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 writers; arranged as a supplement to Dr. Philip Buttmann's "Intermediate, or larger Greek grammar.""

See other formats



U^4tvE(t5ITY OP 













Rev. Wm. TROLLOPE, M.A., 





Printed by William Clowes and Sons 
Stamford Street. 




&c. &c. &c., 







By the author. 

April, 1841. 



There can be no doubt that the genuine sense of the writers 
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 
dangerous errors, upon which different Christian sects have 
built the peculiarities of their respective creeds, find an easy 
refutation in the same quarter. The want of some standard 
book of reference in this important branch of sacred philology 
is 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, the col- 
lege tutor, and the masters of public 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 
has been performed in the laborious works of Buttmann and 
Matthi^; one of which, in the excellent translation of Bol- 
lean, (re-edited from the learned professor's last corrections by 
Dr. Supf,) or the other in that of Blornfield, is in the hands of 
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. 
MatthicB had once indeed entertained the design of making 
his Grammar complete, by the collation of an unbroken series 
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 Buttmann, 
of which his death in 1830 unhappily interrupted the progress 


would not, even had it been brought to a conclusion, have 
superseded the necessity of a Grammar exclusively devoted 
to the peculiar dialect of the writers of the New Testament. 

It is but very recently, and only in Germany, that the 
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 Grammatica 
Sacra, which are included in the first book of the new ar- 
rangement by Dathe. His remarks are confined to Hebraisms 
only. In 1650, Gaspar Wyss published his Dialectologia 
Sacra; in qua quicquid per universum Novi Foederis contex- 
twn, in Apostolica et voce et phrasi, a communi Grcecorum lin- 
gua, eoque Grammatica analogid discrepat, methodo congrud 
disponitur, accurate definitur, et omnium sacri contextus exem- 
plorum inductione illustratur. As a collection of examples, 
this work is very valuable. The peculiarities of the New Tes- 
tament diction are arranged under seven heads, as belonging 
respectively to the Attic, Ionic, Doric, JEolic, Boeotic, Poetic^ 
and Hebraistic 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 con- 
siderable merit, which was edited by his son, Matthias Pasor, 
with additions and emendations of his own. The title is, G. 
Pasoris Grammatica Grceca Sacra ISovi Testamenti, in tres 
libros distributa a jilio M. Pasor. TheoL Prof. 1655. This 
work, which is now very scarce, contains much 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, which is particularly valuable. From this 
period, until Ph. H. Haab published his Hebrew-Greek Gram- 
mar (Hebrdisch-Griechische Grammatik 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, Hermann^ Matthice, Buttmann, Lobeck, and Elms- 
ley, had entirely exploded the system of the older gramma- 
rians. Under these circumstances. Dr. George Benedict Winer, 
Professor of Theology at the University of Erlangen, in Ba- 
varia, published, in 1822, his Grammatik des neutestament li- 
chen Sprachidioms, als sichere Grundlage der neutestament lichen 
Exegsse 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 Sturx, Planck, 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 ; and has shown that, although many of the forms 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 sacred writers, is the popular dialect of con- 
quered Greece. A New Testament Greek Grammar, written 
in Latin, was published in 1829 by /. C. G. Alt ; but it con- 
tains little, if any thing, which is not to be found in Winer, 
whose extensive, and, for the most part, very accurate re- 
searches will form the necessary groundwork of all future in- 
quiries into this highly important branch of biblical inter- 

The different ingredients, which enter into the composition 

^ The references in this work are to the fourth edition, publihhed at Leipsic in 


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 the 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 are unavoidable, and ambiguities 
continually arise. Hence the latter method is not only infi- 
nitely preferabk in itself, but is open to the adoption of some 
approved work, in which the grammatical rules of classical 
Greek have been established and illustrated, as the 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 is 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 for 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 Buttmann has adduced, to which 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- 
braismsy whether perfect or imperfect, are rel'erred 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 of the prapcsitive 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 
cr 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 
mere comparison of the sound reasoning by which the doctrine 
is supported, with the careless and unphilosophical manner in 
which this part of the subject is treated even by Winer, will 
show that it is not a few detached exceptions which will be 
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 
therefore curious, and even painful, to wade through his con- 
fused mass of examples, which, without even an allusion to 
Mr, Sharjje's Canon, tend to its complete vindication. He 
seems to have thought that the use of the article depends, in 
some manner, upon the sameness or difference of the number 


or gender of the nouns ; and the exceptions will be found to 
be almost as numerous as the proofs, independently of much 
carelessness and inaccuracy in the classification. Many of 
them even violate his 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 Mattfii(£ ; 
but the consideration that the former is now more generally 
adopted in our schools and universities, that it is less volumi- 
nous and expensive, 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 
undertaking 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. Suffice 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 Buttmann 
and Matthice, 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 
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. 

First Declension. 

Second Declension. 

Third Declension. 

Anomalous Declension ; MetaplasmuSy &c. 

Declension of Hebrew-Greek Proper Names. 

Defectives and Indeclinables. 


Degrees of Comparison. 



Of the Verb. 
Augment and Reduplication. 
Formation of the Tenses. 
Verbal Adjectives. 
Unusual Forms employed in the New Testament. 

Irregular Conjugation. 

§ 20. Verbs in /xt. 

§21. "Ir/^t, EtyLtt. 

§ 22. Anomaly of Signification ; Causatives and Immediatives. 
















§ 14. 











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


§ 25. Government of the Noun. 

§ 26. Apposition. 

§ 27 — 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, tt, eav, and others. 

§ 57, 58. Infinitive; Attraction. 

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

§ 60. Construction with the Participle; § 61. Casus Absoluti. 

§ 62. Particles. 

§ 63 — 65. Prepositions. 

§ 66, 67. Negative and other Particles. 

§ 68. Peculiar Phrases. 

§69. Particular Constructions : 1. Attraction; 11. Anacohiihon ; III. 
Ellipsis ; IV. Pleonasm; V. Asyndeta; VI. Hendiadys. 

§70. Rhetorical Figures : I. Metonymy; 11. Hyperbole ; 111. Synec- 
doche ; IV. Antanaclasis ; V. Paranomasia. 

§71.. Metrical Lines. 


English and Latin, 


Texts of Scripture. 


Table of the Sections in Matthi-s's Greek Grammar, which correspoml with those 

of the present work. 

Sect. 42. . 

43 et s(iq. . 
48—52. . 
53,54 . . 

68, Obs. % 9 

69, Ohs. 1 

69, Obs. 3 

70, Ohs. 2 
73,2. . . 
78, Ohs. 7 
81 ... . 
83, Obs. 6 
83 b, and 84 
85. . . . 

90. . . . 

91, I . . 
92,3 . . 
95, 96 . . 

113,06*. 1 
116—118 . 
119 b, 06«. 3 
130. .. . 
133. . . . 
136. .. . 
138. .. . 
148. .. . 
162, Obs. 3 
165, Obs. 2 
165, Obs. 3 
167,6 . , 
168, Obs. 1 
168, Obs. 2 
169,06*. . 
170 ... . 
177 b. . . 
181, 2 . 
184,06*. . 
185. .. . 
193, Obs. 7 
198, Ob». 1 
198, Obs. 5 
198, Ofc. 6. 
198,3. . . 
200,2 . . 
200, 4, 06*. 

201.5 . . 
203, Obs. 1 

208.6 . . 
208,6. . . 
210, Obs. 1 
210, Obs. 2 
210, Obs. 5 
210, 6, Obs. 1 
211,11. . . 
216. .. . 
220. .. . 

§ 2 
§ 5,1 

§ 4, and 5, 4 
§ 5,2 

§ 6, Obs. 1, 2 
^ 7 

\ 7, Obs. 2 
§ 8, Obs. 1 
§ .^2 
6 8, Obs. 2 
§ 8, Obs. 3 
§ 8, Obs. 5 
§ 9, 1 
§ 9, 06*. 1 

10, Obs. 1 
§ 9, 3, and Obs. 3 
§ 8,4 
§ 12 

§ 8, Obs. 2 
6 13, 06*. 1 
§ 13, 06*. 2 
§ 13, 05*. 3 

§ 15,2 
§ 16, 06*. 2 
16, Obs. 3 

16, 06*. 1 
§ 16, 06*. 4 
\ 16, 06*. 6 
§ 16, 06*. 7 
§ 16, Obs. 4 
§ 16, 06*. 8 

17, 06*. 3 
17, 1 

22, Ohs. 9 
17, 06*. 4 

19, 06*. 3 
19, 06*. 1 

19, 06*. 2 

20, 06*. 7 
19, 06*. 8 
19, 06*. 7 
19, 06*. 6 

19, Ohss. 4, 5 

20, 06*. 5 
§ 20, 06*. 4 
§ 20, 06*. 2 
" 20, 06*. 1 

20, Obs. 6 

20, 06*. .-^ 

21, II. 


Sect. 222—255 
264 . . 
26-), 266 

267 . . 

268 . . 
268, Obs. 1 
26S, 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 . . 
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 . . 





Sect. 385, 386 

387 . . 

388 . . 
391, 392 

393 . . 

394 . . 

395 . . 

396 et sqq 

401 . . 

402 . . 
403, 404 

405 . . 

406 . . 

408 . . 

409 . . 
411 . . 
412, 413 

414 . . 

415 et sqq 

420 . . 

421 . . 

424 . . 

425 . . 
427, Obs. 
429, 430 

430 . . 

431, 432 

434 . . 

435 . . 
437, 438 
439. 440 
441 . . 
442, 443 

443 . . 

453 . . 

455 . . 

457 . . 

458 . . 
463/' • 
464 . . 
465, 1 . 

466 . . 

467 et sqq, 

470, 471 

472 . . 

473 . . 

474 . . 

475 c. . 



6 46,4 
§ 45, Obs. 13 

Sect. 478 ... . 

487 ... . 

§45, 5 

488 ... . 


489 ... . 

490 ... . 


491,492 . . 

6 47 
§ 45, 8 

493 ... . 

495 ... . 

§45, 06«. 16 

496 ... . 


497 ... . 


498 ... . 

§ 47, Obs. 15 

499 et sqq. . 

§ 40, 4 

§ 40, Obs. 8 

502 . . . . 

504 et sqq. . 

§40, 1 

507 et sqq. . 


511 . . . . 


513 et sqq. . 


516,517 . . 

518 et sqq. . 

§ 40, Obs. 15 

521 . . . . 

6 48,3 

522 ... . 


523 et sqq. . 

§ 69, II. 2 

527,528 . . 

§ 25, 7 

531 ... . 

r§ 41, Obs. 16 

532 ... . 

§ 25, Obs. 13 

533 ... . 


534 ... . 


536,537 . . 


540 et sqq. . 


545 ... . 


546 ... . 


548,549 .1 
550 et sqq.j* 


§ 25, Obs. 10 

556 et sqq. . 


559 . . . . 


560 et sqq. . 

§ 43, 3 

568 . . . . 

§ 43, Obs. 4 
§ 13, Obs. 4 

570 ... . 

572 et sqq. . 

§41, Obs. 2 

577 ... . 

578,579 . . 

§ 43, Obs. 7 

580 et sqq. . 


5S3 et sqq. . 

§ 34, 4 

594 et sqq. . 

§ 44, 2, Obs. 5 

597 et sqq. . 

§ 15,2 

608 . . . . 


609 et sqq. . 

§34, 1 

630 . ; . . 


631,632 . . 


634 ... . 

§59, 2 

635 ... . 


636 ... . 

§ 69, II. 2, Obs. 1 
6 15,3 

§ 34, 2, Obs. 13 

§ 22, Obs. 6 
§ 22, 4 
§ 22, 1—3 
§ 50, 1—3 
" 50, 4, 5 

50, Obs. 6 
§ 50, Obs. 4 
§ 50, Obs. 5 
§ 51 

§ 53, 1, 2 
§ 53, 3—5 
§ 56 

§ 55, 1, 2 
§ 55, 3 


59, Obs. 9 

6 57, Obs. 1 
§ 58, 1, 2 
§ 58, 3—5 
" 57,3 
58, Obs. 6 



§ 60, Obs. 16 


60, Obs. 5 
60, Obs. 19 

§63, 2 





§ 65, Obs. 5, &c. 




§ 69, I. and V. 

69, II. 

69, III. 2 
§ 69, III. 1 
§ 69, IV. 



Chap. Verse. Page. 


8 . 

. 64 

29 . 


33 . 

. 11 

35 . 


2 Corinthians. 


17 . 

. 66 

20 . 

. 65 


4 . 



13 . 



21 . 



13 . 

. 49 

14 . 



3 . 

. 51 


3, 20 163 


3 . 


13 . 

. 62 


4 . 



13 . 


19 . 




6 . 



5 . 



9 . 

. 32, Note 

17 . 




16 . 


18 . 



11, 12 84 

21 . 

. 76 


1 . 

. 59 

16 . 



9 . 

. 48 

16 . 

. 91 

Chap. Verse. Page. 
V. 2 . . 93 
13 . . 35 



Chap. Verse. Page. 

ii. 20, 26 60 

iv. 1 . 143 

V. 10 . . 93 

1. 28 . 158,06s. 6 
iii. 5 . 116 
16 . 156 

19 . 166 

20 . . 43 

1 Peter. 

iii. 3 . . 62 
14 . . 43 

21 . . 48 

ii. 14 . 119 

2 Peter, 
i. 3 . 176 

1 Timothy. 

i. 5 . 171 
ii. 8 . . 18 

ii. 5 . . 22 

iii. 2 . Ill 

5 . 163 

15 . . 80 
V. 13 . 162 

1 John. 
iii. 20 . . 84 

2 Timothy. 
i. 8 . . 69 

. V. 16 . . 83 
20 . . 69, 72 

i. 12 . . 22 

2 John. 
ver. 7 . . 61 

ver. 18 . . 92 


i. 4 . . 18 
iii. 17 . .59, Note 


vi. 1 . 110 

3 . 143 

8 . 163 

ix. 1 . . 69, Note 

2 . . 95 

28 .. 77 

iv. 3 . . 18 

vi. 8 . . 56 

viii. 4 . 119 

11 . . 56, 171 

X. 9 . 156 

xii. 7 . 152 

XV. 4 . . 84 

xix. 13 . . 56 

London : Printed by William Clowes and Sons, Stamford-street. 



§ 1. — 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 Chalda^ans, however, during a period of seventy years, 
it would almost necessarily happen that the Aramcean dialect of 
the country, Avhich 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-Chaldaic, or 
Babylonian-Aramaic, became the national language of the 



Jews. Hebrew still, indeed, existed as the language of lite- 
rature, though fragments of Aramaic are introduced into the 
books of Daniel and Ezra; but Chaldee Targums, or para- 
phrases, were universally employed in the synagogues for the 
benefit of the unlearned, to whom 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 of 
dialect. Both the Hebrew and the Aramaic were branches of 
the same parent stem : the grammar of both, as of the other 
Shemitic 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 universally 
applied to the latter. This practice is followed in the New 
Testament and Josephus, in the Rabbinical writings, and many 
of the early Fathers. ^ It was this strong nationality that, after 
the victories of Alexander, and during their subjection to their 
Grseco-Egyptian and Syro-Macedonian rulers, resisted the 
introduction of the Greek language, which prevailed at the 
courts of those princes, and had been very generally adopted 
in their conquered dominions. It seems, indeed, that Greek 
was held in peculiar abhorrence ; probably because it had been 
sometimes employed in the service of treachery.^ Such being 
the case when Pompey laid siege to Jerusalem, a curse was 
denounced against every one who should teach Greek to his 
children ; and during the war with Titus the Jewish youth 
were expressly forbidden to learn that language.* Inde- 
pendently of these considerations, however, the more distin- 
guished families among the Jews had too much national pride 
to seek the acquisition of a foreign tongue ; ^ and the doctors 
and scribes considered the knowledge of Greek to be entirely 

^ Rab. Azarias in More Eieajim, c. 9. Servatus est mos interpret andi legem vulgo 
lingua Aramcea toto tempore templi secundi, mansilque ista lingua semper inter eos 
usque ad captivitatem Hierosolymitanam. 

^ See John v. 2, xix. 13. Acts xxvi. 14. Joseph. Ant. i. 3. 3, ii. 1. 1, iii. 
10.6. Kpiphan. t. ii. pp. 117, 188. Jerom. Comra. ad Matt. xii. 13. Compare 
also Lightfoot's Hor. Hebr. in John v. 2. • 

^ Pfannkuche's Essay on the Language of Palestine in the Apostohc Age, iii. 1. 

* Bava Kama, fol. 82, b. Sota Mischnae, c. ix. 14. 

^ Joseph. Ant. xx. 10. 2. Ila^' hf^7v ya^ ovx. Ixtivoui uTTohi^ovTui <rohs ?raXX&Jv ISv&tv 


Toli Tv^ouiTiv, aXXa tcoit tuv oixiTuiv to7s ^iXovffiv' f/,ovois 01 ffciplav f^ocpTvpoZfft To7i Toi v'ofji,i/j,a 
ffu<pus iTKrrKfiivots, xxt rnv ruv hoaiv ypafif^druv Ivvocf^iv i^ju'/iviiia-at 'hvvuu/ivoii. 


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

3. With the exception, 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 Aramaean or Syro-Chaldsean of the age of Daniel and 
Ezra. From the oriental colouring of his discourses, as well 
as from the fact that they were more usually addressed to the 
humbler classes, it is certaia that our Lord generally employed 
the vernacular Aramaic ; and St. Paul relates that, on the 
occasion of his conversion, Jesus spoke to him 'E^pa'i^i ^taXsxrw 
(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. 

Obs. 1. The Aramaic dialect was not spoken in all parts of the country with equal 
correctness. In Judaea, and particularly at Jerusalem, which was the great resort 
of persons of distinction and liberal education, it was necessarily distinguished by 
its purity of diction and grammatical accuracy. The provincial dialects exhibited a 
more rude pronunciation, and sundry idiomatic expressions, which were studiously 
avoided by the polished classes of society. That of Galilee more especially, appears 
from Matt. xxvi. 73, to have been exceedingly harsh and inharmonious, so that a 
Galilean was easily recognised by his pronunciation ; and the same character is 
attributed to it in the Talmud.* 

Obs. 2. It may be proper to collect the principal Aramaic expressions occurring in 
the New Testament, and in some cases to place in juxta-position the corresponding 
Aramaic form: — Matt. m. 7, ^a^itra.Tos ; v. 22, puxa a.nd yiiwet; vi. 24, /ubecfjb/jMvSf 

Aram. K^^QQ ; x. 3, Ba^^oXofia.7os ; xii. 24, BuX^ifiouX, Aram. ^!)^| bv^ ' ^^^' ^^> 

T T : •• ; 

Ba^ '\uvoc ; xxiii. 7, pa^fi), Aram. >3,'l ; xxvi. 2, 'xa.ffxa-y Aram. KPTDB 5 xxvii. 16, 

Ba^a/S/saj ; 33, yoXyo^ci; 46, 'HX), 'HX/, Xecf^a. ffaliax^'>iv) (in Mark W. 24, 'EXm is 
another form, ^J^7J^, instead of vJ^)? Mark Hi. 17, fioan^yts, Aram. Ilj'^y^ "J^^; 

V. 15, Xiyiuv, Aram. p^j)7 (hdA. Legio); v. 41, ruXiBa xovfn ; \i, 27, ff^nxovXaTa^, 

^ Mcnach. fol. 99, b. Age igitur, reputa tecum, qucenam sit iUa horo, qucenec ad 
(linn, nee ad noctcm pertineat : quam si inveneris, licebit tibi sapienticB Grcecce ope- 
ram navare. There is a reference to the precept in Josh. i. 8. 

2 Joseph. Ant. xviii. 7. 10. 

^ Talm. Babyl. Erubbim, fol. 53. Homines Judcece, qvi polita utuntur lingua : — 
homines GalilcBiB, qui impoliia. See also Lightfoot's Hor. Heb. in Act. Apost. ii. 7. 
Schoettgen. H. H. in Matt. xxvi. 73. Pfeiffer de dial. Qalilcecc, Excurs. x., and Bux- 
torf's Lex. Ch. in v. 7>7J|. 

B 2 


Aram. '^'jJ^^^ptSp (Lai. Sj)ecu/afor or Spiculalor); vii. 11, xfl«/3av ; 34, l:p!pec^a ; 
X. 46, Buprlfzaioi; 51, f>a(i(hov)', xiv. 33, 'A/3/3«, Aram. i>^21i^ 5 ^"*^ ^' ^^> (rijcioa, 
Aram. J^")^ti^; xix. 20, irovha^iov, Aram. TI^^D (Lat. Sudor ium) ; John i. 43, 

V ; • • T 

Ktita;; iv. 25, M£<r<r/a5 ; V. 2, B>j3to-^« ; xix. 13, ya/Sj3«Sa ; yifc/s i. 19, 'AkiX^u/jju ; 
24, Ba^(ra/3a; ; iv. 36, Baava'/Saj ; ix. 36, Ta/S/Sa ; xiii. 6, BajiVj<ray; ; xvi. 12, xaXwv/a, 
Aram. Ji^^^^p (Lat. colonia); 1 Cor. xvi. 22, /xaoavec^a. 2 JyA/i 12, xagT»jf, Aram. 

D^lDnp (Lat. charta).^ To these may probably be added the word xoa-ftixov (Heb. 

ix. 1), which is probably the rabbinical noun I'lp'^Onp, signifying /MrrnVwre;' and 

in Matt.v. 22, the term /^upi is far more likely to be the Aramaic n")iD' °" apos- 
tate, than the Greek word denoting a fool. In Josephus also there are a great 
variety of words which are Graecised from the Aramaic language of his age.^ 

§ 2. — Of the Common or Hellenic Dialect y 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 allow^ed 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 w^ould 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. PfelfTer de locis Ebraicis et exoticis N. T. 
* Middleton on the Gr. Art. ad loc. 

3 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. ?,. 1. 

^ Marsh's Michaelis, vol. ii. p. 39. 


Obs. 1. It is generally supposed that the IIelt.enists, mentioned in Acts vi. I, 
were Greek Jews, who were utterly unacquainted with the Aramaic lan;;uage of 
Judaea, and read the LXX version of the Scriptures in their peculiar synagogues. 
Although it may not he necessary to suppose that Jews horn 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- 
phus, 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 Rome, in order that foreigners, and, among them, the Jews 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 are 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 {ri xoivrn ^ixXektos, 'ExXrjvjxrj) ; and it has been copi- 
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. Wherever 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. ProQDm. ^ 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. 

Obs. 2. Such forms as «/39«XjjS»v, ti/jAXXt, Bovku, from the Attic ; afpiu^rai, from the 
Doric ; the ^olic optative in -net, and the Ionic aorist u'^a, are found in the New 
Testament; to which may be added the imperf. 3 pi. in -oa-av, the perf. 3 pi. in -av, 
and a variety of other forms and inflexions which occur only in the later writers. 
See§§ 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 Avhich 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. 

Obs. 3. Such expressions, for instance, as oi(piivai h^n^rti^ara, vr^offw^ov Xety,(idyiiv, 
and others, would convey either an inaccurate idea, or no idea at all, to a native 
Greek. These, however, are lexicographical peculiarities. 

Obs. 4. The sources from which a knowledge of the true character of Sacred Hel- 
lenism, 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 xoivh haXiKTos, 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 xotvh hdxtxros have 
been diligently investigated and explained by Sauraaise, Kirchmaier, Engberg, 
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 Commeniarius de lingua Hellenistic a, Lugd. Bat. 1643; G. G. Kirch- 
maieri Dissertatio de dialect o Grcecorum communi, Viieb. 1709; And. Engbergii Dis- 
sert atio de dialecto Hellenistica, Hafn, 1714; H. Benzelii Dissertatio de lingua Hel- 
lenistica, Goth. 1734; F. G. Sturzii de dialecto Macedonica et Alexandrina Liber, 
Lips. 1809. This last is a work of great learning and extensive research. 

^ H. Planckii de vera natura atque indole orationis GrcBCce Nov. Test. Commenta- 
rius, Gott. 1810. It has been several times reprinted. 

^ Phrynici Eclogce nominum et verborum Atlicorum. Cum notis Nunnesii, Hoes- 
cheHif Scaligeri, et de Pauw, edidit et explicuit 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 scriptis inculta omnia 
ct Jiorrida 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 tlie 
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. 

Ohs. 5. The contest was begun by Sebastian Pfochen} in 1629. He maintained 
the absolute purity of the New Testament Greek, and was followed on the same 
side by /. Junge, Jac. Grosser Erasmus Schmid, Sigismond Georgia J. C. Schwarz, E. 
Palairet, and others. Their opponents were D. JVulfer, J. Musceus, Thomas Gataker, 
John ForstiuSy S. fVerenfels, and John Leusden. Passing over in silence whatever 
forms or expressions baffled all attempts to bring them within the scope of classical 
illustration, 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 congest 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 J. H. Boeder, 
T. Gataker, Horace Fitringa, J. Olearius, J. Leusden, So/anus, J. H. Michaelis, and 
A.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 maintaiixed 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. 

1 In bis Diatribe de Linguce Grcecce purilate. Amst, 1629. 

* The most important works connected with this controversy are the Findicice 
N. T. ab Hebraismis, and the Hierocrifieus Sacer of Georgi ; Palairet's Observationes 
Phil. Crit. in N. Testamentum ; Th. Gataker's De Novi Testamenti Stylo Disser- 
fatio ; Vorstius, Leusden, and Olearius, de Hebraismis ; and Blackwall's Sacred 
Classics defended and illustrated. 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 Disseriationum Philol. 
Tfieol. de stylo N. T. Syntagma (Leov. 1702), to which a Supplement was published 
by Van den Honert at Amsterdam in 1703. 


Independently of such terms as Simplicists, Purists, Hebraisls, Mixlitristi^ 'Bi^Kio/ji.a.iT- 
riyis, and Helienislicistnijices,^ by which the several pavties designated each other, 
there were not wanting satires and lampoons to complete the apparatus of literary 

6. AUliongh 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 been 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 eitlier to coin new words, or employ those already at hand in new sig- 
nifications ;* 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 iexicographical or rhetorical character ; and it is 
exceedingly seldom that the grammalical 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 Hebraizi7tg 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 ^ 
Alberti, Kypke, Raphel, and Krebs,'^ are also readily available to the same purpose. 

^ See Georg, Hierocrit. Sacer, passim, and E. 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 prceler cetera Genius Seculi cum moribus Eruditorum 
vapnlat, p. 97, sqq. (Altenb. 1761.) 

3 Planck de vera Oral. N. T". § 1. Winer's Sprachidiomx, Sect. 1 & 2. 
^ T(> this class belong the technical significations affixed to such words as ^t/Vt/;, 
'ipyft, iiKBCtov(r^a.i, ixXi>cToi, xXnro), ecyiot) &C. 

* i.YA^Tinx'x Observation es Sacree, Traj, ad Rhen. 1720; J. Alberti Observa/iones 
Philologiice in Sacros N. T. libros, Lugd. Bat. 1/25 ; G. Raphelii Annotationes in S. 
S. ex Xenophonie, Polybio, Arriano, et Hei'odoto, Lugd. Bat. 1747; Krebsii Ob- 
servationes 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 on. and s, s and yj, i and st, 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. 

Obs. 1. In Illustration of these peculiarities examples have been adduced in such 
forms as ^air/XsaV) vvxrav, <p^ex.iviiv, for fiecffiXia, vvxrcCf (p^dvuv ; ^sv/f/^aTa, ^v(rilihi, foF 
ytwrifiarei, ^v(Tinp)hs ; uyaX'/if.i(pBi)s, a.THK-Kvxectn, h^ci^iov, for a.):a,Xr,(p^u;, ocxiXTaxaci, 
iy^u^iov; &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.^ 

Obs. 2. As instances of the various dialects, which occur in the New Testament, 
none can be safely adduced, of which tbe genuineness is not established by the 
concurring testimony of the best copies. Among these will be found numerous 
Atticisms; such as outos (Matt. xxiv. 28), for which the rest of the Greeks used 
ahrof ; (pidkrj and uaXos (Rev. v. 8 ; xxi. 18), for which the lonians and Dorians 
used (ptixn and viXos.^ There is the Doric xXiliavo; for K^ll^avos (Matt. vi. 30) ; 

^ Principally the Codd.Alexandr. and Turicensis. AlsoCod. Vatic. ; Cod.Ephrem. 
Rescript.; Cod. Bezae, &c. See Hug's Introd. N. T. 

* Sturzius de dialect. Alex. p. 116 ; Planck de orat. Gr. N. T. p. 25. 

3 Thom. M. p. 862, and Hemsterhuis ad 1. Moeris, pp. 18, 389; Etym. M. p. 51 
49; Eustath. adil. A. p. 21. f, 


Kctftfium for Karafjtjiuv (Matt. xiii. 15; Acts xxviii. 27) ; Ktavloxuov iox '^u,v%okuov 
(Luke X. 34) ; •ria,Z,uv for 'rtiZ.iiv (John vii. 30).^ lonisms are less frequent ; but St. 
Paul writes \'ri(pocvuv for i^/fduv (Eph. v. 14)"; fiec^/Aos for fix(r/iios (1 Tim. iii. 13). See 
also Acts xxi. 35.^ 

Obs 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, voffffiov and vofftrta, still remain ; and the best manuscripts have votra-oh; in 
Luke ii 24, where vioa-troli, the Attic form, has been substituted.^ Many manu- 
scripts, in uncial characters, read ^/'^^a^/ta for 'hi'h^a,xH'«> in 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 ovHv u/jui, instead of the common reading ovUv.'^ 

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

1. The N EtpgXxc/jTiKov is not always thrown off in the manu- 
scripts of the New Testament before words beginning with a 
consonant. Thus also evehev 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. 

Obs. 1. Corrections have nevertheless been very generally made in the printed 
text. For example. Cod. Diez. gives ^xouffiv (puvhv, in Acts ix. 4 ; and aTrnyxytv 
xiXivffas, 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 ovrcu, fj-exqi, and 
ccxqh before words beginning with a vowel; and the v is con- 
tinually rejected from adverbs ending in Osv.* 

Obs. 2. In Matt. xxiv. 38, Luke i. 20, a%^/ ris still holds its place in the text ; but 
elsewhere the manuscripts have Ux^'h ^^en before a consonant, though the editions 
in general omit the final j. See Luke xxi. 24, Acts xiii. 6, Rom. v. 13, viii. 22, Gal. 
iv. 2. In Acts xxvii. 33 a few manuscripts have a^^is ov, without the particle SL 

§ 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. 

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

2 Phrynich. p. 142 ; Thom. M. p. 46. 

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

* Phrynich. p. 76, OhSus ha rod f u xa.) X^vffi-:fTo; «a< ol ocfjuip' avrov ovreu kiyooffi, 
ffv Ti a'^oTPiTov Xiyiiv' ol ya,^ a^x"^^"' ^'^ '^"^ ^' ^^>"»'<''^v ov'^iig' See Planck t/bi supra. 
^ See Matt. Gr. Gr. § 41 ; Lobeck ad Phryn. pp. 14. 284, 


2. The contractions which arc usual in other writers prevail 
in the New Testament. There are a few deviations in the 
phiral of certain nouns ; but the usage is not constant. Thus 
we have oarex, ogteuv, for 6<jToi, oaruiy, in Matt, xxiii. 27, Luke 
xxiv. 39, Eph. v. 30, Heb. xi. 22; o^icov, for oqaiM, in Rev. vi. 
15. So also x^iXe'cwv, in Heb. xiii. 15; but x^lKn, in Rom. iii. 

Obs, 1. The uncontracted forms, however, are not uncommon even in Attic vvrilers. 
See Matt. Gr. Gr. § 69, Obs. 1, ^ 78, Obs. 7, and add Eur. Hec. 1071, Plat. Phaed. 
p. 728, Aristot. Probl. 26, 25. Examples also occur of the forms I'm, Vurat, «%£«y, 
«tX££v, &c. ; but they are by no means either uniform or predominant. Thus in 
Luke viii. 38, Wuro for i^ilro ; John ii. 15, Acts ii. 33, Tit, iii. 6, i^ix^^ for '^t-X^'- 
So Gen. xi. 9, LXX, truvixii- On the other hand, Matt. ix. 17, Mark ii. 22, ixx^Trat ; 
John iii. 8, ^vi7; Acts xviii. 18, i^i-ttXh; xxii. 20, i^ix-^'^^} xxiii. \l,h7; 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 xat, or the neuter al-ticle. Matt. v. 23, Mark i. 
35, Acts xiv. 7, xaxgT; Matt. x. 32, 33, ycoiyu ; xv. 18, xx. 4, 
xaKsTvos- ; xxi. 21, xav; (Mark x. 12, xat i«v;) Luke i. 3, xapco/; 
(Gal. ii. 8, ytal E/utot ;) John vii. 28, >c«/>o£ ; Matt, xxvii. 57, rovvofAca; 
Gal. ii. 7, Tovvdvnov.'^ 

4. The same prepositions, particles, and other words ordi- 
narily suffer elision in the New Testament as in the Attic 
Avriters ; 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. 
l,a9ro avaroXoiv ; vii. 9, C'^o l^ovalav, xxi. 22, Trdvrx ogol av; Mark 
ii. 17, aXX' o\ xaxft^f, olKKix ufj^x^rcoXouf ; vii. 5,6, ettsitcjc kTTEiqco- 
rci'aiVf hXKa. dviTTToi^, o ^g d-TroKpi^sls ; xi. 33, o^^g eycu. 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 ETTi d^xispEuy in Luke iii. 2 ; /xgra cciGyJj^ris, Luke xiv. 9 ; 
and two Vienna manuscripts have aXXa akn^ziOLs, Acts xxv. 25. 

Obs. 2. A remarkable instance of this uncertainty occurs in 2 Cor. vii. 11, where 
the printed editions have akXa d'ToXoyiecv, dkka. dyavdjiryKrtVf but aXX' Ix^txnirtv. 
Doubts seem to have existed respecting the word ;^^>j(rTa, in 1 Cor. xv. 33 ; but as it 
occurs in a regular Iambic senarius cited from Menander, the true reading must be 
X^riff^'- The LXX, Josephus, and the early Fathers, present the same irregularities. 
Thus, Gen. xvii. 22, a-ro 'A/3gaa^; xviii. 15, dxxd, iytkeitrxs ; Joseph. Ant. iv. 6. 2, 
d-ro Ev^^drov ; Iren. Haer. iii. 3, v^o d-xoffroXuv. In the manuscripts of the New 
Testament the particles a^a, utx, iti^ "va, never suffer elision. 

^ Leusden de Dialect. N. T. c. 1. p. 14. 


Obs. 3. From the very general neglect of the Jpostrophus in Ionic writers, 
amples of similar usage in the New Testament have been called lonisms. ^ 

§ 6. — First Declensio7i. (Buttm. § 34.) 

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

Oi6. 1. There is a solitary deviation from the Attic rule, which forms the genitive 
of nonns ending in a purcy or ^a, in a,;, in the case of the substantive a-';ruoa, of which 
the genitive o-Tni^n; is found in Acts x. 1, xxi. 31, xxvii. 1. 

Obs. 2. Proper names of this declension, ending in xs, make the genitive, with 
very few exceptions, in a, instead of ov: Luke iii. 27, 'Juxwa. ; 30, 'luJ^a; 31, MsXsa; 
35, IdXa; xiii. 29, Rev. xxi. 13, Boppdi; Lukexvi. 9, Maf/.fiuva', Johnviii. 13, Kaia(p«; 
xix. 25, KX«^« ; xxi. 15, Matt. xii. 39.41, 'l^va Acts xi, 30, xv. 12,Col.iv. 10,Ba^vai3a; 
Acts xix. 14, 2x£ya ; 1 Cor. i, 12, Kjjfa ; i. 16,xvi. 15, 2r£(pava ; 2 Cor. xi. 32, 'Aoiru; 
Col. i. 7, *E'ra(poa. ; 2 Thess. ii. 9, Rev. iii. 9, :ZxTavcc. The regular form occurs in 
Matt. i. 6, ol^iov, Luke iii. 3, Za;^a^/<3y ; Luke iv. 17, Acts xxviii. 28,'H(rai'oy ; Luke 
iv. 25, 'Ux'iov'y John i. 45, ^Avh^iov. In the Fathers, and later writers generally, the 
termination a is continually recognised. Thus Origen c. Cels. i. p. 7, Uv^ayo^a', 
Phot. Bibl. n. 254, Ns^^/Sa.'^ 

Obs. 3. Many proper names in -«j seem to be popular abbreviations ; as 2/Xa; 
(Acts XV. 32), for 'S.iXovuvos (1 Thess. i. 1). In like manner "Awa? (Luke iii. 3) is 
perhaps the same as 'Avav/aj (Acts xxiii. 2); Aovko,; and Anfjca,? (Col. iv. 14) the 
same as Aovxio; (Acts xiii. 1, Rom. xvi. 21) and Ar,f^ex,^Ko$ or Anfiy,r^to?.^ 

Obs, 4. Names of dignities, compounded of the verb a^x^iv, 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^oi^x^^^ Acts 
vii. 8, 9, rovf TTKr^id^x"^ 5 '^' !• ^2,^x,''^s ; xxiv. 23, xxvii. 2. 31, ixxrovra^xV >^ 
xxviii. 16, ffr^xro-rilnoxn] 2 Cor. xi. 32, l&va.^'^ris. There is, howevei*, no uniformity 
of declension, for \x,cx,tovtdc^x°s repeatedly occurs, as in Matt. viii. 5. 8, Luke vii. 6, 
Acts xxviii. 16, and elsewhere ; and ;^/>./a^X''? is 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 o;, and later authors that in «;. Hence Gen. 
xli. 34, Dan. ii. 3, ToTx^x^i ■> 2 Mace. xii. 2, Kyzpiai^^rii ; xiv. 12, iki<pix.vTa,^x,^s ; 
Joseph. Ant. i. 13.4, ytvx^x'^' '^ ^^^' ^' -^j aXaf^d^x,'^; -, Euseb. V. Const, iv. 63, 
Ta^/a^X>j;.' This was also the form which the Latins followed. Cic. Epist. Att. ii. 
17, Abelarches ; Auctor Hist. Bell. Alex. c. 67, Telrarckes ; Spartian.v. Hadrian, c. 
13, Toparcha ; Tertull. de Anim. c. vii. 55, Patriarchal Cod. Theodos. xv. 9.2, 
Asiarcha. Of course the genitive case, whether singular or plural, is doubtful \ as 
'Arid^X'^^i Acts xix. 31.^ 

^ Georgii Hierocrit. i. 3. 9 ; Wyssii Dialect. Sacr. p. 17. 
'' See Alt. Gram.N.T. §6. 

3 Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 433 ; Winer's Sprachidioms, § 2, 23. Another form of 
abbreviation is lu-Traros, for laxrl-Trar^os. Compare Acts xx. 4 ; Rom. xvi. 21. 

4 Parkhurst gives barovra^;^*;;, x£oj, according to the third declension. See Lex. 
in V. This must have been an oversight. 

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


Obs. 5. With respect to declension in general (Buttm. ^ 33.), and conjugntirm 
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, kki^ov xa) xxt^ovj ko.) "fjbitrv 
xaioov, 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 ^sos is always used, with 
a single exception, for the vocative. This exception is Matt, 
xxvii. 46, where the vocative S-se is employed in rendering the 
words from Ps. xxii. 1, 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 S-ee in Judg. 
xxi. 3, LXX. 

Obs. 1. Of contracted nouns of this declension, both the uucontracted and con- 
tracted forms occur indiscriminate!}'. See §5.2. 

Obs. 2. Proper names of the Attic second declension ending in us. as 'A<?fokXa; 
(Acts xviii. 24) commonly omit the final v in the accusative. See Acts xix. 1, 1 Cor. 
iv. 6. Some manuscripts also have Km, for Kmv, in Acts xxi. 1. 

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

With respect to the gender and inflection of nouns of this 
declension, the ordinary grammatical rules are applicable 
throuo-hout to the usajje of the New Testament. The followin": 
observations may, however, be subjoined : — 

Obs. 1. Some manuscripts and editions have the Attic accusative xktTv from kXu;, 
in Rev. iii. 7, xx. 1 ; but xXiila is perhaps the correct reading, as in Luke xi. 52. 
The plural xXt7i, for xXirSaj, occurs in Matt. xvi. 19, Rev. i. 18. In like manner 
we find i^m in 2 Cor. xii. 20, Gal. v. 20, Tit. iii. 9 ; but s'^/Bs,-, uncontracted, in 
1 Cor. i. ll.» (Buttm. § 44, 2, and Obs. 1.) 

Obs. 2. In the contracted declension, nouns ending in vs and v did not contract 
the genitive, either in the singular or the plural, except in the later writers ; and 
thus h(^i(rovs occurs in Mark vi. 23; -rvix^v in John xxi. 8, Rev. xxi. 17. So also 
the neuter plural «^<V>7, in Luke xix. 8, of which the Attic form, whether adjective 
or substantive, is hfAiffia, without contraction.'* (Buttm, § 51. Obs. 5.) 

Obs. 3. According to the old grammarians, the accusative plural of nouns in -tl; 
was not contracted by the Attics from -ixi into -li;. 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 yon7s, Matt. x. 21, Luke ii. 27 ; yfa,izfji.a' 
ru;, Matt, xxiii. 34.^ (Buttm. § 52. Obs. 1.) 

* Lobeck ad Pluyn. p. 4G0 ; Passov. Lex. in v. xXiU \ Alt. Gr. Gr. § 8, 5. 

* Phrynich. (ed. Lobeck, p. 432,) aju-u^ravouiriv ol t-x vifzierri xiyovrss, xcc) ou ra, 'hy-icrioc,. 
See also Lobeck ad p. 78 ; Fischer, Prolus. p. 60G. 

^ Fischer, Prolus. p. 663. 


Obs. 4. Nouns ending in -»}?, with a vowel before it, usually contract the termina- 
tion -la of the accusative into a ; but the form uyiTJ, which is fcuud constantly in 
Plato, occurs in John v. 11. 15, Tit. ii. 8.' (Buttra. 6 53, 1.) 

Obs. 5. Of neuters in -as, the Attic contraction of the dative occurs in yr.^a, from 
yrpas, in Luke i. 36. Griesbach, indeed, upon the authority of certain manuscripts, 
has admitted the Ionic form yv^u into the text, but without due consideration. In 
the plural, xe^aj and rt^as are universally uncontracted in the New Testament, con- 
trary to the Attic usage.* See Acts ii. 43, v. 12 ; Rom. xv. 19 ; Rev. v. 6, ix. 13, 
xiii. 1.11, xvii. 12. The contracted accusative x^sa, from »^ias> is found in Rom. 
xiv. 21, 1 Cor. viii. 13. (Buttra. § 54.) 

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

1. There are many nouns which have more than one form 
of inflection, or are declined in a different way from that which 
the nominative indicates. Of these the New Testament is not 
without its examples : as, for instance, the accusative vocvm, from 
the Attic nominative vxvs, in Acts xxvii. 41,^ and some others. 

Obs, 1. Perhaps the substantive vovs, as inflected by the writers of the New Tes- 
tament, can scarcely be classed with nouns abimdantia casibus, as it invariably fol- 
lows the form of the third declension. Thus the genitive voo; occurs in Rom. xii. 2, 
1 Cor. xiv. 19, Eph. iv. 17. 23, Col. ii. 18, and the dative votxn Rom. vii. 25, 1 Cor. 
i. 10, xiv. 15. The same maybe said of jrXoyj, of which the genitive -rXoos is found 
in Acts xxvii. 9. Examples of this mode of inflection, which is peculiar to the later 
writers, may be seen continually in Simplicius, Philo, and the ecclesiastical Fathers.* 

2. By metaplasmus, the dative plural of o-a/3/3*rov is always 
aoc^^dcai, after the form of the third declension. See Matt, 
xii. 1. 10, 11, 12, Mark i. 21, Luke iv. 31. So also in Joseph. 
B. J. i. 7. 3, Ant. xiii. 8. 4, and elsewhere. 

Obs. 2. The proper form ffafifidTots is found in Numb, xxviii. 10; 2 Chron. ii. 4, 
LXX; Joseph. Ant. xi. 8. 6. In other writers, <pr^oP>a,fft is frequently used for 'xoo- 
fidrots ; but although the noun occurs repeatedly in the New Testament, it is never 
employed in the dative plural. 

3. Of neuters plnral in -a, from masc. in -os, St. Luke uses 
ra Izafxa, in Acts xvi. 26, xx. 23, xxii. 30, xxiii. 29, and else- 
where. St. Paul has the Ionic ^Etr/xot in Phil. i. 13.^ The 
plural ra. air a, occurs in Acts vii. 12. 

Obs. 3. Not only in the form and inflection, but in the genders of nouns, there 
were frequent varieties in the ancient dialects ; and peculiarities of this kind are 
observable in the New Testament, in accordance with the usage of the later writers. 
They made /Saro,', a bush or bramble, masculine; but in the New Testament it is 

^ Heindorf ad Plat. Charmid. p. 64. 

^ Moeris, pp. 366, 369 ; Thom. M. p. 840. 

^ Planck, de Orat. Gr. N. T. ii. 3. 

* Fischer ad Weller, ii. p. 181 ; Herodian. Herra. p. 303. 

^ Schleusner and Bretschneider in v. 


always found in the feminine, and so al»o in the writers of the later epoch. See 
Mark xii. 26 ; Luke vi. 44, xx. 37 ; Acts vii. 35 ; Theophr. H. Plant, iii. 18 ; Dios- 
corid. iv. 37.^ There is little doubt that in Luke xv. 14 the true reading is X/^o; 
iVxf^a, and in Acts xi. 28, Xtfiov fnyetkhv, accordinj^ to the best manuscripts, al- 
though l(rx,u^o{ and fji.iyav are still retained in the printed text. If the masculine 
adjectives be genuine, it is impossible to account for the introduction of the feminine 
into so many copies; whereas h xif^os, which is Doric, seems to have been adopted 
into the later tongue.' Generally, ffKom occurs in the neuter (Matt. iv. 16, vi. 23, 
viii. 12); but in Heb. xii. 18 it is masculine. Both forms were also in use among 
the Attics. There is also a feminine noun ffnoriot. (Matt. x. 27 ; John vi. 17, xx. 1)' 
which is peculiar to the Doric dialect.^ In Attic, vaXo; is feminine ; in Rev. xxi. 18 
it is masculine. The word Xjivoj is feminine in Rev. xix. 15, and masc. in Gen. xxx. 
37, 42, LXX. Hence some would account for the remarkable reading in Rev. xiv. 
19, rrtv Xnvov rov fjuiyuv, for which t'/jv /^syoiXyiv now stands."* Besides these variations 
of gender, which accord with one or other of the ancient dialects, it is remarkable 
that the noun 'ixto;, which is masculine in all the Greek writers, is neuter in the 
New Testament and in the LXX. See Luke i. 50, 78, Rom. ix. 23, 1 Pet. i. 3, and 
compare Gen. xix. 9, Numb. xi. 15, LXX. So also in the writings of the Fathers.^ 

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

1 . To the head of Anomalous Declension may be referred 
a large proportion of the proper names which occur in the 
New Testament. Many of them, indeed, though derived from 
the H ebrew, are declined in Greek after the first declension, 
except that they make the genitive in a, instead of ov, as before 
mentioned in § 6. But others have a more simple form of in- 
flection, changing the final s of the nominative into v in the 
accusative, and rejecting it altogether in the other cases, which 
are all alike. (Buttm. § 56. 1. Obs, 1.) To this class belong, 

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

Gen. Dat. Voc. 'UgoC (Matt. i. 1, xxvi. 17 ; Mark i. 24) 
Ace. '[n<sovv (Matt. xxvi. 4, Acts xx. 21).^ 

2. Nom. A^vU or Ac^l" (Luke v. 29; Heb. vii. 9) 
Gen. \zvi (Luke iii. 24, Heb. vii. 5) 

Dat. Asvi 

Ace. Aet/iv (Mark ii. 14)."^ 

^ Schol. ad Theocr. Idyl. i. 132 ; Planck, de Orat. N. T. ii. 4. 

2 Valcknaerii Specim. Annot. Grit, in N. T. p. 383 ; Fischer, Prolus. p. 672 ; 
Planck, ubi supra. 

^ Passov. Lex. in v. vKoro;', Sturz. de Dial. Mac. et Alex. p. 151 ; Fischer, Prolus. 
p. 673. In a very few manuscripts, vXavToi is neuter in Eph. ii. 7, iii. 8. 16; Phil. 
iv. 19 ; Col. ii. 2. 

* See Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 188. 

* Planck, ubi supra. 

^ The Egyptian name Qafjt,ovi, which occurs in Plat. Phaed. p. 27 1, is declined in 
the same manner. See Matt. Gr. Gr. 6 70. Obs. 8. 

^ Nom. Aivi, dat. Ajy't/, in Joseph. Ant. i. 19. 7, ii. 7. 4. 


3. Norn. 'Ia;(Tr>r (Matt. xiii. 55) 
Gen. 'Icuarj (Matt, xxvii. 56) 
Dat. 'I<w<T^ 

Ace. 'I&;(Tr/v. 

Obs. 1. There is an exception to the rule in the name M«y«<r<r?f, gen. Mav«(r<r? 
(Rev. vii. 6), which makes Mavtctra-tj also in the accusative (Matt. i. 10). The name 
of tlie Hebrew lawgiver, Mmo-v;, or Mu'Ca-y^s, has an heteroclite inflection somewhat 
similar to the Greek name luKotiT-A?. Some grammarians have imagined an obso- 
lete form Muffiii;, from which the cases are formed in the same manner as v'liui, vita, 
from the old nominative v'avs.^ Not only is this form altogether unknown, but the 
genitive Mckxr'iu; is expressly referred to the nominative 'Mair^; in John vii. 22. Jo- 
sephus, however, and the LXX adhere to the above mode of declension, except that 
the gen. '^laaiu; is sometimes used by the former. In the New Testament it is thus 
declined : — 

Nom. Maeryis, or MwyVjJj (Luke ix. 30 ; Acts vi. 15, vii. 37) 

Gen. 'Muffius l^luvffitu; (Mark xii. 26 ; Acts xv. 1. 5) 

Dat. Mcaffi? and Muffvi Mwi/Vs? (Luke ix. 33; Matt. xvii. 4; 2 Tim. iii, 8) 
Ace. Mws-sa and isluffnv Muvtrhv (Luke xvi. 29 ; Acts vi. 11, vii. 35). 

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

Obs. 2. There are a few exceptions, as Ao^x-on (Acts ix. 36), Auts (2 Tim. i. 5) ; 
and some are undeclined, as 'Is^a/sTjA, in Rev. ii. 20. In the instance of Ma^/a, -aj, 
an indeclinable form, M«^/a^, 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 2oXo/xwv (Matt. i. 7), gen. SoXopca^vroi^ (John 
X. 23, Acts iii. 11), ace. SoXo/x&vTa (Matt. i. C). The manuscripts 
vary between ^oXo^xuvros and -o^vos-, but either form is in accord- 
ance with ordinary Greek usages.* In Matt. xi. 24, Luke iv. 
26, ^iluv, -ciws, is an example of the latter form. 

Obs. 3. A great proportion of Hebrew proper names, which might readily be de- 
clined in the same manner, are undeclined in the New Testament : for instance, 
'li^iX,t^, gen. and ace. (Matt. xx. 29, Luke xx. 30) ; 'Aa^a/v, gen. (Luke i. 5, Heb. vii. 
11); iccvovviX and 'A<r/,j, gen. (Luke ii. 36); NaSavaj^x, ace. (John i. 46); ^lur,X, 
gen. (Acts ii. 16); 'E^^o^, geii. (Acts vii. 16); 'Iff^ccriX, gen. (Rom. ix. 6, 22); BaaX, 
dat. (Rom. xi. 4) ; ^mv, 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. 

Obs. 4. It is worthy of remark that many Hebrew names which are undeclined in 
the New Testament, are declined by the LXX and the later Greek writers. Thus, 
in the dative, tm MsXx/a, ru 'Afilx, 1 Chron. xxiv. 9, 10. From 'lioi^u the gen. 
and ace. ^It^ixovvro;, -to., occur in Strabo and Fabricius;' and Josephus declines 
^Itr^avi'koi, -ov, after the second declension. Epiphanius (Haer. ii. p. 19) declines the 
appellative to. •^rucrxo'' as a neuter plural; whereas in the New Testament it is always 

» Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 68 ; Matt. Gr. Gr. § 91. 1. 
^ Thvis we have '5,ivo<puv, -uvto;., and Uoffithuv, -uvo;. 

3 This noun was also inflected after the second declension ; for we meet with the 
gen. ^h^ixov in 3 Esdr. v. 44, and dat. 'hoizv i" Procop. de jEdifieus. 


an indeclinable noun in the singular: as in Luke ii, 41, raw ?ra<r;^a. It may be 
doubtful whether ffUioa, in Luke i, 15, is declinable or otherwise. The LXX treat 
it as undecliuable in Numb. vi. 3, dctto o'lvou xcti crUiox. On the other hand, the geni- 
tive irtxiooi is found in Euseb. Prsep. Ev. vi. 10.^ For liva, which is undeclined in 
the LXX as well as in the New Testament, Josephus employs to 2/yarav, with ofo; 
sometimes expressed, and sometimes understood. See Ant. ii. 13. 2, iii. 5. 1. As 
an opposite example, ^uouvas, which follows the first declension in Acts ix. 35, is 
the same with 2a^&;v, undeclined, in Isai. xxxiii. 9, xxxv. 2. LXX. In the Latin 
Fathers the Hebrew proper names are very commonly undeclined. 

§ 11. — Defectives and IndecUnables. (Buttm. § 57.) 

1. Many nouns in tlie New Testament which are used in the 
plural, 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 Qv^oLMo'i, the heavens, of which the Jews reckoned 
three (2 Cor. xii. 2) ; viii. 1 i, dvxroXacl kou Ivaixou, the east and 
west, i. e. the countries so situated ; Heb. i. 2, o\ xiwvs^, the 
icorlds, or the universe f ix. 24, ra, cLyicn^ the temple, as consist- 
ing of three parts. Thus also Matt. xx. 21, va. ^cgto^v, Vz, zhmu- 
ixwv, which include the entire right and left sides of the body ; 
and in like manner, Luke xvi. 23, h to7s- xokTrois, John i. 13, 
1^ ouixocrcoy. To this head may also be referred rx hpci yooiix- 
fxo!.rx, in 2 Tim. iii. 16; the names of certain festivals which 
lasted several days, as ra, a^vfj,a, ysvaaia., eyxaclvioc (Matt. xxvi. 
17, Mark vi. 21, John x. 22) f and of some cities, as 'A^rivxi, 
OiXiinroi, &c. 

Obs. 1. Although ra, ffa.p>P>a,ra, in the plural denotes not only a week or period of 
seven days (Matt, xxviii. 1, Mark xvi. 2, Luke xxiv. 1, John xx. 1. 19, Acts xx. 7, 
1 Cor. 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, 
ifi'ho(jt,vi yif^i^ct, nrti ffufificira xakiTrau Some have thought the word not so much a 
real plural as a mere imitation of the Aramaean ^^Jl^^^; but its occurrence ia the 

T ; — 

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 7rx(s%cc, and the names of let- 
ters, aX(pa, cjfXEyoL, Icoroc, 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 □''^^i^. 

^ There is the same usage in the Latin Saturnalia, Litpercalia, &c Josephus 
(Ant. xii. 7. 7) uses ra, (pu-u. for ra iyKoc'tvix. 

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



declinable names from the Hebrew ; such as Btj^XseV, Na^a^sV 
(Matt. ii. G. 23), 'A^i^ (Luke i. 5), 'Ll\cu^^x (Luke xiii. 2), Kavc^ 
(John ii. 1. IL iv. 46, xxi. 2), J^r,hsaU (John v. 2), ^ux^ix (Acts 
vii. 16), Mdl.a^. (Acts vii. 29), 2iva (Acts vii. 30. 38, Gal. iv. 
24. 25), &c. &c. 

Obs. 2. In addition to the indeclinable form 'U^ovffcckii/u, (Matt, xxiii. 37, Mark 
xi. 1, Gal. iv. 25), the neuter plural 'li^o(roXvfz.u, -uv, is very generally used ; and so 
So'^a^a, -/wv, in Matt. x. 15, xi. 23, Rev. xi. 8. Some commentators understand a 
third form, regarding 'U^oirdXu/xa, in Matt. ii. 3 as the nom. sing, of a. feminine noun ; 
but it is far more probable that ^ao-a agrees with toP.h understood. At the same 
time TofjLoppa is declined both as a fetn. sing, and a neut. plural. Compare Matt. 
X. 15, 2 Pet. ii. G. 

Obs. 3. The formula expressive of ^Christ's eternity, o uv xa.) o ^v xui o l^x'^M^o^t 
assumes the character of an indeclinable noun in Rev. i. 4, et alibi. 

§ V2.— 0fthe Adjectives. (Buttm. § 59-— 64.) 

The declension o^ 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 -;or, which are derived from substantives (Buttm. § 60. 4. 
and Obs. 3.) are not always common in the New Testament. 
Thus a/jyos- is formed with a feminine termination in the verse of 
Epimenides, cited in Tit. i. 12, K/jryres- ast -^^varofA, ycacxai ^riploc, 
yxtjTEpss' dpyoci. We have also in 2 Thess. ii. 16, Trct^oLickinaiv 
aicuviQcy, Heb. ix. 12, alcovlxv 7^vrpcoGiv. On the other hand, 
oaios, which has almost universally three terminations,^ is com- 
mon in 1 Tim. ii. 8, k7rcx,{povroi,s haiovs j^sT^as-. To refer h'jiovs to 
avlpoLs in the preceding clause, is extremely harsh ; and the 
various reading, oaiixs, is but weakly supported. 

Obs. Griesbach would also read T^/j ofzoio;, instead of o^a/a, in Rev. iv. 3, upon 
very good authority.^ 

§ 13. — Of the Degrees ofCompcmson. (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 raxtj; is raxiuv in the New Testament, not the more 
Attic form ^aa-a-uv, or B-ccTTcov.^ See John xiii. 27, xx. 4, 1 Tim. iii. 14, Heb. xiii. 
19, 23. (Buttm. § 67. 3.) 

1 Matthiae (Gr. Gram. ^ 118.) says always ; but there is an exception^ if genuine, 
in Plat. Legg. viii. p. 831.' D. ^ Alt, Gram. N. T. 6 7. 

^ Fisch, Prolus. p. G72. Phryn, p. 76. 


Obs. 2. Of superlatives, which have no regular positive, there is a new instance 
in the form a-inrTos, which is not employed by the more ancient Greeks.^ Heroilian. 
p. 473. ffiTivravs oovi^ai, ovi vvv ffirtiTTov; Xiyovcri. The word occurs iu Matt. xxii. 4, 
and iu Joseph. Ant. viii. 2. 4, Atheu. xiv. p. C5G. E. It is formed from the ob- 
solete adjective cItos^^ or probably from the substantive correspoudingtoit. (Buttm. 
§ 69,3, and Obs. 1.) 

Obs. 3. New forms of comparison sprung up rapidly in the later speech ; of 
which two only are found in the New Testament. In Kph. iii. 8 we have the new 
comparative \>.a,x,KTroTi^o;, from the superlative £^a;^;/^raf ; and ^s/^ars^a; from 
the comparative f^uiuv, in 3 John 4.^ (Buttm. § 69. 3. Obs. 3.) 

Obs. 4. The positive is put with fia>.Xov for the comparative in Mark ix. 42, xaXov 
iffrtv abru (x,aXXov it, ». r. A. This adverb is also frequently put with the com- 
parative, thereby forming a sort of double comparative ; as in M9,rk vii. 36, 2 Cor. 
vii. 13, fjt,a.xXov Ti^iira-on^ov. And, with a yet greater degree of emphasis, in Phil. i. 23, 
^okXu iu.aXXoy x^sTo-trov. The Latins also have a like usage. Thus Plant. Men. v. 
4. 22, 3Ia(/is dulcius^ 

2. There are some modes of expressing a svperlative in the 
New Testament which indicate a Hebrew origin. Thus a subst. 
is sometimes repeated in the genitive; as in Heb. ix. 3, a,yix 
a,ylcov, the Holy of Holies, i. e. the most holy place. Rev. xix. 
16, ^aaiXivs ^aca-iXecov xou ytvpios au^iaiv. Precisely similar is 1 
Tim. vi. 15, (Sxa-iXsu^ rajv (SoccsiXsuovtcov, y.%\ kv^ios rcoy ytu^izvovrcov. 
So in Levit. xxiii. 32, ad^^ocTo, aoc^^drm. 

Obs. 5. A similar form is also used to imply eternity: as in Luke i. 50, u? yiviu? 
yiviuv, Gal. i. 5, 1 Tim. i. 17, Rev. i. G. 18, us rohs aluvxs tojv ocluvuv. In 2 Pet. iii. 
18, it is us y>fJi>s^oiv aiZvos. The Hebrews expressed the same idea by a copula, us 
ytvidv xa) ysvidv. There is an analogous repetition of the same word to express con- 
tinuity in 2 Cor. iv. 16, dvaxaivcvrcti ri/ai^a, xa.) v\[jt,k^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, Exod. 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, iv zlXtx^ivua, Biou, the sincerity which God approves, not per/eel since) ity: Col. ii. 19, 
T«y av^ijffiv rod ©soy, a growth in grace which God requires, not an exceeding growth: 
Markxi. 22, -rlffriv Qiov, faith in God, not a s/rotig faith (see § 44. 1) ; Rev. xxi. 1 1, rhv 
^o^av rouQiou, the glory derived from God, not an exceeding glory ; James v. 11, tixos 
Kv^'tov, the end which God put to Jub''s troubles, not the glorious end of them. Nor is 
the idiom required in Luke i. 15, f^'tyas IvaTiov rou Giou. 1 Thess. iv. 16, Iv trdkTiyyi 
Biou (Compare 1 Cor. xv. 52) ; Rev. xv. 2, xt^d^us rou @ioZ. Much less will it 
admit of an extension, so as to include such expressions as those in Rom. xiii. 1, 
Tx7s y^JtiirffUis ruv ctyyiXcov. 2 Cor. xi. 10, dX'/iBsia X^itrrou. Col. ii. 18, ^oviffxila, tuv 
ayyikuv. Compare Actsvi. 15, Rom. ix. 1, Rev. xxi. 7.* These passages are, indeed, 

^ Mceris, p. 794. » pianck de Orat. N. T. ii. 5. 

3 Winer's Sprachidioms, § 37, 2, Alt, Gr. N. T. § 23, 3 and 35. I b. Gesen. § 173, 
Obs. 1. 
* 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 kariloi tu Sty, though it may well be rendered 
exceedingly beautiful, will admit of explanation upon ordinary principles. See § 
47, 2, Obs. 6. 

Ohs. 7 . Certain figurative expressions, and others indicative of 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, Ihv 'ix^n v'kttiv us k'okkov ffivd'nui, i. e. (he least degree 
of faith ; 1 Cor. xiii. 2, Tria-riv, uffrt opvi fzi^iffrdntv, i. e. the greatest faith ; Rev. i. 14, 
a'l T^/%£?, Xivxa,) util t^iov Xst/xov, *\ x^iuv' xai ot o^B^aXfioi cchrou, us cpXo^ -rupos, x. t. 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, S^jjvo; xa) KXav^f^o; Ka) o^voyJ; 
•roXvs', Luke i. 14, 'icrTeti ;^a^a ffoi xa.) a.yuXX\acis. See also Rom, ii. 8, 1 Thess. ii. 9. 
A like reason will probably explain the expression in Heb. x. 37, //.ixoov 'o(rov oa-ov, 
which signifies a very verg short period. Precisely similar are Arist. Vesp. 213, oVav 
offov friXm, Arrian. Iridic. 29, oVav o<rov rris X'^i^''' Words are thus doubled frequently 
in the Hebrew ; and thence in the LXX, as in Exod. i. 12, eripoha eripo^^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 ««}, in the Rosetta Inscrip- 
tion, V. 9, 'EpfiTis fAiyas xa) f^iyas, i, e. fziyurros.^ 

§ [4.— Of Numerals. (Buttm. § 70, 71.) 

1. The cardinal number sTr is very commonly employed in 
the New Testament instead of the indefinite pronoun rU. 
Thus, in Matt. viii. 19, eTs- ypocfxfjLocTEu^ eT-zrev avro}. xxi. 19, l^cuy 
Gvytriv pLt'av IttI Tr,s o^ov. John vi. 9, eVrt Trai^iqiov sv oi^b. See 
also Matt. ix. 18, xvi. 4, xviii. 24, 28, xix. 18, xxvi. G9, Mark 
xii. 42, Luke v. 12, 17, John vii. 21, xx. 7. 

Obs. 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 U7ius; as in 
Plin. N. H. XXXV. 36, Tabulam anus una custodiebat. Terent. Andr. I. i. 91, Forte 
unam aspicio adolescentulam, 

Obs. 2. For the ordinal -rourosi the cardinal sTj is also frequently used ; more espe- 
cially in speaking oi the first day of the week; as in Matt, xxviii. I, il; f^'^v ffa(->(^oiTuv, 
Mark xvi. 2, -pt^ul 7r,s f^icis (fci(h(^u.Tuv. Also in Luke xxiv. 1, John xx. 19, Acts xx. 7, 
1 Cor. xvi. 2. In enumerations sT? 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 Cluept, c. 64, 
unum, alteriim, 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, /*/«? 'OAi/^Tia- 
Ba;. Cic Senect. c. 5, unoet octogesimo anno. See also Herod, v. 89.^ 

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

2 Alt,Gr. N. T. § 45. 1 . Winer, § 17. Obs. 3. Ast ad Plat. Legg. 2 1 9. Schiefer 
ad Longi Past. 399. Passov. Lex in v, r/j. Turselliu. de Partic. Lat. in v. unus , 
n. 17. 


Obs. 3. In Matt, xviii. 22 the cardinal number t^ra is used, euphonice causa ^ for 
the adverb i-rrcixi;, seven times. A similar usaj^e occurs in the Hebrew of Ps. cxix. 
164, and is preserved by the LXX in Gen. iv. 24. It may also be remarked by the 
way, that the number seveii, bein<^ constantly employed by the Jews as a round 
number (Isa. iv. 1, xxiii. 14, Jerem. xxv. 11, et a/ihi), is used with the like iude- 
fiuiteness in the New Testament. See Matt. xii. 45, xviii. 21, Luke xi. 26. 

2. The numeral ^vo 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 tbe dative W; is used. So also in Gen. ix. 22, LXX, and 
constantly by Aristotle and Theophrastus. Matthlse' cites a solitary example from 
Thucydides ; but there "^vaTv is probably the correct reading.^ 

3. Instead of the compounds oh'^cU and [xri^sU, for which the 
Hebrews have no corresponding expression, the writers of the 
New Testament, in accordance with their vernacular idiom, 
sometimes employ the adjective Trar, with a negative particle 
closely connected with the verb. Thus, in Matt. xii. 25, iraia-ac 
ttoKls fAspia^sTcrcx xaQ' kxuTris ov arcc^ricrErai, xxiv. 22, Mark xiii. 
20, Qvyt av kdcL'^n iracrx adp^. Luke i. 37, ovic d^uvxrin'ysi ttx^oc 0£a» 
TTav prii/^Qc. (Here priixa, signifies a thing according to the Hebrew 
usage ; and, indeed, the passage is cited from Gen. xviii. 14. 
In Greek, however, sVos- has frequently the same import.) 
John vi. 39, 7va ttSv, o ^s^o^xe ptoj, pcrj (xTroXeaco. Acts X. 14, ov^e- 
TTors sipayov Troiy x-oivov. Eph. iv. 29, Tras" Xoyos (JocTrpof ex rov crro- 
IX(x.ros VIJ.CUV fx-h kycTTOpEvsa^oj. 1 John ii. 21, Trav -^ev^os ex. rris aXn- 
^iloLS ovK eari. Rev. xxii. 3, Trav xacravoi^s/xoc ovk sdToci %ri. 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, 8v £$ auruv ou vrecreTrai ettI rm ym, 
(Compare Isai. xxxiv. 16, in the Hebrew.) 

Obs. 5. When the negative particle is not immediately connected with the verb, 
but with 5ra,-, the exclusion is not necessarily universal. Thus in Matt. xix. 11, oy 
!Tai"r£; x^^''^"'' ■''*'' ^^7^^ rourov, aXX' oTs Vi'^orici, i. e., not a//, but some only. So 1 Cor. 
XV. 3i), ch -Traffo. ca.f\ n al/Th (ra^^, all jlcsh is not the same flesh, i. e., there are different 
kinds of flesh. Ste also Matt. vii. 21, Rom. 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. 211. Wahl's Lex. in v. 

' Winer, §26, 1. Alt, H-^j 3- 


elf in a different case ; as in 1 Cor. iv. 6, Tvac ju,-^ eIs Ctte^ rov Ivof 
(pv(jiov(7^s, one ov €7' another. So 1 Thess. v. 11, olxo^o/jisrre eh rov 
Ev^. Equivalent are the forms in Acts ii. 12, aKKos it^ls aXKov. 
Rom. XV. 2, £xai7Tor rco TrXajd/ov.^ 

5. The Greeks and Romans, as well as the Hebrews, omit- 
ted the names of measures and monies after numerals ; and 
thus ^^(x-yjxuv must be supplied in Acts xix. 19, dpyvplav ij.upi- 
doQCf TTEvrs. This is the only example in the New Testament.^ 

6. An ordinal number may be concisely employed, so as to 
include the companions of the individual designated; as in 
2 Pet. ii. 5, oy^oov No/s E(pvXa^£, i. e., Noah with seven others. 
In such cases a.urbs' is usually added, as in Polyb. xvi. 2, Tplros- 
avros Aiovvao^co^of (xTiEVYi^ocro. Sometimes, however, the pro- 
noun is omitted, as in Plutarch. Pelop. p. 284, e\s o\yclocv ^co^i- 
KocTos xocteX^wv. Appiau. Punic, p. 12, rqirof ttote Iv aTrriXaicj 
Kpvnro^/.EM'is sXaS-s. Compare 2 Mace. v. 27.'' 

§ 15.— Of Pronouns. (Buttm. § 72—80.) 

1. In the New Testament the gen. of the personal pron. is 
more usually employed than a possessive pronoun. See § 34. 4. 
(Buttm. § 72. 4.) 

Obs. 1. Instead of a possessive pron. the adj. "Iwi is occasionally employed, as in 
Matt. xxii. 5, ol ^s aTiiX%v, o fAv ih "rov "hov uy^ov, o Ti tU If^.-ro^iav aurov. XXV. 14, 
IxaXifft Tov; Wiov; ^ovXovi. 1 Pet. iii. 1, ul yvvecTxts, iiToraa'a-o/u.ivxi 7o7s loi'ai; av^^dcrtv 
(iirri). So Josh. vii. 10, Prov. xxvii. 8. LXX. More generally, however, this adjec- 
tive is not simply equivalent to a possessive pronoun, but implies an antithesis or 
distinction, as denoting one^s own, in opposition to that of another. Thus, Matt. ix. 1, 
rXSsv £/V 'rhv tViav -roXiv. So Polyb, xxiii. 9. 14, tiiXvirav s/; rcc? iVia.; 'iKatrroi ToXug. 
Again, Matt. XXV. 15, l»d(rrM Kara rhv iVtav "hvvafAiv. Rom. xiv. 4, ffv ri; ti o x^tvuv 
aXXor^iov olxirtiv ; ru I^i'm xv^iat ffTwu, Pi Ti'^rn. Compare also Luke X. 34, John 
x. 3, 4, Acts ii. 6, iv. 32, Rom. viii. 31, xi. 24, Heb. vii. 7. The antithesis is 
clearly marked in 1 Cor. vii. 2, 'ixaffro; r^v lavrov ywaTxa s%£r«, xa) Ixatrrn Tov'i%ov 
civ^^a ix,iru. When a pronoun is added, as in Tit. i. 12, i'^/a; alruv •r^oipyirnsyii 
merely indicates a possession which is more distinctly marked by the adjective. 
The meaning therefore is a native poet, not ^foreigner. Compare ^schiu. c. Cte- 
siph. 143. Xen. Hell. i. 14. 13, In a similar way the later Roman authors use 

2. The pronoun avros has the following senses (Buttm. § 
74. 2.) :— 

1. Joined with a noun, or as the nominative to a finite 
verb, it signifies self, as in John xxi. 25, oy^s olvtq^ oT/xa< 

» Winer, § 20, 2. Alt, Gram. N.T. § 45, 4. '' See Kuinoel ad loc. 

3 Winer, § 6. 1, 2. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 40, 4, 5, 6. Wetstein & Kypke on 
2 Pet. ii. 5. Tursellin. Partic. Lat. in v. unus, n. 18. 


Tov xocT/uiov %(jji^rt(TOL\, Toc y^x(pofji.£vcc ^i^xloi. See also Rom. 
viii. 16, 1 Cor. ix. 27, 2 Cor. xi. 14. 

Obs, 2. Connected with this sense is its use to point out, emphatically, a person 
or thing of peculiar dignity, as when servants speak of their masters, children of 
their teachers, &c. Thus also it is used of God in Rom. x. 1'2, Heb. xiii. 5 ; and 
of ans/in Matt. 1.21. r 

2. It is used in the oblique cases as a mere personal pro- 
noun, though generally with reference to some preceding 
word, as in Matt. i. 18, 19, 20, el alibi passim, 

Obs. 3. There are many places in which it appears to he used in a reflexive sense 
for avros. Thus in Matt. xxi. 45, ol ^a.^i(ra.7oi 'iyvatrctv on ^s^< a-vruv Xiyn. John iv. 
47, h^ura. avrov, 'iva, la,ffnra.i avrov tov vVov. Add Matt. iii. 16, John 1. 48, xiii. 11, Eph. 
i. 9, Heb. xi. 21. This may be a Hebrew idiom, though it may also be supported 
by a similar usage in the Greek writers. Thus Diod. Sic. xvii. 64, t^v -r^hs al/rov 
iuvoiav. Add Herod, ii. 2, Thucyd. vii. 5, Aristot. Ethic, xi. 4, Arrian. Epict. i. 19. 
1 1, Herodian. i. 17. 9, ii. 4. 13, iv. 11. 13. Compare also 1 Mace. i. 2. It is sel- 
dom, however, that in such cases some manuscripts do not exhibit a variation in 
the breathing.^ 

3. 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. 14, Heb. i. 12, xiii. 8. 

4. It is used sometimes, though rarely, in the sense of 
sponte. Thus in Luke xi. 4, kqu yx^ aurol d<^i£iJisv tT'^vtI 
6(psiXovTi YifMv. Compare John xvi. 27, 1 Pet. ii. 24.^ 

5. It stands sometimes for (xovo^, as in Mark vi. 31, ^evts 
VIJ.ZIS acuroi year MIqcm, 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 socvrovy so as to exclude 
any other agent. Thus Rom. viii. 33, o^.ctas- avrol ev 
socuroT^ GTsvx^ofxsv. Add 2 Cor. i. 9. 

Obs. 4. There is also an emphasis, when ecvros is connected with a primitive pro- 
noim; as in Luke ii. 35, xa,) trou ll ccvTris rhv -^vxvv hiXiva-irai po/u,(paict. John iii. 28, 

3. In the New Testament the interrogative pronoun tU 
(Buttm. § 77.) is used, as in other writers, both in direct and 
indirect questions. See Matt. v. 25. 31, Mark v. 9. 30, 31, 
ix. 33, 34, Luke vi. 11, Acts xiii. 25, ct alibi. So also when 
Tjy is equivalent to sT t/^, as in 1 Cor. vii. 18, Trsqir^rfjinfXEvo^ rU 
hiikri'hrr, porj ETTicTTrxcr^aj. Compare James iii. 13, v. 13. 

^ See Heinsius ad Hesiod. Op. D. p. 226. 

« Winer, § 22. 5. Alt, C^ram. N. T. ^ 38. 3. Matt. Gr. Gr. § 148. Obs. 3. 

'^ Alt, Gram. N. T. § G. Passov. Lex. in v. 

* Kuster ad Arist. Achiirn. 506. 


Obs. 5. The interrogative power, though still less direct, is also plainly discerni- 
ble in such passages as Matt. vi. 3, fj//i yvuru « cc^ttrri^d gov tI •xoiu tj di^id, crou. xx. 
22, evx oChart rl aJruaBi. Compare John X. G, xix. 24. It also retains this import 
in the formula -ris lernv i| v/uav iivB^a^os ; and the like, in which Is there any one ? is 
put for who? Compare Matt. vii. 9, xii. 11, xxiv. 45, Luke xi. 5, 11, xii. 45, 
xiv. 5. 

Obs. 6. There are many passages in which, however rare the usage may be in 
classical Greek, r/j is used for the relative oo-tis. Thus in Matt. xv. 32, ovx 'ix^ufft 
Ti (pdyuffi. Luke xvii. 8, iroifiaffov v'l htTTvriffu. 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^i, l(p'' Z •Tra^ii. 

Obs. 8. Frequently r); is used for •rars^o?, which of two: as in Matt. xxi. 31, tis l» 
Tuv '^vo l-roitiffi TO BiXyi/u,a, rod <;ruT^'os ', xxvii. 21, r/va BiXtn ocro tuv ^va a.-roXiffo) v(mv; 
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, tU implies a strong aflBrmation, as in 
1 John ii. 22, <r/V Iffriv o -^luffryis, d fih x. r. X; Every G7ie is a liar, who denies, &c. 
So ] John V. 5, Rev. xv. 4. On the other hand, it denies without a negative ; as in 
Matt, vi. 27, t/? ^s 1% If^t-uv ^vvarai ; no7ie of you is able.^ 

4. In its proper acceptation t\s is found in Matt. v. 23, 
Acts xi. 36, et scejnus. Sometimes ek ns occurs, as in Mark 
xiv. 51, xai eTj- tis vsav/ffxcf ooxoXot;3"£/ ocvrcv. Luke Xxii. 50, eh ris 
l| avraiv. 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 o^ 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, 
Xsycov efvacl riyac eocvtov (xsyav. Heb. X. 27, (po/Sc^a ris l)t^op(,a) 
x^iascos. So Died. Sic. v. 39, sTriTrovos ns (2i6f. Compare 
Heliod. ii. 23. 99, Lucian. D. M. v. 1, Plutarch. V. Cic. 
p. 784. 

Obs. 10. In the same sense it is found with a substantive in James i. 18, ils to 
tivai viy,eis a-ra^^^iv Tivce. tcov uItou xTifffiuTuv, unless, perhaps, the meaning is merely a 
kind off rst -fruits. The adjective is sometimes wanting, n; being used by itself in 
the sense of eminent, distinguished. Thus in Acts v. 36, x'lyuv iTvai Tiva Iuvtov. Also 
in the phrase iJyciJ ti, to be somewhat of importance : as in 1 Cor. iii. 7, uffTi ovn h 
(pvTivuv IffTi Ti. Gal. ii. 6,hxovvTuv uvui Th Compare also 1 Cor. viii. 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, 7rpoax.x- 

X£(7a/u,£vos- luo Tivaf Tft;v [xa^YiTaJv avrov. See also Acts 

xix. 14, xxiii. 23. 

' Winer, § 25. 1. Ah, § 43. Passov. Lex. in v. r/j. ^ Winer, § 25. 2. Alt, § 44. 


3. Added io proper namesy'xi has been supposed to desig- 
nate an obscure individual ; in which sense the English 
frequently say one. Thus in Acts xix. 9, iv axoK-Ti Tu- 
qxvvou Tivo^, of ojie Tyrannus; xxi. 16, Mva;ra;vi rtvt. Com- 
pare Acts XXV. 19. 

Obs. 11. Some commentators suppose that the nouns av»)^ and avB^uros sometimes 
supply the place of t/; in the New Testament, in imitation of the Hebrew ; in sup- 
port of which such examples are adduced as Matt. xix. 6, S oZv o esoj ffuviZ,iv%iv^ 
avB^uvos y.h x^i/^/^sTw. Luke ix. 38, av/i^ octo rou ox>-ov anf^onffu In the former of these 
passages, however, av^^ewro; is plainly opposed to Qiog, and in the latter may be appro- 
priately rendered a man among ike crowd: nor is there any reason against a similar 
rendering in other places, though it is true that the Hebrew words ti/^^ and J3'1J»J 

• T X 

are rendered by r/j in Nehem.iv. 17, Prov. vi. 27, Ecclus. vi. 8, LXX. Compare 
Matt, ix.9, Luke v. 18, vi. 31, Acts x. 5, et afibi. The same remark will also apply to 
the alleged use of av^owro; for 'ixciffroi, since a man, or mankind generally, will equally 
meet the sense ; as in 1 Cor. iv. \,ouru; rifMas koyt^iirSii) avBoM-ro;, u; Ltc^oitk; Xpi<rrov» 
xi. 28, h»tu,a,t,iru av^^M-roi lavroy. Compare Prov. xxiv. 12. It may also be re- 
marked, that avii^ will sometimes admit of being rendered by the demonstrative pro- 
noun, when it is followed by a relative ; as in Rom. iv. 8, fjt,ex,Kdipios avhp,^ ou /u.yj Xoylffn- 
rai Kv^ioi af^t.o'.^rla.v. So also James i. 12, fji.a.x,a^io$ avii^, os vto/:4,zvu 9rii(ja(r/u,cv. 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 iiXri(pa is used, instead of xi\n<pa. See Rev. ii. 27, iii. 3. 
xi. 17.— (Buttm. § 83. Obs.3.) 

Obs. 2. The three \ eihs, liovXef4ai,'^vmfjc«i, and ^/xXa/, sometimes take the temporal 
augment instead of the syllabic, in the aorist and imperfect tenses, after the Attic 
usage. Thus in 2 John 12, r/Sa^^XwSrjv, Matt. xvii. 16, rihwyi^mccvy xxvi. 9, rihvvot,ro^ 
Luke vii. 2, ^f/AXXt. The practice, however, is not uniform ; for in other places the 
syllabic augment is used ; as in Matt. i. 19, i^ovXn^n, xxii. 46, ihivaro, Luke x. 1, 
'ifj^tXXi.^ (Buttm. § 83. Obs. 5.) 

Obs. 3. The omission of the augment in the /^/wsyj/aTw ;j<r;y. continually occurs. 
Matt. vii. 25, Luke vi. 48, TtBi/u-iXiuro, Mark xiv. 4.4, h^uKii, xv. 7, irscroojxj/o-av, 10, 
Ta^x^i^coxiKTav, xvi. 9, IxflifiXrixit, Acts xiv. 23, -riTia-TivKUffav, 1 John ii. 19, fnfn- 
vwiitroct. These and similar omissions of the augment, which occur in the later 
speech, have sometimes been referred to the poetic figure Aphceresis, 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 ih there is the usual fluctuation between lu and 
>!ti, in the tenses which take the augment; and the MSS. variations are propor- 
tionably numerous.* Thus we have in Matt. iii. 17, ihVo}iriira.y Luke iii. 22, nvloKtjffa, 
Acts xvii. 21j svxciipovv, Mark vi. 31, nhxai^ovv, x. 16, y,l\oyu, Acts xi. 29, yih-ro^uro, 
xxvii. 29, ailxevro. For texts in which the readings vary, see Luke xii. 16, Acts ii. 
26, xxvii. 35, Rom. i. 21. It may here be observed that the verb ivecyyiXt^uv in- 
variably takes the augment after £y, in the manner of verbs compounded with preposi- 
tions : Gal. iii. 8. '^^oivnyyiXitraTo, Heb. iv. 2, 6, ivnyyiXierfiivoi, Rev. X. 7, iV'/iyyiXi(n. 
(Buttm. § 84. 5. and 86. 2.) 

Obs. 5. In John xix. 31, xanay&io-i, 3 pi. aor. 2, pass, of KxrKywfjLi, has the 
syllabic augment, instead of the temporal. (Buttm. § 84. Obs. 5.) 

Obs. 6. The syllabic augment is prefixed to the temporal in the per/. lu^otKa, in 
Luke ix. 36, and elsewhere. With respect to the verb avotynv, instead of the forms 
uviculcc, oiviM^^nv, anciynv, employed by the Attics, the New Testament writers use 
r,voi%a, &c. Thus John ix. 17, 21, '^W^s, Acts xii. 10, rivoix,^yi, Rev. xi. 19, xv. 5, 
ivoiyyj. Sometimes this verb is found even with a triple augment, as in Rev. iv. 1, 
3y^a ^viMyfzivy], XX, 12, '/ivsMp^^B-tj. So in Gen. vii. 11, LXX, ^vs^'^Sj^o-av, viii. 6, ^vf»|s. 
The regular form occurs in Luke i. 64, John ix. 14, 30, Rev. x. 2.^ (Buttm. § 84. 
Obs. 8.) 

Obs. 7. 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, axwoot, in Luke vii. 24, John iv. 42, 1 John i. 1 ; a<roXuXMs, Luke xv. 4, 
et alibi scepius ; and the plusq^ perfect IXuXv^uv, in Luke viii. 2, John viii. 20, 
Acts viii. 27, ix. 21. (Buttm. § 85. 1, 2.) 

Obs. 8. In 2 Cor. xi. 4, ^vs/x^^^^s is read with a double augment, instead of a.vii- 
X£(7-^s. There is also a various reading which gives awixaritrTci^n for ccroxanffrd^vi 
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, the 
preposition, which led to its insertion, in some cases, both in the beginning and 
middle of a compound verb. (Buttm. § 86. Obs, A.) 

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

1. The Attic contraction of the future of verbs in -/^cu into 
'iM occurs very frequently, but not universally, in the New 
Testament. Among others, the following examples will suf- 
fice.* Matt. xii. 21, bKtiiovgi, xxv. 32, a^^opiii, Luke i. 48, 
lxocy.(x^iov(^i, xix. 44, E^oe,(piovGi, Acts vii. 43, fjLsroi>cia>, Rom. x. 19, 
Tra^o^yiu, Heb. ix. 14, xaOccpieT, X. 37, xpovLsT, James iv. 8, 
EyyiiT, 1 Pet. V. 4, Kofj^isTa^E. On the other hand, Matt. iii. 11, 
^txTrriasi^ xxv. 31, xaS^tVei, Mark xvi. 3, dTroycuXlcrEi, 2 Cor. ix. 6, 
^spiasi. To these may be added a-aXma-Ei, which is used in 1 Cor. 
XV. 52, for the more regular form aoiXmyhi.^ (Buttm. 95, 9.) 

1 Poppo on Thucvd- 1. i. p. 228. Leusden de Dial. N. T. p. 17. 

2 Air, Gr. N. T. ^S 16. Georg. Hier. i. 3. 13. 

3 Planck de Orat. N. T. ii. 3. ^ Georg. Ilierocrit. i. 3. 1 1. 
* Thom. M. p. 789. Lobeck ad Pbrvn. p. 191. 


Ohs. 1. There is a similar analo<;y in the noun ffciX-rnrrhy for which the older 
writers used (raXcr/yxr^,-, Rev. xviii. 22. 

2. The formation of the second aorist after the manner of 
the ^r^^ has 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, Ei'^a/XEV, 
2 Sam. X. 14, sl^av, %(pvy(x,v, xvii. 20, zv^oLy, xix. 42, eipaya/otev, 
xxiii. 16, eXa^av, 2 Chron. xxix. 6, lyxarsXiTrav, Esth. v. 4, 
sX^oirco, Ps. Ixxvi. 18, Epocvxv, Prov. ix. 5. eX^octs, Isai. xxxviii. 
14, E^g/XotTo, dipslXixro, Amos iv. 4, luXn^vvoLTE, rivEyaocrs. There 
is one unquestionable example in the New Testament, where 
we fmd svp(i(j.svof, in Hebr. ix. 12. Nor is there reason to 
doubts from the very great consent of the best MSS., that the 
true reading is in Matt. xxv. 36, ^xS-arc, Luke vii. 24, e^v-jX^ars, 
xi. 52, EljyjXS-aTE, John vi. 10, h£7r£<7xv, Acts ii. 23, dveiXocre, vii. 

10, xii. 11, E^Et'XaTo, vii. 21, dvsiXxro, xxii. 7, sVsffof, Rom. xv. 3, 
ETTdTrefy^zv, 1 Cor. x. 8, Rev. vi. 13, 'stteo-qcv. (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 utx, from il-riTv, should be referred to 
this head. It occurs in the second person sing, in Matt. xxvi. 25, Mark xii. 32, 
Luke XX. 39. The imperative s;Vov is found in Gen. xii. 13, xx. 13, Exod. vi. 6, 
viii. 5.16, Levit. xxi. ], and elsewhere repeatedly; and the manuscripts vary be- 
tween ti-PTov and j/Vs in Acts xxviii. 26. In other places, however, it is always s/Ve, 
even when a vowel follows. See Matt. iv. 3, xxii. 17, Luke iv. 3, vii. 7, x. 40. 
Nevertheless we have uTart in Matt. x. 27, xxi. 5, Col. iv. 7 ; and j/Va^rwo-av in 
Acts xxiv. 20. The Alexandrian manuscript has also giWv, indie. 3 pi. in Mark xi. 
6, Luke xix. 39, Acts i. 11, and the part, i'l'-ras in Acts xxii. 2^.^ 

Obs. 3. From a^-rd^a, the aor. 2. pass. Ti^-ray/iv, and part. u^Tayi);, are found 
2 Cor. xii. 2, 4. Some copies also read fi^rdy^v, for h^'^iff^nv, 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 >j or a 
in the aorist of verbs in -oclvu. 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 i-xitpava. in 
Luke i. 79 ; Uriftava in Acts xi. 28, xxv. 27. (Buttm. § 101, 4, and Obs. 2.) 

§ \^,— .Verbals. (Buttm. § 102.) 

Verbals, derived from verbs pure, have s before the final 
syllable, which however is frequently omitted. Thus the more 
ancient Greeks used aVe/^aror, or lonice, dTrsipnTos, as in Hom. 

11. M. 304. Find. 01. xi. 18. Nem. i. 33. But although ccTrsipota- 

' Ileiaclides ap Kustath. p. 1 709, 10. ^ Stiirz. do Dial. Alex. ])!>. GO, seqfji. 

'^ Matt. Gr. Gr. ^ 201, 6. and, 232. * Lobeck ud I'hvyu. p. 24. 


ros 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 yvcoaroi and yvcoro^, in Soph. OEd. 7. 361, 
396. d^iixKyrof and d^Efjiiros, in Xen. Cyr. i. 6. 6.Eurip. Ion. 1093. 

Obs. 1. The above remarks are equally applicaLle to the noun (itaa-Ths, IMatt. xii. 
12. With this orthography it is found only in Philo, and in the Ecclesiastical 
writers. It is elsewhere ^larvn, as in Find. Nem. ix. 130.* 

Obs. 2. New compounds, however, were frequently formed by tbe later writers, 
which were not to be found in their predecessors. For example, scKara'TaverTos, unceas- 
ing, for which a-recva-Tos was formerly used, occurs in 2 Pet. ii. 14; and a^riyivv/iro;, 
new-born for noyivh; or a^riysv*;;, in 1 Pet. ii. 2. Compare Polyb. iv. 17. 4. Lucian. 
Dial. Marin, xii. 1 . 

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

The Paradigmas of rvTrrco, ttoieoj, riixioj, and pctcr^oo;, 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 -j/<rav of the third person plural of the plusq. perfect 
is much more usual than -iffav. See the examples at ^ 16. Obs. 3. We have in 
Rev. vii. 11, eo-Wxs^ray, but tiffTwiKfat in Luke xxiii. 10, Acts ix. 7, and elsewhere.' 

Obs. 2. Of the ^olic form of the optat. aor. 1, in -s/a, -£/«?, -m, there are two 
instances, and two only, in the New Testament, and both in the third person 
plural, viz., Luke vi. 11, 'roiriauav^ Acts xvii. 27, ^riXatpritnia.t. (Buttm. § 103. 
II. Obs. 4.) 

Obs. 3. In the third person plural of the imperative the termination -ruffav, for 
which the Attics more commonly emplo5'ed -vtuv, is used in the New Testament. 
Thus, Acts xxiv. 20, iWaruffav, XXV. 5, naTyiyo^UToxrav, 1 Cor. Vli. 9, yxfA,viffareaffav, 
36, yafjijiiruffav, 1 Tim. V. 4, i/MvCanTuffav. (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, ohvvaffat for chuvK, Luke xvi. 25 ; xuvxciffcci for Atay^a, Rom. ii. 17. 23, 1 Cor.iv. 7. 
With respect to luvaffui. which occurs in Matt. viii. 2, Mark i. 40, and elsewhere, 
the grammarians maintain that it is tbe proper form, and condemn the use of ^vv^, 
except in the conjunctive.^ It is somewhat curious therefore, that Ivvri is found in 
the indicative in Rev. ii. 2, and so also in Job xxxiii. 5, Esth. vi. 13. 24. See also, ^^lian V. II. xiii. 32. Synes. Ep. 80, Diog. Laert. p. 158. E. To 
this head belong the foims (^dyio-ai and <riiffai,^ being the second person sing, of the 

1 Planck de Orat. N. T. § ii. 5. 

2 Leusden de Diall. N. T. p. 16. 

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

■* Wetstein in Luke xvii. 8. Matt. Gr. Gr. ^ 183. Winer improperly regards 
the forms (pdyiffcn and 'Xttirai as Jirst ao?-isis, either infinitive or imperative; and 
others, no less incorrectly, explain them to be present tenses with a future signi- 


obsolete futures (pdyouui and -rUficn, of the former of which the third persons sin{^. 
and plural, (pxyircci and (pdyovTut are found in James v. 3, Rev. xvii. 16, respectively. 
(Buttm. § 103. 111. Obs. I.) 

Obs. r>. The contract form in -u, which is commonly employed in three verbs 
only, is found in two of them, oy^ii and (iovku. See Matt, xxvii. 4, Lukexxii. 42. 
Of the third, oUt, 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 t«^£?>7, according to the common orthography, which should probably be re- 
ceived into'the text. (Buttm. § 103. III. Obs. 3.) 

Obs. G. Peculiar to the later speech is the termination of the third person plural, 
both in the imperf. and second aorist, in -oauv, instead of -ov. Of this form there is 
one example in the New Testament, viz., Vha'Atavfav for lloXioZv, in Rom. iii. 13. 
Some manuscripts also read IXafiotrav for -ra^iXex.(ii, in 2 Thess. iii, 6. In the LXK 
the form is very frequently found, which proves it to have been essentially Alexan- 
drian,* though it has been also referred to the Chalcidians and the Asiatic Greeks.^ 
Thus, Gen. vi. 4, iyiwuffxv, Kxod. i. 1, ila-^k^offav, xvi. 24, xanXiTratrav, xviii. 26, 
iKoivoirav, Deut. i. 24, IXaf^offuv, Ps. xiii. 3, 'ihoXiovtrav, xlvii. 4, i^x^offav, Ixxvi. 16, 
illoffctv, &c. &c. It was also commonly employed by the Byzantine historians : 
as in Niceph. Greg. vi. 5, s'/Wav, Nicet. xxi. 7, ^sT/^xSao-av, Since verbs in -^< 
have precisely the same formation, the ending may be traced to the ancient lan- 
guage of the Greeks, and Phavorinus ascribes it to the Dorians.^ (Buttm. § 103. 
V. Obs. 1.) 

Obs. 7. The termination -av for -airi in the third pers. pi. of the perfect active is 
said by some to have been in use at Chalcis/ 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, 'iyvajKuv, Rev.xix* 
3, u^nKKv. In the LXX the usage is much more frequent; as in Deut. xi. 7, lu^ocKavy 
Isai. v. 29, '^fa.^iffTnKav. (Buttm. § 103. V. Obs. 3.) 

Obs. 8. Instead of the usual Attic forms -Truvh and h^'^v, the New Testament 
writers use the contraction into a; as, for instance, in John vii. 37, Rom. xii. 20. 
We find also the {\xi\ue -rtivdiru for -pruvr.ffu, in Rev. vii. 16; but the other form, 
h4'r,tru, in the same text. So the aorist i'Tiivaa-u in Matt. xii. 1, Mark ii. 25, xi. 12 ; 
and again in John vi. 35, where, however, it is coupled with \%l^r)ffu. The verbs 
%nv and x;^5i(rSa/ follow the Attic usage.7 (Buttm. § 105, Obs. 5.) 

§ 20.— Verbs in (xi. (Buttm. § 107.) 

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

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

^ Kustath. pp. 1759, 35 ; 1761, 30. Tzetzes ad Lyeophr. 21. 252. 

^ Fischer in Prolus. p. 681. Phavoriu. in v. i(puyo(rctv. The third person plural 
of the optative in -oitrav and -ata-av, for -onv and -a;=v, ia frequently met with in the 
LXX. For example, Psalm xxxiv. 25, urata-etv, J oh xviii. 7, l^yiozua-cna-uv. In the New 
Testament this form does not occur. See Matt. Gr. Gr. p. SiH. 

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

* Sext. Kmpir. adv. Gramm. 6 213, ki^i; n '^a.^k toI; "x\tl»v\tv(rtv, iX>jXi/Sav xu) 
uTtXvkv^av. See Sturz. de J)ial. Alex. p. 58. 

" Planck de Orat. N. T. ^ ii. 3. 
7 Lobeck ad Phryn. pp. 61. 204. 



Obs. 1. There are occasional instances of the third person plural of the present in 
-uffi: as T/Ssatr/, for T/S£ in Matt. V. 15, xxiii. A, Mark xv. 17. (Buttm. § 107. 
Obs. i. 1.) 

Obs, 2. The contract form of verbs in -^tt/, which passed from the Ionic and Doric 
dialects into the later speech, is common in the New Testament. Thus we have 
Matt. xiii. 13, 2 Cor. x. 12, ffwioZffi, Matt. xiii. 23, Rom. iii. 11, ffwiuv, Matt, xviii. 
8, xxvi. 26, Mark xv. 23, Wi^ou, Acts iii. 2, Wi^ow, Rom. iii. 31, l(r7ufitv, 2 Cor. iii. 
13, st/Sh/, iv. 2, ffwurravTii. In Rev. ii. 20, many copies read a(pti7i, instead of !«;. 
For these forms in the LXX see 1 Chron. xxv. 7, 2 Chron. xxxiv. 12, Psal. xli. 1, 
Jerem. xx. 12, and elsewhere.^ (Buttm. § 107. Obs. 1, 2.) 

Obs. 3. Although the aor. 2 opt. ^^jjv is very generally ceiisured by the old gram- 
marians, it is sometimes regarded as a regular Ionic forni, contracted from BaZ/jy.* 
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. iv. 
p. 215, recent editors have substituted 'hu for ^uri. Later writers frequently em- 
ployed it. See Themist. Orat. 13, 174. Appian. Punic, xviii. 324.^ (Buttm. ^ 107. 
Obs. i. 3.) 

Obs. 4. There is an instance of the plusq. perf. UrnKuv, with the simple aug- 
ment, in Rev. vii. 11. Some manuscripts have also io-r'^Kitrav for iia-r^Kitirav, in 
Luke xxiii. 10, Acts i. 10, ix. 7. (Buttm. § 107. Obs. i. 7.) 

Obs. 5. Among the unusual inflexions of this class of verbs which the New Tes- 
tament exhibits, may be noticed the aor. 1 conjunctive ^wo-jj, from j'Wa, for 'i^Mxa, 
in John xvii. 2, Rev. viii. 3, xiii. 1, 6. This has been regarded as a Doric form ; 
but the texts are most probably corrupt. In every instance the copies vary between 
^eoff'/i, ^uffUf and luffiv, of which %cu(ru is probably the true reading. Many critics, 
indeed, regard ^uxri^, not as the aorisf, but as the future conjunctive.* Examples 
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. 
xav^'/j(ra/u,ai, 1 Pet. iii. 1, Ki^n^r,ffuvTui. The various^readings also give in Rom. 
xi. 26, ffu^nffyirai, 1 Tim. vi. 8, a^xi(rB>:(r&>f/,iBa. 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 
S/^oy, for ^i^oS/, in Matt. v. 42, Luke vi. 30. In compound verbs, ccvda-Tu, for dva- 
ffrti^i, is found in Acts xii. 7, Eph. v. 14. So also Mark xv. 30, Kardfia, Rev. iv. 1. 
dvdlict. Nevertheless we find dvaffrtj^i, in Acts ix. 6, 34, I'mrTn^i, 2 Tim. iv. 2. 
(Buttm. 107. Obs. i. 14.) 

Obs, 7. Syncopated forms of the perfect participle of /W^^/ 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 'nrrdvai, for Iffrtixivat, in 1 Cor. 
X. 12. (Buttm. § 107. II. Obs. 3.) 

1 Georg. Ilierocrlf. ii. 3. 17. 2 Thorn. M. p. 326. 

3 Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 346. Georg. Hierocrit. 3. 1.5. Sturz. de Dial. Alex. p. 52. 
There is a similar contraction in the substantives, <7rccT^a.Xclias and fiYir^aXcuUi in 
1 Tim. i. 9. See Wetstein m loc. The Attic form 'xar^a.Xo'ta.i occurs in Plat. 

* 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. Lipsius de indicativi usu in N. T, § 6. Gebser on James iv. 


S 21. — TJie rerh,^ 'if\ixi and elfxl. 
I. iV;/xi, to 6'encL (Buttm. § 108. 1.) 

1. The imperfect of the compound ^(p/ooiun has frequently 
the augment at the beginning; as Y,(pie, in Mark i. 34, xi. IG.^ 

2. The third person plural of the perfect, ^(psojvTxi, for 
a(pervTa<, 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 ilu^a, which is prolonged in a similar manner frgm u^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 cl<pi.yi, for d(p^^ in Homer. 

II. ElptI, I am. (Buttm. § 108. 4.) 

1 . Of the imperfect ri^/^nv, 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, \7 , and 
elsewhere. The second person ^a^a occurs in Matt. xxvi. 
69, Mark xiv. 6?.^ Of the 3 pers. plural h, for r^auv, there is 
an instance in Luke ii. 33. 

2. For EGTOJ, in the imperative, we have rttc^, 1 Cor. xvi. 22; 
James v. 12. So also in Ps. civ. 31. LXX. This inflexion is 
said to have been Doric. '^ 

Obs, Instead oi'iniTTi, the syncopated form 'iu is used in Gal. iii. 28, Col. iii. 11, 
James i. 17. 

§ 22. — Anomaly of signification. (Buttm. § 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 rfKio^ ocvocteKKei. Luke xii. 37, ocvxxXdis'i qcvtovs. 2 Cor. ii. 14, 

1 See Matt. Gr. Gr. o 170. and 212, 7. 

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

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

' Lobeck ad Phrvn. p. 152. e See Matt. Gr. Gr. § 201, 8. 

7 Heraclid. ap. Eustath. p. 1411, 22. 


to; '^pnxix^ivoyri %ixas, Phil. iv. 10, av5^a?v.£T£ to vTrlp sfxov (p/:ovcTv. 
1 Thess. iii. 12, vfxois h Kupios ttXeovxijoci y.x\ TTc^ia-aEVTaci. Com- 
pare 2 Cor. ix. 8, et alibi. The verb, o-ttcl/'^eiv signifies not 
only to make has-te (Luke ii. 16, xix. 1, 6), but transitively, 
to desire earnestly/, as in 2 Pet. iii. 12, Trpoa-ooicaivraf ycocl o-Treu^oy 
Tas rriv TTccpouaiav rris rov 0£oi} ^ixi^xs. Sec also Prov. XXVlll. 
22,LXX; 39, Eur. Hec. 1175, 1201; ^lian. V. H. 
xiii. 30 ; Polyb. iii. 62. 8. 

Obs. 1. It is probable, indeed, that to most of the above verbs were attached by 
tlxe Greeks a double import, and thus dvariXkuv has an active sense in Anac. liii. 
40, Died. Sic. xvii. 7 ; and a.)icix,Xt))uv, in Polyb. xxxi. 4, 5. At the same time the 
LXX have frequently thus expressed by a neuter verb the causalive import of the 
Hebrew Hiphil ; as in Gen. xlvii. 6, xxtoikiitov tcv crari^a, aov> 1 Sam. xv. 35, 
i(iacrikiv(rz rov laovX It) 'l(r^ar,k. See also 1 Sam. viii. 22, 2 Kings xiv. 21, Ps. Ixxi. 
21, cxix. 50, cxxxii. 17, Isai. xvi. 5, Ezek. xvii. 24. As frequently, however, by a 
periphrasis with -ronTv, as in Deut. xxxii. 39, ^ijv jroiJio'-i;, Isai. xxix. 21, Toiovvrt; afx,a^- 
<ri7v, Jerem. xxviii. 15, t-zTo^Uoci iToinccci. Sometimes the Latins also employed a 
neuter verb in an active sense; as in Virg. M\\, vi. 132; Ne tanta animis adsu- 
escit bella.^ 

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, ora^ Vc TTxpxlcv o aapTTo^, i. e. presents itself: v. 37. rx 
xjy/xara gTrZ/SaXXsv sis- ro TrXoiov, jjoured themselves, or, with a like 
intransitive sense in the English, poured into the ship : Acts 
xxvii. 14, s^xXs Kxr avrra xm^i^os, set against it. Add to these 
Luke ix. 1 2, rt II -hixipQc rnp^ocrvo xXivsiv. 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, XetVeiv, to be 
wanting ; Acts vii. 42, sVt/jsvJ/s ^a o @s6s. (This verb is regu- 
larly intransitive in the New Testament, except in Rev. xi. 6, 
(7T§E(ps{v avTiz e\s acl(J^x.) Acts xxvii. 41, o^ Trpcupcc spzlaxTo. e/xstv£> 

* Alt, § 49. — As the active sometimes bears the sense of the Hebrew Hiphil, 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 ytv^trxitrB-xt signifies, to be caused to know, 
L e) to be taught ; but in the first outo; iyvaa-rai, he is known, refers to God, not to 
him\i'ho loves God, In the last yvuff^ivris will more appropriately mean approved, 
or lovnd, which is a common sense of the verb. Compare Matt. vii. 23, John viii. 
55, llifb. vii. 15, 2 Tim. ii. 19, Heb. xiii. 23. In 1 Cor. xiii. 8, the insertion of ««/, 
after KuStii^ is altogether overlooked in the proposed translation : whereas jca^ati 
xa) iTiynod^'/iv, clearly indicates a sense identical with the preceding word, Tors 
iTiyvuffoy-ai, then shall I know even as also J am known, i. e. of God : or in other 
words, my knowlege will be perfect and universal. Compare Glass. Phil. Sac. 
p. 253. Pott, ad 1 Cor. viii. 3. 



d(jaksvTOf. 43, sKeKEVffs rovi ^uyccfMevovs xoXuix^^v, ocTToppl-^avraf 
{scil. hxurovs- sU ^dXaaa-ocv) ^ TTpcorovs ettI rr/v yojv E^isvtzt. Here 
also belongs ccv^oIvbdi, to grow, in Matt. vi. 28, Luke i. 80, and 
elsewhere ; which intransitive sense it also bears in the later 
Greek writers. 

Obs. 2. Somelimes a noun is required to complete the sense ; as in Matt. vii. 1, 
!r^(j(rj;^£iv, sci/. Tov vovv, to observe; Mark xiv. 72, iTt^aXXnv, scil, rtjv'^ta.voia.v., io 
reflect. (Some understand simply laurov; but compare Diod. Sic. ii. 7 ; M. Anton. 
X. 30. The omission is supplied in Diod. Sic. xx. 44, ^^os ollh IriflaXt rhvliavotav.) 
Luke V. 3, 11, iTavdyuv and xardynv, scil. nrnt vxvv, to put out to sea and to make the 
land, respectively; Acts xxvii. 15, In^ihovui, sciL to -rXoTov. So Heliod. .^th. i. 3, 
Ixlo'vTos ra> avif^a. Here also some supply Ixvtovs. We have in Sil. Ital. xi. 275. 
Puppini dat vento.^ To this head of transitives used intransitively has been also 
referred, but improperly, John xiii 2, rov 'hiufhoXou nl'/i (iifixyixoros u; rhv xa^'^iav 'loJ^cc, 
where the object is implied in the subsequent words Vva avTov ^a^cc^ui:^ Also in Acts 
ix. 19, the verb Ivia-xiJuv is naturally intransitive, though it has an active sense in 
Luke xxii. 43.^ The verb "a-r*ifzt is used in various senses both transitive and 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 luffryifn 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, 
u ri; vfjiMi Kar&^ovXol. Compare Gal. ii. 4. Perhaps also 2 Tim iv. 4, ocro rUg a,Xyi~ 
klas rhv ccKonv aTo<rr^i\povfftv. Sometimes the reflexive pronoun is added, as in Matt, 
xxvi. 65, hip^Yjls ra, i/idnec avrov. So Mark xiv. 63, Acts xiv. 14. The verb -ronTv is 
frequently used in the New Testament where the early Greeks would rather have 
used TonTtr^at. Thus in Mark ii. 23, o^ov <roti7v, to make a journei/ ; which in good 
Greek would signify /o make a road; Acts xxiii. 13, erum/^oertav <7roim. Compare 
Herod, vi. 42, vii. 42, Xen. Auab. iv. 8. 6, v. 17. See also John xiv. 23, Ephes. iii. 
11. Likewise iI^ktkhv, to obtain, for tv^'iffsciff'bcii, in Luke i. 30, ix. 12, Kora. iv. 1, 
2 Tim. i. 18. But Lucian. Reviv. T. i. p. 396, fjcoXi; yoZv tii^of^nv ■roXXk Uiriitxa,?. 
Occasionally the active and middle are used indifferently, as in Luke xv. 6, ffuyKaXil 
revs (pt'Xov; xa) rov; yilrovas, which is repeated in v. 9, with avyxaXiirai.^ 

Obs. 4. The following instances of the active, in a passive sense, are closely allied 
to a reflexive import: 1 Pet. ii. 6, -xton^tt iv nrri y^aip^, for ^i^Axirai. So in Joseph. 
Ant. xi. 4. 7, xet^ag iv awTj? (t>5 iTitTToXf) -n^tix^'i' 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, lU <rrvX»v uXos ^srs/SaXsv, 
she was chctnjed, viz. Lot's wife.^ 

^ Wini^r, 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 luterpp. ad 11, cc. 

« S.e Kypke ad 1. c. 

^ Pussov. Lex. in v. 

"* Winer, ubi supra. 

5 Winer, § 3 J, 6. Alt, § 48. 4. Kuster de V. M. pp. 37. 67. Dresig. p. 401. 
Poppo ad Tuucyd. pp. 185. 189. 

« Winer, § 39, 1 Alt, 48, 2. Georg Hierocrit. i. 3. 31. Glass. Phil, Sacr. p. 
245, Krebs et Pott ad 1 Pet. ii. G. 



3. Passive verbs have sometimes an active or neuter signi- 
fication ; as in Acts xx. 13, ovrco yaq h ^taTsrxyixEvof. Tit. ii. 1 1, 
E'jr£(pdv7i yoip Yi XcHpi^ rov @sov t) (Tcorriqios TradiV dy^pcuTToi^. See also 
2 Pet. i. 3, 4. 

Obs. 5. The construction is peculiar in Acts xxvi. 16, us roZro u(p^-Av got, t^cx^i^'- 
(fcctT^ai ffi vTr'/i^iTViv x,a) ficc^ru^a, uv rt sT^ej, »v t£ o(p3-r,a-ofjbai ffoi. From the similarity 
of the two last clauses, some regard them as equivalent to fAa^rv^a, toutuv a uhn, xa) 
TouTuv a. o<p^ri<roi/.al croi, and render l(p^nffofj!,a,t, in an active sense, / will make to appear 
to you, or will show you. Since, however, the aor. 1. u(p^m has its true passive im- 
port, / have been seen, or have appeared, it is preferable to render o(pBiiffof/,cn in the 
passive also, understanding ha or ^i^t with the second uv. Hence the sense will be, 
those things which thou hast now seen, and those concerning which I will hereafter ap- 
pear to you. The same future has a passive sense in Isai. xl. 5, LXX.^ 

Obs. 6. 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, a-vnTi^uvro ol 'lou^aToi. Acts xiii. 2, 
aipo^tffccTi osj /xoi rov Boi^vcifiav xou rov '2oc,vXov us ro 'i^yov, o ^^0ffKiKXn[jt,a,i ahroiis. (Com- 
pare Acts xvi. 10, XXV. 12.) 1 Pet. iv. 3, •rscra^syyttsyayj iv aa-iXyuais. Compare 1 Sam. 
xiv. 17, 2 Kings v. 25, Job xxx. 28. It may sometimes appear doubtful 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, o Ti hax^ivo/u,ivos, lav (payn, xaraxi- 
x^trat, on ovxlx •prtffrius. Phil. iii. 12, ohx on fi^n 'iXecfoov, jj yi'^yj nriXiiu/jjCti. 1 Pet.iv. 1, 
o^a^aiv IV ffa^x), •x'l'^a.vrot.i a,iMot,^rias. A middle sense, however, is indicated in Acts 
xxiii. 1, -priToXlriVfjt.ctt ru Osf, I have conducted myself obediently to God's laws. Com- 
pare 2 Mace. vi. 1. In like manner the aor. 1. pass, has sometimes a middle 
sense ; as in Matt. x. 26, ^jj oZv (pofivt^nn uvrovs. So in Matt. xvi. 2, xvii. 1 1, Luke 
xxii. 8, a.7rox^i^nvoi.u (The middle is used in Mark xiv. 61, Luke xxiii. 9.) In Matt. 
xxi. 21, Mark xi. 23, Rom. iv. 20, we have hccx^t^hon. (Compare Acts x. 20.) Again, 
in Acts V. 26, xvicmi Qivhas, u ^^einxoXX'^^Tj u^i^fios av'h^uv ucru rir^axoff'icov. James iv. 
\Q , ra,<ruvu^^ri Ivu^m rov Kv^iov. So 1 Pet. v. 6. Compare Ecclus. xviii. 21. In 
Acts xvii. 4, 'T^otrixXn^u^mav, and in Eph. i. 1 1, IxXn^a^yif^sv, are doubtful. Of the 
aor. 2. passive, so used, there is an example in John vni.59/lfio'ovs Tt Ix^vfin, xa) 
IpxSsv. Perhaps also xaraXXaynvat, 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 are frequently used in a passive 
sense. This is more particularly the case with the aor. I pass,, 
when the aor. 1. mid. is also in use. Thus we find s^Eoi^nv in 
Matt. vi. 1, Mark xvi. 11. (compare Thucyd. iii. 28) ; laS-yjv in 
Matt. viii. 13, Luke vi. 18, (and in Isai. liii. 5. LXX) ; sXo- 
yiff^yjv in Rom. iv. 3. (compare Herod, iii. 95, Xen. Cyr. iii. 1. 
33) ; lyjx,piG^nv in 1 Cor. ii. 12, Phil. i. 29 ; and hppva'^m in 
2 Tim. iv. 17. The perf eat 'Uixoa is found in Mark v. 29, and 
graPTJTTj/Aat in Luke xiv. 19. O^ futures^ there are in Matt. viii. 

1 Winer, § 40, 3. Obs. 1. Alt, § 50, 3, Note. Schott et Kuinoel ad Acts xxvi. 16. 

2 Winer, \ 40, 23, Alt, § 50. Lex. Passov. et Wahl. in vv. citt. 


8, \a^vt<jo(jLoct, Luke xii. 9, dTrocqi/fi^ino-oiJioct, Rom. ii. 2G, Xoyia^'^ao' 
fxai. The present of this last verb has a pass, sense in Rom. 
iv. 5. Sometimes 5\'qyx(y fxoci 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. J , dvcird^aa^ai ^iriyin(Tiv. vii. 4, a^ios lariv, c3 
TTocps^si rovro. (Here Trocpi^^i has been regarded as the 3 sing. 
active, instead of the 2 sing, middle. That the latter is cor- 
rect, other examyjles of the middle voice of this verb in an ac- 
tive sense abundantly prove. Some manuscripts read Trxq^^Yi. 
See above, § 19. Obs. 5.) Acts xix. 24, 7ra§£i%6To ro7s nxvlrocis 
EpyoL(ji(xv oux, oXlynv. (In Acts xvi. 16 the active is used in pre- 
cisely the same sense.) Eph. i. 23, toD to, Trivroc h 7ra(ji TrXnpov 
IJievou. Col. i. 29, TYiv IvE^ysiav rriv hs^youfAivnv Iv Ipto/. (It seems 
that the active lyipyny is used with reference to perso7is, and the 
middle ivi^ysff^cci, with reference to things. Compare Matt. 
xiv. 2, 1 Thess. ii. 13, 2 Thess. ii. 7.) Col. iv. 1, to ^Uociov kocI 
rriv laornroc rois ^ouXois TTOLpiy^za'^E. 

Obs. 7. Hence it frequently happens, that the middle voice is accompanied with a 
reflexive pronoun ; as in John xix. 24, ^/£^sg«V«vra t« (//.dnec /zov IuutoTs. (Compare 
Matt, xxvii. 35.) Tit. ii. 7, trtaurov ^et^ix°f^^^^s rvcrov xxXuv s^yuv. So Xen. Cyr. viii. 
1. 3'J, <ra,pa,^iiy//.cc roiovhi lavrov 5r«^5/%STfl. 

Obs. 8. It is scarcely possible to regard <pavs^ovf4,ivov, in Eph. v. 13, in any other 
light than as a passive participle, since it is immediately preceded by (pxn^ouraci 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, light, and is adapted to the exposure of error.^ 

Obs. 9. A great number of active futures, from which, although perfectly regular 
in 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, «ir/a^x'/70'^ ; xii, 14, 15, uKouffu', xviii. 21, uf^u^Tiniru ', xix. 18, kXi-^u ; 
Mark xiv. 13, u'rocvrnffu ; Luke i. Y'i, KocXiffw, vi. 21, yiXaffv, 25, KXavera^ xiii. 24, 
Z,yirr,(ru', John vii. 38, ^'syV^; f Acts xv. 29, ir^a^w;* x\\n. ^, aftu-;rn(ru ; xxii. 5, a^a; ;'5 
1 Cor. xi. 23, Wamaru ; 2 Pet. i. 15, a-Kovhacru ; Rev. ix. 6, ivgmu. For these several 
forms the Attics used i-rto^Kiia-ofiai, Uxovcrofim, a,fjt.oi^Tr,ffOfjuut, KXi'^ofjCoct, a,'Xmrri<TQ- 
(jboci, x.a'kovfjt.a.i, yiXuerofjiai, x,'kcc()(ro(iu.i, t'/iTTiffoficct, ftvffof^ui, TT^a^ofAat, ffiwrnffofjta.i, cc^ofixi, 
i-jramirofA.a.i, a'^ovha.tro^a.t, iv^riffojjMi. In Rom. vi. 2. 8, 2 Tim, ii. 11, Z^ncca occurs ; but 
Z,Yi(fofjt,ui in Matt. iv. 4, Mark v. 23, John vi. 51, xi. 23. It is difficult to account for 
the neglect cf these forms by the older writers ; but probably it arose from some- 
thing ungrateful in the sound, to which their descendants were less sensible. 

^ Winer, § 39. 7. 

« Winer, 6 39. 6. Alt, Gr. N. T. ^S 51 . 3, 4. Kuster de V. Med. p. G9. 

^ Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 789. 4 Moeris, p. 293. 

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



Obs. 10. Analogous to these futures are certain ^r*/ aorisis, which in the earlier 
writers assume the middle form.^ For instance, Matt. i. 2, Luke i. 57, iyivr/iffo. for 
iyivvntrafirtv ', Matt. viii. 21, Acts V. 6. 10, i^cc\pa for iSa\Pci/jjr,v ; Matt. XX. 24, 'hya- 
vuxrnffa, for yiyavu.x.ryiffufjt.nv J Acts iv. 25, i(ppva^a, for l(ppva.^u,[Ji.r,v ;^ James V. 5, fS^sr^a 
for lB^s-4'a/jji^v. In Luke i. 47, viyaXXtacn, but hya'kXia.trafji.nt in Luke x. 21 , Acts xv. 
34. To these may be added several other forms of rare occurrence ; such as Via. in 
2 Pet, ii. b? Also X^Xaarnaa., h^a^rnffo., %v^v\ffa., 'i^yiera, lycif4,na'ci, of which see the list 
of defective verbs. 

6. Of middle verbs for passives, the usage prevails not only 
in those tenses for which the middle has no distinct form, but 
also in the future and aorists. It has been doubted, whether 
the New Testament affords any example of such practice ; but 
certainly it exists, according to the received text, in 1 Cor. x. 
2, TToivrp.^ elf tov Mwcrryv l^airrlaa'vTo. Many manuscripts, how- 
ever, read k^ccTrria^naav , which is very probably correct. There 
can be no question respecting Gal. v. 1 2, ^(pi^Xov x.ocl a?roxo\)/ovTaj, 
vwuld that they were cut off^ i. e., destroyed, or, perhaps, ex- 

Obs. 11. Another interpretation has certainly been proposed, but it is scarcely 
consistent with the Apostles' character and dignity. In Acts xv. 22. 25, it is 
certainly possible that lKy.i1afz.Uov; may have been used rather than iKXix^ivras, 
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 more 
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 Ojf 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 : — 

"Ayco (I lead) has the fat. a^co, instead of a^ofxat, Acts xxii. 5, 
1 Thess. iv. 11. The aor, 1. ^^a is very uncommon in the 

' Planck (le Orat. N. T. ii. 3. ^ Qataker ad M, Anton, x. 13. 

=* Matt. Gr. Gr. § 222. in v. 

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


old writers; but the compound pdrt. sTri^as occurs in 

2 Pet. ii. 5. See § 22. Obs. 9, 10. 
ai^ioj (I take). Of the aor. 2. £<Xa/u.rjv, sec above, § 17. 2. Some 

manuscripts exhibit the rare /w^. a^eXa in Kev. xxii. 19. 
a/xa§rava; (I sin). Fut. 1. ufAaprrt'jM, for which the Attics used 

afjLocprria-ofxai, Matt, xviii. 21. Ao7'. 1. ritxxprnaa., instead of 

T/W^Tov, Rom. V. 14, 16.^ 

/Stow {I live). Of this verb the aor. 1. ^/^^?i. /StcD^at occurs in 

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

i3iM(Ah is ordinarily employed. 
^Xacordvco (I bud). The aor. 1. e/SXaVrriTa, which occurs in Matt. 

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

is used by Hippocrates, de Aliment, i. 

yxfxsco (I marry). In Mark vi. 17 the aor. 1. kydixnacc is found; 
but the regular form synixoi. in Luke xiv. 20, 1 Cor. vii. 
28. The aor. \. j^O'Ss. lyapc^S-ojv, which is rarely met with 
in profane writers, occurs in Mark x. 12, 1 Cor. vii. 39. 

ylyvofxai {T become). The aor. I. pass. iysv^S-Tjv, which is chiefly 
confined to later writers, is used in John i. 13. Hence the 
2)art. yevn^sU, Heb. vi. 4. The old aorist sysvoixnv is com- 
monly employed ; as in Matt. xix. 8, Mark i. 11, John i. 
14, Acts xii. 11, Phil. ii. 7, and elsewhere. 

eI'Jw (I see). Of this verb the plural number of the perfect, 
o\'^aij,BVi -ars, -aai, for which 'lafxsv, \'a-(rE, '(accai are more com- 
monly used,^ is very generally retained in the New Tes- 
tament. See Matt. vii. 11, xxvii. 65, Mark xi. 33, John 
x. 5, XV. 21, 1 Cor. viii. ], ix. 13, Gal. iv. 13. 

£l9r6iv {To say). Aor. 1. iiTtoc. Imper. sT'ttov. See above, § 17. 
2. Obs. 2. 

£§XOi^«* (/ g"o). Impe?'/. ripxofj.nv, Mark i. 45, ii. J5, John iv. 
30, vi. 17. Fut. £X£z;(7opi,at, Matt. ix. 15; dTrs'ksu', XXV. 
45. See also Matt. ii. 6, John xiv. 23, 2 Cor. xii. 1, and 
elsewhere. Instead of the imperf. 'ji£iv is more commonly 
used in Attic ; and £?/«.», with a future acceptation, instead 
of IX^uaoiACju. 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. Apollon. 

^ Thorn. M. p. 420. Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 722 
* Thorn. M.p.47'i. 


iv. 4, Max. Tyr. Diss. xxiv. p. 295, Chrysost. Orat. 33. p. 

410. So likewise in Gen. xix. 2, LXX, et alibi.^ 
suplaxco (/ find), Aor. 1. ivpr,(ya.y Rev. xviii. 14. The aor, 2. 

si)pov is used by Attic writers. Of the aor. 2. mid. gzJpa/xo^v, 

see above, § 17. 2. 
s^w (/ have). l^\iefut, mid. of the compound verb is dvE^oiJicih 

not dvoc(jx'n(yofAai, in Matt. xvii. 17, Mark ix. 19, Luke ix. 

41, 2 Tim. iv. 3. 
^aw (/ live). Fut. 1. ^yj<7a;. Aor. 1. s^Tj^ra. See above, § 22. 

Obs. 9, 10. For this last the old writers used k^iojax. 
Ytlj^ai {T sit). The less genuine mj9era^/i)e xa3"oy, of the com- 
pound verb xaS-yj/Aai, is used for xaS-oj^o in Matt. xxii. 44. 

In Acts xviii. 3, the 2. sing. pres. indie, is xaS-'/), instead of 

kolIco (^Ihurn). From the aor. 2. pass, of the compound verb, 
y.a.ny.d^nv (Rev. viii. 7), a new future, Ka.ra}ta.ri<sofMacij occurs 
in 1 Cor. iii. 15, 2 Pet. iii. 10. The fut. 1. xacroocacv^riao- 
fj.oiij which is usually employed, is found in Rev. xviii. 8.^ 

yis^ivwixi (I mix). Part, perf pass. yiSKE^atJiJLevos, Rev. xiv. 10. 
Although this form is sometimes used by the older writers, 
yet K£}cpa.fji.Ews is preferred. An analogous form is TrsTrsrda-- 
fj^xi, for 'TraTrrocfAoci, Herod, i. 62.* 

KEp^aivco (I gai7i). Aor. 1. Ensp^inijoi, Matt, xviii. 15, xxv. 20. 
Conj. ycsplrtaco, 1 Cor. ix. 19, James iv. 13. Infin. Ksp^mcci, 
Acts xxvii. 21. Part, xsp^ojcraf, Luke ix. 25.^ 

KTEivco (7 kill). In the compound verb, the aor. l.pass. is 
written a^exTav3"aiv, for dTnytrx^m, in Rev. ii. 13, ix. 18, 
20, xi. 13, xix. 21. //t^tz. aVoxrav^ryva*, Luke ix. 22, Rev. 
xiii. 10.^ See § 3. Ohs. 1. 

oXKui^i (/ destroy). Generally in the New Testament the fut, 
is okia-ou, as in Matt. xxi. 41, John vi. 39, and elsewhere; 
but the Attic form 6t,7rokoJ is used in 1 Cor. i. ] 9. The 
part, aTToWvuv, for aiiok'kvs, occurs as a proper name in 
Rev. ix. 11, et passim.'' 

Qviv/iixi (I benefit), Aor. 1. opt. 6vxifjLY,Vj Philem. 20.'' 

1 Planck de Orat, N. T. ii. 3. 2 Lobeck ad Pluyn. p. 359. 

3 Thorn. M.p. 5il. 

4 Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 582. ^ ibid. p. 740. ^ i^^ij^ p^^ 35 757^ 

7 Moeris, p. 12. Thorn. M. p. 98, » Lobeck ad Phryn. p. I3. 


6(pBl'ka/ (I owe). The aor. 2. oipsKov, as employed in the expres- 
sion of a wish, is used without the augment in 1 Cor. iv. 
8, 2 Cor. ix. 1, Gal. v. 12, Rev. iii. 15.^ 

TTsroiJLaci {I fly). The pres. part. itErooixEvos, formed as it were 
from the contract verb Trerxofjixi, is used in Rev. iv. 7, viii. 
13, xiv. 6, xix. 17. Some MSS., however, have the old 
form TTSToptevoi^.* 

vriyoj (/ drink). Fut, mid. Trlofjixi, for Triovfjidi. See above, § 19. 
Obs. 4. 

TriTTTco (/ fall). Aor. 2. sirscrcc. See above, § 17, 2. Some 
consider this form as a regular aorist from the obsolete 
root TTsrco. 

PECO (I flow). Fut. 1. psdaco. See above, § 22. Obs. 9. 

Grpd;)/wfM: (I strew). The compound verb has the aor. 1. pass. 
x7,T£<yrpco^nv, 1 Cor. x. 5. Grammarians say ecrro^Ej^rjv. 

r^i(pM (I nourish). Aor. 1. e&§e\J/a. See above, § 22. Obs. 10. 

(pdiyco (/ eat). Fut. mid. (pdyofxgci. See above, § 19. Obs. 4. 

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

Xai^cu (/ rejoice). Instead of the Attic flat. 1. yj^npriaoj, we 
have x^p'na-oi/.cci, which prevailed in the other dialects, in 
Luke i. 14, John xvi. 20. 22, Phil. i. 18. Some would 
take ly^dpnaxy from the aor. 1, l^a^yjaa, in Mark xiv. 11, 
Luke xxii. 5. It may equally come from the aor. 2, 
exa§riv, which is more usual, and is found in Luke xxii. 8. 

X^c^ {Ijyour). The compound verb Enxiu has %£&/ in the j^^iw^-^?, 
instead o^ xj^vaoj, Acts ii. 17. Properly this form belongs 
to verbs of which X //, 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- 

wvioiAOLi (/ buy). Aor. 1. wvyjtraptTjv, Acts vii. 16. For this aorist 
the Attics always used ETrpioifxiov, with the single exception 
of the proverb in Athen. vi. p. 91. Xloj- ^sGTrorny uvnaaTo. 
It occurs in Pausan. iii. 4. 4, Phsedr. Fab. 75. 

1 Lipsius de Indie. § 1. '■^ Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 581. 

3 Planck de Orat. N. T. ii. 3. Matt. Gr. Gr. 6 182. Ofjs. 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 ixx, instead of 
the terminations -t), -eta, and -aisy of synonyms in the ancient 
language.^ Several instances occur in the New Testament. 
Thus in Luke ii. 7, yccx.roiXvfxoc, an inn, of which there is no ex- 
ample in Attic writers, and instead of which xarakuais is used, 
in the same sense, in Eur. Elect. 393. Plat. Protag. p. 220, D.* 
The word avTairoloixa, 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 ccvrccTro^oa-is 
has the same meaning in Thucyd. iv. 81, Polyb. vi. 5. 3, xx. 
7. 2, xxxii. 13. 6. For the Attic form a'troocrts, a petition, we 
have Qi:irni/.a, 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 avrXo^/jia, which denotes a bucket 
in John iv. 11. Except in Rom. xv. 1, aa^eV^/xa is nowhere 
found ; and the Attics used da'^sy-cKi, as in Eur. Here. F. 269. 
To these may be added yirrr^ixx, inferiority, in Rom. xi. 12, 
1 Cor. vi. 7 ; instead of Avhich yjV^a is found in Thucyd. iii. 109, 
vii. 72 ; and TjTTa in Xen. Cyr. iii. 1. 11. Also dTroKpifjix, a 
sentence of condemnation, in 2 Cor. ii. 9, in lieu of oLvroycpiais, 
which bears a like sense in Isocrates and Plato. 

Obs. 1. Many other examples of the same nature might be adduced from the 
Septuagint, hut 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, 'ivtuyfjcct, and 'ivhilis 
in Demosthenes ; (p^ovti/u,oc, and (p^ovmt; in Eur. Suppl. 862, Tem. fr, 13 ; /«/«« and 
"cccrts in Thucyd. ii. 51, Soph. Elect. 876 ; Z,^Tn/^c6 and t,'^T>iffi;, in Eur. Bacch. 1137. 
Thuc. i. 20. 

Obs. 2. It may also be remarked that the above is nut the only change in the 
forms of substantives, which has been pointed out in the New Testament. Gram- 
marians have noticed [jbirouKrla, in Matt. i. 11, instead of furoUitris, which is used 
by Plato (De Legg. viii.), or //.iroiKia, in ^Esch. Eum. 1016. There is also f^ec^nTpia, 
for ^aS>}T^/f, in Acts ix. 36,^ and xocvxtis'i?, for x.a.'jx^> in Rom. iii. 27, et passim. 

1 Passov. Gram. N. T. p. 571. Planck de Orat. N. T. 6 ii. 5. 

2 The Attics commonly used KOirayuytov in this sense. See Moeris p. 241. Thorn. 
M. p. 501. 

3 Moeris, p. 263. Thorn. M. p. 693. 


Analogous with ihis last, however, are the duplicate ibrms ai'^tj and ail^v^n, Plat, 
Pha;d. p. 1211. D. Xen. CEcon. 5. 1; (iovxh and (iovXuffis, Xen. Hell. vi. 4. 35, 
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 <vof, ac- 
cented on the final syllable, and involving the notion of time» 
Thus, instead of }ca,^iniji.£^ios, the later writers have y,x^niJi£pivof, 
whch is also found in Acts vi. 1. Compare Soph. Elect. 1414. 

Obs. 3. In Rev. xxii. 16, the MSS. vary between o^^^ms and v^u'ivo;, both of 
which are new forms j instead of which the more ancient authors employed o^B^icg 
(which is also used in Luke xxiv. 12) and -r^uioi. See Xen. de Vectig. i. 3. The 
latter of the two readings is preferable ; and the adjective also occurs in Rev. ii. 28. 
Another form is 5r^&/>Jt«aj, cognate with o-^if/,os, 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 fi'ahl, and in the late edition of 
Parkhurst, by Bose. 

42 A grp:ek grammar 



§ 'Ib.^Ofthe Noun. (Buttm. § 123.) 

1. An yJdjectivey 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. 

Obs. 1. This construction occurs with an adj. or part. inEph. iv. 17, rxXoi'^a, 'i^vn 
cTiPi'^a.Ti?, iffKoritrfAivoi t55 havoix ovTis. 2 John 4, l%a^;jy X/av, or/ ivpriKcx, [rivci) Ix ra/v 
TiKvuv erov •ffi^tTcx.rouvTce.s. Rev.iv. 8, Titrffoi^a, ^mo,'ra.vaiv ovk 'ix,ovffiv, Xiyovrtg. (Another 
reading is Xiyovra.^ xix. 14, rd, ffT^ariu//,aTcc lv^s^iJf4,ivot (hvffffivov Xivkov xou xaS-aoov. 
Compare also Rev. v. 13. Some refer to this head Eph. ii. 11, v/u,i7s, to, V^vj? h 
ffa^x), 01 Xiyo/xivot, ». r. X.; butitis scarcely an example in point. The following are 
examples of different gender in the pronoun: Matt, xxviii. 19, f^x^^nua-ars ^rdvra to, 
VSvjj, /SaiTTi^flVTEj ahrov?. Mark V. 41, x^uTriffKS r^j %s/^o? roZ -rccihlov, kiyu ahrvi. Acts 
XV. 17, TavTO. TO. sS-vJj, £(p' ovs iTTtxix'Krirtx.i, x. r. X. Rom. ix. 23, it) trxiv-n ixiov;, a 
'XpoYiTolfJt.ativ SIS ^o^av, oSs kki IxaXiffiv, x. r. X. Gal. iv. 19. Tixv'tex, (aou, oui -proiXiv uhlvu. 
Col. ii. 19, T^v xi(poiXhv i^ ov ?rav TO aufjt.a, x. r. X, 2 John 1. toIs rixvois ccuryj;, ovs 
a,ya.<ru. Rev. xvii. 16, rk Vixoi xi^ara, a. iJlis STt ro B^tj^iov, ouroi fjt,i<Tri(Tovfft rhv -ff'opvTtv. 
Also in John vi. 9 the true reading seems to be sW/ ^xihii^iov h ah, os £%£/, x. 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, quae, &c. 

2. A collective noun in the singular 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, xxviii. 19« 


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

Obs. 2. There are instances with an adject, or partic. in Luke ii. 13, •ry.n^os 
ffT^etTixs el/^eivlov, aiyouvruv rov Siov. xix. 37, fi^^avro cl-rinv to ^XjjSuj ruv fix^nruv %a<^o»- 
rii alvuv rov ©so'v. Acts iii. 11, ffV)iih^oc.fjt.i -ras o Xao;, iK^a,fjt.(hoi. V. 16, (ryv)5^;;^STa ro 
^Xv^oi, (p's^evris, x, r. \. Rev. vii. 9, o^Xo; 'Tokv;, ifrarts ivui'tov rod Bpovou. There IS 
a double construction in Mark viii. 1, -^awroXXou o;^kou ovtos, ku) //,h ixovruv t) ^a- 
yaifft, K. r. X. So Diod. Sic. xiv. 78, rov 'rXri^ovs ffuvrpi^^^ovTOSi kcc) rous fiKT^ovs 
<r^oTi^ov a-prairouvTuv. Again with a pronoun, in Matt. i. 21, avrog ya^ ffua-ii rov Xotov 
uuTov uTo ruv ocfjca^riuv avruv. Mark vi. 46, a.Torci^u.fJi.ivos avroTs, i. e. tm o^kai. ]E)ph. 
V, 11. fji,yi ffuyxaivaviTn roTg e^yoi; roT; a,Kcx,^<yroii rov cxorov;' ra yap x^vipn yivofiivot ««•' 
avraivf scil» ia'xoritrf/,ivuv, x.r. X. Phil. ii. 15, ytvtcis ffxoXia,:, Iv al; (patvtff^-s, 3 John 9, 
ty^oL-^a rri ixxXntriaf aXX' o (piXo'T^unvuv ocvruv AioT^i(pyis ohx i7rthi-)(^irat rifiois. 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, yiftuv ya,^ ro ^oXinufiOi h ov^ocvol; v-ra^x^h ^1 "^ ^<*^' creorrjoei 
a-rtxhxofii^et' But s| oS, subaud. ro-rov, is constantly used adverbially in the sense 
of the Latin unde.^ 

Obs. 3. Since the adjective vas includes the idea of multitude, the same con- 
struction is employed with reference to it; as in Acts XV. 36, xard. -xairav ToXiv, U 
ecTs, «. T. A.. So also with ordinals ; as in 2 Pet. iii. 1, ravrnv iiitn h.vripav vfjcTv ypoi<pu 
i-riffToXnit h aJs, ». 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 
auTOfy which constantly indicates in a collective sense the in- 
liabitants of a country, mentioned in the preceding sentence. 
Thus in Matt. iv. 23, TTEqiriysv oXajv tviv VaXiXaUv 'Inaov^, ^i^oca- 
ycm iv ra'is au^oiycuyoCis ocurwv, i. e. Takl'Kaim, implied in TaXi'Koi.Uv. 
Acts viii. 5, ^iXittttos Vc xarsXS-o/v b'is ttqKiv rr^s XxtxctpEia,^, ixripva-' 
(TEv oivrois Tov X/?i(TTov, 1. o. to the Samaritcins. Add Matt. ix. 35, 
Luke iv. 15, Acts xx. 2, 2 Cor. ii. 13, 1 Thess. i. 9. 

Obs. 4. Occasionally the reference is somewhat more obscure ; as in Matt. xi. 1 

Koi lyiviTo on IriXitrtv o ^lyia-ou; dtardcr(ruv roTg ^luhixa f/ia^yiraTs ecuroUf /u,irifi'/] ixtihvDJ 
h^dffxuv xa) xn^ufffnv Iv ral; ToXiffiv cchrZv, i. e. of the Galilceoiis, in whose country 
Jesus then was. Compare Matt. xii. 9, Luke v. 17, Acts iv. 5. Closely similar 
is the use of ahrm in 1 Pet. iii. 14, rov "hi ip'o(->ov alrm f^h ^a/SjjSJJts, i, e. raiv xaxovvra/f 
videos, with reference to o xaxuam in the preceding clause. Sometimes the reference 
is indicated by some official designation, or an abstract noun, preceding; as in Luke 
xxiii. 51, oZroi olx viv ffuyxaran^Uf^ivo; rri (iouX^ xcct t55 Tr^ci^ti ochreiv, i. e. of the 
toioicil, of which Joseph has just beeu desciibed as a member (fiovXivrn;) ; Rom. ii. 
25, lav ovv h axoofhuffrloc, rd. 1ixaiufjt.a.rot. rov v'ofAov (pvXdcftrv, olx) h ax^ofivffrloc. avrou us 

1 Winer and Alt, ubi supra; Poppo adThucyd. i.92. Passov.Lex. in vv. Ik, o's. 


tiQirofjiMv XoyKTByjcrirat ; where avrov must mean an uncircumcised individual^ included 
in the abstractum pro concreto of the foregoing clause. 

Obs. 5. It is usual to class under this head John viii. 44, ort ^ivirrns iirr), xat 
-rocrh^ avrov, on the Supposition that avrov refers to ^Jyiv^ovs implied in i^ivarris. 
But it is manifest that after o ^ocrho ahrov the words -^tUrm Itrn are to be repeated; 
for if <x-ocrh^ u.vtou is to follow Uti, the article is wholly inadmissible. Compare 
vv. 31, 42, 54, of this same chapter, and see § 27. 4. iiifra. The sense of the 
passage is rendered abundantly simple by supplying r)s before XaXT; in the preceding 
clause. See § 37. 7. Obs. 17. In the beginning of the verse it had been said, Ye 
are of your father the devil: and it is here added, When any of you speaks falsely, 
he speaks after the manner of his kindred : for he is a liar, and so also is his 

Obs. 6. The reference of avrcs is sometimes only discoverable from the subject 
under consideration ; as in Luke i. 17, uvros ^r^oikivairat lvcu9nov ai/rov, where avrov 
can only refer to the Messiah, as being uppermost in the thoughts of the person 
addressed; John xx. 15, Kv^n, il erv ifhocifraffas alrcv, iIts. /jloi -proZ ccuTovi^nKai. No 
person has here been mentioned, but the dead body of Jesus is plainly intended. 
Compare 1 John ii. 12, 2 John 6.^ 

Ohs. 7. There is no case in the New Testament in which an adjective or pronoun 
is referred, in respect to gender, to a word implied in a preceding one, except it be 
perhaps in Matt. xxi. 42, Mark xii. 11, x/Sov, ov a'Ti^oxiftaffav ol olxoho^ovvris, olros 
lyivv^t] iU xiipoiXriv yuvlx;' ' Kv^i'ou lyiviro auTn, xcci 's(m ^au/xaffTh Iv to7s opB^aXfioTj 
Tjf^uv. Since av-rri and Bavficta-rri cannot be referred to xKpaX^ yM/ta;, ihe construction 
is generally considered as a Hebrew idiom, according to which, there being no neuter, 
the feminine is constantly employed, where in other languages the neuter is necessary.^ 
The LXX have retained this idiom in Gen. xxiv. 14, Judg. xix. 30, 1 Sam. iv. 7, xi. 2, 
Ps. xxvii. 4, and elsewhere: and the passage under consideration is a citation from 
Ps. cxviii. 22. It may not, however, be altogether improbable that the feminine 
adjective may have a reference to oixo^o//,^, implied in the participle olxo^ofAovvris. 
There is a precisely similar example in Epiphan. Hser. ii. 368. A. iZlal fjt,oi, ^rdno, 
oTta; vytccivM. Hlffriui, rixvav, ru lirrav^ufiivM, xai 'i^iig ravr^v, scil. rriv vyiuav. A 
Hebrew feminine has been also supposed to exist in Luke xi. 33, ohlus Xux^ov cl-^'ccsy 
lU x^vrryiv riBrjfftv, ev}i vto rov f^o'^tov. It should rather seem that x^v^rrri is a sub- 
stantive,^ with which the word crypt corresponds in English ; more especially as 
ii-^o rov fiohov foUows in immediate connexion with it. 

4. Pronouns, whether demonstrative or relative, instead of 
taking the gender of the substantive to which they refer, are 
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 jdural. 7'his will explain 
Mark xii. 42, E/SaXs XeTrra ^vo, o IjTt y.(^Q^a,-^i:ris. 

Obs. 8. Similarly an adject, orpron. is put in the neuter singular, when it refers to 

1 See Middleton on the Gr. Art. Note in loc. 

2 Winer, § 22. 3. Alt, § 36. 2. 

3 Vorstius de Hebraism. N. T. p. 282. Fischer ad Leusdeu. de Hebr. N. T. 
p. 80. Gesen. § 169, 2. 

* Bretschneider and Passow in v. 


a word, or an entire proposition preceding, and a masculine or feminine substantive 
is added per exegesin. Thus 2 Cor. xiii. 9, roZroTi ko.) sy;^a>s3a, t^> vfjiZv xard^rifftv. 
IJy a like enallage the adjective tZ; is used in the masculine or neuter, with 
reference to a substantive in a different gender and case. Of this there is an example 
in Mark xii. 28, to/x Ut) ^^uri^ vavTuv hroX'/i. So Thucyd. iv. 52, rdi rt akXet; 
•jroXit; xat -ravTuv f/,aktffTcc 7h"Av7av\ov. Lucian. Pisc.p. bS3. fticc -rxvruv 'Jiyt aXv^ris 

5. 1? a.n adj., part., ov pron. refers to two or more substan- 
tives in the same gender, it is properly in this gender in the 
plural : as 1 Pet. i. 18. ou (p^ocprois dpyuqlco 7} y^pvaico sXvTpcu^rirs, 
Very generally however the singidar number is used. Thus 

in Acts i. 25, X^^/Ssn/ tov yXripov ttis ^iockovI^s tocutt,^ kxI d7ro(TToXr,i. 
This is even sometimes the case, when one of the substantives 
is in the plural ; as in Matt. vii. 12, ovros ya,p Icrrtv mo^^os nccl ol 
7rpo(pr,Tai. When all are plural, the rule is strictly observed ; as 
in Matt. iv. 24, Troix-iXocts voaoi^ xal ^aaxvoi^ ouv^y^pixivovs. Mark ii. 
15, TToWo) r&Kcuvxi xai u/xocprcoXoi, Acts vi. 8, ettoIsi repccra xocl 
an/jLs'ia, ixiyaXoc. 

Obs.9. If the substantives are of different genders, and inanimate objects are 
signified, the neuter plural is commonly employed ; as in Acts ii. 45, to, Krnfjia.ra 
»a) ra; vcrd^^ti; iTtT^atrxov, xa) ^is/u,i^i^ov ochrd. -Tfa.ffi. With animated beings the adj. is 
placed in the masc. as the worthier gender, if one of the substantives be in the 
inasc. ; as in Matt. xii. 50, abro; (jlov ahi'K<poi xai abiXi^n xai fJt-nm^ 'tffTiv. xix. 5, av^puTo? 
•TT^otrxoXXn^rKTiToci rn yuvocixi ahrou' xui 'iffovrai ol 'huo s/V ffd^xa fjt,'ia.v. It also happens 
continually that an adj. agrees in gender or number with one only of its substantives. 
Luke X. 1, lis <Ta,<rav croXiv xa.) tottov. 2 Tliess. i. 4, h Toifft to7$ ^luyi^oli ufx,av xui reus 
^Xi^tffiv; aJ; dvix^ff^s. Equally common, though perhaps with a view to some 
degree of emphasis, is the adj. repeated with each substantive; as in Matt. iv. 23, 
IX. 35, X. 2, ^i^a9riv&)v 9raffav vocrov xa) 'pra.ffccv fji.ccXaxtu,v iv tm Xuu. xxii. 37, d,ya.'rn(nis 
Kv^iov rov Qiov ffov Iv oXv Tn xccoVia. coy, xa) iv oXn t'/j '^f%»3 cay, xa) Iv oXv rn ^tuvoia trov. 
Add Mark xiii. 1, Acts iv. 7, 1 Pet. ii. 1, Rev. xxi. 1. Compare 3 Esdr. iii. 5, Arist. 
Nicom. vii. 9. In James i. 17, •raffo, ^ocrt; dya^'h, xa) -rdv ^eupyif^a rixniov, dvcoBiv iffTi 
xarafhalvov, the part, agrees with the neuter noun only. There are each of the 
three genders with one repetition of the adjective in Eph. i. 21, i/Tn^dvu '^rdirn; 
doy^r,; xa) l^ovg-ia; xa) ^vvd/aiu; xa) xupioTfiTo;, xa) Tavro; ovdfiaro; ovof4,a^oyjivov. In 
Heb. ix. 9, 10, there is a double construction, in which two of the above principles 
are combined. The former part. Iwdfuvai agrees with the fern, substantive only, 
although referring equally to both; and the latter \-7rixufx.iva itiiwiha neut. plm-., 
not with more especial reference to luoa, but because the things indicated are in- 
animate. It has been proposed to read Wixilf/.tvat, without any authority, and little 
necessity. ^ 

Obs. 10. Several adjectives are frequently joined to one substantive without a 
copula, so as to present one undivided image to the mind. Thus Heb. vii. 3, ovro; 
MiX%itnVix , d-prdru^, dfji.nruo^ dyzviaXoynTo;, x. r. X. James i.8, dv'/io ol^vx^os., dxard' 
ffraroi iv -rda-aii raT; ohTi uvroV, In like manner, a second adj. refers to the entire 

Alt, §§ 33, 2. 36, note 2. ^ \yiner, § 35. 2. 


idea, which a substantive forms together with a preceding adj.; as in 1 Pet. i. 18, 
IXuroeuSriTi Ix rn; fjcaTalocg vfjLuv uvec(rTpo(piis crccr^o-ra^a^orcv, from the vain conversalion, 
which (vain conversation) was traditionally derived from our ancestors. 

Obs. 11. The contrary usage in the case of vroku;, which the Greeks join by ku) 
with another adjective expressive of praise or blame,^ is not observed in the New 
Testament. Thus we have in John x. 32, -roXXa. KaXa, 'i^yct iht%a vfuv. 2 Tim. iv. 
14, 'AXs^avS^aj o ;^aXx£yj ToXXd /u,ot Kctxa Ivihu^uro. 

Obs. 12. An adj. is frequently followed by another adj. or a. part., which empha- 
tically repeats the sense in a negative form ; as in Acts xiii. 11, Tv<pXos , f^h (hxi-Truv 
rov ijXiov. Eph. v. 15, fiii us uffotpct, aXX' ug ffo<poi. Nearly the same is 1 John ii. 27, 
ciXyiBis iffri, kou ovk 'iffri •^ivtos. 

Obs. 13. The adj. or f>ar/. sometimes, though rarely, agrees with the relative in- 
stead of the substantive, from which it is separated ; as in Rom. iv. 24, \y^d<pn ^<' 
vificis, ois fjiiXXn Xoy'iZ^ar^cii, ro7s Tio'Tivovo'tv, x. r. X. 

6. Adjectives are sometimes used in the sense of substantives, 
and take a subst, in the genitive^ or another adj. in concord ; 
as in Mark X. 42, ol (xsyaXoi ocdrajv. Acts XXV. 2, ol Trpooroi Twv 
^lovlociojy. See also 1 Cor. i. 26. To the same class belongs 
Acts XXV. 5, o\ ^vv(x,i:o\ Iv ly/xTv. 

Obs. 14. Hence, perhaps, the origin of substantives; and hence, in the New Tes- 
tament as in other writings, the addition of the words civn^ and dv^^wrosio a personal 
denomination expressive of an office, employment, situation, or the like ; and also in 
addresses. Suchformsoccur inMatt. xii. 41,av^^sj "SivtuTrau xui.4b,dv^oeu9rM If^To^M. 
b2,uv^^d'ra)oixo^iff9roTyi. liVike ii. \5, olvS-^wrn 'rotf4,ivts. Actsi. 16, avS^ej aBsXifo/. ii. 14, 
22, avS^sj 'icv'^aToi. viii. 27, avh^ Ai^io"^. xvii. 22, dv^^is 'A^t}va.7(n, Compare Gen.ix. 
5. 20, xiii. 8, xlii. 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, et 
alibi. Precisely similar is cru7s olxirns, in Gen. ix. 25. Strictly speaking, dvr,^ 
more commonly implies respect, dv^^aTtoi, 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, dv^^u^o; (pdyo; xa) ohotorya. xiii. 28, ix^ph dv^^u- 
<7eoi. It has been thought that yv\n x^i""- (Luke iv. 26) is a circumlocution of a 
similar kind j but x'^'s^ is in fact a feminine adjective, which is used ellipti- 
cally in Luke ii. 37, vii. 12, 1 Tim. v. 3. So, in Latin, C. Nep. Praef. c. 4. foemina 
vidua. Terent. Heaut. v. 1. 80, viduce mulieri.^ 

Obs. 15. Thearfy. also, when referred to a masc. or fern, substantive, supplies the 
place of an adverb ; as in Mark iv. 28, aliTofidrn yd^ h y^j xa^-zrotpo^tT. John viii. 7, 
dva[A,u,^rnros vfzuv tt^utos rov X'l^ov W ccvt^ (iciXiru (some manuscripts read t^mtov') ; 
XX. 4, nXBi ^r^uTos ih to fjt,))yifjt,i7ov. Acts xii. 10, v^rts (^rvXyj) durofidrt] r,voix^*l a.lro7s. 
xiv. 10, dvucrti^i o^Soj. 1 Cor. ix. 17, u yd^ ixuv Tovro "^^dcffu, [akt^ov iX,u' it ^l dxay, 
oixovofi,tix,v 'Ti'riffTivfiai. 1 Tim, ii. 13, 'A^dfA ydp 'pr^uroi IvXaff^n, iWa.'Eua,. 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, yivof^tvui o^B-piat W) to fjt,vnfAi7ov. So Job xxix. 7, LXX, l^i'ro- 
^ivofjL'/iv o^^^ioi. Of adjectives in ouosi derived from ordinals, thus employed, we have 
examples in John xi. 39, Tsra^rarflj ydf lo-ri ', Acts xxviii. 13, hvTt^a7oi tjxB^ofJuiv ils 
UunoXovi, So Herod, vi. 106, Xen. Cyrop. v. 2. 2.^ 

^ Matt. Gr. Gr. § 444. 2 Alt, Gram. N. T. § 23. 2. 

3 Winer, § 58. 2. Valckn. ad Herod, viii. 130. 


7. Substantives expressive of a general idea are frequently 
put for a definite person or thing : ahHrnctum j)ro concreto. 
Thus in Matt. xv. 13, Traa-a, (pursioc, for ttocv (pvTov, tlie act of 
jdanting for the plant itself; Rom. iii. 30, itzpnoyiriy xai dupo^va- 
rlacv, the circumcised and uncircumcised ; 2 Cor. viii. 23, a^ioo-ToXoi 
fxxXriffroJv, ^o^a. Hqiarov. Col. iv. 11, oiTivsr eysvjoS'ooffav ixoi ifx^n- 
yo^ix. 1 Pet. ii. 17, T^v aJeX(poT*jra ayaTrarg. See also Phil, 
iii. 2, 1 John iv. 10. Thus also -J/su^os- signifies a false yod, 
or idol, in Rom. i. 25. On the other hand, the author of any- 
thing is put for the thtjig itself; as when Moses and Christ are 
put for the Law and the Gospel : Luke xvi. 29, sxouat Majnix 
xocl roos 7rpo(p'nrocf. Eph. iv. 20, vfxsTs ^s ovy^ ovrcos Ipta3"£rs tov 

Obs. 16. Many manuscripts read for ficc<nXi7; xu) h^tTs, in Rev. i. 6, t^oitiffav 'hf^as 
(iaffiXsiav, it^iTf. For examples in the LXX see Gen. xix. 6, Ps. xxi. 7. 

8. Two substantives are employed in the same case, one of 
which must be rendered as an adjective or jjarticiple. Thus in 
Mark xiii. J 9, saovroci yoip ocl rifXEpacL eksTvoci 3'X/\|/{f, i. e. TsS^XtpL/XEvat. 
So in Herod, i. 32, Trois- san av^pooiios (jvfji(p6qin. Arrian. Epict. 
ii. 1, Ti ydp £(7ri Trat^iov ; ayvota* ti sari Trai^lov ; acfxx^ioc.^ Again 
1 Cor. ix. 5, d.'^sX(pY,v yuvocTKa, i. e. a Christian wife. 1 Tim. ii. 
2, Tit. i. 3, ii. 10, iii. 4, toj; o-wt^§os- o^/xa;v 0£oi;, 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, eT^gv oI 6(p^<xX(/.oi (xou to acoTYt^iov aov (^oJs z\s oc'TTokcx.- 
Xr^N^tv iS'vo/v, noci ^o^av Xocov aou T(T§ayjX. xiv. 1, rcuv apyJi\rii)M ruv 
^aqia-oc'iajv, rulers, who were Pharisees. Add Rom. viii. 2-5, Eph. 
i. 7, ii. 15. 

Obs, 1. Although, strictly speaking, Opposition should agree in gender and number, 
an abstract noun in the neut. sing, frequently answers to a plural ; as in James v. 
10, v'Tohiiy/jLu. \a(liTi rat/,- aToffroXoui. See § 25. 8. We have also in 1 John v. 16, 
"iuffu tturZ ^uviv, Tot; ctfAxoravovffi f^h 'Tpog !^dvei7ov, where avrZ is used distributive^^, 
auei^Tuvovtrt 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. Ij •rpicrf^vTifoui roug iv vf/.7v -rcc^axaXu <rvf/,9r^t(rfiuTs^oi xat /au^rvs, 
». T. X., where o ffv/^^^ifffivrt^os is in apposition with iyu, contained in ?r«^«- 


' Alt, Gram. N. T. ^ 23. 1. ^ Kypke ad Mark xiii. 19. 


2. Sometimes a whole is put in apposition with its part s, a vessel \\\\\i its cori' 
tents, and the like. Ttius Mark viii. 8, r,^a,v m^iaaiiid.arcx, x-y-acfjuurm, 'i-xrot, 
ffntvf'iha.i, 1 Pet. ii. 5, ui Xl^ot ^uvrs; olxohou.itir^i, cixog Tyivf^ariKOi. x. r. X. 

3. A substantive, sometimes accompanied with an a</j., is added by way of 
explanatory apposition to a whole sentence. Rom. xii. 1, ^ra^axuXu eSv vf/.as, 
a^iX^e), 'ra^affTijcra/ to, ffeufjcura, vficuv Svffiav ^uffccv, aytav, ivu^iffrov rZ QiZ, rhv 
Xoyixrtv Xar^iixv vf4,uv, i. e., *)' iffft Xoyixh Xcir^iia. So 2 Thess, i. 4, 1 Tim. 
ii. 6. So, in Latin, Q. Curt. iv. 7. 13, Repente obductce ccelo nubes condidere 
solem, itigens cBstu fafigatis auxilium. Upon this principle is to be explained 
the introduction of an adj. or part., with or without an article, as an apposi- 
tion with an entire sentence : as, for instance, to XotTov, what remains ; ro 
f/,iyitrTov, what is greatest ; and the like. Thus in Gal. ii. 7, aXXa, Tcivavriev, 
X. T. X. 1 Thess. iv. 1, ro Xoitov oZv, a,hX(po)^ x. r. X. Heb. viii. 1, xi^peiXaTov 
It, X. T, X. To the same class must be referred Mark vii. 19, xa) tU rov a^t- 
^^uvoi ixTo^ivsTeti, xa&upiZ^ov 'Xavra. ru, ^ou^ara, which, i. e., to ixTo^ivcfiiveif sis 
Tov a.<pitoZvoc, purijies all meats, or, in other words, separates the nutritious 
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, fzr> yap oliff6u o civ^^u-ro; Ixiivo?, 
oTi Xn^iTat Ti -ra^ci Kvpi'oW a.r/>p 'hi^vxos, uxaTocffTOcros, x. t. X. In this case 
apposition will sometimes agree with a relative, of which the leading word is 
the antecedent. Thus in Phil. iii. 18, •roXXa/ ya.^ Ti^iTareva-iv, ot; ToXXdxi; 
iXiyov v/zTv, tov; Ix^^o^S "^^^ ffrocuooZ too 'S.^ictoZ, 1 John ii. 25, avTr) iffrh h 
iTayyiX'toc, nv avros ccmyyilXaro vfjuv, Tnv ^uhv t'/iV altuviov. Somewhat similar 
is 1 Pet. iii. 21, ^nff^u^Tia-av ^/ u^aros, o xa.) rii/-a.s uvtItwov vuv ffuZ^ii ^a.irTi(TfJt.a, 
which still, i. e., its antitype, baptism, saves us. The reading Z has every 
appearance of being the correction of some transcriber. 

2. Instead of an apposition, the latter siilst. is occasionally 
put in the genitive. This is the case particularly with the 
names of places, as in 2 Pet. ii. 6, Ttokus 2oSo/xa;v xal Tofji^oppa^. 
So the Latins said urbs RomcB, fons Timavif Jluvius Evphratist 
and the like. 

Obs. 1. The same construction is employed in other instances ; as in 2 Cor. v. 5, 
'hov? r,fjt'7v tov appujiaJva tov <rvivfjLot.Toi, who has given i/s the spirit, as a pledge : Rom. 
iv. 11, ffrifji,uov sXa/35 TTi^iTofJiYi?, where another reading is TiotTo//,r,v. Another example 
is Acts iv. 22, to cryiui7ov TovTo TVS laffieos, 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, xxTi^n ^^utov us to, xoltu-octo. tyis 
yris, which does not mean the lower parts of the earth, but the lower regions, namely, 
the earth, as the context plainly indicates. Thus we have in Isai. xxxviii. 14, LXX, 
TO v-4>os TOV ov^avou. 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, 
pestilenticp, &c., that is, quce consistunt in eluvione, pestilent ia. 

3. A new proposition^ in which of hn may be supplied, occu- 
pies the place of an apposition in a few instances. Thus in 
James iii. 8, rriv yXaxJcray ov^sn ^vvccTxi dv'^puTraJv ^a/Jiccaaci' dxacrac- 

ffj^STOV XaHOV^ /XS<7T73 lov ^OCVXTn^pOpOV. RcV. i. 5, «^0 'ItJCTOi) X^JCTTOl), 



fxa^rus o TTia-Tofy x. t. X. Somewhat similar arc the anacolutha, 
which are noticed in § 69. II. 

OLs. 2. It should seem that an apposition is involved, as it were, in the concise 
expression of 2 Cor. vi. 13, tyiv uhrnv uvrifji,Kr^la,v -rXaruvdYin xai i/nTsj i, e. rov uvtov 
T^oi'ov, lirriy, dvrifiiff'&ix. 

Of the Articulus Prcepositkus. (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, 
ToD V aTTo /Xfcv xqiXTos xvvsnv ^ccKs ^or/Sos- 'A'37'oXXa'V, 'H ^e xuXiv- 
^opc£vaj xavax.'^v exs 7ro(jalv v(p' 'iTTTruv. Had the sentence ended 
here, it is evident that -h would be a pronoun referring to y.vysnv, 
exactly as tou refers to Patroclus ; but it so happens that a,v- 
'kuTTis T^u(pccXBioc follows iu the next verse. Hence the difference 
between the prcEpositive 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 o 
and the pronoun 6 are essentially the same thing, differing only 
in having or not having an adjunct. 

Obs. 1. The adjutict is annexed to the a7-t. by means of the participle of existence 
understood ; so that the art. ntiay be considered as the stihject, and its adjunct as the 
predicate of a proposition, which differs from ordinary propositions, only as assump- 
tion differs from assertion. Thus o uvn^ signifies He, or the male, being, or as- 
sumed to be a man ; and the same reasoning will hold if the jjredicate 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 Arist. 
Ethic. Nicom. iv. 2, ol fjcdxtffra. u^wt oVtsj riKiffrtt T^ovrovffi. 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 pre 

' Winer, § 48. Alt, § 31. Erfurdt ad Soph. (Ed. T. C02. Monk ad Eur. 
Alcest. 7. Matthiae ad Eur. Phcen. 223. Stalbaum ad Plat. Gorg. p. 228. 
« See Matt. Gr. Gr. § 264. 



position, it can be employed only where an assumption will be allowed, either from 
its reference positively to something which has preceded, or hypothetically to some- 
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 idea, 
or when it is the representative of something, of which, whether known or unknown, 
an assumption is to be made. In the latter case the use of the article is not, as the 
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 as- 
sumed from what has been said, or when a well-known person 
or thing is mentioned xar' V^oxnv, the article is always inserted.''' 
Thus in Matt. i. 24, 6 ayyeXor is the angel recently mentioned, 
and rov vttvou refers to ovaq preceding. Matt. ii. 11, rriv olytlay, 
scil.f sTToivoij ^s sf^ov rov darspoc ; v. 25, o avTi^txofj o ycptrins, o vtt'A' 
/5s'T7jf, persons well known in the courts of law ; viii. 12, S KXayS"- 
ptoj- xat ^^uyixos rm o^ovtwv, scil. of the person last mentioned ; 
xiii. % TO 5rXotov, the boat appropriated to Jesus and his dis- 
ciples ; 26, Ta ^i^aivix, 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 ihe particular tares in question. Again, Matt. xxi. 12, rus 
ir&piarspas, the doves, expressly prescribed for the offerings of 
the poor ; Luke ix. 16, rot's- ^tevts aprovs rovs ^uo ix^voc$, the 
loaves and fishes spoken of in v. 12; John vi. 10, sv rw roVw, 
scil. Iv a> EJTajxev o 'lyiffovf ; vii. 51, rov uv^pcoTTov, the man amen- 
able to the law ; 1 Cor. iv. 5, 6 sVaivor, the praise, with refer- 
ence to the action which merits it; 2 Cor. vii. 11, Iv toJ gr^ay- 
[jiuri, the main business respecting the incestuous person ; and 
so in 1 Thess. iv. 6, the matter in hand ; Eph. vi. 12, ^ TraXoo, 
the contest implied in the preceding verses; Heb. xi. 28, 6 
oKo^pzvuvj the destroying angel mentioned by Moses ; James 
ii. 25, rovs dyyeKous, the well-known spies. In John vii. 24, rinv 
^Ixaiav x^tViv xqivarE specifies the judgment which is stiictly just, 
and not in appearance only. The use of the article in this 
passage is similar to the example cited by Matthiae (Gr. Gr. 
§ 267.) from Eur. Iph. A. 305. Its force will be seen by resolving 
thus, Yi xplais, c^v x^tvare, ^ikocU sarco. Of words used xar' iz-o^-nv 

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

2 Middleton on the Gr. Art,, part i ch. 3, § 1, 2. Most of the examples are taken 
from Winer, but his mode of illustration is generally different. 


there are examples in Matt. i. 23, ^ 'jrocp^svos, the virgin fore- 
told by Isaiah (vii. 14); Matt. xi. 3, 6 £qx°f^^^^^> ^^^ 2^^^^^''^ 
confessedly expected to comcj i. e. the Messiah ; Mark i. 7, o 
'laXi^qorspos, that one ivho is stronger, i. e. Christ ; John i. 2L 
7rpo(p'nrr,s, the prophet promised in Deut. xviii. 15, sqq. ; Acts 
iv. 12, 0^ aurnpU, the expected salvation. Thus also o lid^oXos, 
'jroYnpos, TTstpd^^cov, by which expressions the devil is desig- 
nated KocT E^oyjny. 

Obs. 3. Under this head may be placed the monadic noun$ ; i. e. nouns indicating 
persons or things which exist single, or of which, if there be several, only one, from 
the nature of the case, can be the subject of discourse.^ Thus Matt. v. 15, tIv /jcohmy 
the measure ; r^v Xy%v/av, the lamp; of which articles only one would probably be 
found in a house ; Luke iv. 20, ru v^n^iry, the only attendant who was employed 
in the synagogue ; John xiii. 5, tov viTTtipa, the only basin used on the occasion. In 
Matt. iv. 5, TO ^rs^uytov is evidently something monadic ; but it is difficult to deter- 
mine what part of the Temple is meant. By to -rorri^iov, in Matt. xxvi. 27, « single 
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 single loaf is 
indicated ; but here some important MSS. omit rh, and the omission is rendered 
highly probable by a comparison with the parallel places in Mark xiv. 22, Luke 
xxii. 19.* 

Obs. 4. It is evidently the reference to a single portion of time which explains 
such expressions as the following : Matt. xx. 2, Ik 'hnm^iou rhv *i/:jt.i^av. Luke xviii. 
12,1)$ rod (TccfifixTou. Heb. ix. 7, U';j'oil rod htauroZ. For the same reason, the true 
reading in Matt. x. 29 is probably rov avaa^iou, which is found in some MSS. 

Obs. 5. The numerous examples, in which the article has the sense of a possessive 
pronoun, may be explained on the same principles. Thus Matt. xi. 29, ra-rsmg r^ 
xap^ia, lowly in my heart ; Mark vi. 55, roTg K^ufifidrois, their beds ; Rom. xiv. 13, r<w, youx brother. See also Matt. iii. 12, xxvii. 50. So again in 1 Cor. v. 9, 
2 Cor. vii. 8, h t>5 tTta-ToXyi, in my letter. The proper mode of expressing simply by 
letter is h' i-pria-roXni, or ^<' l-pria-roXuv. See 1 Cor. xvi. 3, 2 Thess. ii. 2. In 2 Cor. x. 
10, al I'jrtaro'koCi are his (St. Paul's) J^pistles 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 xmwxa, 
v^t xa/Afi\ot» 

Obs. 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 xar' iloxh, and 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, \k Tvtvfiaros Uyiov, by the Holy Ghost: and 
here it may be observed that, in its personal sense, '^nvfi.a. or -rnvfjt.ot. Mym is 

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

^ Middleton on 1 Cor. v, 9. 




never anarthrous, except in cases where other terms, confessedly most definite, 
lose the article ; but when his influences or operations, which are of various 
kinds, are indicated, the article, unless there be renewed mention or some 
other reference, is omitted. Matt. x. 15, xi. 22, h hfit^a x^iffiu;. Acts xvii. 
13, -ra^oi •rorcif/,oy. Rom. v. 13, ax^* vo/zov, Iv Koa-f^u. Similar examples 

2. Where two or more nouns are coupled together by conjunctions, or where 
the conjunctions are omitted by the figure Ast/ndeton, the article, which would 
otherwise be inserted, is frequently rejected. In the New Testament, Enume- 
rations of this kind are very common : as, for instance. Matt. x. 28, xa) '4'V 
X*iv Kx) ffufi.a. Luke xviii. 29, yo'tCn n a.'^iX'Pous, k. t. X. xxi. 25, iv hXieo xec) 
tnX'^vyi Ku) citrT^oii.] 1 Cor. xiii. 13, critrns^ iX-r)?) ayaTni. Heb. iv. 12, ypvx^f 
Ti Ku) a,'ifjt.ocTos, and again, h^u{jt,'A(Ticav xa) hvoluv. See also Heb. vi. 2, 5, 
1 Pet. ii. 13, et alibi passim. 

3. It might be expected that ordinals would uniformly be preceded by the 
article, since, in a series of things of the same class, only one can be Jirst, 
second, &c. Ordinals, however, for the most part, whether tbe nouns with 
which they agree be expressed or understood, are anarthrous. Matt. xiv. 26, 
riTa^rn (pvXccx'^. xxii. 38, T^urnj IvroKn, "hiu-'ipa 1\ of/,olcc avr'^. In Luke xxiv. 
21, the anomaly seems to have extended its influence so far as to cause the 
omission of the article before ravT'/iv, and a similar reason may possibly ac- 
count for its absence in Acts i. 5, xxiv. 21. See ^ 35. 1. Compare also 
John xxi. 14, 2 Cor. xiii. 1. Many MSS. omit rhv in Matt. xx. 3, and in 
other places the same variety is observable : nor can the correct readings be 
ascertained with any degree of accuracy. The reason of the irregularity 
seems to be, that while their natural definiteness gives to ordinals a right to 
the article, it at the same time renders it unnecessary. 

4. Superlatives have so close an affinity to the ordinals signifying ^rs/ and last, 
that they also sometimes reject the article. There are but few, if any, in- 
stances in the New Testament. Such expressions as vlog v^icrrov (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. 

Ohs. 8. Analogous to the use of the article with monadic nouns, is the reason of 
its insertion before the great objects of nature : as in Matt. v. 45, vov riktov. vii. 25, 
27, h P>^ox^, 01 ^oTaf/.o), 01 avifjLot. viii. 2G, rol? avi/u-ot; xa) Tn ^aXairff'/i. Acts iv. 24, 
Toy ol^avh, xa) tyiv yr,v, xa) t^v ^aXaffirav. 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. has 
the article ; but there are several instances, both in the New Testament and in the 
classical writers, in which rtkio; is anarthrous. A principal reason of this may be, 
that it is one of those nouns, which are closely allied to the nature oi Proper Names; 
hut in genitives absolute, as in the place in question, the case differs little from an 
assertion of existence only ; and the same remark will generally hold, when merely 
the time when an event is said to happen is expressed. So Matt. xiv. 6, yivifftuy 
a,yr>fjt,ivuv. Luke xxiii. 54, irdlifiaTov WnpaxTxi. Acts xvi. 35, xxiii. 12, vi/u,i^as ys- 

Obs, 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 great irre- 
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. 

s Middleton, part i. ch. 3, § 5. See also his note on Matt. 1. c, and compare 
Krliger on Xen. Anab. ii. 10. 15. 

» Part iii. ch. I. § 18. 1. See Rose's Preliminary Observations to the last edition 
of Bishop Middletou's work. 


in the New Testament and the best Greek writers, he supposes to take or reject the 
article ad libitutn, on the ground that they are so definite in their nature as to U^ave 
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 : — 

nkiog. Out of thirty-two instances in the New Testament the article is omitted only 
eight times. Of these, Mark iv. G is parallel with Matt. xiii. 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 with the moon and 
stars. The case is one of Emtmeration ; and so is Acts xxvii. 20. We say, in 
like manner, Sioi, moon, and stars. Nearly similar is 1 Cor. xv. 41, though it 
may here depend upon the regimen ; 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 MSS. before ov^ava/, and, it 
should seem, correctly. Compare v. 12. With respect to v. 5 of the same 
chapter, oh^avo) nffot-j ko.) yTi, there were heavens and an earth, is a simple asser- 
tion of existence. § 27. 4. 
ev^avos, oh^avoi. The omission of the article is confined to cases of Enumeration^ as 

those just cited, or to those in which a preposition occurs.' 
^aXuffcrcx,. 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, Jiide 13, 
the regimen excludes it. The existence of a sea is asserted indefinitely in 
Rev. iv. 6. Asa 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, wliere the words ohov ^aXda-eryis are copied 
from the LXX version of Isaiah ix. I. The translator probably regarded o^ov 
in the light of a preposition, as the original Hebrew word has sometimes the 
sense of versus ; but regimen will also accoimt for the omission of the article. 
fiiiryiufl^iec. There are no omissions except after a preposition ; as in Acts viii. 26, 

xxii. 6. 
vv'^. "With this word may be combined «^£^a and o^ioc, 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-^Ut 
yivofAivvS' XXV. 6, fAiffrii vuKTog. Luke vi. 13, xxii. G6, on iyiviro hfAi^a. Acts 
xii. 3, tiffocv "hi hf^i^ai tuv a.Z,v(A,uv. The article fails before an ordinal in Acts 
xxvii. 33; aiter prepositions, and in enumerations, in 1 Thess. v. 2, 5. 
ayo^d. The article is omitted after prepositions in Matt. xi. IG, Mark vii. 4, Luke 

vii. 32. It is much more frequently inserted.^ 
aypof. Mark XV. 21, Luke xxiii. 26, a.<x' ay^ov, from the country, as distinguislied 
from a city or toivn ; Luke xv. 25, i y ay^Z. 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 yTlsch. Socr. Dial. ii. 2, ra avhoo-rohx, xai 
'I'T'Toi, Ko) x^^"'^'') ^^' a^yv^o;. 

^ So, in English, we say, day breaks, morning dawns, night advances. 

3 The well-known expression •x\n6o6(r-/)i ayo^a-i, cited by Winer from Xenophon 
(Anab. i. 8. 1), Herodotus (iv. 181), and MWan (V. H. xii. 30), is a mark of time 
similar to those just noticed. 


sioii, except in an Enumeration in Mark vii. 56. In the sense oi a field or piece 
of land, the insertion of the article depends upon the definiteness or indefinite- 
ness of the sentence. The plural, as well as the singular, occurs in both senses. 

^i'os. Winer observes that the absence of the article is most frequent in the epistles ; 
and particularly when the genitive ^uZ depends upon a governing noun, as in 
Rom. iii. 5, xiii. 4, xv. 7, 8, 1 Cor. xi. 7, 2 Cor. viii. 5, 1 Thess. ii. 13 ; in the 
forms ^los ^ccrh^ (1 Cor. i. 3, 2 Cor. i. 2, Gal. i. 1, Phil, i.2, 1 Pet.i. 2), and 
vio) or tUvu Siou (Rom. viii. 14, 16, Gal. iii. 26, Phil, ii. 15, 1 John i. 2); 
and when it is joined with an adjective, as 1 Thess. i. 9, ^iM ^avrt xa) aktj^ivS. 
He adds the expression Btov BiXovros from Acts ii. 18, 21. The fact is, that 
the words Biog and xv^ios, in the sense of God, take or reject the article indis- 
criminately, in consequence of their partaking of the nature both of appellatives 
and proper names. It is, nevertheless, remarkable that Bios, which occurs in 
the New Testament more than 1300 times, invariably conforms to the laws of 
regimen, and frequently to the other rules of common appellatives ; but Kv^io;, 
by which the LXX frequently expressed the Hebrew Jehovah, approaches 
more nearly to a proper name. Generally, therefore, though not universally, 
when there is no reason for omitting the article, o Bm is put for the one true 
God, as distinguished from other Bio/; and Kv^iog, without the article, without the 
addition of the name of Christ, and so circumstanced that no rule of appella- 
tives will account for the omission of the article, is almost invariably used of 
God the Father. There are, however, a few instances in which it is so used of 
God the Sofi, See 2 Cor. iii. 17, 18, 1 Thess. v. 2, 2 Pet. iii, 10. All Winer's 
instances are examples of the use of Biog in regimen, or as a proper name. 

^viv/zet clyiov. See above, Obs. 7. 1. 

9rarvt^ and fAtjr^o. These are not used without the article, except under the usual 
circumstances. Winer's examples are Matt. xix. 12, Ik KoiXias f^nr^cs. John i. 
14, fjbovoyivovs <;ra^a 'Trwr^og. 

avriQ and yvvti. Most of the apparent irregularities fall within one or other of the 
rules which have been repeatedly noticed : and, indeed, the frequent omission 
of the article before words implying relationship, which has been remarked by 
numerous critics,^ accords very well with their continual use in Enumerations 
and exclusive propositions. See Matt. xii. 50, Mark x. 29, 30, and elsewhere. 
In Matt. V. 32, xix. 9, Luke xvi. 18, aTokiXufAivriv does not indicate a particular 
individual, but ani/ woman who has been divorced; and oiv\oi wants the article 
by reason of the preposition. The proposition is exclusive, — no husband or wife 
whomsoever ; and so 1 Tim. ii. 12. See § 28. 3. Many manuscripts want the 
article in Eph. v. 23 ; nor is the sense of the passage affected either by the 
omission or insertioti. There is a difficulty in 1 Cor. v. 1, uffTi ywalKoi rtm tou 
^ecr^os 8%s/v. Since yvva,7»cx, 'i^Qitv is a common phrase signifying to take a wife, 
may it be that this led to a casual omission of the article, which seems to be 
indispensable ? Compare Mark vi. 18. 

^^offwrov. The article is omitted after a preposition in Luke v. 12, xvii. 16, Acts 
XXV. 16, 1 Cor. .iv. 25. To these instances, cited by Winer, maybe added a 
case oi Enumeration in 1 Pet. iii. 12. In the expressions '^^offu^ov kafjt,(^univ 
(Luke XX. 21), and <r^oa-a)9rev Bav/Au^uv (Jude 16), the article is plainly inadmis- 

ixKXntria. This word, which occurs very many times in the New Testament, 
seems to be used with the strictest regularity. In 1 Tim. iii. 15 it follows a 
verb substantive ; in Heb. ii. 12 the regimen expels the article j and in 3 John 
6 a preposition precedes. IMiddleton doubts respecting 1 Cor. xix. 4 (Winer's 

^ Schaefer ad Soph. (Ed. T. 630. Matt. Gr. Gr. § 264. p. 462. 


emaining example), and prefers the reading ixKXvffi'av etov, 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. 

JeTfrvay. John xiii. 2, lu-rvou yivo/ucivou, during supper. This is a mark of time similar 
to those already noticed. The phrase -ronTv hT-rvov, to make a feast (Mark vi. 21, 
et alibi'), is of course anarthrous. In 1 Cor. xi. 20, the old Syriac version ren- 
ders Ky^/axov ^srrvav, a meal which is proper for the LorcVs day ; but the article 
may also be rejected by the same licence, by which it is so frequently wanting 
in Kv^iQs. 

^avkros. 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; 
and one (Rom. i. 32) is owing to the regimen. In Luke ii. 26, ^dvaro? is per- 
sonified, and therefore used as a. proper' name ; and so also in the similar ex- 
pressions yiuiff^ai Bavcirou, BiupiTv BdvaTov, in Matt. xvi. 28, John viii. 51. 

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

vifAos. 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 Moses, 
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, xar t^ox*iv, or the 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 vofiog, 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. 

viK^oi. Taken generally, the dead are ol vik^o), although there may be reasons for 
omitting the article. Thus 1 Cor. xv. 15 vik^o) ovk iyu^ovrat is an exclusive 
proposition (§ 28. 3) ; and so throughout the chapter. The expressions lyit^uv, 
iyu^iff^ai, avaa-ryjycti \» vik^uv, of which alone Winer's examples consist, omit 
the article by reason of the preposition. When used for dead bodies, it is pro- 
perly anarthrous; as in the passages cited by Winer from Thucyd.iv. 14, v. 
10, >Elian. V. H. i. 34. 

xocTfios. Matt. xiii. 35, Heb. iv. 3, uto Karct^oXra xofffjt,ou. John xvii. 24, ?r^o koct. 
Ko<rfjt.ov. Matt. xxiv. 24, a-r a^x^s xoo-fjcov. These formulae are perfectly regular ; 
besides which Winer cites only h Koa-fcu, from Rom. v. 13, et alibi. With Koa-fios 
may be classed aiav, which, in the New Testament, alway«i has the article, ex- 
cept after prepositions, or from some other causes. In the. singular it denotes 
life, eternity f the Jewish and Christian dispensations., &c. ; which are all monadic : 
in the plural, it may be classed among the objects of Nature. ^ 

ai^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^- There 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 by prepositions. In 

' Middleton on John xiv. 16. 


Mark i. 1, hVi Iffriv is understood ; and there is a similar ellipsis in Mark xiii. 
9. Hence the verb substantive excludes ihe article. 

xv^iog. See under Sjaj. It may be added that in a single instance (Acts xxv. 26), 
Kv^toi is used of the Roman emperor, Kar llox^^' 

ha^oXos. With the exception of Acts xiii. 10, 1 Pet. v. 8, Rev. xx. 2, the article 
is always prefixed, if the Devil is meant. The first and last are cases of ordi- 
nary usage ; and in 1 Pet. v. 8, avrlhxosh a.n adjective, so that the true render- 
ing will be, yottr opposing evil spirit. So tm ffurri^i vf^oHv 0iSJ, your Saviour God, 
in Tit. iii. 4. 

3. In expressions similar to the well-known Grsecism, elaU ol 
Xsyovrs^, a class of persons is distinguished by the particular action 
attributed to them ; i. e., the existence of such persons is asswned, 
and consequently the article is necessary. Thus in Gal. i. 7, 
rivsV el(7iv ol rocpxaaoyr^s v^ols^ the existence of some iclio troubled 
the Galatians is assumed, and they are spoken of definitely as 
such. The case is similar in Luke xviii. 9, EfTrs ir^os nvocf rous 
TTETToi^oTOLs l(p' koLVTOis. Horo cortalu persons not accurately 
defined (times) are more exactly marked by a character well 
known to belong to them. So again in Acts ii. 47, tovs au^o- 
fxivovs are those particular persons who, being admitted into 
the church, were thereby placed in a state of salvation. 

Obs. 10. In like manner, after verbs signifying to call, 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, 

tvofjboc. avrZ 6 Qavarcg. xix. 13, nuXiTrat to ovof^a avrov o Xoyos rov Qiov.^ 

4. The case is very different in propositions which merely 
affirm or deny existence, or where a verb or participle, suhsta7i- 
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 affirm or deny an existence which is 
already assumed, would be either superflous or absurd. Ex- 
amples everywhere abound, as. Matt. v. 9, u\o\ h^ov Kkn^rio-ovrcii. 
xxiii. 9, nocri^a. per) yccckiar^rs. Mark xi. 13, oii yoip m xoci^os auKcov, 
Luke xxi. 25, 'iaron anij^ztx h rfKiw. John v. 2, \ari Vz y.oKufji(3in^q:)c. 
Rom. iii. 18, ouk sVn (p6j3of, Eph. v. 18, Iv w egtoh oiauria,. In 
Rev. viii. 11, the article is unquestionably spurious; and it 
may be remarked, that many of the best manuscripts omit it 

* Winer. Compare Xeu. Cyrop. iii. 3. 4, Auab. vi. 6. 7, cited by Matthia*. 


even in Rev. vi. 8, xix. 13. There is an apparent irregularity in 
Matt. viii. 12, eksT E(jrocl o xXxv^ixof, x. r. X. ; but the affirmation 
here terminates in IkeT, not in earaci.^ 

Obs. 11. To this head may be referred, by an easy transition, the omission of the 
article after verbs of appointing, choosing, creating, &c., since the existence of an ap- 
pointment cannot be recognised before it is made. Thus Luke xii. 14, rU f^i KetTi- 
ffrrtfft ^ixxffTfiv V fiioiffrhv l<p^ v/u.a.; ; John X. 33, ofonTs ertauTov Sso'v. Acts XX. 28, (Btro 
ixtffx'o-xovi. Rom. iv. 17, •xari^u, -proXXuv IBvuv rihtKo. at. This case may, in fact, be 
resolved into the former by means of sTvai or yivia-Bui understood. Sometimes, in- 
deed, they are expressed; as in Dent. xxvi. 17, 18, LXX, rov ©sov tlxou tr^f^t^ov uvocl 
ffou Bioi, Ko.) Kv^tos it'ktTo ffi ytviff^ai Xaov. 

Obs. 12. It seems to be from the same cause that nouns in apposition, explanatory 
of the end or object to which a person or thing is said to be subservient, are always 
anarthrous ; for in such examples some case of civ, or uvti uvat, may be supplied.* 
Thus Rom. viii. 23, vloBiffiav a^ix^ixof^ivoi, tjjv u,9roXvT^ufftv rou aui^aroi ij/auv, wailing 
for the redemption of our bodies, as our adoption. Compare Matt. ii. 11, iii. 9, Mark 
xii. 23, Rom. iii. 25, James v. 10. When 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 
av'b^coTios means mankind in general ; as in John ii. 2b, iytvo/jxs 
ri Yiv ev tw av^-^ct/TTw.^ If the noun be limited by any qualifica- 
tion, it will still include the full extent of such qualification : as 
in Matt. xii. 35, 5 ayaS-or oLv^o^ooTtos^ every good man ;* and so a 
little before, in verse 29, o \nyjj^os conveys a like general notion. 

' See Middleton ad loc. 

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

^ The irregularity of the use of the article with avB^wroi is frequently noticed by 
the critics ; and passages continually occur in which it is diflScult to account for its 
omisNion 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 
|)lural, Mr. Rose throws out a suggestion whether avB^wroi, without the article, may 
not be used in a less decided sense than men generally ; as we say, for example, 
The man passed among menyor an old man. Compare Thucyd. i. 41. 

* The passage above cited from Malt. xii. 35 demands a moment's attention. It 
stands thus : o ayxB-o; liv^pu-Tro; ixfiixXkii T« ayaBd, xa) o <^ovtj^os avB^uTog ^ovnod. 
There is something remarkable in the insertion of the article before ayxBd, and its 
omission bvfore -rov^oa. IC the reading be correct, -rovt^^oi will merely be less definitely 
marked than Ta a.ya.6a, ; but it is scarcely probable that the difference originally ex- 
isted. The article is omiitcd before ct.yot.Bu. 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. — Middleton ad loc. 


It has been thought, indeed, to have a reference, xar' e^6xr,v, to 
Satan ; but the parallel place in Luke (xi. 21, 22) has 6 \(jxv- 
qoT£po£, which will not admit of this supposition.^ See also Matt, 
xviii. 17, XXV. 32, Luke vii. 28, Gal. ii. 20. 

Obs. 1. In the same manner the article is used to denote a whole class, or genus ; 
and, in the plural, whole classes or descriptions of persons or things. Thus in Matt. 
V. 9, 01 u^y]vo9roioi. viii. 20, al akeo^iKig. XV. 26, roTs Kvva^iots. Xviii. 3, roc •^raiVia.. 
xxiii. 23, ro v^vofffjcoit xaJ re a,vt)B^ov xai to xufzaov. Luke xiv. 34, to cckus- 1 Cor. vii. 
28,^ Tu^hvos, virgins generally; 2 Cor. xi. 4, o l^^ofjcivoi, any ox every one who come th. 
So in Rev. xii. 14, roZ atrov rod fnyeiXov, the Great Eagle, a species so called. In 
Matt. V. 16, we have lus T^ofiara, but ot 'dpi;. This minute distinction is not with- 
out reason ; for all sheep are not to be supposed to be in the midst of wolves, but 
all serpents are supposed to be prudent. The use of the article in these examples 
may be termed inclusive, as distinguished from the case of exclusive propositions, 
which will be noticed 'hereafter.^ Where only some of a class are intended, the 
article is omitted; as in Matt. x. 8, xi. 5, xv. 30, et alibi. 

2. The insertion of the article by Avay of hypothesis, and its 
omission after verbs substantive, will explain the usage in that 
class of propositions in which the subject is found nifh the ar- 
ticle, and the predicate without it. Such propositions being- 
conversant, not about particular, but about universal truths, 
the declaration is made universal by means of the article in its 
inchisive 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, r^ ^soai^sid Ian oQ(ploi. 
Here it is asserted that Piety, however comprehensively under- 
stood, and in all its forms, is Wisdom ; 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, who is pious. 

Obs, 2. An excellent example in the New Testament, as illustrating the use of 
the article in making a distinction between assumption and assertion, is Luke xviii. 
27, roi ahuvecra, Tra^a, avB^^u-^ots , ^uvard iffri ?ra^a rZ @iu. Things assumed to be im- 
possible with men are assuredly possible with God. Similar instances are 1 Cor. iii. 
19, ri ya,^ ffo<^icc rou xocfiov rourov fjt,u^ia TTa^a. rSJ @iu Itrri, 1 John iii. 15, o (autuv rov 
ci^iXipov aiirov uy^^uTToKrovos icrrt. 

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 will then 
be prefixed to both terms alike. It is not to be expected, from the nature of these 
propositions, that examples will frequently occur ; but they are to be met with oc- 
casionally in the New Testament. Thus in Matt. vi. 22, o Xvxvos rov a-dfixros icrriv 
o^^aXfios, xiii. 38, o Ss aypog Iffriv o xoerfjcos x. r. A.^ 1 John iii. 4, ti aju,cc^riei iffrh 

1 Middleton ad loc. See also Winer. 

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

' In V. 39, several manuscripts have ^ ffuvriXuet, which seems to be correct ; and 
ciyyiXot must be rendered simply angels. Compare, however, v. 49, ififra, and Matt. 
XXV. 31. See Middleton in loc. 


fi avofAia. Care must be taken not to confound these universal propositions with 
others widely different in character, though similar in form. In the last example, 
for instance, a^a^r/a and avofAta had both been previously mentioned, but so men- 
tioned that the article affixes to each word its ftdlest import ; whereas, in 1 Cor. x. 
4, n Ti TiT^a «» X^itrros, the first article indicates renewed mention simply, and the 
second is emphatic.^ 

Obs. 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, oV/ ^^ovo? iVrJ Qtou. Here o ov^dvost 
understood, is the subject ; and ^^ovos is equally definite by reason of its relation 
with Qiou. St-e § 30. 1. There is also another form, in which two convertible 
terms form the united subject of a proposition, whereof the predicate is rahro, or its 
equivalent Vv. So 1 Cor. iii. 8, o (punvuv »«,) o Trori^uv iv utriv. 

Ob$. 5. Analogous to these reciprocating propositions are those, in which i\iQ pre- 
dicate after ufju frequently has the article, where the subject is a pronoun personal or 
demonstrative ; as in Matt. xiv. 16, <tu u h vlos rov Qtou. xxvii. 11, truiio (ictfftXsv; rm 
'louhat'av ', Mark vi. 3, aw% ovTOg IffTiv Tixruv ; John X. 7, lyu ilfjci ri Bvpee, ruv •pfpo- 
fixTuv. Rev. xxii. 16, iyeu tifAi h pi(a. Aa/B/^. Compare John viii. 12, xv. 1, Eph. ii. 
14, Rev. i. 17, e/ scepius. In such instances the existence in assumed; the purport 
of the proposition being to identify the predicate with the subject.^ So in Mark 
vii. 15, ixiTvfi iffTi rci Koivouvra, where to. xoivovvtk 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, <ru ii o 
)>{^d<rxaXos rod 'l(r^ccr,k. The English version translates indefinitely, a master of Israel : 
but the allusion is doubtless to a title by which Nicodemus was distinguished from 
less celebrated teachers, and similar to that of o Xuxvos o »cnof4,mi, applied to the 
Baptist in John v. 35. ' There is no real difficulty in John iv. 37, h ya,^ rovru o Xoyos 
iffriv aXn^ms, If WB render, in this instance the saying is true, the article must be 
omitted ; and a few MSS. are without it ; but if, in this is exemplified the true saying^ 
it is absolutely necessary ; as in John i. 9, vi. 32, xv. 1. See § 30.3. 

Obs, 6. Sometimes a personal pronoun is one of two subjects where ev is the pre- 
dicate. So in John x. 30, \ya k») o Turh^ Vv lir/iAiv. There are also cases closely 
similar to these convertible propositions, in which akkog is the subject : as, for in- 
stance, John iv. 37, uXkos scTiv o cr-ru^cov, koc) akXos o B^ioi^cav, V, 32, aXXoj io'rh 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, iyu o Bios 
*A/S^aa^, X. t. 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 lyu U. o Vifff^ios, where some would supply ufjc), is the nominative 
to the verb xafA-rru, 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 kkt i%oxnv in Rev. iii. 17, au it o 
TaXat'xufos, X. r. X., which brings the place under this head ; but such usage before 
an adjective is unexampled in Greek. The Hebrew H i*** 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. 

3 Middleton, part i. ch. 3. § iii. 4. 1, and notes ad 11. cc. See also H'iners 
Sprachidioms, part iii. ch. 1. § 17. 4, 5. 


3. In propositions which are not merely negative, but in 
which the negative extends to every individual^ or to the whole 
species in question^ so as to exclude universally y the article is 
omitted. It has been seen that there is in the article an in- 
clusive 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 no} Thus in Matt. x. 24, ovy^. eVr* fAx^r,Tr,$, no 
disciple ; xviii. 14, ouk eo-ti hsXri^^cx., there is no wish', 2 COi*. vi. 
17, dKocOaprov pc^ a7rr£(y^E, any unclean thing ; 1 Tim. 12, yv- 
vaim ^i^dcfjyLEiv ovx. sTrirpsircj, any woman whatever. In James ii. 
20, 26, y^copis TU)v Epycov is not without works generally, but 
without the ivorks produced by faith : for xcopU Epycov would ex- 
clude all ivorks 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 Thess. iii. 5, h ttsi^x^uiv. Matt. v. 4. sqq., 
ot Trev^ouvTSf, ol Tr^pcsif, oi iXsriiMoyss, k. r. X. viii. 22, rous \£>cpovs. 
Luke viii. 5, o gtieioojv. Matt. xiv. 14, tovs appoua-rovs. 

Obs. 8. Although in all such cases it is the article which gives to its adjunct the 
force and nature of a substantive, still its use is regulated according to the strictest 
principles. Thus, for instance, o -Tru^d^wv is the tempter xar l^ox^v, and h erTrs/^ay 
may either be considered as having a special reference to the Messiah, or the article 
may have the import 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 
who/e c/ass 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 sfibs. adject, or 
part., are joined together by conjunctions, and assumed of the 

^ Middleton, part i. ch. 3. § 5. 

2 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 P Tluis 2 Cor. 
vi. 15, r't; fii^)s TiffTw /ziTo. ecTtcrrov. This amounts to, there is no portion /or any 
believer : and if it had been tm 'TrtffTM, 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 
[jci^ii and -TTiffTu being correlatives, the omission of the article with the former rejects 
it from the latter. See 6 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 d^ovcov xaci auvluv. Mark ix. 25, ro 

TrvEvfJioc TO aXaXov xai xco(p6v. Mark xvi. 16, o ^larsvaocs xat o /3aV- 
r/o-9-etj. John vi. 40, o '^ecopaiv aocl TriaTEUMv, xxi. 24, 6 pca^T^rris- o 
fxacprupajv ttb^i rourcov xoci y^d-^as. Acts ii. 20, t^v v}fJt.Epocv avplou 
TYiv [/.sydXriv xai £7ri(pxvri. iii. 14, tov ayiov xai ^/)caiov. Eph. i. 3, 
eCiXoyrifAevo^ o S-sor xai TTxrino. v. 5, ev rri' jSacfJiXsigc rov Xqirrrov ycxi 
esou. So Phil. iii. 3, Tit. ii. 13, Heb. iii. 1, 2 Pet. i. 1, Judo 4. 
Add Mark xvi. 16, Luke vi. 49, John vi. 40, x. 1, xxi. 24, 
Kom. 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. 

Obs. 1. The remarkable exclamation in John xx. 28, o Kv^ios fj^ov xat o Qsos fj,/iv,iH 
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; andtheLXX have translated ^JIJ^^ Nl^i^ 
by Bii; [1.0V Kcc) o Kv^tog f/,ov, 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 e3-v/xos- xal o rzku^irts. Luke 
XV. 6, Tovs (plXous Kou TQvs ys'iTovoc^. John ix. 8, 01 ya/rovEf ycxi 
0{ ^ECopovvTES auToy. Acts xiii. 50, rsis aE^oixivocs yu^iouKocS xal rov$ 
TTpajTovs TTjr Tio'Ksojs. xxvi. 30, ^xaikEus y.(xl o riyEyLu)/. xxvii. 11, 
To; xu^Epv/iTYi xai red vocvKXr]^co. Add Col. ii. 13, v. 1, Rev. vi. 15, 
xiii. 10. 

Ohs. 2. The reason of this usage is readily deduced from the nature of the article, 
considered as a pronoun united with its adjtmct by means of the participle uv 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, oZroi larnv o TXavo; xat a.vrix^i'^'^oi. Here it is not the intention 
of Ihe writer to assume 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 rnU; is strictly limited to «//W6w/<yfS, being inapplicable to the names of SJ/i- 
stances, abstract ideas, and proper names. And this is just what might be"expected. 
Tliough the same object may possess divers attributes, it is impossible that sub- 
stances in their nature distinct and incumpatible 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 can 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- 
thia?(Gr. Gr. ^ 268, Obs. \) from Plat. Phaed. 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 rerpiire other methods of explanation. 

' Middletou ad loc. 


accurately observed ; but of things or qualities in their nature utterly incompatible^ 
the name of the first only has the article in numberless instances. With respect to 
plurals also the rule is not always applicable ; for though one individual may act 
in several capacities, yet it is not likely that a multitude of individuals sbould act 
in the same several capacities. When, however, two or more persons or things are 
80 related, that what is attributed to one is attributed to all, and any ambiguity 
would arise from an infringement of the rule, it seems to have been invariably 
observed. The following examples will illustrate the above remarks ; and others 
will continually present themselves: — Mark xv. 1, [x^ira, ruv T^io-fivTi^uv xa) y^af^- 
fiariav. Luke xiv. 23, us ras ei^ovi xcti (p^ay/z.ov;. Acts iii. 11, rh nir^ov )cai 'leouvvnV' 
Phil. i. 19, S;« Ttis vfiuy ^t^ffius xai Wip^opviy'ias. W. 17, rn Nutria xcc) Xurovpyia. 
Col. ii. 22, ra'hreiXfiecra x.a) 'hi^affx.ay.ias. Heb. ix, 19, ruv fj^'oirxmt xcc) r^uyeov. 
Rev. V. 12, rhv ^vva, xa) 'rXourov. In none of these instances could any ambiguity 
arise from the omission of the article, since the two ideas in each case arc essen- 
tially distinct. 

§ 30. — Article with Correlatives , 8fc, 

1. Nouns having a mutual relation to each other, and there- 
fore called correlatives^ or said to be in regimen, have the ar- 
ticle prefixed to both of them, or to neither ; and to a series of 
nouns in regimen the rule is equally applicable. To give a 
familiar example, we must either say, Xeovtos- ffxy/xv/ov, or ro rov 
Xiovros <7>ivix\lov ; for, though we may say, in English, the cub of 
a lion, yet the accuracy of philosophical language denies that 
of Xioyros, which is indefinite, there can be any definite a-ycv/xvlov, 
or vice versa. In Matt. xii. 27, o ^£os- vsKpcuv, if the words were 
in regimen, could not be tolerated ; but the passage is elliptical, 
and would stand thus in full : ovy. &ariv o ®zos vex§&;v 9^£os-, aXXa 
^£0$ l^covrm. The construction in 2 Cor. x. 13, is not o ©£0f 
fxirpouy but ou (Jiirpov o ®&os lptg/Jt(T£v y^^mv, 

Obs. 1. Many examples will occur which are apparently repugnant to this canon. 
The principle of omission, however, requires that the governing noun should not 
only be anarthrous^ but also mdejinite in sense ; for it may, though definite, have lost 
its article by some rule which does not require that tbe governed noun should be- 
come anarthrous also. In Hebr. i. 3, the ■, former article is omitted after the parti- 
ciple uvy which the very nature of the article requires ; and again in the same verse 
after a verb of appointing. See § 27, Obs. 11. Enumeration sometimes also, though 
extremely seldom, interferes with the laws oi regimen. In 1 Pet. iii. 3, the reading 
is unquestionably U •r'KoKrii.^ Nor is it only where a noun is indefinite in sense that 
the usage takes place. Even where it is from its nature definite, as in the case of 
proper names, &c., if it be anarthrous^ the governing noun is not unfrequently anar- 
throus also.* Thus Rom. xi. 34, 1 Cor. ii. 16, t/j %yvu voZv Kv^Uu. A very striking 
instance will also be found in the very first verse of St. Matthew.^ But it may be 

^ Middleton ad loc. 

2 Middleton, part i. ch. 3. In the Epistles of St. Paul anarthrous foi-ms are pecu- 
liarly prevalent, and even more so in those of St. Peter. 

3 Perhaps, however, v\ou Aa[ii^ may be literally translated from the Hebrew, which 
in the status constructus does not usually admit the H emphatic ; and /3//3Xflf yin<nu$ 


well to illustrate the rule by examples : Luke i. 5, ruv ^vyari^m ^Ku^uv. i. 66, 

Acts xi. 21, x^h Ky^'«f» Lukeiii. 4, Iv (iifikM XoyMv'Htrn'i'ou. xiii. 19, xoxku ff/va-na;, 
and roc TiTsiva. rotJ ov^avou. Acts viii. 5, I'ii -rcXiv rnt 'Sa/na^uccs. Rono. i. 20, a-ro 
xr'iffius xoff/jt-av. 1 Cor. xvi. 15, rriv olxiav 'iTi'^ayci, and a-ra^^^h rrii 'Axct''ta.i. Eph. iv. 
30, ili hf^'i^a,v a'ToXvr^uffiui. Phil. iv. 3, sv filf^ko) ^u^i, Col. iii. 10, Kar ukovk rou 
xTtffctvro;. Heb. xii. 2, rov riii Tia-nas a^;^*iyov. 1 Pet. iii. 20, ^ tou Biou fiutxpo^v/Jbiet. 
1 Pet. ii. GfToXa; '2o}o/^uv xu) Tofieppas.^ In 1 Cor. xi. 3, there is an apparent, but not 
real, breach of the rule : for tccvto; av}^o; is equivalent to rod uv^^oi with the article 
in its inclusive sense. ^ 

Obs. 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 1 Cor. vi. 16, o xo>.Xufjt.ivos r^ To^vyi.^ 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, rhv ocv^^u-ti-uv (pCfiv, i. e. 
dv^^uTivviv. Such examples, however, are extremely rare in the New Testament. 

Obs. 3. Analogous to the case of words in regimen is that of partitives, between 
which and their respective wholes a mutual relation subsists. Thus Phil. i. 14, rov$ 
-rXuivas ruv a,h\<pcuy. 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, nvis ruv Zh terrnxoTuv, xxi. 31, t/j Ix. rZv %va 
l-roirttn ; Acts xvii. 12, ruv 'Ekk'/ivl^uv yuvaixuvraJv ivff^i^f^oviov xa) coit^uv ovxoX'iyoi. Rev 
vi. 1. ^<av \x ruv ir'^oa.yi.tuv. It might be expected in Luke xix. 30 that avG^utuv, 
after ovhtli^ 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- 
ticles which are employed in divisions with ^ev and Vi. In ihQ pronominal use of the 
article this usage is extremely common ; nor is it unusual where the article has its 
adjui ct, or even when the opposition is between persons and things. Thus Luke x. 
2, (jiXv ^s^ifffAo; ToXv;, oi ol l^yurui oXiyai. 

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, 'Iwavvvais^ 
BaTTTio-rrif. xiv. 1, '^Hocu^iris o r^r^oip'/fns. Acts xviii. 8, K^tWor 
o oL^y^iavvxyooyos, Xxi. 8, ^ikiitTiov rov EuciyysXiiyrov. 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. 'SQ/'AwocTrpoiprjTi^. Actsvii. 10, ^apaoj 
^dGikiojs. X. 32, ^ifj^coyof ^upaicof. XX. 4, Tocio^ ^sp^ouos. 2 Cor. 

is exactly rendered from the Hebrew Jll^lJl 1H)D» 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. 

2 Middleton ad 1. c. ^ See Matt. Gr. Gr. § 268, Obs, 2. 

* Middleton, part i. ch. 3., § 8 and 9. 


i. 1, YlacvXof aTrocrro'Kos. In inscriptions to letters, indeed, this 
seems to have been the usual practice ; as in 1 Mace. xv. 16, 
Auy.lo^ virocros *Fcofjt.Qclcoy YlToXEfxala) ^aaiKzi, %a,ipEi^. Compare, 
however, Acts xxiii. 26. 

Ohs. 5. Nearly similar is the case of an attributive, placed in apposition with a 
personal pronoun ; as in Luke vi. 24, vi^v ro7i TXovffiois, xi. 46, v/u,7v roTs vo/^txeTg. 
xviii. 13, ifiot ru afj^a^TuXu. The article implies the assumption of the attribute, and 
in this last example the sense will be, seeing that I am a sinner. So again Rom. ii. 
27, <r\ Tflv B/a ypeiiu,fAaTo; xcct •n^iTof/.ris, scil. ovra, albeit you profess to observe the law ; 
Heb. X. 10, (^hfjt.i7s^ ol 'Sta, ry>i 'r^oir<popa;, we who partake of the sacrifice. Much in the 
same manner must be understood the greatly disputed expression 1 Cor. xv. 8, 
utrTi^s) raJ iKr^dfiari u(p^yi xufio't. St. Paul here intends to apply the term iKr^u/jca 
to himself and it was therefore necessary to employ the article, otherwise the mean- 
ing would have been that Ixr^ufxara commonly saw what he had seen, not that he 
was, as it were, an 'Ur^u(jM, or last born child (for such is probably the meaning of 
the word in this place), among the Apostles.^ 

Obs. 6. With the nouns vlos, 5rar?, ^vydryjp, yvvyi, understood, the form is variable. 
Matt. i. 6, t7,s roZOv^iov. iv. 21, 'laxufiov 70V 70V Zefiila/a. Mark XV. 47, Ma^/a 'lufffj. 
Luke vi. 16, 'lovluv 'laxufiov, where ahxipos is probably the word to be supplied. In 
Rom. xvi. 10, 11, 1 Cor. i. 2, the sense requires oIkuuv. So also in Acts xvi. 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 article. 
Thus Acts xxi. 38, 6 h.\yviirios h d'axarxrcuaccs. Eph. i. 3, o S'sw o 

Obs. 7. So with personal pronouns ; as in Eph. i. 13, hftai 7ovi cr^a^jXTixora?. 
And with words, which, being otherwise definite, omit the article ; as 1 Thess. i. 10, 
'lyiffodv 70V pvofMvov hf/.as. 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 is 
included in the verb in Rom. ii. 1, ra ya.^ av7a. ^r^uffcrus i x^Uuv. 

Obs. 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. Thus 
Acts iii. 2G, o ho;,,ff7ntrcci 70v -raT^a oci/rou, a'TjWs/Xsv ulrov x. 7. X. Rom.ii. 27, 
'A Ix (puffioji ax^oliv(r7ia,, 7ov v'o^ov 7iXoZaa. So John iv. 6, 39, Rom. xvi. 1, 1 Cor. viii. 
7, Heb. X. 2. The difference between this and the preceding case is clearly marked 
in 1 Pet. V. 10, o 6ioi h xuXiffa; 'huccs oX'iyov craSovraj. Compare also Rom. viii. 

Obs. 9. A similar apposition is sometimes expressive of irony or sarcastn ; as in 
Matt, xxvii. 40, (o't'), o KU,7a'kvajv 7ov vccov, ffuirov ffiavrov. 

4. The neut. 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, ro Ou (povsva-sis' k. r. X. Mark ix. 23, to, el 

^ See Middleton ou Luke xviii. 13, 1 Cor. xv. 8. Alt, Gram. N. T. 6 22. b. 

2 Winer, p. 116, Note, and § 19. 3. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 22. a 3, and Addend, p, 

3 Winer, (> 19. 1. 


^uvctToct. LiUke i. 62, to, t/ av ^eKoi xaXsTdS'a* oclrov. xxii. 2, to, 
TTo/f dysXcuaiv avrov. Acts iv, 21, to^ ttcos KoXocacovrcci aurou^, Rom. 
viii. 26j TO yap, ri TTpocrcv^a/ixe^a. xoc^o ^a7. Add Luke ix, 46, 
xxii. 4, 23, 37, Acts xxii. 30, Rom. xiii. 9. 

Obs. 10. It will be observed, that this mode of writing is chiefly employed by St. 
Luke and St. Paul. Of the usage before a single word, of which an explanation is 
offered, there is an instance in Gal. iv. 25, to yoi^^Aya.^ 2/va o^os itrrlv, the name of 
Agar designates Mount Sinai.^ Closely similar is 2 Cor. i. 20, 'o(rai yd^ i-rayyixlcii 
Biou, Iv auTM TO Na/, xa,) iv ccItm to \\/u,yiv, i. e., whatever God has promised, he will 
assuredly fulfil through Christ; in whom is the Yea, and the Amen — vai and a^/jy 
being well-known asseverations of the Truth.- 

Obs. 11. Most of the other cases, in which the article is used absolutely 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, tuv ( ''\v\irov. Acts v. 17, a< chv uvtm. xii. 1, tuv uto ttj; 
iKx-Xriffioci. xvii. W^tuviv BiffffoiXov'tKr;. Rom. iv. 14, ol Ix. vofcov. Heb, xiii. 
24, 01 ocro rni ^iTuXlas. Phil. iv. 22, oi Ix tjjj Kaiirecpoi o'lxtec;. 

2. With a noun understood ; as in Matt. xiv. 35, Ttjv 'n^ix&'^ov Ixuvnv, soil. yyiv. 
Luke vii. 11, iv t^ £^55;, soil. Ji/jji^a. John viii. 23, tuv xutu, tuv avu. 
Col. iv. 9, Toi uh. 1 Tim. iii. 7, ol 'i^u^tv. iv. 8, ^ut^s ^ns vZv, 2 Pet. i. 9, tuv 
•xoiXeci ocuToZ afjcoioTrif^aTuv. 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, ro vvv. Luke ix. 3, to xa6^ rif^i^av. Acts iv. 29, tcc vuv, soil. 
'TPu.yfia.Ta. xviii. 1, ro xa.&' okov. Phil. iv. 8, to Xoittov. 

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, to Tn? 
ffvxrti. xxii. 21, TO. Koiiffa^o;, tu. tov 0iou. Luke ii. 49, toT? toZ -TciToo;. Rom. 

viii. 5, TO. Trii ffa^XOS, roi tov WiVfJt,OC,TOi, 1 Cor. X. 24, TO iUVTOU, TO TOU ITIPOU. 

James iv. 14, to tjJj av^tov. 2 Pet. ii. 22, to Ttis otXvBoZs Ta^oif^tas, 

5. With prepositions and their case : John xxi. 2, Nai^ava-^A o uto KavS. Acts 
xii. 20, TOV it) T3U xotruvo;. xxiv. 22, TO. Ti^t Tyjs olou. Rom. ii, 8, ol l^ I*/- 
Biioi;. ix. 11, ^ xetr ixXoynv T^oB^ifti. xi. 27, ri -ffot.^ ifx,ou hcc^^x'/j. Phil. i. 27, 
Tcc Ti^i v/jcuv. Col. iii. 2, TO. IcTt Tfji yni. Heb. ii, 17, Ta-xoli tov Qsov. Tit. ii. 
8, i^ ivavTicts.^ Of the formula el ts^i tivx, see § 68. 

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

1. Abstract nouns, or the names o^ 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 a^ixoi will signify all 

1 Alt, Gr. N.T. ^ 22. a. 8. RosenmuUer and Kuinoel on Mark ix. 23. Whitby 
on Gal. iv. 2 j. 

* Middleton ad Ine, 

3 Alt, Gr. N. T. § 22. a. 7. Matt. Gr. Gr. § 272. The observation of MatthiiP, 
that this construction is generally explained by supplying the part, uv, is stron^:y 
corroborative of Bishop AJliddletu/t's Theory, It will be remarked tluit the idiom is 
very constantly employed by St. Paul. 



who are imju.^t, so ^ a^iytla will signify every act of which injus- 
tice can be assumed.^ 

Obs. 1. The practice is, however, somewhat irregular ; and many instances occur 
in which the noun is anarthrous, when the mere abstract sense would have been 
equally true. But there is a wide difference between omitting the article when it 
might have been used, and inserting it where it would be out of place. Thus after 
verbs o^ having, obtaining, fulness, «&c., and adjectives allied to the last, the article 
is always omitted ; for no attribute or quality can belong to one person so exclu- 
sively, that it cannot be ascribed to any other. Hence such expressions as thes3 in 
Matt. vii. 29, l^ovo-iav 'i^cav. xxiii. 28, /uicrro) v-proK^tffius text a.vof^tas> Lulce iv. 28, 
£TX>5<r3>j<rav ^vuou. 1 Cor. xiii. 1, 2, 3, ciyeicrtiv 'ix^- •'^^.mes ii. 14, 'ria-Tiv s^j/v. Verbs 
oi partaking also for the most part, though not invariably, follow the same rule ; for 
though attributes or qualities, as wholes, cannot be exclusively claimed by any indivi- 
dual, yet he may have a part in such wholes. On the same principle, in the common 
phrases, avomv opXiffxavnv, Vik^v ^iVovm, ^<rf%/av ayiiv, and the like, the article is in- 
variably omitted. A somewhat similar expression is aUa Viouv, in 1 Cor. ix. 26. 

Obs. 2. Similarly we may account for the anarthrous use of abstract 7iouns, when 
they are employed in the dative case adverbially, with reference to the manner in 
which anything is said to have happened ; as in Gal. iv. 8, To7g /uh (piffn oZtri ^io7s. 
See § 47. 2. In the same way such words as ffu^\, <7env[jt.a, xaplia, o-rofix, &c., are 
used in the dative adverbially, to express the characteristic qualities of those func- 
tions. Compare Rom. viii. 13, x. 10, Gal. iii. 3, v. 5, 16, 18, 25, et alibi. In such 
cases the reference is not to any particular subject ; and if it were, as it might be, 
the article would be prefixed. Sometimes it is immaterial whether the sense be 
limited or not ; as in Luke i. 80, and elsewhere, 

2. Besides its use as an indication of their most abstract 
sense, the article is sometimes prefixed to abstract nouns in the 
sense of a possessive pronoun ; and also where there is any- 
kind of reference, or where the attribute is personified. In 
Acts xxviii. 4, -^ AUt] is the Goddess of Justice ; and in such 
instances the practice seems to be founded on the iiotoriety or 
celebrity of these imaginary persons. In 1 Cor. xiii. 4, -h dydirn 
may either be used in its most general sense, or it may be per- 
sonified, or the article may be the index of renewed ^nention. 
In 2 Cor. i. 17, rri £Xa(ppioc indicates the sin of light-mindedness 
as a welUknowii quality inherent in human nature.^ 

Obs. 3. With the above exceptions, abstract nouns always refuse the article; and it 
is also frequently omitted, when otherwise its insertion should seem to be necessary, 
imder the circumstances which equally cause its rejection before appellatives; 
namely, after prepositions, and verbs substantive or nuncupative, in enumerations, 
and exclusive propositions. Upon the whole, the onarMrow* usage predominates: 
but, although some considerable difficulties occasionally present themselves, and the 
intricacy of the subject may well admit of some license, the deviation from the prin- 
ciples, which have been explained, are so comparatively few as to affect, in no ma- 
terial degree, the certainty of their applications. The irregularities, which Winer 

1 Middleton, part i. c. 5. » winer, § 17. 1. 


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 hxaiofftjvii, Matt. v. 10, Acts x. 35, Rom. viii. 10, Heb. xi. 33, &c. ; ayaTu, 
John V. 42, Gal. v. G, 2 Cor. ii. 8, &c. ; ^/Vr/,-, Acts vi. .5, Rom. i. 5, iii. 28, 2 Cor. v. 
7, 1 Thess. v. 8, &c. ; KKKia, 1 Cor. v. 8, Eph. iv. 31, James i. 21 ; -rktovi^ia, 1 Thess. 
ii. 5, 2 Pet. ii. 3 ; u/tiaoria, Rom. iii. 9, Gal. ii. 17, 1 Pet. iv. 1, &c.^ 

3. With respect to Proper Names, which, from their very 
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. 

Ohs. 4. Although the poems of Homer do not suffice to establish these points, yet 
their origiii 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 ; but it will be sufficient here to advert to the remarkable instance in Jl.A. 
11, O'uvixa rov Xpvirr,v 'Wtf^m' a^^rtjoa 'At^e/Sjjj. 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 oi notoriety.^ So in //. A. 532, the article is prefixed to Tuhi%;, there named 
for the first time, as being the well-known antagonist of Hector, At the same time 
the simple circumstance of noloriety, 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 'EPutrdfier, re7iewed mention from v. 5 ; 
ii. 16, rr'y ti 'Mcc^iuft xu) Tov'"luffh(p, from ch. i. 27; Acts i. ^, o ^ImoZi^ 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 vaiious exceptions to which, 
as in the case of common nouns, the application of the rule is liable.^ 

Obs. 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 'Afioaafz 
lyivvtiffiv 'la-aax' o Se ^IffocuK iyivvriaiv 'laxuiji' o Vi ''laxufi x. t. X. The article with the 
accusative represents the particle J^J«^, which is also so rendered by the LXX. 
Compare 1 Chron. vi. 4, Ruth iv. 18, et passim. In the Genealogy by St. Luke the 
use of the article is strictly Greek, roZ being everywhere an ellipsis of rov vUZ. 

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. Winer indeed 

^ "Winer, U8. 1. 

^ Heyne on //. A. 11. See also Matt. Gr. Gr. §.264. 

^ Wolf ad Reizium de pros. Gr. p. 74. Nihi/ dubito qtiin tov X^vffm Poeta dixerit, 
vt personam fama celebrem, et auditoribus jam turn, cum primiim ejus nomen audirent, 

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

5 See Middleton. 


observes, that although, in the New Testament, the names of cowitries and rivers, 
with the exception of A'tyvrroi and MuKihovlri, seldom want the article, those of 
cities are occasionally anarthrous. The exceptions, however, will be found to con- 
sist chiefly, though not entirely, of cases, in which a preposition precedes, or there 
is an enumeration, or the regimen or some other ground of limitation interferes. 
See Matt. ii. 13, 14, 15, iv. 25, Luke v. 1 7, vi. 17,xxiii.28, Acts xiv. 2l,xvi.9, xvii. 10, 
15, XX. 15 ; and elsewhere. In Matt. ii. 3, iii. 5, ^ toXi?, is in all probability to be 
supplied before 'li^otTo\vf/.ot. : and in Acts xix. 2G, some MSS. read 'iu; '¥.tpicrov. 
Winer himself remarks that in Acts xvi. 10, sqq,, the article is inserted six 
times before UxKihvia, though it is again omitted, but after a preposition, in Acts 
XX. 3.1 

§ 32. — Position of the Article in concorcL 

Although the Art. is frequently prefixed to adjectives, it is 
always a substantive expressed or understood, conjointly with 
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 taken 
to distinguish the assertive from the assumptive relation 
between an adjective and substantive. Thus k^^os h 7ro!,rYtp and 
ipiw Trarri^ 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, o hixos ttxtv^ dTrs^xvs, Hence, 

Obs. 1. If the adjective be a qualifying word, belonging essentially to the sub- 
stantive, supposing one article only to be employed, it must be placed immediately 
6e/br<? the adjective : as in Matt, xxviii. 19, rou ayiou -rvivfAccTo;. John iv. 23, ol 
akv^ivoi ^^offxvvijTeii. 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 looking 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 with 
its article should be placed first ; since in such an expression as « ocycc^og o ccvB^uto;, 
the addition of o civ^^uros would be without meaning; and as in o cIv^^utos 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, to ^vst/^a to aytov. 
John i. 9, TO <Pms to aX'/i3-ivov. vi. 13, tmv ^ivTi cl^Tuv Tb») x^iBivcuv. What has been 
said respecting adjectives, is equally applicable to participles, adverbs, and preposi- 
tions with their cases, employed in the capacity of adjectives. Examples of the 
sevei'al cases will be found in Matt. ii. 2, o Tix^^^'> fiic<riXiv;. iii. 7, t>?j /xiXXova-tj; 
opyri;. John iv. 11, to vhu^ to Z,uv. Phil. iv. 3, Tr,s oivu xXnffiu;. Rom. xi. 24, TTii 
xciTBC (pvffiv i^ixo-TTi)?' 2 Cor. viii. 4. r^J; 'htuKovioi.i Tns il; tov? ayioug. James i. 1, tcc7; 
(puXccls Tous h T^ hoiffTo^ci. See also Matt. ii. 7, iii. 17, vi. 6, Mark iv. 31, xiii. 25, 
Luke i. 70, ii. '\7, iii. 22, vii. 47, viii. 8, xv. 22, 23, xx. 35, John i. 46, xii. 21, Acts 

^ Middleton, iihi mpra: and Rose's note at p. §2. Winer, § 17. 7. 


xi. 22, xii. 20, xv. 23, xxiv. 5, xxvi, 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, fAoi^rvffi rols ^^oxixn^oTovnfiivoi;. 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 a(pBcioTM, ao^drM, are in concord with esa), not with ^atriXiT. 

Obs. 2. It does not appear that there is any material difference between the two 
forms aya^o; avB^tuTo; and o ccvB-ouTos o uyaBo;. Thus ro ayiov •rvidf/.a and to 
^vtufia TO oiytov 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 imiversal practice. At 
the same time it is not always a matter of indifference, which of the two forms is 
used. 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 
emphasis or opposition. Although the import of to ^rnv/jjot, for instance, is in 
general sufficiently clear, yet the addition of to clyiov prevents at once the pos- 
sibility of misconception ; and, on the other hand, our Saviour calls himself o Troif^hv o 
xaXo; (John X. 11), as opposed to him who is /uktButos.* 

Obs. 3. If the ac/j. 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 xaXoj ovoujo; {scil. sW/,) continually occur j 
as, for instance, in Rom. ii. 13, ol y»^ ol ocx^oaTcc) tov vof^ou ViKcx,iot. In the other case, 
the adjective does not belong to the substantive e5se«/m//y, but as it were incidentallij. 
Thus Mark viii. 17, sV/ 9ri-7r6opuf/,(vyiv 'ixiTt Tnv xa^^iocv v/u.&iv, i.e. uitti ihcci 'Xi-Tru^ufi'ivnv, 
Acts xxvi. 24, fjciydXyi Tn(puv7i 'i(pyi, the voice, with which he spoke, was loud ; not that 
his voice was naturally loud. 1 Cor. x. 3, ^dvrts to avTo /3^&J^a -rvivfzaTtxov 'i^ayov, 
xk) -tt. t. «. -TTaf/.a. cry. sV/vov, the meat and drink, of which they all partook, had a 
spiritual import. So also with /)re;:;osjVjyw* and their case ; as in Matt. iii. 4, iJ^^ 
TO 'iv}v/u.oi avrou utto t^i-x^v xa,y,riXov, the clothing, which he wore, was of camel's 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 o fiatriXsh; o fitya; ari^an, 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, TO ya^ ayiov vvivf/.a : and in 1 John V. 20, many >'ISS. read h X,'»^ ^ 
alums, as in cc. i. 2, ii. 25. The clause xara ^umfcn Gtov, in 2 Tim, i. 8, belongs to 

1 In Heb. ix. 1, if ayiov and xotrfiixov are both adjectives, it is the latter which 
must be iaken substantive/g ; but, jjrobably, it is the Rabbinical noun Op^^Hp. 
which signifies /Mr7<i/i/re. See Middleton ad loc. and Buxtorf's Lex. Talm. p. 2006. 
Otherwise the sense must be, Its sanctuary was xoafjuxov, according to Obs, 3. 

2 Middleton on the Gr. Article ; Pt. i. ch. viii. Winer, § 19. 2, 4. 
^ See Hermann, Hym. Hom. p. 4, and on Soph. Trach. 736. 

■* Middleton, ubi supra. 

^ Middleton, ubi supra. Compare Winer, ^ 17. 2, and 19, 2. Alt, p. 277, in Jd- 


the verb a-vypiaKO'^fxBtia-ov, and cave should be taken not to confound this and similar 
examples with those which depend upon the principle under consideration. 

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

1. Of the Homeric use of the article, in the sense of the ^;?07?. 
odros, there is one unequivocal example in the New Testament ; 
but it occurs in a quotation from Aratus (Phoen. 5.) in Acts 
xvii. 28, rov yoip 7£vof l(T/xev. 

2. In divisions with o /xev, o ^e, the pronominal sense is very 
frequent ; as in Acts xvii. 32, ol pt£v s^'^auoi^ov, ol ^s eIttov, x. t. X. 
See also Matt. xiii. 23, xxii. 5, 6, Acts xxviii. 24, Rom. ii. 7, S, 
Gal. iv. 23, Phil. i. 16. Without o /txsv preceding, h Is, and, in 
the plural, ol ^s, constantly occur. 'J'hus Matt. ii. 5, 6 ^s etTTcv 
auTo}. xxi. 29, 6 ^£ aVoH^tS-cts- aiTTB : and so passim. Compare 
also Matt. ii. 14, iv. 20, xv. 25, 27, 34, xix. 17, Mark iii. 4, xii. 
14, Luke v. 33, 34, John xix. 29, et alibi.' 

Obs. 1. In Matt, xxviii. 17, ei is evidently employed in the sense of nvU. There 
is a similar passage in Xen. Anab. i. 5. 13, citrTi tKihov; iK';rt'7rXvx^°^'> *^' avTov 
Mzvuva, Kcu T^ixiiv It) roi o^Xx' »l Be xa) 'iffroKrav octtopovvtis. See also ^lian. V. H. xii. 
35, Lucian. Timon. p. 68.2 

Obs. 2. Instead of Bs, it frequently happens that fjdv is followed by some other 
word, as HxXos, 'inoof^ &c. Thus in Matt. xvi. 14, 01 [juv 'laccvvm, aXXot Bs 'Hxiav, tTt^ot 
%i 'h^t/i/,tav. Compare Matt. xii. 5. Sometimes Ss y^h — S; li is substituted; as in Matt. 
xxi. 35, ov fjiXv s^ii^av, ov Ti a-rixnivav, 1 Cor xi. 21, os f^lv ^s/va, og Be fctB-un. So Matt. 
XXV. 15, Luke xxiii. 33, Acts xxvii. 44, Rom. ix. 21, xiv. 5, 2 Cor. ii. 16. Also S; 
uh, uXXoi Ii. Thus Matt. xiii. 4, 5, a f^h ir-in taoa. rhv o^ovj MxXa ^l It) to, 
^ir^eudt]. 1 Cor. xii. 8, u fAv 21^orai Xoyo; <ro(pia;, S-XXm Sa X'oyog yvMtnas, Iri^co 3s 
vlffri;, clXXco ol %a^/<r/4aTa iKf^d-rcoVf uXXco "hi \vioyri[j(.ara, ^vvxf4,iMv, a.7JXM ^s -Tr^o^pririlcx., 
cIXXm Bj "^tax^'Kni; ^vtvf/,oiTCJV, Iri^a Ti yiv/i yXMfffZv, cIxXm Vi IpfJi-riviia, yXcoffffuv. Compare 
V. 28 ; where, in a like enumeration, ov; f/,h tt^utov is followed by hvn^ov, t^/t«v, and 
fVsira. In Rom. xiv. 2, Tt answers to S; yAv, but in this instance the article has 
an adjunct in the participle y^im.^ 

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

1. Of these the most remarkable is the form jTj xa) ii;, with or without the 
article; as in Matt. xxiv. 40, 41, xx. 21, xxvii. 38, Mark x. 37, Gal. iv. £2. 
It is to be observed, however, that although in these instances the omission 
or insertion of the article is obviously a matter of indifference, still Jj is 
never employed except with reference to some one other person or thing ; and 
Avhere three or more are in question the article is omitted. Thus in Mark 

1 Winer, § 20. 1,2. Alt, § 22, a. 9. 

^ Schol. ad Lucian. 1. c. oyola. h irvvTCC^t; auT-r, rn iv ti^a roZ ilayyiXtov MarS^. cvy- 
y^ai^n, Tn Ol Ti WicfTaa'Kv'' avri yo'.a rov rms '^0 oi xiiTut. See Kuinoel on Matt, 
xxviii. 17. 

3 Winer and AW, ubi supra; Georg, Ilierocr., p. 109. 


iv. 8, 20, ifso'v iv T^isixovra, KCt) 'Iv i^r,KOVTa, xa.) h tKUTOv. We find o ut used 
for owe 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 
mention^ 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 Exod. xvii. 12, Levit. xii. 8, xv. 15, 1 Sam. x. 3, and elsewhere.^ 
It is, however, closely allied to the expression us f^\v — sTj Jj, which occurs in 
Aristot. Ethic, vi. 1, Rhet. ii. 20.5 

2. In other places of the New Testament us is followed by 'Uioos or by aXXaj. 
Luke vii. 41, h us u<puXi 'hnvd^tex, '^iVTriKoo'ia,, o tii 'iri^os Tivrrixovra. Rev. xvii. 10, 
us \(tt)v, elxxos ou'ffa »jxSs. See also Luke xvi. 13, xvii. 3-1, 35, xviii. 10. 
There is a peculiarity in Matt. vi. 24, where the article is omitted before 
'ivos, and supplied before 'Itioos. May not the preposition in the compound 
verb uv^iliTcit account for the omission ? 

3. In Phil. i. 15, nvts /j^Iv, -rms Ts 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 in Homer and the Ionic and Doric writers, and sometimes 
in the Tragedians, has been erroneously supposed to exist in Acts xiii. 9, lavXoSi o 
xa) UavXos. The participle wv, or XiyofAivos, is here undoubtedly understood. A more 
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 y,v, 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 thought 
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 Ic-tjv , the 

vacancy could not be filled up by vi^iTUTiT: and the same is true, if, instead of an 
assertive proposition, He is, we take an assumptive one. He bein<j. We can there- 
fore only say, o (pikocrops, o ffo'ipos, o -^ioiTraTuv.^ 

§ M.— Pronouns. (Buttm. § 127.) 

1. Between outqs and o^e, the distinction seems to be, 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 i, «, ro. 

^ Middleton, pt. i. ch. 2. 


to \\\i2ii follows, Thus^ Matt. vii. 12, ovros ya.p lanv o vo/xof koX 
ol 97-/Jo(p^raj, referring to the foregoing precept. Acts xv. 23, 
y^avl/avres^ ra^z, viz. the subjoined letter. This is, however, so 
far from being an invariable usage, that exceptions continually 
occur. In Luke x. 39, tt^b refers to Martha, mentioned in the 
preceding \CXB,C', and in Acts iv. 11, ovros refers to yLpiarov, 
not to ©£05-, which immediately precedes. 

In other connexions, ouros refers to a more distant 
object, o^£ to a nearer one; but Ix^ivos refers to what is 
remote or absent. Luke xvi. 25, dir^Xa^^s av ra ayaS-a 
aou Iv rr] ^cori aov, koci Aa^apor roc xaaa. ofJLolcos' yvv ^s o^e 
(Lazarus, the nearer object) Trocpay.oi'Ks'iraci, cru ^g olu^oc'ja.i. 
Acts XV. 1 1, 72"K7"T£yo/xev (T^S'Tjvat, xaS"' ov rpoTT'JV ycdneTvoi 
(scil. Ta fi^VT), v. 7). 

OAs. 1. Some have referred ai/V^ in 'Acts viii. 26 to the substantive olav, but it 
I't'longs more probably to TaZ,a.v. There is also another doubtful case in 1 John 
V. 20, ovros IffTtv aXriBtvos Siog, xa) h ^m ocluvios. It is here doubted whether 
ihe reference is to God the Father or to Christ ; but since h Z,u'/i ccImvio; is a term 
which St. John invariably uses of Christ, and the true grammatical construction 
requires such a reference, there can be no solid reason for violating the rule. 

Obs. 2. As the demonstrative pronoun, so the relative sometimes refers to a re- 
mtiter noun. Thus, in 1 Cor. i. 8, os must refer to eio; in v. 4. See also 2 Thess. 
ii. 9, Heb. v. 7, ix. 2, et alibi.^ 

2. The senses, in which the pronoun aurbs is commonly used, 
having been already noticed (§ 15. 2), it remains to subjoia 
tlie following observations on the demonstrative pronouns in 
general : — 

Obs. 3. When the verb is separated from its case by a parenthesis, or after a pro- 
]iosition beginning with a relative, the demonstrative pronoun is frequently redun- 
dant. John XV. 2, Tav xXrifjta. iv l/uo) yM (pieov xa^Tov, al^ii ecvro' xa) <ff'a,v to xk^tov 
<^i^ov, xaBai^ii alro. Acts iv. 10, iv tm ovofiocTt 'Inffov X^ia-rov, ov vfM7s iffrocv^cuffuri^ iv 
'TovTM X. r. ?. Compare Acts ii. 22, 23, 36, v. 30, 31, vii. 35, 40, x. 38, sqq., and 

Cbs. 4. Frequently the pronoun is repeated for the sake of emphasis, as in I^Iatt. 

Vi. 4, XCc) TO-TYlf ffOV jiXiTUV iV TM X^VTTM, OiVTO; U.'Xo'huffil ffOI Iv TM (^OCVl^M. XXiv. 13, 

» 1)\ v'Tfofjt.iUa.i SIS TiXos, eiiTos ffu^yifftTat. Mark vii. 15, ra ix'To^ivojuivoc, k'ff' avrov, ixitvoi 
icrri TO. xoivovvTK rov uvB^eo-rovt Compare v. 20, 1 Pet. v. 10.^ 

Obs. 5. Before and after paiticiples, the demonstrative pronoun is frequently re- 
dundant without a parenthesis; as in Matt. iv. 16, roT; xa^nf^ivois iv x'^^f *"' ^*"? 
Savdrov, <pus aviTtiXiv auroTs. V. 40, tm B^iXovri troi x^iBijvoci, xas rov "X^iruva, ffou XafiiTv, 
u<pie uvtZ xdu to if/,ccTiov. Compare also Acts i. 21, 22, James i, 25, Rev. ii. 7, 17, 
vi. 4. Sometimes ^yrof is^^twice added j as in Matt. viii. 1, xocTciBuvrt Ii uvtm uro 

^ Winer, ^-23. 1. Alt, Gram. N. T. v^ 41. 1. 
« Winer, §23. 3. 


rau e^ovs, vtoXouBtja'av avrSJ o;^Xei -roXXoL Mark v. 2, i^tXBovrt aurco Ik rov yrXotov, tu- 
Bius cfT-fivrnffiv avTM avBowrei. Add Matt. viii. 5, 23, 28, xxvi. 71, Mark ix. 28. 
Obs. 6. "With the infinitive also, the pronoun is in like manner pleonastic. Tims 

2 Cor. ii. 1, 'ixoiva Ss If/.a.vru roZro, to /u.r] tuXiv ixBuv iv xCwi) too; vf^agm Of a like 
character is the use of a pronoun before the particle "va, or oV/, when the following 
sentence is emphatic; as in Acts ix. 21, «<; tovto IXrtXvBn, Vva '^i^t/aivovs alrovs ayayn 
il; ravi a.px'-i-^'- ^0 XX. 29, xxiv. 14. The usage is especially prevalent in the writin}j;s 
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 raZToc is used with reference to a sini^le object ; as in John xv. 17, ravra. 
ivT'sXXof/.ai vfuv^ 'Ivk ayaTan a,XXr,Xovs. 3 John 4, fji.iiZ,aTi^/x.v toJtojv ovx 'ix'^ PC^^'^^'^ 

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, o 
6so> ido^diTiv ^Inffovv, ov iif/jiTs Txpihunwri, xoe,] riovritrairBi aiiro'v. 1 Cor. Vlll. 6, 'hf4,7v ilg 0£oj 
•ra'rh^, el oii to. Teivra, xcc) hu^u? ii; ah-rov xa.) iii Kvoios ^I'/iffov; X^iirro;, ^i' oi/ to, -pravTa, 
xa) ytiAit; li avrov. So 1 Pet. ii. 22, 2 Pet. ii. 3, Rev. xvii. 2. Compare Ps. Ixxxviii. 
5, LXX. Very similar also is Rev. ii. 18, rd^i xiyu o vlog rod Qiov, o i'xwv toI; o<p- 
BaXfjtjOv; uvrou as (pXoya ^v^o}, xot.) o'l To'^t; avrou oujOioi ^aXxoX/jSava/ (^ticn). 

Obs. 8. The demonstrative pronoun even follows the relative in the same proposi- 
tion; as in Mark i. 7, au ovx slfi) txavos Xva-ai rov Ifjjoivrec ruv uTo'hrifJt.a.rav avTOU. Mark 
vii. 25, ni s<%s ro Bvyar^tov cclrni -prvivf^cc axccBx^Tov. Acts XV. 1 7, Rev. viii. 2. The 
same construction obtains with other pronouns ; as in Mark xiii. 19, Bx'i'4^is, o'la ou 
yiyovi roiav-rn acr' a,o^r,s xr'ifftciis. Also with adverbs; as in Mark vi. 55, oVay tixovov 
on ixit IffTi. 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, hv "Awoi cr^o<pt]rts- avr'/i xoofJjifinxvla, x. r. X. John i. 6, lyUiro 
ay^ow^o;, ovof/jO, uvtm ^luavvYi;* Acts X. 36, ivocyyiXi^ofjLivos u^nvAV ^loi 'Jyiffou X^ia-rov' 
ovros IffTi TavTuv xv^ios. 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 in the later Greek writers. See ^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 s/^/, and the other a relative, are sometimes contracted into one ; 
as in Luke xvi. 2, t/ touto uxovu ^s^t <rou, i. e. t/ (fo-T/) rovTo, {oS} uxovu. 2 Pet. iii. 1, 
TavTYit n^n ^ivri^av vfzlv y^aipiu Wt(rToXhvf for ecvrv iffrt h ^ivri^cc iTtvroXiif »!v y^d,(poj. 

Obs. 11. With respect to the use of these pronoims in the New Testament, it 
may also be observed that — 1. alroi is sometimes put with xeu, as et is or isque in 
Latin, in the sense of and indeed, and that too ; as in Luke vii. 12, vloi fzovoyivhs %n 
fjcnr^) alrov' xa\ cturrn x"'^^' ^'"^^ *''^ ^^^ " widow ; i. e. in addition to her other suf- 
ferings. 1 Cor. vi. 6, cchiX(^oi ^170. a'^iX<pou x^iviTcet, xou touts W) o.'tc laTut . 8, ahiAiiTi 
xa) ccroffTi^iiTi, xot.) tuZto. ahiX(^ovi. Add 1 Cor. ii. 2, Eph. ii. 8, Phil. i. 28. And, 
2. The neuter accusatives toZto and toiZtcx, are used adverbially, with xs:.tu. or l>ia 

1 Winer, §9 22. 4, 23. 4. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 38. 2. 
^ Winer, iibi supra. 

^ Winer and Alt, ubi supra; Ast ad Plat. Polit. p. 551. Goltling ad Callim. p. 
19. Poppo ad Xen. Cyr. p. 478. Boraemauu ad Xeu. Conv. p. 11)6. 


understood, as in Heb. x. 33, rouTo /juv, — rouro h, on the one hand and on the other. 
Compare Herod, i. 30, iii. 132, Lucian. Nicor. 16. Again, in 2 Pet. i. 5, ku) alro 
Tovro Ti, and for this very caused 

Obs. 12. In Hebrew the pronoun sometimes refers to a noun expressed in the 
succeeding sentence ; and a like usage has been pointed out with av7os in two pas- 
sages of the New Testament. These are, Matt. xvii. 18, t^sr/^jjirsv eclru o 'lr,<rous. 
Acts xii. 21, Vhnfjt,yiyoi)it ^^k avroti;. In the first passage, however, avrii may as 
readily be referred to the daemoniac as the daemon, which are so frequently inter- 
changed in the Gospels, that no support can be drawn from the parallel place of 
Mark ix. 25, to the proposed interpretation ; and in the latter, uvtovs refers more 
properly to the deputies from Tyre and Sidon, mentioned in the preceding verse, 
than to Bjj/Aoj in the following. 

Obs. 13. The pronoun airos is sometimes interchanged with a-v, as in Matt, xxiii. 
37, 'ligovtreck'/ifi, ' hooixruXhft', h a'^ox-ruvovtra rovi -^r^oipnras^ kou >.i^ofooKoZ(ru tov; ocriffraX- 
/xivovi 'Z^os ulrhv, 'Xoffu.Ki? 'A^iXriffo, I'^iffwayayiTv to, riKvoc, ffov. Compare Rev. xviii. 
23, 24. Thus also a general turn is given to the words of Elizabeth in her address 
to Mary, in Luke i. 45, »«< (jLUKocpia h •prKrTivffu.ira, 'on 'Urai Tikucain: ro7s XiXuXr,(/Avoii 
ahrTji •Tea.foc Kvpiov. Such transitions, which seem to originate in the fervour of a 
writer, who is more intent upon the importance of his subject than the accuracy of 
his language, are very common in Hebrew.^ 

Obs. 14. The reflexive pronoun Iccurov is frequently put for the other personal 
pronouns compounded with abros. Thus, for the 2 pers. sing, in John xviii. 34, a^' 
lauTov (TV rovTo Xiyus', for the 1 pers. plur. in Acts xxiii. 14, ava.Bif^ccri uvei^ifjcaTla-cc- 
fiiv iavrovS' and for the 2 pers. plur. in Phil. ii. 12, t^v lauT^y a-uryi^iKv x.u,ri^ya.^iff^i. 
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 Thess. ii. 8. So, in Latin, Ovid. Epist. 
Heroid. v. 46, Miscuimus lacrymas moesius uterque suas. 

Obs. 15. The reflexive pronoun is also put fur ay^Xnkojv, as in Col. iii. 16, lilaffKov 
vii xa) vov^irovvTii laviovs. 1 Thess. v. 13, it^'/ivivin h Iuvtc?;. See also 1 Pet. iv. 
8, 10.3 

3. The pronoun indefinite rU is eitiicr used alone, or with a 
substantive in the same case, or followed with a genitive 
(§ 41. 3), in the sense of some one, a certain one, any one, some- 
thing, or any thing. Thus in Matt. v. 23, x:jtx£7 /xvojaQ^f on h 
a^£iX(|/6s" GOV "i'Xfii Ti xara oov. ix. 3, rives' r&5v yqocfj.fjuoircCiJv stVov tv 
hocuTo'is. xii. 47, bJtts ^i rtr auru>. Acts ix. 36, Iv ^loTTTin ^s rts- rjv 
fMOi^nrpia,. 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, 44j 
1 Cor. ix. 22, 2 Pet. iii. 16, et alibi 

Obs. 16. The cases are constautly omitted before genitives taken partitively. 
Thus in Matt, xxiii. 34, j^ aurm d-yroKTiviTn xa) ffrxv^ucnn, soil, tivo,}, John xvi. 17, 
iWov oZv Ix ruv f^.K^fiTuv, Add Luke xxi. 16, Rev. ii. 10, xi. 9. Of the omission of 
r); in the nominative, see § 37. 7. Obs. 17. 

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

1 Winer, § 21. 2. Obs. 3. 

2 Alt, Gr. N. T. § 37. 4. 

3 Winer, § 22. n. Air, § 39. Georgi Hierocrit, i. 3. 30. Viger do Idiot, p. 
115. n. 7, and lierm. and Zeun. ad loc. i^assov. 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 apparent emphasis to 
account for the departure from ordinary usage. (See § 44. 6. 
Obs, 20.) The practice is particularly observable in St. Luke 
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, 
2Thess.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. 

Obs. 17. The possessive pronoun is sometimes expressed by means of a peri- 
phrasis, formed by the preposition x.aru. with an accusative of the personal pronoun : 
as in Acts Xvii. 28, rtvi? ruv xaS' ifjiMS TOiriTuv. xviii. 15, vofjuou Tou *aS' vfJCKi. 
Eph. i. 15, rhv xaS' vfjt,ai -riffriv. So i^Llian, V. H. ii. 42. « xar abrov d^irri' Dion. 
Hal. ii. 1, ol xaB^ '/ly-as x^oya} 

§ 35. — The Article with Pronouns, ttus, Sfc. (Buttm. 
§ 127. Text, 5, 6.) 

1. With the demonstrative pronouns ovrof, oIe, sxeT^/os, 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, rocT^ riiAspais gxe/vats-. 9, roJv 'ki'bu^ rovTcov. 
James iv. 3, ttjv^s ttjv ttoXiv, 

Obs. 1. A single MS. has fixi^us TxvTr,v yuvcxTKu, ia 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 .isserted, i. e. if the prououa 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, rxuTa TiKvx tou Siod, These are the 
children of God. Compare Luke i. 36, xxi. 22, John iv. 18, 54,jGal. iii. 7, iv. 24, 
1 Thess. iv. S.^ 

Obs. 2. In Matthew, Mark, Luke, and St. Paul's Epistles, euro; stands before 
the noun, and in St. John afer it, with some few exceptions ; but tKiTvot usually 
follows the substantive, unless when a preposition occurs.* 

2. When ttocs or azrar is used in the singular to signify the 

' Winer, § 22. 7. Alt, § 40. Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 441. 
^ Middleton on Gr. Art. eh. vii. § 5, 6. Winer, § 17. 9. 
Gersdori's BeitrUge zur Sprach-characteristik der Schriftsteller des N. T. 
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, ttoi.'jx -h ttoKis, the whole city ; iii. 10, ttuv 
IbvI^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, Vaja TTiKpla, may be rendered every species of 
bitterness. So Acts xxiii. 1, 2 Cor. ix. 8, James i. 2, 
1 Pet. i. 15. 

Ohs. 3. There can be little doubt that ?r«5-a h oiKohfz,h, in Eph. ii. 21, is the true 
reading, though sanctioned by the smaller number of MSS., since the omission of 
the article would be a soloecism ; and in Eph. iii. 15, -rcia-a. -rar^ia, is every family. 
Since 'liooa'o'kvit.a. is a neuter noun, h -roXig may possibly be understood in Matt. ii. 3, 
though proper names are a constant reason of variation in the use of the article 
(^ 31. 3). It is probable also that in Acts ii. 35, oTko; 'la-^cchx may be regarded as 
a single proper name. The article is also rejected by the same expression in Matt. 
X. 6, XV. 24, contrary to the correct usage, which is nevertheless adopted in Heb. 
viii. 8, 10. A similar diversity prevails in the LXX, and the Hebrew would cor- 
rectly omit the article. Compare 1 Sam. vii. 2, 3, Nehem. iv. 16. 

Obs. 4. When a participle is used instead of a noun, the article is inserted after tccs 
in the sense of each individual ; as in Matt. v. 22, 28, tcc; o ooyi^if^svos, va; o fixirrav. 
See also Luke vi. 47, xviii. 14, John iii. 20, vi. 40, Act xi. 39, Rom. ix. 33, 1 Cor. 
ix. 25, Gal. 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 tS? oVr/; l^yi^irai^ oa-ns iSXsVs/, &c. &c. See below § 42.^ 
In Luke xi. 4, the case is somewhat different, since (xpuXovn retains its participial 
character. Some copies, however, insert tw. 

Obs. 5. In the plural, w-avTss is almost always accompanied by the article in the 
New Testament.* When the noun has a distinct reference, the law of usage is 
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, Tavras rov; a.^x'^^^~s ^^' y^a./,riTe, i. e. all who were 
members of the Sanhedrim ; xi. 13, ^dvn; ol cr^oipTirai, the Prophets of the Old Testa- 
ment ; Rom. i. 5, wao-/ ro7i 'i^viffi^allthe nations of the v\'orld ; Luke xiii, 27, rravrii ol 
ipydrai, all the workers, namely of the class indicated by the genitive t?,; ahjtia;, 
Avhich follows. On the other hand, the article is omitted in Rom. v. 12, 'rdvra; 
av^^AiTov;, all inen, i. e. without exception or limitation ; and it is also remarkable 
that, in a great majority of cases, the word without the article is avB^wroi. 

Obs. 6. The position of the article is commonly between tu? and the substantive. 
There are, however, some few exceptions in the New Testament, in which ?rS; 

^ Middleton, ubi supra ; and in his notes to the several passages cited. Winer, 
§ 17. 10. Gersdorfs Beitrage, pp. 374. sqq. 

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


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

Obs. 7. The construction of okos is precisely similar to that of 9ra,-. A sub- 
stantive, being without reference, requires the article ; and vice versa. John vii. 23, 
okov avB^a';rov, an en/ire man. Rom. viii. 36, okriv rhv fifii^av, the whole day. 

3. It is seldom that s-Kocarof is used as an adjective in the 
New Testament. When so employed, it is always without the 
article ; as in Luke vi. 44, sKoca-rov ^sv^oov, John xix. 23^ I-hocgtoj 
(jTpariMTY]. Heb. iii. 13, >ca3"' kycdarriv rjfji.f.pxv.^ 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. 
IS.) that ^sTva 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, roiovroov rajv ttocI^cov, such children 
as those before them. In 2 Cor. xii. 2, 3, the reference is to 
av3-§6;97-ov as limited by the words Iv X/jto-ra). 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, qlvtos, &c. the New 
Testament usage is similar to that of the classical Greek. 
Thus aXKos is simply another ; h aXkos, the other, the remaining 
one of two ; ol aXXot, the others, the rest. Compare Matt. iv. 21, 
V. 39, John xx. 25. 

Ohs. 8. In John xviii. 15, some MSS. omit the article, and Griesbach 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, 
uXXo; f/.aB^Tris 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 ol -roXXo) is used in a sense equi- 
valent to Tuvrti, so as to denote the bu/k 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, et alibi. It may mean also a definite multitude, as the many 
with whom ^the disciples were acquainted, in 2 Cor. ii. 17. In Heb. ix. 28, Bentley 

• Gersdorf, p. 447. 

* Wuier, who cites Orellius ad Isocr. Antid. p. 255, sqq. 
^ Middicton ud bcit>n. 


would supply the article before 'toXXuv ; but the conjecture is devoid at once of 
all authority, and as unnecessary to the sense of the passage as in Matt. xx. 28, 
xxvi. 28, Mark x. 45, Heb. ii. lO.i 

Obs. 10. With respect to alros it is sufficient to remark, that, whenever in the 
New Testament it is joined to a substantive in the sense of ipse, the article is 
always inserted. Thus John xvi. 27, airoi o -raryi^. Rom. viii. 2C, uLro to rtnvfjLo,. 
1 Thess. xiv. 16, alroi o Kv^iot, The exception in Luke xxii. 42, is a proper name. 
In other writers, where the emphasis is not so distinctl}' marked, it is frequently 

§ Se>,—Ofthe Neuter Adjective. (Buttm. § 128.) 

Adjectives and participles are used in the neuter, singular 
or plural, with the article,, to express a colleclive whole, which 
might equally be expressed by the masculine or a substantive. 
Thus 1 Cor. i. 27, ra. i/^oopoc, ra adS'ev^, ra. lay^v^tx, ra, oiyz^r, rov 
k6(ti/.ov, the foolish, the weak, SiC, portion of the world ; to whom 
the Apostle opposes rot/r cofpovs. 2 Thess. ii. 6, to Kocriy^pv, 
the restraining power, which is generally supposed to indicate the 
Roman Empire. Heb. vii. 7, to eXaTTov vttq rov xpsirrovo^ svXo- 
ysiraci, i. e. inferiors are blessed by their superiors, (Thucyd. iii. 
11, Tic xpccriaroc ettI rous v7ro^£B(yr£pouf ^uvsTTToyoy.) 1 John v. 4, Troiv 
TO ygyevvajptevov ek tov 0£oy vix^ tov x.6(JiJi.ov. 

Obs. 1. Thus also the article is a frequent annexation to adjectives of the neuter 
gender, when used to indicate an attribute or quality in its general and abstract 
idea.* Examples are Luke vi. 45, ro uyei^ov, to ^ovn^ov. Rom, i. 19, to yvusTov. 
ii. 4, TO ;^^>jdrTav. In the plural to. uoouto.. 

Obs. 2. Instead of agreeing with its substantive, a neuter adjective with an 
article is frequently followed by a substantive in the genitive, to which it seems 
to bear the relation of a part to its whole. Thus 2 Cor.iv. 17, to Ixaip^ov rti; Sx^Vsa;?, 
i. e. \Xu,(p^a, Bxl-^ii. Phil. iii. 8, to ycrs^s^ov t7i$ yvuffiui, i. e. vvioi^ovo'av yvutriv. Heb. 
vi. 1 7, TO afjctToi^iTov T)is (iovXiis avTov, i. e. a.f4,iTa,^tTov /3flf X'/^v. It is less frequent that the 
genitive singular of a masculine or feminine substantive is preceded by an adjective 
in the neuter plural ; but there is an example in 2 Cor. iv. 2, to. x^vtto, TY,i 

Obs. 3. In the same way the neuter plural of uItos is followed by a genitive in 
1 Pet. V. 9, Tct uvraTuv TaByifiuTuv, for Tci ^a^rftuTcx. 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: Matt. v. 33, Z,y,Ts7Ti tt^utov ty.v (ouffiXtUv tov QioZ. xxi. 29, 

^ Middleton ad locum. 

^ Winer, 6 17. 11. See Krtlger ad Dion. Kal. p. 454. B irnemann ad Xen. 
Anab. p. 61. Poppo's Index to Xen. Cyrop. in v., and compare Xen. Cyr. i. 4. 7. v 
2, 29. Diog. Laert. iv. 7. 6. 

3 Winer, § 27. 4, and 34. Obs. 3. Alt, § 32. 1. Poppo ad Thucyd. p. 104. 
Seidler ad Eur. Troad. p. 61. 

* Middleton classes this use of the article among the insertions in reference ; but 
it seems clearly to belong to the hypothetical division. 

'" Winer, §34. 1. Alt, § 32. 1. 


vffnpo* fitru/xtXfiBsli. Mark v. 43, ^tifruXecro alroli toXXd.. xli. 27, vfjA7i euv <roXu 
-rXavxa-^t. Luke vii. 42, t/; otiv avrui tX%7ov uutov aywr'^a-ti. John X. 40, oTou nv 'l«i^ 
etvvni TO TPuTov Isec^Ti^uv. 

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

(BUTTM. § 129.) 

1. From the general rule 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, ct 
alibi), there are frequent exceptions in the New Testament. 
Thus Matt. xii. 21, ^'bvri sXTriovcri. Mark v. 13, ra 7rvBu/ji(x.ra. eIj- 
75X3'ov. John X. 8, riicov(7a,v roc TTpo^acra,. James ii. 19, ra. ^atpco- 
via 'TTiarevovai ytou (ppiaaovai,. Nor are the exceptions confined to 
nouns which represent things which have life. Luke xxiv. 11, 
e(pava:!Tav rx pinfxocTQC. 1 Tim. V. 25, ra xaXa s^yoc TT^c^ajXa £(rri' 
xoci ra. aXKoJs 'syj^vroc. Kpu^r,vca ov ^vvoLvrai. Rev. xvi. 20, o^yj ovy^^ 


Obs. 1. Sometimes both constructions are united with the same noun. Thus 
Luke iv. 41, i^n^x^ro 'hai/ji.oyitx, x. <r. X., on rihtirizv. John X. 27, rcc T^o(locra axo'jn, xcci 
axoXouBodtrt. 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, TTxTTip aou y.a,yc>j o'^uvcufjisvoi i^ooroy/u^Ev era. viii. 19, TTu^'sys- 
vovTo Trpof auroy ^ (jt.'nrYiq kocI ol a^£X(pc) ajJroy. Acts XV. 35, Ylav- 
Xos- xal Bxpyxi3af ^isTpi^ov ev 'Avriox^la. 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, syv^ ^Icoariip xat ^ fxvirY.p 
aurou. 1 Cor. xiii. 13, v^vt^ ^£ fxsvsi Trians, kXmSf x. t. X. 2 Pet. 
iii. 10, )ixi yri ycai ra sv aurr] E^yx ycQ(,rxy.xri<ycrxi. 

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. Malt. xii. 3, Luke vi. 3, i-yruvairiv bcvto; xu) ol ^it' alroZ oWtj. 
John iv. 12, »ou ahros iTti, xu) ol vlo) avroZ xcci tu, ^oifjt,fji.ocras, ccurov. 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, \v o7j a-u^'Ko-ri <rv xa) -rai o oixo; ffou. Although a like construction 
is employed in 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., 
sSysv aitTOi ri xa) ol )(^ooivrai. 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, ccxox^i^i); Ss o Uir^os xou ol d-roffroXoi u'ttov, 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 nv is there the contracted form of ^a-av.* 

^ Winer, § 47. 3. Alt, § 74. 5. . 
* Winer, § 47. 2. Alt, § 74. 4, 5. 


f Ohs. 3. With respect to substantives united by j5, the verb usually follows in the 
same number ; as in Matt. xii. 25, trS<ra ?t«X/; >} oIk'iu, ov ffra^wirat. Compare Matt, 
xviii. 8, 1 Cor. vii. 15, xiv. 24, 1 Tim. v. 16. The rule, indeed, that the verb 
should be in the plural, if what is said applies to all the substantives alike, does not 
seem to have been very strictly observed even by the best writers. An example in 
point will, however, be found in James ii. 15, lav a,liX(pos n dhkcph yvf/.vo'i vtu^x'""''' 

3. Nouns of multitude with the verb in the plural occur in 
Matt. iii. 5, Trciaac % ^lou^ccia, xacl ^a<Ta vi 'n'£pi%(*J^os i/3a9rrt^ovTo 
X. r. X. xxi. 8, 'nX^Haros o/,Xo5- Earpcoaav ra Ifjudria. So Mark iii. 
7, Luke ix. 12, John vii. 49, Rev. xviii. 4. For hke examples 
in the LXX, see 1 Sam. ii. 33, xii. 18, ]9, 1 Kings iii. 2, Judg. 
ii. 10, 3 Esdr. v. 59. 

Obs. 4. When there are two or more verbs, it not unfrequently happens that one 
is in the singular, and the others in the plural. Mark v. 24, y,>ioXovBii uvtm ox^og 
vroXvi, xou ffvvi^Xi(iov kut'ov. So ix. 15, John vi. 2, 1 Cor. xvi. 15. Add 1 Tim. ii. 15, 
ffco^riffirai {h yvvri) ^/a rris nxvoyovlcis, \a.v f^uveotrtv iv TiffTH x. t, X, In this last ex- 
ample, which has been otherwise incorrectly explained, the change of number indi- 
cates that '/) yvv'/i has assumed a collective sense.^ 

Obs. 5. The same idiom is constantly employed with 'ixair-ro;. John xvi. 32, ffxo^- 
^iff^flTi 'ixaffro;. Acts ii. 6, i^xovov it? ixucTTo;. xi. 29, ugitrav 'ixaffrog. Rev. V. 8, SvTE- 
ffov 'i^ovTii 'ixatrroi xi^d^as- In like manner the Hebrew ^^^^J often takes a plural 

Obs. 6. Of the use of the singular in a collective ox generic sense, instead of the 
plural, the sacred writers furnish some instances in Gentile and other nouns and 
adjectives, which have a similar import ; as in Gal. iii. 28, ohx hi 'loulalos, olli "EX- 
X>7V ovx ivi BawXflj, ovTi ikiv^i^os' olx ivi ci^ffiv xcci S>jXy. Col. iii. 11, "EXXjjv xol\ 'Isy- 
^cuoi, •TTi^irofjt.ri xoCi d.x^o(iva'rici, (hd^fla^o;, 'Sx-j^r,;, ^ovkos, IXsySs^aj. Such comprehensive 
expressions as o roc^uirffuv (Gal. v. 10), o ytxaio;, o dffif^vi; xcc) K.fji,a^ruXos (1 Pet. iv. 
18), and the like, have been referred to this headj^ but they depend rather upon 
the hypothetic or inclusive sense of the article (§ 28. 1). 

Obs. 7. It not unfrequently happens that a substantive in the singular is joined 
with another in the plural, where both must equally be understood in the same 
number. Thus Luke xxiv. 5, xXivoZffuv (^yuvaixuv) ro tt^oo-utov us t^v yTJv. 1 Cor. vi. 
19, TO ffu/xci v/jjuv. Rev. vi. 11, ilo^y) avTo7s ffroXvi Xiuxri. So also in Jerem. xvi. 21, 
LXX, Ix ;^ti^os ^ov'/ioav, 1 Mace. i. 44, xaxol tyiv ^j/v^riv. Polyb. iii. 49. 12, tovs 
^Xiiffrovs itr^tJTi xa) ^r^o? Tovrotg v'^'oViffH xofffjtriffoi.s. 

4. The use of the plural ri^sis for syou, by means of which a 
writer associates himself, as it were, with those whom he ad- 
dresses, is very common in St. Paul's Epistles. See Rom. ii. 8, 
2 Cor. X. 12, Gal. ii. 4, Tit. iii. 3, et scepius. So in many cases 
where the singular is absolutely intended, as in John iii. 11, o 
oioaposVj XaXoD/xev, kcu o lo'^aKapcsv, fJiaprv^' kocI ttjv (Aocprupiocv 

^ See Hammond, Macknight, Schott and Stolz in loco. 

•^ Winer, § 47. 1. a. Alt, § 47. 1. See also Kriiger ad Dion. Hal. p. 231 Ja« 
cobs ad Achil. Tat. pp. 446, 622. VVesseling ad Diud, Sic. p. 1U5. 
^ Winer, § 27. 2. Alt, § 21. 



^ptcDv oJ \aiM^xv£T£. Compare 2 Cor. i. 8, sqq., 1 John i. 
1, sqq/ 

Obs. 8. The use of nouns ia the phiral instead of the sinj^ular, when a writer 
would express in general terms what is more immediately referable to a single indi- 
vidual, is very common in most languages; and a due attention to this idiom will 
serve to reconcile many apparent discrepancies in the New Testament. Compare, 
for instance, Matt. viii. 28 with Mark v. 1, Luke viii. 26; Matt. xiv. 17, Mark vi. 
38 with John vi. 8, 9; Matt. xv. 15 with Mark vii. 17; Matt. xxiv. 1 with Mark 
xiii. 1 ; Matt. xxvi. 8 with John xii. 4 ; Matt, xxvii. 44 with Luke xxiii. 39 ; Matt, 
xxvii. 48, Mark xv. 36, with John xix. 29 ; 1 John v. 9 with John v. 34, 36.2 xhe 
same idiom occurs in Matt. ii. 20, Ti^vnxocift ya.^ ol ^^rovvm k. t. X., where Herod 
only is meant; though there may be a reference to Exod. iv. 19, where the plural is 
properly employed. See also Matt. ix. 8, xxiv. 26, Mark i. 2, John vi. 45, Acts 
xiii. 40, et alibi. 

Obs. 9. Some writers ^ have imagined that the plural sometimes indicates a high 
degree of excellence, after the manner of the Hebrew. The examples quoted in il- 
lustration are John ix. 3, 2 Cor. xii. 1, 7, Heb. vii. 6, ix. 23, James ii. 1. In all 
these passages, however, with the exception perhaps of Heb. ix. 23, there is no 
reason to suppose that the writers intended to express themselves otherwise than in 
a general way ; nor does it appear that the Hebrew usage in question is ever em- 
ployed without a reference to the name of God.* 

5. An adjective often stands as ?i. predicate in the neut. sing. 
when the subject is masc. or fem., or in the flural. So, in 
Latin, Cic. Off. i. 4, Commune omnium animantium conjunctio- 
nis appetitus. See also Virg. ^n. iv. 569, Ov. Amor. i. 9. 4, 
Stat. Theb. ii. 399.5 

Obs. 10. In like manner, ovhh and fji.nhh are used with subjects of all genders ; as 
in John viii. 54, iav lyu to^d,Z,u if^ctvrh, h Vo^a. (jt-ov ovhiv i<rrtv. 1 Cor. vii. 19, ^ Ti^i- 
rofjun ovh'iv iiTTt, Ka) h a,KPo('>vff7ioe, ovViv Iffriv. aXXa T'/j^riffn \vroXuv Siou. xiii. 2, lav ciyoi- 
Tv^v (An 'iy^oj) ovhiv il/xt. So also t/, as in Gal. iii. 19, ri ovv o vofios ; of what use then 
is the law ? vi. 3, u yap 'hoKii ris tivut rt, f/,yiTiv uv, Iccwrov (poiyaTarcc. Plato has the 
same form in Apol. Socr. in fine : idv ^oxairi t< ilvai, f/.yiHv ovn;, k. r. X. The mascu- 
line is also used in the same import ; as in Acts v. 36, xiyuv iiveci nva, lauTov, where, 
however, several manuscripts and editions add /niyav, as in Acts viii. 9. But the 
received text is parallel with Epictet. Ench. 18, xciv Vo'^ni rta-t stvai rU^a.-rKml fftaurZ.^ 

Obs. 11. When the demonstrative pronoun is the subject, it usually takes the 
gender of the predicate; as in 1 John v. 3, avrn ya^ ia-rtv h dyoczfi rov &iou. See 
also vv. 4, 9, 14. Sometimes, however, it is in the neuter ; as in 1 Pet. ii. 19, rovro 
yu^ X^^ii, Also in the plural ; as in 1 Cor. vi. 11, ravrol Tins ^rs, for roiouTot."' 

' For a similar usage in Latin, see Zumpt's Lat. Gr. § 694. 

* In these parallel passages, the prominent part, which is attributed by one 
Evangelist to the individual who acted it, is by another divided among all the 
parties concerned therein. 

^ Glass. Phil. Sac. T. 1. p. 59. Haab's Heb. Gr. Gram. § 49. 

*■ Winer, «ii supra: Gesenii Lehrgeb. § 171. 1. 

^ Winer, § 47. 1. Alt, 6 32. 2 and 74. 2. Ast ad Plat. Polit. p. 413. Wetstein, 
Kypke, and Palairet on Matt. vi. 34. Zumpt's Lat. Gr. § 368. 

" Wetstein and Kypke on Acts v. 36, and Gal. ii. 6. 

7 Alt, Gr. Gr. N. T. § 42, 3. 



Ohs. 12. Precisely similar is the use of tu 'Tta.^Ta, in the plural in 1 Cor. xv. 28, 

i'va 'AO @io; ra ^dvra'lv <^a,(nv. Col. iii. 11, ccXkoi, ru, •TTuvroc, x.a) Iv <Tafft X^iffrog. So 
Lucian de DHs Si/riis, T. ii. p. 892, ««} ol <7r»vra. Ko/u,fidfics h, Combubiis was all things 
to him. 

6. Personal pronouns are more frequently made the subjects 
of verbs in the New Testament than in the Greek writers gene- 
rall}^ For instance, in Mark xiii. 9, /SXeVsts Vs CfjuTs locurovs. 
Rom. viii. 1, o(psiXofX£v Is ■hy^s'is o\ ^vva,ro\ x. r. X. Eph. v. 32, to 
IxvGT-npioy TovTo i^syx EQ-rlv' syoj ^e "ksyoj x. r. 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, s^TSjS'e ov)i vixzTs tbXeioi, axrirsp o narrip vixouv riXzios lari. 
Mark vi. 37, '^or& ocvrois vtxzis (pacysTy. So Luke xvii. 8, John vii. 
36. See also Mark xiii. 23, Luke xxiii. 40, John i. 31, 1 John 
iv. 19. 

Obs. 13. There are a few instances wliere, lu the same sentence, the pronoun is 
omitted with one verb, and inserted with another ; as in Luke x. 23, fcxKcc^ioi ol 6<p- 
^aXf^oi ol fskiTTovTis & (iXiTBTi' Xiycjo y&io vf/Jiv, ort 'TtoX'ko) •7t^o(pn'ra.i zoCi (iatriXsTs yiB^iXna-av 
idiTv a. vfiSis /sXsVsrs, xal ohx. u^ov ku.) htoutxat a. ocKoviri, zee) ouk nzovov. In this instance 
the pronoun bears a distinctive emphasis in the second clause, which is not so dis- 
cernible in 2 Cor. xi. 29, rU aer^evu, xa) ohx, air^iVM ; t/; erxav^aXl^irai, xcct ohx lyu 

Obs. 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 ofKcial 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 the Son of Man; 
as in Matt. x. 23, a^^v ya^ Xiycu vfuv, oh fjt,yi TiXiffj^ri roL; r^okits tou 'la-^uriX, 'iu; av s?^Bri 
vie; rou avB^&i'Tov. See also Luke ix. 26, xii. 8. Other examples are Mark ix. 41, 
h 7M ovof^ari fjeov, on Xpia-rov iffri. John vi. 40, "vu, Waj o Bieo^Zv rov vlcv, xal TitrrBuaiv 
il; ahrevy f'x'/j X,^'),v a.]uvtov, xcc) lyu x. r. X. An intensity of expression, such as these 
passages seem to indicate, is not however always observable under similar circum- 
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, 1 Cor. 
i. 21, 2 Cor. iii. 7, Eph. iv. 16. A demonstrative pronoun accompanies the re- 
peated noun in Matt. iii. 24, icev (LeenXiloc, \(f lecvr/iv ju,ioiffB^, oh Ivvarat o'rccBnvoei 'h 
(luffiXiia ixilvn. 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, us ovv 'iyvu o 
xv^tof on 'Axovcrav ol ^a,^iffouot, ort 'itja-ovg ^rXiioiocs /u,aB-'/iTai TTonl xoCi fia.Trt^ii vi 'ludwi^s, 
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 is not without example in the best Greek 
writers. See Thucyd. vi. 105. Xen. Ephes. ii. 13. ^sch. Prom. 312. Plat. 
Euthyphr. p. 31. Ed. Stalb. Altogether different are the passages in which there 
is an opposition or distinction ; as in Mark ii. 27, ro o-afifiarov lio. rov avB^eo-zov lyinro, 
ohx ocvB-^co'To; ^tx ro a-a.fi0eirov. Rom. V. 12, d/' hof ocvB^uttou h a/^a^r/a ils rov xoa-/u.ov 
ila-nXSi, xal ^lu rni ufJioe^rtai o Bdveiroi,^ 

» Winer, § 22. 2. ;Alt, § 35, 7. Raphel. ad John x. 41. 



7. The nomin. is sometimes to be derived from a verb, which 
indicates a definite act or occvpation ; as in 1 Cor. xv. 52, craX- 
man yao, sell. cacXmy^ or <j(zX7ny)crrif' In citations also, the sub- 
ject nomin., being well known, is constantly omitted; as in 
2 Cor. vi. 2, xiysi yoi^, scil. h 0£of. Gal. iii. 16, ov Xiysi, sciL 'h 
ypa(pr}, Heb, vii. 17, fJLaprupsHya.^, scil. to tcv^vixol. viii. 5, "O/ja 
7a§, (p-yjo-t, 6c//. 6 0£Of. Compare 1 Tim. v. 18. The 3rd pers. 
phir. is also frequently used without a nominative, where h'^poj- 
Ttoi may be supplied. For examples see Matt. i. 22, v. 11, vii. 
16, Mark x. 13, Luke vi. 38, xii. 20, 48, xvi. 4, 9, John xv. 6, 
XX. 2, Eev. xi. 9. So in Latin, Catull. 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 he called, 
for men shall call ; and so on. 

Obs. 15. The frequent use of tea) iyUiro at the bej^inuing of a sentence is imper- 
sonal, hut derived from the Hebrew. Other verbs are also sometimes used imper- 
sonally ; as in Matt. vii. 7, alnlTi, xa) 'ho^Y.cnTui vfjuv' x.^oviti, xa) avoiy^ffirai v(mv. 

Obs. 16. In 1 John v. 16 the nominative to ^uffu is Qioi, to be supplied from thj 
context;^ and in Acts ii. 4, ^/a tZv yX&xrfuv must be understood before Ixa^nri. 

Obi. 17. In general and indefinite expressions the verb is often found without a 
nomin., where n; may be supplied. Thus in John vii. 51, ^>j o vcf^os fifiuJv x^ivu rov 
elvB^uTov, lav juri aKovff'/i 'TTa^ a.hrav ^oon^ov k, t. X. unless One hears, &c. ; viii. 44, 
oTccv A.aX55 TO ^piv^os, If any of you speaks falsely ; 2 Cor. x. 10, a\ f/Xv WicrroXa), (P'/iff), 
(oa^iTcct Iff^vpa), says some one / Heb. X. 38, lav vTroffTuX-'^ra.t, scil. <rt;. 

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, (MaKoc 
^ia, ri 7ri(Tr£V(Ta,a-a, scil. iari. Heb. v. 13^ TTois o /xsr£p^a;v yccXocy.TOi- 

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, fiay.a^tos avh^, 
u> ov /ji-'/j XoyiZ,vira.i Kv^tos afiapriuv. James i. 12, f^coixa^io; av>j^, o; v-ro/u,ivti 'rn^afffjt.ov. 
Compare Matt. v. 3, 6,sqq., Kom.xiv. 22. Also with the interrogative pronoun 
rU- Mark v. 9, t'i got ovofza; Luke iv. 36, rU o Xoyo; oZ-res. 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 
T« yiyoviv on in John xiv. 2. Likwise ia-ri fails Avith a verbal j as in Mark ii. 22, 
Luke v. 33, oTvcv vsov t/'j atrxovs Xdivoh; jltkyiriov, 

Obs. 19. Where a substantive, or its equivalent, is the predicate, the same usage 
prevails. Thus Rom. x. 4, riko; vofiov {Icrn) X^io-tos. 2 Cor. iii. 11, il ya^ ro xara^ 
yovfiivov (J.v) lia, lo^nf, rroXXu ficiXXov to fAivev (la-T<) \v ^c^j?. See also Rom. xi. 11, 12, 
15, 16, Eph. iv. 4. 

1 Winer, ^ 49. Alt, § 48. 3. Wolf ad Demosth. Leptin. p. 288. Wyttenbach 
ad Plutarch. Mor. T. ii.p. 105. 



Obs. 20. The first and second persons are never omitted, except where the pro- 
nouns iyM or (Til render mistake impossible ; as in John xiv.'ll, iyu h tm -rccr^), xa) o 
^ocrri^ iv ifjt,oi. Heb. V. 6, ffv It^ihs iis tcv aiavcc. Compare Mark xii. 26, and see above, 
§ 28. Obs. 7. There is, however, a remarkable exception in the case of the second 
person in Rev. xv. 4, ort f/.ovog oa-io;, sci/. li trv. (compare Plat. Gorg. p. 487, D. Very- 
rare also are omissions of the third person plural. Winer's example from Heb. 
V. 12 is not in point ; for after a neuter plural the verb would have been in the sin- 
gular. In Luke ix. 28, riirav is understood with the words ufftl 'hfjcioat oktu, which 
form a parenthesis : for they can scarcely be construed with lyiviro. See below § 
69. II. 3. Obs. 2. More frequently, but still rarely, the imperative is wanting. Thus 
Rom. xii. 9, h a.ya.'vn ctvuTox^irsg, sell. 'iaru. The ellipsis is repeated through several 
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, /x^ £v 

TTi lo§T7], scil. TouTo 'yz^kd^oo. Acts ix. 6, ^£ K^§tOf iifos avTov, 

sail. eJttev, as in the preceding verse. Eom. ix. IG, apx ovv ou 
rov hiXovrof x. r. X. (roDro scrri.) 2 Cor. i. 6, £iT£ S"X{/3o/X£3"a, vTrzp 
rra inx,uy cajTYtpluS (^Xt/SopcsS'a). Eph. V. 24, oogtie^ rt sxxKna-lx 
virordaa^rcti rco X^tcrTo;, qutm ocl yv^xiyiss roTs ocv^paGiv (y'Jiorcx.aaia- 
3"a/(Tav). 2 Tim. i. 5, rins IvJiKr.cnv \v rr} fxctix^'/^ aou, '^sTTBiafJUOii ^b, 
on Kocl h (Tol (IvoiKBi). To these may be added Matt, xxiii. 25, 
xxvi. 5, Mark xiv. 29, Luke vii. 43, John ix. 3, xv. 4, Rom. 
ix. 32, xiv. 23, 1 Cor. xL 1, 2 Cor. ii. 10, v. 13, vii. 12, 1 John 
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, (puvyj 
Tcckiv Ik 'hivr'i^au 'T^og avrov (Xsysi). Rom. iv. 9, o /xctxa^tfff^os Iti rhv Ti^iTo/u,riv n It) 
rhv ax^olivffrtav (j^r't-rTii); I Cor. vi. 13, rx. (^^', rZ, xotX'ta, xa) « xoiXioc ro7s P>^ufji,a.iTiv 
{-r^offnxu). In the first case, however, ihe ellipsis may be supplied by iyiviro, and in the 
two latter by so-t/. Some would repeat yi\,uffKoi/.iv before the second on in 1 John iii. 
20. This particle, however, is in like manner doubled in Eph. ii. 11, 12; where it 
equally encumbers the sense : so that in both places its insertion is probably owing 
to the inattention of the writer, or the interpolation of a copyist. There is also a 
similar exuberance of the Latin ui in Cic. Epist. Att. v. 3, Tantum te oro, ut, quu- 
niam meipsum semper amasti, ut eoclem amcre sis. The repetition of yivM(rxo/ziv, in 
the passage under consideration, would be fully as superfluous as the particle itself. 

10. Instead of the nomln., the prep, alf with an accus. is oc- 
casionally used for the predicate in the New Testament, after 
efvai or y/v£(T3-a<, 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, £aovrai o\ ^m BIS ad^xoc (xixv, i. e., 

* Winer in Append. § 66, 1, 2. 


(Ta§^ fjifx (from Gen. ii. 24). Matt. xxi. 42, oi/ros lyevo^S-r) elr 
xc(pxXriv yuy'ias (from Ps. cxviii. 22). So also with Xoy/^grrS-ai in 
Rom. iv. 3, 22, iXoyla-hn ocvtu &\s ^lycacioa-vyYiy (from Gen. XV. 6). 
Compare Rom. ix. 8, 1 Cor. xv. 45, Heb. viii. 10, 1 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, 
Jerem. xxxi. 33, 1 Mace. i. 4, 33, 35. 

Obs. 22. Although the above may be Hebraisms properly so called, this mode of 
explanation must be carefully confined within its proper limits. There are many 
passages in which the phrase iivai, or y'lncrBaiy us n is strictly Greek, either in the 
sense of io become something, i, e., to undergo a change, or to serve some purpose. As 
an instance of the former ssiise, in Acts v. 36, yivi<r^oc.t us ollh is to become a nul' 
Hfy, to fail; and there is a precisely similar phrase, ih ro (/.nTiv ^kuv, in Eur. Hec. 
622. Other examples are John xvi. 20, Rev. viii. 11, The latter sense is found 
in Rom. i. 15, tvvaf/.ts Qsov Iffrh bis ffurn^'tuv. So also 1 Cor. iv. 3, et alibi ; and, in 
like manner, ^Esop. Fab. xxlv. 2, us [jbiiZ,cva troi a(piXuav 'io-o/juKi. In the same way 
Luke ii. 34, oSros xiifrai us -Trrxirtv kou avdffrtzffiv, is to be explained ; and the verb 
7.oy'iZ,i<T^ce,i x^ SO constructed in Xen. Cyr. iii. 1. 33, x^^wara us a^yv^iov Xoyi(T^ivra} 
In the later writers, indeed, and the Scholiasts particularly, Xa^/3avs<> and lixiffBou 
are constructed with its and an accusative ; and the later Roman authors adopted a 
similar phraseology. Thus Tacit. Ann. vi. 13, Silentium ipsius in superbiam acci- 
piebaiur.^ The construction of esse with a dative, in such forms as auxilio 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^iir^cn is followed by 
eis with a nominative in Rom. viii. 36, ikoyia-^y.fiiv &>s T^ofiarce, ff(pcx.yns. 

Obs. 23. Another construction which has been supposed to supply the place of 
the predicate after sTva/ or ylyviff^xi, is that of the preposition Iv with a dative, to 
which the sense of the Hebrew ^ {Beth essentia-) has been attributed.^ The pas- 
sages adduced in support of this opinion are Mark v. 2h,yvvri ns oZ<ra. h pvffu a"ifjt,uTos. 
John ix. 30, Iv tovtm Bav/jjaa-rov iffri. Eph. V. 9, o xa^Tos rou faJros iv -rdff'/t dya^w 
ffvvTi{iffri). 1 Tim. ii. 14, yvvri dTccTn^uffcx, iv -pra^afidtru yiyovi. Rev. i. 10, iyiyo/:z,riV iv 
Tvtvf/.ari. Now, with the exception of Iv tovtm, which may be rendered simply .herein, 
or in this respect, all these examples obviously implj'^ the being in a certain state or 
condition; and to say that Iv Ta^afidtni, for instance, is equivalent to Ta^ufsatris, is 
manifestly absurd. In proof that a construction, analogous to that of the ^ essen- 
tice, exists in Greek or Latin writers, the expressions Iv ffo<po7s uvxi 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 ca-^e, Iv ffo(pSi would have been used as equi- 
valent to ffo(pos. 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, 
v. 37, TO -xi^iffffov ix rou TovYi^oZ IcTTiv. It is not here meant to say that ro -ri^Kra-ov is 
evil in the abstract, but that it springs from an evil principle, or the Evil One.* 

» Winer, ^ 29. 2. Obs. 1. Gesen. Lex. Heb. in v. l^rT- 

« Alt, Gram. N. T. § 25. Note 5. 

^ Gesen. Lehrb. § 228. Glass. Phil. Sacr. T. i. p. 31. Schleubuer, Lex. iu v. Iv. 
Haab's Heb.-Gr. Gram. N. T. p. 337. 
♦ Winer, § 47. 3. Obs. 


§ 38.-— Of the Vocative. 

In the New Testament the Vocative is used in simple ad- 
dresses (Matt. XV. 28, Mark xv. 18, Acts xi. 7, xxi. 20, xxiii. 
11, XXV. 26) ; in interrogatiojis (Rom. ix. 20, James ii. 20) ; 
and in exclamations (Matt. xvii. 17, Luke xxiv. 25, Eom. xi. 

33) : and sometimes loith^ sometimes without u. 

Obs. 1. Frequently the nomin. is used for the vocat., as in Mark ix. 25, to <rvivfjt.a 
roakocXov, \yu ffoi I'^iroiffffu. Luke viii. 54, v\ <ra.7:, iyti^ov. So Mark v. 41, Eph. vi. 1. 
Nor does this happen only in the authoritative address of superiors to inferiors ; but 
also in prayers and exclamations. Thus Matt. xi. 26, va), o crecr'/i^, on olrus lyivtro 
iltoKtoc 'ifjcT^off^iv ffov. xxvii. 29, xcti^i, (iaa-tXivg. See also Mark x. 47, xv. 34, Luke 
xii. 20, xviii. 11, 13, Heb. i. 8, and compare Ps. xviii. 29, xxii. 1, LXX. 

Obs. 2. With the vocaf. a characi eristic or explanatory apposition is often added 
in the nomin.; as in Matt. i. 20,'laffri<p, vtos AafU}. Mark xiv. 36, Rom, viii. 15, 
Gal. iv. 6, ^Afifia, 'xarYi^. Rom. ii. 1, u av^^wcrj iraj o K^ivcjv. Rev. xv. 3, xvi, 7, 
Kv^n, Qio's.^ 

§ ^d.—Ohject—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, (yu ^s vri'jrcucov ocXsi^l/CJcl gov rinv x£(pac'KY)^/, xal to Trpo- 

ffCOTTOV (TOU Vl-^aci. Xix. 20, TrdvTX TdCVroC £(pL/X«^a/X'/5V £K VEOTYjTOS ixou. 

Mark X. 16, ytocl'kiGa.^zvos ccvra., t.'3"£{$- Tar y/ipx^ lir^ olvtoc, 
riv\oyzi ocvri. Luke X. 35, hyoj sv to) iTravi^y^&G'bcLl /xs airo^coTCAj aoi. 
John ii. 24, ouyc s'^Igtsvev sayrov auroTf, ^lac to uuToy/ yivo^crxciv TTccvra.^. 
Compare Gen. xvi. 3, xxi. 3, John xxiii. 2, xxiv. 1, Nehem. 
ix, 34, 1 Mace. i. 6. 

Obs. 1. On the other hand, the pronoun is sometimes, though rarel}^, omitted, 
where its insertion might have been expected ; as in Mark vi. 5, oXiyoi; appua-Tois 
icrth); ra? xi7pocs, Ih^a-Trivo'i, scil. avTovi. Eph. v. 11, ^^ avyxoivuiviiri Toli spyois tov 
ffKorovi, fjt,oiXXov Ti Kcit iXiyx,iTi, scil. alra. 1 Tim. i. 12, ^lerrov [M hynffaTo, ^if/.ivos 
(sc. tfjcX) us ^ictxovixv. vi. 2, ol Ss ^ta-rov; 'ixovTis her'TOTCce, f^h }ia.ra<poovil7coffav, scil. 
avrovs. Add Matt, xxvii. 2, Luke xii. 36, John xx. 22, Acts xiii. 3, 42, 2 Thess, iii. 
15, 2 Tim. ii. 1 1. In Matt. xxi. 7, the true reading is Itikk^ktiv, and consequently 
it has been improperly placed under this head; and in 1 Cor. x. 9, icrs/Wo-av does 
not refer to rov X^ta-rov, but signifies, in an absolute sense, thet/ tried the divine pa- 
iience. There is an anomaly in Eph. iii. 18, where avrJ??, i. e., Tns a,ya-7rn; tou Qiov, 
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, (pi^ova-tv alirSJ (X^/o-rf) 
TVipXov^ »«/ 'ru^ocKccXova-iv avrov, "va ahroZ (rvtpXev) cl\Jyvrai. \ 

1 Winer, ^^ 29, 1. Alt, § 25. 1. Georg. Hierocr. i. 3. 12. 
2 Winer, § 22. 1, 4, 6. Alt, 6 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 ^Yhich 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 j^f'cposition ; 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 ivraj) one in a cloak, and to wrap a cloak about one ; 
but to hear a person, and to hear of a jjerson, 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. 1 . Among those verbs with which, though in other languages, as the Latin 
for instance, thsy are followed by other cases, the Greeks employ the accusalive, are, 

1. Tti'Buv, to persuade: Matt, xxxii. 20, BTiis-oiv roh; 'ix>-o^i) "''«■ oclrnin^rai rov 
Ba^afoliav, Acts xiii. 43, 'i-Xii^ov ochrovs i<riy.ivuv rn %a^/T/ roZ Qiou. xviii. 4, 
sVj/Ss re "lovtcclovs Ka)"F.\Xnvus, This verb is also construed with two accu- 
satives. See § 40. 6. Obs. 15. 

2. -TrKOKivilvy to exhort ; Acts xxvii. 22, ':ru,^atvu l^jMi il^v^ut. This verb takes 
a dative of the person in ^sch. Dial. ii. 13. Here too belongs, perhaps, 

3. (acitrKotiviiv, to bewitch, i, e., to seduce ; which has an accusative in Gal. iii. 1, 
ri; vf4,ais Ifiaffxccvs. It takes a dative in Philost. Epist. 13. 

4. v(hpi%nv, to insu/t, or ma/treat : Luke xii. 45, ^t^affKaXt, raZra, Xiyuv koc) yium; 
vfi^iZii;. Acts xiv. 5, vfi^/a-en kki \t^o^oXvi(rcx.t u-vrou;. Add Heb. X. 20, ro 'Xvivfjt.a 
rris X^oiro; \vv^p't<ras. This compound is followed in i^lian V. H. ix. 8, by a 
dative; and in Joseph. Ant. i. 4, by an accus. with us. The form vfioi(tiv tls 
rtva does not occur in the New Testament ; but there is, what is precisely 
similar, in Mark iii. 29, Luke xii. 10, (ixacr(pnfii7v u; ro ^rvivf^a to ayiov. Else- 
where this verb takes a simple accusative ; as in Matt, xxvii. 39, ifiXxiripr,f/.ouy 
auTov. So in Luke xxiii. 39, Acts xix. 37, Rev. xiii. 6, and elsewhere. Of 
Xoilo^tTv Tiva, and aviihil^tiv riva, see § 45. 4. Obs. 5. 

5. alixiTv, to act injuriously : Matt. xx. 13, iToit^t, eux nhtKu n. Actsvii. 26, 27, 


ivari ochiKuri uXX^Xovs ; o Ti a-lixuv rov TrXntriov k, r. X. Rcv. VI. 6, ro 'iXctiov xai 
rov otvov f/,h ahx-riffyis. See also § 40. 5. Obs. 9. 

6. &i<piki7v, to benefit : Heb. iv. 2, ovx u<piXmiv o x'oyos Tr,? a.x.or^$ 'muvovs. Of the 
construction with a dative, and with two accusatives, see §b 45. 5. Obs. 6. and 
ubi supra. 

7. (iXec'yrritv, to injure: Mark xvi. 18, ol /u,h avrovs /3Xa%/'£i.^ 

2. It frequently happens that the action expressed by a verb 
has no immediate reference to the object which is y)ut in the 
accusative^ and which is only so far affected thereby as the 
sense would be imperfect without it. The following instances 
occur in the New Testament : — 

1. irpoGycvviiV Tiva. Luke xxiv. 52^, '7rpo'yKv\ri<7a.\T^s avro^. 
Add John iv. 22, 24, Kev. 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 yowTrsrEiv rtva in Mark i. 40, x. 17. 
Some manuscripts, however, read avTcb in both places. 
On the same principle kvrpkTr^ahoih to reverence, which has 
a genitive in classical Greek, has an accusative in Matt, 
xxi. 37j £vr/?a5r^(JovTai rov vlov imov. See also Heb. xii. 9. 

2. (pS-a'vEtv, to anticipate ; as in 1 Thess. iv. 15, ou (/.'n <p^(i- 

3. "KoLv^dvziVj to escape notice ; as in Acts xxvi. 26, XavS-avstv 
yap avTov ri rovrcov ou Trsi^ ou^ev. 2 Pet. iii. 5, Xav- 
3"a'v£f yao avrous rovro S'sXcvrar. See also V. 8. 

4. ettiXeIttsiv, to fail ; as in Heb. xi. 32, iTTiXtZ-J/si ya§ /its 
^/TjyozypcEvov xp6\os. So Isocr. ad Demon. § 5, kTciXliroi 
V av rifxa^ o 'Tras xpows. Compare Jerem. xxxiii. 17, 

5. Verbs of seeing; as in Matt. ii. 2, si'^o/xev olvtov rov 
daripa, xviii. 10, o\ ayysXoi avraiv ^XaTTouai to tt^ocfco'^ov tou 
TTOirpos IJ.OV, Luke xxiii. 49, h^uaon ravToc. The emphatic 
accusative with eU or Trpos, which indicates peculiar at- 
tention, regard, or expectation, is found in John xiii. 22, 
s^XsTTov ovv elf aXXriXous ol fJia.'^Yirai, uTropovixzMOi Treqi rlvos 
Xeye/. Acts i. 10, aTEVi^oyTzs e\s rov ov^olvov. iii. 4, oiTEviaas 
his oLvrbv sTttc, BXe'\I/ov eh rifxaif. It may be mentioned that 
the verb drsvi^Eiv is also constructed with a dative in 
Luke iv. 20, ttocvtcov ol 6(p^aXiJ.ol %<5a.y drsvi^ovr^s QtuTco. We 
have in Lucian, I)e Merc. Cond. p. 455, irpos to Tr^oaoj' 

1 Winer, § 32. 1. 
^ Wetstein and K} pke ad Heb. xi. 32. 


wov drsvi<^£iv, which is similar in form, though it does not 
bear the proverbial import of the expression /SXeVeiv sis- 
'7rp6(jco7rov,m Matt. xxii. 16, Mark xii. 14. An accusative 
is also used after /oXs'tteiv, when it signifies menial visloi?, 
or consideration, as in 1 Cor. i. 26, /SXeVere rriv xX^<t*v 
vfjiuiv. Also in the sense, to be heedful , or cautious re- 
specting anything ; as in Mark xiii. 9, ^XiTrsrs ^e vfxa.^ 
laurovs. Phil. iii. 2, /SXettsts Toys' xzJvas-, ^"Ksttsts tovs 
XQcxous E^ydrocs, /SXsttsts ttJv xararoitxTjv. In the same sense 
(pt^XafffjecrS-ai takes an accusative in Acts xxi. 25, (puXccT- 
asa^oci oLVTous to ei^ooXo^utov. 2 Tim. iv. 15, ov xai <Tt' 
(pvKci'ja-ou. So in Xen. Mem. ii. 14, Diod. Sic. xx. 26, 
Lucian, Asin. 4. Both verbs are elsewhere followed by 
aTTo with a genitive. Thus in Mark viii. 15, o§aT£, /SXe- 

TTETS aTTO TT^S ^UfJifif TCOV ^xpi(70ClCiJV. xH. 38, /SXsTTeTS aTTO TO/V 

ypaiJ^ixccTEcov. Luke xii. 15, hpoirs xat (puXdaaBa'^s diro r^ns 
TiXzovi^ioiS. Compare Xen. Cyrop. ii. 3. 9. 

6. (psi/ysiv, and d7ro(psvyEiv, to flee from ; 1 Cor. vi. 18, 
(pet'yeTs t^v Tro^vs/av. 1 Tim. vi. 11, ravTX (peuye. 2 Tim. 
ii. 22, Tois vscur£pix.a.f sTri^vixiocs (psDyE. 2 Pet. ii. 20, 
aTToipfyovTEi- tc^ (jt^ida-fxacra toi) xoo-fxov. Also with a9ro and 
a genitive ; as in Matt. iii. 7, (pz^yeiV aVo ttJs- /ocsXXoi^^ttjs- 
opyrts. Markxvi. 8, %(^vyov (X7I0 rov fjLvinfXEiou. 1 Cor. x. 14, 
(psyycTs cfTTo Trys- el^ooXoXarpiix^. 2 Pet. i. 4, d7ro(pvy6vrES 
rr,s (p^opois (where the genitive depends upon the com- 
pound verb). 

7. After o/xvystv, the person or thing, which is sworn by, is 
put in the accusative in James v. 12, fxri o/xvi^ete, ^ctjts 


Isai. Ixv. 16, LXX, Isocr. ad Demon. § 12, Diod. Sic. 
i. 29, Joseph. Ant. v. 1. 1. Hence Acts xix. 13, hpai^co 
vfjLois TOV 'Itijouv. See § 40, 6. Obs, 15. The more com- 
mon form, however, is ofxyusiv h nvi, or sis- Tiva, as in 
Matt. V. 35, sqq., /tx-y) oixoaxi oXus' iJirirs iv rco ov^avcf, /j^rirs 
£v T7) yri, fJLTiTs els- ^IzpoaoXvy^oc, x. t. X. Add Matt, xxiii. 
16, sqq. xxvi. 74, Mark xiv. 7, llev. x. 6 ; and compare 
Jerem. v. 2, 7, Ps. Ixii. 10, LXX. Another form, oixvveiv 
xaTct Tivor, is found in Ileb. 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 are doubtless 
of Hebrew origin. 
8. With £^(Tc/3e7v there is an accusative of the person in 
Acts xvii. 23, ov oZv dyvoZ^JTSi euo-e/SsTtc, Toi^Tov lyu Kctroiy-- 
yeXKco vfjuv. Compare Xen. Hell. i. 7. 10. 

Obs. 2. OildtrtfitTv T/v« the New Testament does not furnish an example. In 
Zeph. iii. 11, LXX, it is followed by tU with an accusative ; and the same construc- 
tion is used with afJcuoTo.niv in Matt, xviii. 15, lav Vi ufjLKornffi^ tU <n o ahXipos <rev 
X. T. X. So also in Luke xv. 18, 21, xvii. 3, 4. Compare 1 Sam. xix. 4, Jerera. 
xxxvii. 17, LXX.i 

3. Many verbs which designate an affection or emotion of 
the mind, such as shame, fear, compassion,, take an accusative 
of the exciting cause of such emotion : as in Matt. ix. 27, 

IXeo^uov r,^.as, v\b Aoc^i^. xxi. 26, (po^ovfXB^ac tov ox^ov. 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 o-TXayxvi^t'rBai, which is not used by any profane writer, 
belongs to the same class ; but, instead of an accusative, it is followed by a genitive, 
by l^rJ with a dative or an accusative, and by 5ri^} with a genitive. Examples are 
Matt. ix. 36, l^rtrXayxv/o-S?? ^i^) auruv. xiv. 14, itr-rXay^vlff^yi I-tt' avrovi, xviii. 27, 
ff'XXa.YX^K'^^ti ^5 xv^ioe tov ^ovXav ixsivov, aviXvffiv ctln'ov. Mark vi. 34, iffTXay^vlff^y) 
W a,lro7s. Another form is found in Test. xii. Patr. p. 642. ff'T^.ttyx^linr^tn 
i"; riva. 

Obs. 4. Probably the combined notion of fear and flight may have given rise to 
the double construction of (poji-JffBi in Matt. x. 28, ^^ (pofhiUff^i octto tuv aTOKruvovruv 
TO o-aJfjucc' (po^yiBriTt Ti fz,ci\Xov tov ^vvd//.tvov k. t. X. So in Luke xii. 4. That with a^ro 
seems to be an Hebraism ; which is preserved by the LXX, in Levit. xxvi. 2, Jerem. 
i. 8, 17, X. 2. The Greeks said <polit7irBai Tm or vtto tivo;. We find, however, (polios 
a-ro rtvoi in Xen. Cyrop. iii. 3, 58, vi. 3. 27.^ 

Obs. 5. It happens sometimes, but rarely, in the Tew Testament, that neuter 
verbs are followed by an accusative of the exciting object; as in Luke vii. 9, 
l^uvfjiafftv ccuTov. John V. 28, /u,'/] ^avfioi^iTi tovto. Rom. xvi. 19, x'^'tfoj TO If' vyJiv. Gal. 
iv. 19, TiKnoi.fjt.ou, ots TciXiv uVivu. The constructions mentioned under § 47. Obs. 11 . are 
far more usual. In like manner the middle verb Ko-^rTio-^ai, to bewail, is followed by 
an accusative in Luke viii. 52, tKXuiov Bs •rdvTis, x,al ix.o<rTavro avTriv. See also Luke 
xxiii. 27. It is otherwise in Rev. i. 7, ko-^ovtoh W^ uItov -Traacci ai (fivXeu t?,; ytj;. xviii. 
9, xXocCffovTOCi avThv, xai xd-^^ovTat fT kvt'/i et fictffiXiT; t^; yr,;. Thus we Say in 
English, to lament or bewail a pej'son, and to lament over him. 

4. Many verbs, both transitive and intransitivCy take a noun 
of kindred meaning in the accusative, so that the verb seems to 

1 Winer, § 32,1. Alt,' § 30. Spanheira ad Arist. Plut. 129. Wetstein ad 
Acts xvii. 23. Schsefer ad Long. Past. p. 3)3. 

2 Wmer, § 32, 1. Alt, ^ 30. b. 


stand in the place of some general term, which requires the 
object to be particularised. Thus Matt. ii. 10, 
%aph ixzyikriM, they experienced great joy ; xxvi. 10, eoyov xaXov 
s\pya<7(x,vT0y ihey ha\)e performed a good work; Mark iii. 28, 
|SXa<T^oo/u</a<, onxs ocv ^XxiT<pnfjt.Yia-cu(nv, the blasphemies, ichich they 
utter ; iv. 41 ^ Luke ii. 9, sipo/STJ^rytrav (^o^ov pce'yav, theAj felt great 
fear ; John v. 32, rt (/.xprupiay rjv iJi^xprupsTi the testimony which 
he bears ; vii. 24, ttiv ^lytotlccv x^la-iy xdivocte, deliver a just judg- 
ment ; 1 Tim. vi. 12, wixo\oyr\o-cis rr\v xacXr,v ofMoXoylaVy thou hast 
made a good confession ; Heb. viii. 10, o^ ^taS" 75x73, -yjv Zioc^ria-oixoci, 
the covenant, lohich I will ratify. Similar examples are Luke 
viii. 5, Eph. i. 19, 1 Tim. i. 18, 2 Tim. iv. 7, Kev. xvi. 9. 

Obs. 6. There is some little difference, in as much as (pvXaxa) is not used in the 
abstract, but the concrete sense, in Luke ii. 8, (puXufftrovrs; (pvXoiKas rns wktos, keeping 
the nightly watches, not keeping watch. Compare Xen. Anab. ii. 6. 10. 

Obs. 7. It will be remarked that an adjective, or some defining terra, which 
might be rendered adverbinUy, is indicated by the ^substantive ; as, for instance, 
they 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. Obs. 3.) ; so as to express with greater emphasis 
the action indicated by the verb. Thus in Matt. xiii. 14, axoln aKovtrtn. Luke xxii. 
15, i'jei^vfjt.ia, Wi^vfjt.'/i<ra. John iii. 29, %a^a x'^k-'' -^cts iv. 17, aVs/XJj oi'2niXweu[j(,i^a. 
v. 28, Ttx.ooe.yyi'kia, ^ra^yiyyiikayAv. xxiii. 14, dvu^if^ctTi dva^tf^a.ri(Ta[i.iv. James V. 17, 
ir^atnvx^ '^^otrnv^aro. A word of the same meaning, but of a different root, is added 
in Matt. xv. 4, Mark vii. 10, ^avdrco riXtvroirM. (Compare Gen. ii. 17, Exod. xxi. 
15, 17, LXX.) The same mode of expression frequently occurs in the LXX, 
where the original Hebrew has the injlnitive 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. (Ed. T. 65, i/Vva; i'lihtv. GEd. C. 1625, Plat. Symp. p. 195, (psvyu (pvy^. 
M\\m\. V. H. viii. 15, vUnv hixna-t.^ An emphasis is produced by means of a 
preposition in Eph. iv. 16, ^ta -rairvs ^^env^^vi xcci h^tnu; ^^otnuxoy^ivoi. In its 
import the jjassage is, however, plainly different from the preceding examples. 

Obs. 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 way in which 
one goes, the quality 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, o'l-as viKYivKi iv ru 
K^lvKT^at (Ti. xvi. 19, S/Xw Hi v[ji,a.s ffo(povi fjuiv uvai iig ro aya%v, aKt^a'tovi Ti iI; to xaxo'v. 
Possibly the words o^ov ^aXuffffm ia 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 Sara. vi. 9, LXX, o%ov h^iuv avrns ^o^iva-trcn. Compare Exod. xiii. 18. 

^ Vorstius de Hebraisrais N. T. § 32. Leusden de Heb. N. T. p. 122. See also 
Kuinoel on Luke xxii. 15. Pott on James v. 17. 

2 Winer, § 32, 2, and § 58, 3. Alt, Gram. N: T. §§ 47. 1. 82, 1. Georg. Hierocrit. 
i. p 79, and Vindic. p. 199. Ast ad Plat. Epinom.p. 586. Schsefer ad Soph, 
ii. p 213. Matt. Gr. Gr. § 403.- 


5. In Grcclc, not only the immediate object of an action, but 
the remoter object also is frequently put in the accusative. 
With the verbs signifying to doj and to say, for instance, the 
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 
TToiCiv signifying to do good, or ill; as in Matt v. 44, xaXoJs- 
SToistrs rovs f/^iaovvToc^ viJ^ocs. Mark xiv. 7, ^vvckt'^e avrous zu 

Obs. 9. According to this analogy, those verbs in which the same idea is implied, 
are construed with two accusatives, of which one is generally either t) or a neuter 
adjective, to he rendered in English by more, very, not at all, &c. Thus in Luke iv. 
36, ^jj^jv /SXar^av aurov. Acts XXV. 10, 'lovtaiovs ovhh hViKyKra, 1 Cor. xiv. 6, tI v( 
e!)<piA.n<rea. Gal. iv. 12, ovhiv fji,t yihxr,ffccTt. V. 2, v/jbcii oi/Tiv uipiXriffu. Philem. 18, 
il Vi ri r^Unffi ffi, K. r. k. As involving the adverbs, the verbs dyct^o-ronTv and 
xecxovv take a single accusative ; as in Luke vi. 33, lav aya^oTohn rov? dyx^o-rot- 
oZvra.; iif4,as. Acts vii. 19, Ixaxajers tov? TTocri^as hf^uv. 1 Pet. iii. 13, ko.) t/j o XKXuff'MV 
vfici;, lav tov dyocBov fjt.ifji,nraA yivi^a-^i ; 

Obs. 10. The remoter object is also put in the dative, and sometimes in the accu- 
sative with sis. Thus in Matt. vii. 12, ^ravra ovv oa-cc dv ^tXriTi'ivcx. Toiuffiv vfjt,lv 01 
avh^wroi, ovTU xa.) vf/ji7s ^oiuri ahroli. Mark xiv. 6, xaXov 'i^yov u^yaffaro il; \fji.i. 
Luke vi. 11, ^itXdXow -r^og dXXnXov?, rl dv <r9i^trnccv tZ ^Ititrou. John xv. 21, raZroc 
<prdvra, 9roir,ffovinv vfjuv "oid to ovof/,d ficou. Acts iv. 15, rt ^otr,ffOju,iv 7o7s dvB^u<7rois rovrois ', 
xvi. 28, /u,nTiv T^dl,rii <na.uTu xccxov. Except indeed in the two examples above cited, 
the expression su and xocxui -ttoiuv are in the New Testament always followed by a 
dative ; and even in Matt. v. 44, some MSS. have roli (/.la-ovcrtv, 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 rihUnffi <roi. Of Iv, inserted Hebraice, see § 46. 2. 
Obs. 3. 

Obs. 11. An accusative follows xuXus utiTv in Luke vi. 26, ova) liuv, orav xaxZs 
vyMs u'TTuffi Tavrts oi dv^^wrot, when men speak well of you. Hence BXafftpnfuTv nva, 
and the like. See above, Obs. 1. 4. The verbs tlXoyuv and xaxoXoyuv have in the 
New Testament a peculiar sense, but they also take an accusative; as in Matt, v^ 
44, ilXoytln rolls xara^uf/ivovs vfjJds. XV. 4, h xaxoXoyuv ^aripa xa\ fit^ripa, Savdreo 
riXivrdroj, We also meet with xiyuv nva, to speak of or respecting any one, in John 
vi. 71, viii. 27, 54, ix. 19, 1 Cor. i. 12, et alibi. In the same way dicere is used in 
Latin. See ^lian. 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^ujrdv nva n. Matt. xxi. 24, 
l^MT'^ffM vfids xdyu Xoyov 'iva. So Mark iv. 10, John xvi. 23. Sometimes -npl 
Tivos is used; as in Luke ix. 45, l(po(iotJvro i^uTtia-ai avrov ^r&pi <rou pvf^aros-Tovrov. 

2. Verbs signifying to request, to desire; as alrsiv nvd n. Mark vi. 23, o idv 
f/,1 ahriffris, lucru ffo't. So Luke xi. 11, 1 Pet. iii. 15. The person is some- 
times put in the genitive with -za^d. Thus Matt. xx. 20, aWovffd n va^^ av- 
Tov. James i. 5, a'lruru (^ixotpiav) -^ra^d tou h'^o'vros Qsov -xdaiv d-rXus. Com- 

» Winer, § 32. 1, 4. a. Alt, Gram. N.T. § 29. b. Valcknaer ad Herod, vii. 144. 



pare Xen. Anab. i. 3. IG. In Matt, xvlii. 19, the thing requested Is put ia 
the genitive; but this is by an atlrnctton of the relative into the case of its 
antecedent. See § 59. 1. 

3. The verb (po^ri^ttv, to load, takes a doub/e accusative in Luke xi. 46, (p')OTlZ,irt 
Tovs dvB^uTov; (po^rla, ^vtrf-taffraKToi. Opposed to this form is 'tlie expression 
diro(po^TiXiiv tXoTov tov yofjuov, to Unlade a vessel of her freight. This is closely 
analogous to dipai^iTa-^cci rtvx n, to take any thing from one ; but in the New 
Testament d<^ai^i7<r^cci is foUowetWiy aVo with a genitive, or by a genitive of 
the person which is governed l)y an accusative of the thing. Thus Matt. 
XXvi. 51. Mark xiv. 47, d^pilXiv ulrou to urlov. 'hwkQX.Ib, u^iXuv to oviiVos 
fAOV, Luke xvi. 3, h xvoti; f^ou a,(paioitra,t Tr,v olxovof^iciv aa*' i/xou. 

4. Two accusatives follow "^t^dffxuv, to teach, in John xiv. 26, iKiTvos i/f/.oi; li^d^n 
creivTcc. It takes, however, a genitive with -rto) in 1 John ii. 27, lildffKss u/MUi 
Ti^) ToivTuv. We find a dative of the person in Rev. ii. 14, t^/Baa-xsv tS, 
BaXax, where another reading is Iv tm BaXax, Were this reading correct, 
Balak would be represented as the means through whom the instruction was 
communicated ; and so the manner of instruction is expressed in Col. iii. 16, 
£v -yao-'/j ffofix ^thccffKovTn lavTovs- Winer has a reference to 2 Chron. xvii. 9, 
which is rendered in the LXX ihl^aiTKov Iv 'lou^a. The preposition here mani- 
festly denotes place, at least in the Greek version ; as in Matt. iv. 23. h^Jtrxcov 
Iv Tali ffvvxyuya,7i. 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 ivlZirai, \K^uira.i, ^s^ificikXiiv. 
Matt, xxvii. 31, Mark xv. 17, 20, s^sWav uvtov t-av ;^Xa^y^«, xa) Wiluffav auTov 
TO. IfidTia at/Tout Luke xxiii. 11, ?rs^</3«X«uy ocvtov IcSJira XufiT^dv. So John 
xix. 2. That which is put on is expressed by a dative with Iv in Eph. vi. 
14, 15, ^ioil^aiffdfiivoi Ttjv iff(pvv iif^,MV iv ccXvi^iicc, xcit i)7ro^)j<rdf4,ivot tous <ro^eis Iv 
iToifji-ottria, TOV ivocyyiXiov. See also Rev. iii. 5, iv. 4. The simple dative is 
used, as frequently in classical authors, in Rev. xvii. 4, h yuvh h 9ti^i^iP>X'/iy.ivn 
'7rop(pvoa, xoc) xoxxivm. 

6. Those verbs, which in the passive take a double nominative, as to call or 
nam,e, to make, 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, iv^uois TfoiiiTi to.; T^ljiovs ovtov. xix. 4, 
Ufffiv xx) B^^iXv \'roir,ffiv uvtov;. 17, t'i [jijI kiyn; dyxB-ov ; xxi. 13, vfAi7; ^l uvtov 
WoiriffUTi ff'TT'A'kaiov X'/tffTuiv. So Mark xii. 37, Luke vi. 13, 14, John vi. 15, 
XV. 15, Acts XX. 28,'Ht;b. i. 2, 1 John i. 10. 

Obs. 13. Sometimes these verbs employ the infinitive i^ivuci to connect the object 
with the predicate; as in Matt. xvi. 13, r/va f^i Xiyovtriv oi dvB^coroi iJvea. In like 
manner, au infinitive, as Xufsuv, ix-'^y &c« ^s redundant with verbs oH ashing, and 
giving. Thus Acts iii. 3, ijoura \Xiif/,oavv/iv Xa(ii7v. vii. 46, ^T'A(roiTo ii/^ut tfxnvet)iJi.oi, 
Tf esf '\axu(o. So donat habere in Virg. Mn. v. 262. Winer refers to this head 
James v. 10, v'rohuyf/.ot. Xd(i-Ti tovs d'TocrTo'kov;, which is evidently an apposition. 
See § 28. 

Obs. 14. The preposition £/; is sometimes prefixed to the predicate accusative; 
as in Acts vii. 21, dvi^^i^ocTo ocvtov locvrn us vl'ov. xili. 22, tysi^sv avTo7s tov Aot,ll\% tls 
/Sair/Xia. 47, Ti^uxd at us (^us i^vuv. 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. xliii. 18, 1 Sam. xv. 11, 2 Kings iv. 1, Isal. xlix. 
9, Judith V. 11. Those examples are altogether distinct, which have been pro- 

^ Winer, § 32, 4. a. All, Gr.Gr. N. T. § 30, c. 


duced as parallel from Greek writers ; as, for instance, from Herod, i. 34, -rivm 
ro7fft x{-'^'^^^ ^'i '^oXifj.ov. Compare Eurip. Troad. 1207 ; and, in the New Tes- 
tament, Phil. iv. 16, iU rh x^s/av fjuoi Wifz-^ccri. See also § 46. 5. {Daf. com.) ; and 
of Acts vii. 53, see § 47. 2. Obs. 5.^ 

Obs. 15. In classical Greek the vevhs xouTtruv and awoxgyVrj/v are followed either by 
two accusatives, or by a simple acct/safive of the person; but in the New Testament 
the person is put with a?ra in the genitive. Thus Matt. xi. 25, Luke x. 21, 
k^tK^v-^ai TavTo, aTo ffo^uy xu) ffvnrZv. Compare Luke xviii. 34, xix. 42, John xii. 
36, Col. i. 26 ; and Dent. vii. 20, LXX. It frequently happens indeed, both in 
the sacred and profane writers, that verbs are found with two accusatives, although 
another construction may be equally or more common. To some which have been 
already noticed, the followint^ from the New Testament may be added : — 

1. a.vct(jLifjt.vr,ffx,iiv, See § 42, 3. 1. 

2. /*av3yv, to qualify : 2 Cor. iii. 6, o; xa; ixdvatrtv h/u.ccs 'hiaxovou; KUivrii ^ix^r,K7ii. 
Otherwise in Col. i. 12, ih;^a,^i(;ToZvrii tm ^rar^) tS ixavutrccvTi 'h/^a; ih rhv 
/u,tot^oi rod xXyi^ou rZv ccyluv, 

3. o^-KiZ,iiv, to conjure ; Maik v. 7, o^xiZ,u ci rev QiU. So Acis xix. 13, 1 Thess. 
V. 27 ; and Gen. 'xxiv. 3, LXX. But in Matt. xxvi. 63, X^o^xIZ^m si xura. rou 
QioZ Tou X>^vro;. We have in Acts iii. 25, LXX, o^xl^uv h ru QiZ. Compare 
1 Kings ii. 42, 2 Kings xi. 4 ; Xen. Symp. iv. 10. See also Obs. 2. 7. 

4. ir£/Sj;v, to persuade, soil, by teaching : Acts xxviii. 23, <rit^uv odtToh; -a. Tt^i -rou 
'Inffov. Hence 'ru^io-Bai t;, as in Heb. vi. 9, crs^rs/V^sSa irs^i vfzuv to. x^siTTom. 
For another construction, see Obs. 1. 1. 

5. ^ot1Z,uv, to give drink : Matt. x. 42, Mark ix. 41, os yao av -z-orlffri Cf^a; cto-t-^- 
pi6v ti'^arosf X' T. X. 1 Cor. iii. 2, yaXa vfiug l^orKra, But in Rev. xiv. 8, ix 
Tov o'i'vou rou ^uf^ov •pti-rorixi -Travra eSvjj. Elsewhere with the accusative of the 
person only, as in Matt. xxv. 35, xxvii. 48. The same construction is used 
with •^e,)f/,lZ,iiv, which has two accusatives in Numb. xi. 4, Deut. viii. 16, 
LXX. Compare also Rom. xii. 20, 1 Cor. xiii. 3. 

6. y^p'tnv, Heb. i. 9, s^pttri tn o &io$ 'iXaiov uyccXXidiriuS' Rev. iii. 18, xoXXov^iov 
iyxoiffov roll! oip^aXfiov; gov. With a dative in Acts x. 38, 'ixf'<riv.avrov o Qicj 
'jrnvfJt.a.ri ay'iM xai ^vvdfin. So Mark vi. 1 3, 7JXii(pov iXcciu ToXXovi d^patrrov;.^ 

7. A very common construction is the employment of the accusative as an 
adverb ; of which one of the most frequent instances is that of •z-dvra, in the 
neuter plural, in all things, in evert/ j^espect : Acts xx. 35, ^dvra v'7rihul,a, Ifuv, 
on X. r. X. 1 Cor. ix. 25, crSj Ti o dyuvt^cf^ivo; -^dvrx iyxoarivirai, Phil. iii. 8, 
ra. -zdyroc, iZ,r.fjt,iu^vjv. So -z'dvra r^oTov, ov r^ovrov, and the like; Matt, xxiii. 37, 
ov rpoTov ivtirvvdy'ii o^vis ra, votra-ia savT?iS vTo rag 'Tri^vyug. Add Acts 1. 11, 
Jude 11. So Gen. xxvi. 29, Exod. ii. 24, LXX. 

Obs. 16. Sometimes xccrd is supplied; as in Acts xv. 11, xocB-' Sv r^ocrov xdxtTvot, 
scil.iffdi^r,(roc.v. 1^0Xt\.'\\\.\, rl oZv ro 'Xioiffffov roZ ^lovhuioV, •proXh, xard 'ffdvra. r^ocrev, 
2 Thess. ii. 3, /Lcyih); v/ l^ccrarrio-'/j xard ft'/iVn'Oi r^oTov. Possibly therefore xara. 
may generally be considered as understood in these cases, of which t/ and ay^b, 
in any thing, in nothing, are also examples. Thus 2 Cor. vii. 14, i'l rt a,vrM ifrXo 
vfjuuv xVicu.v'X.'nfjf.u.i, ov xaT'/iff'X,vv^'/iv. Gal. iv- 1, ovolv otaipi^ti oovXov. 

Obs. 1 7. We have also hi the New Testament the following among other in- 
stances of this adverbial usage, including definitions of time, number, distance, &c- 
Matt. XX. 2, rhv ri/ut^i^ctv, by the day, daily ; Luke ix. 14, xarccxXivccrs avrovg xXio-iag, 
in rows; xxii. 41, a-priff-xdff^n a.'X ahruv uaii Xi^ov {ioXhv, distant about a stone's throw; 
John vi. 10, rov a^S/aov uifu TivraxttT^iXiOi. viii. 25, rhv a^X'^* '^"^^ *^' XaXu vf^Tv, what 

' Winer, § 32, 4. b, ^ Winer, 6 32. 4. a. 


I told you at first ; Acts X. 3, uffu ci^xv ivit^iryi* 7r,i Yifii^a;. xviii. 3, crxi^voTom rriv 
'Tix^ny, % trade. For to yivo;, by birth ; and ova/xx, by name ; the dative is used in 
Acts xviii. 2, oyoyMTt 'AxvXav, Uovrixov ru 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 expressed by means of the prepositions xaru, h, or 

§ 4\.— Genitive. (Buttm. § 132.) 

1. The relation or connexion indicated by the Genithe 
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 signitication 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, aip^i ro Tr'K'npoJi/.a, aiirov r<i xotivo-tt rov 
TTocXaiov. Luke xiv. 4, orav (x^roca-Tod^o) rrts olxovoyatar. Acts XV. 
29, a.TTE'/S'y^oii ii^oo'ko^vrojv. XXvii. 43, SKoo'Kuazv aurohs rov ^ou\r)- 
l^oLTOs, 1 Tim. i. 6, Sjv r^vls a.<Jir}yjf\GavrcS x. r. "k. ix. 3, ai^'zy^za- 
^aci ^pcofMcLTcov. xi. 5, TTocpac^iocrqi^ai ^isp'^apiJ.sycjv dy^pcuTTcov rov 
vo'jv, ycoci oiTTza-rBpriiJiivoov rrts aXvjS'stai-. 1 Pet. iv. 1, o TraS'o'v Iv 
a-oL^ytl TreTrauTcci a,(j.ocpri(x.s. So also with an infin. and gen. of 
the article ; as in Luke iv. 42, y.a.rii'/pv avrov rov fj.ri Trop^vsff^ai. 
Rom. XV. 22, £V£xorro/>ty)v rou IxS-sTv Trpos v^jiois. Compare Luke 
xxiv. 16, Acts X. 47, xx. 27. 

Obs. 1. The whole of this class of verbs, however, are far more commonly fol- 
lowed in the New Testament by a genitive governed by U or u'^'o. Take the fol- 
lowing examples from Matt. vi. 13, pZ^xi f]ficcs uto rou tov/i^ou. ix. 16, a'/^u to -rk^i- 
pu/u,a auTou ocro tou tfj^otriou. Mark vii. 6, ri xot,oVioc avruv Toppa/ aTix^i ^^' '^f^ou. So Luke 
vii. G, xii. 58, xiii. 15, Acts i. 4, ii. 40, v. 2, 3, xv. 20. Again, Acts xviii. 1, x^S''^" 
BtU ix Tuv ^A^r.vuv. xix. 16, ix(puyuv ix rod olxov. 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 Xay's/v a.vo rtvo; (Acts xvi. 33, Rev. i. 5), and 
xec^a^l^uv uto tivo; (2 Cor. vii. 1).^ Compare Tobit iii. 14, Diod. Sic. i. 24, Appian. 
Syr. 59. In James v. 4, o /^iirBoi o cc'^iffn^Tii/Jm df vuuv, the recomjpence fraudu- 
lently withheld by you, does not belong here. 

1 Winer, § 32, 6. Alt, Gr. N. T. § 30. 2. Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 366. 

2 Winer, § 30, 6. Alt, h\ 27, 2 and 67, ,iS. Bornemann ad Xen. Anab. p. 56. 


3. All kinds of partitives are, from their very nature, fol- 
lowed by the genitive ; and most of the cases which occur in 
other writers are found repeatedly in the New Testament. 
Thus with such adjectives as oXlyoi, ttoXXoI, r^^Aiahs, &c., when 
the substantive is considered as the w^hole, and the adjective 
as a part: — Matt. iii. 7y ttoWou^ tSjv Oxpiaalcov xai ^oc^^ovaocicuv, 
XV. 37, TO 7rspi(T(Jcuov rcuv xKaaiJ.a.rcuy. Luke xix. 8, Ta riixlan rojy 
vTicaoyJiMroo^ [J.QU. Heb. xi. 21, to axoov T73J- pd^^ou. With ris, as 
in Matt, xxvii. 47, r/vef rcov UeH haruruv, Luke xiv. 15, tis tcDv 

Ohs. 2. Hence the superlative is followed in the New Testament, as in classical 
Greek, by the genitive plural of the substantive to which it belongs. Thus in 1 
Cor. XV. 9, l>.a%/(rTflj tuv aToffroXuv. Another construction, however, with h and 
a dative, occurs in Matt. ii. 6, cited from Micah v. 2, xa) cv, B>jSX£s^, yyt 'Iou^k, ov- 
'hctfjcui IXa^lffTn u Iv ro7s hyif^offtv 'lovta. Somewhat akin to this exception from the 
usual form, is the similar use of the positive, to which the addition of a noun, indi- 
cating the class of persons or things to which it belongs, gives the force of a super- 
lative ; as in Mark x. 43, (Ji.iyu.s Iv Ifjuti. Luke i. 28, tvXoyfi/u.iv'/i av Iv ywai^iv, blessed 
among women, i. e. most blessed of women. This has been regarded, and perhaps 
with justice, as a Hebraism, which the LXX have preserved in Cant. i. 8, xaX-h h 
yvvail'i. At the same time it is very similar to the Greek expressions Z (ptX' kvh^uv, 
and the like, in which the positive is supposed to be put for the superlative;^ not 
to mention that the exact form occurs in Pind. Nem. iii. 138, odiroi ukvs iv ToTct- 
vo7s. So in Latin, Liv. xxiii. 44, Magna inter paucos, for maxima. There are also 
other passages, in which the positive has been thought to be put for the superlative: 
as, for instance. Matt. v. 19, ours; f^iya; KX^^'^enrcct, where, fAiya; is opposed to ixd- 
Xiaroi in the preceding clause, xxii. 36, '^oia. ivroXyj fisydXti iv tu vof^u -, (Compare 
V. 38.) Luke ix. 48, oZros ta-rai fizya;. X. 42, Maa/a tjjv dya^yiv fiiol'^a. i^iki^aro. 
1 Cor. vi. 4, Tol; l^ovS-ivTif^ivovs iv Tn \xxXn<r'ia, tovtou; xu^i^iTi. In these instances, 
however, may be understood a great otie, the great commandment, the good part, the 
despised,' iio^h, without having recourse to a superlative sense. 

Obs. 3. ThQ partitive use oi adve)'bs of time occars in Matt, xxviii. 1, oi/.j trx(ofidreov, 
at the close of the Sabbath, 

Obs. 4. After names of places, the name of the country in which they lie is in 
the genitive; as in Matt. ii. 5, Iv Bn^Xti/a tsJ; 'lawWaf. iii. 1, Iv t^ l^rifiM rJj; 'Uw 
^a'iui. X. 23, <roXus rod 'Ifrgar'x. 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 o /Av — o Ti, 
the whole is usually put in the same case as the parts, e. g. Acts xxvii. 44, tov} Xot- 
^ovg, oSi fJiXv It) ffciviffiv, ovs Ti sjr) tIvuv rav uTo rod tXoiou. 

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 signifj'ing to participate in any thing ; as fxarsx^iv, fj^sra- 
Xa/x/Sacvstv, xoivMViTv rivosj &C. Thus 1 Cor.x. 21, ou ^ovxa^E rpaiiil^ris 

^ Matt. Gr. Gr. § 320. 3. Monk ad Eur. Alcest. 743. 


K^vpiou fjLiriy^siv, xnjci rpocTTB^m^ ^onfAoyicuv. 2 Tim. ii. 6, tov xoTTiuvrac 
yscopyov ^sT ru'V xccpTraJv fM^raXociJi^uvsiv. Heb. ii. 14, ettei oyv ra 
TTxtotcc XcXOivcifvnx.s (rxoxoi xocl (z'lfAtxTos, xat avrof Tra.pacTiX'no-ius f/.s- 
Tecrp^e to/v avrajv, k. r. X. V. 13, 9raf 6 fxsrsy^ouy yaXaxros". vii. 13, 
(puXrif sri^ocf fXBrEa-y(;»xEv, participated in, i. e. belonged to, a7i- 
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, 
xoivcoviQC rou alyLocTos rov XgiUToy, ycoiMuyoi rov ^v(Tiac(7rinqiov. Heb. 
iii. 1, xXvia-scuf iTTov^ocvlou /uiETop^oi. Add Heb. iv. 14, xii. 8, 
1 Pet. v. i. 

Obs. 6. In Acts xxiv. 25, furxXxfifsdvuv is followed by an accusative, but in a 
sense which scarcely belongs to this head ; and the same phrase, /u.iTuXecfii7v xatpiv, 
to take an opportunity, is also found in Polyb. ii. 16. There is one instance in which 
ftirixiiv is constructed with the preposition Ik in 1 Cor. x. 17, l» rou ivo$ u^rou ^srt- 
Xa/M-sv. Once also KotvuviTv is followed by s/? with an accusative expressive of the 
object, in Phil. iv. 15, ov^tfiiK, fj^joi iKKkfifict ixoiveovyia-tv us Xoyev ^oasug xcu Xri'^iu;. 
The more usual construction of this verb, however, is with the dative ; as in Rom. 
XV. 27, il yk^ ro7i ■rviVf/,a.rtKo7; avruv tKoivuvttirav ra iB^w, k. t. X. 1 Tim. V. 22, fivioi 
xoivuni ufiaortai; aXXor^/an;, i. e. fitiTiv xomv 'iffTu ffoi xx) roui uXX'^Xcuv a/na^rixi;} So 
also Phil. iv. 15, 1 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, ^Elian, V. H. iii. 17, 
Herodian, iii. 10. 15. 

Obs. 7. Throughout the New Testament fjutrx'^ilovxt occurs only with the acctua- 
iive, expressed or understood ; as in Luke iii. 11, o £;^<yy Ivo x^'^'^^'^s, (Jt-irxVoru tS fzh 
%p^ovri. Rom. i. 11, 'Ivx r) fjcirx'hu ^x^ttffji.x Ifjuv •rvtvf/.xrixov. 1 Thess. ii. 8, luhoKovfutv 
fjLlTxhovvxt vfj(,7v oh fiiovov TO ivxyyiXiov rou Qiou, xXXx xxi rxg ixuruv •^v^xs. So also 
Test. xii. Patr. x rixova-xn, fz^Brdlon xx) vfji,i7s ro7s rixvois IfjLut. 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 x-Teo or \x, where an ellipsis of fA^os is manifest from 
Luke xxiv. 42, o\ Sj Xvihuxxv xCtZ ip^Bvo; h-rroZ f^'t^os, xx) xTo ftiXiorcrtou xnotou. So 
John xxi. 10, Wiyxxri dro ruv o^x^iuv. Acts ii. 17, ix^tu xTQ rou -rnvfjixro; /aou, 
1 John iv. 13, Ix rov ^vtvy-xros xurov Vi^uxiv hfjuv? 

Obs. 8. Sometimes ilvxt and ylyviff^xi govern a genitive in a partitive sense, im- 
plying to belong to ; as in Matt. vi. 13, o-ov ia-rtv h (ixfftXilx. Luke xx. 33, rlvos xuruv 
ylnrxi yvvv ; Compare Rom. xiv. 8, 2 Tim. ii. 19. Thus also in Heb. x. 39, fi/xt7s 
eux ifffjLiv uToffroXrii^ we are not a portion vf the drawing back, i. e. we do not belong to, 
we are not partakers with, those who draw back. xii. 1 1, -rxtrx -rxt'^ux eu hxi7 x»^as 
iJvxi, xXXx Xv-rm, i. e. partakes of, is attended with, sorrow. Again, in 1 Cor. i. 12, 
iii. 4, iya fiiv uimi UxvXov, x. r. X., I am the follower or disciple of Paul. The prep, 
ix is, however, more usually employed, when belonging to a sect or party is signified j 
as in Matt, xxvii. 73, xX^Bus vv il xhruv u. Compare Luke xxii. 58, John vi. 64, 
viii. 23, xviii. 17, 25, Col. iv. 9, et alibi. There is one instance, in which the gen, 
is accompanied by ^^os, where the expression signifies to be of advantage to. It oc- 
curs in Acts xxviii. 34, rovro ya^ t^os rrii vfAtri^x; trurn^tas vTcc^x-'- 

Obs. 9. The gen. is also used with other verbs, when the reference is to a part 
only ; as in Acts xxvii. 36, T»offiXx(iovro r^otpm, they took some nourishment, 

^ Winer, § 30, 5. * Winer, vbi supra. 



5. Of verbs signifying to enjoy y ovaa^at is followed by a geni- 
tive in Philem. 20, kyu aou ovatVyjv, may I find comfort in thee, 

Obs. 10. The verbs which denote eating and drinking, lir^'niv, -rmiv, (puyi7y, &c., 
take either a genitive or an accusative in the best Greek writers/ but in the New 
Testament these verbs are more comnaonly followed by a genitive with aro or l«.* 
Thus Matt. XV. 27, Mark vii. 28, ra, Kuvd^ia y^lu a-ro ruv -^ix'^V' John iv. 13, <rSf 
v'lvuv Ik rod t/^aros -roureu, vi. 26, Itpdyiri rui* a^rav. 1 Cor. xi. 28, ovru; Ik tou 
cc^Tov 'iff^iiru, xai Ik rov ttotyi^Iov ^riviru. Rev. ii. 17, ^uffa kvtu (payilv a-ro rod fjMvvct. 
Griesbach, however, considers the words <puyi7v a.<ro, in this last example, as a gloss ; 
in which case it will belong to Obs. 9. Sometimes the verbs under consideration 
are found with an accusative ; as in Matt. xv. 2, orav a^rov la-^ivffiv. xxvi. 1 7, (paytTv 
TO '^d.ff^a. 1 Cor. xi. 26, oa-aKts yd^ av ierS-ltjTi rov a^rov rourov, ri ro 9roTv^iov rovro iri- 
vnTh ». r. k. 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 ia-^inv n signifies to take food as an adequate means of 
nourishment, and IffB-hiv rtvog or Iff^Uiv V« Tivaj, to eat a portion of any thing. In like 
manner we say, in English, to eat meat, to drink water ; and also to eat of this, to 
taale of that, 

Obs. 11. The construction of yiuiff^ui seems to have been indifferently with the 
genitive or the accusative. Thus we have the figurative expression yiviffBoit S-avdrou 
(Matt. xvi. 28, Mark ix. 1, John viii. 52, Heb. ii. 9); and hence TertuU. c. Mar- 
cion, iii. 149, Debitee mortis gustavit. John ii. 9, u? Se iytvaaro o a^^ir^iKktvos ro 
i/'Swg oTvav yiytvyjfAiyoy. Compare Diod. Sic. i. 89, .(Elian, V. H. i. 8. In Heb. vi. 
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, rriv 
E7retyysXia.y, ^v rtxouaocri fjt.ov. In the New Testament, however, 
this is more generally expressed by 'Trxpa, U, or aTro. Thus in 
Matt. ii. 4, k'^vv^xvsro itoLp ocvruv, itov o ^pioros yswara/. Luke 
xxii. 71, avroi yocp rty.oua-ocfji.ev dTTo rov gtoixoltos avrov. John xii. 
34^ TiiXBiS riKovcrociJi.ev ex. Toi) v6fj.ov. 

Obs. 12. In the same manner, uvai and yiynaSat, implying birth or origin, are fol- 
lowed in the New Testament by Ik with a genitive ; as in Matt. i. 20, ytwn^h Ik 
•rvivfAaros ayiov. John vii. 44, vfnTg Ik •rair^os rod "^lufioXov itrri. Rom. i. 3, rov ysvo- 
fjt,ivov IK ff'ri^fjt.oc.ros Aar/S/S. Gal. iv. 4, yivofjiivov Ik yuvuiKos. Add Matt. xxi. 25, Luke 
ii. 4, John i. 47, iv. 22, vii. 52, xiii. 44, 1 Cor. xi. 8, 1 John iv. 5, 6, 7, et alibi. 

Obs. 13. The same usage also prevails in expressing the material of which any 
thing is made ; as in Matt, xxvii. 29, John xix. 2, ffri(pxvov 1% aKav^uv. Rev. xxi. 
21, dva tli tKairrof rav tuXuvuv ^v t| ivoi [Mt^ya^trov. When, however, the author or 
cause of any thing is intended, the simple genitive is employed. Thus in 2 Cor. xi. 

^ See Monk ad Eur. Alcest. 855. Mitchell ad Arist. Acharn. 134. 

* Winer excepts from this rule Heb. xiii. 10, \-x^o[ji.iv Bvcnaa-rri^iov 1% oS (fiocytTv k. t. X. 
Since, however, Bv(ricc<rr^^tof, which is here used lor the sacramental table, with espe- 
cial reference to the sacred elements of bread and wine, the passage may readily be 
explained upon the same principles. 



26, xivlvvdif trerxfCMf Koi kva-raiv, dangers occasioned by rivers and robbers ; (and so 
Heliod. ii. 4. 65, xlvhwei SoiXarffuv.) Eph. iv. 18, h {uri rev Siov, the life which God 
gives; 1 Tim iv. I, h^atrxaXiais '^aif/.ovteov, doctrines suggested by devi/s. Also, though 
less frequently, when the 'genitive is to be taken passively ; as in Matt. xxv. 34, 
iuXoynfiivoi rod -recT^os. John vi. 45, iilaxro) rov 0iov. Compare 1 Cor. ii. 13. Many 
good manuscripts read in 2 Pet. ii. 14, xx^ytav ytyufJuvafffjuUnv TXtovi^ias (vulgo ?rXia- 
nl,iectf). Compare Philostr. Hev. ii. 15, iii. 1, x. 1. The preposition iito is in- 
serted in I Thess. i. 4, hya.-JtnfJi.ivoi v-ro BioZ. So also in Acts x. 41, et alibis 

Obs. 14. A somewhat similar idiom seems to obtain in the expression fia^rtiv 
viaroi, to dip into wafer, which occurs iu Luke xvi. 24. As an example of the same 
kind Wetstein cites from Aratus, fid-rruv uKidvoio.'^ We find in Exod. xii. 22, LXX, 
fia^ruv a-ro rou aifiarog, to dip into, i. e., to stain with, blood. Compare Lev. xiv. 16. 
Here also may be referred Acts ix. 1, ifATviuv a^ukvs tec) (pivou, where the genitive 
indicates the origin of the passion, which affected the breath. So Heliod. iEth. i. 2, 
wvss/v (p^o^Tifiaroi. 

Obs. 15. With respect to the analogous practice of expressing ^wa/iVie* of persons 
or things by the gen. of substantives, which receive the sense of adjectives, the follow- 
ing are instances: — Luke xvi. 8, rov oUovo/lcov rrisoiot»ias> the unjust steward; Rom.i. 
26, ^ccBn a.rifjt,ia,; , for oirifjLa.. Eph. i. 13, 14, ru -X'tivfia.n rni i^ctyyiXiai, tU ayroXu- 
r^uffiv rvs •n^i'Totriffiui, i. e., ru iT^iyyiX/jjivu and ^i^iToinBiTffav. iv. 29, ir^o; oiKo^ofAriv 
riis Xi^'^^'i-) useful edification. Add Acts ii. 19, arfiila. Kct-rvov, smoky vapour (Hos. 
xiii. 3, LXX, ir/Mg xei'rvio^yii) . ix. 15, a-xivos iKkoyyis, for tKktxrov. Rom. i. 4, Tvid/AX 
aytuffvvtis. Eph. ii. 2, roTg viols rris cicru^uas. 1 Pet. i. 14, rixvcc u^uxofis. The prin- 
cipal, not the qualifying, noun is placed in the genitive 4, iv xamrnn ^uvis. 
Gal. iii. 14, rnv l^ayytXicnv rov •rviv/n.ccros, i. e., •rvidf^ec 'i^nyyi}.f/.ivov. 2 Thess. ii. 11, 
m^yiiccv Tkeivfif, strong delusion. 1 Tim. vi. 17, it) 'jrkovrov a.'^tiXornri. 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, ^ravra ra p^iMara ryjs ^atis ruurvS' xiii'. 26, o 
Xoyof rrii aurrt^'toci ravrnf, Rom. vii. 24, ir&ifictros rod B-avcirov rovrov, i. e., ffcufAotret 
roirov Bavxr)^(po^ev. Heb. i. 3, r&i prifjt,a.rt r^s ^vveifjiitui avrev, by his powerful word. 
Rev. xiii. 3, fi TXriyh rev Bavcirou avrov, its mortal wound. So Judith ix. 10, LXX, 
tx x^ttXiuv aTurns f/.ov. When the governing noun has the force of the adjective, the 
idiom is rather to be regarded as an Hebraism ; as in Luke i. 48, rhv raTtivutriv t^s 
^ovXnti for "hovXt^v rocrimv. In Rom. vi. 6, ro atufLot. rni u/xu^rtecs 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, (ixi<ruv ro ffn^iuf^ot, rrn tis X^tffrov •riirrtus vfr,ajy, looking, 
not to your strong faith, but to the steadfastness of your faith. The sense would, in 
like manner, be inadequately conveyed by an adjective in 2 Cor. iv. 7, '/y« ri v-rs^fioXh 
rni iuvd/jttus V rov Btov, xa) fch e? vfAuv. Gal. ii. 14, oifx o^BohoTovffi t^os rnv aXn^uotv 
rou tvecyytXiov. Eph. iv. 17, /«>j«st/ v/neif Ti^tTanTv iv fjt,araiorriri rov voos ui/ruv. 1 Pet. 
i. 2, txXsxroTs iv ayiocfffiZ Tvivfjbetros. Again in 1 Cor. x. 16, ro Torv^iov rtjs ivXoyieif 
is not the blessed cup, but the cup of blessing (so called) ; in Eph. v. 2, Phil. iv. 18, 
offiii tvuViots, which is rendered in the English Testament a sweet-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. 

I Winer, § 30. 2, 4. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 26. 2, 4. 
* Wetsteiu on Luke xvi. 24. See also Matt. Gr, Gr. \ 375. 06*. 2. 



ix. 2, fi 9r^sha-ii ruv a^ruv should probably be translated the setting on of bread; 
though it may also be convertible with the a^roi rr.s T^o^iixiusy shew-bread, of the 
Evangelists (Matt. xii. 4, Mark ii. 26, Luke vi. 4).^ 

§ 42. 

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 b}^ 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, dTr^lpaaros xaxcc-v. 2 Pet. ii. 14, 
a.Kocrae.'Trcx.iKJTOus: a/ma^r/as". 

2. Words which represent an action or affection of the 
mind ; as, for instance, adjectives denoting experience, 
ignorance, lust, zeal, &c. Thus Acts xxi. 21, ^nXuron 
rov vofxou. xxvi. 3, yva/crrYiv s^cuv ycou ^-j^Toj/xaTwv. I Cor. 
X. 6, iTn^vfjt.'nroi^ Kxaa-v. Heb. v. 13, iir^iipos Xoyou 'Sr/.aio- 

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, /xeiTrot vTrox^la-cco^ xal dvo- 
fjiioi^. Luke v. 12, 7rXiopr,f 'kiirpocs. John i. 14, TrXr^pris 
'/jxpiTd^ xou dXrt'^cicx.f. Acts ix. 36, nXr^pfH oiycc^aiv E^ycuv xaci 
sKEinfxofjuyajy. Rom. xv. 14, ptsaroi ea-rs dyu^cocuvris. 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, \7, 2 Pet. ii. 
14. Sometimes, however, the relation is expressed by 
ccTTo or Ix. Thus Matt, xxvii. 24, d^ajoi z'n^i utto rov 
aliXQLros rov ^txaioy toutou. Acts XX. 26, xaS'a^cf d-^o rov 
aT/xaror. 1 Cor. ix. 19, kXeuBspof o/v lyt liiyrm. Also by a 
dative, as in Rom. vi. 20, kXBv^s^oi rjrs rri ^ixocio'juvri. 

Obs. 1. Hence the names of vessels take the gen. of that with which they ai'e filled; 
as in Matt. xiv. 13, xi^df^iov v^xros, a. pitcher fu^l of water. Compare Jerera.xlviii. 1, 
1 Sam. X. 3, LXX. Dion. Hal. iv. 2023. Theophr. Char. 17. Diog. Laert. vi. 1. 
4, vii. 1.3. Athen. i. p. 177.2 

2. Verbs. Matt. xxii. 10, gTrXTjjS-oj 6 yaj/xof avaxcipt6va;v. 
Mark viii. 4, 7r69"£v rovrovf ^vynasrocl m m^s yji^rxaca a^Tuv 

' Winer, § 34. 2. Alt. § 23. 3. Hermann ad Viger, p. 890. 
2 Matt. Gr. Gr. § 353. c. Winer, § 30. 2. 



€CT* epfiixloLs ; XV". 36, ye/juVas- aTroyyov oJol/s-. Luke IV. 28, 
ETrXiQff&nffav 'TTavr^s ^ufxov. xi. 39, to ^e eVwS'sv z5/:Aa/v yefXEi 
aq'TTxyrif xccl TTovoj^/ar. XV. 17, TTo^roi (Jiiabiot tov nocr^os f/.ou 
TTiqiaazvovaiy aprcuv, iycu ^e Xt/j.:^ dTroXT^ufMxi ; John ii. 7, 
ysfj.ia-ccT£ ras v^qlas v^cctos. Acts ii. 28, TrXinpcoans /xa 
zv^poavvfts. xxvii. 38, xopejS-evTEj- T§o(|Jr>s'. 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, KQcl eTttev avrois, "Otz ocffsarsiKoc C/xois arsp ^ocXum- 
rlou xal TTinpas xai vTro^r^iAcHra)^, f/^ri n-Jos varEprioot-rz ; ot oe 
EtTTQv, OvIevos. Acts xvii. 25, ovVe 3-e§a9reverai 9r/50J^eo//.£V05- 
riMos. Rom. iii. 23, Travrsr ^'/:xa§Tov, vanpoVMrcci rr^s 
^o^ns rov 0£oi;. James i. 5, £1 Je Tis^ i5/ui&/v XsiVsrai ao(^ia,s, 
aiTEirco X, T. X*. 

06«. 2. All or most of these verbs, however, are equally followed by a genitive 
withj ix or uTo.^ Thus in Matt, xxiii. 2S, 'Uu^iv yif/.ovfftv i% ap-rayrtS xca ochxiccs' 
Luke XV. 16, 'tTiBvfMt ytfiiffai rhv KOiXt'av avrou tt.<jro raJv xipoiTiojv. xvi. 21, Wt^vf/'Cuv 
Xop~aiT^7,vai d-ro raJv •^i^'tuv. John xii. 3, r> oixiec WXrj^cki^*} Ix rr.; C(rfjcri;. Heb. xil. 
15, vtrn^uv aTo rrn ;^d^iTos rod Biov. Rev. xix. 21, ^dvra, to, o^vict i-x^ooraff^nffecv tx 
ruv ffct^xav avruy. We have likewise, Tkn^ovv and Trt^tva-ivnv with a dative in 2 Cor. 
vii. 4. So in Ecclus. xi. 12, Truxtia -rt^ifffivu. See also Rom. i. 29. 

Obs. 3. When followed by the prepositions Iv or s/j, the verbs ^t^itrcnviiv and iitm- 
^uffBai, have the sense of making progress, or falling short, respectively. Thus in 
1 Cor. i. 7j fm vffTi^iTff^oct Iv fjt,vitiv) ^u^ifffiaru XV. 58, •^i^io-ffiuovrts iv rZ i^yco tov Kv^iou 
'pravTOTS. 2 Cor. ix, 8, ^wxrot Ti o Szog •'i ;^af <v 'XioLaaivtrm sis, Vva Ti^tirffiVfiTi 
iii -TTav ioyov dya^ov. So trXovrl^tff^cti^ and ^XovrtTv tv rivi, in 1 Cor. i. 5, 1 Tim. 
vi. 18. We find also 9rXri^ovff6ut 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, vXn- 
fu^nri ri)v i-riyvufftv rov ^iXrilJt,a,ros alrov. In Phil. i. 11, the MSS. vary between 
xa^Tov and xBc^Tuv.^ See below, § 48, 3. 

Obs. 4. The verb hiff^ui, to need, to require,'does not occur in iis 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, v^ea-vv^aro rov f^h (i^i^ect.^ It has a gen., of the person and an accus, of the thing 
in 2 Cor. viii. 4. We have also Vuff^on -rtpi nvos, and BsKrSa; vti^ rtvos, to pray for 
a person, in Luke xxii. 32, Acts viii. 24. Compare Ps. xxix. 8, Job ix. 15, LXX. 
So Rom. viii. 27, ivrvyxavn vxi^ ayluv. James V. 16, si^so-Ss jJcrig aXXwXwv. 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 to forget. Thus 
Luke xvii. 32. /mvry/xovEj^ETs rrts yt/vaixos- Aur. John xv. 20, 
/xvr//A0V£e/£T£ rov Koyov, ou lyu sTttov v/xTv. Heb. vi. 10, iTTiKac- 

'ISchweighaUser ad Athen. xiii. p. 569, et in Addend, et Corri-jend. p. 478. 
' Wiuer, ^ SO, 5. Alt, § 'Z7, I. 


bs(T^ai roil 5pyou vfxuy. xiii. 2, rrjs (piXo^syixs fxri ETrikoLV- 
^ave<T^e. Add Mark xiv. 72, Luke i. 72, Acts xi. 16, 
2 Pet. iii. 2, Heb. xi. 15, xiii. 2, 16, et alibi. 

Obs. 5. An instance of the construction with Tt^t occurs in Heb. xi. 22, rns ll^ohov 
ruv vluv 'lo-^ariX ifjuyfj/t^onvri, made mention of the Exodus. Compare Tobit ^iv. I. 
Sometimes also these verbs are construed with an accusative ; as in Matt. xvi. 9, 
evhi /Avt]f£oHutTt revs TivTi cL^revs. Phil. iii. 13, ra fih o-r'nru iTtkav^avofUvos. See 
also 1 Thess. ii. 9, 2 Tim. ii. 8, Rev. xviii. 5. lu a transitive sense, to remind, to 
call to memory, these verbs usually take a double accus. (John xiv. 26. 1 Cor. 
iv. 17) ; but the thing to be recollected is in the gen. with ?r«f/ in 2 Pet. i. 12, l,o oIk 
afAtXraru ufjuaf dti v^ofAi/uvi^axuv «rt^} vovruv. 

2. Those which signify to be careful, or careless about any 
thing : as in Luke x. 34, s7rE[XEXri^n avrov. 1 Cor. ix. 10, 
f/,Y) rajv ^oaiv fxiXEi rco 0£a; ; 1 Tim. iii. 5^ ttcu^ sKKXincrioc^ 
&EOV £7rifAsXri(7ETai ; iv. 14, pc^ apceXe/ rou Iv crot %api(TiJ,Qcros. 
Heb. ii. 3, mXiKOLUTin^ oi[XEKr\G(x.vTis acoTfiplas. xii. 4, v\s 
fxou, /xTi oXiyaipsi TTa/^gtar Kvpiou. Frequently the con- 
struction is with TTspi and a genitive. Thus Matt. xxii. 
16, Mark xii. 14, ou fxix^i aoi Trspl ot/^svor. John x. 13, ou 
fJiiXsi ocvro) TTE^l ruv Trpo^oircov. xii. 6, ovx on Trspl to/v 
TTruy^Zv eptsXsv qcvtu. 1 Pet. V. 7, on ocuto; fxeXei Trspl vfxcuv. 
Compare Wisd. xii. 13, 1 Mace. xiv. 43. According to 
some,^ there is an instance of (/.iXsi with a nominative 
in Acts xviii. 17, ol^lv rourcov r^ T'aXXiMvi. sfXcXiv. By 
rendering ov^bv, not at all, it will equally suit the regular 
construction with a genitive.* 

3. Verbs signifying to long for anythingy to covet ; as in 
Matt. V. 28, ^Xettcuv yvvaXyca Trpos to sTi^vfj^riaxi avrris, 
1 Thess. ii. 8, IfAsi^oixsvoi vfxm. 1 Tim. iii. 1, eI ns ewi- 
<T)to9rris" o^iyETaij jcocXov Epyou etti^vixei. Add 1 Tim. vi. 10, 
Heb. xi. 16. 

Oht» 6. Under this head may be classed the expression •ruvriv rtvog and h^^vv rm?, 
employed in a figurative sense. Thus Plutarch, de Ira cohibenda, t. ii. p. 460, 
(jt.h ^tnuy /ttn^t J/\^aiv avrtjs,scil. rifjiaipicis . Compare Xen. CEcon. xiii. 9, Joseph. B. 
J. iv. 11. 4. We find however the accusative in Matt. v. 6, iJi.a.Ka.^101 o\ artiva/vrts x«j 
itypuvrn T«y hxeuoffvvnv.^ So also Joseph. B. J. i. 32. 2, ^;i/'>jWj rov/zov cJfAa. The 
verb h^l^Hv is followed by a dative in Exod. xvii. 5, LXX, sJ/V»?«» » ^aos v'Setru 

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 supra : Wetstein and Eisner on Matt. v. 6. 


of comparison in the genitive. Thus in Matt. xvii. 17, 
Z yevea aTTiarrof, ems ttots dvE^ofMoci vfxuv ; Acts xviii. 12, 
raXX/ft;vof uvbuTrxr&uovros rriS" h'/jxia.s. 1 Tim. ii. 12, 
yt/va<xl Se ^t^ajxsiv own. ETrirpiTTco, oC^e au^svrsTv dv^^o^. 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 xarxvei^xmv rivoj, 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- 
tive, or a preposition with its case. Thus Matt. ii. 22, ^A^x^Xaos (ieta-tXivn It) Tr,s 
^lov^cttag. Luke i. 33, (iaiirtXtv<ni i-r) rov otxov 'l^^a>gX. Acts vii. 10, fiyoufiivov l^r' a7- 
yvTrov. XX. 28, xoif^amiv t^v s»xX>j(r/av Qiov. 2 Cor. xii. 13, t/ ya^ ia-riv, o ^ttjjSjjt* 
vfip rag Xoi<rai iKKkr]trias ; Phil. iv. 7, m uorivn roZ Qiov, h vTtpi^ova-x ^sivrx vouv. 2 
Thess. i. 4, tkTs ^xi^Piinv, aJs av£x«<7'^s (which may, however, be otherwise accounted 
for). 2 Pet. ii. 19, ai yd^ ti; riTTriTui, rovru xa) ^thovXuTau^ ReV. ii. 27, Totfjcavii au- 
rovi \v pdli'^M ffthri^a. See also Matt. ii. 6, Luke xix. 14, 27, Rev. v. 10. The form 
«^Xj(rSa/ 'iv nvt occurs in 1 Sam. ix. 17, x. 1, LXX. 

Obs. 8. In the opposite sense, to obey, only kxouut is found with a genitive ; as in 
Luke X. 16, xvi. 29, 31, John viii. 47, Acts iv. 19, et alihi^ Other verbs of the same 
import are universally construed with a dative. Thus in Matt. viii. 27, ei dn/Lcoi xa) 
V B-dkaa'era. VTfuxovovffiv aurS. Acts V. 29, TH^a^xuv Js? QtZ f^ZkXov ri dvB^ca^ots. xxvii. 
21, ilii fji.iv TiiB-aoxtltravTKs ftoi f/,n dvdyttrS-at uTo rvs K^«r>jf. Gal. iii. 1, v. 7, t« aXff 
Sua //.h 'TiiBio-Bai. Add Mark i. 27, iv. 41, Luke viii. 25, xvii. 6, Acts v. 36, 37, 40, 
vi. V, 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 aTTti^iTv, as in John iii. 36, o Tg oi-ruB'cov ru vIS, olx o-\^irat Z,uri)i. Rom. ii. 8, 
a-ru^evffi f^h rn aXn^iix, <rn^ou,ivois Ti r^ d^txiif. The adjective a'Tu^hs also takes 
the dative in Acts xxvi. 19, Rom. i. 30. In Rom. xvi. 17, where the proper con- 
struction would have been I'^nxQvffu.n tm tvtm rfjs h}ax*is tU Sv ^a^t^oB-tjTt, the ajite- 
cedent tu'Tov is attracted into the case of the relative. See § 59. The LXX fre- 
quently construe vTuxoum 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 account 
of which the charge is made, as in Acts xix. 40, kyaa.- 
Xsia'ba.i (jTac(jsa)f. More commonly, however, this gen. is 
accompanied with lia. or ttb^I, as in Acts xxiii. 29, syxa- 
Kou/jisyov TT^pi ^viTinfxaircuv rov vo/xov. When these take the 
gen. of the person, it is in consequence of their compo- 
sition with the prep, xoctx. Otherwise they take the daf. 
of the person. See § 45. 4. 

6. Verbs of sense. The verb axozJsiv 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. ^ V\^iner, § 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 
dycovsiv itself in John viii. 43. 

Obs. 9. It should seem that this verb, when simply marking t/te sense of hearing, 
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 ix. 7, compared with xxii. 9. 
Thus also the verbs h^ufAiTa-^ect, ffwiiven, to reflect, to understand, are commonly in the 
New Testament followed by the accusative ; as in Matt. ii. 20, ravra Vi alroZ IvSw- 
/UrtiBivroi. i IX. 4, ivarl vfjuiii \thvfJt,Uff^i ^ovnoa iv renTs xa^'tuis vfjiuv ; Luke ii. 50, alra) 
eh o'vvtixav ro p)i/!^a. xviii. 34, avrot oiiTiv tovtuv ffwriKCCv. xxiv. 45, trvviivxt raj ypcKpds, 
The construction, however, with ti^) and a genitive is found in Acts x. 1 9, nir^ov 
iv^vfiovfiivou <zi^) rov o^d/uaros. Also with it) and a dative m Mark vi. 52, ov yap truv 
rJKCiv iTi ToTi doTois. In like manner dxovnv sometimes occurs with Ttp) and a geni- 
tive of the t/iitig. Thus Mark v. 27, Luke vii. 3, axova-as -noi rou 'Infov. So in Acts 
xxiii. 20, Tvv6d,nff6at crift auroZ.^ 

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 limits otflxes 
the relation expressed by the verb. For instance, verbs compounded with xara take 
the genitive of the person, against whom any thing is said or done. John v. 45, fin 
'hoxilri on \yu xarnyo^^o-u vfiuv sr^oj rov Tecri^cc' Hvriv o xarnyo^av vjjmv, Mufffis. Rom. 
xi. 18, fzh xtx.Toi.xa.vxfi' 'rut xXaChuv. James iv. 11, (t.n xa.ra.Xa.\{i7% dXX:^kuv, do not speak 
against, i. e. calumniate, one another. Add John viii. 6, Acts xxv. 5, 1 Pet. ii. 12, 
iii. 16. The same import attaches to the preposition when separated from the verb, 
as in Rom. viii. 33, t/j lyxaXiffn xara ixXiktuv Stav ; James iii. 14,^^ xaraxtzw 
Xcitrh xa) •^ivhicrh xard tjjj dXtihieis. V. 9, ^>j ffri)idZ,iTi xar^ ocXXriXuv. 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 xxv. 
\\,uy ovToi xxrnyo^ovffl fjcou. Of the same class is xaratp^ovuv rivos, to think against, \.e, 
to despise or slight, any one, in Matt. vi. 24, xviii. 10, Rom. ii. 4, I Cor. xi, 22, Heb. 
xii. 2, et alibi; xarafucoru^iTv r I rives, in Matt. xxvi. 62, xxvii. 13; xaraytXav rive;, 
in Matt. ix. 24, Mark v. 39 j xaraffTpriviav nvog, in 1 Tim. v. 1 1 ; xturccyivuffxnv r/v»f, 
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, Tjjv Bo'^av Kv^i'ou xex.<TOTT^tZ,ofMvoi. Col. ii. 18, fi.^'hui vfjtocs xarafo^etPiiviru. With 
respect to verbs compounded with other prepositions governing a genitive in the 
'^&\v 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, 'roifjffev rifMt 5iou;, ol T^oTaosua-ovTai rifzuv, i. e. Tooiva-ovrut too 7iju,ay. Some- 
times the genitive depends upon the relation expressed by the verb itself; as in 
Luke X. 35, l-rif/.tX^hn eclrov ; 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 HXovra dvo eov ^avsltraer^ai /u.h a.-ro(rr^d.(prii , i. e. do not reject him. Of 
words governing a genitive, although compounded with prepositions which are not 
followed by that case, as trvv for instance, the following are examples: — Acts xiii. 1, 
'iipuhou ffivrpoipo;. xxiii. 20, (njvt^svra rou i^urrio'eii ffs. 1 Cor. ix. 23, ffuyxetvuvos alrov. 
Phil. ii. 25, cwieyh xa) ffUffr^ariturr,)) imv. 

1 Wiuer, § 30, 7. Alt, § 27, 4. Kuinoel on Acts ix. 7, 


§ 43. — Of the Comparative, 

1 . 'J'he ordinary syntax of the Comparative requires the 
things compared to be united in the same case by means of 
the particle rt, 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 /U.71 TTEpia-a-Evari ri ^Diccioauyin vf/^cov ttXeTov tcuv y^acfM- 
IMxreojv X. t. X., for rris ^ ixociocrvvris rouv yqx(jt.[jia.ricuv. John V. 36, 
eycu Se g'x,^ '^'^v [/.xprvp'tacv [xsi^co rov ^Icodvvou. 1 Cor. i. 25, to 
ixctfpoy Tov 0eou cro(pc<;T£§ov rcuv dv^qofTraJV kari, ycocl to do'^&'vh rov 
0£oy ]<jy(^up6rsqoy rcov oi\hpc!j7roov lari. 

Obs. 1. In this last example the genitives omitted are rn; ffo(ploti and rou iVxyoj, 
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 iorrentior ; for Iscei sermone. 

Obs. 2. The abbreviation is not confined to comparatives, but occurs after other 
words, as of/,om for instance. Thus Jude 7, loho^jt-a, kcci Yo/u.oppa, zai at crs^J avrds 
ToXiiS) TOV ofioioy Tovrois r^oTov ix'^roovi-ja'aiTcii, i. e. tm rovreuv T^oTeu. Rev. ix. 10, s'%ay- 
fftv ovpa; of/co'ia; trxooTioi;- xiii. 11, sT^s xs^ara "hvo ofcottx, cc^vim. 

Obs. 3. The particle r, is omitted before numerals in Acts iv. 22, Wuv yd^ tiv Tkuo- 
vm Tira-ciosiKovrci. In Acts xxiv. 11, the true reading seems to be, ov -n-Xilovs utrl (ah 
n^ioai liKo^vo. The Edd. insert v[. 

3. Sometimes the thing compared is put in the accusative 
with TTapa. Luke iii. 13, y^t^h TcXiov Trocpa. to ^larsrccyixivov i5ptiv 
TrpdaaTz. Heb. i. 4, '^ioi.(popcl>rz^oM Trap'' ocurous ovopoa, where it will 
also be observed that ^rcc^' ai;rot/$^ is concisely put for ttc^o' auroj^j 
ovopca. iii. 3, 57"Xe/ovo5- ^o^ns' ovro^ TTx^oi M<wj^v ri^iiurai. xi. 4, 
TrXEiova ^valocv "AjScX TTupa, Kaiv TT^oari^izyycs. Also with v'nip» 
Luke xvi. 8, (ppoyiixcurs^oi J-TTE^ rous vlovs rov (^cotos. Heb. iv. 12, 
To/xcwTEgof vTTE^ TToiaocv fj.x%(xip(x.v^iaroiAov . 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. .^n. i. 351, 
Scelere ante alios immanior omnes. 

4. Some verbs, used in a comparative sense, are followed by 
^, with lAoiXKoy understood. This usage of ^ovXoiAai is common 


in the best writers; and ^^Xsiv has a similar import in 1 Cor. 
xiv. 19, ^sXco TrhrE "koyous ^/a rov moos (xou XaXTjupci, ^ ixv^iovs Xo- 
70^5- sv yXaxra-ri. The same omission occurs with KuairBXeX in 
Luke xvii. 2. Compare Tobit iii. 6, vi. 12. 

Obs. 4. The comparative is often used without an expressed object of comparison, 
which is nevertheless imphed in some additional circumstance which is passinj; in 
the mind. Thus John xiii- 27, S TonTg, -ro/tKrov rdx'ov, more quickly than is your pre* 
sent purpose. Acts xvii. 21, ^A^maToi us ovTiv 'irt^ov tvxai'^ow, rt X'tyuv r) xai aKovui 
KatvoTt^ov, something more new than the latest news, i. e. one novfliy after another. 
In the next verse the particle us is inserted to qualify a disagreeable expression, 
and we may render us iutri^aif^oviffTi^ovs, somewhat more superstitious than, from your 
high philosophical notions, might be expected. Again, in Acts xviii. 26, uxptfhiffTt^av 
ai/rS i^ihvTo rhv rov Qiov ohov, more accurately than he had hitherto been acquainted with 
it. XXV. 10, as »a) ffh xdXXiov iTtyivucrxus, i. e. xdXXiov, ri WiyivaiifKitv ^oxus. xxvii. 
13, uffffov rret^XiyovTo rhv K^Tirnv, nearer than they had intended. Other examples are 
2 Cor. vii. 7, Phil. i. 12, ii. 28, 1 Tim. iii. 14, 2 Tim. i. 18, Heb. xiii. 19, 23, 2 Pet. 
i. 19. Compare Theophr. Char. viii. 1, Eurip. Orest. 1327, Arist. Av. 254, Lucian. 
Asin. 41, Plat. Euthyphr. 1. 

Obs. 5. There is no passage in the New Testament in which the sense is precisely 
the same as if the positive were used ; for even in 2 Cor. ii. 4, -jn^iffffori^us may be 
rendered, more abundantly than you imagine. On the other hand, the positive is 
sometimes put for the comparative; as in Matt, xviii. 8, Mark ix. 43, xaXov voi ia-rlv 
ilffiXiilv US TJ7V ^cohv xcoXov n xvXXov, ri ^vo xi^l^rts x. r. X. Luke Xviii. 14, xccrsfiij ovtos 
h'hixuiufjt.iyosy ri IxtTvos. Compare Gen. xlix. 12, Ps. cxviii. 8, Lament, iv. 9, Hos. ii. 
7, Jonah iv. 3, LXX. So, in Latin, Plant. Rud. iv. 4. 70, Tacita mulier est bona 
semper, quam loquens. We have also the positive with Ta^d in Luke xiii. 2, a^a^- 
ruXoi ^oc^d -ffivrocs. This has been referred to an analogy with the Hebrew use of 
the particle ^D) '^ Exod.^ xviii. 11, Numb. xii. 3, Judith xiii. 18, and elsewhere. 

But similar examples occur in Greek. Thus Dion. H. Ep. ad Pomp. ii. 3, ax^i^ris rt 
xet) Xfrrh •rcc^'' hvrivovi iri^etv "^idXsxrov. Philostr. V. Apol. p. 110, Tet^d ^dvras 'A%a/- 
evs fiiyas. Eph. iii. 8, tJ IXa^irrori^u ^uvtoiv tuv dy'iuv. In the same way vft^ is 
used in 1 Sam. i. 8, xv. 28, 2 Sam. xiii. 15, LXX. And thus prce in Cicero : proe 
nobis beatus. To this head belongs Luke xv. 7, x''''i°'' *''•'"«' ^^' ^i*' dfAa^rukw furavo- 
ovvri, vt lur) hnvyixavrxivna "^ixaleis. Compare Gen. xxxviii. 26, LXX.^ So, as some 
have supposed, Matt. xxvi. 24, Mark xiv. 21, xaXh rjy ahru, u ev» lyswrh, which 
may, however, be rendered, // were well for him, &c. 

Obs. 6. The comparative is put for the superlative ; as in Matt. xi. 11, Luke vii. 
28, It fAtxportPos iv T^ (haffiXiitt. ruv ou^avuv f4,u'^uv uvrov iffrtv, i. e. fnx^ort^os ruv dXXui, 
ox'fA.tx^oraTos. Matt, xviii. 1, Mark ix. 34, Luke ix. 46, 48, tIs ei^a. f^ti^uy la-rt; for 
[jbiytaros. So Diog. L. vi. 1. 4, i^urviB-us ti ftaxa^iuri^ov iv dv^^uTois, s<pn, iuruxovvra 
dcro^aviTv. To the above may be added 1 Cor. viii. 13, juu^uv "hi rovrcov h dyd-rtt. 
2 Cor. xii. 15, tl xa) ^i^iffffoTi^us vfjide dya-ruv, riTTov dyu.<ffufjMi. The case is different, 
where •xdvrwv is connected with the comparative ; as in Matt. xiii. 32, //.ix^on^ov 
<xdvruv ruv fftipf/^druv. Mark iv. 32, vavruv ruv Xaxdvwv foii^aiv. John X. 29, f^u'^av 
-rdvruv. 1 Cor. xv. 19, XXtuvon^oi -ffdyruv dvB^^eo^uv ifff^'tv. Eph. iii. 8, ru IXa-xurrori^M 

1 Winer, § 36. Alt, § 34. Georg. Hierocrit. i. 3. 29. -Dorvill. ad Char. p. 538. 
Weiske de Pleonasm, p. 153. Wyttenbach ad Plut, Moral, i. p. 238. Ast ad Plat. 
Phaedr. p. 395. 


v»^rut TflJv oky'tm. In these cases •ravrwy gives a superlative sense ; but at the same 
time, the comparative has its proper sense and government. So Athen. iii. 15, 'jtavrm 
xa^-raiv dtptXificuri^x. Dio Chrysost. iii. p. 108., 44, aToivrcJV ^i^avartpos. Liban. 
iii. p. 17. ocrdvTuv aroTuri^ov. 

Obs. 7. The use of the superlative for the comparative is occasionally met with 
in the substitution of the adjective ToZros for T^ort^os. Thus in John i. 15, toutos 
fiou Jv. Acts i. 1, Tov T^urov Xoyov, the former narrative, 'namely, the Gospel of St. 
Luke. Also the adverb t^utov for t^otioov, as in John xv. 18, i/uX -r^urav v(ji.uv fufxi- 
ffnxt*. Compare also Matt. v. 24, viii. 21, Heb. viii. 7. Another example, accord- 
ing to a very widely received interpretation, is Luke ii. 2, uvm h a-roy^et(ph t^utv iy'mro 
fiyiftevitjovro; rrts 'Sv^iccf Ky^>jv/ay, be/ore Cyrenius was Governor of Syria. The true 
meaning, however, seems to be, that the census in question, though decreed by the 
Emperor some years previously,^;**/ 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, or sentiment. Thus in Matt. xiii. 18, t-^v Tracpx^oXviy toD 
a-Triiqovro^, the Parable relative to the sower ; John xvii. 2, e^ov 
ff/av TTxa-ns axpytos, power over all flesh ; Rom. xiii. 3, (p6/3or t&/v 
dya.'buv eqyouv, terror with respect to good works ; 1 Pet. i. 2, 
pavri(7fA.ov alfxaros, sprinkling with, or^ by means of, blood. So 
with verbs : as in 2 Pet. iii. 9, ou ^qoc'^uyei o Kvpiof rv^s aTracyyeXi^xs, 
with respect to his promise. And with adjectives ; as in Luke 
xxiv. 25, /3§a^£7s- rri yccc^igi, tov Triarevsiv, slow with regard to 
believing. See also Eph. ii. 12, iii. 6, James ii. 5. 

Obs. 1. An analogous usage is that of the genitive with substantives or verbs, in 
cases where tti^i is otherwise used ; as in Matt. iv. 24, axov avrov, the fame of him, 
or concerning him; for which we have rj^^of ^i^) avrou, in Luke iv. 37. Thus again 
in Acts vii. 19, ixaxua-t rat/j -rxri^as hf/uv rou touTv 'ixStra, x. r. X., ill-treated them 
in regard to the exposition : xx. 3, yveofj.n rov v-rotrr^iipuv, 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. 

Obs. 2. A remoter relation, which requires to be more fully developed, exists 
in the following : Mark i. 4, (iavrrtirf^x [AiTocvoias, baptism which inculcates repen- 
tance; Luke xi. 29, trnfuTov 'Java, the sign which Jonah affords; Rom. vii. 2* 
rou vofAOu rou av^^oS) the law which binds to the husband; viii. 36, rr^ofiaroi (ri^ayrti, 
sheep destined for slaughter ; Phil. iv. 9. o SsaV tJJs u^^vyis, the God who gives peace ; 
Col. i. 20, rod ectfjixro; rod ffrav^ou, the blood shed upon the cross ; ii. 19, xtl^no'iv roll 
Biou, an increase required by God ; 2 Thess. iii. 5, rvv iiTofioviiv rou X^ia-rou, patience 
similar to that of Chnst ; James ii. 4, x^trai haXoyio-f^aJv tovv^Sv, judges who decide 
upon evil principles. To the same head may be referred the expression Tiffr/s *diou 
(Mark xi. 22), v'raxoYi X^itrroZ (2 Cor. x. 5), and the like. Thus also Rom. i. 5, 
vTaxohi Tiffriuf, obedience upon a principle of faith. Pet. i 22, rri vraxo^ rris 

^ See Interpp. ad loc. 


aXnBi'iai, the obedience required by the Gospe/. For additional instances, see Matt. 
X. 1, xii. 31, xxiv. 15, John v. 29, vii. 35, Acts iii. 16, xiv. 9, Rom. 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, Col. i. 
23, Heb. vi. 2, James ii. 1, Jude 11, Rev. xiv. 12, xv. 2. The LXX. use the 
genitive in similar relations in Numb. xxvi. 9, Job xxi. 4, Obad. 2, Ecclus.iii. 14, 
Wjsd. viii. 3, 1 Mace. iii. 14. Compare Thucyd. i. 129, Heliod. ii. 4. 65, 
Theodoret,iv. 1140. 

Obs. 3. There are also a class of expressions, which admit of different explana- 
tions in different contexts. Thus ayK-rrj S-ov may mean either the love which man 
owes to God, (John v. 42, 1 John ii. 5, 15, v. 3), or the love of God towards mankind j 
(Rom. v. 5, viii. 35, 2 Cor. v. 14). Similarly in Pausan. viii. 7, o^xei Biuv, oaths by, 
or in the name of, the Gods. The Latins likewise employed the genitive in a two- 
fold application after certain words, as observed in A. Gell. ix. 12, Metus quoque 
et injuria aique alia qucedam id genus, sic uiroque versum did possunt : nam metus 
hostiura recte dicitur, et cum timent hostes, et cum timentur.* 

Obs. 4. It may be doubted whether the expression ro tvayyiXiov rev X^kttov, which 
repeatedly occurs, is to be rendered the Gospel concertiing Christ, or the Gospel 
preached by Christ. In support of the former acceptation, Winer remarks, that it 
appears to be abridged, as it were, from the more complete form in Rom. i. 2, 3, 
tvayyiX/ov 0iov Ti^) rod vtov ccvtoZ. He refers also to the similar expression, ro tvxy- 
y'iktov rtii (ia<riXsias, in Matt. iv. 23, ix. 35. On the other hand, however, tloiyyiXm 
fLov is plainly the Gospel preached by me (St. Paul) in Rom. ii. 16, xvi. 25, 2 Tim. 
ii. 8- Both significations may therefore be included. 

2. The genitive is constantly employed, to mark the object 
or cause of any feeling or affection of the body or mind. Thus 
Acts iv. 9, ettI suc^yeaiac av^^cuTTouj beneficeiice towards the man ; 

2 Cor. i. 5, 'KOL^r\iJ^a.T(x. tqv 'Kqia-Tou, svfferings for the sOike of 
Christ ; Eph. iii. 1, o ^sapojos- rov Xpiarou, a prisoner in the cause 
of Christ ; Philem. 13, ro7s- ^E<j{jt,oTf rou EvayyBXiov, bonds for the 
sake of the Gospel; Heb. xi. 26, rov ovBi^icr/xov rov 'Kpurroij, 
repfvoach on accou7it of Christ. Compare Col. i. 24, 2 Tim. i. 8, 
Philem. 9, Heb. xiii. 13. So with adjectives; Heb. iii. 12, 
xapVia, TTo-yfipa oiTnarlas, a heart which is tvicked by reason of 
unbelief The Latins have a similar idiom ; as in Virg. ^n. 
xi. 73, Lceta laborum.^ 

Obs. 5. There are also passages in the New Testament as well as in other authors, 
in which the genitive is used, where the object may more properly be otherwise 
expressed. Thus Luke vi. 12, r^ T^atrivx*) rov Siov, in prayer to God ; instead of the 
more regular form t^c; rev Stov, which occurs in Rom. xv. 30. So also Joseph. 
Ant. ix. 9, Wi ^iYiffiv xai ixirtiav rod 6tov. The Latins said, in like manner, supplicia 
deorum (Sail. Cat.). Very similar are the expressions vUns Siou, v^ccxoh X^tarov, &c. 
which have been already noticed. Thus also the possessive pronouns are sometimes 
put objectively ; as in Luke xiii. 19, 1 Cor. xi. 24, rovro vonln lU rhv ly.>>v uvccf/.vfi(rtv, 

> Winer, § 30, 1. Alt, § 26. .1, 2. Dor\'ill. ad Char. p. 498. Markland ad 
Eur. Suppl. 838. Ast ad Plat. Legg. p. 72. 
« Winer, § 30, 1. 4. Monk ad Eur. Alcest. 751. 


in rememhrance of me ; Rom. xi. 31, t« vfurieu tXiu, the mercy extended to you; 
1 Cor. XV. 31, T>jy iifjLiTi^av xavxnifti »iv 'ix'^> ^U fioasting of you, Winer adds 2 Tim. 
IV. 6, xetiooi T}ji (fitif avaXvo'iai; ifitrrnxi, which is not a case in point. The Latins 
have the same usage ; as, for example, in Torent. Phorm. v. 8. 27, Neque negligentia 
tua, neque id odio fecit tuo ; i. e. erga /e. 

O'ls. G. Instead of a genitive, the dative with h is put after a verb expressive of 
a mental affection in 2 Cor. v. 2, |y rovru ffTivcc^ofAiv. 

^s. 7. The word svop^e; is properly constructed with a dative in Matt. v. 21, 22, 
tvo^o; iffTcti rr, x^ltru, ru ffvvih^iu. In the latter of these two verses it is also followed 
by %U with an accusative, and manifestly in the same sense. It is found with the 
genitive, x^lftun or some like word being understood, in Matt. xxvi. 66, Mark xiv. 
64, ivo^oi Bavd'ToUf Mark iii. 19, hox^s aluviou x^i<rsu;. So also in I Cor. xi. 27, Heb. 
ii. 15, James ii. 10. 

3. Words which huply a comparison with respect to value, 
as a^tof, ava^jof. 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, &c. Matt. x. 
29, oiJ^^^/St'o a-Tfovblx daaocqiou TTco'kurod ; xvi. 26, ti ^wasi av^qcoTfOf 
avTaXXay/xas rrjs xj/y^vis" avrov ; XX. 13, ovy(^i ^rivapiou avtx(^uWiacx,s 
/xoi ; xxvi. 9, rt^VMocro ydp rovro to (xvqoy tt^x^^mqh ttoKKou. Acts 
xxii. 28, lyu) itoXkov x£(pxXxiou rm TroXirsixv Tauryjv sxTTj^ra/xTjv. 
1 Cor. vi. 20, rtyopQca^Tirs yoip rt/xrir. Rev. vi. 6, %o7vi^ airov 

Obs. 8. Upon the same principle the genitive is put after words which denote a 
distinction ov difference ; as after }ix<ps^iiv m Matt. x. 3\, •rokkuv trr^imBiuv '^iec(p(^sTt 
vfZiTs. xii. 12, <T6(rM ovv ^ia.(pi^ii uv^^u-roj T^ojidrov ', 1 Cor. XV. 41, uffrhp ydp ccffrtpof 
ha(pi^u sv lo^ri. Add Matt. vi. 26, Luke xii. 7, 24, Gal. iv. H 

06*. 9. Frequently the preposition ix or avr/ is inserted ; as in Matt. xx. 2, ffvfjc,(pu- 
9r,rai yttsra reuv i^yaruv ix d'Avu^'iov. 28, oovvxi tjjv "^vx^v uvtou Xutpov ccvt) toWuv. 
Xxvii. 7, yiyo^cccrav i^ uutuv (^d^yv^iuv) tov uy^ov rod xtoK/jt,iu;, Acts 1. 18, ixryiffctro 
Xi^o'iov IX TOV fj^KT^ov Tv\i d^ixix;. |Heb. xii. 2, uvTi rr,; -rooKti/^ivyis avrZ ^^^a^cc; vTifJt-Hvi 
trravoov. So in Joel iii, 3, LXX, to, xo^xa-icx, i'Ta/y.ovv avTi rou o'/vou. Kpist. Jerem. 
v. 25, Ix Txa-tis Ti/xY.i rtyo^xiTfzivx icrrlv. 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, x^arvj^af 
ocvTov Tvis x^ipo^. Acts iii. 6, Triciffccs avrov rvis ^s^/as- x,ej§os-. 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, 
x^arviaois ^r\s yji^o<: oLvrris. John xxi. 10, hkyxctrz utto ruv oyi/ccpiutv, 
c5v iTTid'jars vyv (though this may be an instance of attraction). 
Heb. vi. 18, x^arTj-rai- rris TTfoxziixiwiS IXtci^os, 

» Alt, Gram. N. T. o 27. 6. Wetstein on Matt. vi. 26. 


Obs. 10. The more 'proper form is x^artTv rtva, as in Matt. xiv. 3, xvii. 28, Mark 
iii. 21, et alibi. Compare also John vii. 30, 32, x, 39. Sometimes U is prefixed to 
this genitive, as in Acts xxviii. 4, x^ificcfuvov l» rrvis x^'i°>' Compare Herod, iv. 
10, Xen. Mem. iii. 10. 13. 

Obs. 11. Analogous to this usage is that of XafifiuvurBat and some of its com* 
pounds, with ci^na-^at, and txiff^m, signifying, in the middle voice, to take hold of. 
Thus Matt. xiv. 31, o 'ir^ffoZs^ iKnlvai rnv ^i^^oc, iTiXafiiTO avrov. Xvii. 7, T^offiX^uv 
^Itiaovs Hiyparo etlruy. Luke i. 54, dvriXec(iiro 'l^^«^^ Tailog avreu. XX. 20, 26> 
i^tXdfiia-Sm Xoyov, to lay hold of one'' s words, i. e. with a view to make them a subject 
of accusation or blame ; Heb. vi. 9, \x,ofAtva, ffum^lcci, things laying hold o/*, i. e. con- 
nected with, salvation. Other examples will be found in Matt. vi. 24, viii. 15, ix. 
20,21,29, Marki. 41, v. 30, vi. 46, viii. 23, Luke ix. 47, xvi. 13, xxii. 51, Acts 
XX. 35, xxiii. 19, 1 Thess. v. 14, 1 Tim. vi. 2, Tit. i. 9 ; and in Gen. xxxix. 12, Job 
i. 19, xxxiii. 34, LXX. In the sense of el-^rrter^aii we find ^tytTv with a genitive in 
Heb. xi. 28, xii. 20. It is to be remarked however, that the verb lcr/Xa^/3av$(rSa/ is 
also found with the accusative ; but in a sense which indicates the forcible seizure 
of the entire person; as in Acts xvi. 19, l-rtXafiofjuvoi rov IlaZkov kk) rov ^Ixav^ itkKv<rciv 
Its rhv ayopocv \t) tovs a^p^avraj. xviii. 17, i'^ikoc,(io/^ivoi luff^ivtjv, iTvrrov tiJu'T^off^iv 
Tou (i^fAarog. The verb ^puima-^ai also takes an accusative in 1 Cor. iii. 19. It is 
by no means agreed that rrpotrXa/ufidivia-^cn, as employed in Matt. xvi. 22, is used in 
the sense which belongs to the class of words under consideration. 

Obs. 12. The verb 'n;y;^av£/v, signifying to obtain, is found in the New Testament 
with a genitive only; as in Luke xx. 35, xotTctliu^ivris tou alZvo; Iksivov rvxiUv. See 
Acts xxiv. 3, xxvii. 3, 2 Tim. ii. 10, Heb. xi. 35; and in the LXX, Job iii. 21, 
xvii. 1, jPfOV. XXX. 23. So the compound Wtrvyx^'VitVi in Rom. xi. 7, Heb. vi. 15, 
xi. 33. In Luke i. 9, Xay;^avt;v takes a genitive: in Acts i. 17, 2 Pet. i. 1, an 
accusative. Except in Gal. iv. 30, (where it is used absolutely), xXfifovo/jLiiv is 
followed by an accusative of the thing which is inherited. Thus in Matt. v. 5, 
uvToi xXn^ovo/zriffovfft rh y^iv. Compare Matt. xix. 29, xxv. 34, Luke xviii. 18, 1 Cor. 
XV. 50, Gal. V. 21, Heb. i. 4, 14, et alibi. So in Prov. iii. 35, LXX, Vo^av »X9i^ovof/.t7v. 
Such indeed is the general construction in the LXX, and also with the accusative 
of the person, as in Gen. xv. 4, xXn^ovofAnffii ftt, he shall be my heir. The later 
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 vvxros, in Matt. ii. 14, xxvii. 64, xxviii. 14, John 
vii. 50, 1 Thess. v. 7, et alibi ; 7)(j.sqais xgcl viJxTof, in Mark v. 5, 
Luke xviii. 7, 2 Thess. ii. 9, 1 Tim. v. 5, et alibi; %uiaumqs, in 
Mark xiii. 18. Add (xsffowicr lov ^ dKeKTpo(pajvl(zs, in Mark 
xiii. 35. 

Obs. 13. Both time and place, in answer to the questions when and where, are 
usually expressed by the preposition iv, as in Matt. iii. 1, iv ra7s fif/.ipats ixtivais, 
xiii. 4, h Tu ff-ril^uv. John v. 7, iv o, sc. x^°^V' Rom. xiii. 13, iv hf^'i^cc.. So also, in 
the sense of within in John ii. 19, 20, iv r^Kr)v r,,ui^ats. Again, Acts ix. 10, 19, b 
Aafiaffxu. xix. 1, iv Kflg/vS<w, 2 Tim. iv. J 3, 20, iv T^uahi, iv 'i^hXxru. Both construc- 
tions are united in Matt. xxiv. 20, 9r^offivxi<r^t Ti 'Ivu fin yivrircn h (^vyh vfiuv ^ufiuvoi, 
fAfihi iv ffck^^uru, 

» Winer, § 30, 5. Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 129. 


Oba. 14. To the head of genitives of time^ Winer* refers Rom. ii. 5, «^wa l^y^i 
the day in which the divine ivraih will be displayed ; Jude 6, x^/<r/f fiiyuXvis fifii^etf, 
the judgment which shall be executed upon the great day ; but such examples l)elong 
rather to Obs. 2, supra. He adds Heb. vi. 1, tov rns oi^x^i ''"'"^ y^^ivrov koyoy, in- 
struction 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- 
tives 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, 7ifji&i9 kafji^ev ocurov fxccprvpss raiv pnfAairuv rourcovj we are 
his witnesses with respect to these things; Phil. ii. 30, to 
va-Te^fifxcc fxou rris Xsirovpyias. 2 Pet. iii. 2, toos- toJv ocTroffToXuv 
rif/Lcuv IvToXogs" roy K^uplov. 

Obs. 15. This last example seems to be elliptical, and the sense may be thus 
supplied from the preceding clause, Ttjs ivreXiis rrn ^^ou^vifAivris vto tuv a-ro^rokuv. 
Compare Jude 17. Similar instances in Latin authors, are Cic, Off. ii. 22, Cujusque 
custodia sua rei sit libera. Epist. Fam. i. 9. 54, Crassi defensionem Gabinii. In 
English one of these genitives takes a different form. Thus we say, Scott's Edition 
of Swift, 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, 
for the most part, more of harshness than obscurity. Examples are 2 Cor. ii. 4, 
rev (penTtfffjLOv tou ivayytXiov rrjs Vo^yis rou X^ta-rou. Eph. i. 6, ii; i^aivo* rns ^o^*lS 'I'tis 
p^a^/Tflf auTov. Col. i. 14, iig rriv (haffiXuecv rov vlou tjjj dyoi'TYis avrov, ii. 12, ^/a rrjt 
vrUrius tJJj ivi^yiias rou &iod. 2 Thess. ii. 14, s/; 'yfi^iToitKriv Vo^'/ii rov Kv^tou ri/jMv. Heb. 
Y. 12, rec ffroi^i7u tJj? a^X^^ '^^'' koyluv rov Stov. Rev. xiv. 8, Ik rov oivov rov B^vfiov ryji 
^o^nlus avrm. Add Rom. ii. 4, Eph. 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, Isai. 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. 1 1, 12, furoncto'ict BafivXaJvaj, the carrying away to 
Babylon ; x. 5, iU oVot i^vaJv, i. e. fi eiyu t'l; rec iSv>}. So Gen. iii. 24, LXX, fi oSo; rov 
\vXov ri^i ^uiji. Jerem. ii. 18, ^ o3o; Aiyv-rrov. 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, « ruv Xei-rui 
iTi^vfiia. might perhaps have been substituted for fi Tt^i ra Xoi-ra. i^iBvfAia, but the 
latter does not so much mean lust of o'her things, as iust which has relation to other 
things. The same form of expression occurs in Heliod. ^th. i. 23,45, 'fri^vfila vi^i 

1 Winer, § 30, 2. 8. * Kuiuoel ad loc. ^ Q«$emus, § 17. Obs. 2. 


T>3v Xa^lxXiixv. Arist. Rhet. ii. 12, «< vrt^) to trufict i-ri^vfjuau Again in 2 Cor. viii. 7, 
ry. tl vftZv ocyu-xn removes the ambiguity which would have existed in rn vfjjZv 
a,yu,Tyi, See below § 65. So Acts xxiii. 21, Tnv ato irov tTayyiXUv. Dion. H. p. 
2235. 13, jroXvv i» ruv -JToc^ovruv x,tvy,ffcii tXiov, Plat. Polit. ii. p. 363. A, rag wt' uurtjs 
iuhoxifjiYKnii. See also Arrian. Ind. xxix. 5, Polya;n. v. 11, Diod. Sic. i. 8, v. 39* 
Very different, again, from to, Tx^rificcTu, X^ierrov is 1 Pet. i. 11, ra i'k X^kttov vraBn- 
fixra, which means the sufferings, which, according to the Prophets, were to fall upon 
Christ. Other instances are Acts xvii. 28, Rom. ix. 11, xi. 21, Eph. ii. 21, Tit. 
iii. 5, 1 Pet. ii. 9, v. 2, 2 Pet. ii. 7. It may be added that the form of the titles to 
the 4 Gospels, To xxric, MarSarsv, &c. EyayysX/uv, of which the correct import 
is the Gospel written by Matthew, &c. prevents any ambiguity similar to that 
which is noticed at § 65. Obs, So Polyb. iii. 6, at xar' 'Aw/'/Jav Tfulus, the exploits 
performed by Annibal, 

Obs. 19. Certain nouns, by which the genitive is governed, are commonly 
wanting ; as vUg, in Matt. ix. 21, 'idxufiov tov tou ZifiihaUv. So also in Matt. iv. 21, 
Mark ii. 14, Luke vi. 16, John vi. 71, xxi. 2, 15, Acts i. 13, xiii. 22, et alibi. Other 
words thus omitted are ywn, ^arii^, /zijTyio, a.h\(po's. Thus Matt. i. 6, 'tx. rtii rou 
Ou^iou, soil, yuvaixof. Mark xv. 47, Ma^/a 'lufftj, soil, ftnrr,^. (Compare Matt, xxvii. 
56, Mark xv. 40,) Luke vi. 16, Acts i. 13, 'loySa; 'lecxtufiov, soil, a^ikipos. (Compare 
Jude 1,) Acts vii. 16, 'E^^a^ rou :Euxi/^> soil. <ra.r^o;. (Compare Gen. xxxiii. 19.) 
These last omissions are of rare occurrence ; but there are parallel examples in 
iElian, v. 1 1, xiii. 30, « 'AXs^av^^ay, subaud. fjbtir^^. Alciphr. Ep. ii. 2, Tifioxpartis 
e MtjT^o^upov, subaud. a.hX<pos. Steph. Byzant. Aai^aXec.' v <rokis ccTo AotthoiXov rou 
*Ixa^ov, soil, ^ur^of. Either o'lxiiat, inmates, or some word of like import, is wanting 
in Rom. xvi. 10, rovs ix ruv ' A^i(rTo(iovXov, those of the household of Anstobu/us. So 
also in 1 Cor. i. 11, vto ruv XXons. Another word which is frequently understood is 
cTxflf, or 'hufjt.a,. Thus Mark v. 35, a.'ro rov x^y^Kruvuyuyov^ scil. olxov. So John xviii. 
28, a-^o TOV Ka'idfa. In Luke ii. 49, iv roTg rev <rxT^os f^ov, where some supply 
^payuufi, it is better to understand o'/xon' or lufzaa-t in the plural. Compare John 
xix. 27. The classical phrase tls ahou occurs in Acts ii. 27, 31. Some, however, 
here supply ;^£r^a 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, to euiJt.oc, (aov to t^s xamg Si«S>jx>jj. John xix. 
25, Malice 71 TOU KXu-ffa. 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, auTov al fidcrus *«< 
Toi e^v^oi. 

2. When it is emphatic, and especially where there is an antithesis. Thus Acts 
xiii. 23, TOUTOU 0soj a.'To TOU ffTi^f/.uTo; fjyupt ffiurr,pot.. 1 Cor. iii. 9, Siou ydp 
ifffjtiv ffvvieyoi' Qiou yiu^yiov, Qtou oJxo^o/xn iffri. Phil. ii. 25, ffuffTootTiuTnv [jlov. 
vfjtuv Ss d.-roffToXov. 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, 
ISvi/v d^oiTToXos. 1 Tim. vi. 17, It) tXoutov d^nXornrt. Tit. i. 7, Q-oZ oixove/u,ov. 
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, tl Vi th xaXil vfid: tuv olTriffruv. 


Eph. ii. 3, TtKva (pvfftt o^ynS' 1 Thess, ii. 13, Xa'yav aKoni Tetf^ hfJMV raZ Qtov, i. e. 
xiyo* Siov -ra^' ru,uv dxouofjbtvov. Compare Luke vii. 36, xiii. 11, xx. 36, 
John iv. 39, Phil. ii. 10, 1 Tim. iii. G, Heb. viii. 5. Similar instances are 
found in profane writers. Thus Plutarch. Timol. 20, rt; uvi ruv arpa.Tiuo 

§ 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, xpr^aov (xoi 
rpsTf ocprous. Gal. iv. 5, ols ov^l tt^os up(x.v sI^ociazv. Of ^i^ovoci and 
eiTren/ so governed examples abound ; but it' may be well to 
observe that ev is sometimes added, as in Acts iv. 12, ^a^optivov 
£v Tor? dv^pojTToif, i. e. given among men. So 2 Cor. viii. 1, t^v 
yjxpiy rou ©eoy Je^opisvyjv ev rocTs sxxX'ntjia.ii. 

Obs. 1. We have <rcioa'hihovat with the dat. of the person; as in Matt. v. 25, 
fi-ri^ort ffi Tcx.^a.'hcj o a.vrt%)cos t>5 x^tryi. When, however, the object is pimishment or 
miser?/, this verb is followed by us 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, -raoa^ouva,! rov rotourov tm 
larava. il; oXtS-^ov T»jj ffcc^xo;. 

Obs. 2. Many verbs signifying to announce^ &c., which properly govern a dative, 
are found in the New Testament with u; or -rooi and an accusative. Thus Luke 
xxiv. 47, xtiov^B-tivat f/.ird.vo{ecv u; ^dvrcc roc sSv*?. 1 Thess. ii. 9, Ixn^v^af^iv sif v^m; <ro 
ivocyyiXiov rou Qiou, So Pausan. viii. 5. 8, I; aTccvra,; l^yiyyik^yj ro roXfi'/ifjcec. The 
verb iuuyysxi^ttr^at takes the dative of the person, when it signifies to bring glad 
tidings, as in Luke i. 19, ii. 10, Rev. x. 7 ; or, to preach the Gospel, as in Luke iv. 18, 
Rom. i. 15, 1 Pet. iv. 6. More usually it bears the sense oi 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, iUyyiXi(o'fj.svoi 
rus ruv uyiojv \^t;;^^a,-. 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, Euseb. V. Constant, 
iii. 36. It is construed with U and a dative in Gal. i. 16, "va tvayyf.x/^ufAcn uvrov 
iv roTs tBvitriv, i. e. among the gentiles; and with s;; and an accusative in 1 Pet. 
i. 25.^ 

3. After verbs signifying to command, 2)er7nitj exhort, &c. 
the dat. is used. Thus Matt. viii. 21, £9riTos\|/6y (jloi dTreX^eTv. 

» 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, ExiXsuaE rots ''oyy^ois ava-reffetv Im rriv y^jv. xxi. 6, 'jroir^(yac\ 
TEs x-a^cus TTpoa-ETOi^Ev xvTots. Add Mark i. 27, viii. 6, 1 Tim 
iv. 6, Philem. 8. The same construction obtains with siTrsrv in 
the same sense in Matt, xxiii. 3, Travra ol'v, oaa. oiv El'Traja-iv vixiy 
rnpEtv, rnpHTE ytoLi ttoicXte. These verbs, however, are equally 
constructed with an accusative and an infinitive ; as in Mark 
VI. 27, eTTSTa^Ev EVE'x^^'^va.i rriv X£(paX^v aurov. viii. 7, etTre Tra^aS'Ervai 
xai avrd. Luke xviii. 40, UiKeuaEV alroy ay^rivcci. Acts x. 47, 
'zrpo(TEToc^sv avrovs ^ocTrna^^^ai. 

Obs. 3. It is from their analogy with verbs of this class, that those) signifying to 
ru/e, or govern, sometimes take the dative. See above § 42. 3, 4. On the other 
hand, -ra^aKccXiTv, tcxoot^wuv, vou^inTv, &c. take only the accusative. See Luke iii. 
18, Acts xi. 23, xiii.'sO, xx. 31, Rom. xv. 14, 1 Cor. iv. 14, 1 Thess. v. 12, 14, et 

Obs. 4. Another construction of these words is with "va, oiru;, &c. Thus Matt. 
IV. 3, itTi, 'Iva ol Xl^ot oZroi apToi yivuvrai. viii. 34, -rupixdXiffaV) oTu; fitrecfa^ ccTo ru-t 
o^iuv auTuv. Mark vi. 56, tccoixccXow avTov, "vex, xav rou x.oaif<7r'ioov rov tfAUTioti avrou 

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, Eirir'nxnas rots 

ave'/xoif x«f rr\ hocXdaat^.^ Luke Xxiii. 40, o 'irEoos ETTErifxa. ocvtSj. 
Ads xix. 38, kyKoXElrcoGxv aXkrtkois. Heb. viii. 8, pC£/x(poptEvo$- 
avroTs XiyEi.^ So 2 Macc. ii. 7, fj^sfxyi/dixEvos auro7s eIttcv. Com- 
pare Ecclus. xli. 7, Arrian. Epict. ii. 23. 

Obs. 5. When signifying to charge strictly, Winy.u.v 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 i-ri-rXviffffiiv takes a dative in 1 Tim. v. 1, T^to-fivrs^u /xh 
iTivXri^rii, So also in Xen. GEcon. xiii. 12, Herodian. iii. 3. 13, Polyb. v. 25. 3, 
Joseph. Ant. xii. 4. 2, 8. As in classical Greek, however, we have Xot^o^ilv Avith an 
accusative in John ix. 28, Ixo/So'^s^irav olv avrov. Acts xxiii. 4, 'zov upx'-^'-^ '■*^ ®"^ 
Xoi^ooiTs ; So in Deut. xxxiii. 8, LXX ; but with a dative in Exod. xvii. 2. With 
us or •T^oj and an accusative, it signifies to rail against one, in Gen. xlix. 23, Exod. 
xvii. 2, Numb. xx. 3. Also ovs/^/^s/v takes an accus. in Matt. v. 11, Rom. xv. 3. 
In Matt. xxvi. 44, likewise, the best MSS. read aivilh^ov uvtov.^ 

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 ^oyi^eTv governs a dative in Matt. xv. 
25, xvpiE, /3o7]^£t (xoi. So Mark ix. 22, Acts xvi. 9, Mark ix. 25. 
We have also in 2 Cor. viii. 10, touto ya.^ Cfjuv (Jufji<^ipEi. 

Obs. 6. The verb u:piXi7v, however, is always construed in the New Testament 
* See Wetstein ad loc. * Reitz ad Lucian. T. ii. p. 787. 


with an accusative. See § 40. 1, 6. So also XvfAa'mff^ut in Acts viii. 3, 2«yX(),- li 

tXvfitx,tviTO TYiv ixxXtiffiav. 

Obs. 7. Adjectives also which signify any thing useful or vijurious, are properly con- 
structed with the dative ; as in Phil. iii. 1, j^oi/tsy oh» ox,)>noov, vfuv Vi ccff(paxU. 2 Tim. 
li. 21, iux^vtrrov rSJ ^laTorri. \\. 1 1, 'iffri yoif (jloi lilx^yKf^oi s/j ^lUKov'tav. Tit. iii. 8, TavTci, 
iffTt TO. xaXa Kcc) u'^iXifjLct, rols uv^^uvoi;. Sometimes with a preposition ; as in 2 Tim. 
ii. 14, f/f ovhh %j;jir;^<jv. (Compare Wisd. xiii. 11.) iii. 16, -raffcx. y^w^h Biorviuffros, 
x,a) dxp'iXifAos T^oi hlaa-xakiuv, x. r. k. A genitive is sometimes used ; as in 1 Cor. 
vii. 35, rovro Ti •r^oi ro vfji,uv alruv erijfz(pi^ov Xiyu. Add 1 Cor. x. 33. 

6. Verbs signifying to obey, to disobey, Trs/S-sd^a/, a^giS-srv, 
vTro^yiov^iyy take the dative, as observed above, in § 42. Obs. 8. 

50 ^o^/Xeusiv, to serve ; as in Matt. vi. 24, ov ^yya^S-s ©go; ^ov\£vziv 
X(Xi (xacfj.iJi.covx. Rom. ix. 12, o fXEi^cov ^ovKsvaBi rcb skdcaoyi. Also 
Jiaxovsn/ and XstToy/^ysrv. Acts xix. 22, ^uo tuv ^laKovouvrcov avrcb. 
xiom. XV. 27, o(bzi\ouGi sv ro7s <rapKiy.ois 'ksirovqyr](yoci aurotf. We 
have, however, in 1 Pet. iv. 10, sis eocutous adro ^lacycovovvrs^. 

The verb XocrpsuEiy, likewise, which in the New Testament 
always denotes religious . worship, regularly takes the dative. 
Thus in Matt. iv. 18, Luke iv. 8, Kv^iov rh 0eov a-ou Tr^oaycv 
vajo-Eif, yccci aurcb /jlovcj Xar^svasis. Acts vii. 42, Trxpi^coxev ccvrous 
Xocrpsvsiv TY) arpoLTioc rov ov^ccvou. Rom, i. 25, kXa-rpivaacv rri 
xTiffsi TTocpoi TovxTtWvTa. 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. 1 5, xxii. 3, et alibi. 

' Obs, 8. It will be observed that, for a like reason probably, T^oerxvnTv^ though in 
the example above cited and elsewhere it properly governs an accusative (§ 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, ^^ocrKvvii<ron a,hru. 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 
yovvTiTilv rtvi (Matt. xvii. 14.), of4,oXoy(7v rtvt (Heb. xiii. 15). See below § 46. 2. 
Obs. 3. In Luke iv. 7, Rev. iii. 9, xv. 4, the form ^^oa-xwiTv hcu-rtov nvo; seems to be 
an Hebraism, which the LXX have also retained in 2 Kings xviii. 22. We have also 
in Matt, xxvii. 29, yovvxirr,ffa,VTis 'i/zir^otrSiv uvrou. 

Obs. 9. With one exception, a^iffxuv {governs a dative in the New Testament. 
Thus Matt. xiv. 6, tj^ift tZ 'H^ai^K, Rom. viii. 8, o'l \v <ra^x) ovn; &iZ a^iffai oh ^uvxvTai. 
See also Rom. xv. 1. sqq. 1 Cor. vii. 32, sqq. 2 Tim. ii. 4. We have in Acts vi. 5, 
tjoiirtv Xoyos ivtu'Ttov 'ravros rod vXrtBou;. 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 iv^oxiiv is seldom found in profane writers, and then only with 

51 dative ; as in Polyb. Exec. p. 1213, Diod. Sic. iv. 23. In the New Testament 
the more common form is ivboxilv tv rtvi (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, 

1 Winer, § 31. 1. Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 463. Kypke ad Matt. ii. 8. 



and thence adopted bj^ the LXX. See 1 Chron. xxix. 3, Ps. xllv. 3, li. 18, 19, cii 
15, cxlix. 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, avvzi%tro ro; 
TTvei/ptaTt, ivas earnest in his mind. (Compare v. 25, xx. 22, 
Eph. V. 23.) Rom. iv. 19, porj a,n'bc\ri<yoc% rri TTiaTSh i- e. as to his 
faith : vi. 20, ky^^v^sooi v)T£ ty] ^ikocioo-uvyi, free in respect of 
righteousness. (See § 42. 2. 1.) 1 Cor. ix. 21, txri uv avofxos 0ea), 
aXX' SVVO/X.OJ Xpto-Toj, being not without a law in relation to God, 
but under a law in obedience to Christ. Gal. i. 22, tJ/xtiv ayvoou- 
/xevofTo; itpoawitoi rous Ix^XrytTtaif, I was personally unknown to the 
Churches. Phil. iii. 5, TTEpirofxrt oKrmixspos^ with respect to cir- 
cumcision, circumcised on the eighth day. Some read TrspLTo/xri 
in the nominative, but of this the tenor of the passage, in 
which syuf slfxt is understood throughout, will not admit. Col. 
li. 5, el ya§ jcqcI tyi (jx^kI a'^sifXh dWoc rcb itycufxccri gvj v(jav e\[/.i. 
Add Matt. xiii. 14,'7iX'/}pourai auTOis ri Trpo^firzioL, with reference 
to them ; where however another reading is Itt' avrois. To this 
head belongs also Luke xx. 38, ttx-vtes ya,^ avrcb ^Si<yiv, all are 
still alive with reference to God, inasmuch as he can restore 
the dead to life. And precisely analogous are the expressions, 

ctTToS^aveTv TYi ufAccpTicc, vsxpov eIvxi rr] a-fj^xprix (Rom. vi. 2, 10, 11.), 

aVoS-avEiv ro) yofxco (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, tw vlcb rou dv^puTrou, 
which some refer to yeypa-ixfji.bvoi, is more properly construed 
with rsXso-'^YiGEroci. 

Obs. 1 1 . 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, £<j rrtv li-ayyiXiav roZ Qiov oh hix^i^tj rn 
a'Triffrla.. Eph. V. 32, iyu Ti xiya its X^kttov, xcci il; rm Ixxkyiffiav, vnth reference to 
Clwisi and the Church. Compare Acts ii. 25, Heb. i. 7, 8. Sometimes a second 
dative is added ; as in 2 Cor. xii. 7, Wo^n f^ot axoXo'^' rn ffx^x), a thorn for my flesh. 
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, •r^oa'fjcivovffi /u,ot. xviii. 8, 9, xaXov 
ffot 'nrr'iv X. T. X. XXvi.4, xaXov ?}v avraj, si ovx iyivvr,^v,. Acts ix. 5, XXvi. 14, ffxXnooy coi 
^^os xivr^a Xaxr't^uv. 1 Cor. xi. 6, aicrx^ov yvtaixl to xii^cca-Bcci. 2 Tim. iv. 8, aTOKiTrai 

* Parkhurst's Lexicon in v. Raphel. ad Matt. iii. 17. 

2 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. 


fjLoi Tvii lixaiotTvvm ffTi'pitvo;. It is no less usual, however, to meet with a preposition 
and an accusative ; as in Matt. v. 13, s/V oVhh ltr;^uii. Eph. iv. 29, aya^og <rooi oIko- 
2o/xm- 2 Tim. iv. 11, tirri yd^ f^oi iS^^nffro? u; '^laxovtav. Sometimes the construction 
is with the accusative and an infinitive ; as in Matt. xvii. 4, kuXov iimv fifia; aih 
uiai, xix. 24, EvxoTairioov iffrt xd/ztiXov S;a T^wrvf^aros pcupi^os hiX^tTv, ri T\ova-iov 
». T. X, 1 Cor. xi. 13, -rps'Tev Iffr) yvvalKcc a.xBCTXxd.Xvxrov raJ QtS! 'r^ctriu'^^^itrBai y This 
example, however, may be explained by the dativus commodi (§ 46. 5.). 

Obs. 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, t'/J a^itr/xiv/i ^ovXn xou •x^oytuffu rov QioZ 
'ix'^arov. v. 4, ovx^ f^ivov aoi ''ifjcm, i. e. at thy disposal. XV. 1, lav [/.rt Tiptriyj- 
vTitrBi TM iBit MuuffiMi, ou ^vvcicrB-i ffco^nvut. Rom. xiv. 4, ffv rU sT o x^ivuv 
aXXor^iov olxirrjy ; tm iTim xv/tM ffrnxii n "TtTmi, i. e. according to the will or 
judgment of his own master; and so in the following verses. 2 Pet. i. 21, 
ou ya^ ^iX'^ficctri uvB-^m-ttov rivix^t) rrorl T^opn-niei. Compare Tobit iii. 3, 
2 Mace. vi. 1, Xen. Cyr. i. 2. 4, Sext. Emp. ii. 6, Strabon. xv. p. 7ir3.i 
A preposition is inserted in I Cor. xi. 13, b vfjtTv avroTs x^tvan. Both con- 
structions are united in 1 Cor. xiv. 11, 'sffofiat tZ XaXouvri fia^fha^o?, xa) o XctXuv 
iv ifA,o) l^d^fia^os, u e. in my judgment.^ 

2. In definiti(ms of /<»ze and />/ace, or when an action has reference to- some 
, one, with respect to some feeling or qualification ; a participle expressive 

thereof is sometimes, but rarely, employed in the dative. The two follow- 
ing are examples : Luke i. 36, oSto; fjt,nv 'Ixto; Itrr'iv avr^ rn xxXovfjbivr^ ffTu^a,. 
James iv. 17, i'lhoTt ovv xttXlv toiuv, xa) ^>j ^roiovvn^ ufzcc^ricc ccvtm Iffrtv, i. e. 
if one knows, Sec, Another form occurs in Acts xxiv. II, ou TXnovi tiff! (aoi 
fifiipdi >j "^ixu^vo, cc<p^ h «• r, X. To this head may probably be referred Matt, 
viii. 1, ««TajSavT/ %i uvtm x. t. A., when he came down; Acts xxii. 6, lyinro ^i 
^ /Ltoi' ^o^ivof^ivM X. T. 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 dative are often followed by the 
same case : as in 2 Cor. ix. 12, ilxtx^oKTrta,)) tZ Obm. Heb. x. 25, xaBas 'i^os tio-iv. 
So Plat. Legg. ii. 4, to «S«s rjfiTv. Upon the same principle we have in Luke 
iv. 16, Acts xvii. 2, xarilc TO ila^os avTM.^ 

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, v7rri)irnGa,M avrch ^vo ^a//ocovi§o- 
[MEvoi. (Compare v. 34.) xiv. 11, Tjveyxs ttJ fAfirpl ahrris. xxi. 5, 
^(xcriXsus aou s^^etx'i, uoi. Acts ii, 33, tiq ^s^i^ ovv rov 0£oi) 
vy^dJ^Bif. V. 4, ovK s-^^EvactJ oivhpcuTrois, aWa. 0£a;. 

Obs. 14. It will be observed that in the preceding verse the verb -^ivhia^ai 
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. 16, ayovn?, 'jto.^ Z ^iyKr^cu/xiv, Mva<r<wv/, it is impossible 
to suppose with Beza and others, that the dative is put, by attraction, for the ac- 

1 Winer, § 31. 3. b. Wyttenhach ad Plat. Phaed. p. 101. D. 

2 Doederlein ad Soph. CEd. C. p. rv29. Jacobs ad Athen. p. 183. 

3 Winer, ubi supra ; Stalbaum ad Plat. Euth. p. J 01 . Ast ad Plat. Polit. p. 4ol. 
Legg. p. 36 


cusative ; not to mention a similar construction in Xen. )Ephes. iii. 6. fiyofx.i^v 
*AP>poxofjt,vi. Epiph. Vit. p. 340. D. ^yaytv aurov * ABaveiffiu tm '^a-rTa. 

Obs. 15. The ordinary construction with lU or •tt^Is is perhaps more frequent. 
Thus in Matt. ii. 1 1, IxSovns iis rhv oIkiuv. iii. 14, <ru 'i^xv "^^'"^ f^^ » ^^* ^' a.vinx^^ *'f ''''"' 
lonijjov. vi. 26, IfjijfhXi-^ari s/j rk -nritva. viii. 32, u^fArxn vaffoe, h ayiXri us 'rhv ^a.Xa.<r~ 
ffav. xii. 18, e/f ov lOVoxno'iy' xiv. 19, avafixi'^as us tov ov^avov. Luke ii. 41, i^ro^iuovro 
us ^li^ovffaXvif/, rri lo^r^ rou Tairxa, (In this example some suppose that direction is 
also indicated by the dative ; but rln U^rri marks the time, at or during the feast.) 
Acts xxiii. 10, ayuv us rhv ^x^t/nfooXvv. 2 Cor. xiii. 7, ttlxof^ai ^r^os rov Stov, Col. iii. 9, 
fich "^ivhirBi us aXXrikovs. We find ■^ivhf^en 'T^os nva in Xen. Anab. i. 3,5.^ 

Obs. 16. Hence many verbs have a like government, which are compounded with 
i-r) and ^^os, 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 
be observed that some of the best MSS. read largols in Luke viii* 43, us Ixr^ous 
'Tr^oaavcx.Xucraffot. okov rov jS/ov. Probably the received text may have arisen from the 
ordinary construction of the verb -^ooffxvaxia-xuv in profane writers. Compare Xen. 
Cyrop. ii. 4. 9, .Elian. V. H. xiv. 32.-2- 

§ 46. 

1.- In a less obvious sense, the dative is found with verbs 
which signify to meet with. Thus in Luke viii. 19, ovk Ti^iJvavro 
avvrvy/tv aJro). 

Obs. 1. So also hrvyxa-vuv rivt, which in the New Testament signifies to make 
application to any one, either by way of petition or complaint. Thus in Acts xxv. 
24, «r£^/ ov -rav ro crX^Sa; reov ' louhciiuv ivirv^ov fcet, x. r. X., Rom. xi. 2, ivruyxoi'vu ru 
eiM xark rh'lfff)v,nX» Compare Wisd. viii. 21, xvi. 28, Pclyb. iv. 7^, Theophr. 
Char. i. 2. 

2. The dative is also used with verbs which imply inter- 
course or companionship ; as in Acts xxiv. 26, orpt/Xsi avru). 

Obs, 2. It is this dative which follows words compounded with <ruv and ofji,oZ. 
Among the numberless instances of the former composition a few will suffice. Matt. 
ix. \0,ffvvce.viKUvrQ ru'lyiffou. Luke Xxiv. 15, cuvi'^o^ivtra alroTs. Acts xvi. 18, r/vsf 
ruv <piXeiro(pu>y ffvv'i(ia.XXov aurA. Rom. viii. 16, avroro Tvsvfca, ffV[if/,afrvoi7 tm Tvivfjt,ari 
'AfjLut. XV. 30, trvvayuviffaa-^ai /aoi Iv ra7s fT^offivx^'^i' 1 Cor. iv. 8, 'Iva xcci ttfuTs vft7v 
ffVfjt.p)affiXivffufjt.iv. Phil. iv. 3, alrtvis Iv r^> tvayysXiu cvvri^Xntroiv fjt,oi.^ Add Acts X.27, 
<rvvofjt,iXuv avTM. But, in a different sense, Luke xxiv. \A,avro) af/,lXovv <r^os aXXnXouS) 
they conversed together. Under this head must be classed 2 Cor, vi. 14. fjt,ri ylvser^i 
\ri^oZ,vyoZvris ccziirrois, which may perhaps be explained as an abbreviation of fAvi 
ylvtff^i Irs^o^vyovvris, rouriffriv, of/,o^uyovvris a'PTitrroTs .'^ 

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 t^a^a- 

1 Winer, § 31. 2. Alt, § 29. b. Ast ad Plat. Legg. p. 55S. Engelhardt ad 
Plat. Menex, p. 260. 

2 Winer, § 31. 2. and note to p. 173. ^ ^it, Gr. N. T. § 29. 2.] 
* Winer, § 31. Obs. 5. 


XoyuffBeii is more usual; as in Matt.xi. 25, Luke x.21, Rom.xiv. 11, xv. 19. When 
it signifies to con/ess or acknowledge, the object is put in the accusative ; as in John 
ix. 22, Acts xxiii. 8, xxiv. 13, Rom. x. 9, 1 Tim. vi. 12, 1 John i. 9, iv. 2, 3, 
2 John 7. There seems to be a more emphatic signification in the form ofiokoyiTt 
iv ifjLo) (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 ofjcoXoyiHv ffTOfjt.a.'ri and o^aXa^srv iv (rrofiocn 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, Wor/jtrav h alrZ 'oaa riBiXnirccv. (Compare Mark 
ix. 13.) Luke xxiii. 31, si iv Tr, vy^SJ ^'jXm TavTO. <rotov<nv, Iv tm "^vi^m ri yivyjrai. Acts 
xiii. 1 5, it iffTi X'oyoi sV Ifjuv -Tra.oa^'kr.ciwi cr^oj tov Xaov, Xiytn. 1 Cor. ii. 6, a'o(pixv 
XetXoufjbtv IV Toli Ti\iio7i. ix. 15, Vva ovru yivfjTat Iv if/.oi. 2 Cor. iv. 3, Iv to7s ccroXXv- 
fiivot; \(fr) xiKxXvf^f/.ivcv. Gal. i. 16, aToxaXv-^^eci rov vlov avrov iv ifAOt. 1 John iv. 9^ 
i(pavi^cuBn v ctyitn tov ©say iv rifziv. 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.^ 

Obs. 4. Instead of the accusative of the o6;Vc/, the preposition iv with a dative fol- 
lows the verb iKXiyio-B^ai, more Hebraico, in Acts xv. 7, o Oios iv hf^Tv i^iXi^aro, i. e., 
^ita?, we (Peter). Some, indeed, would render Iv iifiTv, one among ns ; and others 
join iv hf^uv ©50J, our God. These interpretations are not only very harsh, but the 
Hebrew form is precisely thus rendered in 1 Chron. xxviii. 4, LXX, iliXilaro iv if/,o) 
ilvai (■>a<riXia. So in 1 Sam. xvi. 9, 2 Chron. vi. 5, Nehem. ix. 7 ? 

3. It seems to be the idea of companionship j which explains 
the use of the dative in the following instances : — 

1. After the verb ay.o'kou'bclv , to follow ; as in Matt. iv. 20, 
22, 25, o^KoXo:y^''30Tav olvtw. So also in Matt. viii. 19, 22, 
ix. 9, 19, Mark ix. 38, Luke ix. 23, John i. 38, 41, 44, 
and elsewhere. 

Obs. 5. Hence this verb is sometimes accompanied with ^s-ra and a genitive, as 
in Luke ix.49, oIik aKoXou^u f/,zr rifAuv. Rev. xiv. 13, ra Bs ioyx ocvTuv axoXouBs? fisr^ 
ahrZv. When direction only is implied, the form is rather as in Matt. x. 38, cckoXov- 
Ss? o-rla-w fjt.ov. So also in Matt. xvi. 23, v-^ayt h-rifftj fjbou. Luke ix. 23, u tis ^ixn 
Wura (Jjov ix^i7v, x,. r. X. In Mark viii. 34, the manuscripts vary between axoXov^iTv 
and iX^itv.'* 

2. With verbs signifying to converse ; as in Matt. xii. 46, 
^TiToDvTes- acvTo} "KaXridoLi. Add Mark xvi. 19, John iv. 26, 
and compare Gen. xxix. 9, LXX. We have, in the 
same sense, John iv. 27, fMsra, yuvaiKos iXaXe/, and, t/ XaXiT 
/x£Ta aiyTTjf. ix. 37, 6 XaXcuv fXcroc (rov. xiv. 30, 7\.xXr]<yco 
jtxeQ' vfj.wv. Compare also Matt. xvii. 3, Mark ix. 4, 
Luke ix. 30, xxii. 4, Acts xxv. 12. Again, Acts xvii. 2, 
^isKsyETO ocuroTs. xviii. 19, ^isXe'p^S'a) Tors 'I ot/^CKtois-. 2 Gor. 

^ See Kuinoel ad loc. 2 "Winer. § 31. 5. 

3 Alt, Gram. N. T. § 30. 1. a. See Vorstius de Hebr. N. T. p. 622. 
* Alt, Gram. N. T. § 29. 6. 


xii. 19, TTcxXiv ^^okeTtc oTi viJUM dTToXoyoufxs^a. To this 
head must also be referred Eph. v. 19, XccKovvtes IxutoXs 
•i^dXixoTs, which the English Testament wrongly trans- 
lates, speaking to yourselves, 
3. With words which signify to contend ; as in Matt. v. 40, 
TO) ^iXovTi aoi x§t3-77va(, to one that would go to law with 

Ohs. 6. In the New Testament a preposition is, with perhaps this single excep- 
tion, constantly employed. Examples are, John vi. 52, ift.dxovro oZv t^os aXXv- 
Xov;. 1 Cor. vi. 1, T^diyptoi V;^«yv Tpo; tov 'inpov. 6, a^iX(po; fMra, a,^tX(pov x^ivzrcxt. 
Compare Gen. xxvi. 21, Judg. xxi. 22, Jobxxxi. 13, 10, Jerem. ii. 9, 3fi, 
Lam. iii. 36, Hos. ii. 2, Mic. vi. 11. Thus, also, Eph. vi. 12, ol/x 'ierrtv hfjt-h h -rdxy} 
T^os cc't'/xa xci) cra.^K(x. ReV. ii. 16, TToXifJiritToi ccvtmv. xii. 7, WoX\fz.r)ffa,v xccroc, rou 
^^dxovTo;. To this head may also be referred the verb hxXoyiXiff^eci, to reason or 
dispute, which is followed by h or t^o;. Matt. xvi. 7, 2tsXoyiZ,ovTo iv lauroTs. Mark 
ix. 33, rt Iv tTi ohuj T^oj ICX.VT0V5 ^iiXoyl^to-Bs ', add Mark ii. 6, Luke iii. 15, v. 22, 
xii. 17, XX. 14. 

Obs. 7 . There are many collective nouns, such as err^aro:, vms, i^^-Ji, iTXJJSa?, and 
the like, which, as indicating companionship, are put in the dative case, with an 
ellipsis of ffliv'. and a similar construction seems to obtain in Col. ii. 14, l^<x,Xsi-4^cis to 
KxB^ rifAuv %£/^^7^a(pflv roTs Voyfj^afftv. Few passages have more severely perplexed the 
commentators, Fjy some of whom it is rendered, with the English Testament, hand- 
writing of ordinances, which can never be extracted from the original ; by others, the 
written law consisting in ordinances (co\n\>?iX\ng Eph. ii. 15); and by others again, 
among whom is Winer, rois Voyfjcccffiv is made to depend upon l^aXsZ-v^-a?. The true 
meaning is, having cancelled the iont^ together with its ordinances ; and this is con- 
firmed by the reading of a few manuscripts which have erm to7s 3. So Clem. Rom. 
Hom. ii. TOV vo/xov <rvv toTh i-riXuffio-u The same ellipsis, which is also found in He- 
brew, also occurs in Rev. viii. 4, avifh'/i o xccTrvoi tuv Buf/,m/u.ix,Tuv tcc7$ 'T^o(riv;^a7s Tm 
Kyiuv, together with the prayers of the saints,^ 

4. Words which signify resemblance, equality, fitness, and 
the contrary, whether adjectives, verbs, or adverbs, and those 
also which signify proximity, govern a dative. Matt. vii. 24, 

ofxoicijo-cu ccvrov dv^^l. xx. 12, 'I'aovs ^/jJiv avrous sTToiinuocs-. Lllke 

vii. 32, 0(X0101 sldt TTOCl^ioif. Eph. v. 3, aoC^COS TT^ETTEl ^yloiS. Phil. 

ii. 27, r)cr'^5v'rj'jB 7roc^!x.7r'k'n(yioy '^ocvoircp. Heb. vi. 7, yn riycTQua-x ^o' 
Tavoov sL'S'STov exEtvois-. James i. 6, EOiKS Kkii^oovi ^otXicrans. iv. 8, 
iyylaxTc rcb 0Ea', K(x,i kyyiit v/jav. 

Obs, 8. An example of o auTos, idetn, with a dative, which includes a similar use 
of iT;, and where the sense must be expressed by a particle of comparison, occurs in 
1 Cor. XI. 5, sy ycco itfTi xoc) to uvto tjj \'^v^'/ifjt,ivv, it is one and the same thing as %f she 
were shaven P- 

' Middleton (on the Gr. Art.) on Col. ii. 14. Noldius, p. 576. See also Mac- 
knight, RosenmuUcr, and other Interpp. ad loc. 
* Winer, ^S 22, 4. 


Ohs. 9. The exceptions to the rule with respect to the class of words denoting 
similitude, &c. are very rare in the New Testament. Once only J'^a/oj is found with 
a genitive in John viii. 55, trof^ai o/xoio; vfAuv, •^ivffrm. Among those, however, which 
denote /jroa-JwiVy, \yyvi takes a genitive in John iii. 23, vi. 19, et alibi; and so trXjj- 
fflov, in John iv. 5. The verb tyyl^nv is followed more frequently by tli or It/, as in 
Matt. xxi. 21, 7]yyi(rav stg 'li^otrokiijU,a. Luke X. 9, 11, yjyyixiv i<p* v/xag h ^acriXiioc, tou 
Qiov. Compare Luke xix. 29, xxiv. 28. It occurs also with ^e;^^/ and a genitive 
in Phil. ii. 30, fjcix^t ^avdrou vyyiffi. We have also in Luke ix. 62, tu^iros u; rh 
(iafftXiiav TOU @iou. So also in xiv. 35. 

5. The dativus commodi will be recognised in the following 
passages: — Matt. iii. 16, avsw'x.S'yitxav avrco o\ ov^a,)io\, i, e. in his 
behalf, or in honovr of him. Mark ix. f), TroimojiMi^ a-xinvx^ rqcTf, 
(Tol fxlocv, vtQU Ma;(T£r /xjav, ytcci 'Hx/^ jui/av. Luke i. 54, pcv/jT^o^vai 

sXeous rev 'A^pocdifx. (Compare Psal. xcviii. 3, LXX.) xii. 21, 
6 bnaaupi^ajv Iolvtu). 2 Cor. v. 13, EiTs yap E^saTYifxsv, 0eai* sirs 
a-co(ppovov(Asvy v(juv. Phil. i. 27, (Juvix^Kovvrss rr) 7r//Tre/, in defence 
of the faith. Heb. x. 34, yivwiTKovTsr sx.^'^ tzurois xqsirrovcc 
vTtocp^iv Iv rdis Quqocvoi^, 

Obs. 10. Here also belongs' ^a^ry^srv rm, to give testimony in favour of any one 
(Luke iv. 22, John iii. 26, Rom. x. 2. Compare Xen. Mem. i. 2. 21) ; and, on the 
other hand, the dativus incommodi, in Matt, xxiii. 31, /xa^rvoiTn \u.vTo~i, ye bear wil- 
7iess against yourselves. Compare James v. 3. Another example is Heb. v. 6, iva- 

(TTavpovvras lavroTs tov vtov roZ Qiov xa) '7ra,^a^iiy[jja,'rtZ,ovra,s. 

Obs. 11. Not unfrequently is advantage or disadvantage expressed by a preposition 
and its case. Thus in Luke vii. 30, oi vo/x.iKo'i rhv fiovXhv rod &tou n^'irnffav us locwroh?, 
i. e. to their own detriment, ix. 13, ayo^a.<ru[jt,iv sh Toivra rov Xocov rovrov (houf^ocroc, i.e. 
for their nourishment. Acts xxvi. 1, WiT^i'rtr«i eroi v-zi^ ffixuroZ xiyuv, in your own 
defence. Phil. i. 7, xaBeus la-rt Vtxaiov \(/,o) rovro (p^ovuv v'Ti^ -zrcivTcov vf^uv, to your credit. 
1 Thess. i. 5, to tbayyiXiov vif^Mv oIk iyivn^n i'S vf/,a; Iv Xoyoo f^'ovov, did not befteft you.^ 

Obs. 12. A pronoun in the dal. com. is sometimes inserted, where it might have 
been omitted without injury to the sense ; but instances in the New Testament 
are rare and doubtful. Such are Matt. xxi. 2, XviravTis ayxyirt iu,oi. 5, o (iaa-tXivs 

ffOU tpXiTCci ffOt, T^OCUi X. T. '/.. ReV. 11. 16, S^^Of^XI ffOi TCfx)), XOU <ProXlfJl.n(fCa fiiT^ OCVTUV 
X. T. X.^ 

6. Instead of referring a thing to a substantive, as in the 
genitive of possession, the dative is sometimes employed in re- 
lation to an adjective, or to the action expressed in the verb ; as 
in Matt, xxvii. 7 , 'hyopa.acot rov dyqov sU ra.(priv rois ^smqis. Luke 
v. 20j d(pEajvracl aoi al afj^acprioci. (Compare Luke vii. 48.) So 
also Mark iii. 28. Again, Luke vii. 12, vlo^ fj.ovoysyr,f ryj fxnr^i. 
Compare Judg. xi. 34, 1 Chron. iii. 1, Tobit iii. 15, Ecclus. 

» Winer, §31, 1. 2. 

« Winer, § 22. 7. Obs. 4. Jacob, ad Lucian. Tox. p. 138. 


iv. 11. Some add Mark ii. 18, ol ^e (to! ixa^^ral ov Mmrcvoual ; 
but here aoi is the nom. plur. of the possessive (jos.^ 

Obs, 13. Probably this relation is also the basis of the construction of uvai, yly 
viff^at, ii-ra^x.^tv, &c., with the dative. Thus Matt. xix. 27, t/ uoa 'itrrat rtfjuv, What 
shall we have, or obtain ? Luke i. 7, ovx h auroTg rixvov, they had no child. 14, ta-rai 
X^Z"" "^'^ ^^' ayakXiairii. viii. 42, B^uyurno //.ovoyivt]; r,v ahru. ix. 13, ov>c iitriv yi/u,7v 
^XiTov ri 'Tivri a^rot x,cu ^vo l^Bvi;. xiv. 10, 'iffrai ffoiVo^a. Rom. xii. 19, \fjt.oi iKViKyi- 
ffis, soil. i(TTi. This last example is a citation from Dent, xxxii. 35, where, be it ob- 
served, the same idiom obtains in the Hebrew. 

0^5. 14. So likewise xotvo; is constructed with the dative ; as in Acts iv. 32, r,v al- 
roii a'Tavra, xoiva. Whence the phrase in Matt. viii. 29, r/ hicc7v koc) ffol ; Compare 
Luke viii. 28, John ii. 4. It occurs also in Judg. xi. 12, 2 Sam. xvi. 10, LXX. 


The dative occupies the place of the Latin ablative in most 
of its applications. Thus it expresses — 

1. The means zfjAere^y, or the instrument wherewith, any 
thing is done; as in Matt. iii. \2, ro ll ocx^pov ycxraycav- 
(TEi TTv^i a(T^ifjrco. Mark XV. 19, srvirrov avTov rriv xetpaXriv 
y.(xX(ki^cCi Jliuke iii. 16, kyu ptav li^ari ^oltttI^m vy^xs. John 
xxi. 8, 10, Tw TrXoiaqlco ^x^ov. (Compare Matt. xiv. 13, 
Acts xxviii. J 1.) 19, aniMalvcov ttoico ^ayd-rco ^o^dasi rov 
Ss6y. Add Acts iv. 12, Kom. vii.'25, Eph. iv. 28, v. 
18, Heb. i. 3. 

Obs. 1. Hence the constmction of ;:^^?(r^a< with a dative ; as in 1 Cor. ix. 12, oujc 
£%tf»j^a^£Sa T^ i^ovff'ia, ravrn^ 2 Cor. i. 17, fji,r,rt a^a, rh i>.a.(p^ia l;^^)j<ra^))v ; Add Acts 
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, a/ ;^^<!y^£ya/ rov Kofffjtov tovtov 
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, ra yk^ ao^ara ccvtou octq KTttnas xotrf^ou roTs rror/i- 
fjcatrt tooviMiva xa^c^aTai, known from his works. This sense is, however, more usually 
indicated by a preposition; as in Matt. vii. 16, 20, a-ro tuv xcc^tuv uut&jv iTiyv&Krto-Bi 
avTov;. xii. 33, ix rov xa.p'rov ro %ivh^ov yivuffxirai. Luke xii. 57, r'l §s xa,) a(p^ \otvruv 
oh x^tviri ro Vixaiov ; Indeed the instrument or meatis are much more rarely ex- 
pressed in the New Testament by a simple dative, than by that or some other case 
with a preposition. Thus in Matt. ii. 16, IviTat^^^n uto rut fji,a.yeov. iii. 11, lyoj i^it 
^a.'jrriZfi) ^/*aj iv vha.ri. iv. 1, ^u^TiBmon vTo rov ^/cclioXov. xii. 27, u lyu iv BssX^sjSouX 
ix(ia,XXu rk dxiyjoviccy ol vlo) vfiuv Iv rlvi lxficiXXov(ri ; 37, Ix yko ruv Xoyeov ffov ^ixonaBr,(rn, 
xoci Ix ruv Xoyuv ffov xarahixoi.ffBvtff'y^. xxiv. 15, ro pr^h ^tk AavthX rov 9r^o<pr,rov. XXvi. 
52, iv fjt.Bi.x'X'i^cc k-roXovvroct. Add Mark viii. 3l, xvi. 1 1, John i. 3, xiii. 35, Acts iv. 7, 
xviii. 19, Rom. iii. 20, 1 Cor. v. 4, Heb. i. 1, 2, Rev. ii. 27. 

i Winer, § 31. 6. Ast ad Plat. Polit. p. 43 L ^ Winer, v} 31, 4. 


2. The manner of an action is expressed by the dative, as 
in Acts ii. 6, v^kovov sTj- 'i-Kccaros rr) \^i^ oiockiaTCO XaXovvrcov 
avrcov. vii. 60, ek^oc^s (pcuvri fxsyxXri. xxiii. 1, sycu wda-ri 
ffvyii^'r)(TEi dyd^ri TTETToXlrEUfxact tw 0ew. 1 Cor. xi. 5, 7r§o<T- 
Evypfjiiyri ocxocTocxocXifTrTco tyi xetpaXy). Col. ii. 11, iv co xaci 
TrspiETfjiri^YiTs TTspirofMr) a%e/§o7roi7jra?. 

Obs. 3. Hence the dative is frequently used adverbially; as, for instance, in 
Rom. viii. 13, crvsvytjiiiTi, in a spiritual manner, or spirititally ; since it is evidently 
opposed to xxTo, ffa^Tca, Carnally} So in 1 Cor. xiv. 2, •ffvvj^a.n XaXit f^var'A^ia., Gal, 
iii. 3, Iva^la^sva/ TviVf^ari, vvv ffocox) iTinXsTff^i ; i. e. •rvivfjLo.rix.ui and ffa^xiKUi. Add 
Gal. V. 5, 25, et alibi. So the dative feminine of adjectives; as in Matt. xiv. 13, 
riXoXov^nffctv ahru 'ynZ,ri ocTo ruv ToXiuv. Acts xvi. 37, ^ii^ccvrs; 7if/.a,i ^YiUjOfflct. XX. 20, 
'hiha.'^ix.i If/a? 1nfjt.offla, xa.) xar olxov$. 1 Cor. xii. 11, lno^t^ovii /^/a ixMrM. Under each 
of these cases, however, a preposition is equally employed. Thus in Mark vi. 31, 
32, xar' /^<av. 2 Cor. i. 12, £v a5rXoT>jT/ x(ti iiXtx^inta. Qtou, olx h (ro<piei ffa^xixn, aXX' 
Iv ;^a^/ri ©saw, avia'T^oi(pyifiiv iv tw xofffjbcu. vii. 9, "ya iv fjt,noivi Z^'/ifjuiu^'^'ri l^ vif^ajv. Heb. 
xi. 37, Iv ^'ovu fia-x,«'!^a,s aTiSavov. Rcv. ii. 22, ra, rixvx avTrts a^oxnvcu Iv ^avartu. 

Obs. 4. To this head are also to be referred the verbs ^spfranTv and '^offsvitrBon, 
which, in their figurative sense, are accompanied either by a dal., or by an adverb, 
or by a prep, and its case, signifying the line or manner of conduct. For example, 
Mark vii. 5, oi f>c.BiBzTai gov oh -xi^i'^a.TOvat xara. rhv <7ra^^offiv ruv -Tr^itr^vri^uv. Acts 
ix. 31, 'To^ivofjt.ivoi ru (fio'^M rod Kvoiov. So Luke i. 6, Kom. vi. 4, xiii. 13, 2 Cor. xvi. 
18, Eph. ii. 10, Col. i. 10, 1 Pet. iv. 3, 2 Pet. iii. 3. Of the same class are Rom. 
iv. 12, ToTi iTToi^ova'i Tali 'l^vifft T»is TiffTiu; rod 'A/B^aa^it. Phil. ii. 16, ra) avToJ ffT0f)(^i7v 
xavo'vi. Compare 1 Sam. xv. 20, 2 Sam. xv. 11, Prov. xxviii. 26, Tobit iv. 5, 1 Mace, 
vi. 23.« 

Obs, 5. In Acts vii. 53, iU hxrayai may be put for Iv tia.To.youi, 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 with respect to: as in Matt. xi. 29, ra.'xuvo; 
T^ xx^Via, humble in respect to my heart. So in Luke i. 51, v-ri^nipiivoui ^lavot'a, xa^'tai 
avTuv. Acts vii. 51, acrt^ir/u.vrot tm xa^la, xui ro7s utrlv. 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 ©sov tXovtZv. Pos- 
sibly such forms as aaruoi tZ %iZ (Acts vii. 20), Iwara. tZ %iZ (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, T^oixocrn iro(pia, xoCi riXixia, xu) %a^/T/ tocpo, &ta> xou avB^tu- 
-roi;. 1 Thess. iii. 12, Tn^ifftriva-at rri ayccTri. Tit. ii. 2, vytaivovrxs rjj -^iffru, rri uya-rvt 
TV v-roijjovri. Frequently, however, Iv is inserted, or an accusative substituted with 
xara, expressed or understood. Luke i. 7, 18, ii. 36, <r^o(ii(ivixa)s Iv fi/ni^ecis. Rom. 
iii. 9, Tt ovv ^^ii^ofii^a; xv. 13, sis to Ti^itrffivitv vfia? iv tJj iXTih. 1 Cor. XV. 41, 
ccffrnp yoip affripoi ^ia,(pioii iv ^o|>). Gal. i. 14, •pr^oixoTTov iv rZ ^lov^a'ifffjM, Phil. iv. 
13, TavTO, lir^vu. Tit. i. 13, 'Iva, vyiu'tvuffiv iv rn 'x'kttii. 

Obs. 8. The dative expresses the relation of measure or magnitude; as in Matt, 
xii. 12, •rocriu ovv iia(pi^tt avB^wxoi <r^oP>a,rov. 

Obs. 9. The dat. of the measure, and sometimes the accus., is joined with the 

^ Middleton on the Gr. Article, note in loco. 
« Winer, § 31, 1. » Winer, § 31, 3. Alt, § 29, 5. 


comparative; as in "Matt. vi. 30, et scepuis, ^roXXco fiakXev. vii. 11, ireeref> /xeiXXov. 
2 Cor. viii. 22, ^oXi/ a-rovlcct'o^i^ov. 1 Pet. i. 7, -roXv mf^iMTi^ot. (Griesbach reads, 
in one word, •ro'kvrtfji-tuTi^ov?} The comparative is also strengthened by sV/, as 
in Heb. vii. 15, Tioia-ffon^ov 'in. Hence it has been conjectured that iri fiilZ^mv is 
the true reading in 1 John iii. 20 ; for -which, however, there is no authority, and 
the common text is not without parallel. In Phil. i. 9, 'in-t fiaXXov ku) f/.aXXov has 
been regarded as a Hebraism ; but the same phraseology is found in Xen. Cyr. iii. 
2. 18, Achil. Tat. vi. 13, Dion. Hal. iv. p. 2228, 6. So magis magisque in Cic. 
Epist. ii. 18. Two comparatives are also united by octm and rotrovru. Thus in 
Heb. 1. 4, roffovTM x^i'tTTuv ytv'ofjcivos ruv ayyiXuv, oero) ^laipo^art^ov x. r. X. Some- 
times rotfovru is omitted in the first member; as in Heb. viii. 6, 'htix.<po^eo7'i^a.; 
rirsvxi Xtirov^y'ia.;, offco x,a,\ x^iirrovos iffri %tix.^riX.'/;$ jLciffiTri;. The comparative is 
omitted after oVa;, which will bear the sense of on, in Heb. x. 25, xcc) rocrovrM /xaXXov, 
offu (iXiTiTB lyy'iZ^ovffuv rhv Ti/u-s^ay. There is a double omission to be supplied, as in 
the brackets, in Mark vii. 36, o<rov ll uvto; alroii (fidiXXov) hitrrixxtro, (roffoZroi) (jmX' 

XOV 'Tl^tffffOTi^QV Ixri^vffffov. 

3. The dat. expresses the cause or occasion of an action ; 
as in Rom. xi. 20, rfi aTcia-rlgc l^sjcXaaS-TjTav, hy reason of 
unbelief. 30, ri7.£r'3"y5T6 t^ rourcjv dTrsi^slx, on account 
of their disobedience. 2 Cor. i. 15, ravrri rri TrsTroi^mEi 
l^ouXof^nv, under this persuasion. Heb. ii. 15, oaoi (p6^co 
^ocvccTou ^isi TTa^ros tov E^r\y ""iyoy^oi riGOLv ^ovXEiocff through 

fear of death} Yet here also a preposition and its case 
arc more commonly used in the New Testament. Thus 
Matt. vi. 7 , ^oKovai, yap h rr\ TToXuXoyicc a.vra>v s'laoocov^Yiaov- 
rxi, by virtue of their much speaking, xiii. 21, ycvoy^syrts 
^l hxl-i^ECos ^ ^icoy(/.ov ^lai tov Xoyov, Buoys' (JX-ocv^xXi^sroci. 
xiv. 9, ^la. rovs opy.QVS xcct rous (Juyavaxsi/xsvou^ ekeXsvos ^o- 
S'r/V;?^/. xix. S, eI s^sdTiv dv^pcoTTCj} airoXvaxi rhv yuvcuyix 
avrov Kccra. 7roi.Gav airlx)/ ; 8, Mwcrryj- Trpos rr,y axXripoKxp- 
^ixv vfAoov ETTerpeNj/sv vfJiXy (XTToXvaoci, rocs yuvouKocs vixuv. Add 
Luke xxii. 45, xxiv. 41, 2 Cor. ix. 15. 

Ohs. 10. To this use of the dative belongs the phrase a^xtlff^al rm, to he con- 
tented zvith any thing. Luke iii. 14. a^xs7tr^i roli o-^av/oig vfiav. 1 Tim. vi. 8, sp^ovrsj 
Ti ^iciroo(poi; xat cxiTcciffjtarcc, rovrotg aoxiff^nffofti^u. 

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. 2.2,opyiZ,'of/,ivo; ru a.^iX(pZ, Rom.xii. 12, 
Tn iXvi'Si ^ai^ours;. 1 Pet. iv. 12, f/,h Isv/^so-Ss t55 Iv vfjuv "TTv^uan, The construction, 
however, is more frequently with 'i-^ri, or h. Thus Matt.^xviii. 13, %a/^£/ W aur^. 
Mark xii. 17, l^avf/^uerav i^r^ avrZ, 1 Cor. xv. \9, TjX'Tfixori; h H-^KfTM. (Compare 
2 Cor. i. 10.) Phil. i. 18, h rourw xa/^w. 20, iv ovlivi alo'x'J^^^ia'ofJi-a.i. 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 § 40. 3. There is a peculiar construction in Rev. xiii. 4, 
IBavfiafftv oXn h yri oTicrca rov ^'/joiov, where the sense seems to be, to follow with 

Obs. 12. When an affection or disposition of the mind is represented as the motive 

1 Winer, 6 31, 36. Ast ad Plat. Polit. p. 392. 


of an action, the dative is sometimes employed ; as in 2 Cor. viii. 22, toXXukis 
fffovl'uo^ oyreCf vvv) Ti <roXv ff'Tov^aioTi^ov, 'TiToiS^trsi 5raXX>5 tv u; vftu;, from his great 
confidence in you ; Phil. ii. 3, tyi Tacruv'):p^o<rvv'.j ccXX-hXav; '/}yovf<.ivai ^^«^£;^«vTa; lavruv, 
from a sense of humi/iiy. A preposition, however, and particularly ^la with an 
accusative, is more frequently employed. Thus Matt, xxvii. 18, p»i ya^ on lia 
(p^avov ^afii^MXCiy alrov. John xix. 38, xix,^v(M[ji.ito; 'hia rov <po(->ov rZv ^lovtuiuv. Phil. i. 15, 
Sqq. T/v£f fJtXv Ko.) ^/a (p^ovov sea) 'ioiv, rivii "hi xai Bi' ivdoxiccv, tov Xoitrrov xyjovircroiia-iv' o't fiiv 
s| lai^uitg, 01 Ti 1% a.ya,Tri;, 

Obs, 13. To this head is to be referred the verb cr/CTsys/v, which in the New 
Testament is constructed, not only with a simple dative (Mark xvi. 13, 14, John v. 
38, 46, vi. 30, x. 37, 38, Acts v. 14, 2 Tim. i. 12, &c.)'; but also with W) and a dative 
(Matt, xxvii. 42, Luke xxiv. 25, Acts xiii. 12, Rom. ix. 33, x. 11, 1 Tim. i. IG, 
1 Pet. ii. 6, &c.) ; with Itt) and an accusative (Acts ix. 42, xi. 17, xxii. 19, Rom. iv, 
5, &c.) ; with sJj and an accusative (Matt, xviii. G, 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 o^ 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 ^icc with a genitive. Thus in Eph. 
ii. 8, T« ^d^tri Iff-TS ffiffcuff/iiiyot ota t^> ^iittsus. 

Obs, 15. The time when an action is performed is sometimes expressed by a 
dative ; as in Matt. xvi. 21, r^ rpiry h(^i^a lyi^Smcci. Mark vi. 21, 'U^uln; ro7i yinerUis 
alrou ^iT-^vov Itoiu. Luke viii. 29, -proXXol; %f^ovoti ffvvri^'pra.xii airov. xii. 20, raurn rn 
vvxr't. Acts xxi. 26, rri ixofiivri vifii^a. Continuance of time is once so expressed in 
Acts viii. 11, ha, TO ixavZ x,i°^V '''^'^ f^xyila,i; i^iff'Ta,xivai ccutov;.^ The place where 
any thing occurs is invariably marked by the preposition Iv. Thus in John ii. 1, 
11, ly KavK rr,; TaXiXocixf, iv. 21, oiiTZ Iv tm oou tovtZ, o'jTi Iv 'li^o<rQXv{/,oii. 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 

i Alt, Gram. N. T. §29. 2 Winer, \ 31,'l. ^ 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 V710 and a genitive ; as in Matt. v. 21, kpps'^n to7$- a^x^toif. 
Many indeed would render this expression, in the strict sense 
of the dative, as in Gal. iii. 16, roj 'A^pocafx sppri^'/io-oiv ccWita-y- 
ysXloci. 2 Sam. v. 6, LXX, spps^n rcb Aa/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, us eipinrai fxoi Trqorcpov. See 
also Lucian. Pise. vii. 22, Strabon, xvii. 806, Procop. Hist. 
Ecc. 16. Again, Luke xxiii. 15, ou^h ahoy ^avdrou ka-rl TTBTrpocy 
/xEvoy avTcp, which the English Testament improperly renders 
done wito him. The true syntax is supported by Xen. Hell, 
ii. 2. 17, oivoc.[j.vricroj vfjjiv ra. rovrco 'TrsTT^ayptEva. Arist. Eccl. 73, xocl 
(ji^'/iv roL y aX>C v/xiv opcu Tr^'Troccy^i^a,.^ Other examples are Luke 
xxiv. 35, ky^ua-'^'in avrois. Acts vii. 12, oivsyvcopiu^'n ^lc(j(jri(p rois 
ao£>.(poTs" avrov. xvi. 9, o^apca ^la rr/j- vuktos &;(p3"73 rco Y\(xv\oj. 
XX. 9, xa.r(X(psp6(ji.svo^ vitrei) /SaS'ei. 1 Tim. iii. 16, u'p'bYi dyyiXois. 
James iii. 7, ^rajct ya^ (^vais hnpluv ^acf/^cz^Ercci ycou ^E^ccfj^aarat 
rr) (puaEi rri dy^qcoTTivri, So also most probably V. 18, xxpTTos- T^f 
^iKociofJuyy]^ h sl^invri GTT&iqsrai roTs" TToiovaiv ^'ipmYtv. Add 2 Pet. iii. 
14, aTrov^daxTs aairiXoi y.a.1 dp^ufj^riroi avrcp svpE^rivoci. 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, eT^ov vExvlatcov Trspi^s^KinfJi'ivov aroXriv XEUKrt)'. Acts 
Xviii. 25, ovrof ^v xarT^^rj/XEvos' t-^v o^ov rov ycvpiou. 2 Thess. li. 15, 
Kparsirs r^^ TTocpoc^oijEis, as k^i^ocyPnTE. 2 Tim. iv. 3, xv7]3"6/x£vo< r^v 
ajto'^v. Rev. i. 13, Tri^iE'C^ooa^xivov iipos roiS (xccdTots ^gJvtjv j^^t/aryv. 
Here also belongs Luke xii. 47, ^apviarai TroXXaf, \scil. TrXnyds. 
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; 
but those verbs 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, irs^/V- 
TivfJi.oci TO iuayyiXiov Tij; aKfiofovtrrtas. And SO in Rom. iii. 2, 1 Cor. ix. 17, 1 Thess. ii. 
4, Tit. i. 3. So again, for clkva-i; -^npiKUTai [jloi, we have in Acts xxviii. 20, rnv clkva-iv 
Tuvryiv ^z^iKiiuai. And in Heh. \. 2, uvros cnoiKurut affB^ivimv, Other examples are 
Acts xxi. 3, a,vcc(pa,v'ivri{ t^v KyV^av. 2 Cor. iii. 18, rhv aurhv ilxova f^irci.f/,o^(povfji,i^a.. 
1 Tim, vi. 5, .2 Tim. iii. 8, ^ii(pBa^/u.ivoi tov vovv. Hence too, perhaps, Col. i. 9, "va 

^ ^ See Kuinoel ad loc, * Wetstein and Kypke ad loc, ^ Winer, §31.6. 


vXrtpeoB-iiTi t^v iTtyv&xriv rav BiXvi/jtaro; avrov. 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, i-raihuBn Taa-yi aoipla,. See also § 40. 5, Obs. 12. We have, besides, 
in Luke i. 4, Tio) Zv xaryi^ri^ra Xoytiiv.^ 

Obs. 2. To -ritfTivuv Ti simply, must be referred 2 Thess. i. 10, Wttrnv^ti to (jLa^ru^i- 
ev fifiuv. 1 Tim. iii. 16, i-ria-rsu^yi U KO(Tfjt,u. To the active construction with a dat. 
and accHs. belonjj Matt. xi. 5. Luke vii. 22, ■rrux,oi ihccyyiXi^ovrai. Heb. xi. 2, 
\f/.u,oTVon^niTa,v ot T^itrfovTi^oi. Also Pleb. Vll, 11, o Aaoj ya^ Itt avr^ vivof^oBiTnroy the 
people were placed under the Law with reference to this pi'iesthood. The active form 
vof^oBiTsTv Tivd 71 occurs in Psal. cxviii. 33, LXX ; and the regular construction of the 
passive in Deut. xvii. 10, oVa av vo/i^o^iTyi^Ti ffoi? 

% 49.— 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 gTammatically 
termed, its usage is either directly or indirectly reflective. 
This 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 klXOCUrOMy (7£(X,VT0V, &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, tnavTot ^ulfiii. John viii. 
22, a.'Teoicri'iu laur'ot. Examples, however, of the true middle sense are Matt, xxvii. 5, 
a.'vny\aTo, he hanged himself. Mark vii. 4, pxzTTiffuvroct. Luke xxii. 30, Ka^icnT^i. 
1 Pet. iv. 1, oVX/Vao-Ss. To this head may probabh^, but not necessarily, be referred 
Matt. viii. 30, (iotrao/xivn. xxvi. 46, lyii^iff^i. Acts xxvii. 28, Ktvo'jf/.i^cc, 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, o^y'iZ,iff^tx.i) to provoke 
oneself to anger, i. e. to be angry : Luke v. 4, 'xa.viff^a.i, to make oneself rest, i. e. to 
cease : xii.K), (pvXaa-iriff^cct, to protect oneself, i.e. to beware : Acts xxvi. 26, cr5i'^£<rSa/, 
to persuade oneself, i. e. to believe; xxviii. 25, dToXvKr^cn, to dismiss oneself , i.e. to 
depart: Heb. xii. 25^ dTroffT^'upur^at, to turn _one self away, \. a. to reject ox despise. 
Add 2 Thess. iii. 6, ffrixXiff^oct, to avoid ; 2 Cor. x. 5, iTal^itr^en, to be arro- 
gant : 15, avlxHff^cci, to increase ; and some others. In some few cases this new 
sense becomes transitive. Thus in Matt. xxi. 26, <po[iovfz,iBcc tov oxXov, Mark vi. 20, 
ttpofiuTO TOV ^lucivvm. 

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 Ixvrcx), and, if the verb 

^ Winer, §. 32. 5. Alt, § 30. d. 

2 Winer, § 40. 1. Alt, § 50, 1. Wesseling ad Died. Sic. xix. 58, 


governs an accusative, it is retained. Thus in Marli vi. 23, 

aiTEiv ri, to ask for something ; and in v. 24, a.W^'iGhai n, to ask 
something for oneself. Also in Luke x. 11, a^opoaTTa-rS-ai Koviop^ 
Tov, to wipe off the dust from ourselves ; Acts xx. 28, ir^piTroiEi's- 
^oLiy to j)ur chase for oneself (In 1 Tim. iii. 13, so(,utq1s is 
redundant.) Eph. v. 16, E^a-yo^d^sa^och to redeem for orieself ; 
2 Thess. iii. 14, an^AEiova'^oci, to mark for oneself; 1 Pet. i. 9, 
y.oij.ii^sa^cx.1, to carry off for oneself 

Obs. 3. Here also the signification may frequently be expressed by an appropriate 
verb ; as in Phil. i. 22, Heb. xi. 23, etlgilff^ai, to take for oneself, i. e. to choose. 
Thus also (puXufffficr^oci, 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, eixn-^al aov tjjv ^s^aXs^y. Mark vii. 3, sav ixM 
cruyfiyi vl-^uvrcci rag x^''^'^'' Acts xviii. 18, xtiod/JAve; rhv xi(f'xX'^v. Rom. ix. 17, o'Tug 
hhJ^uif^at iv aoi rhv ^vvctfiiv jjijqv. In this last example, however, the pronoun is redun- 
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 suffer. We 
have, for instance, in Luke ii. 5, oc7roy^oc(p£<j^ai, to cause oneself 
to be enrolled; (Compare v. i.) 1 Cor. vi. 7, a^ixsTffS-a/, to 
submit oneself to injustice ; xi. 6, xsipe(jJai, to cause oneself to 
be shaven. Perhaps also TrsoirifMyBa^oci, 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, ^eivii^iff^ai, to cause moue?j to be lent to oneself i. e. to borrow ; xx. 1, 7, 
fjt,ttf^ouff^at, to cause to let to oneself, i. e. to hire ; Luke xxiv. 21, XuT^ova-3-ai, 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, ffuvri^iff^cct, to make a bargain 
together: xii. 20, (iouy-iviff^aiy to consult together ; 2 Cor. xiii. W, 'Xce.^eix.a.Xilff^ut, to 
afford mutual coiisolation ; 2 Tim. ii. 24, fjt,a,x^<^^<^h 'o contend together. The 
reciprocal sense is less distinct, but still discernible, in the verbs ffroa.rivi<T^a.i and 
uyuvlliff^ui, in 1 Cor. ix. 7, 25.^ 

Of the anomalous interchange of the active, passive, and 
middle voices, see above, § 22. 

§ ^0,— .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 ner, § 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 indeji- 
nitely, without reference to any other action, and is accordingly 
the tense appropriated to history and narratives. Thus in John 
i. 46, oy ^ypoL-^^ Mcc'fTo^s' ev toj yofxco, sv^', the aorist Eypx-^s 
represents the writing of Moses as a. simple historical fact ; but 
the pe?' feet eJ^ajxa/uiev not only indicates the act of finding as 
past, but 2^^ consequences as remaining, — we have found him, 
and still know where he is. Again, in Matt. iv. 4, yiypaTrron^ it 
has been written as a permanent record ; Acts ix. 13, dtcnuooc 
d'^o TToKKuiv wspl rov dv^pos rourou, oaac xaxa iTrolnc^e, I have heard, 
and still retain the knowledge, what evils he did ; Gal. ii. 7, 
'TrETrlarsufxai to suacyyiXiov, 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, rd Tr^evixccrcc rd uKd^acpra, orxv avrov E^soupei, 
'jrpoaiTTi'JirEv acvrco. Gal. i. 14, riyLomoLTz ydq rriv £fx,riv dvoc- 
arpo(pYiv TTor^ £v to; ^lou^xiaixa), on xaS"' v7rsp^oXr,v e^Iouxov rr,y 
sx.xXinaixv 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, %oj^\s Troc^oc^oKriS ouk iXdXzi avrois. Mark 
xiv. 12, ore to itdayjx, \^vov, on the day when they 
annually i-Ze?!? the paschal lamb; xv. 6, Kcird ll loqrriy 
uTriXvsv ezvToTs tvoc ^eV/xtov. (In the parallel place of Matt, 
xxvii. 15, it is elft/S-et dTroXv^Av.) 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 ll 
^lajdvvns ^lExcuXvBy aurov, sought to prevent him ; Luke i. 
59, IxaXoyv abro, wished to name it ; v. 6, disppriyvvro to 
^Urvov, began to break ; Gal. i. 13, sTrop^ouv avTm', en- 
deavoured to destroy it. 

Obs. 1, The difference between the aorist and imperfect is distinctly marked ia 
Luke viii. 23, tXiovtoiv Se avruv a.<puTvu(ri' xa) xctrifift Xcc7kct^ ii; rnv Xi/lcvtjv, xai ffuvt- 
'rXtj^ouvTOy xa] Ixivluvtvov. Compare James ii. 22.' 

I Winer, § 41. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 52. Stallbaum ad Plat. Phacd. p. 29. Jacob 
ad Liician. 'fox. p. 53. Reisig ad Soph. (Ed. Col. p. 254. 


3. The plvsquam-perfectum denotes an action which was 
already completed before, or during, the performance of another 
jpast action, to which it has reference either in itself or its con- 
sequences ; as in Matt. vii. 25, re^EfxsXicoro yap l7t\ ttjv irlrqav, 
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 fut. passive, or 
paulo post futurum, marks 2i 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, hay 

5. The other futures express not simply 2l future action, but 
a supposed or possible case, or such as might or could happen 
under certain circumstances. Thus in Luke xviii. 22, ird-vra 
oda ex^iS" 7ru\%aov, xal '^la^os TTTw/jcns, aal e^sif ^fityaupoy ev oupavo). 
Rom. iii. 6, ptTj yivoiTo' etteI ttws x^tvsr 6 0£Of Tov Jco'jfAov ; X. 14, 
TTus ovy i'^iKaXiaovTai s\s ov oJx ETtldTEvaav ; x. t. X. James ii. 10, 1 1, 
oaris yaq oKov tov v6{J.ov rripYia-Ei, Trraif^Ei ^s sv svt, yiyoyE Travra/y 
£vox,05- si ^s ov fxoty(^EV(JEiS, (povEVCTEis ^E, yEyovas' TTapa^aTTis yofjiov. So 
when purpose is spoken of; as in 1 Pet. iii. 13, nxl ris h xaxoJcrcyv 
viAas, Eav Toy dya^ov fxifjt.'nral ye'vridS's ; And who is he that would 
harm you, if, ^-c, 

Obs. 2. Hence also the fut. is^used in questions where the conjimctive might be 
used; as in Rom. vi. 1, rt ovv l^av/xiv; iTifUvov/Juiv rn afia^rla, 'tva h x^^'i '^^iovoiff^; 
[jt,'A yivoiro. Are we to continue in sin ? or, would you have us continue in sin ? So 
again in v. 15, where some manuscripts read kfjLugTncruftiy. Compare Matt, xviii. 21, 
xix. 16, Luke iii. 10, and elsewhere. See also § 54. 1. Obs. 3. 

Obs. 3. Th<d future is frequently used for the imperative ; as in Matt. v. 48, 'iffiffh 
ovv vfitls Tikuoi. In Hebrew the same idiom is very prevalent, and it is preserved 
in several citations from the Old Testament. Thus in Matt. v. 21, oh (ponv<rus. 27, 
oh ftoi^ivffus. 33, ohx, i'Tto^x^a-iis. Acts xxiii. 5, a^x"^'^''^ '''*'' ^^^^ "'ov ehx i^iTs xaxug. 
Rom. vii. 7, ohx i-ri^vf/,ritnis. See also Rom. xiii. 9. 

Obs. 4. Besides their proper import the tenses also frequently signify to be wont ; 
as indicating a general habit, or an action continually repeated. 

1. Imperfect: as in Luke iv. 15, lyt^cc^iv iv raTs avtayuyali cchruv, he was in the 
habit of teaching : Acts ii. 44, 'Xavris Ti ol 'riffnuovris nffav iv) ro ahro, »a) tix'* 
a'^avra xoiva,, x. r. X. 

2. Perfect : John xiv. 25, ravTa \i\a,\nxa. vfjt.7v, <ra^^ vfji.7v jxivav. 2 Tim. iv. 8, 
ffri(pavos, ov ocToouffn [jloi o Kv^iogy xu) vatrt roTs vya^yixoa-t rhv ivi<pdvnoiv ahrou. 

3. Aorist : Matt. iii. 17, o vio; /u.ev o aya-^nrh, iv u ihVoxT^ffo,. xxiii. 2, It) rns 
Muffias xuB-Q^as Ixd^iffav ol y^a,f/,[iitrus. 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 d^vvarrio-u •ra^a ru Qiv ?r«v prifiK, where, however, the 



particular reference is future : Rev. iv. 9, oruv }atrou(ri rk Z^Zec Vd^av k. r. X., 
^tff^ovvrai 01 iixovt kxi rtf tracts -r^iff^vri^oi^ xai T^offKVvnffouin^ x. r. X. The dif- 
ferent tenses with this signification are frequently interchanged. 
Olfs. 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 

New 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 prcesens historicum would be 
used. Thus in Mark v. 15, 'i^^^ovrai -r^og rev ^Irjffovv, xa.) ^tu^oZffi Tov 'ha,ifJcovt%o- 
fAtvev, Johni. 29, t>j iTav^tov ^XiTH o ^laicivvtis rov 'iwovy, xa.) Xiyn. 46, iuglffxn 
iiXt^<ros rh NaSava>7>.j xx) Xiyn alrZ, ix. 13, cLyovinv avrov T^og rohs ^cc^iffoctoviy 
vov 9ror\ Tvfko'v. Hence ihe present and the aorist are frequently united in the 
same sentence, as in Matt. ii. 13, ava;^w^»)<rayTwy avruv^ Thov, ayyiXog Kv^iou<pui'- 
ytrai xar ovao ru \u(rr,(p. Mark ii. 4, uTiirriyniTav rhv (rriyvv^ o'X'ou *iv, xai 
ilo^v^avn; pf^akajfi rov x^dfiliarov. 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 alibi. The perfect is also 
used with the present in Acts xxv. 11, u /Av yu^ uiixZ, xa) a^tov ^avdrou 'ri- 
'X^a.^u, Ti,x. r. X, Rev. xix. 3, xa) ^ivn^ov u^yixav^ ' AXXyiXovi'a' xa) o xa-rvos alrni 
avafiatvn 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 maybe added 
that the present is sometimes employed in a secondary proposition, in an 
imperfect sense ; as in Mark v. 14, Ihlv^ rl ifri to yiyovos, what was the matter. 
John iv. 1, 7}xov(rav ol ^a^iiraToi, ort'lriffous -rXiiovus fia^nras <7roi{l xa) jSa-rr/^E/, 
was making and baptising. Add Mark viii. 23, Luke xix. 3, John i. 19, ii. 9, 
vi. 64, Acts V. 13, xii. 3, xix. 34, xxviii. 1, and elsewhere. So^lian. V. H. 
ii. 13, iZ,riTouVi offTis "TtorX oiiros o 'Satx^drvis IffrU, 

2. To the verb nxu is attached the signification of the perfect, / am come, I am 
here : as in Luke xv. 27, o d2iX<pos cou nxn. John iv. 47, axovtras on 'Inffod; 
viKu Ik Tfif 'lov^aiag. The perfect, however, is used in Mark viii. 3, rm; atiruv 
fiax^o^iv vixaffi. 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, -xug 'ia-rai rovro, 't-ru avh^a oh ytvuffxiu ; xv. 31, cv •ra.vTOTi fzir Ifiov 
u. John viii. 58, cr^Jv 'Afi^aafjt, yiviff^ai, lyu itfzL XV. 27, d-r d^x,^,s f^ir if^ou 
ttrn. Actsxxvi. 31, ovhXv Bavdrou a^tov -r^dcra-u. 1 John iii. 8, a^r' a^X''? ° 
^tdfioXo; dfjta^rdvii. So Jerem. i. 5, LXX, -r^o rod (At vXdffal ffi iv xoiXia, i<ri' 
era/xai <n. 

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, Tav "hivl^h fjt.n -roioZv xa^Tov 
xaXov ixxo^Tirai, xa) us <rv^ (idXXirat. XXVl. 2, f^ird. %uo fif^i^ag to "xdrxa 
ytvtrai, xa) o vlos tov dvB^uTov 'Xa^a^tlorat lis to (rrav^coS-tiyut. John viii. 33, Vri 
fiix^ov ^^ovev fjt.i6^ vfjtuv iifii, xa) v-xdyu <r^os tov TifA-^avTa f/,i. In Latin there 
is a similarusage; as inTerent. Eun.ii. 3. 46, Cras est mihi judicium. Cms. 
B. G. vi. 29, sese confestim subsequi dixit. Hence the present and the future 
are frequently combined; as in Mark ix. 31, ovios tou dvB^u-Trov -xa^ahiloTai us 
X^'Z'^t dvB^u-rm, »a) u'ToxTtvouo-iv uutov, x.t.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. Ib6. et ad Viger. p. 746. Poppo ad Thucyd. p. 158. Matt. Gr. Or. § 502. 

K 2 


xxiv. 40, and Luke xvii. 34j the former has the verb in the present wa^aX«/A- 
(iavtrai, and the latter Tcc^nXviip^nffirai in the future. The verb ufti, to go, 
does not occur in the New Testament : but the verb V^p^^a^a/ is very constantly 
employed in a future acceptation ; as for instance, in the title o i^^^ofuvos, 
applied to Christ in Matt. xi. 3, Luke vii. 19, 20, Heb. x. 37, et alibi. See 
also Matt. xvii. U, xxi. 5, Mark x. 30, Luke xviii. 30, John iv. 21, v. 25, 
xvi. 13, Acts xviii. 21, 1 Thess. i. 10, Rev. i. 8, ii. 5, 16. There are many 
other passages also, 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, h -riffrivuv lU rh vlov i;^ii Z,uh aieovtov, 
i. e., the title of the believer to eternal life co-exists with his faith ; and this 
import of the passa-;e is rather confirmed, than refuted, by the change of tense 
in the subsequent clause, o Ti a.'ffit&uv tZ vim olx, o\^itu,i Z,u'/iv, aXX' h o^yh rov 
Ssou f^ivii W avTov. Oil the other hand, the present is strictly proper in the 
following examples : — John x. 32, Ita 'xolot 'i^yov XtSei^iri fit; xiii. 6, kv^h, <rv 
ftou viTrns Tov; Toda; ; 27, o ToiiTs, ^o'tnffov <rd.-)(^ioy. Acts ili. 6, o oi tx.^) tovto 
trot ^/^ufiu 2 Cor. xiii. 1, r^lrov tovto io^ofiut. In 1 Cor. xv. 35, Tui iyi'i^ovTcct 
ol nx^ol; the reference is not to the resurrection as a/act, but as a subject of 
enquiry. ^ 

4. An instance of the future, employed in the sense of the present, has been 
adduced from Rom. iii. 30, iTuTio us o Sio;, as ^ikkiuo'u •ri^tTofM^v x. r. X., com- 
pared with v. 27, Xoyi^ofjLi^a, ovv -riffTU ^ixeiiova-Bai avB^MTov. So also ill Gal. 
ii. 16. The full effect of justification, however, is still /?</Mre ; and it does 
not appear that this tense is ever used, without at least including a future 
notion. See likewise Rom. ii. 13. In 1 Cor. xv. 29, some manuscripts read 

5. The imperfect is sometimes put — 1. for the aorist, especially when a narrative 
is related by an eye-witness. Thus in Acts xv. 22, ol <rT^aT>jyo), ^i^ippy<^avTis 
TO. \fji.i,Titt,, ixiXivov pa/SB/^wv. Compare also Mark iv. 10 with vii. 17. — 2. 
When there is reference to something said before, the imperfect y^v is some- 
times used for the present, as in John i. 15, oZros rtv, Sv uttov. So also with 
some verbs impersonal, as in Col. iii. 18, at ywcuKis, v-roTua-ffiirBi toTs iVtois 
uvh^airiv, us avtixiv Iv Kv^iei.', Some manuscripts have xaS^riKtv, for xetByjxov, in 
Acts xxii. 22. This is different from the use of 'ihi, and some other imper- 
fects, which, like the Latin oporiebat, denote that something should be, or 
should have been, which is not : as in Matt. xxv. 27, 'i^u en ftcckiTv to apyv^i'ov 
fzov ro7s T^aTi^iTats. (Compare Matt, xviii. 33, Acts xxvii. 21, 2 Cor. ii. 3.) 
So Matt. xxvi. 9, ri'hvvoiTO ya,^ TOVTO to fji.voov rr^ocB^voci toXXov, xa.) BaSjJva^ ^ru^ols' 
Also u(piiXav, in 2 Cor. xii. 11, lya ya^ clxpuXov v(p' vfMv ffvnffraffBui.^ See also § 
51.6, Obs. 6. And 3. Sometimes the imperfect has the sense of the plusquam- 
perfect f as in Acts iv. 13, iTiyivucrxov avToh;, oti irvv tm 'Ivtirov yjerav. This is 
more commonly the case after the particles il or civ. See the examples in 
§ 51. Obs. 6. infra ; and these will also show that the usage is not confined 
to the verb bI//,), which has no plusquam-perfect, as some have supposed.* 

6. The perfect is used for the presen/, when an action, commenced in past time, 
is still continued ; as in John v. 45, 'ittTiv h xuTfjyoouv iifiuv, Mua-Tis^ its ov v/ii7s 
viX-rixuTi, in whom ye trust ; i. e., have placed your trust. Again, John xx. 

1 Winer, § 41. 2. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 54. Hermann ad Viger. pp. 211, sqq. 

2 Winer, \ 41. 6. Zeune ad Vijijer. p. 212, sqq. 

3 Winer, §41.2. Stallbaum ad Plat. Syrap. p. 74. 

* Winer, § 41. 3. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 54, b. 2, 3. Poppo ad Thucyd. p. 155. 
Kuinoel ad John i. 15. 


29, oTt tM^axds /u,i, Qufjua, Tiviffrtuxat, where the origin of present belief 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 present, it is put for ihafuturef 
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, aXkoi Kixo-ria,- 
xaa-i, xat v/u,i7i (Is re* xotto* ahruv UfftXijkv^ari. V. 24, o rot Xoyov fAov ccxovuv 
«%£/ Z,uriv cciuviov, xa.) ug x^ifftv ovx i^')(^irai, xa,) //.iTOC^ilinxiv Ix tow ^avdrov sig Trjt 
Z,unv, where the certainty of the event is indicated first by the present, and 
then by the perfect. (Compare 1 John iii. 14.) Some refer to this head 
John xiv. 7, ocr' a^ri yivu<rxiTi aurov, xa) luoaKUTi uurov^ but here the perfect 
has its proper sense, and so in Demosth. adv. Lept. p. 597, A. ov hf^us oliri 
yt)iutrxofjt,iv, oun Icjodxa/Lciv. With u or idv preceding, the perfect answers to 
the^«/?^r//m exacium in Latin ; as in Rom. xiv. 23, o ll hczx^ivofiivos^ieiv (pdyv, 
xarxxix^irat. Lastly, the perfect is used for the plusquam-perfect in Luke i. 
22, iTiyv'Mtrav on Wraalat lu^axiv. 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 /j/M^^i/am-pci/. is used for the ifnperf. or aor is t ; as in Matt, 
xii. 46, £T/ Js avreZ kakouvros roTs oxkois, l^ov, h fn^rrip xa) oi uhkfo) avrou tiffrrt- 
xsKTav i^) ^yjrevvTis ahru \ee,\n<rat. John ii. 9, us Ti iytvtraro o d^x^'^^'X^'^^^ 
TO v^a^ otvov ytytvyifi.ivov, xa) ovx i^n •roB^iv itrriv, x. 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 f as in John vii. 26, ^^j^ors dkri^Ss tyvuxrav ol d^'x^ovriSi ori oZros i<rriv 
dXn^us X^itrro; ; This is particularly the case with the verb sypaypa, with 
reference to a letter then under the writer's pen; as in 1 Cor. v. 9, 11, ix. 15, 
Philem. 19, 21. The purport of an Epistle is also expressed by sVs^-v/'a in 
Acts xxiii. 30, Philem. 12, and by 'hf^ovXri^nv in 2 John 12. On the other 
hand, it is y^d(pu in 1 Cor. iv. 14, xiv. 37, 2 Cor. xiii. 10, and ebewhere; 
and y^d(^u and 'iy^a-^a are used indiiFerently in 1 John ii. 12, sqq. Thus 
also the Latins use scripsi. In the same manner as the perfect, so also the 
aorist is used, 2. for the future, to denote the rapid completion or indubitable 
occurrence of an action or event. Thus in John xiii. 31, vvv t^o^da-B-ii o vies 
rou dv^puTov, xa) o Qso; i^o^da-Bn iv kvtm, where the future ^oldffst imnAediately 
follows in the next verse, xv. 6, lav fj^n ns f^ilv/i iv ifjco), i^Xn^n 'i^u, xa) i^tr 
^dv^v 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, IIeo-tj?, 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 
inXiffSn and TtXivSri. 

Obs. 6. Although the peculiar signification of the tenses is more clearly marked 

» Winer, ^^^,4. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 55. Poppo ad Thucyd. p. 16. Viger de 
Idiom, pp. 213, sqq. Ast ad Plat. Pol. p. 470. Stolz on John xiv. 7. 


in the indicative and the participle, still the other moods are equally used with 
reference to the distinctive import of each respectively. The infinitive present^ for 
instance, which serves equally for the imperfect, is used to indicate an action com- 
menced, continued, or repeated ; as in Luke v. 7, (hv^tZ,i(T^a.i, to begin to sink. Thus 
also the imperative perfect enjoins that an aclion is not only to be completed, but 
to remain so; as in Luke xiii. 12, yvmi, aTokikverat r^is uff^ivua.? aov, be permanently 
and effectually cured. Compare Mark iv. 39. At the same time these niceties are 
not always very strictly observed even by the best writers ; and the aorist in parti- 
cular is frequently found, where the perfect or imperfect should seem to be more 
proper. Often, indeed, it is optional, whether an action is considered with reference 
to its completion, duration, or repetition ; and the tense will accordingly be selected 
according to the views of the writer. Thus, for instance, in Luke i. 19, aa-serraXjjv, 
and in Luke iv. 43, a.xiaraXfji.a.i, may seem to indicate a precisely sirailar^meaning ; 
but the Evangelist in the former case viewed the commission with respect to its 
delivery only, and in the latter with respect to its continued exercise. In like 
manner, in Luke i. 25, •n-^otviKi does not necessarily mean precisely the same thing 
as i-^ro'mifi in v. 49, though in reality either might have been substituted for the 
other. The writer, moreover, will frequently be found to have taken euphony for 
his guide, rather than the strict requisites of the language ; and sometimes there is 
a change of signification. In the New Testament this intermingling of tenses is 
exceedingly common ; and though a trifling shade of difference may occasionally 
be apparent in the sense of each, they are for the most part precisely equivalent. 
Examples have indeed been already given in which the distinct import is unequi- 
vocally marked, and to these numerous others might be added ; such as Luke vii. 
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, IroifAocffan rnv ohov Kv^lov 
tChias •ronTrs, rag r^ifiovs ccvrov. Luke i. 47, //.iyocXuvu h yj/ux^ f^ov rov Kv^iov, xai 
hyotXXiaffi 70 ^vivfid fiou l-ri tS ©sa/. iv. 18, ^Xi^iffi fti iutt>yyi'>JiZ,i(r6a,i crru^oTg' airs- 
(TTaXKi fjct lua-cttrSai roug <rvvTiT^tfA/u,ivoos rhv Koc^Vntv. John i. 1 5, ^lua^ivn; [jca^rv^ii -n^i 
uvrou, xai KiK^ayz. ili. 19, ro (pZ; Ik^Xvhv us tov xofffjLov, xat yiyoc^vKTocv ol av6pco'roi fccck- 
Xov TO ffKoros, >j TO (pajg. Acts xxii. 15, av tu^aKUg xou ^xovffoig. 1 John i. 1,0 aKtiKoet- 
f^iv, lupaxaf^iv Toig o<p6oe,Xfjt,o7s 'hf^ei'V, o i6iocffdfjt,i6a,, xoCi at X^'t^ig rj/aaiv iypt}kd(pyitra,v. Now 
although an interchange of tenses is often found in classical Greek, yet the above 
examples indicate a practice so arbitrary, that it should rather perhaps be referred 
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, 
ifiecffTCiirccg, xa) v-rofiovhv «%«'?, xet) xixovloLJiag. iii. 3, tlXnipotg xcci tlxouffocg. xii. 4, ^ 
ov^a. avTou ffu^u to t^Itov tuv da-Tioeov tov ovpavov, xou ifhocXiv avTovg iig Trjv yriv. 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. For the reason alleged in the preceding Obs., it may be difficult to affirm 
that the aorist is ever put for the perfect ; and yet many passages have been ad- 
duced in support of the opinion. Such are, Mark xi. 17, vfjuTg i'^omcraTi auTov ff-xn- 

^ Winer, § 41. Ohs. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 53. Gataker de N. T. stylo; c. vi. p. 
69. Glass. Phil. Sacr. cc. 43. sqq. Georg. Hieroerit. i. 3. 33. Eichhorn's Intro- 
duction to the N. T. ii. p. 378. 


Xaiov Xjja-Tft/v. Luke i. 4, l-rnlv'TS^ ^oXko) tTt^^u^t^^av «. r. X. — iX|s xoifi,oi xah^rj; erot 
y^a^petu ii. 43, tikvov, ri i^oiva-a; fi/xTv ourui ; xiv. 18, dy^ov vyo^afet. xix. 42, vuv 
5i \K^v(->n aTo o<p6a\fji,uv ffov. Add John xii. 49, xvii. 4, Rom. xiv. 9, Phil. iii. 12, 
Heb. xi. 16, Rev. ii. 8. In 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 explana- 
tion will in some degree account for the negligence of the writer. Thus, after rela- 
tives, in Luke xix. 15, uTt (pavn&mxi a,vru tov? "^oukovs rovrovs, ois 'thuKi TO dpyvpiov, "vx 
yvS rii Ti ^iiT^ John iv. 1, u; ovv 'iyvu o kv^io;, on tlxouffav oi ^aoltraiei, 
X. r. X. xi. 30, ovTreo oi iXrjXtJht o 'Ifjffovs s/j rhv xeo/jcnv, aXX' riv Iv ru ro-prco, o-rov v-rm- 
Ttifiv auTu ri Md^^a. Acts i. 2, lvriiXdf4,ivos ro7s d-roiTToXots, ous i^iXi^aro. 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 alibi. Again, in narrations, where a past 
occurrence is introduced after the proper order of time ; as in Matt. xiv. 3, o yk^ 
'a^uhns x^arnffas to» 'ludwriv, thnffiv at/rov, xa) i^tro Iv <pvXa,x)j, had bound him and 
thrown him into prison. John xviii. 24, a^TsVrs/Xsv aCrov o "Awas ^ihftjivov ^r^o; Ka/a- 
<pciv, had sent him, i. e. previously to what is related in v. 14. But it should here 
be remarked that there are many places, in which a strict attention to the order of 
events would require a ptusquam-pcrfectuniy where the aorist is nevertheless to be 
rendered in its legitimate sense. Thus in Matt. xxvi. 48, o -ra^ahlovs avrlv ihaxtv 
auro7i ffnfjt,i7oVf the meaning is simply he gave them a sign, though the order of time 
is more accurately marked by lihuxu in Mark xiv. 44. Again, in Matt, xxvii. 37, 
xn) i^'i^rixav i-rdvu tJJj xi^aXrii avroZ rhv airiav avrov yiy^afif/.ivvv, the Evangelist 
merely records an historical fact, without studiously observing the exact period of 
the transaction ; and in Mark iii. 16, Wi^rixi ru 2if£uvi ovofAu, Uir^ou, it would be still 
less philosophical to interpret Mark's general statement by a reference to the time 
more 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, ffvAxafhov rov 'I»j<rayy xcx,) H'^yitruv. The aorist is also 
employed in its proper sense, and not, as sometimes thought, in that of the pius- 
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 ov 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 Gram. § 203. Obs, 2. Poppo ad Thucyd. i. p. 157. 


what will certainly happen. Thus in Mark xi. 18, k^-nrov^ irus 
avTov aTroXia-ovcnv. Luke xi. 6, oux. e%co, o TTxpabriacu aura), xii. 

17, ovx- zyjfi TTou (Tuvx^oj rous xqc^ttovs ixov. 1 Cor. vii. 34, ri ya/xyj- 
aaca-oc f^spifxy^ ra rov xo(T/xol', TTouf d^iasi rco dv^pi. So after nega- 
tive propositions, with a relative ; as in Phil. ii. 20, ovUvoc yap 

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 single 
propositions. Of the former may be cited Matt. xvii. 10, rl 
ovv Qiypccy^^ariis Xiyouaiv, on 'Hx/av ^sT £X3"e7v 9r§<wTov ; Luke xviii. 
9, eJtts TTpos Tivas" rous TTSTToi^orxs' l(p' EciuToTs oTi s'lcri ^Uaioi. See 
also John xiii. 24, Acts xii. 18, where some have the opt. The 
two members are connected into one in Mark v. 29, syvw to) 
crcufxaTi on \xrcci. Luke viii. 47, ^t' ^v alr/av ^'vj/aro ocvrov dTTriyysiX&v 
avrco. Acts xxii. 24, <va siriyvcp ^i' c^v alrlacv ovrous iTTst^uvovv xvru. 
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 citations 
are frequently preceded by on. See § ^7. 

4. After interrogative^, w^hether the enquiry be direct or 
indirect, respecting absolute and unconditional occurrences, the 
indie, is employed ; as in Matt. vi. 28, yiocracfxd^Ers rd K^lyoc rov 
uypov, Tiojs QLv^oi-iEi (where the growth is actual, but the Latin would 
be, quomodo crescant). Mark viii. 23, iTrnourcx. a^rov sin (SxiTrei. 
John vii. 27, ou^slf yivcuatcsi tto^sv hriv. X. 6, oux eyva;ffav r/va ^v, 
a eXxXei auroTs. 1 Thess. i. 5, oI'^aTs, oloi iysvn^rifXEv Iv vfjuy. In 
John xi. 47, rl Troiovfjiev ; signifies, what are tee doing ? not, 
what are we to do ? So in 1 Cor. x. 22, rt TtocpaZrikovixz^ rov 
Kv^iov; are we provoking ? 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. 

1 Alt. Gram. N. T. § 57. 2. 

2 Winer, § 42, 5. Jacob ad Lucian. Alex. p. 64. Tox. p. 116. 

3 Winer, § 42, 4. a. Alt. § 58, 1. Viger de Id. p. 505. Stallbamn ad Plat. 
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 Ei 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, el eK^xKXeis ifxas, 
ETr/T^evJ/ov 7)(MV a'TTsXS'eTv sir rriv ayekf^v rai^ y^oi^uv. xii. 26, 
el 6 Saravas" rov Saravav Ix/SaXXsr, £(p* eccurov i(AB^i<j^Yi. 
xix. 10, si ovroji IffTJV ri aclrloc rov dv^pcuTTou {/.stqc t^s yuvoci- 
XOJ-, oil <yufj.(p£pBi y(Z(jt.ri(Toci. XXvi. 33, si kqu irxMrss a-ycacv^aXia- 
3"rjjovTai £v ffoj, eycu ov^iTTora o-xav^aXicrS'yjo'o/xat. 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 ti has unnecessarily been 
taken in the sense of i-ni. Thus, for instance, in Matt. vi. 30, tl }l rov ^o^rav rou 
ayoov ©so; ovru; afje,(ptivvvcriv, ov -roXXaj f^xXkov i/fiaii, oXiyo<riffroi; John xiii. 14, u ovv 
iya 'ivi^a, vfjtuv roh; cro'^x;, ko.) vfJLUi o<pitkiTS k. t*. X. So Acts xi. 17, Rom. V. 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, the indicative of a past time is used twice ; 
first with el, 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 e\eni^ relatively future ; 
and the aorist, or, more rarely, the plusquam-per feet, 
with reference to the past. Thus in J^uke vii. 39, ovros, 
£1 ^v 7rpo(priTYis, £ylvcu(T}isv av x. r. X., were he aprojjhet, 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, b. Note. 


On the other hand, the aorist designates jjast time in 
Matt. XI. 21, el £v Tv^cp Kod 2joa/Vi lyevovro al ^vvcifMsif cjcl 
7£vo/>t£va/ sv vfjuv, TrdXaci oiv sv aaixxco y.ou ano^co poersvoooffav, 
if the miracles had been done, they would have repented. 
Similar examples are John viii. 42, gl 6 0£Of na.rrip z5/x&/v 
^v, riyxirars oiv Ifxs, ye would love me ; Heb. iv. 8, si yap 
auTQus ^Iy,(JovS xacrsTTOiuasVj ovx, av 'nspl aXKfii iXaXet puETti 
TQivrcx, ri/AE^ac^, 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, Luke x. 13, xvii. 
6, John iv. 10, v. 46, viii. 39, ix. 41, xiv. 28, xv. 19, 
xviii. 30, 36, Acts xviii. 14, llom. ix. 29, 1 Cor. ii. 8, xi. 
31, Gal. iii. 21, iv. 13, Hebr. viii. 7. 

0!'S. 3. Instead of the indicative with s/, the participle is used in Luke xix. 23, 
\yu iXB&fv ffvv TOXrU oiv sv^alae, alro, if 1 had come, 1 should^ &C. The pluperfect is 
employed in John xi. 21, x,v^a, il h uh, c ahx<pos fiou ovk civ in^v^xu. Compare 
V. 32. See also John xiv. 7, Gal. i. 10, 1 John ii. 19 j and compare Diog. L. iii. 
26, y?5sop. F. xxxi. 1, Lucian. Fugit. 1. 

Obs. 4. In the conclusion av is frequently omitted, especially with «v, and im- 
personals ; as in Mark xiv. 21, xakov havTu, il ovk iyivrt^n. Again, with an infinitive, 
instead of «/ with an indicative, in 2 Pet. ii. 21, xpiTrrov tjv ecvroTs fjch WtyvuKivaty 
K. T. X. it were better fur them not to have known ; i. e. if they had not known. Com- 
pare Xen. Anah. vii. 7. 40, Mem. ii. 7. 10, Diog. L. i. 2. 17. In such cases the 
particle si does not so much represent a conceivable case, as a real assumption, or 
a result which is represented as [certain : to which head belong John ix. 33, si fth 
r,v ovTos Tapa, Qsu, ovk ri^vvoi,ro •xoiuv ovtivy were he not from God, he were able to do 
nothing, xv. 22, il fjih ?X9-av, koc) sXaXritra ahroti, afi,a^Tia,v ovk il%ov. xix. 11, ovk ux,^i 
\\ov!rla,v ev^SfJbiav xar' sf^ov, si f^h tjv troi ^s'ho/xivov avu^sv. ActS XXvi. 32, a^oXsXva-B-oii o civB-paTos ovtos, si ftn IcrjxsxX^ro Kaifapei. Also, with an abbreviated con- 
struction, in Rom. vii. 7, riiv a,/za^riec,v ovk tyvuv, si fih ^la, vo/jboV Tr,v ts yap i^iBu/xiaf 
ovk iyvuiv, si fjt,n vofAos sksysv' Ovk i-rt^vyjnffsis. In like manner, in Latin, the in- 
dicative is found after a conjunctive with si or nisi; as in Flor. Epit. iv. 1. Peractum 
erat bellum sine sanguine, si Pompeium opprimere potuisset. 

Obs. 5. There is a very irregular usage of the present in the former part of a 
proposition in 2 Cor. xi. 4, si f^h ya^ o s^x,^fji.svos akXov 'ijierovv xn^va-ffn, KaXeus hvstxsffBi. 
It is found also in Diog. L. ii. 8. 4, si rovro tpavko'v ia-riv, ovx av iv raTs ruv B-i&iv lo^raTf 
iytvsre. Perhaps the true reading, though found but in one MS., is av'sx,sffBt.^ 

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 indefniteness, or generally to imply that an event might or 
would have happened under certain circumstances. Thus in 

1 Winer, § 43, 2. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 58. Hermann ad Viger. pp. 819, sqq., et 
ad Eur. Hec. 1087. Poppo ad Xen. C}r. i. 6. 10. 


Mark vi. 56, o'TTov av slas'tropsuBro gls* xcuixas, oaoi av TiTtrovro avrovt 
sTci^ovTo, wherever he wenty into this village or that, as many as 
touched him, whatever their number, were cured. The meaning 
is the same, though more definitely expressed, in Matt. xiv. 
36, oaoi rJ^4^avTo, lau'^naxv. Again in Acts iv. 35, ^ie^i'^oro lxa<7Ta;, 
ytxhori h Tjf %p«'av sfxev, according as each might need ; where- 
as, without av, the necessities of each must have been definitely 
fixed. With the aorist, in Heb. x. 2, ovk av iTravaxwo 7rpo(T(pE§o- 
ptsvat, 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 fiovkoi/xtiv av, ii^ouXofAnv «v, and l(iovXo/zt]v respectively. The distinction 
between the two former are marked by Matthise ; but the simple imperfect implies 
a conditional wish, modified by circumstances, as in Acts xxv. 22, i(iov\ofi,vv xa.) auro; 
rou av^^uTou a.Kov(TCiu A direct wish would have been expressed by ^ixu or (iovXofAttt 
(Rom. i. 13, xvi. 19, 1 Cor. xvi. 7, 1 Tim. ii. 8) ; and the possibility or probability 
of a future hearing by (iovXotyjm av. The imperfect expresses a decided wish with a 
doubt of its practicability ; / wished and still wish, i. e. I could have wished, if 
possible. Precisely similar are Rom. ix. 3, ^u;^ofinv ya,^ avros lyu ava^i/^a uvai, 
X. T. A.., Gal. iv. 20, ij^ikov Ii Tfa^iTvat T^os vfi,ecs cc^rt, 1. 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 /x-y), the imperative of the present is 

commonly used, as in Mark ix. 39, /xog ncoXuBre oivtov. John v. 28, 

pcji S"at//xa^£T£ Tovro. 

Obs. 1. Frequently, the con/wnc/iW aorist is substituted for the imperat.: as in 
Mark X. 19, f^h f^oi'X^tv<rrii' f/.h (povivarn' k. t. X. Acts xviii. 9, fjt,h (po(ioZ, a-XXa, XdXti, xai 
fji^h ffiuTviffni. 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 ob is sometimes put for the imperative with fjiM, as in 
Matt. V. 21, ou (povivffits. See above, ^ 50. 4. Obs, 3. 

2. The imperative sometimes indicates, not so much a com- 
mandt as a permission, exhortation, entreaty, caution, or the like. 
Thus in Matt. viii. 31, o\ II ^ocifXOVBs TrapEytaXouv avrov, Xsyovrss", 
*E9r/T§£\|/ov vif/Av d'TrsX^sTv eU rriv dyiXriv toJv ^ot§wv* ycocl gt^rev ocvrois, 
'T^z-a'yeTE. Here £9n'T^£4^ov marks a request, and vTcxyirz grants 
it. Compare Luke viii. 32. 

' Winer, ^ 42, a. 2, AH. Gram. N. T. § 56. 2. a. 


Obs. 2. The precative sense of the imperative will also be found in the Lord's 
Prayer (Matt. vi. 9, sqq.), and its hortative sense in ihe sermon on (he Mount. (Matt. 
vi. 1, et passim.) It is simply ;iermmit;e in 1 Cor. vii. 15, u Vi o ciTttrTos %w/^£Ta/, 
%a;o/^£(r3(M. xiv. 38, u li rt; uyvail, ecyvoura. Compare 2 Sam. xviii. 23, 2 Kings ii, 
7, Jerem. xxvi. 14. So, in Latin, Ter. Eun. iii. 5. 48, Ubi nos laverimus, si voles, 
lavato. Permission and caution are united in Eph.iv. 26, ooyiX,itr^i, xcu firi a/ua^raviTt, 
you are permitted to be angry^ provided it be without sin. Sometimes a degree of 
irony or sarcasm seems to be implied in the permission ; as in the proverbial form 
addressed by Christ to Judas in John xiii. 27, o -roius, Ttoimov ra^iov. So in the 
address to the disciples in Matt. xxvi. 45, xaSsyJjTs to Xwrh, sleep on, i.e. if you 
can, in this hour of peril. Compare also 1 Cor. xi. 6. Closely allied to these 
examples is the sort of unwilling concession implied in Matt, xxiii. 32, xai 
•xXnguffaTi TO fjctToov tuv 'xos.r'iouv vfji,uv,Jitl ye up then, &c. : i. e. if ye will, ye must. 
Compare 1 Kings xxii. 22, Prov. vi. 22. So Virg. ^n. iv. 381. /, ^ejwere //a- 
liam, &c. 

3. Two imperatives are sometimes united, either with or 
without x«i, so that the first expresses, as it were, condition or 
limitation in regard to the second: as in John vii. 52, spsuvriaov 
Tiou t'^e, search^ and you will see, 1 Cor. xv. 34, Ixv^vJ/are liytocloosy 
y.a.\ fxvi ocixxpTckvzrz. 1 Tim. vi. 12, dyajvt^ou tov xarXov ocycova. rr,s 
iriCTEcosy iTTika^ov rri^ alcuvlou }^cur)s. So Baruch ii. 21 ^ jLXX. 
xXtvaTS rov cufjiOVy ycoci EpyxtJoca^E rco ^olgiK^i, KodblcroLTE etti rriv yriv. 
Epiphan. ii. p. 368, ex,£ rov^ Tot) &bov \6yovs xctra "^vy/nv aov, 

Obs. 3. The same mode of writing is very common in Hebrew ; and not 
imknown in Latin : as, for example, in the maxim. Divide et impera. In such 
cases the second imperative is, in fact, equivalent to a future : which is used with the 
same import in Luke x. 28, tovto toiu, xai Z^nffii. So Lucian. D. D. ii. 2, (ia7n, xa) 
o-^^u. Somewhat analogous are the following passages ; but, though the imperative 
may be rendered conditionally, the connexion between the two parts are sufficiently 
apparent without swerving from tlie original construction : John ii. 19, xCrocTi tov 
vecov TOVTOV, xa) iv T^itrh ij/u.ioee7; iyi^u avTov. Eph. V. 14, 'iyii^cti, o xoc^iv^uv, xat avd.o'Tcx. 
IX Tuv vixouv, xai i'Tt^ocvffit ffoi o X^iffTos, James iv. 7, avriVrjjrj Tat ^laf^oXu, xa) (Div^iTat 
a^' vfjuav. 

Obs. 4. The distinctive import of the tenses is for the most part observed in those 
of the imperative ; the present denoting continued or frequent /y repeated action, and 
the aorist that which is complete or transient. See § 50. Obs. 6. Examples of tlie 
former are Matt. vi. 19, /nh ^viira,votZ,iri bfjuv S-ntrav^oh; it) t'^s yr,;. Rom. xi. 20, fjt,n 
v-^>iXe<p^oni, akktx. (fiofiov. Heb. xii. 14, £/W/y«v huxtTs. Add Matt. ix. 2, xiv. 27, Mark 
viii. 15, ix. 7, xiii. 11, xiv. 38, Luke ix. 3, xxii. 40, xxiii. 28, John i, 44, vi. 27, 43, 
vii. 24, xxi. 16, Acts v. 20, Rom. xii. 14, 20, xiii. 3, 8, 1 Cor. vii. 3, ix. 24, x. 7, 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, iii. 1, Hebr. xiii. 2, 7, 16, James i. 5, 
ii. 12, iii. 14, iv, 1 1, 1 Pet. iv. 12, 2 Pet. iii. 17. On the other hand, we have the 
aorist in Matt. viii. 8, akka. f^ovov iWl k'oyu. Mark i. 41, xiyn auTu, eiXu, xocBa^ltr- 
BnTi. John ii. 7, yif^'traTi <raj vl^'ia; vIxto;. Acts Xxiii. 23, iToiftdffaTi ffTgoLTiuTcti 
^xxoff'iovs. 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 i. 24, 


iii. 4, V. 8, vii. 33, viii. 19, 22, ix. 11, x. 5, xii. 8, xvi. 9, xxi. 39. xxii. 13, Rom. xiii. 
7, 1 Cor. vi. 20, xvi. 1, 11, Kph. vi. 13, 17, Tit. iii. 13, 'Philem. 17, Heb. xii. 12, 13, 
James ii. 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 caiuiot be considered as terminated on the instant. Thus in Matt. x. 11, 
ixiT /uuvuTty 'ius S,v i^iX^riri. Mark xvi. 15, Kn^v^ctri to ilocyyiXiov 'Xa.ffn t'v\ KTiffii. John 
xiv. 15, ras IvroXas ras Ificcs rvprtfari. 1 John V. 21, rixvla^ (pv\a^ocri txuroui ecTo ruv 
tlluXuv. 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, 
fjj'/ih\ 'TTa^iffrdivtri to, /xtXf] vjJjUv ottXo. oioizt'cc; t55 ocubK^rtUf akkoi 'Tectgctffrnffu.ri lavrohi tu 
Ssu, XV. 11, aivsTrs rov YLv^iov, xa) iTUiviffccri avro'v. Elsewhere, when united, the 
distinct import of these tenses is duly preserved ; as in Mark ii. 9^ aoov a-ov rov »^cc(i- 
jSarav, xa.) Tt^t-rxrn, John i. 40, t^^nr^s, xa.) l^iru ii. 16, apxTi ravTOt, hriuBiv' fjun 
itoiiTn rov otxov rod irar^os f^ou oTxov IfA'^o^iou. So Lucian. D. M. X. 14, xeii ffv aTodtu 
Tjgy iXiu^ietav firi^eifieus, ocXXcc xct) Vp^s rccvrct.^ 

§ 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, Tojv sTTKjyiOTTriV ocurov "Kx^oi £T£§of. (Some copies have 
Xoc^srco.^ viii. 20, to d^yvqiov gov auy aol slo} elf aTTo/Xstav. Rom. 
XV. 5, Ss 0sof ^cpn vyCiv rb qlvto (p^ovsTv. 1 Thess. iii. 11, o ®zos 
xocrsu^vyxi rr^v h^ov rtfjiuv Trpos vyLocs' x. r. X. 1 Pet. i. 2, 2 Pet. 
i. 2,y^a,pis viJAv iCQcl eI^-^vtj TrXYi^uv^siin. Add 2 Cor. ix. 10, 2 Thess. 
ii. 17, iii. 5, 1 Pet. v. 10, Philem. 20. In 2 Tim. ii. 7, iv. 14, 
many good manuscripts have Iokjei in the future, which is equally 
adapted to the sense. Of negative propositions with fAvi, the 
formula /x^ yevoiro, in Luke xx. 16, Rom. vi. 1, 16, vii. 7, is an 
example.* So 2 Tim. iv. 16, /atj ocutoTs Koyia^sin. Compare 
Mark xi. 14. 

Obs. 1. In classical writers the particle «< often accompanies the optative in the 
sense of utiuam ; instead of which, in relation to things past, the aorist inaicative is 
sometimes used. Of this there seems to be an instance in Luke xii. 40, -rv^ tixBev 
fiakiTv ti; rh yyjv xa) ti B'tXco ; ti iih av»5(pS>}. Oh ! that it 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 «7^' axpiXov, with an infini- 
tive ; instead of which the later writers use o'^sXav, 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 1 Cor. iv. 8, xot.) o(piXov yt i(ia(nXivtrecri, and truly J 
wish that ye did reign. 2 Cor. xi. 1, o(peXav avux;^ffBi f^ou, would that ye could bear with 
me. See also Gal. v. 12, Rev. iii. 15, and compare Exod. xvi. 3, Numb. xiv. 2, 
XX. 3, Job xiv. 13, Ps. cxix. 5, LXX. 

' Winer, § 44. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 59. 

« \Yiner, § 42. a. 5, Alt. Gram. N. T. § 60. 


2. It is not often that the optative is used with av in the New 
Testament in independent sentences ; and then only with inter- 
rogative particles. When thus employed, therefore, it has 
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 i. 62, 
hivzvov TO) TTurp], ro, ri av ^iXoi xocXs'iff^aci avrov ', what he woidd 
wish him to he named, if he were consulted : John xiii. 24, 
TTv'^ia'^a.i tU oiv eloj ; who it could he ? Acts ii. 12, ^iviTropovv, ri 
av bsXoi rovTo sJyxi ; they douhted what this coidd mean, i. e., if 
it were explained, viii. 31, 'jius ya,p oiy ^vva,tix'nvj lav ix'h k. r. X. ; 
xxvi. 29, sv^^lfxm oiv ru Sso) as yBvia-^xi k. t. X. Compare Luke 
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, iTTtyv^avETo, r'ls oiv ftVj, xal ri saTi TTsTToiriKcof ; who he might 
be, and what he had done ?^ So Xen..Ephes. v. 12, erg^at'/uiaxsf, 
Tt'vEf T£ ^ffofv, xai r/ /SoiyXotvTo. See also Heliod. ^thiop. i. 25. 
46, ii. 15. 81,Polysen. ix. 25. 

Ohs. 3. Although some hypothetical circumstance may have suggested itself to 
the writer's or speaker's mind, such is not necessarily the case ; and hence it arises, 
perhaps, that the omission of av with the optative in interrogations, whether direct 
or indirect, is by no means uncommon: as in Luke i. 29, htXayi^iro, ToraTos uv o 
a,ffva,fff4.os OVTOS' Acts xvii. 11, avatiptvovTis ras y^aipag, il £%«i raura ourus. Add Luke 
iii. 15, viii. 9, xv. 26, xviii. 36, xxii. 23, Acts xvii. 27, xxv. 20, xxvii. 12. Com- 
pare Herod, i. 46, iii. 28.* Xen. Cyr. i. 4. 6, Anab. i. 8. 15, Diog. Laert. vii. 

3. The conjunctive mood expresses the 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, Luke ix. 33, 
TTOiYiacofj.zv u^B Tpst^ aKTivocS. Johu xlv. 31, sysi^sa'^s, ayufj^sv syTEV-r 
9"EV. 1 Cor. XV. 32, (pdyufXEV xat 'TTicofXEv, ocv^iov yaq aTTo^yna-xofJiEV. 

Add Luke viii. 22, John xix. 24, Rom. iii. 8, 1 Thess. v. 6. 

Obs. 4. Many good manuscripts have the future indie, instead of the conjunctive 
in James iv. 1, er^ftt^ov >} av^iov -ro^ivtra/f^i^a, *. r. A.. So also in Phil. iii. 15. A like 
variation occurs in 1 Cor. xiv. 15, Heb. vi. 3 ; but in these instances the/«/«re is 

Obs. 5. All the persons of the conjunctive are also used with "fit, so as to mitigate 
the force of a direct imperative. Thus in Mark v. 23, to ^vyar^tov (lov itrxoirus 'iz*'' 
'ivcc ixBuy sTiS^f avTv Ta.$ %fr^af, o-prus ffuB?,. 2 Cor. viii. 7, 'Ivcc ku) iv ravrvi rr, %«^iTi 

» Winer, § 43. 4. « Winer, § 42. 4. c. 



trt^ifo-ivtiTi. Probably an Ellipsis of hof^ai treu, Ta^uxaku a-i, or something similar 
suggested by the context, is required to complete the sense. Compare 1 Tim.i. 3. 
The imperative import of the form is clearly marked by its interchange with that 
mood in Eph. v. 33, 'iKatrros riiv iaurou yvtaiKO. ourais aya-ruTU, ui lavroV » oi yvvvi, 
'Iva. (pofivrat rov avJ^a. Here o^dru may be supplitd. Other examples are Jobn i. 8, 
ot/K «v ixiJyos ro ipeHs, oikk' '/va fia^rv^nff^ -n^t rov (puros, i. e., he was sent or commis- 
sioned to bear witness. Gal. ii. 10, f/,avov ruv -rru^Zv "va /ucvrifzoviv/iofitv, sail. Tct^iKuXovv 
hfias.^ With these are not to be confounded such cases as Mark xiv. 49, John i. 19, 
ix. 3, xiii. 18, xv. 25, Rev. xiv. 13, et similia. See §. 67. 

4. In questions o^ iiidecision or doubt, the conjunctive is used 
also without av, and with or without an interrogative particle : 
as in Mark xii. 14, ^oJ/xsv, ^ /x^ lutxzv ; are we to give, or are we 
not to give ? Again in Matt, xxiii. 33, ttws- (pyyoirg dTro Tr,s 
Kplasus rvif ysswYis ; How are ye to escape ? xxvi. 54, ttms ov 

Obs. 6. In such questions, and in others with the idea should, the future indie, is 
more commonly used. Thus in Matt. xi. 15, t;v< ^e ofjijoiuffu tJjv yinav rctvrzv; John 
vi. 5, flToSsv ayo^a,trof/.iv a^rovi ; Rom. vi. 2, olrtvis a'^i^avo//,iv t55 a/iu^ria, <rus i-rt ?^/,(To- 
fAiv havTti. vii. 7, viii. 31, ix. 14, 30, ri oZv i^ovfiiv ; 1 Cor. vi. 15, a^as otiv TO. /^ikt] 
revX^iffrav, Toir,(ru To^vrjs f^'ikn', XV. 29, tI "Pfoiiffovinv oi (iec^riZ,of/,ivoi v'v\^ ruv nx^uv. 

Obs. 7. The conjunct, is also used without a conjunction and without av after ^ixuv. 
Thus in Luke ix. 54, Bixng utu/i/.sv tv^ xara^nvai ; 1 Cor. iv. 21, t/ ^ikin ; h pdfi'^co 
sXSu "Z-^oi vf/d.i ; Similarly in Matt. vii. 4, a<pi5 Ix^dkuro xd^(^os utotov otp^akfiov aev. 
Instead of the conjunctive, the best manuscripts have the future in this construction 
in Matt. xiii. 28,'9^£X8/5 evv a-^O-^ovrss trvXXi^ofziv alrd. ; Matt. XXvi. 17, -xou ^ikuslroi- 
fAaffofjciv irot (fxyiiv ro 'Ttaffx,"-. Some commentators would also restore W\e future forms 
in 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, t/ ^'ikiti 'roiriffu 
vfjuv. Compare Matt, xxvii. 17, 21, Mark x. 51, xv. 9, 12, John xviii. 39. This 
seems questionable. The future is used, however, in Exod. xxv.40, LXX, o^a Toir,- 
ffUf xctTO, rov rv-rov x. r. X.^ 

5. In 7iegative propositions the conjunctive is used with ov 
tx.ri instead of \\\q future ; as in Matt. v. 18, lurce. h vi (xla. xe^atV- 
ou fjiri TTocqiX'^ri utto rov vofAov, xvi. 28, ov pov) yzvacovrai 3'avaTOL'. 
xxiv. 2, ov fJiYi a<pe^ri u!^e Ki^os bttI X/S'ov, oS ov {xri X(x,TacXv^r,TETxi. 

Obs. 8. This usage is not unfrequent with the conj.aor. 1. active, from which it is 
excluded by Dawes' rule. (Buttm. § 139. E. Obs. l.note.) Thus in Luke x. 19,et;J«v 
vfji,ai ov fjJn oc^txYiff'^. John xiii. 8, aw^»> vl-<^^i rols <TaB«j //,ou SIS rov ttluva. 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. 
2 Winer et Alt, ubi supra : Lipsius de usu Indie, in N. T. § 2. Fritzsche ad Matt, 
pp. 467, 761. Valcknaer ad Eur. Hipp. 782. 


§ 54. — Conditional Propositions, (Buttm. § 139. A.) 

1. When it is intended to express possibility with reference 
to some condition determinately announced, the conjunctive is 
employed with lav 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, lav 

TO aXoiS txoo^xv'^riy iv r/vt aXiG^riaEroci. viii. 2, xv^ie, soiv S'sX-riS", dvvoc- 
ffoct (XE xxbd^KJoci. John vii. 37, eav Tjf ^ivj/^, Epx^crboj TTpos /xs, xal 
iriVETM. ix. 31, lav ns ^EOcTE^yis ri, rovrov daovci. Add Matt. iv. 

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, Kom. ii. 25, vii. 2, xiv. 23, 1 
Cor. vi. 4, vii. 11, 28, 36, viii. 10, ix. 16, 2 Cor. v. 1, 1 Tim. i. 
8, ii. 15, 2 Tim. ii. 5. 

Obs. 1. It will be observed that the past tenses of ihe indicative are comparatively 
rare, and that these, as well as the present, have in fact a future acceptation. See 
below, § 56. 1. Compare also Luciau. 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 si 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 the 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, oi/s ^eT E'zrl gov TrapETvaci, xaci aocTYiyopETv, sT ri sy^^oiEv Trpos 
/OLE. Compare Acts xxvii. 12, 39, 1 Cor. xv. 37. In 1 Pet. iii. 
17, the manuscripts vary between ^eXei and ^eXoi, of which 
either is equally adapted to the sense. See above, § 51. 5. 1.^ 

Obs. 2. Sometimes ti and tav occur in two consecutive clauses ; as in Luke xiii. 9, 
x.av fuv Totriffn kcc^tov — u "hi (CtJiys, Ix.KO'^iis uhrrtv. Acts V. 38, lav h i| avS-peo^uv h 
^ovkh avT'/j, xaraXv^^fftTBir tl 1)\ Ik &iou iffrh, oh tvvatr^i x. r. X. The different import 
of the moods is, in each case, sufficiently apparent. Compare Xen. Cyr. iv. 1. 15, 
Plat. Phsed. 42, Isocr. Archid. 44, Luciau. D. M. vi. 3, Dio Chrys. Or. Ixix. 
p. 621.2 

Obs. 3. Signifying whether, u is used with the indicative, in Matt. xix. 3, kiyevrts 
uvTct), ii i^iffTiv oivB^euXCf) ccTokviTeci T^v yvvaTKa alirov xarcc Taa-av ul-lav. Mark iii. 2, 
^ct^iT-nfovv avTov, u roii aa.^^oi.(n dt^a^iva-u avrov. Here the co?ijunctive with iav might 

1 Winer, § 42, 2. b. c. Alt. Gram. N. T. 67. Reitz ad Lucian. p. 591. Her- 
mann ad Viger. pp. 831, sqq. Passov. Lex. in vv. u, idv. 

2 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. Tox. p. 143. 


have been expected. Add Acts xix, 2, 1 Cor. i. 16, vii. 16, 2 Cor. xiii. 5, et alibi. 
With the optative, in Acts xvii. 11, kvecxolvoirn raj ypeapccs, il «%a/ r»VT» ovruf. 
Compare Acts vii. 1 . lu this sense lav is not found. 

Obs. 4. Although il 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, ovx 
ii(rh itfiTv 9rXi7ov rj ^£vrs a^rot kui ^va tX^^^h *' f^''^'^' To^wBivrts uyo^atruf^iv. 1 Cor. 
xiv. 5, ixro; il fjcn ^lipfitivivr.. Rev. xi. 5, jj' ng avTovs SsX*? aS/xjjo'a/, <tZ^ ixTo^ivireei 
». 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 lav with the indi- 
cative, but still with variations of the manuscripts, in 1 John v. 15, tav o'/lcc/niv on 
uxo'jii '/1/u.uv, X. r. X. Many copies also have the indicative in Luke xi. 12, John viii. 
36, and a few in Rom. xiv. 8, xv, 24-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 with a pronoun relative, (Buttm. 
§ 139. B.), see § 59. 

§ 55. — Propositions beginning with Particles of time. 
(Buttm. § 139. C.) 

1. In the Greek writers, ors, ottots, IttsI, bttbi^yi, us, &c., are 
used with the optative, and orocv^ oTrorxy, lirw, sttsi^jcv, 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 y aorist, or future indica- 
tive, when an action present, past^ or future is definitely and 
positively expressed. Thus in Matt. vii. 28, ors tryvsTEXeatv o 
"'Inaovi rovs Xoyovs rourous, l^sTrXyjJ^ovro ol ^yQ^oi etti rri ^i^ac^ri 
avrov. Xviii. 32, 'Kolgolv tyiv oipEiKriv SKsivnv a.(pYiic/x. Goiy etteI TTccps- 

yCxKEO-ds fA5. XXViii. 9, OJi ^£ ETTOpEUOVTO X. T. X. Luko vi. 3, OU^E 

rovTQ dvlyycuTc, o ETtoifiGE Aa/3i^, ottote etteIvocgev avrcs ; xvii. 22^ 

^pCOTTOU I^cTv. John V. 25, EpXEr(X.l (IjQ^OC, XOcl WV EGTIV, OTE ol VEXpol 

daovGOvrai rri^ (pcovT^S rod vlov rov Qeov. ix. 4, Epx^nxi yv^, ote ov- 
^eU ^uvaroci Eqyx^^EG^ai. Acts xiii. 46, eTTEi^vi Js aTTco'^ETa^E avrov, 
GrpE(p6lXEB(x. e\s Ta sS^vTj. 2 Cor. iii. 15, rivlxx dvccyiva/GXEr'Xi M-coGris, 
xciKvfxixcc ETi\ TriV xap^iacv auroov xsTrai. Heb. ii. 14, etteI ovv rd. 

TtCL^ix XEKOlMCiJytYUCE X. T. X. ix. 17, ETTeI {/.Yi TtOTE \oy^VEi, OrE ^oj O 

^ta9-8/x£vos-. 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. ^1, fjuoLitccpioi sffTE, oray ovei'^lacijaiv vixas xou ^lu/^coai, 
vi. 2, IroLV ovv TtoiTii EX&yifAOffvvriv, fxri aoLkniariS, as often as ; and 
so in vv. 5, 6^ 16. Luke xi. 21, oracv h Uxvpbs xac^coTrXKyfAivo^ <pu- 
Xa(T(Ty) X. r. X., as long as, &c. John viii. 44, oracv XaXr) ro -^ev- 
^05", ex rcuv l^lcuv XpcXsT, ivhenever, &c. ix. b, orxv ev rco ytoaf^co a>, 
(p&Js- Et/xt rov xoafxov, whilst, &c. 1 Cor. xi. 25, rovro 'ttoieXts, oaa- 
xif av Trhnrsy eU rrtv sixrtv ava/mvyjfjtv. Add Matt. XV. 2, Mark xi. 
25, Luke vi. 22, xi. 34, 36, 1 Cor. iii. 4, xi. 26, Rev. xi. 6. 

Obs. 1. Sometimes only a simple future is expressed ; and if it be the aorist con- 
junctive, the futurum exactum. Thus in Matt. ii. 8, \9rav l\ tv^tirs, u'rayyi'tXari fjt.01, 
when you shall have found him^ Mark xiii. 7, oVav %\ aKovcrnri xo>Sfjt,ovi, when ye 
shall hear of wars. Luke xvii. 10, oVav 'roimyiri TrocyTd, ksyin, x. r. X. 1 Cor. xi, 
34, TO. Se Koi^a, us av iX^co, ^laTa^ofAcci, 2 Cor. iii. 16, '/iv!x,a V av iTiffrpi-^yi <7i'pos Kw- 
oiov, 9ri^icii^i7rai ro xdkvfif^a. See also Matt. ix. 5, xxi. 40, Mark iv. 15, viii. 38, xii. 
23, Luke ix. 26, xi. 22, John ii. 10, iv. 25, vii. 27, viii. 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. 28. 

Obs. 2. Instead of the conjunctive, the future is used in Rev. iv. 9, xa) orav luffoutn 
TO, ^aa ^o^av xai Ttf^hv x. r. X. Some manuscripts also read in Matt. x. 19, -ra^oHhu- 
aovffiv, and in Luke xiii. 28, o\piff^&.^ 

Obs, 3. The usage of on, Wii, &c., with a conjunctive is very doubtful in the best 
writers, though not unusual with Homer. In the New Testament we find in Luke 
xiii. 35, on uTtin. In Rom. xi. 22, the expression is elliptical. See § 69. iii. 
Much more unusual are orav, l-nihav, with an indicative ; but we have in Mark iii. 
11, ra '^viiifcara ra axa^a^ra, orav ahrov l^iu^n, ^r^oiri^i^rnv ahrZ. A few manu- 
scripts also have the indicative in Mark xi. 25, xiii. 4, Luke xi. 2, 21, Rom. ii. 14, 
1 Cor. iii. 4. The same construction is sometimes found in the later Greek writers.^ 

3. Of the remaining particles of time, ecos, or ems ou, ckx^is ov, 
fMEXpis ou, until, are employed with an indicative, iinperf or 
aorist, when an action is spoken of as lasting to a point of 
time already past. Thus in Matt. i. 25, ovyc kyivua-KEv avrm, ecus 
ou ETSKE rov vVov oLuTYis Tov 'TtpajToToxov. 11. 9, daT-hp 9r§or/7£v au- 
rous, Ecos IxS'o'v ecToj Eirccvco ou r,v ro Tixi^lov. Luke xvii. 27, 
^ff9'<ov, £7nvov, EyccfJiouv, lya/xi^ovTo, <^X§t ^r rn^E^ocs eIa-^XS"£ Na/e e\s 
TTjv KilScuTov. And so in Matt. xiii. 33, xxiv. 39, John ix. 18, 
Acts vii. 18, xxi. 26. 

Obs. 4. When it signifies whilst, 'ius is also construed with an indicative ; as in 
Matt. V. 25, "(T^i ivvouv ru dvrihlxM aov rx^v, 'ieas orov u Iv tjJ o^m far avrov. John ix. 
4, i^yeiZ,iffB-ai, 'ius yifjbi^a icrriv. So Heb. iii. 13. 

Obs. 5. With the optative these particles do not occur. With the conjunctive, 
with or without av, 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. 
2 Jacobs. Obss. Cr. in Anthol. p. 30. Passov. Lex. in v. orav. 



Matt. xii. 20, X7vov Tu(pofiivov* ou trfiiffu, 'ius oiv iKficcXri u; v7kos rriv x^Uiv. Mark xiii. 30, 
oh f/,h -ru^ixBri fi ytnot aurn, f^iX^'^ "" "^oiyTa raZra. yivyjTon. XIV. 32, xaB^itroirt uoi, ius 
'?f^Qffiu\ufJt.a,t, Luke ix. 27, ov ^m ytva'ovra.i S^avdrov, 'ius av l^aitri rnv (iatriXiiav rou Siov, 
Compare Luke xii. 50, xiii. 8, xv. 4, 8, xvii. 8, xxii. 16, xxiv. 49, Rom. xi. 25, 1 ('or. 
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. 

Obs. 6. The pres. indie, occurs in the formula tas 'i^x"/^'^'* ^^ Luke xix. 13, John 
xxi. 22, 23, 1 Tim. iv. 13 ; and both the present and future indicative with W ?roT8 
in direct interrogations ; as in Matt. xvii. 17, 'ius -^ots 'iffof^eci /mB^ l/^uv -, 'ius 'ron 
avi^ofiat ii/auv ; John X. 24, 'ius TOTS, rhv "^v^hv Tjfjbuv aloiis ; Rev. vi. 10, 'ius "ffon ou 
K^ims xai \x%iKi7s to atfjLo, hfAuv ; 

Obs. 7. With 5r^/v the indicative does not occur in the New Testament ; hut with 
the optative, as indicating a circumstance passing in the speaker's thoughts, this 
particle occurs in Acts XXV. 16, a^ix^I^yiv, 'on olx so-tiv 'i^os 'Pu//,ctiois ^ct^i^if^ai T/y« 
av^^u-rov us a^ukuccv, -T^/v »i o xetrriyo^ovf^ivos xara 'T^oa'u'rov Bxoi rovs xccrtjyo^ovs , ro-rov 
Tt ocroXoyius Xa^ot 'Ti^t rod lyxX'nfJt.ocros' Some manuscripts read j%») and Xa/3»i, others 
iX^'' With the conjunctive it is chiefly used oi future actions or in negative proposi- 
tions ; as in Luke ii. 26, ^v alru xix^rif^c^rttrfjiivov (Mi 'HiTv B^dvaTov, ?r^<v ti "^'/i tov X^iffrov 
Kv^tou. xxii. 34, ov f4.ri (puvnffii ffrif^igov dxixru^, ^^/v 5) r^h a.'Tfo.gvmn fiM striven fjt.%. In 
affirmative propositions the injifiitive is used, as in the parallel place of Matt, xxvi, 
34, 9r^h akixTo^a ^avtja-en, t^Is uTra^vw^ (Jt.i. So in John iv. 49, xoird(i*iB-i, ^^^ a'Pto^a.- 
viiv 70 Tcti^iov fjtov. Compare Acts ii. 20. The infinitive is also used with respect to 
actions really past, where the indicative is more regular in the better writers ; as in 
Matt. i. 18, <r^)v »J ffvnXBiHv avrovs, sv^iB'/t Iv yectrrpi £%o«o'a. Acts vii. 2, o &ios u(pB'/i 
ru 'A^^ctkfjc, Tph vi ixnffai avrov iv Xecppdv. Here also belongs John viii. 58, -r^Ji/ 
'Afi^etau yivio'Bxi, lyu uftt, since the present, as denoting eternal existence, includes 
the past. Compare Herod, ii. 2, iv. 167, ^Tilian. V. H. x. 16.^ 

§ 56. — Propositions exf>ressing any- aim or purpose. 
(BuTTM. § 139. E.) 

1. Of ihe particles which mark an aim or purpose, 'Ivoe. and 
oTTus are found with the coiijunct. 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 which 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, wait^p o\ vTroycpirou 
iroiQvaiv, o'Kws '^o^cca'^aiaiv vtto ruv dv^pouTTCov. Add Matt. vi. 5, 

» Winer, §§ 42, 3 j 45, 6. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 64, 2. Hermann ad Viger. p. 792. 
Reitz ad Lucian. iv. 501. 

L 2 


Mark iv. 21, Rom. xL 25, Phil. i. 9, 1 Tim. i. 18, v. 21, 2 Tim. 
ii. 4, 10^ Heb. ix. 15, I John i. 3. Here the cG77Junctivemdi- 
cates an object^ of which the attainment is assumed to be cer- 
tain ; and so also after the future, or an imperative, which, 
from its very nature, has a future reference. Thus in Matt, 
ii. 8, aTrayyeiXari fj.oi, ottco^ x.dya) sK^wv 'TTpo'JKVVYi'ycj avru:. Mark 
X. 17, Ti Troirto-co, 'lyx ^curiv aicovioy y.XvipoyofJiYi'Jco ; 1 Tim. iv. 15, 
Iv Tourois laS'i, 7va aov v) TrqoxoTrr} (pocvspa. ri Iv Traffiv. See also Matt. 

ix. 38, Mark v. 12, Luke x. 2, Acts viii. 19, 24, xxi. 24, xxiv. 
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 may be ac- 
counted for as in other writers. They are the following : — 

1. When the verb, which depends upon the conjunction, denotes an action, 
which either in itself or its consequences is continued to the present time, the 
conjunctive is frequently used after a past tense. Thus in Luke i. 3, i'5a|« 
)caf/,o) ypa-^j/oci, 'Iva {-TTtyvMS x. r, X. John XV. 11, rocvTo, ki>.dXnx,a, vfzTv, 'iva'tj 
X'''-i°'' ^ '^f^^ '^^ ^f^~^ /Jjitvy. Acts ix. 17, xv^ios aTiffraXKi f>ct, oTeus ava[ixi\pr,i. 
So 1 Tim. i. 16, John jii. 5. Add Luke xvi. 26, Rom. vi. 4, 1 Tim. i. 20, 
Tit. i. 5, ii. 14, 1 John iii. 8, v. 13, 20 ; and Compare Xen. Mem. i. 1. 8, Plat.. 
Crit. p. 43. b, ^lian. V. H. xii. 3. 30. 

2. The conjunctive is also used after past tenses, when the result, which it ex- 
presses, is announced by the writer or speaker as certain and definite ; as in 
Mark vi. 41, lyi^ov ro7s /ua^yiraTs avrov, "vcc -ra^ccB^uirtv ochrols' Acts V. 26, T^yet- 
yiv uvrou;, "vx f^h Xi^ccff^ufftv. So Mark viii. 6, xii. 2, Acts ix. 21, xxv. 26. 
Closely analogous is the usage in narrations, in which the writer transports 
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 Thucydides ; 
and so likewise in Matt. xix. 13, 'pr^oirmix^''^ ahrZ TaiVia, 'Iva, rag x'-'oas ItS'^ 
avToTs. Acts XXvii. 42, rav Je ffr^ariuTuv l^ovXh iyiviro, 'Iva rovg ^ifffjiMTUs aira- 
xTuvuffi. Compare Matt. xii. 14, John xviii. 28. Hence the cotijimct. is also 
used after the preesens historicum in Mark xii. 13, u.'PtoffTiXXovffi nvag, 'Iva, ai/rov 
uy^iuffutrt XoyM. 

3. With reference to a prayer or wish, the optative is found after a present in 
Eph. i. 16, ftviiav ii/LtMV 'Ptoioufjbivoi It) tuv T^otrivx^v /u.ou, 'iva o Qiog "houri vfjuv Tviv/ji-a 
co(pia;. So again in Eph. iii. 16. In both places, however, many manu- 
scripts give ^M for Iti*}; and as the prayer is decisive, not contingent, the 
former is preferable. 

Obs. 2. The particle 'Iva is sometimes joined in classical Greek with an indicative 
of a past tense, to indicate that something should have happened, which has not ; and 
a like usage with the present indicative occurs in 1 Cor. iv. 6, 'Iva /taS'/jrs to uh yirf^ 
yiy^aTrai (ppoviiv, 'iva f/.ri u; v-rl^ rou Ivoj <pv<riovff^i. So again, in Gal. iv. 17, ^>jXou- 
triv v/bcaS} oh xaXu;- aXXa iKxXiicrat i/juag ^iXovffiv, 'Iva auTov; %nXovTi. Here there IS a 
caution against something which may be done. Both passages, however, are con- 
tested; and in 1 Cor. iv. 6, there are various readings (pvtrtoTa-^i and ipvo-iaierBs, of 
which the former would coincide with the general rule. 

Obs. 3. From the close relation between the future and the conjunctive, it might 
be expected that the particles of design would be joined with that tense. In clas- 

1 Winer, § 42, b. 1. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 62, 1. a. Hermann ad Viger. p. 850. 
Devar, de partic. Gr, pp. 174, 253. 


sical Greek this usage is very general with oVa/? ; and though in the New Testa- 
ment it only occurs with 7y«, 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, ris oZv 
fiot IffTiv fUffSoi ; 'Ivec ivayyiXii^ofjt,ivoi adciTavov ^nau to ivxyyiktov. In John XVJl. 2, 
Rom. V. 21, 1 Cor. xiii. 3, 1 Put. iii. 1, Kev. xiii. 16, and elsewhere, the readings 
vary. A future indicative is united with tlie conjunctive in Eph. vi. 2, ri/tAx rev 
9ra,ri^a <ntu xa) t'/jv fiyiri^a' 'Iva, iv ffoi y'lvnTKi, kcx.) 'iff'/i fiuKPo^povioi Wi rfj; yyjs* Com- 
pare Rev. xxii. 14.^ 

. 2. The particle ixri, in conjunction with 7va and ottcos, follows 
in the main the preceding rules. It is most rarely, therefore, 
found, except with a co7ijunctive ; as in Matt. vi. 18, au Ve vna- 

rzxjuy aXioJ/at croy rviv >ce(paX':ov, qitojs (Jir) (pocvr,i x. r. X. John xi. 

oXov TO e^vos aiToKnron. Add Matt. V. 29, 30, xxvi. 5, Luke viii. 
lO/xvi. 26, John iii. 16, Acts xx. 16, 1 Cor. i. 10, 29. 

Ohs. 4. The same observation will apply to ^v\, fx-riTus, fAri-pron^ fj^nTHy where 'iva. 
may be considered as understood ; as in Matt. v. 25, iVS/ imout tm avrXxu, fjcrfroTi 
ffi vu.^a.'hoo avritiKOi rZ k^i-tTi. 1 Cor. ix. 27, v'Tco'Xioi^u fji-ov ro ffajfia, f^ri-rui ohoKifAos 
yivufiau 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 present in Acts xxvii. 42, /Sai-X^ lyiviro, "vet roh 
l)i(Tfji.uTai a,ToxTtive</(ri) //,v ti; IxxoXvf/.li'Aa'ecs 'hid<pvyoi. Many good mauuscrijits, how- 
ever, read ^taipvyA. According to the best authorities, a conjunctive and future are 
imited in Mark iv. 12, f^n'^on \'pri(TT^i'^uffi, xa) a.(pi3-n<riTBii aunTs ra, afx,a^Trif^aT«. 
Vulgo ^(psS^JJ. 

Ohs. 3. After verbs denoting y>ar or caution, the same usage prevails. Thus in 
Matt. xxiv. 4, fiki^iri, ^ttjj tj; y/*aj TXavy.iryi. 2 Cor. xi. 3, (po(iovfiKt ll, fjt.n'^rui (pBoc^ip 
ra. vo'/ificara v/^uv. Add Luke xxi. 8, Acts xiii. 40, xxiii. 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, ffxoxii ovv, /u,h ro (pus 
iv ffot ffx'oroi \trr)v, whether the tight in you is darkness. Gal. iv. 11, (pofioZfitai iif^as, jtoj- 
?r<wf ilxfi xixoTiaxa it; vf/.as, that I have laboured. Col. ii. 8, (okiTirs, f^^ ri; vfta; 'iffrai 

(TvXayuyuv x. r. X., that no one shall hereafter spoi/ t/ou. See also Heb. iii. 12; and 
compare, for the prcelerite, Job i. 4, LXX, Diog. L. vi. !• 4, Lucian. Pise. 15, He- 
liod. iEth. i. 10. 3. Sometimes the verb of fearing is omitted, as in Matt. xxv. 9, 
fx.n'jfori evx a^xia-yi }i/u,7v xa) i/f/Sv, scil. ipefiovfii^a. 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. 

\b7. —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 Viger. 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. 

* Winer, § 60, 2. Hermann ad Soph, Aj. 272. Bornemann ad Xen. Sympos. 
p. 70. 


pressed by the leading verb, the Infinitive denotes the object 
or completion of some action otherwise incomplete. It is 
therefore used after all verbs which imply a purpose ; as 3-eXw, 
^ovXofj.act, ixiXKco, £j&;^a, &c. Thus in Matt, xxvii. 15, ziu'^zi 
dTToKvsiv. Mark x. 4, sTrhqeyiyE y^a-J/at. Luke i. 1, ETrBX&ipn'jxv 
ocyxrx^xa^oci ^iriyn^yiy- John i. 44, ri^sXriasM s^eX^ziv. Acts v. 36, 
r/ /uleXXete TTpiffffsiv ; 39, oh ^vvoc(t^e x,(x.ra.\v(raci acvro. x. 48, Tr^oas- 
ra^sv avrovs ^ocTrrKj^rivxi. xxvii. 22, ttoc^ocivou vyJoLS sJS'y/XETv. Gal. 
i. 10, l^firw apsffKEiv. 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 injln., take the injin. with the 
article in the genitive ; as in Acts xxi. 12, va^iKaXovfitv vfisTg rod fjt,vi dvafiaivsiv ochrov, 
xxiii. 20, ffmi^ivro rod i^arriffoci <n. The conjunction "vx also is often found with these 
verbs ; as in Matt, xviii. 6, ervf4,<^i^n avrZ, 'Ivoc x^ifiaa-B-^ f^vkos ovikos Itt) rov r^oix,^Xov 
airov. XXvii. 20, iTiitrocv rovg ox^oug, 'Ivct air^ffavrai rov Ba^afificiv. Mark vi. 8, 5ra^jjy- 
yziXiv ahrols, "vec fjt,rih\v cil^affiv, John ii. 25, ov ^^u'ecv sT;^^sv, 'tva r)s fjuoc^rv^riffri. Compare 
also Matt. xx. 21, xxvi. 4, Mark vii. 26, John xv. 1, 30, 1 Cor. i. 10, 

Obs. 2, In some instances the inJin. act. seems to be put for the passive ; as 
in 1 Thess. iv. 9, ttz^) Ss tjj? ^/XaSs^^/aj oh %^£/av i'%sT£ y^a(piiv v[mv. Compare 
chap. v. 1.* 

Obs. 3. Some verbs, of complete meaning in themselves, but not sufficiently 
defined to express a purpose, are followed by an infinitive. Such are those which 
signify to give, to choose, the verbs of motion, to go, to send, &c. ; and other verbs 
and phrases which require a more exact definition. Examples are Matt. v. 32_, 
<roiu avrnv (jloix^''^"'^- ^i- ^j ''"' ^I'^^^S'T's ^ia.ffoi.<r^ai', xiii. 11, viuv li'Choren yvuvai. 
Mark iii. 14, Vva a.toffrtXX'^ alrovg xviovirffnv, Luke xv. 15, i^ifjt.'^zv avrov ttg rov; ay^ovs 
ahrou (oo'(fx,uv ^oipovs. John xiii. 24, vivn oZv rovru ^v^ierS-cci, Acts V. 31, rovrov o Stos 
v^^wffg, ^ovvai fJt,iru,voiav ru 'lir^a^k. XViii. 27, sy^ac-^^av roTg ahiX(po7s a,toVi^a,ff^u.i avrov. 
1 Cor. i. 19, ov ya,^ a.'PTio'ruXi f/,% (ia<zrriZ,nv. X. 7, iKa^icnv o Xaog (paytTv. Eph. i. 4, 
iliXi^aro hfJMs bJvui ayiovg. Add Matt. ii. 2, XX. 28, xxvii. 34, Mark vii, 4, Luke i. 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, Diod. Sic. xx. 69, Plat, Pheed. p. 69. A. In these cases also Vva, atrn or on, 
is sometimes used ; as in John xi. 37, ov» ^'^vvecro oSros ^oirjo-at, "va xa) oSros f/,h 
a^oB-dv'^ ; Rom. vi. 6, vw) Be xeirt]^y'^Bti/:/,iv d-ro rod vo/u,ov, utfri ^ovXivnv, x. r. X., 1 Cor. 
iv. 9, Qios rif/'di dTihi^iv, as icTiB^avariovs, on Biotr^ov lyivriBnfjciv rZ xofffJt,u. See also 
John iv. 15, 2 Cor. iii. 7. 

2. The Infinitive is put after adjectives ; as in Matt. iii. 11, 
oy QVY. Eiif^l Ixavos- ra vTiolrii^ocroc /Sao-raaa/. Luke XV. 21, ovketi sifxi 
a^iof )tX7j3'^vat vlof gov. Acts xi. 17, ^uvcx.ros )tcuXv(Toct rov 0£ov. 
1 Cor. vii. 39, sXEu^ipa. kari yociJi^vi^^vai. Heb. X. 4, a^uvoLTOv d(poii- 
p&iy aixapTias. 1 Pet. i. 5, acoT'nqlav Iroiyinv a7rox.aXv(p^rivoci. See 

^ Alt, Gram. N. T. § 67, a. 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. 

Obs. 4. Here also a Conjunction is sometimes substituted ; as in John i. 27, ovk 
iift) a^ioi, 'ivec kvtrai x. r. X. The injin. act. is used for the pass, in Heb. v. 11, Wsg- 

Obs. 5. The injin. also follows, without the gen. of the article, after substantives 
which produce the action of the verb ; as in Luke viii. 8, o «%(wv Zra eixovuv, ecKouiru. 
Acts ix. 4, 'ix-' i^ou(riav tviffai -xavTct,?. See also Luke ix, 1, 1 Cor. ix. 5, Eph. iii. 8, 
Heb. iv. 1. 

3. The injin. is put after particles ; as coo-te, in Matt. viii. 
24, auaiAos /u-Eyas' fye'vETo, uarz ro ^XoTov y.cckvTTT&a-'^ixi utto ruv xypta- 
rcjv. Mark iv. 32, ttoisT Kka.'^ous wars luvoLo^ai, x. t. X. Luke ix. 52, 
glff^xS'ov £<$■}i^nv, axyrs ErQiiJ.oi(Joci avrcv. Acts xiv. 1, XocKritjaci ovrcus, 
cua-rs TTicrrsvaaci ttoKu TrXri^os. So Matt. viii. 28^ Mark i. 45, Luke 
xii. 1, 1 Cor. V. 1, Phil. i. 13, 

Obs. 6. Once only in the New Testament the infinitive occurs with as, except in 
the phrase a; 'i-pro; tl'^ilv (Heb. vii. 9,) ; viz. in Acts xx. 24, ouhl £%&/ tjjv 4'^X^^ f^"'^ 

occasionally in the best writers, in Col. iv. 6, o Xoyos 'jfAuv -prcivroTi Iv x^^-^irt, etKocTi ri^rv- 
fji.ivoi) itlivcn 'xui "hu \<n iKaaroo u.'XoK^lna^on. Compare Eph. iv. 24. The particle 
'on is once also followed by an inJin. in Acts xvii. 10, ^la^u ori (aito, vfifius xai 'zrokXris 
^ri/Ata; fXjixxav 'iffitr^ai tov ^kovv. This passage, however, must be classed with the 
anacolulha. 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 iMT) (paysTv nqiac, x. r. X. 1 Cor. vii. 26, xaXov dv'^pu'ncj} 
TO ovTMS En/ai. Phil. i. 21, lixol yo^p to ^>5V, X^tcTTOf xa* to 
aTTo^^vsrv, y.iplos. So Gal. iv. 18, Phil. i. 29, et alibi. 

Obs. 7. Frequently the article is omitted ; as in Matt. xii. 1 0, tl i^iffn roTs irapt- 
(iufft ^i^a-rivuv ; Rom. xiii. 5, ho avayxri v^oraia-ina-^ai. 1 Cor. vii. 9, x^ilffffsv yd^ Itrri 
ya.fjLnffa,t, r, 'Tv/yovirBon. 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 noiinsj as the latter of two sub- 
stantives, and after verbs, adjectives, and prepositions 
governing a genitive ; as in Matt. vi. 8, of^e itqo rov Cfxois 
alr^aai avrov. Luke i. 9, eXaj^e tov ^vimiocuoci. xxii. 6, 
E^riTEi Ev>c»iqiav rov Trapac^ovvxi aurov. Acts xiv. 9, TnaTiv 
£X,£* '^'^'^ Toohriyoii. XX. 3, yycijfji.'n rov v'7ro(jrpE(p£iv. xxiii. 15, 
Eroifjioi hfx&v TOV aveXErv aj^Tov. Rom. XV. 23, iTTiTTo'^iocv rov 
eK^eTv TT^oi vixois. 1 Cor. ix. 6, ovx, %y^oiAEV £^oucri»v Toy (/.rt 

1 Winer, § 45. 3. Alt, § 67. a, /3, &c„ Ast ud Flat. Legg. p. 117. 
^ Alt, Gr. N. T. § 70. 


iqyoi}^e(T^oci. 2 Cor. vil. 12, gVvcXsv Tou (pavcfco^riyai rr/V 
dTTou^'hy vfjL^v. Phil. iii. 21, Kara, rm ivipyeiav tou ^vvaff^ai 
aurov. Hcb. ii. 15, ^la Tiavros rov ^tJv. James iv. 15, avrl 
rou Xeyeiv vfxas. 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. xix. 
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 o^ preventing, see % A\, siij^ra; add 
Acts xiv. 18, 1 Pet. iii. 10 ; and compare Gen. xxix. 35, 
3 Esdras ii. 24, v. 69, 70, Susan. 9. 

Ohs. 8. The infin. with rov is also used to indicate a purpose with an ellipsis, 
perhaps, of htxa, or ?r£^/; and sometimes the idea of with respect to (§ 44. 1.) will 
explain the usage. Thus in Mark iv. 3, ll^xSsv o ffTu^uv rov o-TiT^on, in order to sow : 
Luke iv. 10, ro7s ocyyiXois avrov \vriXi7rai Ti^) ffov, rov 'hiot.:^vXtt,'^ai ffi. With respect to 
their care of thee : xxii. 31, v[ rov ffiviaffon us rov fflrov. Xxiv. 29, s/V^xSe 
rov fj.ilvu.i trvv avroT?. Acts vii. 19, iKKKooffi rovs Tari^ag VfJ'Uy, rov TonTv ixBirit ra, (i^i^n 
avruv in regard to the exposition : xx. 30, XaXovvns ^nffr^oif^fiiycc, rov ai-offTav rovs 
fjca^fjroi; o'Tiffu othruv. xxvii. 1, us ix^lByi rov a^ro-rXuv, when it was decided in 
respect oi sailing : Heh. x. 7 , rixa rov '^oir^ffat ro BiXyjfAx ffov. James v. 17, 'r^offnv\o'-ro 
rov /Liri fi^ilat. See also Luke ii. 27, v. 1, ix. 51, Acts iii. 2, xv. 20, xviii. 10, xxi. 12, 
xxvi. 18, Rom. vi. 6, 1 Cor. vii. 37. On the other hand, where the insertion of rod 
might be expected, as, for instance, where a purpose is indicated, it is frequently 
omitted; as in John xiv. 2, To^ivofiai \rotf/,a.ffai ro-yrov Ifjuv. Eph. iii. 16, Vva ^mt^ v/juv 
"hwaf^u x^aruiu^tivai^ xarotxriffoct rov Xoiffrev iv roCls xct^'iais vy^uv. Occasionally two 
infinitives stand together, of which one has rov, and the other is without it ; as in 
Luke i. 72, 79. See the entire context. 

Obs. 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, hf^lv rl anvt- 
Z,iriy us lyia ^wdfcii 'ffi'ToinKoffi rov ^i^fzranTv avrov ', Rom. i. 24, ^uoQaxiv avrov; tls 
dxa^a^ffiav^ rov arifAa^iff^Ui ra au[x.ara avruv. In the former example some would 
resolve 'Xi'^roinxoffi into -ffoiYirals ovffr, but it is better to take rov ^rsot^aruv as 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. ^.th. 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 Avith 7, may have 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, 
xiii. 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, xxyii. 1, xxxi. 20, xxxiv. 17, xxxvi. 7, 
xxxvii. 18, xxxix 10, Exod. ii. 18, vii. 14, viii. 29, ix. 17, xiv. 5, Josh, xxiii. 13, Judj^. 
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 MSB. omit the article ; 
and in Rev. xii. 7, rod ToXty.i^Txi has been properly corrected into WoXiUjn^av. 

3. In the dative the infinitive denotes cause in 2 Cor. ii. 
13, ouK ^iayjriKCK avsdjv tw Trysv/LLari (/^ov, rev ixr\ hvpziv //£ 
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 im'^Mes purpose in 1 Thess. 
iii. 3, Ttx^ctxaXirya.i v(xa.s, ru ixr^ivoc aaivsahoci Iv raus S^X/xj/ear. 
A few MSS. have roi), and others to. Compare, how- 
ever, Achil. Tat. ii. 163. With a preposition, it occurs 
in Matt. xiii. 25, sv tw xx^sv^biv rovs ky^^ouitovs, while men 
slej)t : Luke i 22, eS^aj^post^ov Iv rw xpoyl^siy avroVi because 
he tarried : Acts iii. 26, svXoyovvrac v[j.ais ev rco a7ro(jrps(p£iv 
Exaa-rov diro rojv ttowidiuim uixaiy, bij 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, Ty(pXorf ttoXKoTs' 
hx^ocpiaocro to (SKsTreiv. 1 Cor. xiv. 39, ^riXours to 7r§o(py}r£y£iv, 
xacl TO XaXsry yKa)(y<70cis /xr) xcoXvsrs. Phil. ii. 6, oi5% ocpTTocyfjiov 

TiyrifyacTo TO efvat ^cra, ©cw. Add Acts iv. 18, Rom. xiv. 13, 
2 Cor. ii. 1, viii. 10. With prepositions, in Matt. vi. 1, 

TTpo^ TO 3"ca3"ryvat ai^ToTs". xiii. 5, ^la. to fxr] £%siv ^oi^oS yris. 
John ii. 24, ^ta to at'Tov ytvo/'Txeiv iroLMxas. 1 Cor. xi. 25, 

/XETa TO ^ct7rvry(7«i. 2 Cor. vii. 3, us TO (Tv^oLTtrihcty^i^ XOfi 

(tvIt^^. See also Matt. v. 28, xxvi. 32, Mark i. 14, v. 4, 
Luke xii. 5, Acts viii. 11, xii. 20, xviii. 2, xxvii. 9, 
1 Cor. x. 6, 2 Cor. iii. 13, viii. 6, Phil. i. 7, 10, 1 Thess. 
ii. 9. 

Ohs. 10. A verbal noun with lU or ir^oj is frequently used by St. Paul instead of 
this Infinitive. Thus in 2 Cor. iv. 6, -r^h (^wrifffjt.h ryjs yvutr'nus. Eph. iv. 12, -r^os 
Tov x.u.ra.^riffiA.O'i tuv ayluv, u; 'ioyov ^laxavioii, x. r. X. Heb. xi. 11, laUoi ^tjvKuiv its 
xarafioXhv ffTri^fiaros sXa/Ss.^ 

1 Winer, § 45, 4. 5. 6. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 69. Georg. Vind. p. 325. Valcknaer 
ad Eur. Hipp. 48. Ast ad Plat. Legg. p. 56. Schsefer ad Demosth. ii. 10, 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,, &c., which in Latin also are followed 
by an infinitive. Thus in Luke vi. 34, <nQLp uv IXttII^z'ts oLTrokd,- 
/Ssiv. xxiv. 23, 'Kiyou(j(x,i y-oci oTirocaictv ciyyeXcyv Ecopoocsvai. Acts iii. 
13, x^ivavTos- E>c8(voL' diToXuEiv. XV. 11, 7ri<jrevofASV ffcobrjyxi. Heb. 
xi. 25, iXoptsvof a-uyjcocycovx^ETcF^aci rcb Xocu) to^ 06oi}. See also Luke 
xxiii. 8, Eom. xv. 24, 1 Cor. xvi. ?[ 2 Cor. v. 11, Phil. ii. J 9, 
23, 1 John ii. 6. So after kiv^uvevsiv, and verbs of fearing ; as 
in Matt. ii. 22, Icpo/SoiS'y} Ixsr oLtteK^eiv. Acts xix. 27, rovro xiv^u- 
vEVEi 7)(Mv TO fASfos slf aTTeXsy/xov ixS'st'v. 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 on. Thus with an accusative in Acts xvi. 15, KEKpUocri poe 
TiiGrr^v TO) ILvpico slvcsci. Rom. xv. 8, Xsyco ^e 'lojo'oiJv X^icrov ^ia>covov 
yey EvriO'^oci rris '^spirofxris. 1 Cor. vii. 26, vopc/^cy ouv rovro xacXov 
vitapXEiM. Add Luke ii. 44, Acts vii. 25, xiv. 19, xxi. 4, 21, 
Phil. iii. 8. With or\, in Matt. ix. 18, \kym, on t) '^vyxr'ng (mou 
apn £r£Xsvr'/i(JEV. Luke xxiv. 21, rnJiEl!^ ^E riXTri^oLLsv on avros iariv 
X. T. X. Acts ix. 26, (XT) marEvo\rEs on Ean i/.x^inrris. Add Mark 
vi. 14, Acts xxiv. 26, Rom. vi. 8, 1 John v. 2. 

Ohs. 1 . After verbs which contain a negation the particle ^tt^ is frequently added 
to this infinitive; as in Luke xx. 27, o\ avriXiyovrss avxirTatriv fjcr} itvai. xxii. 34, rp); 

3. If the subject of the infin. is the same with the subject of 
the preceding fijiite verb, it is usually omitted with the injini- 
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, (paVxcvrsf eivoli ao(pol. xv. 24, sXttI^co ^ioltio- 
pEUOfAEVO^ ^Ecca-acr^xi vfxois. 2 Cor. X. 2, ^ioixxi ro fjivi TTupcuv ^appr/- 
(7X1. 2 Pet. iii. 14, (JTrov^xaxrE xaTTikoi kxI df^oufMriroL EupE^rjvxt. 

Obs. 2. For the sake of emphasis, the subject is sometimes repeated in the accu- 
sative; as in Phil. iii. 13, I^m if^cavrov oh Xoyi^ofi,ext xariiXrjipivau So in Xen. Cyr. v. 
1. 20, vofjt.iXoif^i yap IfAavTov UiKivai x. r. X. Compare Xen. Anab. vii. 1. 30, Mem. ii. 
6. 35, Diod. Sic. i. 50, Anacr. Od. xlv. 8, Philostr. Apoll. 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, xa,Xov ao't Iffrtv ua-tX^uv us rhv ^uriv p(^akof 
yj xuXkov X. r. X. Acts XXV. 27, akoyov ya,^ fji,oi ^0Ks7, TrifA-rovrci "hiff/ztov f/,h xa.) ras xecr 
uvTov alrlocs ffti/Accvcti. 

5. Again, if the Injin. has a different subject from that in 
the preceding clause, it is put, together with its definitions, 
regularly in the accusative. To the instances which have 
been already given may be added Luke xxiv. 23, ol Xiyoua-iv 

ai/Tov ^yjv. Acts ii. 24, ovK rjv ^uvxrov ycpxTETa'^oci avrov vtt olvtov. 

Add Acts xxvi. 26, 1 Cor. vii. 10, 2 Pet. i. 15. 

Obs. 4. If the leading verh 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, x^urrov riv alrols f^h l^tyveaxivcct rhv o'^ov rjj; 
otxenoffvvns y ») itiyvooffiv iTitrr^S'^ai x. r. X. Here uvtovs and l^r/yvoyvraj would be 
regular. Lastly, tru/a^fiaivn and other impersonals are often found with an accusa- 
tive and infinitive in classical writers ; and so we have in Acts xxi. 35, ffuv'tfi'/i (oaa-rci- 
Z,iff6oe,t avrov. Thtis ly'iviro in its impersonal sense, it happened, it came to pass, is 
very frequently so constructed, especially in the Acts. See Mark ii. 23, Acts iv. 5, 
ix. 3, 32, 37, 43, xi. 26, xiv. 1, xv. 16, xix. 1, xxi. 1, 5, xxii. 6, 17, xxvii. 44, xxviii. 
8, 17, et alibi. 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 knowi7ig, seeing. Sic, 
followed by Vva, on, ttus, tto^zv, rts", &c. Thus Matt. xxv. 24, 
eVvwv (Ti, ort a-KKfipos sT h^qcoTTo^. Mark i. 24, Luke iv. 34, oT^a. 
as, ris si. John v. 42, dXX syvojxcc vixxs, on, ttiV ayocnriv rov ®sov 
OVK 'sy^srs h sacvroTs. 1 Cor. xvi. 15, o'l^xrs ttiv olxiocv Xrs(p(x,vai, on 
s<jnv X. T. 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 quihus sim gaudiis ? Adelph. v. 4. 20, Ilium 
optant, lit invat.^ 

Obs. 5. In some cases the place of the transposed subject is supplied by a pronoun 

» Winer, § 45, 1. 2. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 68. Poppo ad Xen. Cyr. 1. 4. 4. Stall- 
baum ad Plat. Symp. 3. 

* Kuster ad Arist. Plut. 55. Valcknaer ad Eur. Phcen. p. 355. 


in the second clause ; as in Acts ix. 20, iKri^vffffi tov 'It^ffovv, on oStos Ictiv o mis rou 
Siou. If the verb in the first member be in the passive voice, the nominative case 
is retained. Thus 1 Cor. xv. 12, X^nrros x*i^v(rffirai, on ix vix,^uv iyriyi^rai. The 
case is somewhat different, when the latter clause contains an exj)lanation, as it 
were, of what is implied in the former. So 2 Cor. xiii. 5, rt ovx, I'riyivuffKiri lavrohs, 
on X^iffroi h vfMV Iffnv ; 2 Thess. ii. 4, a'To^iiKvvvra, Ixvrov, on Icrn ^lo;,^ 

Obs. 6. There are a few passages of the New Testament in which the Infm. is 
imderstood to be put for the Imperative. The older Grammarians in such cases 
i^upply Bsror ^j,av>;(ra. Sometimes the imperative and infinitive are combined, and 
as the usage is by no means uncommon, especially in the Greek poets, there seems 
to be no valid reason for assigning other interpretations, which are equally harsh 
and uxmecessar)^. Thus in Luke ix. 3, ^s^Bb u'l^tn lU rhv olov, yy/tri dva "hiio x''^'"^"-' 
c;^iiv. (Some would supply ciffn.) Rom. xii. 15, x^^l^nv (Jt.ira, ;^(Xt^ov<ruv, x,a.) xXahiv 
fttTo. xXaiovTuv. Here also several imperatives precede and follow, and the clause 
is supposed to be a proverb quoted ad /iterant. Again, Phil, iii, 16, tm kCtu aroix^lv 
icBivovi, where it is proposed to refer ffTOix,uv to (p^ovamv in the preceding verse. The 
case is clearly different in such passages as Matt. v. 39, xiyu vfjuv f/,h ccvncrrmxi rZ 
crovn^M. In Rev. x. 9, many manuscripts read }os for ^ovvai. On the other hand, 
•ra^iviyxuv in Luke xxii. 42, which some take in a precutivc sense, depends upon 
fiovXu, and the conclusion is kkXms 'ixti understood. Such passages as 2 Cor. ix. 
10, 1 Thess. iii. 11, 12, 2 Thess. ii. 17, iii. 5, 1 Pet. v. 10, are nothing to the pur- 
pose; for the verbs are all optatives. See § 53, I.2 

Obs. 7. Some Jlnite verbs, as <piXi7v, z^ixnv, ^r^oa-n^ivaiy &c., when followed by an 
injtnitive, may sometimes, but not always, be rendered by an adverb. Thus in Luke 
XX. 11, 12, -Tf^offi^iro ^ifA^pcHf which is in the parallel places of Matt. xxi. 36, Mark 
xii. 4, trciXtv sVs^'v^s.. The same idea is expressed by the participle in Luke xix. 11, 
-r^otr^us i^n. So Gen. xxxviii. 5, LXX, T^off^iltrot, 'in itikiv vlov. Again in Matt. vi. 
5, (piXovffi Ztr^oonux^"'^^'' John viii. 44, ras iTiS^vf^.ia; tov ^arpoj vfjt.aiv S-eXsrs -xoiuv. 
See also Matt, xxiii. 6, 7, Mark xii. 38, Luke xx. 46, John vi. 21, Acts xii. 3 ; and 
compare Gen. iv. 2, LXX, ^lian V. H. xiv. 37. Perhaps also Mark xiv. 8, ^r^as- 
Xocpii fjjv^'tffoct [Jjov ro ffwijjo., she has anointed by anticipation. To the same head, but 
less appropriately, have been referred 1 Thess. ii. 2, g5ra^/j>jo-/«(r«^sS« h tm Qim '/i/nav 
Xa,Xv(fon, we have been emboldened to speak, not we spoke boldly. Tit. iii. 12, tr'n-ovloc- 
ffov iX^ilv, hasten to come, not come quickly. Nor is it quite clear that (^iXiiv in Matt, 
vi. 5, is adequately rendered by the adverb gladly.^ 

Obs. 8. It is by no means necessary that the tense of the Injinitive 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 freqt(e7itly repeated^ or continued in 
itself or its consequences to the present time, the present of the Injinitive is employed, 
whatever be the tense or import of the preceding verbj whereas in the narration of 
past events, in speaking of what is transient or momentary, or oi future actions which 
ar considered as certainly impending, the aoridt is used. Examples of the present 
are Matt. vi. 24, oh "huvuff^i @iM 'hovXivuv tcou fjt.ot.fjt.iJi.w'Da.. John vii. 17, l«v t/j S^Ix^ to 
BiX'/if^a ciVTov -proiiTv. ix. 4, Ifjbi "hi? l^ya^KrS^ai, 'iug ti/j^i^oi tffnv. See also Mark ii. 19, 
iv. 32, Luke xvi. 13, et alibi. With reference to past actions, the aoj-ist occurs in 
Mark ii. 4, fjun %vvd,fjijivot ^^otnyyia'ai uvtm ^tct vov o'xXov, a'Tio'Tiycuroiv ttiv ffnyriv. v. 3, 
ovh); r^uvuTo c(,v7ivl7tffat. So Luke xviii. 13, xxiv. 46, John vi. 21, 1 Thess. ii. 18, and 

1 Alt, Gram. N. T. § 86. 1. Notes 1.2. 

2 Winer, § 47, 7. Alt, § 71. Georg. Hierocrit. i. 58. Bos, EUips. p. 597. Her- 
mann ad Viger. p. 745. Kuinoel on Luke xxii. 42. Ast ad Plat. Polit. p. 522. 

3 Winer, §58, 4. Wetstein on Matt, vi, 5, Kuinoel on John vi. 21. Passov. 
Lex. in vv. (pix'iu and l^ixo). 


elsewhere. Oi' transient events in Matt. xix. 3, uilifriv av^^utu utoXuffott tyw yvvu7xa 
avTov, with reference to the act of divorce. Mark xiv. 7, erecv BikriTS, ^vvxaBt uurovs 
Ew Totwat. 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. 0( future actions, chiefly after 
verbs of commanding, thinking, hoping, and the like, in Matt. xii. 38, Bikofnv a-ro a-ou 
fyjf^uov t^iiv. Mark xiv. 11, iTfiyytiXxvro avru uoyv^tov "hovvcci. Acts X. 48, T^otriTcc^tv 
KUTou; ^a^Ttff^rivat. 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 iroi[/.oi 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, tus ^vva.ra.t ^etravcci 2aTavav ix.- 
(idxkuy; 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, cr^fn^ov iv tZ oIku (tou h7 /jbt f^.uvai. Com- 
pare Matt. V. 14, Luke xiv. 28, xvii. 25, xx. 22, John v. 44. At the same time be 
it observed, that in 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, 
its euTiv t<r-(^vu sri, ii fih (iXn^rivat i^ai, xat Ku.To.'Tra.Tua-^ai. And here at least the two 
senses are distinctly preserved. The future infin. has its proper import in Heb. iii. 
18, rlffi Ti u/xQffi fiii iiffiXiCtriff^ai ; Also the perfect in Acts xvi. 27, vof^l^uv lK'ri(psv' 
y'ivai revi htrfiioui, that they had escaped effectually and permanently. See also Acts 
XXV i. 32, xxvii. 9, 13, Rom. xv. 8, 2 Pet. 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 pai't. is but an abbreviation ; and it may be observed that 
the Attraction, by which a relative is placed in the case of its 
antecedent instead of that required by the verb following, may be 
said to be the usual construction of tlie New Testament. Thus 
Matt, xviii. 19, Tregi "zrctvTos- -zr^fity/xaros-, ou iav aIr>5'Ja;vraj. L<uke 
ii. 20, IttI TTaiTiV, oh riKOvaoLV XQcl eT^ov. John ii. 22^ sTriarsvaiy.v to) 
Koyco, u) sJttp.v. Tit. iii. 6, Trvzvy^ccros uyiov, ou iJs'xEEv. James ii. 
5, xXtj^ovo/xol'S' TTif /SaaiXs/ar, r^^ sTT'nyy^i'kscro. 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, 
Judc 15, Eev. xviii. 6. 

06s. 1. The usage is more rare in Matthew and Mark, and there are also other 
exceptions; as in Heb. viii. 2, r?; (rxtivtii rm aXn^ivni, jjv sV>j|£v o xv^iot. Various 
readings also occur in Mark xiii. 19, John iv. 5, xvii. 11, Acts vii. 17, Tit. iii. o. 
The syntax is peculiarly remarkable, where a verb of cognate signification with the 
preceding noiui follows ; as in 2 Cor. i. 4, J/a rn; 'pra^ccxXtiirtus, vs TraoecxaXoufuBcc, 
Eph. ii* 5; xyciTrnv, nv 'hy^Trniriv hfAUi. iv. 1, rJjf xX'^tnu;, ni ixkriSyirs. 

» Winer, § 45, 8. Alt, § 72. Lobeck ad Phryn., pp. 745, sqq. 


Obs. 2. If the antecedent be a demonstrative pronoun, it is generally omitted, and 
the relative takes its case ; as in Mark xv. 12, r/ oZv SjXsts •roiY,ffu ov xiyin ^\icc 
ruv ^lovtaicov ; Luke ix. 36, ovhin ocTriyyiiXuv ovh\v, uv icoouxxaiv. John vi. 29, \va 
•riffTiiiffYiTi us ov ocr'iffTU'kiv iKiJvos- Rom. vi. 21, l(p' of; vvv i-ratffx>^vi(T^i. Add Luke 
V. 25, John xvii. 9, Acts viii, 24, xxi. 24, xxvi. 16, Rom. xiv. 22, xv. 18, 1 Cor. vii. 
1, X. 29, 2 Cor. ii. 3, v. 10, xii. 17, Eph. iii. 20, Heb. v. 8. Sometimes, but rarely, 
the demonstrative pronoun is simply omitted ; as in John xiii. 29, ayo^atrov uv x^£/av 
s;(^ofiiv. So Xen. Cyr. vi. 2. 1, aTvyyuXas av iYiou. Compare also Col. ii. 10. Both 
constructions are found in Rom. x. 14, ?r»; evv l^ixxkiirovTeii us ov ovx l^itmuffuv, -raJs 
U ^ttrnuffooffiv ou ohx. Tjxovffav ; A like Omission occurs also in the case of relative 
adverbs. Thus in Matt. xxv. 24, awaym o^sv oh '^nvKo^^Kras , for UerSsv otov. Mark 
V. 40, iiff'xro^ujirui o'^ou «v to •rai^i'ov. So John xi. 32, xx. 19.^ 

2. On the other 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. xxi. 42, Luke 
XX. 17, 1 Pet. ii. 7, X/S'ov, ov dTrB^onifxocaocv o; otJto^o/xot'VTgs', ovto^ 
eyevTjS-y) sir xsCpaX-wv ycovia^. Luke xii. 48, ttxvti. ^s, cb l^oS-oj ttoXv, 

TtoKv ^TJTOl^TjVETai TTQCp^ avTOV. 1 Cor. X. 16, TOV Of^TOV, OV xXaJ/x.£V, 

o^x,* x-oiycovlx rov (/IfAocros rot; 'Kpi<jrou saTiv ; So Hippocr. Morb. 
iv. 11, ras" TTYtyas, as m^y^oLaoL, avrai rcj> <7c«;pcarf x. t. X. Terent. 
Eun. iv. 3. 11, Eunuchum, quern dedisti nobis, quas turbas 
dedit ? 

Obs. 3. Here also should probably be referred Luke i. 72, fjLvm^rivcci ha^r,»y)s ayias 
ahrov, o^xov ov S)fjt,o(n ». r. X., unless xara, be understood before o^x.ovr' 

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, ov I7&) 
aW£)C8(paX/cra 'Ict;avva}v, ovros sanv. Rom. vi. 17, v'nnyLOv(Ta.r& eIs- ov 
Tra^E^o^^Ts ri)7rov ^i^<zy/is. Philem. 10, Ttcx.pacKOi'kcu'os '^spi rou Efji,ou 
riicvov, ov lyEvvriaa h rois ^egi^ois fxou, 'Ovrio-ifjiov. So, in Latin, 
Cic. Tusc. i. 18. 41, Quam quisque novit artem, in hac se exer- 

Obs. 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, Iv (S [xAt^u) [JjIt^iIti^ d,^vi^'/icnTa.i v^uv. xxiv. 44, n ooga oh %0Kuri, o 
vios TOV avB-^a/^ov ep^iTcti. 

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. 11, 
dywrufjciv dXkr.Xovs' ov xa^as Kuiv l» rov -rovrt^ov ^v, i. e. xaSwf Ka'iV, Ss Ix, rov •xovn^ov 

Winer, § 23. 2, and 24. 1. Alt, § 41. 3, and 42. 1. Hermann ad Viger. p. 891. 
2 Winer, § 24, 2. Alt, Gram. N. T. 2. §§ 30, 3. 42, 2. Georg. Hierocrit. i. 3. 
22. Kuinoel ad Luc. i. 72. 


''y, Wfl/^tf-s. So, in Latin, Virg. >^.n. i. 18, Urbs cintiqua fuit ; Tyrii tenuere coloni. 
And V. 53-1, Est locus; Hesperiarn Graii cognomine dicunt. Somewhat similar is 
Rev. i. 5, reu dyetTfifcivri fifiaSf xa) Xovaecvri hf^as oi'To ruv a/ubaoriav hfjtuv \v tu oilfACCTt 
ciuTov, xai i^oinifiv hu,ai (iacnXiti, alrao r, ^o^a, xa.) ro xpuros us Tohg alaJvocg. More pro- 
perly, however, this is an example of anacoluthon. See § 69. ii. 4. ^ 

4. When another noun is added by way of explanation, the 
relative sometimes agrees with that which jorecec^e^'; as in 1 Cor. 
iv. \7 3 Tt/a6S"£0v, OS ka-ri reK^ov fxov dyocTrnrov. Eph. i, 22, rr) ex- 
y.Xina-lac, riris hari ro (Twixol avrov. Col. i. 24, rou auixocros avrou , o 
£(Trtv ri lyiycknaioc. iii. 14, r^v oiydTiYtv, yirif sa-ri Gvy^sa^xos rr^s reXsi- 
ornros. (Some manuscripts here read os, and others o.) More 
generally, however, the concord is with the subsequent noun ; 
as in Mark xv. 16, rris a^vXris, o kari Tr^airupiov. Eph. iii. 13, 
Iv reus hXi-^Bai (jlov vTrep ufxcoVy rjTir Icrri ^o^oc vi/.uv. Add Gal. iii. 
16, Eph. i. 14, vi. 17, Col. i. 27, 1 Tim. iii. 15. So also in Phil, 
i. 28, where r^ns refers to the constancy of the Philippians, re- 
ferred to in the preceding context. 

Obs. 6, Sometimes also the neuter pronoun o is used with reference neither to the 
antecedent nor subsequent noun, but to the word ptifiec, understood ; as in Mark xv. 
22, <p'i^ouffiv avTov It) ToXye^oi ro^tov, o Icrrt fjiji^spfi*}vivof£tvov, Koaviou t'o^o^. 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, beinj^ omitted. Thus we have in Matt. i. 
25, 'ius oS, scil. x^ovov, until. Luke i. 20, et passim, avS' uv, because, vii. 45, a^' vn, 
scil. li^ai, since, xii. 1, h oTg, scil. x^^^o'S) meanwhile ; et alia hujuscemodi.^ 

Obs. 7. St. Paul frequently connects two or more sentences together by means of 
relatives, both when they refer to different antecedents, and when the same 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 in Acts i. 2, hruXa^itos roT? dToffro- 
Xois ha. ^vitjfAxros uyiou, ovs i^sxi^aro. This structure was evidently designed to mark 
the connexion of hx Trvivf^aros ay'iov with hnriiXaf^ivos, not with l^iXi^aro, 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, uvtoI ya^ mpt ii/zcov d'rcx.yyiXXovo'iv, otoIocv ilaohot 
£;^;fl^£v cr^oj v(jMi. See also above, § 51, 4. If the person or thing be indefinite, the 
opt. or conj. may be employed; the former without av, in speaking of past time, and 
the latter with av, when something is affirmed of present ox 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. 

2 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 ccv. Examples are, Matt. viii. 20, olx 'ix^t -rou rhv xsipaXsjv 
xX/v*i. X. 11, its Yiv V civ t'oXiv ila-iXSriTi, X. r. X. xxi. 22, Tuvra, ocrec oiv cctT'/KruiTt Iv 
T^ ^^ofiv^n -ffiffrivovrii, Xji-v^so-Se. Mark xiv. 9, oTou av }i7iovx,^n ro ivayyiktov toZto, 
X. T. X. Acts ii. 39, oirovs av •r^offxa.XitT'/irui Kv^tog. viii. 19, ly tecv iTiBu rag •xu^a.%. 
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 o. prceterite, but still in a future sense, in Acts iv. 21, 
a.'TiXvtTa.v avrohgf /xnViv ivpiffxovTis, ro, tm; xoXdffuvrai avrov;. See also Maik ill. 6, 
Luke xix. 48.^ That the future is here also used for the conjunctive, see above, 
6 51.2. 

§ 60. — Construction with the Particijde. (Buttm. § 144.) 

1. The participle indicates a state of iei^g-, 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 jjart., the latter 
is of course in the Nom. case ; as in Acts xvi. 34, dvccyaycu^ 
ccvTovs slf rov otytoy cuvrov, TTxpshny.^ r^xni^ccv. 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- 
finitive, still after many verbs, of which the object might be 
designated by an infin., and which in Latin take the accusative 
with the infin., a part, is used. 

2. With reference to a subject preceding, 2i participle may 
exhibit a variety of subsisting relations, which may generally 
be expressed by conjunctions. For example, 

1. As a definition of time, it may be rendered by when, 
while, &c. Thus in Acts v. 4, oly) fxi^iovj aoi gptsve ; while 
it remained, &c. 1 Thess. iii. 1, ^to, fxriKsn ajsyoyrE^, 
£u^oycri(jx[jt.By xaraXsii^jS'^vat iv 'AS'vivais" fMOMOi, when I could 
no lo7iger control my anxiety. So again in v. 5. 

Obs. 1. Very frequently a finite verb is used iu such cases instead of a part., and 
connected with the principal action by xui. So Matt. xvii. 20, l^iTn tco o^u tovtm, 
MsT«j3'/jS; ivrsv^iv lxi7' xx) ficsrctfimirai. xviii. 21, ^rotrcixis a,ju,eipTritru lU l/al o a^ikipo; 
fjtov, xou uipriffoi alru ; For Xsyovrwv vf^uv, and af^ccoTYiirccvri a^iXfoj, 

2. In assigning a cause, it may be resolved into si?ice, 
because, with a finite verb. Thus in Acts iv. 21, ol ^1 

7rpoa-cc7r£iKiri(7diJ.£VOi ocwiKuffocy (xvrovf, pcr^^gv svpicrxoyTBf ro, 
TTuis ycoXcia-ciJVTcci aurous, when they had threatened, and, 
because they found nothing; Col. i. 3, £^;^a/?{{7Toi;/x6v 

^ Winer, § 42, 4. Alt, § G5. Hermann ad Viger. pp. 901, sqq. 


ru 06a;, uKovcracvTs^ rrjv ttI^tiv v(j.u'V, because we have 
heard, &c. 

3. In restrictions, for although : as in John xii. 37, Toa-avrac 
Jg acuTou <Taj/xeTa TrhTToi'nx.oTo^ sfXTTpoa^Ev auTuv, ovx. smanvov 
gir avrov, although he had done, &c. 1 Cor. ix. ]9, 
iXsv^spos coy ex, TravTo^v, 7ra(T/v Efxavrov k^ovKojax. 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. 
Apoll. ii. 25. 

Obs. 2. In this case, the participle is sometimes accompanied by xa) or Kxi-rt^. 

Thus in Luke Xviii. 7, o Ti Siog oh ^h ^otvfu i»^i»*i(riv ruv IxXtZTeHv uvtou, xa) iu,aKpoBu' 
fjLut t-r avToTs', though he linger : Heb. v. 8, xal'x'ip uv vtof^ 'iftcc^iv octp'' uv iVaSi rhv 
ii-raxovv. So Rom. vii. 3, Phil. iii. 4, Heb. vii. 5, 2 Pet, i. 12,* et alibi. Compare 
Diod. Sic. iii. 7, xvii. 39. 

4. In expressing a condition, if: as in 1 Tim. iii. 10, 
^tocico)iBiTCA)(T{xy, d)iEyx.\nToi ovrgf, provided they are blame- 
less : vi. 8, g5(;ovrgy ^ia.Tpo<paf xai cDtsTracfffXixTOi, toutois^ri(ro[XB^ac. So also 1 Tim. iv. 4, 2 Pet. i. 4, 8, 
et alibis 

5. In expressing a mean; as in Rom. vii. 8, d^opixYiV 
Xa/3oi}(Ta Ti u/jLOC^Ticc ^loi rr]s hroXris, xacrsiqyQi(J(X,To ev e/xoJ 
7raa-(xy £7ri^uiJiioi.v. So agaiii 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 l\y)kvhEi 
TrpoaxuvnciMV sis' leqouaaXrifx. 

Obs. 3. If the action of the participle and the verb are contemporary, the present 
participle is used. Thus in Acts xv. 27, xTsa-TccXxufnv 'lov^ccv koc) lixav uTayyik- 
Xovra; ra avra, (A single MS. has uTayyiXovvra;.^ Rom. XV. 25, vvv) Ti 7ropvjof/,at 
lis 'lipoviraXrif/,, haxovuv roT; ayioif. 

Obs. 4. Instead of the pari., xa,) and a finite verb is often used ; as in John i. 47, 
i^X^u xat 'I^i. xiv. 3, 'i^^ofixiy xect ^ctoaXj^'^ vfAoii ii; I/zccvto'v. 

Obs, 5. When a matter is represented merely as the opinion or assertion of the 
person making the allegation, the participle is frequently preceded by the particle 
oif. Thus in Luke xvi. 1, euros J/s/3X)$S;} awrJ, us huerxo^TiXuv ra u-roc^x"^'^'^ uvtou, 
xxiii. 14, tfOff^viyxuTi fjLot rev uvB^utov reurov, as a,^offr^i(povrx rev Xccev, Also when a 
motive is alleged for any thing done with reference to another ; as in 1 Pet. ii. 13, 
v^oraytirt (iairiXu, us uTi^ixovri' ftytfiecriv us ^i aurou '^if/.TOfx.ivois *• t. X. Sometimes 
the participle uv is omitted j as in Acts xvii. 22, ^iKTihxifjt,ovi(rri^ovs v/zxs ^iu^Z, soil. 
evras, 1 Pet. ii. 12, xecreckecXov(riv vf/,uv us xaxo^oiuv, scil, ovruv. Examples of this 
usage are not very frequent in the New Testament. 

4. Some verbs govern a part, eitiier in the nom. or some 

» Winer, § 46, 9. Alt, § 73, 7. Schaefer. Melet. crit. . 57. 



case, which is to be expressed by the conjunction that, or by 
to, for, ofy &c. Such are, 

1. Verbs of sense; to hear, to see, &c. Thus in Matt. viii. 

14, eT^e rr/v W£v3'e/?av avr^v /Se/SX-yj/jtEvriv xa/ '^upsaffovaay, 
Mark xvi. 5, sl^ov vsacviaxov xac^oj/uiEvov. Luke iv. 23, oaa. 
r^Kouaa^lxsv yevo/xeva. So Acts vii. 12, Rev. v. 11; and 
with the genitive in Acts ii. 11, axozJo/xev KaXouvrav auruv. 
Sometimes dycoueiv is followed by ort, as in Matt. iv. 12, 
daovaoLS on 'Icooivvns 9rȤeJ63'aj. See also Gal. i. 18, et 

2. Verbs signifying to know : Luke viii. 46, lyu yaq eyvav 
^uvQcyiiy IJsXS'ouffav oiTi' I/aou. Acts xxiv. 10, Ix iroK'kwv Iruv 
ovrx (78 x^tT-riv To) eS^vs* rourco E7n<rr<ifj!,svos. Also with on, 
as in Mark ii. 8, liriywus ori ovrus ^iocKoyil^ovrQi,L Heb. xii. 
\7, IWe ya^ oTi d'^e^ox,ifx,!z<j^'n. 

Obs. 6. The verb f/.av^dmv has been supposed to be thus constructed in 1 Tim. v. 
13, afiet Ti xai a^ytti /iiavB-civou(ri 'jri^n^of/.tvai rag oixiag, being idle they learn to go 
about from house to house. But, in this construction, fiuvBdvsiv always signifies to 
perceive ; as in Herod, i. 3, Lucian. D. D. xvi. 2. When it signifies to learn, it is 
followed by an infinitive, as in v. 4, of this same chapter. Hence the meaning 
is, going about frcym home to house they learn to be idle ; uvat being understood : and 
this seems to accord most fitly with the ensuing clause. So Xen. Anab. iii. 2. 25, 
fAaB^atfAiv dgyau ^^v. 

3. Verbs also which signify to observe, to Jiiid, &c. are, 
in like manner, constructed with a participle. Thus in 
Matt. i. 18, sv^i'^n £v yccarpl sypva-a., Mark vii. 30, sv^e. 
TO ^a<jM,ovtov E^gXajXt/3-os-. Compare Luke xvii. 18, John 
xi. 17. 

Obs. 7. Verbs which signify to remember^ take ort or us. So Matt. v. 23, Vuv 
fivyiffS^ris on o ahiX^og ffou 'ix.^i ri Kara. ffov. Luke Xxiv. 6, /ucvntrByin, us Ixdkyja-t* v/juv. 

Obs. 8. After the above verbs, instead of the participle, the infinitive is sometimes 
found ; as in Luke iv. 41, Hhiffuy tav X^ta-rov aurov uvai. 1 Cor. xi. 18, ukouu ort 
ffx><ff^»ra iv vfiiv I'Xa.^x.^iv. Heb. xi. 3, vflai//tt£y xarnpriffB^ai rov; alavas pnfiocTi Stev. 

4. Many 7ieuter verbs also, signifying to persevere, to 
desist, &c., are constructed with a participle. Thus in 
Matt. xi. 1, ersKsa-Ev o ^I'/icrov^ ^locToiffcrcJv ro7s ^cu^sicx. 
Luke vii. 45, oC ^ieXitts x.ara.(piXov(7x fAou rou^ ttoSccs. Acts 
V. 42, ovx. eitoivo'iiro ^iJaffxovTEf. xii. 16, etth/xeve xpovcuv. 
2 Thess. iii. 13, ixri IxxaxTj^^rE xacXoTroiovvrsf* Add Acts 
vi. 13, xxi. 32; and compare Rev. iv. 8. 

Obs. 9. The part. &>v is omitted after an adjective in Acts xxvii. 33, a^iroi (ovrts) 


Ohi. 10, The verb u^x^ffBat, which in the Greek writers often takes the participle, 
is always in the New Testament followed by the infinitive* 

Obs. 11. In may cases the governing verb may be expressed by an adverb in 
English ; as in Matt. xvii. 25, •pffoi^Bafftv aurov xiyvv, Jirst addressed him : Heb* 
xiii. 2, 'iXetBov rms ^ivia-ecvns ayyixovs, have entertained angels unawares. 

Obs. 12. To this class belongs xecXag ^onTv, which is followed by a participle in 
Acts X. 33, ffu xaXuf iTrottKras ^cc^ayivofiivest you have done well to come. Compare 
Phil. iv. 14, 2 Pet. i. 19, 3 John 6. Also many verbs which express an emotion of 
the mind; as joy, f ear ^ gratitude^ &c. Thus in Acts xvi. 34, v^yaXKiaactvo <ravot»i 
^tTurrtvKus fZ StSi. 1 Cor. xiv. 18, ih^a^nrru rZ SsZ fiou, yXutrffotis XaXuv. 2 Pet. ll. 
10, lo^a; ou r^ifjLdvffi (iXa<r(pyifji.ovv'ris. Elsewhere with on, as in Luke x. 20, f/.ri x'^k^'^'h 

5. Various circumstances, either preparatory, accessofry, 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 arc frequently used in one proposition, without the 
intervention of a copula ; as in Matt, xxviii. 2, ayyiXo; xarxQag l^ ov^avou, T^offiXBuv 
a-rixvXiffi Toy XiBov. Luke ix. 16, Xa^m Ti rovg -privrt ctprou; xeti rovg Bwo i^Buecs, ava- 
(ixi-^scf tis rov ov^avov, ilxoyviffiv aurovs. Add Mark i. 41, viii. 6, Luke V. 12, 19, xvi. 
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, Polyaen. v. 33. 4, Lucian. Asin. 18, Alex. 
1 9, Alciph. iii. 43. Sometimes one or more participles are before the leading verb, 
and others after it; as in Mark vi. 2, -roXXol axevovrss t^tvrXnircrivro, Xiyovrif, x. r. X, 
Luke iv. 35, ptxpecv ahrov to laifioviof iig ro fjijifov i^iixBiv UT^ aurov, fjurjSiv (hXoi'^a.v aurov. 
Add Luke x. 30, Acts xiv. 1 9, Heb. xii. 1,2; and compare Lucian. Philops. 24, 
Peregr. 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 
nnite verb. See Mark v. 25— 27.^ 

Obs. 14. A 'sentence is frequently carried forward by means of participles ; more 
especially when the idea expressed by the participles is collateral with that expressed 
by the verb. At the same time, though finite 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, tcoXXu (AaXXov xaraxxayiv 
ns ffuBva-ofiiBa' ou /jcovev Vi, aXXa xa) xa.v^u)y.iyoi x. r. X. Here xa.vx^fJ'-^^Oi may either 
be connected with xaraXXxyivng, or the auxiliary iffnv supplied (^Obs. 16). So 
2 Cor. vii. 5, ouhif/.iav iffx*!^^^ aviciv h ffoi^^ Vfiuv, aXX' iv fravrt BXi(iofiivoi. Eph. V. 18, 
TXn^ouffBi Iv -rviufiarj, Xa^oZvrii laurols x. r. X. Here this and the succeeding 
participles depend upon TrXrj^oucrBi. 2 Pet. ii. 1, "^tulohihaffxotXot, o'lrtvis ^a^ua-a^ouiriv 
al^iffits a^uXitas, xu.) rov ayo^da-avra aurovs 'hiff'Xorm a^vouf^ivoi, i-rccyovris tavrois rax'vhv 
a'XtuXuav. St. Paul indeed constautly arranges participle after participle in this 
manner ; for instances of which, see 2 Cor. iv. 7, 10, Eph. v. 19, 22, 1 Thess. ii. 
14, 16, 2 Tim. i. 9, 10, Tit. ii. 12, 13. With respect to other passages, which have 

1 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. 
Euthyphr. p. 27. Apol. p. 46. Bornemann ad Xen. Anab. iii. 1. 13^. Boisso- 
nade ad Aristaen. p. 'lo7. Jacob ad Lucian Toxar. p. 43. Hermann' ad Soph. 
(Ed. C. p. 43. 


164 A orei:k grammar 

been referred to this head^ Mark xii. 5, seems to be elliptical ; 2 Cor. v. 6, is an 
anacoluthon ; in 2 Cor. iv. 13, i^ovm depends upon TifTivo/ziv, from which it is 
separated by a parenthesis ; 2 Cor. v. 12 is a case in point : in 2 Cor. viii. 3, it is 
not necessary to supply n(rav, but the construction is av^ai^troi lavrohs ihuKctv ; in 
2 Cor. viii. 20, ffriXXof^tvoi refers to ffvn<rifji.^a.fjciv ; in Heb. vi. 8, \x(pi^ovffa, is not put 
for ix(pi^it, but iffr) must be supplied with aloxtfio; xai xccTu^as iyyus; and in 2 Pet. 
iii. 5, ffuviffTuffa is an epithet of y*?.^ 

Obs. 15. Frequently the verb and the participle might be interchanged without 
affecting the sense. Thus in Acts x. 33, xaku; tvoinffui ^ra^aytyof^ivos might have 
been Tfa^iyiviu xaXus troiuv. In like manner the Apostle might have written in 

1 Tim. i. 12, -tio'tov fjci hyyiffecfAtvoSt (B^tre us haxoviav. 

Obs, 16. Participles, for the most part of the present tense, are frequently joined 
•with a verb substantive, and employed as finite verbs. It may be that an idea of 
continuance is thus conveyed ; though in all probability the idiom is nothing more 
than a simple circumlocution. Thus in Mark i. 4, \yinro ^luavvti; fsccrrl^uv. xiii. 
25, ol affri^ts rou oiioavoZ 'iffovrai iX'TiTTovTis, followed in the next clause by the finite 
verb caXtvS^^fovrai, XV. 43, ecvros riv 'X^offtt^'of^ivos tyiv ptUfftXiiccv rou Qiou. Luke i. 21, 
*j» Xacf •r^offhoKuv rov TiCfXpL^iccy.. iv. 31, Jv ^ihda'Keov uhrov;. xxiv. 32, oh-x) V xa^ota r.ftaj* 
xutofjcivvi r,v \v tifAtv ', Acts viii. 28, ^y r« v^offTPipuv, xa) xuS-i^fiivoi It) rod a^fiaro; aurov, 
xa) anyivuffxi. Add Matt. vii. 29, xix. 22, Mark ii. 18, ix. 4, x. 22, xiv. 54, Luke 
i. 20, V. 1 9. Sometimes the participle is used alone, with the auxiliary verb un- 
derstood ; as in Acts xxiv. 5, ivpovtzs yoip rh avl^a toVtov, scil, ifffiiv. Rom. ix. 28, 
Xoyet ya,^ ffvvnXuv xcti trvvri/xvuv, scil> tffTu 1 Pet. ii. 18, ol oiKiroci, v^oraffco/xtvot roTs 
iiff^rorats, scil, Iffri. 2 Pet. i. 17, Xec^a/v ya^ •ra^a, Siou rifji-m, scil. tjv. To this head, 
however, are not to be referred a variety of passages, in which the verb substantive 
is to be taken independently ; such as Mark v. 5, h rols (jLt-nfiaai') ^v, xouZ,uv, xcu 
xurtx.KO'rruv luvrov KiBots. Luke ii. 8, •rotfAivis nffav iv t"^ ^d^a rrt alTri,.aiy^avXovvTis, xai 
(fvXciirffovTis X. t. X. vii. 8, iy&i ccvB^w^'os UfJt,t ii-ro i^ovtrlav ratraofjijivos. See also Mark 
X. 32, xiv. 4, 49, James i. 17; and compare Jerem. ii. 6, v. 5, 11. Neither is it 
necessary to supply the verb substantive in proverbs, viaxims, and citations; as in 
1 Cor. iii. 19, Heb. i. 7, 2 Pet. ii. 22. In Gal. iii. 5, tovto ^on7, not ia-r), must be 

Obs. 1 7. The verb fx<y forms a circumlocution by means of the participle in Luke 
xiv. 19, i^uTM ffi, txt fit ^a^yiTtiftivov. hut the expression is usually regarded as a 
Latinism. Thus Mart. Epigr. ii. 80, Excusatum habeas me, rogo. 

Obs. 18. Sometimes a participle stands in connexion with a finite tense of the 
same verb ; probably with a view to emphasis : as in Matt. xiii. 14, (oXi'Trovrn 
fiXsyJ/irs, xai ol /xv ?5»rj. Acts vii. 34, I'^ojv it^ov. Heb. vi. 14, ri fJi//»> ivXoyav ivXeyriffu ffi, 
xa) -rXijBvvav crXtj^vvS ffi. A like usage is found in the best Greek writers. See 
also Arrian. Ind. iv. 15, Lucian. D. M. iv. 3, xxviii. 1. Since, however, the above 
passages are exclusively Old Testament citations (Gen. xxii. 16, Exod. iii. 7, Isai. 
vi. 9), and the construction corresponds with the Hebrew infinitive absolute, it 
may probably be more accurately referred to that source. The LXX abounds with 
similar examples. See Gen. xviii. 18, xxvii. 28, xxxvii. 8, 10, xliii. 6, Judg. i. 28, 
iv. 9, vii. 19, xi. 25, xv. 16, Ruth ii. 16, 1 Sam. xiv. 28, 1 Mace. v. 40, et alibi.^ 

Obs. 19. It has already been seen that participles, when they have the article, 

* Winer, § 46, 2. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 73, 6. Hermann ad Viger. p. 77&. 
Bornemann ad Xen. Conviv. p. 146. Doederlin. ad Soph. CEd. C. p. 593. 

s Winer, § 46, 8. Alt, § 73, 2. Ast ad Plat. Polit. p. 597. Boissonade ad 
Philostr. 660. et ad Nicet. p. 81. 

^ Winer, § 46, 7. Alt. § 73, 3. Georg. Vind. 196. Lobeck ad Soph. Aj. p. 370. 


are equivalent to substantives (§ 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, ravrt Vi •r^h to iiftaiv avruv (rvfjb<pt^ov xiyu. So Heb. xii. 10. In this acceptation 
they are also folloi^ed by the cases which their verbs govern. Thus in Gal. i. 23, o 
huKuv rtf^Bts ^ort, OUT former persecutor. Compare Luke viii. 3, xxi. 4, John i. 33, 
Actsix. 21,&c.» 

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, ol IffBtovTt;, those who had eaten J James v. II, fjijaxa^i't,ofx,tv rovs v^ofiivoyras, those 
who endure : Rev. xv. 2, u'^ov rovg vixuvrat t» rod ^ti^iou, 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 prceterite 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 
have taken place cotemporaneously with the action indicated by the principal verb. 
Thus in Acts vii. 26, clxp^n alrols fji.cix,ofcUoti. xxv. 2, <r(zoiKd.Xovv xvrov, uiTovf^ivoi 
^dpiv Kctr" auTov, k. t. K. Heb. xi. 22, 'la/o-rjcp rtXiuruv ifAvtifAoviva-i* 1 Pet. i. 10, ^t^} 
V ffurn^'tai ili^^T/Krav xat i^yi^tvvvtrav T^opjjrat, i^ivvuvrts, x. r. X. Rev. XV. 1, u^ov 
uyy'iXoui i-rra 'ix,ov7cis -rXriyas 'frrd. Add Matt. xiv. 21, Luke V. 18, Acts xviii. 15, 
xxi. 16, Heb. xi. 21, 22, et alibi. The participle uv, since si^} has no perfect 
participle, is particularly common in a past 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 
future ihe present is used, yfhQn a. future event is, from its certainty or proximity, 
mentally regarded as present, or when that which is newly commenced is to be con- 
tinued. Such a case is Matt. XXvi. 28, roZro to aT//,d f/,ov, to ^t^) •roXXuv ix^^vvofuvoVf 
unless 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, xc6Tii;^^vf^tv us Tv^ov lxt7<rt ya,^ nv to •xXolot a-roipo^Ti- 
^ofiivov Tov yofjtov. 2 Pet. iii. 11, TovTuv auv -rdyTuv Kvof^'ivm. In 2 Pet. ii. 4, the MSS. 
vary between Tv^ovp,iyovs and nrv^vfiivous. The present participle is employed in its 
proper acceptation in Rom. iv. 4, Gal. vi. 13, Eph. iv. 28, James iii. 6, v. 11, 
et alibi. 

Obs. 22. Between the aorist and peifect 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, ohx, oZtSs itrTiv S -^ro^Bvffas iv 'U^ovfakv/a rol/s 
iTixaXovfiivovi to ovofjca tovto, xa.) uhi tis tovto IXv^vBtt, "vet h'^if^ivovs avTovs aydyip 'tTt 
rovs d^xH^''^ ' 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 po?/. ;;cr/. /jaw. is used in the sense of the Latin 
future in dus ; as in Gal. ii. 11, iV* xaTtyvucrfAivos 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, § 73, 4. a. Schaefer ad Greg. Cor. p. 139. 
2 Winer, \ 40, 5. Alt, Gram. N. T. ^ 73, 4. 5. Eisner ad Gal. ii. 11. 


§61. — Casus 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, or assign a cause. Thus in Matt. ii. 1, tov ^e 'Intjov 
ysvvin^iyrof, l^ou, fxdyoi, aTTo a.-ixroKm Taqsyiyovro x. t. X,, when 
Jesus was born, &c. Acts xxiv. 10, aTrexg/^rj ^s o TlavKof, vau- 
aayros acvru rov 'hyzi/^oyos Keystv. 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. 17, sKTropsvofxiyov aurov sir 6^ov, 
7r^o(TB^qacfji,div sh kifnpurQc avToy. 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. ^th. ii. 30, 113.^ 

2. Instead of the gen, is frequently used, 

L The nominative absolute, which stands without 2i finite 
verb, and the sentence passes into another construc- 
tion, of a different form from that which it had been the 
writer's first intention to adopt. Matt. xii. 36, ttocm pYJixoc 
dpyov, lav XaXo^Xwcxv ol oiv^qcoTroi, dTTo^cuaovffi itlpl ccvtov. 
Luke xiii. 4, IxElvot, !({)' ovs ettso-sv h Trupyos, ^oxerre on ovroi 
K. T. X, ; John vii. 38, o ttkjtevmv sis kfxs, Trorccf^oi psv- 
aouai X. r. X.* Acts vii. 40, o yoip ^oouans o5roy, ovk 
o'i^ac(ji.zv, ri yiyovBv 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. Apoll. vii. 16.^ 

Obs. 1. The nom. is used absolutely in an exclamation in Rom. vii. 24, rakat- 
'jra^os lyu av^^u^of \ 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 anacoluthon 
(^ 69. ii.) ; and in Luke xii. 20, the nam. is put for the voc. Some MSS. indeed 
read a<p^oy» 

2. The dative absolute, as in Matt. viii. 1, xara/SavT* ^f 
ocuraj aTTo rov opouf, 'nKoXou^naacv auTa> o^Xoi lioKKoi, So 
in vv. 5, 23, ix. 27, xxi. 23. 

1 Winer, § 30, 8. Obs. Poppo ad Thucyd. p. 119. Schaefer ad Apoll. Rhod. 
ii.p. 171. 

^ Some would repeat -riviru from the last sentence, as the verb to which o tKfriuui 
is referable ; but this impedes the sense. See Lampe and Kuiuoel ad ioc. 

» Winer, § 28, 3. 


Obs, 2. It has been urged, however, and with some appearance of reason, that 
these are not to be taken as cases absolute, but that the second pronoun is redun- 
dant, as in Matt. iv. 16, John xv. 2, et alibi. So also in Xen. Cyr. i. 3. 15, Ttu^dtro- 
fieu tZ TtxTira., dya^eHv ivrjriatv x^drifrof av Ivrttvs, ffviAfiaxuv avru} See § 45. 7. 
Obs. 13. 2. 

3. The accusative absolute; as in Acts xxvi. 2, Tiynixaci 
lyuauToy /motxa/j/ov, fxeXkcuy aTToXoys'ia^aci sttI aov arnJ^spov' fMcH- 
Xiaroc yvdxJT'nv ovra as TTacMTCoy ytccroc ^lov^cc'iovs l^uy re xou 
l^rimfxairuvj because you are well informed, &c. 

Obs. 3. To this head has also been referred Luke xxiv. 46, ovrus 'ihi -prahTv rov 
X^ifro9, XXI x»i^y%3^yai e-ri tZ ovofiurt ecvrov fAirdvoiav xa) d(pi(riv dfjM^riuv us •rcdtToc rd 
%^fn, d^^dfjtitov d-xo 'UpovffaXrifjc. But dp^dfiivov should rather be taken as an im- 
personal participle, applied in the nominative absolute, like ?ra^£x«y, liov, i^ov, 
^ec^ov, &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 'Ivtx, %dn is to be repeated from the 
preceding verse.* 

§ ^%-^Ofthe 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 differently 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 sufficiently 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 o^ the adjective, 

» Winer, § 31, 6. Obs. 3. Alt, § 29. 7. Kuinoel ad Matt. viii. 1. 
2 Winer, § 32, 7. Alt, § 30. 4. Hermann ad Viger. p. 341. Raphol. and 
Kuinoel on Luke xxiv. 46. 


which the later writers so frequently employ in an adverbial 
sense, particularly conspicuous. Adverbs, formed from adjec- 
tives by means of the termination co^, prevail to a much 
greater extent, as they do also in the LXX and the later 
writers generally. It may also be remarked, with respect to 
the particle ay, 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 tj^eir proper places : such as those effected by adjectives 
expressive of time (§ 25, Obs. 14.); by (p^avw, XavS-avcy, &c. (§ 60. 
Obs. 11.) ; and hy finite verbs followed by an infinitive (§ 58. 
Obs, 7.). See also § 63. 3. Obs. 6. A few additional observa- 
tions remain to be made. 

3. The following adverbial jjrepositions govern a gen. in the 
New Testament. — -"Avei/, without, 1 Pet. iii. 10. — aj^^t and /xix^h 
o^ place and time, as far as, until; Matt. xiii. 30, Acts xi. 5, 
Rom. V. 13, XV. 19. Hence the Elliptical phrase oixp^^ ^^y until, 
whilst, in Mark xiii. 30, Acts vii. 18, xxvii. 33, Gal. iii. 19, 
Heb. iii. 13. — lyylts, near, John iii. 23, vi. 19, Heb. vi. 8, viii. 
13. — £/x'7r§o(T3'£v, before, with reference io place, in Matt. v. 24; 
in the presence of. Matt. vi. 1. See also Matt, xxiii. 13, xxvii. 
11, Luke xiv. 2, Acts xviii, 17. It dienoies precedence, either 
of time or dignity, probably the former, in John i. 16, 27, 30, 
efXTrpoa-^Bv fxou yiyov^v? — evavTi, havrloy, hoomoy, before, in the 
presence of, Mark ii. 12, Luke i. 8, vii. 7, xx. 26, Acts vii. 10, 
viii. 32, 1 Cor. i. 29. — evexck or evexev, on account of, Luke iv. 18, 
Acts XXV. 31, Rom. viii. 36. In the same sense, xipiy is some- 
times used; as in Gal. iii. 19. — iTrdyu, above; o^ place, price, 
and dignity. Matt. xxi. 7, Mark xiv. 6, Luke xix. 17, 18. — tus, 
as far as, o^ place. Matt. xxiv. 21, 31, xxvi. 58, Actsxi. 22, xvii. 
15, 23 ; and until, oi time. Matt. ii. 15, xxvi. 27, xxvii. 45, 64. 
Hence the phrase Icos ov, scil. xp^^iov, in Matt. i. 25, and 
elsewhere. — oTna^ev, behind. Matt. xv. 23, Luke xxiii. 26. — 
oTTio-u}, behind, after, of place, in Matt. iv. 10, 19, x. 38, Luke 
xxi. 8, Acts V. 37, Rev. i. 10; after, of time, in Matt. iii. 11, 
John i. 15, 27, 30. Compare Nehem. xiii. 19, Dan. ii, 19, 

^ See Lami;e, Tiltmau, Ktduoel, and other luterpp. ad he. 


LXX. — TrXna-iov, near, John iv. 5. So in Deut. xi. 30, Josh. 
XV. 46, xix. 45, LXX. 

Obs, 1. With reference to p^acp, tlie adverb Vwj is seldom used except by the later 
writers. The LXX usually add a prep. ; as in Gen. xxxviii. 1, ^us ^^os ccvB^u-ro» 
rna. Levit. xxiii. 14, 'lug us rhv hfji-ieav. So in Luke xxiv. 50, 'lus tl; Bn^avtuv, 
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, 'ius ^ocvarou. So in Exod. xvi. 
28, Numb. xiv. 11,2 Sam. vii. 18, and elsewhere.^ 

4. Besides adverbs which govern a genitive there arc two, 
a/aa and itx^x7r'Kna-iQ)i, which govern a dative. Matt. xiii. 29, a/xa 
avroHs. Phil. ii. 27, TrxpxTrXrKjiov ^ocyaTO}. 

Obs. 2. The former of these is joined with the preposition ffvv in 1 Thess. iv. 17^ 
V. 1 0. 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 IxeT, mov, ottov, which properly in- 
dicate rest, are not unfrequently joined in the New Tes- 
tament with verbs of motion; as in Matt. ii. 22, E(po(3ri^Yi Ixg'i 
uttsX^bTv, for sKsTas. John iii. 8, tiou vTrdyei, for iroT, which does 
not occur in the New Testament. Again in John viii. 21, 
oirov syui vTrdyco. xxi. 18, oicret as ottou ou ^eXsis, where Ixelje 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, ^rov TiBtixeiTi avrov, the adverb bears its proper import. 
On the other hand i»t7(n is once used in the place of Us? in Acts xxii. 5, a^uv xa) 
rehi IxiTffiovras', So in Hippocrates : el Ixutrt olxiovrtS''^ 

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\^lr,ffov 
"XeiffTev h yivvvfis ovtms ?v. xix. 10, «/ ouru; \trT)v h cclrla. And so ill Matt. xxiv. 
39, Rom. iv. 18, 1 Pet. ii. 15. In these passages, however, outus la-rt is merely a 
phrase of equal import with ovrug ix^h which occurs in Acts vii. 1, xii. 15, et 
alibi. Yet more unreasonable is it to render ,ucikko)i as an adjective, greater, 
instead of construing it with the verb, in Matt, xxvii. 24, fjMXXov Bo'^vpc; ymTat. 
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. 

1 Passov. Lex. in v. 

« Winer, ^ 58, 7. Alt, 82. 7. Lobeck ad Phryn. pp. 43, 127. Hermann ad 
Vit;er. p. 790. Stallbaum ad Plat. Euthyphr. pp. 95, sqq. 

•' Winer, § 58, 2. Alt, § 82, 9. Ast ad Plat. p. 371. Reitz ad Luciau. T. vii. 
p. 137. Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 42G. 


The many important relations, which each case is adapted to 
indicate, have been already pointed out ; and it has been seen 
that many or most of them, by the later writers more particu- 
larly, are often more distinctly marked through the medium of 
a preposition. Such preposition must, in the very nature of 
things, have an obvious analogy with the fundamental import 
of the case which it governs ; and nothing is more unphiloso- 
phical than the notion that prepositions and cases may be 
combined with each other ad libitum. Now it seems that the 
original idea involved in every preposition is that of place, and 
that they severally indicate either a state of rest or a state of 
motion. Referred to the same basis, the cases used to express 
motion to or from a place are the accusative and the genitive 
respectively ; whilst that which is fixed and stationary belongs 
to the dative ; and it is according as the signification of each 
preposition is more extended and varied, that they are con- 
structed, some with one case only, others with two, and others 
with all the three. Hence, though one preposition and its 
case may sometimes occur where another might have been ex- 
pected, it will generally be found to be an anomaly in appear- 
ance rather than reality. An instance in point is Luke xi. 13, 
o irarrip o 1^ oupctvov ^cuaei 'ffVEVfJi^a, aytov Tot's- alroixriv ccvrov. The 
parallel place has o Iv toTV oy/)avotV (Matt. vii. 11); but in writing 
I? oupayov, the mind of St. Luke connected the expression more 
immediately with Idffsi. 

Obs. 1 . To trace out the various senses of the prepositions is the business of the 
Lexicographer, but a few examples from the New Testament must be given in 
illustration of their construction, as connected with the fundamental import of each. 
It will be of course unnecessary to reproduce those usages, so frequent in the sacred 
writings, by which verbs, which in the earlier Greek authors govern the simple case, 
are followed by a preposition. It was natural that foreigners should endeavour to 
express any particular related with the greatest perspicuity ; and the manner in 
which they have done so by the constant employment of prepositions, has been 
abundantly exemplified in the remarks upon the several cases. 

2. Of those prepositions, which govern only one case, avrl^ 
d'TTo, Ix, TTgo, take the genitive.^ 

Obs. 2. *Avr), in return for, instead of, denotes the exchange of one object for an- 
other, and therefore, as involving the idea of removal from a place, takes a genitive, 
expressive of succession, price, retribution, &c. Matt. ii. 22, 'A^x^kaes (ia^tXivu avrt 
'Houlov. v. 38, o(pBccX/Aov avTi o(p^a,XfJt,ov, xa) ohovTO. avr) oVovro?. XX. 28, 'hovveu r^v 
■\^yv»jv tciirov XvTflov avri TfoXkav, Rom. xii. 17, fiviSiv't »ax,ov avr/ xaxoZ a-roli^ovTig. 

^ Winer, § 51. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 77. Wahl and Passov. Lex. in vv. ayr), 

»<T0, &C. 


Heb. xii. 16, &tr) (i^iiftt^; fttas a,<riioro ra ^^ureroxia uvrov. So Matt, xvii. 27, Mark 
X. 45, Luke xi. 11, 1 Cor. xi. 15, 1 Thess. v. 15, Heb. xii. 2, James iv. 15, 1 Pet. iii. 9. 
With this notion of exchange are connected the forms avS' <wy, because^ wherefore, in 
Luke i. 20, xii. 3, Acts xii. 23, and elsewhere ; and avri roirou, therefore, in Eph. v. 
31. There is considerable doubt as to the import of the expression xa^/» avrJ XH*" 
ros in John i. 16. Some would render it grace added in the place of grace already 
given ; i. e. an uninterrupted supply of grace ; but perhaps the best interpretation 
is that which repeats cclrou after ;^;ag<Ta?, so that the sense will be. We Christians 
have received a needful supply of grace instead of, and answerable to, the full mea- 
sure of the grace of Christ.* 

Obs. 3. ^A-ro,from, denoting the separation of one object from another with which 
it was externally connected ; as in Matt, xxvii. 2, attKvXnn rov Xt^ov a^o r^s ^v^as. 
It indicates therefore departure from a person, place, or vicinity ; as in Matt. iii. 16, 
avsfitt ato rou v^aros. vii. 23, aTo^a^un a^' lf£od. viii. 1, xcirx^civTi avfa rod opouf. 
xiv. 29, xarafias k'xo rou ^Xolov, i. Q.from ship-board. Acts xv. 38, aTovrcivra a^r' ««- 
ruv ocro Uafjt,(pukicts, which would be incorrectly rendered, departed from them in Pam- 
phylia ; since not only a separation from Mem, but a departure from Pamphylia is also 
intended. Also distance from a place; as in John i. 18, iyyvi rm 'It^o(roXvfiav, ut 
uTo a-raliuv hxccTivrt. Freedom from, or deprivation of, an object is also indicated j 
as in Matt. i. 21, <rcuiru rov Xaov^ uvrov d'Xo ruv a/aa^rMv auruv, Luke V. 34, '/trS'i vythg 
uTo rris fioitrriyos <fov. Connected with these local significations are such expressions 
as the following : — Mark vii. 4, ocro ayo^Zi, after market. Acts xvi. 33, 'iXovffiv a^o 
ruv <r\*iyuv. Rom. xv. 15, a.'jro fii^ous, in part, partly. Transferred to the sense of 
time, it refers to a period, since which any thing has happened ; as in Matt. ii. 16, 
Luke ii. 36, John xi. 53, Acts x. 30, Rom. i. 20. Hence the phrases «»' a^x^,{, ori- 
ginally, in Matt. xix. 4 ; a(p' ov, scil. ^^ovov, d<p' h, scil. hfAi^tti, in 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, 'iv'^ufia uto r^i^^v KUfAriKov. vii. 16, 
a-ro ruv Ka^Tuv auruv l^iyvucrtffBt avrovg. xiv. 26, d^o rov (fo^ov tKoa^av. Xvi. 21, 
troXXa TCiS-iTv d^o ruv ^^nrfiurs^uv, Luke xxi. 30, d<p^ lavruv ynuffxin. Acts X. 17, 
uTiffrei.'kfjLivot d-ro rov KoftriXiou, xi. 19, ^luff^a^tvrts d-ro rrts S^XiyJ/iug, in consequence 
of the calamity, xvii. 2, hiXiyiro etvroTs d-ro ruv y^aipuv. See also Matt. xi. 19, xii. 
38, Rom. i. 7, xiii. 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. Phaed. p. 83. B, Lucian. 
D. D. vi. 5. Analogous to this is the use of d<To in designating the inhabitants or 
natives of a place, or the members of a party ; as in Matt. ii. 1, fjt.dyoi d-r' dvuroXm, 
Eastern magi. xxi. 11, o •r^o(p^riis o d-xo Na^a^ir. Acts xvii. 13, o\ dxa rtis SttrtraXo- 
vixtis 'itfwWw. 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, Pint. Brut. § 2. Somewhat 
similar is 2 Tim. i. 3, xagi» $^u rcf Sta, u Xotr^ivu dieo -x^oyovuv, the God of my fore- 
fathers. Compare Polyb. v. 55. 9. 

Obs, 4. 'e*, or il,from or out of, differs from d-ro in referring to such objects as 
proceed from the interior of another object ; as in Matt. viii. 28, ix, rZv /nvnfAu'uv l^t^- 
xefAivoi. It also denotes removal from any intimate connexion; as in Rom. vii. 24, 
rif fti pvffiTcti ix rou ffu/Aaro; rov ^otvdrou rovreu. Less correctly, but not unfrequently, 
it is scarcely distinguishable from^ d-ro, and the two are occasionally indeed em- 
ployed indifferently. Compare Matt. iii. 16, xiv. 29, with Acts viii. 39, xxvii. 29. 
The forms tx -rt^Krtrov, abundantly (Mark vi. 51), ix hvri^ov, secondly (Matt. xxvi. 42), 
and i» f^ir^ou, moderately (John iii. 34), are cognate with d'ro f^i^ov;. 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, Ix signifies after, since, Just 
after. Matt. xix. 20, U noTtiros fjbov. Acts ix. 33, t'l Wuv oktu. So also the phrases 
«| ^zx^ii ^* ''■*'' "^ii^vov, Ik rovTov, f| ov, in John vi. 64, 66, xiii. 4, et alibi. In a gene- 
ral sense, it denotes origin, whether natural or spiritual, cause, material, means, &c. 
Matt. iii. 9, \k tuv Xl^uv rovruv lyit^ctt riKvec. Mark xii. 30, dyefrriffiii Kv^iev ro» Siot 
ffov il okfjs rris Kct^lui cov, John ii. 15, ^eir,<ras (p^ityiXXiov ix (r;^ei¥iuv. So John viii. 
44, Acts xix. 25, Rom. ii. 29, 1 Cor. ix. 14, 2 Cor. ii. 2. Add Matt. i. 3, 5, 6, xii. 
33, xiii. 47, xxvii. 7, 29, Luke xii. 15, xvi. 9, John vii. 22, Acts xxviii. 3, Rom. i. 4, 
vi. 17, xiv. 23, 2 Cor. ix. 2, Gal. vi. 8, Eph. ii. 8, v. 30, vi. 6, 1 Thess. ii. 3, 1 Tim. 
i. 5, 1 John ii. 16, iii. 8, 10, Rev. viii. 11. Somewhat peculiar is Rev. xv. 2, w*a» 
I* Tives, with which compare the Latin, victoriam ferre ex aliquo, Liv. viii. 8. It 
denotes also connexion with a sect or party ; as Acts x. 45, el Ik ^rt^irofctis -^uttou 
XV. 23, ahiX(po7i ro7s l^ l^yuv. Rom. iv. 14, ei Ik vofiov. Tit. ii. 8, 6| ivavTix;, scil, 
yvufjuns' The significations of ad, in, cum, which have been assigned to it, are en- 
tirely inadmissible. In Matt. xx. 21, U Sf^wv is e dextra, not ad dextram; for in a 
designation of relative place the mind passes /row one object to another. So in 2 
Cor. ii. 4, \k -proxy-m ^xl-^ius 'iy^a-^ix,, the import is, that the Apostle wrote to them 
out of his state of distress, though undoubtedly he was in that state ; and in 1 Tim. 
i. 5, uyocrn Ix xcc^a^af xa^ioti is love proceeding /roy/i a pure heart, not love togethe 
with purity of heart, ^ 

Obs. 5. n^o signifies before, with reference to place ; and thence denotes priority 
oi time, and, in general, superiority dmCi preference. Of place, in Matt. xi. 10, uto' 
ffriXXu rh ayyiXov /u,ov ?r^o tr^oiru'rov (jlov. Acts V. 23, iv^of/,iv (pvXccxag larurai 9r^o tuv 
BvpSy. Add Mark i. 2, Luke i. 78, ix. 52, x. i, Acts xii. 6, 14, xiv. 13 ; and compare 
Heliod. iEth. i. 11.30. Of //me, in John xvii. 24, ^^o xarafiokiis xoa-fzov. Acts v. 
36, jr^o ya^ reuTuv ruv hfj^s^uv dntrrn Qiuoas, Add Matt. v. 12, viii. 29, John X. 8. 
Oi superiority y in James v. 12, 'pr^o Trdvruv ^s, (tt>j ofjt.vviri. See also 1 Pet. iv. 8; and 
compare Herodian. v. 4. 21. Sometimes there is a trajection in the use of this 
preposition ; as in John xii. 1, -r^o s| ti/jui^uv rov <xd.(r^a,, six days before the passover.^ 
2 Cor. xii. 2, ^po irajv hxarttrffu^uv, fourteeji years ago. So in Amos i. 1, LXX, tr^o 
"hvo iruv TOO ffufffjiov. Joseph. Ant. xv. 1. 4, ?r^o fi/ni^ag f^ta; TTis io^rrii. See also Amos 
iv. 7, 2 Mace. xv. 36, Joseph, c. Apion, ii. 2. 

3. The prepositions Iv and al/v govern the dative only,^ 

Obs. 6. 'Ey, in, denotes the place in, vpon, at, or near which an object remains, and 
is therefore joined with the case of rest, the dative ; as in Matt. iv. 16, o kaos o xa^n- 
utvos iv ffxoru, ix. 35, "hihdffxut iv ra7s ffvvayuyai;. xiii. 4, xareixovvrcts iv'li^oviraXrifji.. 
John iv. 20, b rovru vu o^ti ^poffixvvnirav. Heb. i. 3, txdBiinv iv 'ht^ia. Rev. iii. 21, 
xaBiirat h rZ B^ovu. 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 signifies among; as in Luke xvi. 15, ro iv 
d.vBpu'Toii v-^nXov. Acts ii, 29, ro fji.vrifjia avTou iffrtv iv h^v. XXV. 6, har^i'^as iv ab- 
vo7i. From this primary sense the following analogies are readily deducible: — 
(1) Business in which one is employed; as in Rom. i. 9, Z Xar^tvu iv rZ tvecyyikiu. 
1 Tim. iv. 15, iv rouroig 'la6u (2) Society to which one belongs, or matters in which 
one has a share ; as in Matt, xxiii. 30, xcivuvo) iv rZ alfjt,aTt ruv 9r^o<priTuv, Acts viii. 
21, ovx iffri trot fjci^is iv ru Xoyco tovtm, (3) Agency OF ministry, and also an instru- 
ment, in cases of intimate connexion between the act and the agency ; as in Matt. 

1 See Schleusner and Wahl in v. 
'i Wctstein, Kypke, and Kuinoel ad 1. c. 

* Winer, § 52, a. b. Alt, Gram. N. T. ^ 78. Poppo ad Xeu. Cyrop. p. 195. 
lleindorf ad Plat. Cratyl. p. 7 1. 


V. 13, jy r/w kkiffhinreii, v<herewith shall it be salted, i. e. how shall the savour be 
again Jixed in it. vii. 2, iv u fAtr^u fAir^Cn, with what measure^ within which the 
substance to be measured is contained, ye mete, ix. 34, h rZ a^^ovn tZv 'haifiovluv 
ifcfidxku ra lai/^ovia, 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 ii. 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, 
^^•)(,iff6cci ty T»j Vo^v rod tar^os alroZ. Luke i* 17, ^^oiXiuffiTm ty -rvtufJLxri xat luvccf^iii 
'Hki'ou, 1 Cor. ii. 4, Xoyog (aou eux (Jv) tv •3rii6ots civ6^ci)tlvrii ffoiplas Xoyoif, dXX' it oLvo- 
\u\u tviv(/.ccrei x,a) ^vvcifiiais- Eph. iv. 15, dXnhuovrts iv dycc^rri. 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 |y 
frequently siipplies the place of an adjective ; as in Luke iv. 32, t'y l^ovo-la h Xoyoj 
avrou. 2 Cor. xii. 2, oT^a avB^arov iv X^tg-ru, 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 the 
same mode of expression is to be taken adverbially; as in Matt. xxii. 16, ly aX»- 
Bsia, truly, sincerely. Mark xiv. 1, b ^o'Xu, craftily. Col. iv. 5, iv (ro(pia, wisely. 
Add John vii. 4, Acts xvii. 31, xxvi. 7, Eph. vi. 24, Heb. ix. 19, James i. 21, Rev. 
xviii. L Compare Judith i. 11, Ecclus. xviii. 9. An adverb is interchanged with 
this form in John vii. 10, oh (pavi^us, ixx' us iv x^v^ru. With reference to time, iv 
indicates the period in, at, during, or within which anything is done ; as in Matt. ii. 
1, iv hfJj'i^ais'H^utou rou fiafftXius. Mark XV. 29, iv r^mv fi/^i^aii oixo^o/iuv. John v. 
7, iv u (scil. xi°^v) hx^f^^'j while 1 am coming. 1 Cor. xv. 51, aXXaynirofii^u, iv aro- 
fcf, iv pttv o(p6a.Xfjt.ov, iv rri iff^drri ffd.X'Tiyyi, 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, ^lian. V. H. L 6. 

Obs. 7. The primary import of h and lU 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 
iv is sometimes found, generally involve the idea of rest also.' Thus in Matt. xiv. 
3, itricriv alrov, xa) s^iro iv (puXuxri, cast him into prison, and retained hira 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-TTiffr^capiii iv ru op^XM, turning round 
among 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- 

^ Gesen. Lex. and Noldii Concord, in v. Passov. Lex. in v. b. Poppo ad Tiiu- 
cyd.i. 178. 

* Glass. Phil. Sacr. p. 451. Georg. Hierocrit. i. 3. 18. Schleusner and Bri't- 
schneider in v. Kuinoel and RosenmuWer passim. 

^ Winer and Alt, ubi supra: Schulthess in the New Theological Annals, for 
March, 1827, p. '216. Beyer de prcepp. lU and iv in N. T. permutatione. 


plained upon similar principles. Some of these have been classed under their 
respective heads, to which may be added Luke ii. 27, f,khv h rZ -rvivfAccn, not 
he came by the spirit, btit in the spirit, i. e. in a state of inspiration, &c. So in 
Luke iv. 1, e/ passim. Again, John iv. 37, Iv rovru, in this instance: Acts viii. 
33, tv ry vairuvuffu avvou h n^iffis aurov ^'gS>j, during the time of his humiliation : 
Rom. ii. 20, i-m fio^ipao'iv rns yvainug xa) rvs aXyt^ilas \v tm vofcu, the system of 
true knowledge laid down in the Law, 1 Cor. iv. 6, "va b ^/mv fidB^tjTi, that ye may 
learn in us, i. e. by the example exhibited in our conduct. Here also may be men- 
tioned the phrase yin<r^a.i h lavru, to be in owe's right mind, as distinguished from 
ix^iiv us iavrov, to come to one^s senses. Compare Luke xv. 17, Acts xii. 11. In 
1 Cor. iv. 21, Heb. ix. 25, h seems to have nearly the import oi irvv. Compare 
Xen. Cyrop. ii. 3. 14.' 

Obs. 8. 2yv, with, together with, indicates union, companionship ; as in Matt. xxv. 
27, lKofii0'df4,iiv av 70 ifi,ov ffvv roxu^ Mark viii. 34, ^r^offxccXKrafAivos to» o%>.«y iruv <re7s 
fia^yiruTs ahrou, Luke xxiv. 21, ffvv •xa.ifi revroli, besides all these things. Acts v. 17, 
0/ ffuv avrZ, his attendants, or colleagues ; xxii. 9, ol fflii IfAo) ovrif, my companions. 
Sometimes the idea of assistance is included ; as in Acts xiv. 4, ol fih yjffecv cruv roTs 
'lov^ums ol yi ffvv To7s dvtoffToXois, 1 Cor. V. 4, ervv ry ^vvd/ztt rov Kv^lov. XV. 10, ovx iyu 
}ii, akXa h x^^'f '^^'^ ^^"^ *> "'^^ ifAoU In Luke i. 56, vm al/ry means at her house : and 
is equivalent to the French, chex elle. 

4. With the accusative alonCj els, and, in the New Testa- 
ment, dvoc, are used.^ 

Obs, 9. E/Vj to, into, indicates motion to an object ; and in this its primary local 
sense it occurs in Matt. ii. 11, ixBovrts s'V tjjv olxUv. iii. 10, tig tv^ fidWirai, Luke 
viii. 8, t-TTiffiv lU rm yh. Acts iv. 3, eSsvra j<V rrt^nfftv. 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 preserved 
in the use of the preposition after verbs of speaking, and whenever the aim or purport 
of an action is intended. Thus in Matt, xviii. 15, lav a/jtct^rnffi^ us al o a.hX(pos cov. 
xxvi. 10, %^yov xakov u^ycccciTo us if^'u Mark iii. 29, os S' «» (ikacr(pt)fiw'ip us to <mZfjt.» 
ro ayiov. Luke Xxii. 65, xal iTipa ^oXXa ^Xuff^niJ^ovvris tXsyov us avro'y. John V. 45, 
US ov iifitiTs yiX'TixuTi, 2 Cor. ii. 4, rhv uyd.'rtiv nv «%« us vf^ois. Gal. iii. 27, ils X^tffrov 
ifiwrriffBuTi. Add Matt, xviii. 6, Luke xii. 10, xv. 18, 21, Acts vi. 11, i. 27, v. 8, 
1 Cor. viii. 11, xvi. 1, 1 Pet. iv. 9 ; and compare Herodian. vi. 7, 11, vii. 10, Polyb. 
X. 3. 17. Hence it may frequently be rendered in respect to ; as in Acts ii. 26, 
Aa/a/S ya^ Xiyu lis aurov. XXV. 20, d^o^ovfjitvos us tjjv vb^i rovrov ^^Ttjo'iv. Kom. iv. 20, 
its rhv l^rayyiXiav rov &iov oh hix^i^n r^ d^rtcrrta. 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. 
Diod. Sic xi. 50. Pausan. vi. 2, 4, x. 24. Motion is also clearly indicated in the 
following senses: Matt. xiii. 30, Ware avrd, us licrfias, into bundles: xxvii. 30, 1^- 
{TTuo-avTSj ti; ecvrov, upon him : Mark xv. 38, lo-xiVSjj ils %vo, into two parts ; Luke x. 
36, IfA-^iffovTos its Tovs Xyia-ras, amongst thieves : John xi. 32, 'i-rioiv iU rovs ■xohu.s, at 
his /ee/,but with a motion forwards. The design intended, and the event produced, 
are also expressed by this preposition ; as in Matt. xii. 41, fjuiTivoyiffuv ils ro xyi^vyfji,a, 
^luva. xxvii. 7, 'hyo^affuv rov dy^ov ils ruiphv ro7s ^tvoTs. Mark. i. 4, xn^vffffuv ^d'prrKTfjt.a. 
(jLiTatolas ils a,<fiffiv dfia^Tiu)). With reference to time, us denotes of course a future 
period, until ; as in Matt. x. 22, xxiv. 13, o vtofjuiivccs ils riXos, xxi. 19, ilg rov alma, 

^ Hermann ad Viger. p. 858. Krebs. Obss. p. 26. 

* Winer, § 53, a. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 79. Herraaim ad Soph. Aj.p. 80. Gataker 
de N. T. Stylo, p. 180. Wahl de part, il et praep. ils ap. N. T. script, usu et 
potestate, p. 59. Passov. Lex. in vv. ils and dvd. 


far ever : Luke i. 50, tls ymu; ymuv. Acts iv. 3, tU <r^y uu^tov. It is used with a 
genitive, subaud. oixov or leifiUTx, in Acts ii. 27, 31. See § 44, 6. Obs. 19. Also 
with the name of a person, whose house is intended, in Acts xvi. 40, ufftjx^ov us rhv 
AvViav, into Lydia^s house. So, in Latin, Ter. Eun. iii. 5. 64, Ramus ad me. 

Obs. 10. It is not that tls is used for iv, but the idea of rest and motion is com- 
bined, when us is constructed with verbs which convey the former meaning ; as in 
Matt. ii. 23, xecreuxna-iv us rokiv, where many MSS. insert, and it should seem 
correctly, iM^aiv, 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, 
us o7ko¥ liTTi, where s/V^xSjv sis Kecri^vaovfjt. immediately precedes, xiii. 3, Koc^niAivou 
us TO o^os. Acts ii. 31, ov )tetriXii(pB^v h '4"^X^ uvrov us k^ov. xviii. 21, lu f^t tavrus 
rh* io^rhv rm 'i^x^H''^^^'* 'X'oiriffix.i lis ' i-i^offoXvfAK. xxi. 13, a-ro^aviiv its 'Ii^ov<ra>.hfA troifAus 
txf' 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. i^lian. V. H. vii. 12. Other passages, 
which have been referred to this head, do not belong to it ; as Mark i. 9, ifiaTrio-Bt] 
us Tov 'lo^'^dvnv, he was baptized by immersion into the Jordan, v. 34, t/Vaye us ti^vvvv, 
ad salutem: and so in Luke vii. 50, et alibi passim. Compare 1 Kings xx. 13, 
2 Kings XV. 9, LXX. In John i. 18, o uv us rov xokTov, is probably a Hebraism ; 
and the expression in Acts vii. 53, us harayas ayyikuv is clearly parallel with 
Gal. iii. 19, ^/araysvra h' ayyiXav, but Upon what grammatical principle, it is 
difficult to determine. Compare also Heb. ii. 2 ; and see § 47, 2. Obs, 5. 

Obs. 11. 'Ava, in, through, is sometimes joined with a dative in other writers, but 
with an accusative only in the New Testament. Thus in Matt. xiii. 25, iff-ru^i 
l^iZ,a,via, ava fziaov roZ trirov, in the midst of, i. e. amongst, the wheat : 1 Cor. xiv. 27, 
avx f/.i^os, 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, tXa/Ssv ava 
Invd^iov, a penny each : Luke ix. 3, «»a ^vo x^ruvus «%«iv, two coats apiece. Com- 
pare Mark vi. 40, Luke ix. 14, x. 1. It is used adverbially without a case in Rev. 
xxi. 21, uia, us 'ixatrrcs, each one severally. These are the only forms in which the 
preposition appears. 


1. The Prepositions governing two cases are ^li, xara, vTrsq, 
and, in the New Testament, /xsra, tte^I, and vtto. They govern 
the genitive and the accusative. 

Obs. 1. A/a, through, takes (1.) the genitive, inasmuch as, in a local sense, the idea 
0^ passing through includes that o^ proceeding from, and passing out* Mark xi. 16, 
oux v(piiv 'Ivd Tis ^nviyKTi itksvos S/a tov Is^ou. 1 Cor. iii. 15, avTos Ss a'u^^o'iTai, ourus 5s 
us tia ^v^os- Heb. ix. 11, B/a t5Jj fjiju^ovos ffKTtvris ila-^xBiv us fd, ctyta. Hence, with 
reference to time, it denotes a period throughout, or after which an event took place ; 
as in Luke v. 5, 5/* okyis tTis wxros xo^idtravris. ovTiv Ixd^ofAiv. Gal. ii. 1, Vcrs/ra, ^id 
lixartartrdpuv \ruv, crdkiv dvi^tiv us *li^offoXu[jua.. 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 pti^h v-ro rod Ku^i'ou 
S/a TOV 'r^o(priTov. Jolm i. 3, ^dvToc, Bi' xvtoZ lyiviTo. Acts iii. 16, h Tiffrts h 5/ auTov. 
1 Cor. iii. 5, 'hidxovoi, 3/ uv Wiffrtvcran. xvi. 3, 3/' tTno-ToXuv rovrovs Tif^-^u, by means 
of letters of reconvmendation, not with letters : 2 Pet. i. 3, rov xaXia-avros '/ifids ^td ^o^tts 
xat d^irvs, by his glorious goodness. This last passage is rendered by Schleusner 
qui vos ad religiomm Christianam adduxit eo consi/io, ut consequamini felicitatem; 


which cannot be correct, since the genitive never denotes 2. final cause.^ For other 
examples see Mark vi. 2, xvi. 20, Luke i. 70, John i, 17, Acts iv. 16, v. 12, viii. IS, 
XV. 23, xviii. 9, xix. 26, xxi. 19, Rom. i. 5, iii. 20, iv. 13, v. 1, 2, 1 1, xi. 35, 1 Cor. i. 9, 
vi. 14, Gal. i. 1, Heb. ii. 10. Sometimes ^genitive with lux. is used adverbially ; as in 
Heb. xii. 1, V iiTo/^ov^s, patiently. Compare Luke viii. 4, Acts xv. 27, Rom. viii. 25, 
Heb. xiii. 22, 1 Pet. v. 12. (2.) With an accusative, S/a denotes the impulsive or 
ihe final cause ; and signifies on account ofy because of ; as in Matt, xxvii. 18, S/a 
(p^flvflv '^a.^ituxav alnrov, Mark ii, 27, ro trdfifieiTev het rov av^^wrov lyinro, olx. ^ 
avB^wroi iici TO (Toififiarev. Compare, for the impulsive cause, Mark ii, 4, John xi. 42, 
xii. 9, 30, Rom. iii. 25, iv. 23, 24, xi. 28, xiii. 5, 1 Cor. xi. 23, Heb. ii. 9. In some 
cases the cause and the means are so closely allied, that ^/a may be rendered by 
means of; as in 1 Cor. vii. 5, 'Iva fih Trupd^v y^Sf larctva.s ^id T«y uK^aftav vfi-uv* 
Compare Xen. Mem. iii. 3. 15, ^schin. Dial. Socr. i. 2, Diog. L. vii. 1. 12, Longi 
Past. ii. p. 62.* 

Obs. 2. Kara, down., or down upon, signifies </esc'e« //rom a higher place ; and there- 
fore takes (1.).* genitive ; as in Matt. viii. 32, ci^/jbyicn Td^a h dyik*} ruv x«/^wv xard red 
x^ij/iAvov ih riiv BdXaffffav, Mark xiv. 3, xart^iiv ahrov xxrd rra xi(pciXt]s, down upon 
his head; the flask being held over it. Compare 1 Cor. xi. 4. By an easy trans- 
ition it indicates hostility; as in John xviii. 29, rim xurnyo^iav (p't^irt xard. rod 
avB^u-reu rovrov, what accusation 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, Acts xix. 16, 
XXV. 3, Jude 15; and compare Numb. xii. 1, xxi. 5, Job iv. 18, xxxi. 36, Wisd. iv. 
16, 2 Mace. ii. 27, LXX, Polyb. ix. 3. 10, ^lian. V. H. ii, 6, x. 6. Hence, per- 
haps, its use in adjurations ; as in Matt. xxvi. 63, i^o^xiZ,^ cri xard rov Qiov. Compare 
1 Cor. XV. 15, Heb. vi. 13. So likewise in 2 Chron. xxxvi. 13, Jerem. xlix. 13, 
Judith i. 12, LXX. Another sense is that of diffusion; as in Luke iv. 14, (p«^»j 
il^xBi xaf oXns rm ffi^iX'^^^h throughout the whole district. Add Luke xxiii. 5, Acts 
ix. 31. (2.) Since the notion throughout may be referred, not only to the point/7 om 
which an object proceeds, but to that also to which it tends, this local sense belongs 
to xard, with an accusative ,* as in Luke viii. 39, xaS-' oXm rh ^oXtv xn^vtrffuv. Acts 
V. 15, xard rds ^Xariias ixipi^itv rout dff^iviTs, along the sttrets. So Luke ix. 6, x. 4, 
Acts viii. 1, 3, xi. 1. Nearly equivalent is the sense in Luke x. 33, oh.uuv tik^i xar 
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, »ar ovu^, during a dream. 
So Gen. xx.6, xxi. 11, LXX, Herodian. ii. 7. 6, Alciphr. iii. 59, ^lian. V. H. i. 13. 
Again in Heb. iii. 8, xard rnv fi/4,i^ccv rod crtioairf^ov. It denotes at, on, or about ; as 
in Matt, xxvii. 15, xaB' Uorhv, at the feast ; Acts xiii. 27, xard -rdv trdfifiarov, on every 
Sabbath, Rom. ix. 9, xard rov xai^ov rovrov ikiuffof/Mi, at or about this time. Hence 
the formula xard xai^ov, 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, d-ro- 
^euffii IxdffTM xard rnv •x^d^tv avrov. Luke i. 9, xard re 'iBos rvis hpaniag. ii. 22, xard 
rov vof^ov Muffiaif, John ii. 6, xard rov xuBa^ifffjLov ruv ^lov'haiuv. Rom. iii. 5, xard 
avB^cuTTov >Xyu>. Gal. iv. 28, xard ^Iffadx. Compare Job i. 8, ix. 32, xii. 3, xiii. 
15, Ecclus. X. 2, xxxvi. 23; and Lucian. Pise. 6. 12, Plat. Apol. 1, Arrian. 
Exp. iii. 27. To these may be added Matt. xix. 3, xard -raffav alrtav, for every 
reason; Rom. viii. 27, xard Qiov, according to God's will or appointment. Phil. iv. 11, 
ov xa^' vffrigytfftv xiyu, with respect to want, i.e., as if I were in want. See also Matt. 

1 See Vitringa in Diss. iii. Lib. i. c. 7. p. 224. Suicer. Thes. i. p. 706. Pott, and 
Wolf ad 1. c. 

2 Winer, §§ 51. i. 53, c. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 80, 1. Brunck ad Arist. Thesm. 414. 
Wyttenbach ad Plat. Op. Mor. ii. p. 2. 


ii. 16, ix. 29, xxiii. 3, Luke i. 18, ii. 29, xxiii. 56, Acts iii. 17, xviii. 14, xxvi. 5, 
Rom. viii. 1, 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 is 
that xctTu. with an accusative frequently supplies the place of an adjective or adverb ; 
as in Acts xviii. 15, roZ «a9-' ^^Sj, your law ; Rom. vii. 13, xaS-' ii'n^lioX.yiv af/.a^- 
ruXof, exceedrngly sinful; xi. 21, ruv xara, (fvffiv xXahuv, the natural branches. Com- 
pare Luke X. 31, Acts xiv. 20, xxv. 23, xxvii. 2, Rom. i. 15, et alibi. Lastly, with 
reference to tijne and place, and also with numerals, xara, implies distribution ; as in 
Luke ii. 41, xar "iros, yearly, from year to year ; viii. 1, 4, x-arci to).!)/, from city to 
city; John xxi. 25, x«:^' sv, 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 1 Sam. vii. 16, 2 Chron. ix. 24, 
Zech. xiv. 16, LXX.i 

Obs. 3. 'Tirs^, above, over, does not occur in the New Testament in its primitive 
local sense; from which it is readily applied, (1.) with a genitive, to what is 
done instead of, in lehalfof, in defence of, on account of, any object. Thus in Mark 
ix. 40, o; ycc^ ovx, 'iffrt xaS-' vfjcuv, vxio vfiuv iffriv. John Xviii. 14, ffvijt,<^'i^it 'iva avB^u- 
Tot aTo>^i(rBai i'r\^ rou Xaeiu. Acts V. 41, ^Ui^ovns, ort u'ri^ rov ovof^aros auroZ kuth^i- 
aSyia-av arifiUffBrivai. Rom. V. 6, X^iffros vtI^ affii-tuv o.'ffiBavi. 2 Cor. V. 20, i'Tsg 
X^ta-rod ^^itrjiivofAiv. 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. ii. 1, 6, Tit. ii. 14, Philera. 13, Heb. v. 1, 3, vii. 
27, 1 Pet. ii. 21, 1 John iii. 16. It indicates a motive in Phil. ii. 13, v-zri^ rvis 
luloxiecf. Sometimes also it may be rendered concerniiig ; as in Rom. ix. 27, 'Ho-utas 
x^ec^ii vTip rou ^Iff^ccriX, 2 Cor. i. 8, ou BiXofji.iv vftjcis ayvoiTv VTTi^ rr,; Sx/'v/'$&/j yif/,Zvt 
See also 2 Cor. viii. 23, 2 Thess. ii. 1 ; and compare 2 Sam. xviii. 5, Tobit vi. 15, 
LXX. In the same sense the Latin super is used in Virg. JEn. i. 754, Multa 
super Priamo rogitans. (2.) With an accusative, wtrs^ denotes the place of dignity to 
which any one is raised ; as in Matt. x. 24, oux 'ia-rt fixB-nrh; y^s^ rev 'hi^oiffxaXov, 
Compare Eph. i. 22, Phil. ii. 9, Philem. 16. Closely analogous is its comparative 
import : as in Matt. X. 37, o (ptXuv -xarifa. >j f/,yiTifa utfi^ IfAt, oux ia-Tt f4,ou a^io;. Acts 
xxvi. 13, u^i^ rhv XufA-TrpoTyiTct rov hxlou ';ripiXuf/.-^oi,v [JjI (pug. 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, ri 
yap Iffriv, S iirrriBvrt v^\^ rocs Xoi^ras ixxXnalus, 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 ira^a.^ Of utI^, used 
adverbially, see § 65. Obs. 5. 

2. In the New Testament jutsra, tte^I, and vito are also found 
with two cases only, though in other writers they take three 
cases after them. 

Obs. 4. MsT«, with, denotes society^ companionship ; but, whereas vvv with a dative 
indicates that which is, as it were, united with another object, ^sra with (1.) a geni- 
tive, denotes a somewhat looser connexion of various descriptions. Thus in Matt, 
viii. 11, a,vu.xXiBri(Tovro!.i fitr* 'A/3^aa,««. xii. 3, avro; xui ol fjctr uhrou, his companions ; 
xiii. 20, /ttsra X"^?^! XafifidvMV aur'ov. Luke XX. 28, o\ 'htafjcifjuivrixorii /Jbir Ifiou. Xxiv. 5, 
ri l^nrtTrt rov ^ayru fiirci ruv uxouv', Acts V. 26, tjyccytv ccvrovf, ou /Jtsrd fiiec;. xvii. 11, 

» 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 JEach. Theb. 421. 

2 Winer, § 51.1. 53, e. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 80, 3. Raphelius ad Rom. viii. 31. 
Wetstein ad 2 Thess. ii.l. 



ioi^avro rov Xoyov fAtrct 'Xairni "r^oB^vf^ieiS' 1 Cor. vi. 6, ahX<pos fjbtra a!hiX<pou x^mrai. 
xvi. 11, Ixyixof^ai ya,^ avrov fiira ruv uhiX(pu)i. ReV. ii. 16, ToXifji.nffu f^ir* avruv, vi. 
8j ocxoXovBu fjt.iT uiiToZ, 171 his train. In the expression tivui (jlito, nvos, to be of the 
game party with any one, is included the notion of support, assistance (Matt. i. 23, xii. 
30, xxviii, 20, and elsewhere); and, on the other hand, of opposition, in Matt. xii. 41, 
avt^ts 'i^mvlrcti avetffr^trovrai h vn x^lffu fjt.i'ra, rtis yivicis ravrrny xa) xctrax^ivovffiv aur^v. 
Although there is a marked difference in the import of fflv and ^tra, it is neverthe- 
less certain that they are frequently interchanged. See § 65. Obs. 4. (2.) An ac- 
cusative with fiira, indicates a situation behind an object, as in Heb. ix. 3, fitra to 
hvTi^ov xaTciTiTcca-f^ei, behind the second veil. With this single exception, this con- 
struction in the New Testament always indicates time, in the sense of after; as in 
Matt. i. 12, f^tTa TTiv fiiTotxiiriav BaflvXmos, after the removal to Babylon, xvii. 1, 
/KsS' rifii^ag e|. John xiii. 7, fzirx TuvTci, after these things, i. e. after what I am now 
doing. See also Matt. xxiv. 29, xxv. 19, Mark viii. 31.^ 

Obs. 5. IIi^/, about^ in a local sense, in which it is not found in the New Testa- 
ment, with (1.) a genitive, conveys the idea of surrounding an object; and thence, 
in a general sense, it signifies concerning y with respect to. Thus in Matt. ii. 8, ax^t- 
P>us l^iTiiffaTi ?r«g/ Tov TTuth'ov. vi. 28, 9ri^i ivlvft-aros ti fAi^ifjc-vocTi* ix. 36, IcirXctyx^''''^*! 
9ri^i auTuv. XX. 24, viyotva.KTyitru,v ?re^/ tuv ^vo ahx<pMv, Add Mark v. 16, John vii. 17, 
1 Cor. vii. 37. Hence 3 John 2, ^i^t ^avTuv, in all respects. Here also belongs 
the phrase, tu ^n^i nvog, sci'l, ^r^aiyfiaTa, in Luke xxiv. 19, Acts i. 3, Eph. vi. 24, et 
alibi. Closely allied, though not exactly parallel, are the places in which m^) is 
rendered because of. For example, Luke xix. 37, a'mTv tov &iov ';ri^) cruffm uv ulov 
^uvoiftiuv. John X. 33, <;ri^t xctXoZ 'i^you ov XiBd^ofiiv ffi. It signifies for the sake of, 
in Matt. xxvi. 28, to aJfcei ftou to TTi^i -roXXSv ixxwofuvov. Compare Mark xiv. 24, 
1 John iv. 10. (2.) With an accusative, ^i^t indicates the place which any thing sur- 
rounds ; as in Matt. iii. 4, Cix^ t,uvnv h^fjteiTmv ^n^t tJjv off(pvv auTov, Mark iii. 8, ol 
Ti^) Tv^ov, scil. xccToixovvTif. In a temporal sense, it signifies about ; as in Acts x. 9, 
?r£g} u^otv ixTm, (ibout the sixth hour. So Matt. xx. 3, 5, 6, 9, Mark vi. 48, Acts xxii. 
6. Hence, generally, about, with respect to; as in 1 Tim. i. 19, crs^/ rhv TtirTtv hau- 
dynffuv. Compare Mark iv. 19, Lukex. 40,41, 1 4,21, 2 Tim. iii. 8, Tit. ii. 7. 
Obs. 6. 'Y?ro, properly under, has a /oca/ reference, with (1.) a genitive, to that which 
proceeds /rom beneath an object ; but in the New Testament it is used only in its 
applied sense to express the efficient or instrumental cause, by which any thing is ef- 
fected ; and, for the most part, after verbs passive, or neuters in a passive sense. Thus 
in Matt. i. 22, to pfiBh v^o too Kupiov. ii. 16, Ivi^a/x^^J ^cro tuv fAtiyuv. iii. 6, if^cfrrl- 
Z,ovTo It'' uutov. Add Matt. iv. 1, viii. 24, xvii. 12, Rom. xiii. 1, 2 Pet. ii. 7. Com- 
pare Lucian. M. Peregrin. 19,Philostr.V. Apoll.i.28,Polyaen.v. 2. 15. A /oca/sense 
might perhaps be given, though it is not necessary, in 2 Pet. i. 17, ipavm iHx^ti<r)js 
avTu rotaffh iuro Tris fnyaXoT^iTovs Vo^ns. (2.) Local direction towards the under part 
of an object is properly indicated by vto with an accusative ; as in Matt. v. 15, xCx- 
vov TtB'iairtv vTo tov fzobiov, viii. 8, ovk ilfu Ixocvo; 'Ivk fJt,ov i/To Tvtv trriyyiv i'lffixBrii. Less 
correctly, and but rarely in good writers, it marks a place of rest ; as in Mark iv. 32, 
v<xo Tnv ffxiav avTou xuTuirxyivovv, John i. 49, ovra vto tv\v ffvxviv utov ci. Jude 6, vto 
^o<pov TiTri^rtxiv. Compare Lucian D. D. viii. 2, j35sop. Fab. xxxvi. 3. By an easy 
transition, it denotes sM^/ec/tow ; as in Matt. viii. 9, uvB^wros ilfjtji vto l^over/xv, 'i^uv 
war' iftavTov ffT^UTHkiTu;. Rom. iii. 9, v(p' ufict^Tictv iJveiu vi. 14, oi/ yd^ iffTi vto v'ofAOV, 
aXX' iiTTo x^^'V' See also Luke vii. 8, Rom. vii. 14, 1 Cor. ix. 20, Gal. iii. 10, 25, iv. 
2, 1 Tim. vi. 1. It is once used of time, signifying about, in Acts v. 21, vto tov o^- 
B^ov, about daybreak. Compare Jon. iv. 11, LXX, ^lian, V. H. xiv. 27. So, in 
Latin, Liv. xxvii. 15, Sub lucis orium.'^ 

' Winer, § 51, h. and 53, f. Alt, § 81, 2. Kuinoelon Matt. xii. 41. Fritzsche on 
Matt. i. 12, and xii. 41. =« Winer, § 51, b. and 53, k. Alt,681,6. Passov. Lex. in v. 



1. Of the other prepositions which govern three cases, api(pi 
is not used by the New Testament writers. It therefore re- 
mains to consider kii), itoipocy and irpos, 

Obs. 1. 'Et), signifying primarily upon, answers with (1) a genitive to the ques- 
tion where ? It may be also rendered at or near. Thus in Matt. iv. 6, Iti xs/ga^v 
a^ouffi ffu xxi. 19, ihuv ffVKriv fjt.!uv iV/ rns o^ou. xxvi. 12, lia,Xov<rct ro fzv^ov Wi tou ttuf 
fiaroi. xxvii. 19, xuBiif/,ivov aiirou l-ri rod ^rifiaro?. In Mark xii. 26, Luke xx. 37, 
It) rod (iiirou should be rendered, in the place or section^ which treats of the burning 
bush. This was the usual mode of Rabbinical citation, of which there are other 
examples in Mark ii. 26, Rom. xi. 2. With reference to time, it indicates an epoch 
at or near which an event took place; as in Matt. i. 11, Wt rns fAiToixiviui Bafivkuvos, 
about the time of the Babylonian captivity. Luke iv. 27, i<r) 'Ekiiraiou, in the time of 
Elisha. See also Acts xi. 28, Heb. i. 2; and compare 3 Esdr. ii. 16, Arrian. Exp. 
iii. 73, -^lian. V. H. xiii. 17. Hence the following applied senses are easily de- 
ducible : — Matt. ii. 22, fiuffiktvu It) rtig 'lawWa?, reigns over Judcea. Matt, xviii. 16, 
It) arofiUTSi ^vo ju,ec^Tv^uv, upon the testimony. John vi. 2, ra crufAiTei, £ tToiu Itt) tu« 
atr^tvcuy, miracles which he performed upon the sick. Acts vi. 3, oSs Kctru<rrmof^iv W) 
T?f %^£/a? retvrvS} over Mi's business, viii. 27, os nv l^t rtjs ya^KS, over the treasure, 
i. e. a treasurer, (Compare Polyb. v. 72. 8, Diod. Sic. xiii. 47, Herodian. ii. 25.) 
Rom. i. 10, scri tuv T^offiux^v /^ou hofjbtvoi, in my prayers, 1 Cor. vi. 1, x^inffBati W) 
ruv a^Uuv, before heathen judges, 2 Cor. vii. 14, fi xavx*}^'s hfjt.uv h Wi Tlrou, my 
boasting over or concerning Titus. Rev. xi. 6, i^ovffluv ixoviriv It) tuv vharuv, 'over 
the waves. See also Matt, xxviii. 14, Mark xiii. 9, Acts xii. 20, xxiii. 30, xxiv. 19, 
XXV. 9, 26, xxvi. 2, 2 Cor. xiii. 1, Gal. iii. 16, Eph. iv. 6, 1 Tim. v. 19, vi. 13, Rev. 
ix. 11. Sometimes there is an adverbial sense; as in Mark xii. 32, Acts x. 34, 
«V aXn^uus, in truth, truly. (2) The place upon which any thing rests is desig- 
nated by \t) with a dative ; as in Matt. xiv. 8, ^og fjuoi uh Irt tIvuki rh xnpa- 
k'/iv 'ludvvou. xxiv. 33, lyyvg ia-riv i^i Bv^ais, close at the door. Mark vi. 39, 
avcixXivxi It) ru x«^Tiw. It includes the idea of hostility in Luke xii. 52, ttrovrai 
Tpili i-r) St/o-J, xou ^vo iiri r^iat. Accumulation is sometimes signified ; as in Matt. 
XXV. 20, a,)^XBe, Tivrt TaXccvru ixi^nffoc, i-r' aireTf. Add Luke iii. 20, XV. 26, Eph. 
vi. 16, Phil. ii. 27, Col. iii. 13, Heb. viii. 1 ; and compare Xen. Cyr. iv. 5. 38, 
Lucian, D. D. i. 3. In a general sense, it indicates the ground or foundation, 
or the object and purport, of an action ; as in Matt. xix. 9, es civ uToXvcrri ttiv ywuTxet 
avrou, ti fjt.y) It) To^vtiet. Xxiv. 5, ToXXo) ikiva-oyreci It) t^ ove/xuri fmu, xxvi. 50, s(p' w 
frdfiu ; for what purpose are you come ? Mark vi. 52, ev y'd^ cvvnxav it) toIs aoretg, 
in consequence of the miracle of the loaves. Acts ii. 38, (iaTriff^nru It) tu cvefian 
'Itiffou X^iffTou. xiv. 3, Tuppyiffia^o/^ivei It) rcji xv^lco rZ fjM^rv^ovvrt, from confidence in 
the Lord. This is particularly the case after verbs of rejoicing, grieving, and others 
denoting any menial emotion; as in Matt, xviii. 13, x'*'k^^ *"'' »tJru. Mark iii. 5, 
avWuTovfAVtat \t) rn Tu^uau xoc^'ica avTuv, See also §47.3. Obs. 11. It is also 
used to express a condition or stipulation; as in 1 Cor. ix. 10, It' iXTih o(puXu o a^a- 
r^tuv a^orpiav, under the hope of a harvest. Compare Diod. Sic. ii. 25, Lucian, D. 
D. i. 4, Polyb. i, 59. 7. In definitions of time it indicates a continued or repeated 
act ; as in John iv. 27, It) tovtw, in the mean time. 2 Cor. iii. 14, It) tjJ avayvvcu 
rni To.Xtna.i ^/aS»5*>jf , during or at the reading, Phil. i. 3, It) Tucrri rv fivua, vfjL,uv, 
ai every remembrance, i. e. whenever I remember you. Sometimes it must be ren- 
dered after; as in Acts xi, 19, \t) ^r%(poiva), after the death of Stephen. Heb. ix. 17 




^la^^Kt} yao l-r) vtK^oTf fi-fiaia, after men are dead. Compare Xen. Hell. iv. 4. 9, 
^lian. V. H. iv. 5. (3) With an accusative, i-rt denotes motion or /ocal direction 
t/pon or towards an object ; as in Matt. ix. 18, IrBa rh x^''i"' '"^" ^'^' '^t'^''''- xiv. 19, 
avatcXiBnvKi l-rt rovg ^a^rayj. Luke iv. 25, lyiviro Kif/,os f/.iyas It) <7ra,au.v rhv y^iv. Even 
with verbs of rest^ the idea of motion is frequently included ; as in John i. 32, Kurx- 
fiaTvcv 'ifciiuv iv avrov. Combining a notion oi hostility, it should be rendered against; 
as in Matt. x. 21, I'^avocffr'/iffovrai riKva, ivi yovus. Compare Luke xii. 52. Hence, 
generally, it marks the end or object, towards virhich any action or feeling is directed. 
Thus in Matt. iii. 7, i^x^/^'^^ovs It) to fiu-rrterfio, airov, in order to receive his baptism, 
xiv. 14, iff-rXecy^viffBt} {•r* ecurovs, he had compassion upon them. Mark ix. 12, yiy^cfr- 
rui It) T6V vlov rod av^^ci^ou, with reference to the Son of Man. That, too, over which 
power is exercised, is marked by g<ri with an accusative; as in Matt. xxv. 21, e<r) 
oXiya ^; Tiff'Tof. Luke xii. 14, r/; fii Kctriffryifft "hiKocffrr,)) n fti^iffrv^v l(p' vfJMS \ 2 Thess. 
ii. 4, v'Tfi^eti^ofji.ivos It) Toivrei Xsyo/u,ivov &tov *J ff'ifiot.irfjt,oc. Compare Exod. ii. 19, LXX, 
Plat. Tim. p. 336, Diod. Sic. i. 91. Of time it marks the space over which an event 
extends itself. Thus in Luke iv. 25, 'mXitir^n o ol^uvos W trt} r^iu, not.) fjt,r,va.i t^. 
So in Luke xviii. 4, Acts xiii. 31, xx. 11, xxviii. 6, 1 Cor. vii. 39, Heb. xi. 30. 
Compare Polyb. i. 39. 12, iv. 63. 8. The forms Wi r^)s, thrice, in Acts x. If), and 
f-r) ToXh, for a long while, in Acts xxviii. 6, are analogous. Sometimes, more defi- 
nitively, as in Mark xv. 1, WJ to Tout, in the morning. Acts iv. 5, WJ rh av^iov, on 
the morrow.^ 

Obs. 2. Tlu()ic,, of or from, (1) when construed with a genitive^ has a local refer- 
ence to the vicinity from which an object comes ; as in Mark xiv. 43," Tu^ccyivirai 
^lovtui <ra.^cc ruv aoxn^iuv. Compare Mark xii. 2, Luke viii. 49. Hence it denotes 
the origin or source of any thing ; as in John i. 6, oiv^^cuTos uTiffrocXuivoi Tct^a. &iod. 
Acts xxii. 30, rl xamyooureci tu^cc tuv ^lovlccicov. So Matt. xxi. 42, Luke ii. 1, Rom. 
xi. 27, Acts vii. 16, 2 Tim. i. 18. More particularly it denotes the source from which 
information is derived, and is therefore employed after verbs of inquiring, kearinc/, 
telling, &c. Thus in Matt. ii. 4, iTwB-einro to.^ cchruv, Mark viii. 11, ^yiTovvri; 
Tff.^ a,vrov ffy>[Ji,uov. Phil. iv. 18, ^i^dfitvoi Ta^' 'Ecraip^o'^irou ra. tcc^ vfJi,uv, See § 41, 
6. This last passage affords an example of another cognate sense, in which this 
preposition indicates that which is connected with, or concerns any one. Hence the 
above formula tu, Tct^a nvos, the business or property of a person ; and, in the mas- 
culine, el Ta^d Ttvos, one's connexions or kinsmen, in Mark iii. 21. It will be ob- 
served that in the New Testament, as well as in other prose writings, Ta^a is 
usually prefixed to the names of animated existences. (2.) With a dative, -rx^oa 
denotes absolute proximity, and is to be rendered with, at, or near. Thus in Matt, 
xxii. 25, ^o-av To.^ hpi'Tv Itto. a,hX(po), living with us, or, in our neighbourhood. John 
xix. 25, IffT'^Kuerav Tu^a, tm ffrecv^Z. Acts ix. 43, (ji.uva.i Ta^d rivi ItfAuvi. 1 Cor. xvi. 
2, rSiru Tao* iocuru, at home. Compare Lucian, D. D. xxvi. 3. Frequently it is 
applied in a /ro;>jca/ sense ; as in Matt. xix. 16, Tccfd avB^uTots touto ahuvarov icrrt, 
Tct^d. Bs ^lu Tuvra "^uvard, lirrt. Luke i. 30, iv^i$ ^a^^v Toc^d rZ Stu. So in Luke ii. 
52, Rom. ii. 11, et alibi. In similar expressions it may sometimes be rendered be- 
fore, i. e. in the presence of, or in the judgment of; as in Rom. xi. 25, ?ra^' lavroTg <p^o- 
vifioi. 1 Cor. iii. 19, ^ troipioc, rod xoa'fjt.ou rourev, f^u^la Tu^d ru QiZ ia'ri. See also Luke 
i. 37, 1 Cor. vii. 24, 2 Pet. ii. 11, iii. 8. (3.) Before an accusative, Ta^d indicates 
motion by the side, along, or in the vicinity of a place; as in Matt. iv. 18, Ts^iToiTuv 
9ra^d rhv Bdkeio-ffxv. Luke viii. 41, tio'uv Tu^d rovg to^xs. It is also used after verbs 
of rest, an idea of motion being in some sort included; as in Matt, xiii. 1, i^ix^uv 
ixd^viTo Tu^d Th ^dXuffffKv. See also Matt. xiii. 4, xv. 30, xviii. 29, Mark ii. 13, iv. 

* Winer, §§ 51, g. 52, c. 53, 1. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 81, 1. Wetstelu and Kypke 
on Acts xii. 20. Wahl. Lex. in v. ItL 


1, Luke V. 1, 2, viii. 5, Acts iv. 35, v, 2, 10. From the notion of paxsinj by or along, 
the prep, has certain derived senses. It is used, for instance, when one thing is 
preferred to, or surpasses, dinot\\Qr ; as in Luke xiii. 2, 4, ufjiu^ruXo) ^a^a. vdvras. 
Rom. i. 25, IkaT^ivtrav T»j xritru -TK^oi rov xTifavTa. So Roni. xii. 3, xiv. 5, Heb. i. 9. 
Hence its use after comparatives ; as in Luke iii. 13, fjunlh -rXiov ■raou to 'htanvay 
fjbtvay vfjuv vr^x(ririri. Add Heb. i. 4, ii. 7, iii. 3, xii. 24 ; and see § 43. 3. It also sig- 
nifies beside or except; as in 1 Cor. iii. IJ, Si/AtXiov ya.^ akXov ovhls ^vvarai ^limt 
vrec^a. Tov Kii/xivov, 2 Cor. xi. 24, ricra-x^aKovroi Tcc^a, fjtixv, thirty-nine. Likewise 
transgression ; as in Acts xviii. 13, Ta^a, rh mo[i.ov, contrary to the law. Compare 
Rom. i. 26, iv. 18, xi. 24, xvi. 17, Gal. i. 8, Heb. xi. 11. In 1 Cor. xii. 16, 17, 5ra«« 
rovro signifies there/ore, i. e. by the side of this circumstance, or along with this cir- 
cumstance. Compare Plutarch. V. Camill. 28.^ 

Obs. 3. n^oi, to, unto, indicates that which proceeds /rom one place to another; 
and hence with (1.) a genitive, it frequently denotes that which is of advantage to 
any one ; as, for instance, in the phrase sr^o; nvoi uvm, to be of advantage to any one. 
See Herod, i. 75, Thucyd. iii. 18, iv. 220. It occurs with this case once only 
throughout the New Testament, in Acts xxvii. 34, ravro ya^ -r^os t5?? vf^tri^as ffurn- 
^tas Ixu^x^i. (2.) With a dative it signifies at or near ; as in John xviii. 16, j/Vtjj- 
*u ^^o; rn ^vpa,. XX. 12, Ssa^e? ^vo ayyiXovs, 'iva, ^^og tv »i<pciX^, xai tva ^r^os roTg 
'^offiv. Rev. i. 13, 'rt^iit,ufffjt,Uov vrfos toIs ftagroli Zjuvnt %^yo'>jv. Compare Xen. Cyr, 
ii. 4. 17, Polyb. i. 50. 1. It follows a verb of motion in Luke xix. 37, lyyi^ovres 3t 
avrov ij}ri T^of rn »a.ra(iaru rov o^ovg. Perhaps it should be rendered, As he drew 
near the city, being at the foot of the mount. Another reading is rhv xarcc(iKiriv. 
(3.) The primary import of -r^os appears in its construction with an accusative ; as 
in Matt. iii. 5, i^tToptviro -r^os oclrov. John xx. 10, ocxnXBov -^r^os lauTovi, to their own 
homes, 1 Thess. ii. 6, Ik^ovrog T^h ^^a? a.<p' vf^uv. In its various secondary appli- 
cations this directional meaning is easily apparent, as when it follows verbs of speak- 
ing, praying, promising, consenting^ contending, &c. Thus in Matt. iii. 15, sTirs 9rpos 
avrov. Mark iv. 41, sXiyav ?r^oj aXX-nkovs. viii. 16, 'hnXoyiZ,ovro ^^og aWriXovg. Luke 
i. 73, ufjLotri !r^«; ^Afi^axfA rov ^kti^x hfAuv. Xviii. 7, (ioavruv -rpog avrov. John V. 45, 
xarvyoor,trat vfAuv 9r^os rov 9rars^a, Acts viii. 24, h^^nn v^os rov xv^iov. X\U 21, I^tj- 
fAYiyo^ii -r^os avrovg. xxiii. 22, ravr'a ivi(pavitras T^og fjci. It also designates the end 
or object towards which an action is directed ; as in Acts iii. 10. o ^^og rh ixsn/^oa-v- 
vr>v xa^rifAivog, 1 Cor. X. 11, \y^a,(^n '^T^og vov^ieriav hfJt-uv. That which is of concern 
or importance to any one is so indicated; as in the expression, rl T^og fj/Aag -, what is 
that to us ? See Matt, xxvii. 4, John xxi. 22, 23 ; and compare Polyb. v. 36. 8, Diod. 
Sic. i. 72. Hence such periphrases as those in Luke xix. 32, ra -r^og u^vvnv, things 
which tend to peace, i. e. peace itself. Acts xxviii. 10, ra v^og rhv %gs/ay, necessaries. 
After substantives and adjectives it is constantly used in its appropriate signification; 
as in Luke xxiii. 12, h Ix^Z^ ovrig <r^og lavrovg. John iv. 35, Xtvxat t^o; Si^itr/u.ov. 
xi. 4, aff^ivua ^^og Bdvarov^ Add Acts ix. 2, xiii. 31, xvii. 15, xxiv. 16, Rom. iv. 2, 
V. 1, 1 Cor. vi. 1, 2 Cor. vii. 4. In some of these places the preposition may bo 
rendered in re»;)ec/ /o ; and it has a comparative import in Rom. viii. 18, ovx a^ia 
ra ^a^rifjt,ara rov vuv xai^ov t^og rhv fiiXXovffav "^o^av a-roxaXvip^yivat ug hf^ag. Compare 
Xen. Anab. iv. 5. 21, vii. 7. 24, Mem. i. 2. 52, Plat. Hipp. M. 2. It also some- 
times implies a motive, as in Matt. xix. 8, '^r^og rhv irxXn^oxa^^iav t>/u,uv, with reference 
to, or because of, your hardness of heart. In definitions of time it signifies towards 
as in Luke xxiv. 29, T^og U-ri^av la-n. A period of short duration is indicated by 
the phrase vr^og xat^ov, or -^r^og u^av, which occurs in Luke viii. 13, John v. 13, Gal. 
ii. 5, et alibi. There are occasional instances in which -r^cg is found with an accu- 

1 Winer, h\ 51, b. 52, d. 53, g. Alt, § 81, 3. Heindorf ad Plat. Phad. p. 216. 
Schajfer ad Dion. Hal. p. 117. 


sative after verbs implying rest ; but the idea of motion is generally, though not 
always, included; as in Matt. iii. 10, >j}yi 5s xa.) h a,^lvv\ -r^os rhv pt^av ruv Wivl^uv ztirai. 
Compare Matt. xiii. 56, xxvi. 18, 55, Mark iv. 1, ix. 10, Luke xxii. 56, Acts v. 11, 

1 Cor. xvi. 6, 7, 10, and elsewhere. So Diod. Sic. i. 77, Diog. L. i. 37. ^ 

Obs. 4. Although several of the prepositions, in their primary significations, 
express ideas not very distinct from each other ; still the difference is sufficiently 
perceptible to render the investigation of their various relations a desirable pursuit. 
Thus the four prepositions, which more directly express the general idea of motion 
from a place, uto, Ik, <!tc6^ei, and v^o, and which are consequently constructed with 
a genitive, exhibit that idea in different points of connexion. It has been seen 
that ccTTo should mark the separation of one object from another upon which it lay, 
or with which it was in contact j whereas «» denotes egress from within, <ra^a 
removal from a near proximity, and vtto erection from beneath. A nearer or less 
intimate union has also been shown to call for the use of fjcira and o-«v respectively. 
It is not to be imagined however that these niceties were always accurately 
observed, and, from the peculiar position and character of the New Testament 
writers, it might be expected that they would not only multiply the use of preposi- 
tions with a view to ensure perspicuity of expression, but employ them without 
any strict regard to their more intricate shades of meaning, more especially the 
derived ones. The minute distinction between ^^1$ and tU is constantly over- 
looked by the best writers; and they are actually interchanged in Philem. 5, 
axovav ffov tyi^ ayd'^r\v xa) rhv ^iffrtv, 9iv txus W^of fov xv^tov 'ifja-ovv, xai us ^ecvrag fovs 
ay'iovs' See also 1 Thess. ii. 6 ; and compare Pausan. vii. 6. 1, Arrian. Alex. ii. 18, 
Diod. Sic. V. 30. Little, therefore, will it excite surprise, that different prepositions 
are employed by different writers in the same sense. Thus 1-^1 rx o'^v in Matt. 
xxiv. 16, is parallel with sis ra o^>j in Mark xiii. 14: and al^a tre^i iraXX^v Ix^v- 
vofjiivov in Matt. xxvi. 28, with to ^onn^iov <ro v^ip vfiuy ix^wofitvov. Sometimes, 
again, the same preposition is employed, but with a different case. Thus in Matt, 
xxiv. 2, ov fxh a(piByi uh kt%s i'r) Xt^ov, which is in Mark xiii. 2, IcrJ Xi^m. See also 
Rev. xiv. 9 ; and compare Gen. xlix. 26, Exod. viii. 3, xii. 7, LXX, Diog. L. ii. 8. 4. 
Nor, indeed, is it always material which case is employed. In the above example, 
for instance, both Wi XiBm and l-pr) xlBov are equally correct ; but the idea, which 
should properly be presented to the mind by the former is that of one stone /t/ing at 
rest upon another, whereas the latter suggests the notion of one stone placed vpon 

Obs. 5. The adverbial use of prepositions in the New Testament is very rare. 
It has already been seen that ccva is once so used ; besides which another example 
occurs in 2 Cor. xi. 23, haxovoi X^ia-rov tWi ; v-^i^ lyu. To complete the sense, 
however, "hiaxovovs may be considered as understood. Here also it may be remarked 
that prepositions are often used before adverbs as if they were nouns, or combined 
with them into one word, so as to regulate or qualify their import. Thus we have 
in Matt. iv. 17, uto ron. v. 32, ^a^sxros. xxiii. 39, kt'' a^rt. Acts x. 16, l^i r^l;. 
xxviii. 23, a?ro ?rg<Mj". Rom. vi. 10, Ifu-^ra^. 2 Cor. viii. 10, aVo ^i^va-i. xi.5, vtso xiav. 

2 Pet. ii. 3, 'ix-ruXai. So in 1 Sam. xii. 20, LXX, a^o oTtir^sv. See also Matt. xvi. 
21, xxvi. 64, John i. 52, Acts xxvi. 29, 2 Cor. ix. 2, xii. 11, 2 Pet. iii. 5. Of the 
same nature are 'ius a^n in Matt. xi. 12, and a^a -rpui in Matt, xx, 1. Such ex- 
pressions, however, are rarely met with, except in the later Greek. An adverbial 
import is also frequently annexed to a preposition with its case. Several examples 
have been already given in the preceding sections ; to which may be added Matt. 

1 Winer, § 51, f. 52, e. 53, h. Alt, § 81. 5. Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 10. Wetstein 
on Acts xxvii. 34. Passov. Lex. in v. 

2 Winer, § 54. 1, 2, 3. 


XXvi. 42, 44, IX, h.VTs^ov, Ik v^irov. Acts xix. 20, xara Kpoiro;. Rom. vii. 13, «aS' 
vcrt^fieXvv. 2 Cor. viii. 13, t| ]croTfiroi. Epli. iii. 20, v-ri^ U trs^tiftretj (which also comes 
iiuder the preceding examples.) 1 Thess. iii. 5, tig xtvov. Heb. vii. 12, s| avayx»jj.* 
Obt, 6, In composition with verbs, prepositions are always used adverbially, so as 
to qualify in some sort the meaning of the simple verb, by the addition of some 
circumstances of time, place, order, intensity, or otherwise. These various relations 
and modifications are, or ought to be, explained in the Lexicon. With respect to the 
government of compound verbs, it is to be observed that they are frequently followed 
by the case required by the preposition with which they are compounded. Thus a 
genitive is put after verbs compounded with d-ro and \». Matt. x. 14, i^i^x^f^^^o* "^^s 
oixi'as. Luke xiii. 12, aTokiXvo'ai tyu aVSsvs/a? trov. After verbs compounded with 
l-r), Tpost and vvv, a dative is put ; as in Matt, xix, 5, T^ofKoXXn^r^ffirai rri ywaixi. 
Mark xiv. 31, a-uvccTroB^avuv <roi. Luke i. 35, Wiffxiuffu trot. xv. 2, o-wnr^ht avroTs. 
Those compounded with ^t^) take an accusative : as in Matt. iv. 23, motTiytv okn^ 
ryjv TaXtXatav, Luke ii. 9, ^i^n\ecff4'tv aurovs. Sometimes the preposition is repeated 
before the governed noun, particularly a-ro, s<V, ix, l-x)^ and ?r^af. Matt. vii. 23, a-ro- 
^ta^uri u<r' ifiov. viii. 5, UffikS^ovTi ti; K/fpri^vaoufz,. XXVi. 39, ittfTiv i!T< <T^otraj'Tov, 
Mark X. 7, 'pr^oirxo\Xrt^:n<rira,i ?r^of rnv yvvalxa. ahrou. xiv. 43, •^a^uyivirui 'zra^a, tmv 
a^X^tficov. Luke i. 76, 'r^oto^iurri ve^o -Tr^oira^ov avrov, vi. 1, ^ta^o^iVia-B-at ha, rav ifxa- 
ftfiuv, Col. ii. 13, ffuvi^uo^oiria-t trvv alrZ, Instead of repeating the s&vae preposition, 
another of similar import is often employed ; as in 3Iatt. vii. 4, uipa ixfodXu to 
xd^(pos ci^o rod oipBaX/iov. xiv. 19, dvoi(iXi'4'at lU rov eu^avov, Xvii. 3, ^gr' ayraw o-wX- 
XaXtfuvTif. Mark iii. 13, dvafieiivtt us to ooog. XV. 46, T^oirtxvktg-i XiBov W) tvv Bv^av. 
See also Luke vi. 34, xix. 4, John xv. 26, Acts xvii. 23, 1 Cor. xvi. 7, 2 Cor. viii. 
18, Phil. i. 24, 1 Tim. i. 3, 1 Pet. iii. 11. It will be readily observable, however, 
that these different constructions are not always equivalent. Some of them may 
indeed be regarded as fixed idioms ; as, for instance, that of Ixt/We/ with a simple 
genitive, and of us after verbs compounded with that preposition. The single 
exception in Acts xvii. 2, is pecuMar. It sometimes even happens that a construc- 
tion opposite to that indicated by the verb may be necessary ; either with or without 
a preposition. Thus in Mark iii. 16, avifit] d-ro rod l/^ctro;, Luke x. 11, tov xovio^rov 
d'7fofji.u(r(rofji.iBa. v(jt,7v. Acts xiii. 4, d-ri'xXtvffav lU rhv Kvtt^ov. See also Luke ix. 54, 
John vi. 31, Acts xiv. 26, xx. 15, xxvii. 1, Rom. vi. 2, 10, Gal. ii. 19. In such 
cases the direct object of the verb is wanting; but it is sometimes expressed; as 
in Luke ii. 4, dvi^t} d^ro rrn TaXikaius us r/iv 'lov^alav. Sometimes the import of the 
preposition is sunk, and the compound governs the case of the simple verb ; as in 
2 Cor. xi. 33, l^i(ptjyov ras x^''^i"-i (^""rov. Compare Luke ix. 34, Acts xvi. 4.* 

Obs, 7. A preposition is sometimes separated from its case ; but chiefly by the 
particle Vt. Thus in Matt. iii. 1, ev Ti t»7s ^fcipaig Ixsivats, Luke i. 24, /Aird Ss Tauras 
Tus vfAt^aS' 

Obs. 8. It is usual to repeat the preposition before two or more nouns in the 
same case, when a distinct idea is expressed by each ; as in Luke xxiv. 27, d^^dfjbtvos 
d-ro Muffias xk) d-ro •rdvrw/ tuv ^^ofriruv. It is the same where foilr terms are 
united in two bands ; as in Luke xiii. 29, ri^oviriv d-ro dvaToXuv xcCi ^vfffAuv, xa) d<ro 
(ioppei xtt.) v'oTov. More particularly when xa) is repeated with each noun, or when 
Ti xBti couples them ; as in Acts xxvi. 29, xa.) Iv oxlyu xai h 'XoXXZ. Compare 
Aristot. Eth. Nicom. iv. 1, vii. 4, Diod. Sic. xix. 86, xx. 15, Pausan. iv. 8. 2. Also 

^ Winer, § 54. Obss. 1,2. and § 55. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 83, 8. Lobeck ad Phryn. 
pp. 45. sqq. Sturz. de Dial. Maced. et Alexandr. pp. 209 sqcj. 

* Winer, § 56. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 75. Tittmann de vi Praepp. in verb. comp. in 
N. T. and Van Voorst de usu verb, cum praopp. comp. in N. T. passim. Stallbaura 
ad Plat. Gorg. p. 154. Bruiick. ad Aristoph. Nub. 987. 


when connected by the disjunctive particles vi or aXXL Acts viii. 34, Vsgi tavrou, 
VI ^(^) irspov Tivos ', Rom. iv. 10, «t&;j ovv .iXoyitr^ri'j iv <;n^iTO/u.yi ovrt, ri Iv ccK^ofiva'ria'y 
ouK Iv -Ti^iTof^^, dkx' iv dx^ofiuffrla. See also 1 Cor. xiv. 6, 2 Cor. ix. 7, Eph. vi. 12, 
1 Thess. i. 5, 8 ; and compare Pansan. vii. 10. 1, Alciphr. i. 31. At the same time 
the rule is not strictly followed ; but, where the objects are peifectly distinct, the 
preposition is not uniformly repeated. Thus in Luke xxi. 26, d-ro-^uxo'vrav dv^^uTrm 
uTTo (pofiou xat ^potr'^oKias tuv i'^i^'x^o/Jt.ivuv t55 olxovfAiv^m John iv. 23, Iv •jrvivfjtart xat 
aXn^iia.. Acts xxvi. 18, i^iffr^i^pai uTo cxorovg iis <p^>, xa) rris l^ovffias rod laroLva, iTri 
rov ©sflv. See also Acts vii. 38; and compare Aristot. Eth. Nic. vii. 11. 1, x. 9. 1, 
Diod. Sic. V. 31, Diog. L. prooem. 6, Strabon. xvi. 778. D, Chrysost. xxiii. p. 277. 
It is also to be observed that the preposition is seldom repeated before a relaiivef 
which is in the same case with its antecedent' Thus in Luke i. 25, h hf^i^ats, aTs tTil- 
hy X. r. X. So Acts xiii. 2, 39. Compare Xen. Anab. v. 7. 17, Conv. iv. 1, Plat. 
Legg. ii. 5, x. 15, xii. 7, Phsed. 21, Pausan. ix. 39. 4, Dim. Hal. i. 69. There are 
a few cases where the preposition is repeated ; as in John iv. 53, b Ixuvi^ ry <L'^a, 
Iv ri iWtv, Acts vii. 4, lU rhv ytiv ravrnVf tig v,v vf/,i7s vvv xaromiiri. So Demosth. adv. 
Timoth. p. 705, B, Iv rols %^ovoij, h olg yiy^a^Tou x. r. X. See also Aristot. H. An, 
V. 30, Diog. L. viii. 2, 11. In the Greek classics the preposition is seldom repeated 
in comparisons with as or a/Ws^, but in the New Testament always ; as in Acts xi. 
15, l-TTi'Tiffi ro ^vivfjua TO aytov Itt' avrovS) uffTtig xat i'lp' rifccis Iv a^X?* ^^ ^^ Rom. v. 
19, 2 Cor, viii. 7, Gal. iii. 16, Philem. 14, Heb. iv. 10. The case in somewhat 
diflferent in Phil, ii, 22, us ^ar^) rixvov, vvv Ifio) ihouXtuo'iv.^ 

Obs. 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. ii. 10, Si' 
ov TO. jrayra, xai 3;' ou rd ^dvrx, on account of whom, and hy whom, are all things. 
Of a like nature is Heb. xi. 29, hi(!>nffav rhv i^u^^kv ^dXafffctv, as ^la. ^v^as. On the 
other hand, a different preposition accompanies the same noun in order to express 
a different relation ; as in Rom. iii. 22, "hixaiotrvvvt Biou S/a -Trlarieas 'invov Xotffrov us 
trdvrccs xa) itt) •xdvr&s rovs ^/ffrtvovraS' xi. 36, 1^ aurou xa) }/ ai/rou, xat us etvrov ra, 
^dvra. Gal. i. 1, ScjeoffroXos ovk ocjt avS-pu^av, oi/Ti h' dv^pu-xov. See also 1 Cor. viii. 
6, xii. 8, 2 Cor. iii. 11, Eph. iv. 6, Col. i. 16, 2 Pet. iii. 5. The same mode of ex- 
pression is also found in classical Greek; particularly in the later writers. Thus in 
Heliod. ii. 25, ?rgo -xavruv xa) W) trao'/y. Philostr. V. Apoll. iii. 25, rohs Itt) ^akdrTvi 
rn kk) iv BciXdrry. Acta Ignat. h' ou xec) /xsS' ov rw ^arp) h Vo^a? 

§ 66. — Of the Negative Particles, (Buttm. § 148.) 

1. Of the two simple negative particles, ov and (^rt, 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, o^ waaoc ooip^, no flesh ; 

^ Winer, § 54, 7. Stallbaum ad Plat. Sympos. p. 104, ad Gorg. pp. 38. 112. 
247. Ast ad Plat. Legg. ii. 5. Schffiier ad Dion, de Comp. v. p. 325, Melet. p. 124. 
Herm. ad Vig. p. 854. 

2 Winer, 6 54. 1, 6. 



Luke XV. 13, /xet' oh 'jroWais r^ixspoLs, after a few days ; 
xxi. 9, ovx. zv'bicos, at a distant period ; Acts xvii. 4, 12, 
ovK okiyoi, many ; xix. 35, ou yivuaKEi, is ignorant ; xx. 
12, ov ixiT^lcosy exceedingly; Rom. i. 13, otJ ^aXw, lam 
unwilling. See also Gal. iv. 27, Eph. v. 4, Hcb. xi. 
35, 1 Pet. i. 8, et alibi. Here also belongs the citation 
from Deut. xxxii. 21, in Rom. x. 19, lyoo 'Koc.Q^aiC^rikuGca 
vyJas lit ovx. E^vsi. Compare Rom. ix. 25, 1 Pet. ii. 10. 

2. In propositions, where any thing is directly denied; 
as in Matt. v. 16, ovk riX^ov xara\va-xi. xiii. 28, ^iXsif 
ovy awsXS'ovTss- avXKs^cofxsv avrd. ; o ^s £(p73, Ov. Xxi. 27, 
^Tttov, ovy. oCBccyi^y. John i. 21, ripur'naoLv avrov, 'Hx/ar gf 
(TV', xat Xeyej, Oi^'x B\y^i. 'O 7rpo<^rirr]s sT au ; xa\ dTrExpi^n, 
Ov. This is the case, where the negation is positive, 
even in conditional sentences ; as in 1 Cor. ii. 8, si yoiq 
eyvcucroiVj ovk oiv rov xvpiov rvis ^o^ns hravqcoatxv. 

3. In the sermo obliquus, and when on is used with a finite 
verb;, as after verbs implying knowledge, belief, &c., ov 
is still used, where the statement involves a direct 
negation ; as in Matt. xvi. 11, irous ov vo^tn, ori ov in^X 
aprov elTTov vfjuv ; Luke viii. 47, l^ova-ac ^s ^ yvvh on ovx, 
fXaS's. John iv. 17, xolKus eT7ra.S, on av^poc oux ^i%oo. ix. 
31, oI'^a/UiEV on txfxocqrcoKuv o 0£O5- ovx dxovst. Acts xxvi. 
26, Xacv^oivEiv yap avrov n rovrcov ov Trsi^oixaci ov^iv. The 
usage, however, in these cases is somewhat arbitrary ; 
since the proposition may generally be treated as a 
mental conception. Thus in Acts xxv. 24, sTrifiooovrcs 

fjt^Yi ^stv ^riv avTov (xrixen. 

2. On the other hand, fj^rj is used in all independent sen- 
tences, containing a wish, jjrohibition, petition, or the like, 
with an imperative, conjunctive, or optative. Thus in Matt, 
i. 20, fX'h (^o^vihris. V. 17, /x-^ vofj-iainrs on ^x9-ov xarxXvcron rov 
v6iJ,ov. vi. 19, (Jt^T) S^ajdatz/Ji^ers vfxXy ^na-acv^ovf eirl t^s yr^s. Mark 
xi. 14, f/.'/iXETt EX GOV slf rov aicovcf (AnleU xocqTTov (paiyot. Luke xx. 
16, fATi ysyotro. Acts i. 20, /xtj sarcfj o xxroixuv ev avrr]. Rom. xiv. 
16, ptrJ) ^\xa-(py]fjt.sia^co ovv vixcuv ro dy»^6v. Sometimes the verb 
is not expressed, as in John xiii. 9, Kupie, (Mrt rom ttoIocs ixov 
pcovov, scil. ^/i-^Tis. 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. 

Obt. 1. The distinction between ou and ^^, and the conditional import of the 
latter, will readily appear from the following examples : Mark xii. 14, 'iliffri xhirov 


Kala-ei^i ^ouvect, veil; IZfiiv, vi fAn^oJfjt,iv', where the first clause puts the question of 
tribute in a positive^ and the latter in a speculative form. John iii. 18, h 'TritfTivuv 
SIS avrov oh x^ivirar o Ti f/,f) -rKTrivuv i^ln xiKotrat, ort [Jt.n •^I'^rlixriVKiv x. r. X. Here eu 
K^inrai simply denies the believer's liability to condemnation ; whereas o //,*> Tiffnvcov 
indicates a supposed, not a definite, individual, and fjtM <rir'KriiVKii refers to the 
assumed cause of his condemnation. At the same time ol •jri-rlffTivKiv would have 
been equally correct; since, admitting the supposed fact to be true, the cause 
might be positively stated, and so it is in 1 John v. 10, o fjcn 'Xitrriuut tm Qsu, ■^tvffrnv 
^i'Toitjxiv at/Tov, on oh TtTTiffTiVKiv k. r. X. The two particles are frequently thus united 
in the later writers, and not always with the distinction accurately marked . See 
Lucian. Tyran. 15, D. M. xvi. 2, Adv. indoct. 5, Strabo iii. 138, xv. 712, Plu- 
tarch. Apopth. p. 183, Sext. Empir. Hypotyp. iii. 1, 2, Adv. Math. i. 3, 68, ii. 60, 
Himer. Orat. xxiii. 18, Agath. ii. 23, Joseph. Ant, xvi. 9. 3. 

3. Since a conception of the mind is implied in the use of 
the particle /cat), it is properly found in the following construc- 
tions :^ — 

a. After the causal particles 'hoc, ottcos, &c. Matt. vi. 18^ 

oTtus fJiYi (pacvr]^ x. t. X. Acts XX. 16, OTTCO^ [xr^ ysvriToii ocvru) 
X^ovorpi^mai. Rom. vii. 25, Tva ixri ^re Traq sacuroXf (pq6vt(Aoi. 
XV. 20, 7va fj^rt ETT aXkorpiov ^siJ^iKiov o'iko^oixcu. 2 Cor. iii. 5, 
aa-TE (jiY] ^uma^xi k. t. X. See also Luke viii. 10, 1 Cor. 
i. 17, ii. 5, iv. 6, 2 Cor. ii. 3, 5, 11, iv. 7, et alibi. Of 
IJ.YI, after verbs of fearing, see § 56. 2. Obs. 5. 

b. As a simple interrogative particle, where a negative 
reply is anticipated ; as in Matt. vii. 9, ixvi Xl%v kiii^cua-Bi 
aura) ; Luke xvii. 9, f/.vi xacpiv g^ei rco ^ov\a) ekbivco ; ou 
^oKoij. 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. 1. 
Where an affirmative reply is expected, ov or ouki is 
used ; as in Matt. vii. 22, ou rco aco ovofji^Qcn 7rqoE(pnr£u- 
aa/A£v; Add Matt. V. 26, xiii. 27, Luke xii. 6, James 
ii. 5. Sometimes ou is found, where fj.^ might perhaps 
be expected ; as in Acts xxi. 38. So also in Luke xvii. 
18, which should doubtless be read interrogatively. Both 
particles have their appropriate import in Luke vi. 39, 
fA-nTi ^vvccrcci rv<pXof rv(p'Kov o^'nyETv ; ou'/J df/^f^oTEpoi eU /So- 
S-fvov TTsa-ovvToci. By ou fj.v] the negative is strengthened, 
and involves in fact an energetic affirmative; as in Luke 
xviii. 1 , ^s ©SOS- ou fAYi itoiriOEi rriv ek^Utxjiv touv ekKex-Tuv 
aurou; John xviii. 11, to itorrnpiov, o^b^coks ixoi h Tro^Trip, 
ou fjiYi TTtoj auTo; Compare Matt. xxvi. 29. When fxri ou 

' Winer, §§ 59, 1—5. 61, 3. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 83, 1. 84, 2. Anton. Progr. de 
discrim. partt. oi> et /x>j. Schaefer. Melet. Cr. pp. 71. 91. Stallbaum ad Plat. 
Phaed. pp. 43. 144. liermaua. ad Soph. CEd. T. 5(i8. Aj. 76. Schaefer ad Demosth. 
in div. loc, Fritzsche ad Matt. xxvi. 42. Passov. Lex. iu vv ov et (/.ri. 


are used, the former alone is interrogative, and the 
latter belongs to the verb; as in Horn. x. 18, 19, /xtj 
OVA rjKou(Ta,y ; iJ^vi oun 'lyvcu ^lo'qocn'k', Add 1 Cor. ix. 4, 5, 
xi. 22 ; and compare Judg. xiv. 3, Jerem. viii. 4, LXX, 
Ignat. Ep. ad Trail. 5. 

c. After the conditional particles si, loiv, whence el /tx,'^, 
except. Thus in Matt. v. 20, lav peri TrepiaasudYt w ^ixato- 
(jvvn vyLwv X. T. X. Mark vi. 5, el /A'^ oXiyois appojarois 
£7rt3"£i$- ras %eT§as". Luke ix. 13, ovx. slatv ^/xTv vcXziov ^ 
TTEvrs aproi xat ^vo /p^S'Z'ss-, el fJLinrt TTopsv^ivrsf dyopd^ajfjiEV. 
John XV. 24, e! rd egya fxri eTToima, Compare Mark xii. 
19, John XV. 4, 2 Cor. xiii. 5, Gal. i. 7, James ii. 17. 
Here also belongs the elliptical phrase el ^e /xo^ye. 
Matt. ix. 17, oy^e ^cxXKovGiv ofvov vsov els- daxovs TTokociovs' 
ei II /mriye, x. r. X. Add Matt. vi. 1, Luke x. 6, xiii. 9, 
xiv. 32, John xiv. 11, Kev. ii. 5. It is not, however, to 
be denied that o^ is very frequently found after e/. But 
it will be seen that, in such cases, the two particles have 
no connexion, and ov either coalesces with the 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, el 
oux. iyevv^S'a), if he were unborn ; 42, e! ov ^^'arcct, if it is 
impossible ; John v. 47, el oJ ^io-reiJeTe, if ye disbelieve. 
When it combines with the whole clause, it is not a 
condition which is represented by et, but a positive 
denial or exception indicated by ov. Thus in Luke xi. 
8, Et xal ov ^cuasi ocuto) dvarsrocs, though he will not rise up 
to give him; 1 Cor. ix. 2, el oiXkois ovx. el/xt dTrouroKof, 
dXKd ys vyuy s\(ai. To one or other of the above cases 
may also be referred Luke xii. 26, 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. 5, ^sop. F. 
vii. 4, Aristid. Orat. i. 56. 

d. After relatives used in a conditional or indefinite sense, 
and with the article, when, with its adjective or par- 
ticiple, it may be resolved by a relative. Thus in Matt. 

X. 28, /x-^ ^o/3io9">9Tc duo rcuv TYiV ^l^v^rtv y^'Ti ^vvacfxivco:/ dito- 
xreTvat. xi. 6, (XQixdpios IcrriVj bV sdv ixrt (jKocv^ocXia^Yi iv epco/. 
xii. 30, 6 lATo avvdyooy /xer' e/utoi), aKopTTi^si. Mark vi. 11, 


oaoi av tx'h ^E^wvrai vi^as, x. r. X. John V. 23, o ixri ri/xouv 
Tov uVoVj ov rifMgc rov ^ccr'spx. Col. ii. 18, a /xt? eo/^axev e/x/Sa- 
TEvcuv. Tit. i. 1 1, ^t^acrxovTSf a /xoi ^eu So with the parti- 
ciple only ; as in Matt. ix. 36, 9r§6/3ara /a-^ gj^ovra TroifMevoc. 
Compare Matt. iii. 10, xiii. 19, xviii. 13, xxii. 24^ xxv. 
29, Mark xi. 23, Luke viii. 18, ix. 5, x. 10, John xii. 48, 
XV. 2, Acts iii. 23, Eom. xiv. 3, 1 Cor. vii. 29, Col. i. 

23, 2 Thess. i. 8, 2 Pet. i. 9, Rev. iii. 15. It frequently 
happens, however, that, to maintain a negative assertion 
with greater assurance, oD is employed in a relative 
sentence. Thus in Matt. x. 26, oiJ^ev yag san xexaXf/x- 
fjiivov, oux. oc7roxa\v(p^Yi<ysrxi' xal xquTrroy o ov yvcoa^-ncfsrai. 
See also Luke xxi. 6, Acts xix. 35, 1 Cor. iv. 7, Heb. 
xii. 7. So Lucian, Sacrif. 1, oux, of^a, s'/ ris ovtm yca,rri(^rts 
sari, oans ov yz'Ka.G^ra.i. 

e. With participles in a conditional sense ; as in Luke xi. 

24, ptrj svplffytovj if he finds none ; John vii. 15, vajs ovtos 
ypckfJLfxccToc ol^E, iJiTJ /xs/xaS'y5xo(/f ; though he has never 
learnt; (So Philostr. ApoU. iii. 23, ypoi(psi fjt.'h fxac^uv 
ypd/Xf/^acTSt.^ 1 Cor. X. 33, Ka,ya> iithircc "^aaiv d^£<, ixr, 
^nruv TO EfMocvTov (rt//x(p6/)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, ov with participles denies simply and uncon- 
ditionallyy whether they depend upon the preceding 
verb, or are used absolutely. Thus in Acts vii. 5, qvk 
OVTOS" ccvrcb r'syivov. 1 Cor. iv. 14, ovk evt^sttcov vfxai^ y^x(pcj 
ravrcc. Add Gal. iv. 27, Phil. iii. 3, Col. ii. 19, Heb. xi. 
35, 1 Pet. ii. 10; and compare Strab. xvii. pp. 796. 822, 
Diod. Sic. xix. 97, Philostr. Apoll. vii. 32, ^han V. H. 
X. 11, Lucian. Philos. 5, M. Peregr. 34. 

f, "With an infinitive, when dependent on another verb, 
or employed substantively with or without the article. 
Thus in Matt. v. 34, lyu ^e "Kiyu vfMV fxri o^Aoaoti oKms. 
xiii. 5, ^la, TO ixr^ 'i%Eiy ^ai^Of y^s. Xxii. 23, 61 XEyovrss /m-tq 
efvat dvdaroccriv. Acts iv. 20, ov ^vvdfJiE^a yxp vi[XEi^, a 
Ei'Joptsv xaci 'TiKovffQciJiEV, fxr] XaXc7v. Rom. xi. 8, 6<p^xXijiovs 
rov ptTi ^XsVstv, xoci corac rov fxin dx.ouEiv. xiv. 21, xaXoy to 
IxYi (payETv xpioc, that is, it is well if one never eats 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, xv. 1, 


1 Cor. V. 9, vii. 1, ix. 18, 2 Cor. ii. 1, I Thess. ii. 9 

2 Thess. ii. 2, iii. 8, James iv. 2. 

Obs. 2. It is perhaps more difficult to explain the occasional use of /a^ for ol, than 
that of ol for fin. In a fev^r passages the latter occurs where the negative is so 
l)lainly direct, that the former would rather be expected : as in Acts ix. 9, h h/Jbi^as 
ToiTs ftrts^Xiiruv, Rom. i. 18, 'jcotuy toc /Mti ku^yikovtu. (Compare Kph. v. 3.) 1 Tim. v. 
13, ra fth liavTu. Probably the continual occurrence of this negative, especially with 
participles, 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, l^iXi^aro o Qio; ra fi,h 
ovra, 'IvK ra ovtoc, Kccraoyriffvi' 2 Cor. iii. 14, ro oclro xa.'KviJLiJi.a. f^ivsi, fi*i uvaxaXvrTofjctvov. 
iv. IS, fih (TKOTouvruv '/;,uuv to, fiXi^opbtvci, aXXx to, f^h (ikt^ofjitva. vi, 9, uig TTai^ivo/jiivoi, 
xat fjLvt Sav£CTo6//.iyoi. (Compare ch. iv. 8, 9.) An emphasis seems to lie in the 
turn of expression in 2 Cor. v. 21, rov yuo fjuh yvovra uf/.K^Ttciv vvr\^ hf*,uv afia^rtccv 
i-rar/jtriv, who catinot be supposed to have known sin ; for rov eh yvovra, would imply 
nothing more than rov iyvoovrx. Compare Rom. iv. 19. Both negatives are united 
in 1 Pet. i. 8, ov oIk u'^ons aya<rurs' u; ov, d^rt f/.yi o^eavns, eiXku, •^iffrivovris, ocyaX- 
Xiaff^t. For this change in the expression there is no apparent cause ; but it has 
an exact parallel in Lucian. adv. indoct. 5. xu^ipvav evx, ulus xxi 'nr-rtvuv, yjh 


Obi. 3. Two negatives sometimes destroy each other ; as in Acts iv. 20, oi 
IvvoifiiB^ec. ya,^ hfiii;, a ti%/u,sv xut rixovtretfjAv, fm >.xXuv, we are not able not to declare, 
i. e. we must declare. Here the negatives belong to difTerent verbs ; and it happens 
much more frequently, that two negatives, joined to the same verb, render the 
negative stronger. Thus in Mark v. 37, ovk aip)j»iv ollivoi, avru ffuvaxoXou^^a'ai. 
John XV. 5, x'^f'i '^/^"^ "^ ^tjva<r!^i •xoiuv ovV.v. See also Mark i. 43, xv. 4, Luke iv. 2, 
XX. 40, John vi. G3, Acts viii. 39, xxv. 24, Rom. xiii. 8, 1 Cor. vi. 10, viii. 2, 2 Cor. 
xi. 8. The expression is sometimes yet further strengthened by an accumulation of 
negatives ; as in Luke xxiii, 53, oZ obx h olliTTM ol^ui xuf^tvos,^ Of the construction 
of ou f/,yi, see above § 53, 5. 

§ 67. — Of some other particles. (Buttm. § 149.) 

*n$, a.?, like, is a particle of resemblance, answering to ovrus, so ; 
for which, however, it is never substituted, as some have 
supposed. The sense must be thus filled up in Mark xiii. 
34, (ourcuf EOTiv jcQLiqos), ojs av^qouTTOf n. T. 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 knowing, it is the same with on, that ; as in Luke 
viii, 47, d.Ti'hyyci\zy ocurco, us laS'yj 7racp<xy(^p'ri(xcx. Acts x. 28, 
vij^eTs £7rl(Troc(j^s ojs aS^c'/unrov kari x. r. X. With superlatives 
it expresses intensity, as in Acts xvii. 15, us ri.x^'^^oc, as 
quickly as possible ; and with adjectives, admiration; as 
in Rom. x. 15, ws- upouoi ol tto^ej- ruy &vQcyycXi^o(ji.ivcoy eigrjvoQv. 

» Winer, 6 59, 8. Alt, § 83, 3. Ast ad Plat. Polit. p. 541. Hermann, ad Viger. 
p. 542. 


Add Rom. xi. 33, 1 Thess. ii. 10; and compare Cebet. 
Tab. iv. 6. With numerals it signifies about ; as in Mark 
V. 13, ojs ^lax^Xioi, about or nearly two thousand. See also 
Mark viii. 9, John i. 40, vi. 19, xxi. 8, Acts i. 15, v. 7, 
xiii. 18, 20 ; and compare Euth i. 4, 1 Sam. xi. 1, LXX, 
Polyb. i. 19. 5. 

"Otto;? is much less frequently employed in the New Testa- 
ment, as well as in the later Greek writers, than in those 
of the earlier and purer ages. Its uses are precisely simi- 
lar to those of 7va, and, like that particle, it sometimes in- 
dicates the event ; as in Matt. ii. 23, xiii. 35, et alibi. 
Some refer also Acts xiii. 19 to this head. As an adverb, 
how, it occurs in Luke xxiv. 20. The adverbial sense, 
though possible, is not necessary in Matt. xxii. 15, xxvi. 
59, Mark iii. 6. 

"hxy in order that, properly indicates jo?/r/?, as in Matt. xix. 
13, John xvi. 1, Eph. v. 26, 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 saying, commanding, &c., and other verbs and 
adjectives, which are more properly followed by on. Thus 
in Matt. iv. 3, sItte iva o< X»3o; outoi aproi yeycovrsci. V. 29, 
30, (7u[x(p£^si yoip GOt '^ivoc a/noKfircLi x. t. "K. vii. 12, TrcUvra. ovv 
o(Tcc oiv S'eXTjre iva <7roioj<Jiv vfjJiv x. r. X. viii. 8, ova slixl \k(x,mqs 
'^ivcc fxov vTTo rm arkym ElcEXS'ipr. Luke i. 43, 7ro3"ev /xoi Toyro, 
7va eXS"73 ri iA.rirrt^ tov ycvpiov fxov itpos pes. See also Matt. xii. 
16, xiv. 36, xvi. 20, xviii. 6, 14, Mark ix. 12, Lvike vii. 6, 
John ii. 25, vi. 62, xv. 16. Hence it is sometimes simply 
exegetical ; as in John xvii. 3, ocvtyi ^e karh 7i oiimios ^uri, 7va 
yiyua-auai ai. There are also many passages, in which 7va 
denotes event, result, cofisequence ; as in Matt. i. 22, and 
elsewhere, when a prophecy is mentioned. See also Luke 
xi. 50, John ix. 2, 3, 39, Rom. v. 20, xi. 31, 1 Cor. xi. 15, 
1 Pet. V. 6, 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, although it was cer- 
tainly designed, for example, that a prophecy should 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 be accomplished; 
and the same remark may be applied to the other passages 



above cited.* As ^particle of thne, Iva, occurs in John xii. 
23, xiii. 1, and elsewhere ; and the elliptical form ha. n in 
Matt. ix. 4, xxvii. 46, Luke xiii. 7, Acts iv. 25, 1 Cor. x. 
29. See § 68. 

cuffTSf SO that, with inji7i. chiefly. See § 57. 3. 

oT/, that, is properly used after verbs of saying, knowing, and 
such others as take the accusative with the infinitive in 
Latin. See Matt. ii. 16, v. 5, 1 Cor. v. 6, Heb. viii. 9, 10, 
et passim. An ellipsis of some such verb as T^iycj, oT^a, 
will accordingly explain what is called the relative use of 
ort, and most 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, Rom. ix. 20, xiv. 11, 1 Cor. xi. 15, 1 John iii. 20. 
Another sense assigned to this particle is because, but it 
here depends upon lix 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. 11, 28, John xiv. 22, Acts 
V. 4, 9. In Luke vii. 47, ori riyxTrms 'jroKv indicates the 
sigUy not the cause of the woman's forgiveness. The 
greatness of her love evinced her sense of the great mercy 
she had received. Lastly, on is frequently used in quoting 
the words of another, even when the sermo obliquus is not 
employed ; as in Matt. ii. 23, to p'nbly lia. ruy 9rp(pooTa/v, 
''Orf Na^cu^aTof xX-yjS'TjcreTa:. John i. 20, wfAoKoynaev, "Or} 
ovK elfxi ly&t Q XpiffTos. 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 Epict. Ench. 14.* 

eI, 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, xa) yxp ei hra.vpco'^n e^ da'b&yziacs, dXKoc ^-y] l)C 
^uvacfXEcos @Bov. More frequently, however, we find el xa/, 
though, even though; as in Matt. xxvi. 33, e* xai Tfavref 
aKccy^aXia'^'ria-Qvroci sy col, lyu oI^e'ttote (Txav^aXi(r3"75cro/>ta<. See 

^ Winer, § 57, 6. Fritzche ad Matth. Excurs. i. Lucke's Comment, on John, ii. 
\ 144. Tholuck on John xv. 16, Rom. v. 20. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 85, 4. Hermann. 
[ ad Viger. p. 852. 

' 2 Winer, § 57, 4. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 85, 7. Kuinoel ad Luc. vii. 47, Acts i. 

17. Passov. Lex. in V. er/. Wahl in v. oVa»;. 


also Luke xi. 8, xvii. 2, xviii. 4, Kom. xl. 17, 1 Cor. ix. 2. 
Sometimes it indicates the event, and may be rendered 
tJiat or whether ; as in Mark xv. 44, kh(xviMO(.(TQcv el v,ln rkh- 
yYiXs. John ix. 25, el ufxacqrcoXoi sariv, ouk oJ^x. Also, as an 
interrogative particle it denotes whether. Thus in Matt, 
xii. 10, E7rripcuTin(j(Xv ocvrov Xfyo vres". El e^sgti rois crcx-^^ocji S'e^a- 
TTBVEiy; Luke xiii. 23, el oXlyoi ol (ju^ofMEMoi; 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, xxii. 25, J 
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 si in direct questions is not found in the earlier 
Greek writers.^ 

OIjs. In oaths and solemn assertions, the particle £« has sometimes the force of a 
negative ; as in Mark viii. 12, a/u.riv 'K%yu vfjuv, il ^oBriCtron rri yivia, TaJry trnfjciTov. 
(Compare Matt. xii. 39, xvi. 4, Luke xi. 29.) Heb. iii. 11, iv. 3, us u^ocra. h rn 
cpyvi [Mv, il ilffO.ivffovrat us rijv Kxrd-x'a.vffiv /^ov. This is an Hebraism, arid occurs 
])eut. i. 35, I Sam. iii. 17, 2 Sam. iii. 35, Ps. Ixxxviii. 35, xciv. 11, cxxxii. 44. The 
form is in fact elliptical, and is given in full in Exod. xiv.'16, ^u iyu, il vlo) »j Buyoc- 
ripis ffuB'/iirovrai. Very similar is Aristoph. Equit. 2, lav ^>j «•' lx(f>vyu, ohVi-zon p>tu- 
aoyi.a.1. So in Latin, Cic. Papist. Fam. ix. 15. 7, moriar, si habeo. On the other 
hand, lav /uch is sometimes used in the LXX as an affirmative ; but it is very injudi- 
cious to explain such passages as Mark iv. 22, x. 30, 2 Thess. ii. 3, by this idiom. 
The latter involve an ellipsis, which is readily supplied from the context j and in 
the former, the relative is followed by lav according to common usage.* 

etteI, e92'£»^7]. See § 55. 1. 

£av, >5v, oTav, oTToTav, ETTEiEdv, See § 55. 2. and § 56. 

7j, or, and, after a comparative, than, requires no illustration. 
It is never used for xa/, as some have thought it to be; 
though, in the very nature of things, the employment of 
either 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 1 Cor. xi. 27, 
xal 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 
9j xa», or even, are united; as in Luke xviii. 11, Rom. ii. 
15, 2 Cor. i. 13. In a double question, yi introduces the 
second member, either with or without an interrogative 

* Winer, § 61, 2. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 84. Bornemann. ad Xen. Apol. Socr. 5. p. 
39. Wahl de il et us in N. T. usu. 

2 \Yiner, § 59, «, Obs. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 83, 6. Bos Ellips. Gr. p. 803. Wahl 
Lex. in v. idv. 



particle in the preceding clause. Thus in Luke xx. 4, 

TO l2d.7rTia-f/.oe. 'lojxvvou s'^ oupccvov riv, tj e^ dy^pcoTTcuv ', 1 Cor. 
i. 13, fji^ TlavKo^ sdTacvpco^'/i virlp vixuv, ^ c\s to ovopca YlxuXou 
s^xTTTia-^nrs ; See also Mark iv. 30, Luke xiv. 31, xv. 8, 
XX. 2, Rom. ii. 4, 1 Cor. ix. 5, Gal. i. 10, James iii. 12. 
Where there is only a simple question, the former mem- 
ber may be considered as suppressed; as in Matt. xx. 15, 
^ ovK E^sa-rl (xoi TToirjUQci o ^eXco iv rors" sfxoT^ ; So in Matt. vii. 
9, xii. 29, Rom. vii. 1, xi. 2, 1 Cor. x. 22, xi. 14, 2 Cor. 
xiii. 5. Once only r, is repeated, namely, in 1 Cor. xiv. 36, 
h a.Qp' z5/xa/v 6 Xhyos rot) 0£oi} Vz^y^zv, ^ sts" i^/xSi" ixq^jovs nocrriy' 
TYtazv; Of rjToi, with r, following, there is an example in 
Rom. vi. 16.^ 
Kai, and, has the same uses in the New Testament which ob- 
tain in other writers. Thus it is used, though its con- 
junctive force is still apparent, as a particle of time : — 
Mark xv. 25, ^v ^s aiq» r^irvi, y.oc\ larxvpojaa.\ ocvroy. Add 
Matt. xxvi. 2, 45, Luke v. 17, xix. 43, xxiii. 44, Acts v. 7. 
So Plat. Symp. p. 220. C. '^^03 ^v jU,E(Tr)/x,^§/a, xa*^ h^pcoTtoi 
^(T^a'vovTo. In comparative sentences: — Acts vii. 51, us ol 
'TTaripss vfxcov, xocl vfxsTs, i. e. ovrco xa,i vixst^ sTroiYiaars. See 
also Matt. vi. 10, John vi. 57, xx. 21, and elsewhere; and 
so Thucyd. viii. 1, o/s- s^o^sv ccvrois, kou sttoIouv ra,uTx. In 
questions, where it marks a strong emphasis : — Mark x. 
26, xat TiV ^uvaroci (7a;3'^vai; 2 Cor. ii. 2, xxi rU eariy £u- 
(pqxivcov fxs ; Also before imperatives ; as in Luke xii. 29, 
xal v/j,cTs- per] ^rireTrs I'l (pgcyTjrs, k. t. X. It is frequently ex- 
planatory, and may be rendered even^ namely ; as in the 
expressions, S-soV xal Trocrri^, hcos y.ou a-corvip. See above, 
§ 29. Thus also Matt. xiii. 41, auWs^ouaiv Ttdvroc tx ay.d,\- 
^otXa. xcci rous TTOiovvTx^ rrtv dvofxixv. John X. 12, 6 fj^Lrr^ajrof, 
xacl oun a>v TTolfj^Yiv. In such explanations, however, xocl often 
adds something stronger to what precedes ; as in 1 Cor. 
ii. 2, ov ya.0 sy.pivoc rov Ei^ivcci tI iv z^ptTv, el (xy) 'lina-ovv ^piarov, 
Kou rouTov ia-ravocofxiyov. It has, moreover, the sense of 
aho, likewise ; as in Mark xii. 22, gj^^araj Trx^ruy dTri^avs 
x^i Yi yuvYi. Luke xii. 35, kx{i y.ou Y) xocp^ia. CfJiouy aarai. But, 
besides these ordinary usages of xai, there are others, 
which, though not perhaps wholly unexampled in pure 

^ Winer, § 57, 3. Alt, t^bi supra. Passov. Lex. in voc. w. 



Greelv, seem rather to have originated with the antithetic 
import of the Hebrew \ Thus it frequently signifies but, 

and yet; as in Matt. vi. 26, ra Trsretva ov ffTTEipouinv, ov^e ^spi- 
^ouaiv, xccl TTarrip vixaiv rpi(pEi avra.. xi. \7 , rivX'no-afjt.EV vfjuy, 
Kocl ovy. apy^Yi'yscd^E' i^p7iyYi(JX(/.EV vfjJiv, kou ouk SHOvI/aaS'e. Add 

Matt. i. 25, vii. 26, x. 29, 39, xii. 5, 35, 39, 43, John iii. 
14, 32, viii. 49, ix. 30, xx. 29. On the other hand, it 
may sometimes be rendered 7ior ; as in Matt. x. 26, John 
xii. 40, Kom. ii. 27, 2 Cor. xii. 21, et alibi. Its frequent 
use after iysvaro, it came to pass j is also a Hebraism. See 
Matt. ix. 10, Luke v. 17, vi. 1, viii. 1, Acts v. 7; and com- 
pare Deut. ii. 16, 17, Josh. xvii. 13, Judg. xiii. 20, 1 Sam. 
xiii. 22. 

With respect to the repetition of the copula, the double 
xccl is found in Luke xxii. 33, Kv^is, pcsra aov sroiixos slfxi xat 
sh (puKaycYiv kolI sir 3"avaTov iro^zvza'^a.i. So in John ix. 37, 
Acts xxvi. 29, Rom. xi. 33, et alibi. Instead of which, rs 
is followed by kocI, in Luke ii. 16, Acts xx. 21, et scppias. 
In Acts xxvi. 16, tc is doubled. Sometimes also, xa/ is 
combined with other particles ; but it is only necessary to 
notice xocl ^s, and besides^ which frequently occurs in the 
New Testament with the intervention of one or more 
words between them, as in other writers. Thus in Jolm 
vi. 51, kyco sl/xi ocpros o (^cuV lav rif (pdyri ex rourou tov oiprou, 
(^rj(Tsroci eU tov alcDva* x<x.i o apros ^s, ov hyu ^wctoj, 4) aa^'z, fxou 
ear/v. See also John xv. 27, Acts iii. 24, 2 Pet. i. 5, 1 
John i. 3. In some of these places little or nothing seems 
to be added to the import of aoti alone. ^ 

It is by no means easy to ascertain the precise differ- 
ence which exists between the import and application of 
the two particles xoci and re. In general the former seems 
to connect words or sentences, and nothing more; whereas 
the latter indicates some additional idea, besides that of 
mere conjunction. See Acts xxi. 28, xxii. 8, 28, et alibi. 
This distinction, however, is not based on very satisfactory 

Obs. One of two verbs, which are connected by the copula xa.), may frequently be 
expressed adverbially. Thus in Luke vi. 48, e(rxa.\P= ko.) ifidSvn, for (iuBsu; ia-Ku-^i. 

^ Winer, § 57, 2. Alt, Gram. N. T. ^ 85, 5. Passow, Schleusner, and Eret- 
schneider in v. Gesen. in *). Pott ad 2 Pet. i. 5. 


John viii. 59, ix^v(in *«) I|?xSjv Ik toZ liooZ, he withdrew secrelly. Rom. x. 20, ccro" 
roXftS. Kui Xiyti, speaks out boldly. Col. ii. 5, ;:^a/^(4;v xa.) (ikiTuv, joyfully beholding. 
Two citations from the Old Testament probably belonj^ here : one from Amos ix. 
11, in Acts XV. 16, fura rouirec avecmi-^u ko.) ccvoiKotoLCYiffco t'/iv trxmnv AajSiS rhv •TTi'TTu- 
xvTccv, I will again build up ; and the other from Ps. cxiii. 9, in 2Cor. ix. 9, iffxo^- 
fl-z^fv, (*«') tluxiv Tcli crivtjffi, he hath given abundantly. Indeed the usage, though 
luiquestionably found in Greek writers, is probably to be referred in the New Tes- 
tament to the Hebrew, whence it has frequently passed into the LXX. Thus in 
Judg. xiii. 10, I'Tuxvviv xx) 'il^ocfjt.'.. See also 1 Sam. xvii. 48, xxv. 42, Ps. cvi. 13, 
Jerem. xii. 15, Dan. x. 18. Elsewhere, however, the Hebrew idiom is rendered by 
an adverb ; as in Gen. xxvi. 18, xu) -TroiXiv u^v%i. Compare Gen. xxx. 31, Job xix. 3, 
Ps. xxxiii. 3, Hos. i. 6. The rule does not hold in Matt, xviii. 3, lav fjuh ifToa<^lnri^ 
xut yivrjff^i us Toi 'Xocthia,.^ 

As is an adversative particle, though far less strongly disjunc- 
tive than aXXa, and frequently serving merely as a con- 
necting copula. See Matt. i. 18, v. 31, xxv. 19, 38, Mark 
i. 6, Luke xxiii. 2, Rom. vi. 18, 1 Cor. xv. 1. Hence with 
Kociy after an interval of one or more words, it may be ren- 
dered also ; as in John viii. 17, xv. 27, Acts iii. 24, v. 32, 
2 Pet. i. 5. In pursuing, resuming, illustrating , or modi- 
fying a discourse, ^s 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 els etchers ; though in the latter case ixaXkov II 
is more usual ; as in Matt. xxv. 9. Particular illustra- 
tions of a general proposition are also introduced by this 
particle ; as in Matt, xxiii. 5. Its disjunctive import is 
marked when opposed to ixh, and in such passages as 
Matt. V. 32, xxiii. 11, Acts xi. 17, xii. 9, 1 Cor. vii. 2, 
2 Cor. vi. 14, et scepius. 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 elsewhere; nor a causal import in Mark 
xvi. 8, Luke iv. 38, 1 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 ^£, not only when an opposition, 
but when a mutual relation between two propositions is 
indicated; as in Matt. iii. 11, ix. 37, xiii. 2, Acts xxv. 11, 
ct scepius. Frequently, however, there is no correspond- 
ing ^L Thus in Acts i. 1, rov ixh tt^utov Xoyoy a. r. K. ; 
and this, it may be remarked, is the usual mode in which 

1 Winer, § 58, 4. 5. Alt, § 82, 2. 3. Kuinoel on Luke vi. 48. Glass. Phil. 
Sacr. p. 272, sqq. Vorstius de Hebraism, p. 590. Leusden, p. 115. 
* Winer, ubi supra. 

r o2 


authors refer to what they have previously written. See 
the commencement of each successive book in Xenophon's 
Anabasis. Again, in Acts iii. 21, Sv (Xpiarov) laT oupavov 
fj.h ^i^<x(j^a,i ci,%pi %p6vcov dTTOxocraca-rxaEcus TTckvTcov. Here an 
antithesis, but afterwards, &c., maybe suppressed; and 
a sentence with II may generally in such case be supplied 
by the mind. Compare Acts xix. 4, xxvi. 4, llom. i. 8, 
iii. 2, vii. 12, 1 Cor. xi. 18, 2 Cor. xii. 12, Col. ii. 23, Heb. 
vi. 16, vii. 18. Instead of ^e, an equivalent particle is 
sometimes used after ixsv. Thus xal, in Luke viii. 5, 
sqq. ; re, in Acts xiii. 4; gVctra, in James iii. 17. It 
has been thought that /xevtoi and Vz are opposed to each 
other in James ii. 8, 9. This is very questionable ; since 
/txivToi is elsewhere an adversative particle; as in John 
iv. 27, vii. 13, xii. 42, xx. 5, xxi. 4, et alibi. The particle 
ixlv cannot stand at the beginning of a period ; but the 
compound ptsvouvys is so placed in Luke xi. 28, Rom. ix. 
20, X. 18.^ 
oi^re and /mrlre, ov^l and pcoj^s. The appropriate use of these 
compound particles depends upon the respective nature 
of II and re. Hence ovn and ixrirz may be considered 
merely as connecting negative particles, employed in 
couplets ; but ovll and ptry^a strengthen the negation, so 
that clause rises above clause, or word above word, at 
each successive repetition of the particle. If used alone, 
olill or ixrtTs must be rendered not even, not so much as. 
Thus in Matt. v. 29, Xsyco ^g v(mv, on ov^s SoXo/xo'V Iv irdari 
rr] ^ojv] avTov TTBpis^xk^ro us ev rourcov. In such cases, in- 
deed, a preceding ov or [xri is necessarily implied. Re- 
peated negatives, therefore, are thus regularly arranged: — 
oLVe — ovrs, fxrirz — fxinrs. Matt. vi. 20, ottou ours a-hs ovts 
^puais a.(p(X.)/i(^£i. xi. 18, ^XS'e yap ^Icodwris (xriTs. gcrS'/o^v 
fjiriTG TTivojv. See also Luke xiv. 35, John v. 37, viii. 

19, ix. 3, Acts XV. 10, xxiii. 12, xxiv. 12, xxv. 8, xxvii. 

20, Rom. viii. 38, 39, 1 Cor. xi. 11, 1 Thess. ii. 5, 
Rev. ix. 20. Sometimes ov or (j^yi precedes, so as to 
indicate an entire negation, which is subsequently 
divided into portions ; as in Matt. v. 34, /xrj hfAoa-ai 

o'Xcof, (MviTB Iv ru) ov^ocvo), [XYiTS £v Tri yr}, x. r. X. xii. 32, 

» Winer, § G4, 2. e. Heindoif ad Flat. Phoed. p. 133. Ast ad Legg. p. 230. 


ov>i a(pe3"'3i(TeTat ocvro}, outs ev rourco rci oclcuyL, outs h tco 
pcsXXovTj. So in Luke ix. 3, 1 Tim. i. 7, James v. 12. 
Occasionally also outb or fx-nrs is referred to a simple 
oh or |M,79, which has the import of ovre or (j.-nrs ; as in 
John i. 25, si au ouk ef o ^^laros, ours 'Hx/as-, oute h 
7rpo(py\rns, So in Eph. iv. 27, Rev. v. 4, vii. 1, ix. 20, 
21, XX. 4. 
ou — ov^l, iJ^ri — /xoo^e. Matt. vi. 26, ou aTTEipoua-iv, ov^h ^spi- 
i^ov(Jiv, ouoe avvsiyoutJiv £i$" dTTo'^inKocf. x. 9, fMri xroojyjaS'e 
Xpvaov, perils apyu^ov, fAin^s xxXytov, vt. r. "K. 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. 11, xiv. 21, 2 Cor. iv. 2, Col. 
ii. 21, 1 Tim. i. 4. Sometimes there is no incipient 
ou or /XT), as in Mark viii. 26, /xTj^e z\s rriv xcc^/x^jv slniX- 
S-rir, ixfi^l sIVips- TivX Iv rr^ xai/jiri. There are a few in- 
stances in which oure or fjL-nrs follows ou^s and fjirt^L 
Thus in Acts xxiii. 8, Xoc^^ouxaXoi, Xiyoua-i ixr\ ^1\oli dvx- 
(Tra,aiv, /xa)5a ayyeKov fxrira TTviviJ^oi. In such cases it 
should seem that there are two references ; that of 
fxri^s to /xr/, and that of /xtIte to the second /xri com- 
prised in fxri^E : and the explanation is confirmed by 
the fact that, in the present instance, «/x(p6re§af in the 
next clause evidently indicates only two articles of 
belief, namely, a resurrection, and the existence of 
immaterial spirits, which are subdivided into angels 
and sjnrits. Compare Gal. i. 12, 1 Thess. ii. 3. 
Some passages also occur with ours or pc/jre, where 
ouls or pcoo^s would rather be expected ; as in Mark 
iii. 20, ucm (/.'h cuvaca^oci ccuroui (xinrs aproy (payen/. V. 3, 
xai ourz akuaeaiv ozJ^els" 'h'^ aurov J^(T«i. Luke xii. 
26, gl ouy ours eXux^ttov ^ovocj^s, x. t. X. In 1 Cor. iii. 
2, some manuscripts read ou^e, and the correctness of 
the text may probably be questioned in the generality 
of such cases. Sometimes, however, it seems to be 
immaterial whether ouce or oute, fMvi^z or /jltjts were 
employed. Thus in Matt. xxiv. 20, Trqo'jEux^a^E Ss "vx 
fXYi yivftToti Vi (puyvi u[Acuv x^i/jLuyos, ptoj^e iv aa/S/Saro;. See 

also Matt. xxii. 29, xxv. 13, 2 Pet. i. 8, I John iii. 18; 
and compare Matt. x. 9 with Luke ix. 3. 


Instead of a repetition of ours, the second member 
of the sentence has sometimes an affirmative copula ; 
as in John iv. 11, oiyrs avr'Kni/.a, ex^J$^, xax to (ppioc^ sari 
^oc^v. 3 John 10, ovTS avros' iTTi^E^erat rot/r a^eXcpowi", 
Kocl Toui' ^ovXofxivou^ xcoXevei. Compare Aristot. Rhet.^ 
ii. 16, Lucian. D. M. xiv. 1, Philost. V. Apoll. ii. 24. 
This copula is sometimes to be understood negatively; 
as in James iii. 14, /w^yj xaranayx^^^s ^** •J/ej^^saS'e. See 
also Matt. xiii. 15, Mark iv. 1*2, John xii. 40, Acts 
xxviii. 27, 2 Cor. xii. 21, Gal. iii. 28; and compare 
Diod. Sic. ii. 48, Sext. Emp. adv. Math. ii. 20.^ 
'AxXa is used simply as a disjunctive particle, implying contra- 
distinction or opposition ; and hence it is used in a series 
of questions involving distinct or opposite ideas ; as in 
Matt. xi. 7, t/ £^>)X3"£T£ eIs- t^v Epriixov S'eao-a^rS'ai ; ytaXaiAov 
V7I0 avs^ov (yaXBUofjisvov ; dXka. rl l^73X3"srs l^siv ; ay^pcuTTov Iv 
IXQLkoLKois l/LLocrloi^ rif/.(piE(T(jt.&voy ; (xkXoi t/ s^YiK^sTs \osiv ; Trpo' 
(piOTTiv ; vocl Xsyco vfjfiv, yaxi Trspia-a-orsqov Trqaiprirou. Compare 
Luke xvii. 7, 8, Heb. iii. 16. Hence also its use in intro- 
ducing an objection, or a series of objections ; as in Horn. 
x. 16, sqq., 1 Cor. xv. 35. Compare Xen. Cyrop. i. 3. 11, 
Mem. i. 2. 9. It is found in the conclusion, after condi- 
tional particles, to mark an opposition, or superaddition to 
the subject of a former clause ; as in Rom. vi. 5, el yap 
o'vfji,(puroi yayovxijisv ro) o(jioiui{Ji<zri rov ^txvdrou aurov, aXKa, xa.i 
rrjs' (zyxa-rda-sous e/joixe'^oc, surely also, on the other hand, we 
shall be, &c. See also 1 Cor. iv. 15, 2 Cor. iv. 16, xi. 6, 
Col. ii. 5; and compare Lucian. Pise. 24, u:Elian. H. An. 
xi. 31. Sometimes the condition is wanting, as in Mark 
xiv. 36, TTxpivEyycE to TTbrripiov a.7i ky^ov toDto* aXX' ov rl kyu 
^eXco, QiXKa. rl ah. Let this cup pass from me, if it be possible ; 
yet not as I will, &c. Certain other particles are often 
joined with aXka,, as ys, at least, /llbvovv ye, nevertheless. 
See Luke xxiv. 21, 1 Cor. ix. 2, Phil. iii. 8, et alibi. In 
exhortations and entreaties, aXKx. is used with an impera- 
tive, though the thought to which aXXa is opposed' may 
not be expressed. Thus in Acts x. 20, dXk' avxaras >ia,rx- 
^Y^bi. 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- 

* Winer, § 59, 6. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 83, 5. Engelhardt ad Plat. Lach. pp. 64, 
69. Stallbaum ad Phileb. p. 3 1 . Gataker in Advers. Misc. ii. 2, p. 268. 


rian. Alex. v. 26. Preceded by a negative, it may some- 
times be rendered except ; as in Matt. xx. 23, oux eanv 

Efxov ^ovvoct, aX\' off riToi/xxa-raiy except to those. So in 
Herod, i. 193, y^picuvrai ^s ou^sv EKa'ico, aXX' ax, rouv (y/iO'diJicov 
TToiEvvTss. Compare Mark ix. 8 with Matt. xvii. 8. At 
the same time, dxXa. is not convertible with si [j,r,, but 
some word must be supplied or repeated ; and so ^oS-'^- 
ffsrai will complete the sense in Matt. 1. c. Nor indeed 
is dXXoi ever put for other particles, as 7a§, ^s, ovy/, &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, 1 Cor. ii. 9, xv. 10, 2 Cor. viii. 7, Eph. v. 24, et alibi. 
Sometimes o^x' is omitted in the reply to a negative ques- 
tion before dXKx. Thus in John viii. 48, fju-n ns sk rajv dp- 
^ovTCfjy ETTiaTauaBV sh avrov ; aXX' o o'^Xos ovro^ x. r. X. So in 
1 Cor. X. 20. In connexion, aXX* ^ signify but rather, but 
only ; as in Luke xii. 51, ^oxerrf ori eI^tjvoov irapzysvoixr^v ^ov- 
vat £v TT) yr\ ; ov"/), Xsyco v/jl,Tv, dXX^ ^ ^lacfAspiaixov. See also 
1 Cor. iii. 5, 2 Cor. i. 13. Where the opposition between 
the clauses of a sentence is sufficiently apparent, dXXd is 
sometimes left out ; as in John iv. 22, ufxeHf Tr^o^jxyvstrs o 
ouK oI'^aTS* 7)iJi.e7f 7r^o<7xvyov/j,ev o oY^ccfxsv, So in John ii. 10, 
Heb. iv. 15.^ See also § 69. v. 2. 2. 

Obs. It has been laid down as a rule by some commentators, that in many sen- 
tences, which contain a negative followed by aXXoi, the denial is rather comparative 
than absolute; but it roust always be borne in mind that, in all such cases, a 
negative clause is employed with a view to make the opposed affirmation more em- 
phatically prominent. Thus in Matt. x. '20, ou ya^ vf^sTs i<rrt ot XaXovvn;, akXei ro 
vrviufAa, the sense is scarcely expressed by saying, tt is not so much i/ou who speak, 
as the Holy Ghost ; since the reference is not to the act of speaking, but to the in- 
spired matter of the Apostle's speech. Had the import of the words been simply 
comparative, the meaning would have been qualified by fjiovov in the negative, or by 
IJt.a.XXot in the affirmative clause. Compare Matt. xxi. 21, xxvii. 24, John v. IS, 
Acts xix. 26, liph. iv. 28, Phil. ii. 12, et scepius. Again, in Acts v. 4, qvk X^iUu 
av^fu-rois, ctXXa 0iui, the sin against man shrinks into nothing when compared with 
its magnitude in relation to God. So in the cognate form in Matt. ix. 13, skiov 
^'iXcu xa.) oh ^va-iuv, though unquestionably comparative, the sentiment of mercy is 
represented as, in a manner, superseding the efficacy of sacrifice. Other examples 
of a like nature are, Mark ix. 37, John vi. 27, vii. 16, xii. 44, 1 Cor. i. 17, vii. 10, 
X. 24, xiv. 22, XV. 10, Eph. vi. 12, I Thess. iv. 8.^ 

* Winer, ^ 57, 4. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 85, 1. Bos Eilips. p. 752. Schweighseus. 
ad Arrian. Epict. p. 830. Passov. Lex. in v. ukXu. 

2 Winer, 6 59, 7. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 83, 2. Glass. Phil. Sacr. T. I. p. 418. 
Bos Eilips. in v. f^tivcv. Kuinoel ad jMatt. x. 20, John vi. 27, 


Tap, for, is a causal particle ; but the proposition of which it 
assigns the cause is sometimes omitted ; as, for instance, 
in questions, which nevertheless imply a reason for some- 
thing previously understood or expressed. Thus in Matt, 
xxvii. 23, Tt yap ytaycov ETroiYiaBv ; as if he had said. Your de- 
via7id for his crucifixion is unjust; for what evil hath he 
done ? See also Matt. ix. 5, Mark xv! 14, John vi. 41, 
Acts xix. 35 ; and compare Arist. Acharn. 594, Diog. L. 
vi. 1. Also in answers, whether positive or negative; as 
in John ix. 30, sv yap rovrco havtxaarov kanv, x. r. X., where 
the speaker, in his earnestness, has omitted some such 
clause as, / heed not i/onr cavils, for the wonder is, «Scc. 
Acts xvi. 37, y.a\ \vv Xa3"§a rn/.as sK^dKXovaiv ; oh yap' aXka. 
£X3"6vr£f avroi r^xas E^xyircuaav. Compare 1 Cor. ix. 9, 10, 
1 Thess. ii. 20, James iv. 14. The particle is frequently 
used to introduce a causal parenthesis; as in Mark v. 42, 
1 Cor. XV. 5, Eph. vi. 1, et alibi. Nor, in this case^, does 
< it always refer to what immediately precedes, but to some- 
thing more remote, and even at a considerable distance. 
See Mark xi. 13, xii. 12, xvi. 4, and in St. Paul's Epistles 
passim. Hence it is frequently employed to mark the 
connexion or continuation of a discourse; as in Matt. i. 18, 
Luke ix. 44, 2 Cor. ix. 1, and elsewhere. From the fre- 
quent omission of a clause, to which yctp more immediately 
refers, it has been supposed to acquire a variety of mean- 
ings, which do not correctly belong to it. Thus it has 
been rendered but, in 2 Cor. xii. 19, ra ^l Trdvra virlp rins 
vixcuy oljco^o/xryj- {\a%u)' (po^ov(J^ai yap x. t. X. The sense 
may be thus supplied : — I speak with a view^ to your edi- 
fication ; and I have reason to do so : for I fear, &c. Nor 
in Luke 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 of 
a hunl^n adversary. If it be translated although in John 
iv. 44, it is with reference to some cause, which, though 
not immediately apparent, was doubtless passing in the 
writer's mind ; and so in all cases it is necessary, and 
generally easy, to affix a causal import to this con- 

' Winer, § 57, 4. 6. 


OZ^v, therefore, is an inferential particle ; as in Matt. vii. 11, x. 
16, 26, xvii. 10, xxvi. 54, xxvii. 22. It is, however, fre- 
quently used for the mere purpose of tranution 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, Luke xxii. 36, John 
xviii. 19, xix. 24, 1 Cor. viii. 4, xi. 18, xiv. 23, Eph. iv. 1. 
Some would render it huty in Matt. xii. 12, Acts ii. 30, 
viii. 4, xxvi. 22, Horn. xi. 19, and elseivhere ; ^nd for, in 
Matt. X. 32, 1 Cor. iii. 5, vii. 26, xi. 20. There is no rea- 
son in any instance to depart from the ordinary accepta- 
tion of the word.^ 

TT^iy. See § 55. Obs. 7. 

"Apa is an inferential particle, signifying therefore, consequently; 
and it properly stands after one or more words in the sen- 
tence ; as in Rom. viii. 1, ovV^v a^cc yvv axrcixpifxa, x. t. X. 
1 Cor. V. 10, Ittei o(ps/X6r£ oipx sx. rov ytoayiov g^EXS-erv. In 
the New Testament, however, it is more commonly at the 
beginning of a sentence, and is frequently joined with ol^v 
or ye, producing an emphatic asseveration, founded on an 
inference. Thus in Matt. vii. 20, a^ays oino ruv xxqircov 
avTMV iTnyvou^zahs avrovs* Rom. vii. 25, apex, ovv acvTos eyat 
y.. r. X. viii. 12, «§a ovv ©(psiXsra* IfT/xsv x. t. X. 2 Cor. V. 
15, apex, o\ TravTsr dTTs^avov. See also Matt. xvii. 26, Acts 
xi. 18, Rom. V. 18, 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, si ^h aycu h ttveu- 
IxcxTi 0eoi; Ik^xWco roi ^xifxoyiix, apa. £(p3"a(Tcv l(p' vixa.s rt /Sa^rt- 

Xcjo. rov &EOV. So in Luke xi. 20, I Cor. xv. 14, Gal. ii. 
21, iii. 29, V. 11, Heb. xii. 8. After si it may be rendered 
if perhaps ; as in Mark xi. 13, vjXbsv, eI oipce. svpyt>7si ti iv 
ocvTY]. Acts viii. 22, ^sYi^nri rov (^EOv, el aqac oi(pF.^ria-sroil aot 
7) ETTivoioc rr,s xxq^ias aov. Xvii. 27, ^^inraTv rov 0eov, el apa. ye 
\|/7)Xa(p^crctav avrov. Compare Numb. xxii. ^11, LXX. 
As an interrogative particle, apac (with a circumflex) oc- 
curs singly, and with the same combinations. Thus in 
Matt, xviii. 1, rU apex, ijlsi^cov etrrtv ; Luke xviii. 8, TrXrtv 
vVos rov av^qcuTTov iX^aiv apa. evqri^si rriv Tilariv IttI rris yr,s ; 
Acts vii. 1, si acqix ravra. ovrcos e'x^t ; viii. 30, cx^x ye yivwGKeiS 

' Winer, ubi supra. 


oi dvayivcucTiiEi^ ; Gal. ii. 17, £t ^e zv^Bhmy.zv a-ixxprcoXol, apa. 
X§io-TOf ocixa^rUs ^taxovoj- ; And with a negative in Acts 
xxi. 38j ouK ccqx <Tu sf Alyi^TTTJOf x. T. X.;^ 
^o3-£v, TTOTe, TTOTEpo^, TTov, TTws. Tlicsc intciTogative particles, of 
which the appropriate use is confined to direct questions, 
are equally employed in indirect questions in the New 
Testament. Thus in Matt. ii. 4, £rt;v9"avETo Traq' avruv, 
TTOV ^piOTo^ yzy^arxi. xxiv. 3, el-^s "hfJiA^, ttote rocvra, eVra/ ; 
Mark xi. 18, H^rnTouv ttoos avrov aTToXiaovcnv. John vii. 27, 
rovrov ol'^a/xsv, tto'^ev eutIv 6 ^s 'Xpiarof, oracv ^spyr^rcci, ov^i:\s 
yivcu(jyisi tto^sv Eariv. Acts xv. 36, ETTiax.syl/cuf/.s'^x tous a^gX- 
(povs, TTois ExovtJi. As an emphatic negative^ tto^ev occurs 
in Mark viii. 4, xii. 37. So ttus, in Matt. xii. 29, 34, John 
ix. 16, Rom. iii. 6, vi. 2, x. 14, et alibi. Once only, and in 
an indirect question, irorEpov occurs; viz. in John vii. 17, 

E/jiOLvrou 'kaku ; Of the relative particles, otto^ev does not 
occur in the New Testament ; ottote is found once in Luke 
vi. 3 ; oTTCAis also once, as an interrogative, in Luke xxiv. 
20; and ottou 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\ II hvioc irov; 1 Pet. iv. 18^ o a-re/S^s- nocl 
a/xa§T&;Xof ttov (pcjcvElrai f 

§ 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: — 
oTos" elptt or oTos- T E(pt(. This phrase is properly roiovro^ eI^jli. It 
is very questionable, whether instead of an infinitive, ort 
and a verb may follow ; though some have so understood 
Rom. ix. 6, ov% oioy ^E on exttetttcoxev o Xoyos rov &eov. The 
passage should probably be rendered, Not as though the 
ivord of God, &c.^ 

1 Winer, ^ 57, 4. 61, 2. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 84, 1. Stallbaum ad Plat. Eu- 
thypVir. p. 32. Passov. Lex. ia v. 
^ Alt, Gram. N. T. § 84, 6. 
^ Sec Ivosenrauller aU loc. cit. 


Ti, Ivx rl, &c. The neuter rl is frequently used adverbially for 
^iiz Ti; whyy wherefore 9 Thus in Matt. vi. 28, Trzfi Iv^j/- 
/xaroj- rl fj.spifx\ ; viii. 26, ri ^siXoi Ijts, oXiyoTTKyroi', Add 
Matt. xi. 7, xix. 17, xx. 6, and elsewhere. In the same 
sense Ivx rl is also used, as in Matt. ix. 4, Vva ri v/xs'if h^u- 
ixsTabs Trovnpoc ; The expression is elliptical for iva rl ys- 
voxro, that what may be done, i. e. for what purpose? It is 
also written in one word, hxrl. 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 rl is found ; as 
rl yap ; what then ? in Rom. iii. 3, et alibi ; ri ovv, in Rom. 
iii. 9, vi. 15, et alibi ; and the elliptical expression rl on 
(i. e. rl yiyoyzv or^ ; What is it that ? How happens it 
that?) in Mark ii. 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 ka-r\ following, rl is sometimes ac- 
companied by the substantive in the neuter plural ; as in 
Luke XV. 26, eTrt/vS'a'vsTo rl sm rocvroc ; John vi. 9, rocvroc rl 
eariv bU roaovrovs ', Acts xvii. 20, rl oiv '^iXoi ravra. kTvtzt. 
eTs- xaS-' eTf, ava eh sKoca-rof. These are two forms by which dis- 
tribution is marked in the New Testament, which can be 
reduced to no rule. One of these, sh xaS-' eh, which is 
clearly a soloecism for eh ko.^' hx, one by one, occurs in 
Mark xiv. 19, John viii. 9. We have also o xa^' eh in 
Rom. xii. 5. It may possibly have arisen out of the 
Greek phrase ev xa3-' ev, which occurs, though with various 
readings, in Rev. iv. 8. The other form, ava eh eaxaros, 
occurs in Rev. xxi. 21.^ 
luo, Ivo. By an Hebraism, a numeral is doubled to express 
distribution; as in Mark vi. 7, rtp^ocro aurovs uTroa-reXXeiv 
^uo ^uo, to send them two and two together, i. c. in pairs. 
This was expressed in Greek by the preposition ava, and 
so we find it in Luke x. 1, dTrea-reiXev avrous oivx Ivo. Sec 
also §63. Obs. 11. This Hebrew mode of reduplication 

' Winer, ^ 38, 3. Alt, § 46, 1. Interpp. ad Lucian. Sola»c. 9. Passov. Lex. in 
V. ui. 


is not, however, confined to numerals, but is adopted with 
nouns generally. Thus in Mark vi. 39, sttstx^ev avrois «va- 
xXTvai lionvrxs (yuij.7r6<ji(x, (Tvy.7ro<Ticc, hy companies. So Exod. 
viii. 14, LXX, cr^'volyayov avrous 'bniAOJvlccs ^rjfxuj^/icx.s. Both 
the Hebrew and Greek forms are united in Mark vi. 40, 


rows by hundreds and by fifties. The same is also ex- 
pressed by an accusative, with xara understood, in Luke 
ix. 14, xaTanX/vaTE avrovs xXialocs dya. 7r£VT7)Kovra. A copula 
is inserted between the repeated nouns in 2 Cor. iv. 16, 
rttxipgc y.ou r^fJ^s^a., day by day. 

eiraivM. Excess is marked by the adverb sttxmco prefixed to a 
numeral, which it does not govern in the genitive accord- 
ing to the regular syntax, but which is put in the case 
required by the verb. Thus in Mark xiv. 5, rj^i/vaTo ya^ 
Tovro TTpoc^Tivoci sTioLvu Tpiaxoatcov ^rivx^iojv (where the genitive 
is governed by Tr^u^rivxi). 1 Cor. xv. 6, c^tpS-oo ettxvco ttsvtx- 
yioa-iois d^5X(poXf. In the LXX sTrdvoj always follows the nu- 
meral, to which it is united by the copula xal, in exact 
conformity with the Hebrew. See Exod. xxx. 14, xxxviii. 
26, Levit. xxvii. 7. The New Testament usage is rather 
built upon that of the Greeks, who occasionally omit ^, 
in joining eXxttov or ttXeov wdth a numeral. Compare 
Tliucyd. vi. 95, Pausan. viii. 21. 1.^ 

TO hoc eIvxi. 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, ovx xp7rxyfx,ov 
riyno-ocro ro bTvqci Tctx ©ew. The expression, however, is pe- 
culiar, bearing some resemblance to the adverbial usage 
of the neuter plural in Hom. 11. E. 71, Od. A. 431, O. 
519. See also Thucyd. iii. 14, Soph. O^d. T. 1 182, ^lian. 
V. H. viii. 38, Philostr. V. Apoll. viii. 26. It is, however, 

aye. The verb ays is found in the singular with the vocative, 
or rather the nominative for the vocative, in the plural, in 
James iv. 13, aye vDv, ol Xiyovre^. v. 1, aye vuv, ol "TrKoua-ioi. 
It will be observed, however, that ays is here used as a 
kind of interjection; so that nothing perhaps can be in- 
ferred from the usage, which prevails also in the best 

1 Winer, ^^ 38, 3. Alt, ^^ 46, 2. Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 411. 

2 Winer, § 27, 3. Alt, § 30, 1. Note. 


Greek writers, and equally before nouns in the singular 
and the plural. See Horn. II. A. 302, Z. 376, Xen. Cyrop. 
iv. 2. 47, V. 3. 4, Dion. Hal. vii. p. 456, Aristid. T. 1. p. 
415. So also the Latins use age. 
ovo/xcc scrri, ovofxxrt. It may be observed of ovopta san, that it 
is joined not only with the dative, but with the genitive 
of the person or thing, the name itself being put in the 
nominative. The following are examples of both forms : — 
liUke i. 5, TO oyo/j^ac ccuTTis (^v) 'EXitja/osr. 26, r\ ovo/xx (r^v) 
Na^acc'r. 27, av^^t, u; ovopca 'lM(7'yi(p' y.ou to ovo/>05c ttjJ TTocp- 
^e'voy, Ma^ia'pt. In like manner the name follows ycxXziahoci 
or Xiy-co-'^ai in the nominative; as in Matt. x. I, 1,'nxuv o 
Xsyo/XEvos" IIsV^o.c. Luke ix. 10, ttoKsojs Kxhouy-ivris Bo^S^dal'^a. 

Evidently opos is to be repeated in Luke xix. 29, sis- to opr 
TO xxXovixzvov 'EXaciuiv. So also in Acts i. 12. Even where 
the accusative would properly have been employed, the 
nominative is sometimes found. Thus John xiii. 13, (pw- 
vcTte /x£, lild(7)caXof. Similar examples occur in the 
LXX and the ecclesiastical writers ; as 1 Sam. ix. 9, rm 
7rpo(prjrriv sxaXej 6 Xaor £/x?7'^oj3"ev o ^KiTrcuv. Theodoret. iii. 
241, rriv ^£os' Trqoariyo^iacv. 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 ovo/xaTt is added in the 
dative. Luke i. 5, Upsvi^ rif 6v6/j.octi ILccyjx.ploi.s , Acts xxi. 
10, '^^oipyirryj^ ho^o^n '^ Ay x^os. Compare Acts ix. II, 12, 
xviii. 2, xix. 24, xxvii. 1, xxviii. 7.^ 
ixeKXco. K future is frequently made up of ixeWcj and an iiifi- 
nitive of the present, aorist, or future, corresponding with 
the \^2ilmfuturus sum, and to be expressed in English by 
about to do, intending, is to be, &c. Thus in Matt. ii. 13, 
txiX'Kzi ^r3T£n/ to Trat^/ov, is about to seek, or intends to seek ; 
xi. 14, oiuros hanv Wxtocs h [AsXXcov £^5(,e'T3"«t, tvho was to 
corne ; Luke vii. 2, ripofXXs TeXs^T^v, was about to die, i. e. 
was at the point of death; Acts xi. 28, X/ptov pcEyav iMiw^iy 
£ff£(T^a<, simply that there would be. Add Matt. xvi. 27, 
Luke xix. 11, xxiv. 21, John iv. 47, vi. 15, Acts iii. 3, xvi. 
27, xxi. 27, Gal. iii. 23, llev. i. 16, ii. 10, iii. 2, 10, 16, et 

^ Winer, ^ 29, 2. Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 517. 
* Winer, § 43, 8. Alt, s^ 72, 2. 



ol TTspi rim. This remarkable expression demands attention. 
In Mark iv. 10, ol tts^I qcvtov is simply his companions. 
Generally the person named is included ; and so in Acts 
xiii. 13, xxi. 8, ol vrspi rov HxvXov, Paul and his companions. 
Compare Ezek. xxxviii. 6, xxxix. 4, LXX. But some- 
times the form is even so employed as to mean the prin- 
cipal person exclusively ; and thus it occurs in John xi. 
19, Tas TTE^I Ma/)3'av y.oi\ Mxplxv, where Martha and Mary 
only are intended. (In some manuscripts the words roif 
TTs^i are omitted.) Compare ^sch. 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, ^dXKovTzs xX>3§ov Iti' av- 
raiv rlf ri Qc^ri. Compare Luke xix. 15. Somewhat of the same 
nature is Rom. iii. 7, ri et; y.oiyu us ocfAa.prco'KQs xpivoixxi ; xai /x^ 
(jcxbcus ^Kxa(pYj[AoufX£^iz, Kocl xaS'o'S- (pxai rivss rnxais Kiysiv), on ttoit,- 
acofxsy roc xaxa, <va sxS-yj ra dyx^x; the question being combined 
with 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, Eyco OS TiV TjptTjv duvixrof xouXviyai rov 0£ov ; for aicrrs [jt^s eTvui 
^i/v^Tov. In Latin writers combinations of this nature are not 
unusual. Thus in Cic. Orat. pro Rose. Am. 49, Quid censes 
hunc ipsum lloscium quo studio esse? See also Cic. N. D. 
i. 27.^ 

II. Anacoluthon. 

L It frequently happens that the construction, with which 
a proposition begins is abandoned ; and, either for the sake 
o^ perspicuity y emphasis, or elegance, the sentence proceeds in 
a different manner from that in which it set out. Writings 

^ Winer, § 53. Wetstein on John xi. 19. 

2 Winer, iu Append, h 63. Alt, 6 86, 4. Hermann, ad Viger. p. 745. Erfurdt 
ad Soph. Ant. 732. 


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 
forgetfulness to have slipped into another. These are not 
accusatives absolute, but are to be rendered by quod attinet 
ad. Thus in Luke xxi. 6, tctvioc, a h&ojpiiTz, eXsvaovrai "hi^ipai 
X. r. X. Acts X. 36, Tov Xoyov, ov ank'j-KiKz rois vioTs ^la-pacviK, vfxsif 
o\ TO prifj^x x. r. X. Perhaps, however, tov Xoyov may depend 
upon o\'^2,r£, and p>5/xa be taken in apposition with Xoyov, as 'Ivi- 
ffovvy in the next verse, is again in explanatory apposition with 
both. A more apposite example is Rom. viii. 3, to yoip a^t^vi^trov 
ToD vofjiou. £v cb 'y)(r3"£V£i ^loc Tris aoL^Kos, 0eos" icocri^xpiyz rriv ocfjix^riuv 

Obs, 1. Tlie neuter pronoun is also sometimes put absolutely a.t the beginning 
of a sentence, probably with the preposition xaroc understood, in the sense of quod 
ailinet ad. Thus in Rom. vi. 10, o ycto uTiSavi, rrt ocfiaoria. uTiBaviv ItpaTa^- o Bs ^«, 
Z,n Tu ©j&J. Gal. ii. 20, o Vi vvv Z,u h a-aoxi, iv miTTu Z,u. In like manner the Latins 
use quod. 

3. When the leading proposition has been interrupted by a 
parenthesis, and the subject is resumed at the end of tlie di- 
gression, there is frequently no grammatical connexion between 
the first and last parts of the discourse. Thus in Gal. ii. G, 

aTro o£ To/v ooxoL'vTa;v efva/ ri, {oTroiol ttotb oo^qcv x. t. X.), sfxol ya^ 
ol ^oxoDvTcj^ ovl&v 9r/30(Tave'3'evro. Here, instead of completing the 
construction with the passive verb Tr^oaocvsri^in, it is thrown 
into an active form after the parenthesis. 

Obs. 2. It may here be necessary to observe that great caution is necessary in 
ascertaining the limits, and even the reality of parentheses in the New Testament. 
Editors have frequently marked them, where they do not exist; and there is so 
great difference of opinion with respect to their commencement and termination in 
many passages, that Tittmann has rejected the signs, by which they are distin- 
guished, from his edition. At the same time it is often, if not always, essential 

* Winer, 6 32, 7. Hermann, ad Vlger. p. 341. 


to an author's perspicuity, that, where real parentheses occur, they should be accu- 
rately defined; more especially as, in the writings of St. Paul, they are not only 
very numerous, but sometimes long and intricate. Now parentheses are, lor the 
most part, of two kinds, and exist either when the words of the writer are inserted 
between those of a speech which he recites (Matt. i. 21, 23, Luke xxiii. 51), or when 
a proposition is interrupted by the introduction of explanatory matter (Rom. vii. 1, 
1 Cor. vii. 10, et alibi). 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 particle, such as Ti, n, ya^, uXXa, xat. 
Thus in Matt. ix. 6, ha li s/^jjrs ». t. X. (tots Xiyii tm TotpuXvrtxu), 'Eyio^u; u^ov vov 
Tjjv kXiv'/jv. Mark vii. 26, iX^ova-ec T^oa-iTicn T^og tov$ v'o^ix.i ecvroZ- (Jav Ti ri ywh 'EXX'a- 
vi;.^ John i, 39, ol ^s itTov uuTM, *Pa/3/3/ (a Xiyirai io[/,yivivfii/.ivov, Ai^ua-xccki), "ffou fiive/i ; 
So Acts i. 15, Rom, vii. 1, 1 Cor. viii. 3, Eph. ii. 5, Col. iv. 10. See also Mark xv. 
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, Eph. 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. Obs. 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 vlou alrou 
and Ku^iov yiju,uv. 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, o oxXoi lluv on •TrXota.piov aXXo ohx. h Uu, (aXXa It 
iiXB-i '^rXoioiota, x,. <r. X.), on ovv sT^sv o o^kog x,. r. X. 1 Cor. viii. 1, ?rj^< Be >r&/v uluXo- 
^VTuv o'/^cufcit, (on ^avTis x. r. X.), crtot rr,; pi^uffia; raJv u}ukoBurav ol^u^iv on x. r. X. 

1 John 1. 1, axnxox/xiV} lu^dxufztv Tip) Tou Aoyev Tns ^^>Jfj \xa.) h ^u'/i x. r. X.), o iu^a- 
xocfziv, xou a.xnx'ooi.ui'i, a-rayyixXofiiv u/uTv. In Ephes. iii. 1, the sentence is interrupted 
by a long 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 in itself, 
it is then a proper Anacoluihon.^ 

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, oaoi 
av pcr^ ^i^coyroci v^xas, ixTToqiivo/XEVOi ekei^sv eKrivci^ocrE tov y^ovv sU 
IxoL^rupiov oiVTOis. Acts xxiii. 30, ixr,-\iv^Elarts ^i /xot rr^s ETn^ouXris 
sir TOV av^§a //.eXXctv ^gbg^qh, for (jlcKKovgi^s. Rom. ii. 7, ToTs fxlv 
^coviv oc'iMvioy {^(XTlo^wGEi)' tgjV ^£ S'tz/AOf ytocl opyviy scil. dTTo^obriGsroLi. 

2 Cor. viii. 23, g'trs v'^lp l.irov (Ksysi ns), s'ite d^EK<pol rifj^aiv (ovo- 
pcx^ovra;). So again^ where the true reading eI ^e av seems to 
have been altered into T^s, av by some copyist, to whom the 
anacoluthon was unintelligible, in Rom. ii. 17, si U ah 'lovlouos 
sTTovoiJidEpn, X. T. X. — OL'v ^I'^o.GKuv ETE^ov, asfxvro)) ou di^daKSif. Sec 
also § 59. 3. Obs. 5. Such constructions are particularly fre- 
quent with participles, which appear in a case different from 

» Winer, Append. § 64. I. Alt, Gram. N. T. § 87. Tracts de parenthesis by 
WoUe, Hirt, Spitzner, and Lindner. 


that which the syntax requires ; as in Mark xii. 38, /SXs'ttets ano 
raiv ypaf^piocrscov tcuv ^iXoyrcvv iv aroKotAS TTspiTrxTcty' ol xixrea^iovTSS 
ras o'lKixf ruv %vipcuv, x. t. X. Acts XV. 22, tots E^o^g roii dTroaro- 
"kois TTEfx-slyxi av^§af, y^jcxJ/avTSf ^loi %Biqos aurcov tx^e. (Compare 
Thiicyd. iii. 36, Xen. Cyrop. i. 4. 26, Lys. in Eratosth. 7.) 
Eph. iv. 1, TrapocxaXou ovv vfxaif a^ioos 7r£qi7racrYi<rai, dvs'^ofj.BVOi dKXri- 
Xojv ev dydTTTi, (77rou^a(^oyTSf x. t. X. See also 2 Cor. ix. 10, 11, 
12, 13, Col. i. 10, iii. 16, et alibi. Probably also in Col. ii. 2, 
<yvfji^ificx.(j^eyr£f 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, Eysl^oc^ acvTov sk vsxpcov, xal sKa^iasv Iv ^E^igc avrov. Col. i. 
26, TO (Mvcriopiov TO <x7roKBxpu(j.[xivov ccTTo rcov x'lcuycov, vvvl ^£ £(f'ave- 
qco^n. Add John v. 44, Col. i. 5, ii. 14, Heb. viii. 10, 2 John 
2; and compare Xen. Cyr. ii. 3. 17, v. 4. 29, viii. 2. 24, Pau- 
san. iv. 1^3. 6.' 

Obs. 3. The construction is sometimes altogether broken off; as in Mark xi. 31, 

iXoyiXovro t^os Xocvtovs, Xiyovrts, 'Eav s'/'Ttufi.iv, 'E^ ou^avov, i^i7, AtctTi ovv oux iTiffrivffctTi 
avTM ; 'AkX lav itTufAiv^ 'E^ a.v^^tu'^cdv — i<po(iovvro Tov kccov. 

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, Troi.p'f^yyBi'kzv aura) /xrj^svi el'^sTv a'XX' 
dTTEX^aiv ^sT^ov ffEocvTov rcb tepsT. By some grammarians the varia- 
tion in the form of address is accounted for by an ellipsis of 
the verb £(p>j. On the other hand, the direct form sometimes 
passes into the indirect ; as in John xiii. 29, Hokow, on Xsysi 
uvro) o ^IiTic^ovsj 'Ayogacov c5v y(^pslav s'x,oix£V sh r'hv loprriy ri to7s" 
itrojyjns Tvat t1 %oj. Acts xxiii. 23, sfTTsv, 'Eroi/xctcrars aTparicuras 
'^iocy.oalovs, xr^voo te TTccpacaTricrQci. In some cases an intermixture 
of the sermo directus et obliquus is found ; as in Acts i. 4, Trap- 
inyyeiXsv ctvrovs TrspifAivsiv rriv eTTpcyyeXiocv rov Trccrqo^, yjv oiy.ouaa.Ts 
fji.ov. See also Acts xiv. 22, xvii. 3, xxiii. 22. So in 1 Mace. 

xvi. 21, aTrriyyEiXsy 'Icyavvr), oti uTTouXfiTO o TTxTYiq avTOv, x.xi oti xtts- 

ffTaXxe xa/ ds ctTroiTeTvoii. Compare also Gen. xii. 13, 19, LXX. 

Obs. 4. Closely analogous is the change which sometimes occurs of the subject 
or person of the verb; as in 1 Cor. vii. 13, yvvvi) n^is 'ixn av^^u aTriirrov, »ai ulroi 
ffunvloKil oIkiIv fitr^ aiiTTis, f^yi u<ptira ccvrov. Frequently also a change of number 
takes place; as in Gal. vi. 1, vf^zTs ol •rvivfiotrixot KaTd^rl^irs rov roiovrov, ffxo'Tuv fftau- 
T«v, fch Kot.) ffu <ru^ci(rBris- Here the transition makes a general caution more closely 
applicable to each individual. Other instances of change from singular to plural, 
and vice versd, are Rom. xii. 16, 20, 1 Cor. iv. 6, 7, Gal. iv. 6, 7, James ii. 16. 

^ Winer, § 64, II. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 88. Richter de Jnacoluthis. Hermann, 
ad Viger. p. 894, sqq. Poppo ad Thucyd. i. p. 360. 



6. Two equivalent constructions are frequently united in the 
same proposition. Thus in Mark vi. 1 , Trr/.p-nyy^Cksv ccv-vois, 'iva, 

£v^ij(7oc(j^act ^vo xiToivocf. Another reading is hlvana-^s, which 
would effect a triple variation of expression ; of which the two 
first forms are oblique, and the last direct. Again, in Mark 
xii. 38, ToDv ^eXovtcov sv ttoKocT^ 'zrspiTracreTv, aocl da7rcc(7iJ.ous sv raXf 
ayopoiiS. Rom. xii. 4, TroLpdytaXai ouv v[Jias itocpoLOTriaoLi, ta (jcuixcx,r<x 
v^xcov ^ualacv (^uaocv, xai fjL'^ auay/ifxocrl^su^e tw aiu^i tqvtco, aWoi 
fxsrxixop(pov(J^£ X. T. X. 1 Cor. xiv. 5, biXoj Js TrdcvTocs vixas XocksXv 
yXuaaocif, fMoiXKov ^e, 7va 7r§o(pr3reyooT£. Add Rom. 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 Esdr. iv. 48, viii. 22, 80, Judith xv. 4, LXX, Thucyd. 
viii. 78, Xen. Mem. ii. 7. 8, Pausan. i. 19. 5, v. 1. 2, viii. 22, 
X. 1, Heliod. ^th. i. 6.^ 

7. This is also perhaps the place to mention that change of 
construction, which is called Hypallage, when an adjective or 
other word, which logically belongs to one connexion, is gram- 
matically united with another. Thus in 2 Cor. iii. 7, ri Iixkovix 
Tov btxv»rou ev y^api/[xa^jv, EVTErvTrcofMsm ev X»3"o/s-, where in fact the 
letters^ not the ministry, were engraven on stones. Again, 2 
Cor. V. 1, ^ Eiriysio^ ri/xaiv oiyt'ix rov (jkyivovs, for rov ETnyEiou. 2 Tim. 
ii. 6, TOV xoTTio/vTa yEOj^yov ^eT TrqaJrov ruv ycapTrouv (XETocXocfM^ccyEiv, for 
TOV rcov "KOLqituv fXETocKoc/ji^acvEiv S's'XovTa yEcopyov ^eT TrqcoToy ycoTTigiv.^ 

Obs. 5. Here also may be mentioned the figure called Antiptosis, whereby two 
cases in regimen are mutually interchanged ; as in Heb. ix. 2, h T^o^sa-is tuv uptuvj 
for ol a^rot rns x^o^itnug' Some improperly refer va^oj 'htKccioffvvnii in Rom. ix. 31, to 
this head.^ 

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 by the mind, 
either from the fact of its customary omission in particular 
instances, or from the obvious demands of the sense. 

» Winer, Append. ^ 64. III. Alt. Gram. N. T. §§ 89, 90. Hermann, ad Viger. 
pp. 207. 218. 546. Raphelius and Kypke on Acts i.'4. Wolf ad Deraosth. Lept. 
p. 365. Duker ad Thucyd. iv. 37. Ast ad Plat. Legg. p. 160. Heindorf ad Plat. 
Protag. p. 510. 

* Winer, Append. § 65, 4. 7. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 92, 1. Lobeck ad Soph. Aj. 7. 
Hermann, ad Viger. p. 891. 

3 Hermann ad Viger. p. 890. Blomfield ad .Esch. Agam. 148. 1360. Tholuck 
on Rom. ix. 31. 


Obs. 1. Many abbreviated forms may be regarded as mere idioms, in which the 
words rfjbi^a, x^'^, vlos, ywv. Sic, are at once suppUed without hesitation. They 
occur at every step; as in Matt. i. 6. fi rod Oh^iov, scil. ywri. iv. 21, o rov Ztfit^eciov, 
soil. vies. vi. 34, h ctl^iov, scil. fi/u-ioct. x. 42, ^/'«;^;^«t', svi/. ii^aroi. xxiii. 15, rhv 
^rioav, scil. yiiv. John iv. 31, rZ f/,ira^u, scil. XS°*V' ^^' ^2^ '" ^ivxoTsy scil. ifj^uTioii. 
Acts ii. 33, TM ^$|/a, scil. %f/^/. xvi. 1 1, r^ iTiovtr^, scil. ^/ts^a. In like manner the 
word omitted is easily found in Luke ill. 5, sa-Tcct to. a-KoXitx. us tv^'Sav, scil. o^ov. xiv. 
18, xTo fjbtas, scil. (puvyjs, 2 Cor. viii. 15, o to toXv, o to ok/yov, scil. £%(yy. James iii. 
11, firiTi h Tnyri i» rns alrris o-rris (^^vii ro yXvxv xa) to ^ix^ov j scil. v^u^. 

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 
rsXiVTav and hdyuv (Matt. ii. 19, Tit. iii. 3), ^poa-ix^tv (Matt. vi. 1), x^ovuv and avoi- 
yuv (Matt. vii. 7, xxv. 11), ffvXXcif/,[iavitv (Luke i. 24), T^offipi^uv (Luke v. 14), trv/x.- 
fidxxuv (Acts iv. 15), erTpcdvvvitv (Acts ix. 34), et alia, with which the accusatives of 
the object, /S/av, vouv, S^^av, viov, ^vfflav, Xoyovs, xxivtjv, &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, lxi7vos o lovXos 'ha.^mira.t -Tto'kXas^ scil. TXnyds. See also 2 Cor. xi. 
24 ; and compare Xen. Anab. v. 8. 12, JFAisin. V. H. x. 21, Liban. iv. p. 862. 

Obs. 3. From the fact that, in the later writers, prepositiotis 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 getiitive 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 to, xut' l/u,i, to iffuBiv, 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, not elliptical. So with respect to conjunctions, such 
expressions as <r/ SsXsts <^oin(ra) vfjclv -, (Matt. xx. 32) are explained by an omission of 
/W; and J}, in the sense of rather than, hy fiocXXov 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, whicTi 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 yap sv TO) (pixvsp^ ('IoL/^a7o5"), ^lou^ocios iariy, ovoe r) iv rcb (pavepcj 
(^TrspiTOfjLV)), 'ffspirofjLYi (^sttim)' ccXX' ev TO) x^uTTTo) 'loy^acibs" ('loy- 
^Qc76^ eari), xal (o^ TTs^irofXYi ecrrl) TTsqirofji'h xap^iccs x. r. X. So 
again the sense must be thus supplied in Rom. v. 16, xcii oCx 

us ^i' Ivos apta§Tyj(T(a;vrof (^k(Triv o 9'av«Tos", ovroj oi' hos ^ixa/ot;vTOf) 
TO ^d/pin(A.of TO /w,ev yap xplfxoc k% hos (^napaTCru^ocros) sis xaTa'x^ipca 

1 Winer, Append. § 66. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 93. Hermann, ad Viger. pp. 869, 
sqq. Bauer Philol. Thucyd. Paul. pp. 162, sqq L. Bos. de EUips. /)a»«w. lu- 
terpp. ad N. T. iu 11. cc. 

p 2 


X. T. X. Also in V. 18, ro xpifxa. and to y^a.^KJij.'x, must be sup- 
plied after Tto^pa'jiTciJi^oc.Tos and ^ixaicufxocroi respectively. See 
also Rom. xiii. 7. Of a similar nature are the abbreviated 
expressions noticed above in § 43. 2. 

Obs. 4. A verbj or part of a clause, is frequently to be supplied from the preceding 
or subsequent context, because, though omitted, it was obviously present to the mind 
of the writer. Thus in Mark xiv. 29, xa) tl Tavn; ffxav'SaXitrB^ritrovrxi, aXA' ovx iytu' 
soil, ffxa.vha.Xiff^riffo^ti, Luke vii. 42, rU oZv avraJv 'jrkUov avrov ayaT'/tffti i a^ox^i^us 
Ti a "SifAeov it-7rni, 'TToXxf4,^icvco on («CJ7. avrcv vXuov Scywryio'ii ovroi)y u to -rXiTov sx^S^' 
ffoiro. See also John xv. 4, Rom. ix. 31, xi. 18, 1 Cor. xi. 1, 2 Cor. iii. 13. Add 
Mark xii. 5, Rom. v. 3, 11, viii. 23, ix. 10, 1 Cor. vii. 3, 4, xiv. 27, xv. 27, 2 Cor. i. 
6, ii. 10, V. 13, vii. 11, viii. 19, Eph. iv. 29, v. 24, Phil. iii. 13, 2 Tim. i. 5, 1 Pet. iv. 
11, Rev. xix. 10, xxii. 9. Sometimes there is no omission, where it might be ex- 
pected ; as in John xv. 16, ov% vfji,s7s (jul l^sXe^a^Ss, aXX' lyu i^iks^a./u,nv vf/.Zs. 

Obs. 5. It may also be observed here, that the verbs to say are often omitted 
before as^ an, &c. Thus in Acts xiv. 22, i^icn^i^ovTi; Tag •^ux,«'S tuv fjuocS-yireoVf 
vrocDaxccXovvn? if^fjiivtiv tJJ TiffTH, xa) (sci/. Xiyovrss) an ^la, 'ToXXav SX/"v^£&»v ^i7 x. c. X, 
Compare 2 Cor. i. 24, viii. 12, Phil. iv. 17, 2 Thess. iii. 9. The same also occurs 
in other cases, where the sense is sufficiently implied in what precedes ; as in John 
xiii. 18, iya> oThoi ovi i^iXi^cc/u,r,v, aXX^ 'Ivec h y^on^h -rXn^d^ti,, soil, ovrui iTotno'ci. See also 
Mark xiv. 49, xv. 8, John i. 8, ix. 3, xv. 25. 

3. Sometimes the sense requires that a word or words should 
be supplied, which are directly the reverse of those in a pre- 
ceding clause. Thus in 1 Cor. vii. 1 9, c^ TrspiToi^r^ ovIev san, xat 
'/) oLK^o^varloL ou^ev so-riv, dXXa. r-npmais evroXo/v ©eoi), scil. sari ri. 
xiv. 34, ov yap ETririT^ocTrraci ocuracis XocXeTv, o-XTC v7rora,GOEa-^xi^ sciL 
KsXsvo^rai, 1 Tim. iv. 3, TccoXuoyrajv ya/txsiv, a^£'^£ff3"a/ ^pcjfxdTOJv 
(scil. KEXsuayrcuv). In Acts xxvii. 43 a similar form is complete. 
It does not seem that James i. 9, 10, belongs here. 

Obs. 6. The same verb is even employed in two different acceptations j as in Luke 
xix. 43, i}a(piov(ri ff% xtxj ra, rixva. aov iv tro), where i'haipi^uv signifies both to level with 
the ground, and to dash against the ground. In this last sense it occurs in Ps. 
cxxxviii. 9, Hos. x. 14, LXX. 

Obs. 7. Somewhat analogous to this is the figure called Zeugma, by which a verb 
is grammatically connected with two substantives, but in sense only with one of 
them ; as in Luke i. 64, kvsmx^^ ^^ ''■o tfTOf^a, alrou vrK^cc^^r,fji,a, xa) h yXuffffa alrav', 
where tt.nux,^i^ can be strictly applied only to ffrofia,, and IXuSu, or some like word, 
must be supplied with yXutraa. So again in Luke xxiv. 27, a^jla^svaj acre Mooffias 
xut a-ro ^avreuv tuv ^oetpt^Tcov., scil. v^ofiifix^ckiv. 1 Cor. iii. 2, ydXcc. ufjb^i i'X'ontra, xut 
ev ^pufia, scil. \'^6uf/,itra. 

Obs. 8. To this head also belongs the cotistructio prcegnans, when a verb derives 
an additional force from a preposition, with which it is improperly constructed. 
Thus in Luke iv. 38, avaffras ix ryis ffvvayuytj;, arising and departing yVo7?i the syna- 
gague. Acts xxiii. 24, '/va liaffuffeoai <^gh ^nXixa,, to conduct him in safety. 2 Tim. 
ii. 26, avavri-\i/uffiv ix rr,; rod %ta(hoXov -^ayths, they should recover from their stupefac- 
tion, and be delivered /row the snare of the Devil. See also Acts xx. 30, Gal. v. 4, 
2 Tim. iv. 18, 1 Pet. iii. 20 -, and compare Xen. Anab. 3. 11, Polyb. vi. 58. 5.^ 

* Winer, Append. § 66, 1. 7. Alt. Gram. N. T. § 47, 4. Hermann, ad Viger. p. 



4. Under the head of Ellipsis should perhaps be classed the 
suppression of the whole or part of a sentence, which the emo- 
tion, or energy, or studied conciseness of a writer may lead him 
to omit. This is called Jposiopesis ; and the import of a clause 
thus suppressed, which in conversation is collected from the 
tone, manner, or gesture of the speaker, is indicated in writing 
by the tenor of the discourse. Thus in Luke xix. 42, si syvcu^ 
KCX.I (TV ra, TT^Qs el^o^voov aou' vuv ^e ek^v^yi oino o{p3"aX/xa>v <tou. XXll. 
42j si (SovXei TTQC^EvsyKEiv TO Tioxrifiiov Touro* TrXriV y^ri h. r. X. There 
is another example, according to those manuscripts which omit 
the words povj S-soptax.'^it^^sv, in Acts xxiii. 9. 

Obs. 9. In conditional sentences, after the formula il 'hi fiTiyi, the alternative is 
generally suppressed ; as in Matt. vi. 1, -^poirixiTi rrtv hxatoavvm vfjt,uv fih "TonTv 'ifA- 
•pTpotrSiv ruv ivS^eoTuv, T^og to B^ta^fiveii alrois' il Vi (j^riyi (jscil. T^o(rix,y>Ti k, t. X.), fjjiff^ov 
ovK 'ix^Ti* So in Matt. ix. 17, Mark ii. 21, 22, Luke x. 6, Rev. ii. 5, and elsewhere. 
There is a douhle aposiopesis in Luke xiii. 9, xav (Av 'roim'^ xoc^tov — $1 Js /n.^yi, — «<V 
TO (z'iXXov iKxo-4'fis avTYtv. In the first clause kuXus 'ix^' ™ay be supplied, and in the 
last the alternative is suppressed. 

IV. Pleonasm. 

1. The opposite of Elhpsis is Pleonas-m, or the insertion of 
a word which is not absolutely necessary to the sense, and 
therefore rcdinidant. 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, '/^<os" ccvTuv 7rpo(pYirr,s. 

Obs. 1. Hence the use of us with verbs of assimilating, reputing, and the like; as 
in Matt. xiv. 5, us T^oipy>ryiv ii;^ov ahrov. Luke XV. 19, ^olj^tro'v fici us iva ruv ftiff^tuv 
ffav. 1 Cor. iv. 1, hf^ois Xoyt^itr^u us vTn^iTas. Hence also the addition of tbe nei^a- 
tive particle after verbs of denying and preventing; the formulae its iKaffros, us rts, 
&c. ; and the preposition repeated after compound verbs. See §§ 15, 4 ; 58, 2. Obs. 
3 ; and 65. Obs. 6. 

2. The next degree of pleonas7n is the use of two equivalent 
terms, with a view perhaps of giving energy to the style, but 
still altogether or nearly synonymous ; in which case 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, iaiv f^rt 
TrsqiaasvcTY} r^ ^ lytotiocrvvn vfxou^ ^rXeTov twv yqacfx/jiQir&ajv. x. 38, axo- 
Xou^&X oTTiacij IX.QV. xxvi. 42, TrdXiv in ^cUTspou. 58, oiTio fAaxpo^sv. 

869. Poppo ad Thucyd. i. pp. 282, 292. Stallbaum ad Plat. Apol. p. 78, Symp. 
p. 80, Eiithyphr. p. 60. Kuinoel on Luke i. 64, Acts xxiii. 24. Pott on James' i. 9. 


xxvii. 51, h,7rh ava^S-cv. Luke xiv. 10, 7rpo<ja.-v(x.l2Yi^i avwr^^ov. xix. 
4, 'Tr^o^^xfxuv sfX7rpo(j^£v. John ix. 34, e^e/3«Xov ocurov s^cu. xi. 7, 
eVstra /Ulst^ touto. Acts xiii. 24^ tt/jo TT^oaouTrou rr^s ii\ao^ov ccvrov. 
(An Hebraism. Compare Gen. xxxv. 18, Numb. xix. 4, LXX.) 
xviii. 21, TTaXiv avocytdyu-^co. 1 Cor. xiv. 5, extos" eI /xoo. 2 Cor. 
iv. 19, 01 s on. Gal. iv. 9, iraXiv avwS-sv. 2 Tim. iv. 9, (TTro^^a-rov 
IX^Eiv rxy^icos. Heb. vi. 6, TrdXiv dvacyiocivl^siv. Rev. ix. 7, ra 
ofjLoicufAocrcc, raJv oi)ipi^a;v of/^oia, '^iTTTlois. 

Obs. 2. It is usual also to represent the verbs a^x^tr^eti, hxtTv, roXju,Zv, 'frix^t^iTv, 
^iXiiv, and some others, as frequently redundant ; though perhaps they generally 
give some accession to the verb with which they are connected. Examples are, 
Matt. iii. 9, ^»! Vo^nrt Xiyiiv h ta,vro~S' Luke i. 1, "ttoXXo) Wi-x,i't^7i(fa,v uvard^cca-^eii S/»7- 
yvctv. John v. 35, riB-iX^eran a.yoc.XXtoc.ff^'^vat •roos m^ocv iv <ru (fxuTt ocItov. xiii. 5, T^^^aro 
ytTfrsiv Tohs •protas ruv ju,a^iirMV. xxi. 12, ev^sh Irokfia t^irdffai avrov. 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, xi. 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, rhv svhii^iv T)js ayd^yi; iifiMv ug ahrovs Iv^u'^cta^i. 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, vi-oTohiov rZv 'Trohuv. Luke xxii. 1 1, reo otKohff'roTri T^ii otxtas. 
Compare Hom. P. 247, T. 235. 

Obs. 4. Tlie frequent redundancy of the copula xx) in the second member of a 
proposition seems to have arisen from a confusion of two constructions. Thus in 
Luke ii. 21, on iTXriff^rKrav vifziocn oxra, xac) IxX^jB'/; x. r. X., the two forms l-rX'^ff^tiirccv 
x'ju iKXtn^yj and on i-rX^a-^tia-av lxXv^>} appear to be intermixed. Of the pleonastic 
use of the relative pronoun see § 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, nupis, 

ytupiZi avoi^oy rjfJiXy. 1 Cor. vi. 11, dXXd. dir^XovcrccG^z, dXkd, 
7)yix(y^7)re, ccXXa E^ix.atcu^'/iTS. xiv. 26, orccv auvspy(Yi(r^s, 
BKxa-ro^ v[Jiouv •J/'SfXpcov exet, ^i^ccx'nv E^^h yXcua-a-ocv sx^*, (xtto- 
xaXy\)/iv sxsi, E^fj^nvslacv sp^s/. See also 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, uya- 

iTTiffii; Kv(iiov rov &iov ffov l| oXm rm xa^^iei$ ffou, kcc) i^ oXn; r>ii y}/t>X^S """^f **' ^1 oXyis 
Tiis hoi,voixs ffov, xec) i^ oXm '^ni 'iffxvos ffov, Rom. ii. 4, >j rov TXovrov t^j x^nffTornros 
avrov, xai rni avo^fj;, xa) rns fiotx^o^vf^'tai xoc,rai<ppovi7s ; Eph. i. 21, v'Ti^oiveu ^dfffis a,^ 
"Xjhi xa) l^ovfficcs xoCi ^vveSi/u,iu; xa) xv^torrtros. Phil. iv. 9, a, xcci tju,ci^in, xx) ^a^sAa/Ssrs, 
xx) hxovffxn xa) si'^srs iv ifjcoi. Col. iii. 16, ^jxXfAoTs xa) v/zvoi; xx) uitxii •ffviv^arixaii 
S:hovn?. 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. 11. 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, tl Jt 
h a.'Tfo.^'xjh ayta, xeu to <pvoetficc' xai it h p'l^et ay'ta, kx) ol xXaiot. This frecj^uent 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, trTouja, uutoZ us (rrofAo, xiovrot. Compare Rev. ix. 2, xiv. 2. There 
is a parallel example in Athen. v. 21, ixoviro h rols (iaXocnion, on Ivf^oruv nv tu /3aXa- 

2. The expression of a sentiment both in an affirmative 
. and a negative form ; as in John i. 20, oj/xoXoyncJz, xocl 

oux, Yip^/riTXTo. Acts xviii. 9, XaXet, xoc\ {JLvi aioj'ji'hcry^s. 
Eom. ix. 1, aXfibzioLv Xeyco, ou yiysv^ofxaci. 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, /x^ Cyl/YiXo'p^oni, dXKoi (po^ov. 1 Pet. iii. 11, 
EX-xKivdrco octto xcckov, TToiriaoLTco ayaS'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, xa/, 
avo/^as" TO oropia ocvrov, h^i^ocGHcV auTous. xxvi. 51, IxTs/vas" 
Toiv y(^eipXf aTrscrTrixas rm f/.ck'/jsc.iqa.y qlvtqv. Acts i. 16, riv 
TrqoBim ^lai <7r6(/.ocTOf Aa/3/^. xi. 30, a7rocfTzik(x,\Tss ^(a 
%BipQS B(Z§va/S(3i:. Acts XV. 3, Xoc^uiv TTEOisreiXEV aurov. 
1 Cor. vi. 15, ocpa.^ ouv roi ixi\in to!) X^idTou, noiria-co TTopvns 
ixsXn; 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 powerful emphasis ; as in Luke ii. 
30, sf^'ov ol 6(p^oiXijt.ol fjiou TO (TcuTrtpiov aou. Compare 
1 John i. 1. 

Obs. 6. Circumlocutions occur in the New Testament with the following substan- 
tives : — 
tpyov. Eph. iv. 12, 'i^yov ^taxeviett, for ^ituKovicc. In 1 Thess. i. 3, 't^yov 'Tt(frtui, and 

x'o-roi ocyai-ns are not pleonastic expressions, but strongly emphatic. 
Kui^os. 1 Thess. ii. 17, t^os xai^ov li^as. So in Hor. Sat. i. 1. 9, Horce momento, 
Kt^xXri. Acts xviii. fi, ro ou(jt.oi. vfjuut It) rrjv xt(paxhv vf/.uv. Perhaps, however, the 

word cannot be considered as altogether pleonastic, since the consequences of 

* Winer, Append. § 67. Alt. Gram. N. T. §§ 95, 96. Tittmann. de Synonym. 
N. T. and Weiske and Mains 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. G^-org. liierocrit. i. 3. 44. Poppo ad Thucyd, i. pp. 
197, sqq. Lowth de Sacr. Poesi Hebr. xix. pp. 360, sqq. Vorstius de Ilebraeism. 
N. T. pp. 60:'), sqq. 



■guilt are usually imprecated upon the head, with reference perhaps to Levit. 

xvi. 21. Neither perhaps is *s(paX}? to be regarded as a perfect pleonasm in 

Matt. viii. 20, Luke ix. 58. 
koyog. 2 Cor. xi. 7, h Xoyu aXfiBtias. 1 Thess. ii. 5, Iv Xoyoo xoXaxttas. 
oiKOi. John ii. 16, oikov iju.To^tov, for l/u.'ro^tov. Though possibly iyj-ro^tov may be used 

in the sense of merchandise, which is more usually in the plural s/n^ro^ia, 
ovofia. John iii. 18, to ovofix rod f/,ovoyivovs vlou rov Qiou. Acts iii. 16, iTt tv "pr'nrnt 

rov ovofjt,ix,ro; ahrov, rovrov iffri^laffi to ovof^ec avrov. Rom. X. 12, tus ya-p, os ccv 

iTixeikicryiTat to ovo/xa Kv^iov, ffu^mtTai, 
^vsvfia. Eph. iv. 23. oivccnov(rB-eii tm •Ttvtvfji.a.Ti toZ voog, for va*. 
^ovs and x«/'^. Matt. xvii. 22, /AxXn o v'los toZ uv^^utov 'proc^a^iloff^ai ug pc^'t^"'? av^^u- 

^avt Mark vi. 2, ^wa/asTs toiuvtch ^;a tuv ^^upcHv aliTou yivovTai, Luke i. 71, 

ffUTyi^nx,)) IK ^it^os TavTuv tuv (jbiffovvTuv hfJiMS. 79, KOiTiv^vvat Tov; <rohai hfJi-uv lU 

ooov il^Yivni. John iii. 35, 'za.vTu, li'^uxsv iv rjj X''^' ^'^'^oZ. Acts v. 9, oi -ro%s tuv 

B-aypdvTaJv tov civ^a, ffov l-ri Tri ^v^a,. Rom. iii. 15, o^us ol Tohs ecuTuv iK^^iat alf^coc. 
« 2 Cor. xi. 33, k^ipvyov Toci ^tT^dg ocvtov. - 
tra,^^. Eph. V. 29, ouliis yko tjjv lavTov ffd^xa ifjt,iffn(Tiv. 
eufjjoi, Rom. xii. 1, ^ra^otxeikM obv vf^a,? <Tot,^oc,ffTriffO!,i to, ffuf/LO-To. vf/MV ^Vff'iav ^axfocv. 

Eph. V. 28, ovTcus (XpuXovfftv ol av^^is a.yoi'rav Tag totUTUv yvvouxui us to, Ixutuv 


vVos. Mark iii. 28, •pra.vTo, a,(pi^nffiTai to, a,(jijX^TyiiJija,Ta to7s vio7; tuv avB^uTuv. (Com- 
pare Matt. xii. 31.) Eph. iii. 5, to fiva-T^^iov, o h iti^uis yivious olx iyvu^tff^vi 
vols vto7s tZv ocvB^aTTuv. 

(puv^' Matt. iii. 3, John i. 23, (puvri P>oZvtos Iv t^ io^f^V) ^or fiouv. Compare Isai. 
xl. 3, 

(pvcris. James iii. 7, ^aa-ci (P'jeris B^yj^ieov ts kou 'xrtrtivuv, i^'^riTuv rs xa) ivaXiuv, ^oifid'^tTcti 
xa) %i^a,fjiot,ffTai t« (pvirn Tri uvB-^/uTtvyi. 

%&!^a. Luke iii. 1, Ttjs ^iTv^aiag xa) Tpa.x^v'iTihos %wpai. 

''^v^ri. Luke ii. 35, ffoZ Vt etVTT^s ^hv ^^w;^^v "hnXivffiToct pof£<paiei, ix. 36, o yap vlos tou 
uvB-^a'Tov ovx ?X9-6 -v^fxay av^^u'Tcuv a7roXi(rcci, uXka, ffuerat. 

V. Asyndeta. 

1. Each simple sentence, of which a compound proposition 
consists, may incUide various combinations of the several parts 
of speech dependent upon each other according to the rules 
of government, which have been stated and exemplified. 
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 tlie word which it qualifies, the 
preposition annexed to the noun which it governs, and the verb, 
if not at the end of the clause, in that prominent situation 
which effect, 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. 7), 
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 xviii. 18, John 


vi. 66, vii. 38, xii. 18, Acts xxvi. 24, Rom. i. 11, viii. 18, xii. 3, 1 Cor. ii. 11, v. 1, 
Gal. iii. 1, 23, Heb. xi. 32, xiii, 11. Nor are similar instances rare in the best 
writers.^ Indeed the arrangement of words must naturally depend upon the pecu- 
liar bent of the writer's taste or genius, and in an argumentative or didactic style 
will be far removed from the regular and obvious order of simple narrative. A 
much greater freedom will accordingly be found to prevail in the animated and 
energetic writings of St. Paul, than in the calmer and more sedate compositions of 
the Evangelists. The omission of conjunctions is more particularly a predominant 
feature in his Epistles ; and their absence is the means of increasing their force 
and spirit in a very sensible degree. Similar asyndeta are not wanting, however, in 
the other parts of the New Testament. 

2. Asyndeta may be resolved into four classes — conjunctive, 
disjunctive, explanatory, and causal. Examples of the first 
class are, 1 Cor. iii. 12, si ^e ns eTrotxo^opceT hm tom ^g/xsXtov rau- 
Tov, y(^pv<yov, oi^yupoy, Xi^ovs rtyL.iQUs, ^uXx, %6prov, KoXxfJiiny' 1 Tim. 
iv. 13, TT^oasy^s rr^ dvacyvoutysi, ty) TTapa.x'kriazi, tt] ^j^acrxaX/^K. Heb. 
xi. 37 , IXi^xa'^rniJocv, sTrpia'^naacv, l^aretpaa^yjaav, £v (povco y.(x.yjx[paLs 
aTTs^xvov X. T. X. See also 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 agrestis, scsvus, tristis, 
j)arcus, truculentus, tenax. (2.) Of the second class are, Mark 
ii. 27, TO (Ta/S/3aTov ^loi Tov av3'/?<w7rov syEvero, ou% o ccv^pooTTo^ ^loi to 
cajSiSarov. 1 Cor. xv. 42, ovrcu kqlI "h acvxa-ractjif to/v vexpcov' ctttzI- 
pEToci iv (p^op^, sysipEToci Iv a(p3"ap(j/a* x. t. X. James i. 19, eVro; 
'TTois cLv^DooTTos Tccyjjs sli" TO axot3o"aj, ^poc^uf elf to. XaX^cat. Add 

Mark ii. 27, 1 Cor. vii. 12, Eph. ii. 8. To one or other of the 
above classes may be referred such addresses as these in Mark 
xvi. 6, ^InfJovv (^riT^Trs, tov e<TrxuqcofMivov' 'nyep^ri, ouk sariv c5^e. 
Acts XXV. 12, KatW^a iTTiyiiiiKricroci' l7i\ K^cciaocpae, Tfo^sutyri. (3.) A 
clause added to explain or define another more exactly is fre- 
quently without a copula ; as in 2 Cor. vii. 5, Iv ttocvti Sx^jSopcsvo/ 
(Icrpcev)- e^w^sv (J^dx^h eW^Ev (p6/3oj. Compare 2 Pet. ii. 18, 19. 
(4.) Causal asyndeta are John xix. 12, iuv toDtov aTroXj^rris-, o^x 
El (plXos TOV Y^(xi(yy.pos. 1 Cor. vii. 15, el 5e o a,7ri<Tros j^w^/^eTai, 
^£y§t^£(TS'&;* ou ^E^ovKcoraci h a^gXtpos" ^ yj (x^sX(pri Iv TOir TOioi^Toii-. So 
I Cor. vii. 4, Rev. xvi. 6, xxii. 10.* 

^ Winer in A].pend. § 65. Alt, § 91. Gersdoif's BeitrUge, i. 1. Poppo ad Thu- 
cyd. i. p. 299. KrUger ad Dion. pp. 139. 318. 

« Winer in Append. § 66. 8. Alt, § 94. b. Glass. Phil. Sacr. i. p. 512. Bauer. 
Rhet. Paulin. T. ii. p. 591. Stallbaura ad Plat. Crit. p. 144. Protag. p. 52. 



VI. Hendiadys. 

When two substantives, of which one denotes some quality 
or accessory of the other, are joined together by a copula, this 
last is frequently to be rendered by an adj., or in the gen.; 
and the figure is called Hendiadys (sv lia, Ivolv). Thus we 
have in Luke xxi. 15, a-royua, xai o-o(plocv, wise words, or vjords of 
wisdom. Acts i. 25, ^iaxov/a^ xa) omoaroKrts, i. e. "^iocno^iCLs a^no- 
aroKiY.'ns. xiv. 13, rocvpovs xqci (rrepo/xara, i. e. roLvpous ka-XEixyiivovs. 
2 Tim. i. 10, ^&;^v xat d(p^a.q(j-lciy, for ^o^tjv a(p^ocpTOv. 2 Pet i. 
3, ^ou'hv xai £u(j£^£iacv, and ^o^o^j- xsti dp£Trjs. So in Latin, Virg. 
Georg. ii. 192, Pateris libamus et auro, i. e. pateris aureis. 

Obs. 1. In Matt. iii. 11, xai -rv^i is omitted in many manuscripts; but if the 
words are genuine, the passage is another example of this figure. Compare Acts 
ii. 3. Chrysostom unites xoiwvia and xXdirn rav a^ruv, in Acts ii. 42, into a hendia- 
dys ; but it should seem that the latter refers alone to the Eucharist, and the former 
implies Christian fellowship generally. The figure is only employed where one 
subst. indicates a property of the other ; so that Phil. i. 11, and 25, are not cases 
in point. ^ 

Obs. 2. The case is similar when a copula joins two verbs, of which one is to be 
expressed adverbially ; as in Luke vi, 48, jWa-v^j ko,) Ifia^ws, for (ia^ieu; itrKa^^i. 
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, a-uvsqyov ^/xo/v sv 'Kpiarcoj 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. pri{J!^ocroc, a syou XxXco vfjuv, TTvsvixac kari, kxI ^cort scrTtv, 
i. e. proceed from the Spirit of God, and lead to eternal life, 
1 Thess. V. 19, to Trvsu/ma fxri a^ivwrs, where the Spirit is repre- 
sented as ?ifire, from its enlightening and purifying influences. 

' Glass. Phil. Sacr. p. 18. Alt. Gr. N. T. § 97. Kuincel on Acts xiv. 13. Pott 
on 2 Pet. i. 3. 


Compare Eom. 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 language (Mark xvi. 17, 1 Cor. 
xiv. 19) ; the hand for hand-writing (1 Cor. xvi. 21, Col. iv. 
18); the sword for death ov persecution (Matt. x. 34, Rom. viii. 
35). On the other hand, the effect is sometimes put for the 
cause ; as in John xi. 25, kyu e///.i n oivxaracais y,ou rt ^cwn- Rom. 
viii. 6, TO 7a§ (ppoyYJixoi rris axpycbs, 3"avaTos"* to ^e (ppovnfxoc, rov ttveu- 
IxoLToSj ^cori atzl slqinvn, 1 John v. 4, a-vvn hrlv ri •viKn rt viKri<7ac(Ta. 
rov Koa-fAoy, ri ma-ris riixoov. 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. 14, 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 thing containing indicates that which is contained 
in it; as in Matt. iii. 5, s^eTro^susro itphs azJTov 'le^ojoXf^a, where 
the inhabitants of Jerusalem are meant ; or when the object is 
put for something connected with it ; as in 2 Cor. v. 21, tov /ui^ 
yvovTa u/jLocprio-y vTrsp T,(jLuy apta^Ttav iTToina'B, 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, bina-<xupol are cabinets or caskets; and in Matt, 
viii. 12, xxii. 13, ctkoto^ l^uT^pov is the place of outer darkness ^ 
or hell. The abstract is put for the concrete; as in Rom. iii. 
30, TTspirofxm Kxi aKpo^ua-Tiocv, the circumcised and uncircumcised. 
Eph. V. 8, TTOTs GKoros, vSv ^6 (^us, oncc unenlightened, but now 
enlightened. Compare Rom. xiii. 12. Also the sign is put for 
the thing signified ; as in Eph. iii. 14, Kocfxirrco ra, yovaTa ixou, I 
bend the knee, i. e. / worship. Gal. ii. 9, '^^^loe.s e^wxav, gave 
their hands, i. e. in token o^ fellowship. 

Obs. 1. The usage is closely analogous, by which an action is frequently, in 
Scripture, regarded as done, when it is said or permitted to be done, or when it is 
foretold. Thus in Matt. vi. 13, /nh uftviyKrn fif/jcis lU -rn^aa'/u.ov, lead us not, i. e. 
suffer us not to be led, info temptation, xvi. 19, o lav 'hricrrii ko.) Xvff^s It) rvis yrj;, 
whatsoever ye shall declare to be bound or loosed. Acts x. 15, a h &ios IxaSei^itrt, fch 
ffv xoivov, call not thou dejiled. Compare Gen. xii. 13, Jerem. i. 10, iv. 10, Ezek. xiii. 
19, XX. 25, Hos. vi. 5. Sometimes also an action is said to be done, when an occa- 
sion of doing it is given ; as in Acts i. 18, ixTtiffaro x^y^/av, purchased a field, i. e. 
furnished the purchase-money. Rom. xiv. 15, i^M ixiTvov utoXXvi, do not cause his 
destruction. See also 1 Cor. vii. 16.^ 

^ Rambach. Institut. Ilermeneut. Sacr. c. 4. Jahn's Enchiridion, iii. 2. 


Obs. 2. Here also may be introduced the figure Ca/aekrcsis, by wViich an idea is 
attached to an object, with which it is not compatible ; as in Luke viii. 23, xarifin 
XaiXei\l/ avif^ov its rhv xl/u,vy,v, xa,) ffvviTXz^ovvTo, where ffvvtTXji^ovvTo is referred to the 
crew, instead of the ship. 

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, eav ouroi aiMTrricrcfjaiv, o\ X/9"ot xsx^a^ovrai. John xxi. 25, ov^l 
cjcvToy olfxai rov kogixov '/jM^riaa.i roc ypoc(p6y^vJcc /St/3X/a. Other ex- 
amples are Luke ii. 37, Acts ii. 5, 1 Cor. xiii. 1, Gal. i. 8, iv. 
14, Heb. xi. 12.^ 

Obs. 1. The opposite figure is called Litotes; of which an instance occurs in 
Matt. xvii. 20, ikv s'%>;rs TjVt;* a? k'okkov (Tivktius. 

III. Synecdoche. 

By this figure a part is put for the tvhole, or the whole for a 
part; and a genus for a sp^ecies, or a species for a genus. Thus 
in Acts ii. 41, xxvii. 37, -^vyjfi indicates the entire man; and in 
Matt. iv. 8, Rom. iv. 13, y(.oa[/.os, the world, is Judcea only. In 
like manner, ri olytovfAsv/i 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 
TTacra ycricns means only all mankind; and in Matt. vi. 11, the 
specific name aproi, 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, TrappiXafA- 
/Savst /xeS"' eacvrov ettt'x. tTepac TTVEVLnocra., where etttoc., as commonly 
among the Jews, is used of any number whatsoever. Cora- 
pare Gen. iv. 15, Ruth iv. 1.5, 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, syiOrrovraTrXcxaiovx Kri-^Erxi. See also 1 Cor. 
xiv. 19, Rev. i. 4, et passim. 

IV. Antanaclasis. 

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, a,(^Es tovs 
vEKpous ^xylytzi rous exutum vsaqous, let those spiritually dead bury 

> Glass. Phil. Sacr. T. ii. pp. 55. 897. sqq. Turretin. de Interp. S.S. p. 206. 


those naturally dead. Rom. xiv. 13, ixr^xin ovv aXKrikovs xpiyco' 
pcev, dXXai rovro x§/vars /xaXXov, x. r. K., where x^/veiv signifies 
first to censure, then to resolve. See also 1 Cor. iii. 17, 
James i. 9. 

V. Paranomasia. 

1. Paranomasia, 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 some- 
times 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 o^ paranomasia is that of two words 
alike in sound, but unconnected in sense ; as in Matt. xxiv. 7 , 
Luke xxi. 11, Xcrovrxi Xi(xo\ kocI XoifAoi. Heb. v. 8, e/xaS-gv a(p' aiv 

ETTu^s. 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 Rom. i. 29, 31, 

TToovEigc, TToyri^igc' (pS'ovot/, (povou' davverouf, afffvSsToys". 

3. The more elegant kind of paranomasia is that in which 
the words are not only similar in sound, but give an emphatic 
or antithetic import to the sense. Thus Rom. xii. 3, ptTj v7ri:p' 
(p^ovclv 7ia.p ^e^ (ppovsTv. 2 Cor. iv. 8, dTropovfXEvoi, aXX' ovk k^oc- 
TTopovixsvoi. V. 4, ov S"£Xoptsv E>c^6(yxa^a.i, aXX' sTrsv^va-acff'^ai. Phil, 
iii. 2, ^Xe'^sts rriv KOLrccroi^m' rtfJi^sTf yap e(tij.ev n TTspiroix'r), x. t. X. 
See also John xv. 2, Acts viii. SO, Rom. v. 19, 1 Cor. xi. 29, 
31, 2 Thess. iii. 11, Heb. x. 34 ; and compare Dan. xiii. 54, 55, 
58, 59, Wisd. xiv. 5, 3 Esdr. 5, LXX. Similar instances are 
found in classical writers. Thus Thucyd. ii. 62, fjiri (p^ovYifAocrt 
fxovov, dXKa. koli K(ZTix(pqovriiJ^(Xri. Plat. Pheed. 74, oyt^or^o'^os rz xccl 
oixorpofpo^ y/vEjS-ai. Compare Diod. Sic. xi. 57, Xen. 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 venio ornatu prologi, sinite exorator sim. 

Obs. 1. Another case of the same word, or one of its derivatives, occasionally form 
a kind of paranomasia; as in Matt. xxi. 41, xaxovs xaxcos ccToXicm avrovi. 2 Cor. 
viii. 22, Iv ToXXoTs ^oXXdxts a-Trouhctlov. ix. 8, h •^kvt) ^avron Toia'av avrd^Ktiav sxovTSf, 
Add 1 Ctir. ii. 13, vi. 2, 2 Cor. x. 12. So Xen. Anab. ii. 5. 7, -rtivTyi ya^ <» rots 
Bio7i ii'Tro-xa- >ta) -ravTax,*! tccvtmv 'icov ol Bto) x^arovffu See also Anab. 1. 9. 2, Mem. iii, 
12. 68, iv. 4. 4, Diog. L. ii. 8. 4, Alciphr. iii. 10. 

Obs. 2. In order to effect a paranomasia, unusual forms of words are frequently 
employed ; and occasionally a new word seems to have been coined exjin ssly for 
the purpose. An instance of the latter description occurs in Gal. v. 7, r'n vfiZf Jvs- 
xoypi rij aX»jSl/a /Ari rruB^fff^at ; h 'TUfffAOvn ovx Ix rov xuXovvrof vfAcis. 


Obs. 3. If rendered into Hebrew, the words of St. Paul would have somewhat the 
cliaracter of a paranomasia in 1 Cor. i. 23, rifitTg Be x,r^6ffcro/jciv Xpia-rov Iffrav^atf^ivov, 
lovbalois fjiXv ffK(X.vha,\oVy"'EXX^<n Ti //.u^txv avTois ^5 to7s pc,X*ito7s, ^lovhxlois t£ kcx.) "F.XX'/iai, 
X^itrrov &10V ^vvccf^iv koc) Giou ffo(p/ccv. AcconHngly it has been thouj^ht that the pas- 
sage was written with a view to the similarity of the words /^]^f2> ^ cross, and 

/i^^DD' " stumbling-block ; 7^^, foolish, and 7^^^^, wisdom. A concealed para- 

l ' T X V V 

nomasia has also been pointed out in Gal. i. 6 ; nor is it impossible that in the dis- 
courses of Christ, who taught the Jews in the Syro-Chaldaic dialect, tbere 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 : — 

Toi; ya,p y,ou ysvos Icptev* ^' yjTnof dv^quTroiai ■ 
^s^ioi arifJLCJCivsi. 
An Iambic senarius (Trim. Acat.) from the Thais of Menan- 
der is cited in 1 Cor. xv. 33, 

^'^ZipQUcriv ^S'oj X^o^dS"' ofAiKiaci Kocxtzl. 
And lastly, an entire hexameter of Epimenides of Crete is 
found in Tit. i. 12. 

K^qriTss dil yl/EVCTToci, xacKoi ^Yiplac, yacuri^Bf dpyoci. 

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, Ter^a'/XTjvov kari, yjo S'e§/c7/uios- e§x,sTar. 
James i. 17^ Yiaiaa ^ocrif dyoc^ri, xocl ttocv ^cooY^fxa tsXeiov. 
See Quintil. Inst. Orat. ix. 4. 52.» 

1 Winer in Append. § 62. 1, 2. Glass. Phil. Sacr. i. p. 1335. sqq. C B. Mi- 
chaelis de Paran. Sacra. Bottcher de Paran. S^c. Paulo Ap.frequentatis. Wetstein 
on Heb. v. 8. Kruger 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 se com- 

2 Winer in Append. § 68. Jacob, ad Lucian. Alex. p. 52. 



The Numerals refer to the Pages. 

Abbreviated forms of proper names, 
12 — of verbs in ^/, 30 

Abstract nouns in apposition, 47 — with 
article, 65 

Abstractum pro concreto, 47, 219 

Abundantia cosibus, 14 

Accusative in v instead of «, 13 — of 
nouns in us and y, and *is pure, ib. 
Obs. 2 and 4 — of proper names in 
&»j, ib. § 7. Obs. 3 — p/ur, of nouns 
in tug, 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 iv, Kccxuf ^oitTv, 92 — 
with tls for nominative, 84, 93 — 
double after certain verbs, 92, sqq. 
— used adverbially, 94, Obs. 16 and 
17 — absolute, 166 — to be rendered 
by quod attinet ad, 207 

Active verbs for middle, 33 — with re- 
flexive pronoun for middle, 127 

Adjective, compound and ending .in lo; 
not always common, 18 — agreeing 
with subst. in sense, not in gender, 
42 — with collective nouns, ib. — re- 
peated in the negative, 46 — instead 
of subst., 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., i6.— with article, 65 
— of time, with gen,, 96 

uEolicaor. 1, 28, Obs. 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 

Anacoluthon, 206 

Anomaly in declension, 14 — in gender, 
ib. — in the signification of verbs, 31 

Antanaclasis, 220 

Antecedent attracted into the case of the 
relative, 158 

Antiptosis, 210 

Aorist 1 of verbs in aUu, 27, Obs. 4 — un- 
usual forms of aor. 1 employed in 
the New Testament, 36 — Alexan- 
drian form of aor. 2 in a, 27 — 3 
plur. aor. 2 in offctv, 29, Obs. 6 

Aorist, perfect, and imperfect, their dif- 
ference, \2^— aor. pass, as middle, 
34 — aor. 1 conj. with ol [jun, 143 — 
aor. infin. after 'iroif^os, 157 — aor. 
signifying to be wont, 130 — iov pre- 
sent and/w/., 1 33 — for per/I a.ndplusq. 
perf., 134 — aor. part., use of, 165 

Aposiopesis, 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 raention 
and xar'' t^o^hv, 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 axidi predicate, 
ib. — after «/^i, 59 — its exclusive use, 
60— with adj. and part.., 60, 164— 



by way of definition, 64 — with a(- 
iributives, 61 — in regimen, 62 — with 
ffen. employed as an adj., 63 — in 
divisions, tb. — with certain words 
understood, 64— used ahsoluiely, ib. 
— with adverbs, preps., &c., 65 — 
with abstract nouns, ib. — with pro- 
per names, 67 — its use in Homer, 
67, 70 — as a pronoun, ib. — for pron. 
relative.) 71 — with ulroi, o%i, ixitvos, 
75 — with 5ra?, ib. — with okoi, 77 — 
with neut, adj., 78 — with infin., 150, 
sqq. — omitted with irifin., 151 

Jrticle omitted after prepositions, 51 — in 
enumerations., with ordinal numbers, 
and superlatives, 52 — wiihgen. abs,, 
53 — when existence is affirmed or 
denied, 56 — after verbs of appoint- 
ing, choosing, &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, 
68 — with <ras, 76 

Asyndeta, 217 

Atticisms in the New Testament, 9 

Attic accus. in v, 13, Obs. 1 

Attic future in tu, 26 

Attic reduplicatio7i, 26, Obs. 7 

Attraction, 206 — with the injin,, 155, sqq. 
— with the relative, 158, sqq. 

Augment, 25 — temp, for syll., ib. — syll. 
for temp., 26 — double and triple, ib. 
— double in compound verbs, ib. — 
in verbs beginning with tl, ib. — 
omitted in the plusq.-perf.f 25 

Ba.^is 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 
Cir'cumlocution, 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., ib. — with dative, 


Common or Hellenic dialect, 5 — its mixed 
character, ib. 

Comparative, new forms of, 19 — formed 
by fjoaWov, ib. — syntax of, 105 — 
with gen. omitted, tb. — formed by 
Taoa, and v'Ti^, ib. — instead of su- 
perl., 106 — followed by vdvrcfv, ib, 
— with dative, 123, Obs. 9 — with 'in, 

Comparison oi adjectives, 18 

Compound adjectives, number of their 
terminations, ib. 

Compound verbs, with' double augment, 
26— syntax of, 104 

Conciseness of expression, 211 

Concord, position of the article in, 68 — 
of the^ew., 112, 065.20 

Conjunctions, seldom interchanged, 167 

Conjunctive, with M.ri for imperative, 139 
— its imperative signification, 142 — 
interchanged with imperat., 143 — 
with 'tva, ib. — with "va, oVw?, after a 
past tense, 148, Obs. 1 — with Vva, or 
on, for infin., 150 — after 'iva. ^iM, o-ttus 
f/,ri, 149 — after fjuh, fA^^a;, &c., ib. 
Obs. 4 — without av, in doubtful pro- 
positions, 143 — with ou f/.Yt, ib 

after ^iXa, ib. — with orav, oTorav., 
&c., 145 — with ors, 146 — with tcos, 
'ius ov, oi^^i; oS, ib. — with -r^/v, 147 
— with Uv, 144— with u, 145, Obs. 
4 — with pronoun relat,, 159 — with 
f/'h, 185 

Construction, rules of, 216 — changed, 
206, 209— interrupted, 207— mixed 

Constructio prcegnans, 212, Obs. 8 

Contraction, 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 hy for, 116, Obs. 12— and by 
according to, 117 — implying direc- 



fion, ib. — denoting comparison, 118 
— redundant, 121, 167 — instead of 
gen., 121 — instead oi gen. with vto, 
126 — of means and instrument, 122 
—o{ manner, 123 — used adverbially, 
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 place, 125 — with 
collective nouns, \2Q— absolute, 166 
— with adverbs, 169 — with h, as an 
adj. or adv., 173 — ^with verb of cog- 
nate signification, 91 — with verbs of 
giving, commanding, blaming, helping, 
injuring, 113, 114 — with adj. signi- 
fying hurtful and useful, 115 — with 
verbs denoting intercourse and com- 
panionship, 118 — with verbs com- 
pounded with ffvv and ofAoZ, 118, Obs. 
2 — with verbs signifying to converse, 
to contend, and those denoting re- 
semblance or equality, 119, 120 — 
with itvai 2inA ylyviff^ect, 122. (6.) 

and Obs. 13 — with ^^^ff^at, 122, 
§ 47, Obs. 1— with i alros, 120, Obs. 
8 — with Komi, 122 — dut. of parti- 
ciple in definitions of time and 
place, 117 

Dativus commodi et incommodi, 121 

Declension, 12, sqq. — of Hebrew-Greek 
proper names, 15 

Defective nouns, 17 

Degrees of comparison, 18 

Demonstrative pronoun. See Pronoun. 

Deponent verbs, 34 

Dialect, the Galilcean, 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, 
06». 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 suhst. with the art. 
and the^e/i., 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., ib.—oi adj., 41 

Future tense, use of, 130 — Attic fut. in 
lu, 26 — fut. conjunct., 30, Obs. 5 — 
unused forms of fut. 1 act., 35, Obs. 
9— future formed by /aixxu, 205 — 
fut. instead of conjunct., 130, 146 — 
instead of imperat., ib. — with oh, for 
imperat., 139 — fut. indie, in doubtful 
propositions, 143 — signifying to be 
wont, 131--after ^ika, 143— with 
'iva, 147 — instead of present, 132 — 
part. fut. with verbs oi motion, 161 

Galilcean Dialect, 3, Obs. 1 

Gender, anomalies in, 14 — non-agree- 
ment between adj. and subst. in, 42 

Genealogy in St. Matthew's Gospel, ex- 
hibiting the Hebrew use of the 
article, 67 

Genitive oi nouns in ga, 12 — of proper 
names in ag, ib. — of nouns in vs and 
V, 13 — its superlative import, 19 — 
used as an apposition, 48 — with to 
and ra, 65 — with rtt uIto,, 78 — 
with Tii, 96 — with partitives and 
stiperlatives, ib. — with words imply- 
ing partition, ib. — with adverbs of 
time, ib. — denoting cause or origin, 
98 — instead of an adj., 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 ofAoios^ 105, Obs, 2 — to be 
rendered with respect to, 107 — with 
TTi^t understood, 107, 152 — employed 
in two senses, 108 — expressive of 
the object of mental emotion, ib. — 
gen. of possessive pron. put objec- 
tively, ib. — (/en. of price or va/ue, 
109 — of time and place, 110 — in- 
stead of preposit. and its case, 111, 
Obs. 17 — expressed by a circumlo- 
cution, 111, Obs. 18 — with noun 
understood, 112, Obs. 19 — its posi- 
tion in regimen, 112, Obs. 20 — gen. 
of article with injin., 150, sqq. — 
with adverbs, 168 — gen. abs.^ 166 — 
art. omitted with gen. abs., 52 — 
gen. with verbs of freeing and de- 
sisting, 95 — with Jvai and yiyviir^ai, 
97 — with verbs signifying to remem- 
ber, to/orget, 101 — with those which 
signify to be careful or careless, to 
covet, to command, 102 — with verbs 
signifying to seize, 109 — two getii- 
tives in different 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 spoken after the 
conquests of Alexander the Great, 
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, 168, 

Hebrew and Aramcean, their affinity, 1 

Hebrew-Greek proper names, declension 
of, 15 

Hebrew Hiphil, verbs having its signifi- 
cation, 32 

Hebrew indeclinable nouns, 18 

Hebrew superlatives, 19 

Hellenic or common dialect, 5 

Hellenists, 5, Obs. 1 

Hendiadys, 218 

Hiatus, 10 

Hypallage, 210 

Hyperbole, 220 

Hypothetic use of the article, 57 

Imperative, with /tt»i, 139, 185— its per- 
missive and hortative sense, ib. — im- 
plying sarcasm, 140 — two impera- 
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.^ pres., and plusq. 
perf, 132 

Impersonal verbs, 83 

Indeclinable nouns, 17 — indecl. Hebrew 
names, 16, 18 

Indicative, its use, 135 — with relatives 
and relative particles, 135, 159 — in 
the sermo obliquus^ 136 — after inter- 
rogatives, ib. — in conditional propo- 
sitions, 137— with tl, 137, 144— 
with ay, 138 — with \uv, 145, Obs. 4 
— with on, o-PToTi, 145 — with oVav, 
146 — with 'iwSi s<w? ov, H^^ts ov, ib. — 
indie, pres. with 'Iva, 148 

Infinitive, its nature, 149 — after verbs 
implying an object, 150 — with neu- 
ter art., 150, sqq. — with ar/. omitted, 
151, Obs. 7— act. for pass., 150, 151, 
Obs. 2 and 4— after adj., 150— after 
subst,, 151 — with eia'Ti, a>s, and or/, 
ib. — redundant, 93 — with ^^h, 147, 
Obs. 7 — with fjiM, 188 — with ^^, 
after verbs of denying, 154, Obs. 1 
— denoting an object after certain 
verbs, 154 — after verbs of giving, of 
motion, &c., 150, Obs. 3 — after verbs 
oi fearing, 154 — its subject in the 
accus., or in a clause formed with 
ort, ib. — its subject omitted, 154, 
155 — its subject repeated emphati- 
cally, ib. — its subject in the accus., 



when different from that of the 
leading verb, 155 (5.) — attracted 
into the accus., 155 (6.) — instead of 
the imperat., 156 — with yt/ijVe verb, 
used adverbially y 156, Obs, 7 — in- 
stead of the part.y 162, Obs, 8 — irifin. 
aor. after trotfjt.os, 157, Obs, 8 
Interchange of letters, 9 — of pronouns, 
74 — of tenses, 131 — of prepositions, 
173, 175, 182— of «y and ^^j, 189 
Interrogations, affirmative and negative, 

Interrogative pronoun t<;, 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 writers, their peculiar ortho- 

graj)hy, 10 — altered the forms of 

words, 40 
Letters, interchange of, 9 
Litotes, 220 

Measures and monies, not named after 
numerals, 22 

Metaplasmus, 14 

Metonymy, 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 b— indirectly re- 
flexive, 127 — signifying to get a 
thing done, 128 — denoting recipro- 
city, ib. 

Monadic nouns, with the article, 51, 
Obs, 3 

Moods, 135, sqq. — indicative, 135, § 51 
— imperative, 139, § 52 — conj. and 
opt., 141, § 53 to b6—inflnitive, 149, 
§ 57, 58 

Moveable flnal letters, 10 

Name o/Qod in Hebrew superlatives, 19 
Names of countries, in the genitive, 96 
Names of dignities, compounded with 

ei^X^iv, 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, ib. — ^« redundatit after 

v&xhs 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 pt]/u,a, understood, 

Neuters in as, contract forms of, 14 — 

in fjbdt, their use by the later writers, 

Neuters plural in a, from tnasc, in es, 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- 

sitio7i with the voc, 86 — repeated, 

82 — omitted, 83 — expressed by us 

with an accus., 84 — nom. abs., 166 
Noun, government of, 42, sqq., § 25 — to 

be supplied in an opposite sense, 105 
Nouns, indeclinable and defective, 1 7 
Numerals, 20 — with avu, 175 — with xara, 


Object, ellipsis of, 211 

Oblique cases, 86 — oi personal pronouns, ib. 

Oblique discourse. See Sermo obliquus 

Optative, in the sermo obliquus, 136 — 
expressive of a wish, without av, 
141— with il, 141, 144, 145— r/jiVA 
and withottt av, in interrogations, 
142 — with ^r^Jv, 147 — with pron. 
rel., 159, Obs. 9— with ^>j, 185 

Ordinals, inclusive use of, 22 — with plu' 
ral noun, 43 — with art. omitted, 52 

Orthography, the Alexandrian, 9- — of the 
later Greek writers, 1 

Paranomasia, 221 — concealed, 222 



Parentheses, \heir nature and design, 207 
— numerous in St. Paul, 208 — pron. 
demonst. redundant after them, 72 

Participle^ its nature and use, 160 — ren- 
dered by a conjunction, 160, 161 — 
with jta,) or xa/Vs^, 161, Obs. 2 — 
with verbs of motion, 161 — with as, 
161, Obs. 5 — with verbs of sense, 
162 — with verbs signifying to know, 
to observe, persevere, desist, ib. — with 
fActv^dvuv, 162, Obs. 6 — with <f>^ecvnv 
and Xav^dvsiv, 163, Obs. 11 — after 
KccXas cronTv, 163, Obs. 12 — part, uv 
omitted, 162, Obs. 9-~part. instead 
of indie, with si, 138, Obs. 3 — in- 
stead of/mVeverb, 164, Obs. 15— 
with itfii and «p^« instead oi Jtnite 
verb, 164, Obs. 16 and 17— with 
tense of its own verb, 164, Obs. 18 
— used with the art. as a subst., 60, 
164 — rendered by is qui, 165 — with 
a pron. demonst. redundant, 72, Obs, 
5 — used impersonally, 167, Obs. 3 

Particles, negative, 184, § 66 — various, 
189, §67 

Partitives, in regimen, 63 — followed by 
a gen., 96 

Passive verbs for active or neuter, 34 — 
with dat. instead of gen. with v^o, 
126 — followed by an accus.^ ib. 

Paulo -post-futurum, 130 

Perfect tense, instead of present, fut.y 
and plusq. per/., 133 — perf. pass, as 
middle, 34, Obs. 6 

Periphrastic forms, 75 

Person, the 3 pi. plusq. perf. in utretv, 28, 
Obs. 1 — 3 pi. imperat. in reaa-eiv, 28, 
Obs. 3 — 2 sing. pass, in «ra/, 28, Obs. 
4 — in ii, 29, Obs. 5 — 3 pi. im'perf. 
and aor. 2 in efav, 29, 06s. 6 — 3 pi. 
perf. act. in av, 29, 06*. 7 — 3 pi. 
pre*, of verbs in /jui in a<ri, 30, 06*. 
1 — third pers. plur. used imperson- 
ally, 83 

Place and /ewe, in the^'ew., 110 — in the 
dat.viWhh, 110, 125 

Pleonasm, 213 

Plural, instead of sing., 81 — denoting 
excellence, ib. 

Plusqttam-perfectum^ without the aug- 

ment, 25, 06*. 3 — pass, for middle, 
34, 06*. 6— its use, 130— instead 
of the imperf. and aor., 1 33 

Positive, instead of superlative, 96 — in- 
stead of comparative, 106 — with 
-rufa and i^rs^, «6. 

Predicate and subject, 79, sqq. — ^prer/. 
formed by accus. with s/?, 93, 06*. 
14 — omitted 

Prepositions, their primary import, 169 — 
governing a gen. only, 170, sqq. — a 
dat. only, 1 72, sqq. — an accus. only, 
174 — a gen. and accus., 175, sqq. — 
three cases, 179 — preps, multiplied 
by the New Testament writers, 182 
— if interchanged, ib, — used adver- 
bially, ib. Obs. 5 — compounded with 
adverbs, ib. — with verbs, 183 — re- 
peated after compound verbs, ib 

repeated, omitted, or changed in cer- 
tain connexions, 184 — art. omitted 
after preps., 51 — art. with prep., 
65, 06*. U— ellipsis oi prep., 211 

Present, instead of aorist, perfect, or 
future, 131 

Pronoun demonstrative, redundant, 72, 
167 — repeated emphatically, 72, Obs. 
4 — instead of relative, 73, Obs. 7, 9, 
and 10 — repeated with relative, 73, 
Obs. 8 — in the predicate, 81, 06*. 
11 — art. used as a pronoun, 70 

Pronoun personal, 74 — as the subject to 
verbs, 82 — employed to mark an 
emphasis, ib. — inserted and omitted 
in the same connexion, 82, 06*. 13 
— use of the oblique cases, 86 

Pronoun possessive, 74 — expressed by a 
periphrasis, 7b, Obs. 17 

Pronoun relative, instead of interrogative, 
24 — with verb subst. omitted, 83, 
06s. 18 — its attraction, 157, sqq. — 
omitted, 158, 06*. 5 — agreeing with 
the subsequent noun, 159 — accu- 
mulation of relatives, ib. Obs. 7 — 
transposition of relatives, ib. Obs, 8 
— pron. rel. with the optative, ib. 
Obs. 9 

Proper names, abbreviated, 12, 06*. 3 — 
Hebrew-Greek, their declension, 15 
— with the article, 67 



Reciprocating propositions^ their effect 
upon the use of the article, 58 

Reciprocity, indicated by the repetition 
of the numeral $7;, 22 

Reduplication, 25 — the Attic redupL, 26, 

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 Jtgures, 218 

Rules oi construction, 216 

Sacred Hellenism. See C?rec^ Vrfiom o/ 

Me New Testament 
Sermo directus changed to the indirect, 

and vice versa, 209 — the two forms 

intermixed, ib. 
Sermo obliquus, its use with the optat., 

Sharpe (Mr. G.), his canon, 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- 

j'ects to the same verb, 79 — subject 

of the verb changed, 209 
Substantive, instead oi adj., 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, 19, 

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 — in 
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. — adjec- 
tives, 41 
Time, in the dat. with h, 110, Obs. 13 
Transitive verbs for intransitive, 32 

Verbal adjectives, 27 — new forms of, 28, 
Obs. 2— with genitive, 100 

Verbal noun, instead of the infin. with 
the art., 153, Obs. 10 

Verbs, anomalies in their signification, 
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 

Verb substantive omitted, 83 

Verbs in f/,t, contracted and abbreviated 
forms of, 30 

Vocative, 86 

Words to be repeated, 211 — to be sup- 
plied in an opposite sense, 212 — 
veiteaLted emphatically, 214 

Zeugma, 212 


A, a, termination of the gen. of proper 

names in «?, 12, Obs. 2 
tt.ya.'Tr) Stov, 108, Obs. 3 
eiyt, with plur. noun, as an interjection, 

ayiiv fiffux'"^*) "^ 
ei^KiTv, with accus., 87 

iiTOi, 9, Obs 2 

-ai'va, aorist of verbs in, 27, Obs. 4 

ee,irt7v rivcc ri, 92 

ccluvii aluvuv ] 9, Obt. S 

uKokovBtTv, constr., 119 

ixovity, constr., 98, 103, 104 



akka, in reply to negative questions, 199 
— used comparatively, ib. — ctkXa, yi, 
aXX' »j, 198 

aXkos, with the article, 77 

eifjba,, with dat., 169 

a,f/,ix, <r^ui, 182 

a/jt^a^Teivuv its nva, 90, Obs. 2 

-av, for ciffi, in 3 pi. per/, act., 29, Obs. 7 

uv with indie, 138 — with the opt. in iw- 
terrogations, 142 — omitted, 138 

ava, 175 — with numerals, ib. — used ad- 
verbially, ib. 

ecvdyuv, scil. rvtv vctvv, 33, Obs. 2 

dva its 'ixaffro;, 203 

dvet/at/Av^ffKiiv, with two accus., 94, Obs. 15 

avjjg or «v;^^(i»^aj, instead of t/?, or the 
pron. demonttr., 25, Ofe. 1 1 — redun- 
dant, 46 

av^^u^of, with the art. used irregularly, 
57, ww^e 

a»S' Jv, 159, Obs. 6, 171, 06s. 2 

oivoiav o(p>^itrxdvtiv, 66, 06$. 1 

avo'iyu, with double and /r/p^e augment, 
26, 06s. 6 — avolyuv, scil. ^ygav, 21 1 

dyr), 170 

atr' a^r<, 182 

d^r* d^x^^i 171 

d'^iikrjs l/jcrviiiv, 99, 06s. 14 

airo, 171 — dcro, lb. 

d^a^avuv a/^ct^ria, and like phrases, 116 

dvro fjo'i^ovs, 171, 06s. 3 and 4 

d^ro •pri^vff), 182 

d-ro ^^ai, ib. 

dfeo TOTS, ib. 

a^TSff^ai, with gen., 110, 06s. 11 

apa, 201 — a^a, ib. — a^xyi, ib. — a^a ovv, 

upyoSf 18 

d^iffKiiv, with dat., 115, 06s. 9 

a^^a^svav, used impersonally, 167 

ag?ray£/;, 27, 06s. 3 

«g;^e/v, declension of nouns compounded 
with, 12 

a^X^<r^"'t, with </a/., 124 — withm/n., 163 
— redundant, 214 

-us, contract form of neuters in, 14, 
06s. 3 

-uffi, termination of 3 pi. pres. of verbs 
in //,i, 30 

aTivi^uv, constr., 88 

uv^dviiv, 33 

oLVToSi its various significations, 22 — em- 
phatic, 23 — instead of kvtos, ib. — 
twice repeated, 72 — interchanged 
with ffVy 74 — its reference implied, 
43 — redundant, 167 — xal uItos, 72, 
06s. 11 — etvTos, 77 — with dat., 
120, 06s. 8 

a<f)ei4^s7<rSai, constr., 93, 06s. 12, 3 

CitpiUVTUl, 31 

u,<p* oS, scil. xpovov, 171 
liZ^'i °^} with indie, 146 

(ix^ficos, 10 

(ioLTTUv vhaTos, 99 

^ocffKamtv, with accus., 87 

(iaros, gender of, 1 4 

(iiaffTtiS) 28 

(iXd^Tsiv, with accus., 88 — with two ac- 
cus., 92 

fiXaff(pyif^t7v us Tivet, 88 — Tiva, 92 

(ikicrsiv, constr., 88 

^ovXo/jcoci, its augment, 25, 06s. 2 — (6ovku, 
29, 06s. 5 — (iovXo/^eii, with fteiXXov 
understood, 105 — QovXolfifiv civ, lp>ov- 
X.ofjt,nv, ifiovXofjjnv av, 139 

ya^, elliptical use of, 200 — its reference 

remote, »6. 
yiviat yiviuv, 19 
ytviff^ai, constr., 98 
ytyviff^ai, partitive use of, 97 — with dat., 

122, 06s. 14 — yiviff^at its ovTiv, its 

Ti, 85, 06s. 22— Vv Tm, 85, 06s. 23 

— ?» Tivos, 98, 06s. 12 — \y iavToo, 

174, 06s. 7 
yovv<riTi7v, constr., 88, 115 
yvvalxa 'i^^iv, 54 
yvvri, ellipsis of, 64, 112, 211 

l\, 195 

Ss/va, with the article, 77 
"htlff^at, constr., 101 
liofAoct aou, ellipsis of, 143 

^'ifffJ^os, VifffJi^a., 14 

yi^^a-^'^i, constr., 85, 06s. 22 

ha, with gen., 17 b — with accus., ib. — 

with gen. used adverbially, ib. 
^teiyuv, scil. (itov, 211 



^laxonJv, with dat., 115 

itdktKTOS XOIVV) 5 

hecXoyi^iffBai, constr., 120, Obs, 6 • 
5;^«ir*s/y, constr., 93 

^i^^ay/ubCi, 10 

h^^v, 29, Obs. 8— constr., 102 

loxiTv, its supposed redundancy, 214 

^ovXivttv, with claf., 115 

IvvafAai, its augment, 25, 06s, 2 — luvaerect, 

Syv»j, 28, 06*. 4 
Sya, 21 — Swo, SJa, 203 
^y,y, 30, 06s. 3 
^ufia, understood, 112, Obs. 19 
^eua-yi, 30, 06*. 5 

lav, with the conjunctive, 144 — with «/, 
in the foregoing clause, 144, Obs. 2 
— with the indie, 145, 06s. 4 

latfraw, applied generally, 74, 06s. 14 
and 15 

lyyi^itv, constr., 121 

lyivtTo, used impersonally with the injin., 
155 — xa) lyinrs, 83, 06s. 15 

-u, termination of 2 sm^. pres. and /«/. 
pass., 29, 06s. 5 

Si, 191 — with indie, 137 — followed by 
av in the conclusion, ib. — instead 
of 'i<ri), 137, 06s. 2 — with the opt., 
signifying utinam. 141 — with opt. in 
conditional propositions, 144 — with 
lav in the next clause, 144, 06s. 2 — 
with the conjunct., 145, 06s. 4 — 
used with a negative import in ad- 
jurations, 192 

it, whether, 192 — with indie, 144, Obs. 3 
— with opt., ib. 

u CC^CC, 201 

u }ii fjiivyi, 187, 213 

(/ xcii, 191 

uXfi<pci, 25 

tifu, 31 — its effect upon the article, 59 — 

in what persons omitted, 84, 06s. 

20 — with part, instead of finite 

verb, 164, 06s. 16 
tlmi ri, 24, 06s. 10; 81, 06s. 10— «v rm, 

85, 06s. 23— /« nvoi, 98 ; 06s. 12— 

fAiroi nvos, 178 — uvect, its partitive 

use, 97, 06». 8— with dat., 122, 

06s. 13 

uTo,, uTtot, 27, 06s. 2 

uf, instead of r/j, 20 — instead of 'x^Zro?, 
i6.— with the article, 71, 06«. 2 — 
followed by aXXos or trs^of, ib. — ui 
ris, 24 — t7s xai us, 70— ilf «aS' i7f, 

tU, 174 — with gen. subaud. otxov, 175 — 
if used instead of iv, 175, Obs. 10 — 
with accus. in the predicate, 93 — 
indicating direction, 118, 06s. 15 

iif aiuivas aiavuVj us ytvtois yivimv, 19, 
06s. 5 

-iiffav, termination of 3 pi, plusq. per/., 28 

ix or il, 171 

'ixatrres, with ar/., 77 — with plural verb, 
80, 06s. 5 

£« htlTi^OV, IX T^'irov, 171 

ixilvos, 71 — with ar/., 75 
Usro-s, instead oilxil, 169, 06s. 3 
sx fjb'iT^ov, ix Vi^nrffov, 171 
IxfTaXa/, 182 

IfXwj, its gender, 15, 06s. 3 
iyJ^ilv us lavrov, 174, 06s. 7 
Iv, 172 — if interchanged with tls, 173, 

Obs. 7 — with verbs of motion, ib. — 

instead of crh, ib. — redundant with 

dat., 119, 06s. 3 
iv ti/xTv, instead of rifAas, 119, 06s. 4 
tvt, for svstf-Ti, 31 
ivoxos) constr., 109, 06s. 7 
Ivr^i^itrB-cn, constr., 88 
ivrvyxoivuv, COnstr., 101, 118 
ei o^ZX^S> ^I "^j *^'^' X^^vw, 172 
l^ravft/, with numerals, signifying excess, 

8^$i, iTiihri, with indie, 145 
^-a-s/Ta, after ^ev, 196 
liT^v, eTSiSay, with conjune, 145 
s^r), with gen., 179 — used adverbially, 

ib. — with dat., ib. — with accus., 

iTikuTtiv, constr., 88 
iTt'TXvffffuv, with dat., 114 
tTt Tokv, 180 
'friTtf/,a,v, with dat., 114 
Wi T^/Vj 180, 182 
tTtfaviiv, 10 

iTixtiiiih if redundant, 214 
t^r«, instead of WraKt$, 21 



i^yov, in circumlocutions, 215 

i^u;, from i^is, 13, Obs. 1 

i^X^f^ai, in a future acceptation, 132, 

Obs. 5, 4 
i^corav rivd ri, 92 

IcrS-iiiv ri, rtvo;, ?» rtvog, 98, 06*. 10 
f<rT^x£/v, with simple augment, 30, Obs. 4 
srt, with comparatives, 124, Obs. 9 
'iroifios, with aor. fw^n., 157, 06s. 8 
sy, augment in verbs beginning with, 

25, Obs. 3 
ivayyiki^ia-^at, constr., 113 
svayyiXiov Xpi(r7ov, 108 
ew^axsrv, constr., 115, Obs. 10 
ivXoyuv, constr., 92, Obs. 11 
«« TonTv, 93 (5.), and OA*. 10 
iu^lffxiiv, to oblain, 33 
-ivs, ace. pL of nouns in, 13, Obs, 3 
svo-ifisTv, constr., 89 
ivxiff^ai, constr., 101 
lipd^ra^, 182 

£XS(rSa/, with ^ren., 1 10, Obs. 1 1 
'i;^u, with /ja/Y. {oxfnite verb, 164, 06«. 

I'wj, its use in the later writers, 169 — 'ius 

oZ, 159 
ius, 'ius oS, with indie, 146 — with con- 
junct., 146, Obs. 5 
sW a^Ti, 182 
iias «^%(9/Aa/, 147, 0^5. 6 
'iu; TOTS, in interrogations, t'A. 

^«v, 29, 06*. 8 

97, omitted with numerals in a compari- 
son, 105, Obs. 3 — never the same as 
xcii, 192 — in interrogations, ib. — 
% xat, ib. 

^Ku, used in a perfect sense, 131 

yifjt,i7s, instead of lyu^ 80 

rifit^a, ellipsis of, 211 

7}ft»IV, 31, II. \ 

fiv, for vffav, ib. 

^vlxoc, with indie, 145 

-ns pure, accus. of nouns in, 14, Obs. 4 

;i<r^u, 31, II. 1 

riffvxlav clytiv, 66 

i^Toi, 193 

^rai, 31, II. 2 

^iti 31, I. 1 

^/x<w, with fjjcikXo* understood, 105 — if 
ever redundant, 214 — followed by 
conj. or fut. indic, 143, Obs. 7 

Ssof, with or without the article, 54 — Ss8, 
voc, 13 

S/^srv, -with, gen., 110, 06*. 11 

Sy/ja, ellipsis of, 211 

^u<ria, ellipsis of, 211 

T^ioi, instead oi pron. possess., 22 

'li^iX^, 17 

'It^offokvfia, 'h^ov(rdXh/^, 18, Obs. 2 

7>j/4<, 31 

^Ififfovs, declined, 15 

Ixavovv, with two accus., 94 

iva, with conjunct., 143, 147 — with conj. 
instead of injin., 150, Obs. 3 — with 
pres. and fut. indic, 148 — instead 
of oTi, denoting event, 190 — as a 
particle of titne, ib. — 'tvec fth, with 
conjunc, 149 

Ivan, 203 

'Itrrn/ju, its different significations, 33, 
06*. 2 

-tw, Attic futures in, 26 

^laxrrjsf declined, 15 

xa^ec^i^Btv d^ro rtvos, 95, Obs. 1 

xa), its Hebrew usages, 194 — after lyinro, 
ib. — doubled, ib. — redundant, 214 
— with verb instead of part., 160, 
161 — xa) Ti, 194 — difference be- 
tween xec.4 and Ti, ib. — ««) or xal-rip 
vi'ithpart., 161, 06*. 2 

xa) iyivtro, 83, 06*. 15 

xKt^os, in circumlocutions, 215 

xaxoXoytTv, constr., 92, 06*. 11 

xecx&js 9ron7v, constr., 92 (5.), and 06*. 10 

xccXui ^oiiTv, with part., 163, 06*. 12 

xa,fji.fjcviiv, 9 

xoc^^la, dat. used adverbially, 66, 06*. 2 

xard, with gen..^ 176 — with accus., ib. — 
with ace. instead of adj. or adt\, 1 77 
-—with numerals, implying distribu- 
tion, ib. — understood, 73, 94 

xardyitv, scii. r^v vocvv, 33 

xard, xaioov, 1 76 
xarava^xav nvos, 103 

xKpxXh, in circumlocutions, 215 



^jj^yfTCj/v, constr., 113 
xtv^vvivnv, with injln., 154 
xXiTv, xXiii, 13, 06*. 1 
xkti^ovo/xiTv, with accus., 110 
xX//3a»af, 9 
Kkivv, ellipsis of, 211 

KOlvh ^idkiXTOS, 5 

Koms, with rfa/., 122, Obs. 14 

«flivft;v£rv, constr., 97, OZ>s. 6 

x^ar^rv T/y«, 110, Obs. 10 

x^oviiv, soil. Sw^av, 211 

x^vTTiiv, a-roxfiuTTsiv, constr., 94, Obs. 15 

xv^tos, with or without the article, 54 

Xay;^avs;ii, with ^ren., 110, 06s. 12 

Xafjt^dvuv, with £/f and accus., 85, 06s. 22 

A.a^/3av£<rSai, with ^e«., 110, 06*. 11 

XavSavsiv, constr., 88, 163 

Xar^iuuv, with f/rt/., 115 

kiyuv Tiva, 92, 06«. 11 

ksyovTis, omitted, 212 

kstrov^yiTv, with dat., 115 

Asw/j or Aivt, declension, 15 

XjjxoV, its gender, 15, 06s. 3 

Xifcos, its gender, ib. 

Xoyi^iffBcci, constr., 85, 06s. 22 

Xo'yoi, in circumlocutions, 216 

Xoth^iTv, with accus., 114, 06s. 5 

Xflwe/v aero rivog, 95 

XufAalviffBon^ with accus., 115, 06s. 6 

-^a, class of noun ending in, 40 
fjiciWov, comparative formed by, 19 — 

understood, 105 
'M.ava.ffffrii, declension of, 16, 06s. 1 
'^/a, Ma^tufi, 16, Obs. 2 
ficc^rv^tTv Tivi, 121, 06s. 10 
(Alitor i^os, 19, 06s. 3 
f^ixti, constr., 102, 06s. 5 
fAiXXu,fut. formed with, 205 
fjtXv, followed by Tt, x%), n, &c., 
fiivovvyt, fjbivToi, 196 
fAi^os, understood, 97, Obs. 7 
(AiTo., with gen., 177 — with accus., 178 
fiirech^ovai, constr., 97, 06s. 7 
ftiTcckafifiecviiv, constr., 97, 06s. 6 
fitrei Tivoi uvat, 178 
^sT£x«'v, constr., 97, Obs. 6 

^sx^/f ov, with inrfic, 146 — with conjunct., 
146, 06s. 5 

(£4^, with imperat., 139, 185 — with con- 
junct., 149, 185 — with con/, instead 
of imper., 139, 06s. 1 — with opt., 
185— with injin., 188, 3 /.—after 
verbs of denying, 154, 06s. 1, 213 — 
after Vva or oV^u;, 186 — as interro- 
gative particle, ib. — after tl or lav, 
187 — after relatives, ib. — with adj. 
or part., ib. — difference between ftn 
and Qu, 184—^^ and oh united, 185 
— interchanged, 189— ^^j oh in in- 
terrogations, 186— ^^jVwf, fAn^oriy 
fAviris, with conjunctive, 149 

f^ri yivotro, 141 

fii^Tiv, in the predicate, 81, 06s. 10 

fiia, a-afifioiriov, 20, 06s. 2 

Macros, declined, 16 

V, Attic termination of accus. for a, 13, 

06s. 1 
V l<Pi>.xvffrixov, 10 
vayy, 14 

vo^oSsTsrv, constr., 126 
v'ofAos, with and without the article, 55 
vofftr'tov, 10 
vows, 14, 06s. 1 

oSs, «^T«j, and Ixsrvflj, their difference, 71 
o^ov BoiXufftrTii , 53 

us, one of two, 71, Obs. 1 
01, instead of t/vsj, 70, 06j. 1 

oJxos, understood, 112, Obs. 19 — in cir- 
cumlocutions, 216 
o7os r ufM) 202 
ei 9ra.^a. rivos, 180 
el vrt^i Ttva, 206 

01 -rokko), instead of -rdvrts, 77, Obs. 9 
ekos, with the art., 77, 06s. 7 

fi,h, Se, put partitivehj, 96, 06s. 5 

fiiv, Si fjbivi followed by aXXoj, srtgoy, 

&c., 70, 06s. 2 
ofivvtiv, constr., 89 
ofjLoios, with gen., 121, 06s. 9 
ofAoXoyuv, constr., 118, 06j. 3 
ofjiov, constr. of verbs comp. with, 118, 

06s. 2 
ovaff^ai, with gen., 98 



o»£/^/?£/y, with accus., 114 

ovoficn, in circumlocutions, 216 — ovefiei 
iffri, ovofiMTi, &c., 205 

oV&>f, with conjunct., 147 — denoting event, 
190 — oTus f^h, with conjunct., 149 

o^xi^uv, with two accus., 94, 06s. 15 

-o(ray, termination of 3 pi. imperf, and 
aor. 2, 29, 0J«. 6 

OS IffTt, understood, 48 

oo-ios, its terminations, 18 

orav, o^orav, with conjunct.) 145 — with 
indie, 146, 06s. 3 

oTs, o-rors, with indie, 145 — with con- 
junct., 146 

or/, with cow/, instead of tn^w., 1 50 — with 
injin., 151, Obs. 6 — after verbs sig- 
nifying to remember, 162, Obs. 7 — 
used as a relative, 191 — denoting 
the sign, not the cause, of an event, 
ib. — used in citations, ib, — redund- 
ant, 84, Obs. 21 

oit, with single words, 184— in direct de- 
nials, 185 — after verbs of knowing, 
&c., with oVi, ib, — after t\, 187 — 
with relatives, 188 — with parti- 
ciples, ib. — instead of fii\, 189 — dif- 
ference between oh and fjiMi 184 — 
oh and ^« united, 185 — oh, and oh 
fjm, in interrogations, 186 — oh f^h, 
with, conjunct., 143 (5.), and Obs. 2 

evhi, fii^Vi, and e'uTi, f^vrt, 196, sqq. 

oh^sy, in the predicate, 81, Obs. 10 

eh^iv, 10, Obs. 3 

oZv, 201 

0^ ?ra?, 21 (3.), and Obs. 5 

evTu, our us, 10 

«yT«f l^r/, 169 

opXev, with tnc&'c. in wishes, 141 

o(pXiir»dvuv avotav, 66 

^'^;.g/, 29, 06s. 5 

uv xa) riv xcii o i^%ofAivos, 18, Obs. 3 

^cus, understood, 64, Obs. 6 

?rav^fl;^£~«v, 9 

{r«gai) with ^fn., 180 — ol ^a^d rtves, tk 
tct^d rivos, ib. — with dat., ib. — with 
accus., ib. — its comparative import, 
105, 106, Obs. 5 

'Tet^ec^thovatf COnstr., 113 

^et^aivtTv, with accus., 87 

^a^axaXu at, ellipsis of, 143 

ir«^a^X>?(r/ov, with dat., 169 

^as, with plural noun, 43, Obs. 3 — ^with 
the article, 75 — with the art. and a 
participle, 76, Obs. 4 — its position 
with the art., ib. Obs. 6 — o\ <rdvris, 
ib, Obs. 5 — TO, ^dvra, in the predi- 
cate, 82, Obs. 12 — ToivTuv, after 
comparatives, 106, Obs. 6 

^da-xei, 1 7, Obs. 4 

retrh^, understood, 112, Obs. 19 

9ru'Bsiv, with accus., 87 — with two accus., 

jfj/vJjy, 29, Obs. 8 — constr., 102 

Ti^), with ^ew., 178 — with accus., ib. — 
01 <ri^i Tiva, 206 

^i^irarCv, constr., 123, Obs. 4 

'^i^iffffiviiv, constr., 101, Obs. 3 

Titffat, 28, Obs. 4 

?r/v£/v, constr., 98, Obs. 10 

jrtcTTivsiy, constr., 125, Obs. 13 — rtimu- 
iff^alri, 127, 065.2 

frXjj^ayo-S-a/, COnstr., 101 

9rkovs) 14 

sTXawr/^s/v, ^kouTiXia-Bat 'iv rivi, 101 

<T*iufjbet, in circumlocutions, 216 — used 
adverbially in the c^a/., 66, 06«. 2 

a-vjE/ta ay/av, i^eVA or without the article, 51 

ToBiv, ^oTi, •pror'i^oy, -rov, 'Xus, 202 

?ro«rv, instead of TonTtrB^an, 33, 06s. 3 

^oXvs, without xa), 46, 06s. 1 1 — with the 
article, 77 

ToTi^uv, with two accus., 94 

9rods, in circumlocutions, 216 

«"giv, with op/., conj., and in/in., 147 

jrgo, 172 

irgof , with ^e«., 181 — with dat., ib. — with 
accus,, ib. — in periphrases, ib. — in- 
dicating direction, 118, 06s. 15 

^^offi^nv, seil. Tov vouy, 33, 211 

^^os xai^oy, 181 

tT'^o(rxvvi7v, with accus., 88 — with dat.,l\5 

^^offipi^uv, scil. Suffiety, 211 

•ru^iir^en, constr., 98 

'^a, gen. of nouns in, 12, 06s. I 
s final, 10 



ffoifi^Kra., 17 — ffafifiafi, ffccfifiardif, 14 
-«"«/, original termination of 2 sinff. pres. 

and/w/. pass., 28, Obs, 4 
erecXTiyKTrjl, 27 
<ra^|, in circumlocutions, 216 — used ad- 

verbially in the dative, 66, O65. 2 
2iJ<wy, declension of, 16 
ffixt^ee,, 17, 06«. 4 

ff-rraf, o-rra, 14 
ffxoTos, its gender, 15 
'S.aXofjtMtv, declension of, 1 6 
aTil^ei, 12 

(TTivhlv, in a transitive sense, 32 
<r?rXay%y/^S(rSa<, constr., 90 
areixitv, constr., 123 
ffrofAot, dat. used adverbially, 66, Obs. 2 
ffr^ipiv, a neuter verb in the New Testa- 
ment, 32 

(TT^uvvvtiv, soil. KXivViV, 211 

ffuXXccfi^amv, soil, viov, 211 

ffvfifialvii, used impersonally with in/in., 

trvfcjiaXkuv, scil, Xoyovs, 211 
o"i»v, 174 — 0/ <r«» r/y;, 16. — Syntax of verbs 

comp. with ffvv, 118 
ff-w^aa, in circumlocutions, 216 

ra, ect/ra, followed by a gen., 78, Obs. 3 

rtt^luv, 18 

Tikwrav, scil, (itov, 211 

T4 on, 203 

t/ irgoj ^ftas, 181 / 

T/V, 74 — instead of o<rris, 24, Obs, 6— ex- 
pressive of dignity, 24, 81 — with 
proper names, 25 — omitted, 74, 83 
— ^redundant, 24 — t) in the predi- 
cate, 81, Obs, 10 — TtHf fiiv, rivif ^i, 
7 \, Obs. 3 

rU) interrogative, 23 — instead of vroTt^es, 
24, Obs. 8 

TO 7ffx tivai, 204 

roiouTos, with the article, 77 

ToXfAav, if ever redundant, 214 

ro ket-rov, and like expressions, in apposi- 
tion, 48 

TovTo and ruvrei, subaud. xecra, 73, Obs, 11 

rvy;^dv(iv, with gen., 110, Obs. 12 

-ruffctv, termination of 3 pi, imperat,, 28, 
Obs. 1 

vakos, 9 — its gender, 15 

vfi^i^iiv, with accus., 87 

vios, omitted, 64, 112, 211 — in circumlo- 
cutions, 216 

vcra^X^iv, with dat., 122 

wiTsg, with ^ew., 177 — with accus., ib. 
— its comparative import, 105, 106 

v-TTi^kiav, 182 

tt'To, with^en., 178 — with accus., ib, 

-hs and v, gen. and accus. of nouns in, 
13, Obs. 2 

txrrt^iTir^cci, constr., 101 

(paytTv, constr., 98 
(poiyiffut, 28, Obs. 4 
^ivytiv, a^ofiuynv, constr., 89 
<p^oivuv, constr., 88, 163 
(piaXh, 9 

(po(ii7ff^ai, constr., 90 — ellipsis of, 149, 
Obs. 5 

(pa^Tt^uv, a^o(po^ri^itv, COnstr., 93 
^vXaiffffiff^ai, constr., 89 
(^vffii, in circumlocutions, 216 
<pu\>ri, in circumlocutions, 216 

%8/^, in circumlocutions, 216 
XS^tr^cci, 29, Obs. 8— with dat., 122 
X^'i'V} constr., 94 
X^tg-rov svayyiX/ev, 108, Obs. 4 
^u^a, in circumlocutions, 216 

4"JX^i ^^ circumlocutions, 216 
\Pa/jt'i^uv, constr., 94 

us, 189 — with indie., 145 — with injin., 
151— with part., 161— omitted, 151 
— redundant, 213 

us tTes uTiTv, 151 

ufTi, with injin., 151 

u(piXitv, with accus., 88 — with two accv».j 





Verse. Page 










18 . 
3 . . 

23 . 
5 . 

15 . , 

16 . . 
21 . 
37 . . 
44 . . 

5 . 
12 . 

1 , . 

27 . . 
14 . 

3 . 
18 . . 
42 . . 

2 . 

24 . 
24 . 


175, 06s. 10 

191, Obs. 8 



92, Ois.lO 





173, Obs. 7 
74, Obs. 12 









, 15 

, 59 


. 48 







. 44 




. 59 











i. 17 . . 44 




ii. 3 

, 21 
. 79 

21 . 214 

Chap. Verse. 


Chap. Verse. Page. 

ii. 27 

173, 06«.7 

V. 29 . . 79 



36 . , 81 



vii. 20 . 123 

vi. 16 

. 64 

21 . . 20 

vii. 4 

. 29 

53 . 123, 175 



viii. 26 . . 72 

viii. 43 


ix. 7 . 104 

ix. 3 


9,10 45 


. 84 

X. 15 . . 84 

xi. 4 

. 76 

25 . 152 


. 44 

36 . 207 

xii, 12 

. 69 

xii. 21 . . 74 



XV. 7 . 119 

xiii. 9 


22,25 36 

xiv. 19 


38 . 171 

xvi. 1 


xviii. 17 , 100 

xviii. 27 

. 58 

xix. 19 , . 22 



xxi. 16 . 117 

xix. 37 


xxii. 9 . 104 



XXV. 16 . 147 

XX. 37 


xxvi. iQ , .34 

xxii. 9 


xxvii. 10 . 151 


141, 156 

42 . 149 

xxiii. 51 

. 43 

xxiv. 46 


i. 24 . 152 


ii. 17 . 208 



25 . . 43 



iii. 7 . 206 

iii. 10 

. 54 

20 . 132 



iv. 9 . . 84, Obs. 21 

iv. 37 

. 54 

V. 10 . 163 



vi. 17 . 103, Obs.S 

vi. 9 

. 42 

ix. 17 . 128, Obs. 4 

vii. 38 


xii. 15 . 156 

viii, 44 

. 44 

xvi. 10, 11 64 



ix. 40 

1 Corinthians. 

xi. 19 

xiv. 7 

xviii. 15 


. 77 

i. 11 . . 64 

23 . 222 

iv. 6 . 148 

XX. 15 

. 44 

V. 1 . . 54 
9 . . 51 


vi. 13 . . 84 

i. 2 


vii. 31 . 122 

ii. 4 

. 83 

viii. 3 . . 32, iVo/e 



X. 16 . . 95 



xi. 3 . . 63 


. 76 

20 . . 55 



27 . 192 

iii. 12 


xiii. 4 . . 66 



8, 12 32, Note 

V. 4 


xiv. 15 . 143