nouns in, 12, Obi. 1 
; final, 10 




-«*«!, original termination of 2 tinff, prea, 

aad/ut. pasa.j 28, Oba, 4 
^aX.9rty»rns, 27 
^»f^ in drcamlocutions, 216 — ^used ad- 

verhiatly in the dative^ 66, 06«. 2 
2i2<wy, declension o^ 16 
^i»i(a, 17 y Obt, 4 

rTrtff, rrra, 14 

«'»«««(, its gender, 15 

2»x»fiMfy declension of, 16 

tfvtr(*«y 12 

^muiu9f in a transitive sense, 32 

«'flrX4y%w{i«'S«i^ constr., 90 

^rotj^tTv, constr., 123 

^rifitt, dat. used adverbially, 66, Obt, 2 

g^fi^uv, a neuter verb in the New Testa- 

ment^ 32 
^r^ttnuiif, 8cil* xkiftiVf 211 
^uKXMfAfimntVf 8Cii, oiivf 211 
evft^tniy used impertonally with tn^M., 

0tY«i3^XAii9y «ct/. Xiyaast 211 
^OT, 174 — 0i tf-pi^ rm, i6.— fiyntax of verbs 

comp. with 0^, 118 
#"«/««, in circumlocutions, 216 

ri^ tthrot followed by a gen,, 78, Ob», 3 

r«;^Avy, 18 

TikiUTfVi tcil, fiiov, 211 

«-;yri, 203 

ri fr^«; A^f, 181 

r}f > 74— instead of ognsi 24, 0&«. 6 — tx- 
pressive of dignity, 24, 81 — ^witfa 
proper names, 25— omitted, 74, 83 
—redundant, 24— W in the predi- 
cate, 81, Obs, 10— r/yif /uU, ring h, 

vis, interrogatiite, 23 — instead of vSvt^of, 
24, 0b9. 8 

rolg»t!vmi, 204 

votwTds, with the artide, 77 

rcXfifv^ if ever redundant, 214 

re Xct9rh, and likfi expressions, in appotU 
tion, 48 

Touro and raSra, subaud, zara, 73, Oba. 1 1 

Tpyxdvuf, with ^eii., 110, 06*. 12 

Tst^ay, termination of 3 pi. hnperat,, 28, 

vetXos, 9 — ^its gender, 15 

vfi(it^uf, with accus,, 87 

uiof, omiited, 64, 112, 211— in .circumlo- 
cutions, 216 

i^a^tn, with dat,, 122 

£«^, with gen,, 177 — ^with oocta., ib. 
— its comparative import; 105, 106 

vin^X/«y, 182 

v$r«, with gen., 178 — with accut., ib, 

"Vf and t*, gen, and aceii«. of nouns in, 
13, Obs, 2 

vrri^iTcr^ai, constr., 101 

^»yu9, constr., 98 

^eiyt^eu, 28, Obs, 4 

^t4yu9, a9eo^iuytn, COBStr., 89 

^^AfM, constr., 88, 163 

^taXh, 9 

^tfiu^^eu, constr., 90-^lip8is of, 149, 

Oba, 5 
^o^iZuv, ait»^6^viiu9, constr., 93 
^»Xei99%9^at, constr., 89 
^V9ts, in circumlocutions, 216 
^mh, in circinnlocutions, 216 

Xi)f* in circumlocutions, 216 
Xtn9^»*, 29, Oba, 8— with dat,, 122 
X^/iiv, constr., 94 
"X^tsreSi thayyiXtn, 108, Oba, 4 
;^«i^«, in circumlocutions, 216 

^vx^t ^ circumlocutions, 216 
^tml^w, constr., 94 

is, 189 — ^with indie,, 145— with u^n,, 
151— with part,, 161— omitted, 151 
•—redundant, 213 

«f H^ecs iiflriTy, 151 

«rrt, with injin,, 151 

i^iXuv, with occiM., 88— with two accua., 





i. 1 . 

18 • 
u. 3 . 

23 . 
IT. 5 • 

15 . 

V. 16 • 

21 . 

37 . 

44 • 

vL 5 • 

vial. 12 



zL 1 

ziL27 • 



ziil. 14 • 

zIt. 3 • 

xviL 18 • 


XX. 2ir 

zxL42 . 

xxiv. 2 • 

xxf i. 24 • 

xxvii. 24 • 


• 62 

• 76 

175, Ok. 10 
. 51 


'191, Ok. 8 
. 58 


• 85 

• 92,0k. 10 

. 57 


• • 

• • 





173, Ok. 7 
74, 0b9. 12 




if. 12 

vii. 15 



xii. 5 





xiii. 2 

xiv. 8 



. 149 
. . 59 

• • 

, 44 


i. 17 

37 • 

56 . 

72 . 
ii. 3 • 

21 . 

• • 












• • • 




• • • 


















173, Ok. 7 



• 64 

• 29 

. 84 
. 76 
. 44 
. 69 





• 58 
141, 156 

• 43 


iii. 10 



vi. 9 

vii. 38 

viii. 44 

ix. 40 
xi. 19 
xiv. 7 
xviii. 15 
XX. 15 


. 171 
. 175 
. . 54 
. 132 
• • 54 
. 42 
. 44 
. 77 
. 44 


i. 2 . 159 
ii. 4 . . 83 

27 . 


32 . 


36 . 

. 76 

42 . 


iii. 12 • 


24 . 


V, 4 . 











29 . . 
36 • • 

20 • 

21 . . 
53 . 
26 . . 

7 . 

15 . . 
25 . 
36 • 
21 . . 

7 . 
38 . 
17 . 
19 • • 

16 . 
9 . 

16 . 
16 . . 
10 . 
42 . 












i. 24 . 152 

ii. 17 


ui. 7 


iv. 9 

V. 10 

vi. 17 

ix. 17 

xii. 15 

• • 



84, Ok. 21 

103, Obt, 8 
128, Obi, 4 

xvi. 10, 1 1 64 

1 Corinihiaru. 

i. 11 


iv. 6 

V. 1 


vi. 13 

vii. 31 

viii. 3 

X. 16 

xi. 3 



XIU. 4 

• • 


• • 

• • 



32, Nide 


• 63 

. 55 


. 66 

8, 12 32, Noie 
xiv. 15 • 143 



Chap. Verse. Page. 

XV. 8 . . 64 

29 . 132 

33 . . 11 

33 . 132 

2 Corinthians, 

i. 17 . . 66 

20 . . 65 

ii. 4 . 171 

iv. 13 . 163 

V. 21 . 189 

vi. 13 . . 49 

14 . 118 

vii. 3 . . 51 

viii. 3, 20 163 

X. 3 , 123 

13 . . 62 

xi. 4 • 178 

xii. 13 . 177 

19 . 200 


ii. 6 . 207 

iii. 5 . 164 

iv. 9 . . 32, Note 

17 . 148 


i. 16 . 148 

18 . 167 

ii. 11, 12 84 

21 . . 76 

iii. 1 . . 59 

16 . 148 

iv. 9 . . 48 

16 . . 91 

Chap. Verae. Page. 
V. 2 . . 93 
13 . . 35 

i. 28 . 15S, Oba 6 
iii. 5 . 116 
16 . 156 

19 . 166 

20 . . 43 

ii. 14 . 119 

1 Timothy. 

i. 5 . 171 

ii. 8 . . 18 

15 . . 80 

V. 13 . 162 

2 Timothy. 
i. 8 . . 69 


i. 12 . . 22 

ver. 18 . . 92 


vi. 1 . 110 

3 . 143 

8 . 163 
ix. 1 • . 69, Note 

2 . . 95 
28 .. 77 

Chap. Verse. Page, 
ii. 20, 26 60 
iv. 1 . 143 
V. 10 . . 93 

1 Peter. 

iii. 3 . . 62 
14 . . 43 

21 . . 48 

2 Peter, 


3 . 176 

ii. 5 . . 22 

iii. 2 . Ill 

5 . 163 

1 John. 

iii. 20 . . 84 
V. 16 . . 83 
20 . . 69, 72 

2 John, 
ver. 7 . . 61 


i. 4 . . 18 

iii. 17 . . 59, Note 

iv. 3 . . 18 

vi. 8 • . 56 
viii. 4 . 119 

11 . , 56, 171 

X. 9 . 156 
xii. 7 . 152 

XV. 4 . . 84 

xix. 13 « . 56 

Ix)n(lon: Printed by William Clowes and Sons, Stamford'Sttcet. 


1 i\Al.> 










: ' 

■ . 

! I