Full text of "Syntax of the moods and tenses in New Testament Greek"

See other formats

THIS BOOK

IS FROM

THE LIBRARY OF

Rev. James Leach

Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2010 with funding from
University of Toronto

https://archive.org/details/syntaxofmoodstenOOburt ©

oN a

OF THE

MOODS AND THNSES

NEW TESTAMENT GREEK

ERNEST DE WITT BURTON

PROFESSOR IN THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

CHICAGO

The University of Chicago Press
1906

ane Gee ;

< sb LEN
NOV 1 0 i967

Sj,

Vy <0
v
ERsity oF TORS

Ba ING AX

OF THE

MOODS AND TENSES

NEW TESTAMENT GREEK

ERNEST DE WITT BURTON

PROFESSOR IN THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

CHICAGO

The University of Chicago Press
1906

= -_ es a
LT Ue) Poe eae an
a ba g - sew ao

PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.

Tue first edition of this work appeared as a pamphlet in
1888. In issuing this revised and enlarged edition, it seems
desirable to state somewhat more fully than was done in the
former preface the purpose which it is hoped the book will
serve. Classified according to its intent, it belongs among the
aids to the interpretation of the New Testament. It is de-
signed to assist English-speaking students in the task of
translating the Greek New Testament into English forms of
thought and expression. The work has not been undertaken
under the impression that grammar is an end in itself, or that
a knowledge of it is the sole qualification for successful in-
terpretation, but in the conviction that grammar is one of
the indispensable auxiliaries of interpretation. The book is
written, therefore, in the interest not of historical but of
exegetical grammar, not of philology as such, but of philology
as an auxiliary of interpretation. If it has any value for
historical grammar, this is incidental. Its main purpose is
to contribute to the interpretation of the New Testament by
the exposition of the functions of the verb in New Testament
Greek, so far as those functions are expressed by the dis-
tinctions of mood and tense.

The student of the New Testament who would interpret it
with accuracy and clearness must possess — along with other
qualifications for his work —a knowledge of the distinctions
of thought which are marked by the different moods and
tenses of the Greek verb. If he would acquire facility in the
work of interpretation, he must have an easy familiarity with
the leading uses of each mood and tense. It is not enough

Vill PREFACE.

subject of this book, and to whom my obligations in many
directions are larger than can be acknowledged here.

In quoting examples from the New Testament I have fol-
lowed the Greek text of Westcott and Hort as that which
perhaps most nearly represents the original text, but have
intended to note any important variations of Tischendorf’s
eighth edition or of Tregelles in a matter affecting the point
under discussion. The word text designates the preferred
reading of the editor referred to, as distinguished from the
marginal reading. In the English translation of the examples
I have preferred to follow the Revised Version of 1881 rather
than to construct entirely independent translations. Yet in
not a few passages it has seemed necessary to depart from
this standard either because the revisers followed a Greek text
different from that of Westcott and Hort, or because their
translation obscured the value of the passage as an illustration
of the grammatical principle under discussion, or occasionally
because I was unwilling even to seem to approve what I
regarded as unquestionably an error of translation.

While I have given all diligence to make the book correct
in statement and in type, I dare not hope that it has altogether
escaped either typographical errors or those of a more serious
character. I shall welcome most cordially criticisms, sugges-
tions, or corrections from any teacher or student into-whose

hands the book may fall.
ERNEST D. BURTON.

CuicaGo, September, 1893.

NOTE TO THE THIRD EDITION.—It having become necessary to send the
plates of this book to the press again, I have availed myself of the opportunity
to correct such errors, typographical and other, as have come to my attention,
and to make a few alterations of statement which use of the book has convinced
me are desirable. The chief changes are in 22 67 Rem. 1, 98, 120, 137,142-145, 153.
189, 195, 198, 200 Rem., 202, 225, 235, 236, 318, 325-328, 344 Rem. 2, 352 Rem., 406, 407, 485.

CHICAGO, June, 1898. IDS LD ler

PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.

vill PREFACE.

subject of this book, and to whom my obligations in many
directions are larger than can be acknowledged here.

hands the book may fall.
ERNEST D. BURTON.

CuicaGo, September, 1893.

NOTE TO THE THIRD EDITION.—It having become necessary to send the
plates of this book to the press again, I have availed myself of the opportunity
to correct such errors, typographical and other, as have come to my attention,
and to make a few alterations of statement which use of the book has convinced
me are desirable. The chief changes are in 27 67 Rem. 1, 98, 120, 137,142-145, 153,
189, 195, 198, 200 Rem., 202, 225, 235, 236, 318, 325-328, 344 Rem. 2, 352 Rem., 406, 407, 485.

CHICAGO, June, 1898. KE. D: 5:

CONTENTS.

—_1oo——_
INTRODUCTORY.
SECTION
1. Form and Function .
‘2. The Interpreter’s Relation to Gannnar
2,4. The four Moods and the seven Tenses .
THE TENSES.
5. Two-fold Function of the Tenses .
TENSES OF THE INDICATIVE MOOD.
6, 7. General Definition of the Tenses of the Indicative .
The Present Indicative.
8-10. PROGRESSIVE PRESENT .
ihe Conative Present . :
12. GENERAL OR GNOMIC PRESENT .
13. AorisTIC PRESENT
14. HisroricaL PRESENT
15. PRESENT FOR THE FUTURE
16. Present of #xw, mapecu, etc. ees
17. PRESENT OF PAST ACTION STILL IN eee ;
18. Similar use of the Aorist .
19. Present in Indirect Discourse
20. Periphrastic Form of the Present
The Imperfect Indicative.
21, 22. ProGReEssiveE IMPERFECT
23. Conative Imperfect
24. IMPERFECT OF REPEATED ACTION
25-27 Minor uses of Secondary Tenses
28, 29 Imperfect translated by English Perfect fad Blige fect
30-32. Imperfect of Verbs denoting obligation, etc.
DD. Imperfect of Verbs of wishing
34. Periphrastic Form of the Imperfect

15,
14,

15,

SECTION

1382, 133.
154-158.
139-141.
142-140.

146.

147.
148, 149.
150, 151.

154, 155.
156.

157.

158, 159.

160, 161.
162-167.
168-171.
1723473:

CONTENTS.

The Aorist Participle.

General Force of the Aorist Participle .
AORIST PARTICIPLE OF ANTECEDENT ACTION
Aorist PARTICIPLE OF IDENTICAL ACTION
Aorist PARTICIPLE OF SUBSEQUENT ACTION.
AoRIST PARTICIPLE WITH THE OBJECT OF A VERB OF
PERCEPTION :
Aorist Participle w ith epee
Exceptional uses of the Aorist Particle
Equivalence of the Aorist Participle

The Future Participle.

GENERAL FORCE OF THE FuTURE PARTICIPLE . .
MéA\wv with the Infinitive, denoting inten-
TIONS ELC!) ee Se wh out cel ee ee

The Perfect Participle.

GENERAL FORCE OF THE PERFECT PaRTICIPLE. . .
Perfect Participle used asa Pluperfecu. . . . .

THE MOODS.
MOODS IN PRINCIPAL CLAUSES.
The Indicative Mood.
GENERAL ForcE OF THE INDICATIVE
INDICATIVE IN QUALIFIED ASSERTIONS .
The Subjunctive Mood.

Horrarory SUBJUNCTIVE

PROHIBITORY SUBJUNCTIVE .

DELIBERATIVE SUBJUNCTIVE

SUBJUNCTIVE IN NEGATIVE ASSERTIONS ... .

The Optative Mood.

Infrequency of the Optative in later Greek
OPpTATIVE OF WISHING
POTENTIAT, OPTATIVE... 4) ae eee

PAGE
59-63
63, 64
64, 65
65-67

CONTENTS.

#0
INTRODUCTORY.
SECTION
_1. Form and Function ames
2. The Interpreter’s Relation to Geannae
“4. The four Moods and the seven Tenses .
THE TENSES.
5. ‘Two-fold Function of the Tenses.
TENSES OF THE INDICATIVE MOOD.
6, 7. General Definition of the Tenses of the Indicative .
The Present Indicative.
8-10. PROGRESSIVE PRESENT
We Conative Present .
12. GENERAL OR GNOMIC PRESENT
18. Aoristic PRESENT
14. Huisrorican PRESENT
15. PRESENT FOR THE FUTURE
16. Present of kw, madperu, etc. ALS
17. PRESENT OF PAST ACTION STILL IN PROGRESS .
18. Similar use of the Aorist
19. Present in Indirect Discourse
20. Periphrastic Form of the Present

‘The Imperfect Indicative.
PROGRESSIVE IMPERFECT
Conative Imperfect
IMPERFECT OF REPEATED ACTION
Minor uses of Secondary Tenses

Imperfect translated by English Perfect and einpestact

Imperfect of Verbs denoting obligation, etc.
Imperfect of Verbs of wishing :
Periphrastic Form of the Imperfect
ix

Xll

SECTION

132, 135.
134-138.
139-141.
142-145.

146.

147.
148, 149.
150, 151.

160, 161.
162-167.
168-171.
172, 178.

CONTENTS.

The Aorist Participle.

General Force of the Aorist Participle .
AorIst PARTICIPLE OF ANTECEDENT ACTION
Aorist PARTICIPLE OF IDENTICAL ACTION
AORIST PARTICIPLE OF SUBSEQUENT ACTION.
AORIST PARTICIPLE WITH THE OBJECT Of A VERB OF
PERCEPTION :
Aorist Participle with Nevodve
Exceptional uses of the Aorist Eaecemic
Equivalence of the Aorist Participle . .

The Future Participle.

GENERAL FORCE OF THE FUTURE PARTICIPLE . .
MéA\wy with the Infinitive, denoting inten-
tion, ete. - 2" <h. “2 “ERS Oe

The Perfect Participle.

GENERAL FORCE OF THE PERFECT PARTICIPLE. . .
Perfect Participle used as a Pluperfect .

THE MOODS.
MOODS IN PRINCIPAL CLAUSES.
The Indicative Mood.

GENERAL FORCE OF THE INDICATIVE
INDICATIVE IN QUALIFIED ASSERTIONS .

The Subjunctive Mood.

HortatTory SUBJUNCTIVE

PROHIBITORY SUBJUNCTIVE .

DELIBERATIVE SUBJUNCTIVE

SUBJUNCTIVE IN NEGATIVE ASSERTIONS .. .

The Optative Mood.

Infrequency of the Optative in later Greek
OPpTATIVE OF WISHING
POrentimaD OPpranie) 2 = = ee eee

~~ =~]
7 >

=
ae

.
at sas] eI

OOo a or

“J =I
Oo ©

79, 80

CONTENTS.

The Imperative Mood.
SECTION

180. InvpeerRArivE IN COMMANDS AND EXHORTATIONS .
181. Imperative IN ENTREATIES AND PETITIONS Bae.
182,183. IMPERATIVE TO EXPRESS CONSENT OR AN Hyporuesis
184. Tenses of the Imperative in Commands and Pro-
hibitions

FINITE MOODS IN SUBORDINATE CLAUSES.
185-187. Subordinate Clauses Classified

Moods in Clauses Introduced by Final Particles. ©

188, 189. Classification and General Usage
190-196. New Testament Use of Final Particles

197-199. Purr FINAL CLAusES See BA Petes
200-204. Opsecr CLAUSES AFTER VERBS OF Eonar etc.
205-210. Ossecr CLAUSES AFTER VERBS OF STRIVING, etc. .
211-214. Sussect, PrepicatTr, AND APPOSITIVE CLAUSES INTRO-
DUCED BY iva. Fe a Wes, os eetly foes
215-217. COMPLEMENTARY AND EPEXEGETIC CLAUSES INTRO-
DUCED BY iva. ae ee ae es
218-223. CLAUSES OF Goats ED Reanive INTRODUCED BY iva.
224-227. Opssecr CLAUSES AFTER VERBS OF FEAR AND DANGER

Moods in Clauses of Cause.

228. Definition . ‘
229,280. Moods and Tenses in “Causal Clases
231,282. Independent Causal Sentences

235. Other Methods of expressing Cause

Moods in Clauses of Result.

234. Definition . Spey 2

235. Distinction petwean indicative aM Tnfiiitive in Con-
secutive Clauses .

236. Indicative with wore . 3

237. Independent Consecutive Serkon eed.

Moods in Conditional Sentences.

238-241. Definition and Classification ee
242-247. SimpLe PRESENT OR Past PARTICULAR SUPPOSITION

Xlil

PAGE
80
80
80, 81

81-83

85, 84
84, 85
85, 80
87, 88
88-90

90, 91

99
99, 100
100

100, 101
102, 103

Xvi

SECTION
36

1-563.

364, 565.
366, 367.
368.

369-371.

372-374.

B75.

376, 377.
378, 37

oe
383.
384, 385.
386.
387-389.
390.

og.

402, 403.
404, 405.
406-417.

CONTENTS.

THE INFINITIVE.

Origin, and Classification of Uses . - : : . ..

The Infinitive without the Article.

IMPERATIVE INFINITIVE

INFINITIVE OF PURPOSE ot:

INFINITIVE AS AN INDIRECT OBJECT

INFINITIVE OF RESULT
Exceptional -usages sees

INFINITIVE DEFINING CONTENT OF A PREVIOUS VERB
or Noun wae

INFINITIVE LIMITING ADJECTIVES AND ADVERBS .

INFINITIVE LIMITING Nouns .

INFINITIVE AFTER mply OY mplv 7

INFINITIVE USED ABSOLUTELY

INFINITIVE AS SUBJECT

INFINITIVE AS APPOSITIVE

INFINITIVE AS OBJECT. . . iy ll ee
Infinitive in Indirect Discount ae
Infinitive after verbs of hoping, promising, swear-

ing, commanding, ett... - - | .

The Infinitive with the Article.

General Use of Infinitive with the Article

INFINITIVE WITH TO AS SUBJECT
INFINITIVE WITH TO AS OBJECT
INFINITIVE WITH THE ARTICLE, IN APPOSITION
INFINITIVE WITH T®
INFINITIVE OF PURPOSE WITH Tov.
INFINITIVE OF RESULT WITH Tod
INFINITIVE WITH Tov AFTER ADJECTIVES
INFINITIVE WITH Tov AFTER NOUNS
INFINITIVE WITH 700 AFTER VERBS THAT TAKE THE

GENITIVE 3 ‘

Various constructions after ech of hindlertae
INFINITIVE WITH Tov AS SUBJECT OR OBJECT.
INFINITIVE WITH THE ARTICLE GOVERNED BY PREPO-

SITIONS

jue

PAGE

145-145

146
146
147
147-150
150

150, 151
151
151, 152
152

153

155, 154
154, 155

155

157, 158
158

158

158, 159
159

59, 160

160-163

SECTION

180.

185-187.

188, 189.
190-196.
197-199.
200-204.
205-210.
211-214.

215-217.

218-223.
224-227.

238-241.
242-247.

CONTENTS,

The Imperative Mood.
IMPERATIVE IN COMMANDS AND EXHORTATIONS .
IMPERATIVE IN ENTREATIES AND PETITIONS Hee
IMPERATIVE TO EXPRESS CONSENT OR AN Hyporuesis
Tenses of the Imperative in Commands and Pro-
hibitions

FINITE MOODS IN SUBORDINATE CLAUSES.

Subordinate Clauses Classified

Moods in Clauses Introduced by Final Particles.

Classification and General Usage
New Testament Use of Final Particles
Pure Finat CLauses Say Care “hed eke
Oxsect CLAUSES AFTER VERBS OF EXHORTING, etc. .
Opsect CLAUSES AFTER VERBS OF STRIVING, etc. .
SuBpsect, PREDICATE, AND APPOSITIVE CLAUSES INTRO-
TOM DMB Yaneyant, cid Aly cece wee lush oediaiso ay Uren eae
COMPLEMENTARY AND KHPpEXEGETIC CLAUSES INTRO-
DUCED BY iva. DAN Eee os
CLAUSES OF CONCEIVED uae INTRODUCED BY iva.
Opsect CLAUSES AFTER VERBS OF FEAR AND DANGER

Moods in Clauses of Cause.

Definition . :

Moods and Tenses in ¢ auraatl Clnibes
Independent Causal Sentences

Other Methods of expressing Cause

Moods in Clauses of Result.

Definition . ‘

Distinction between fidteative and Infititive in ane
secutive Clauses .

Indicative with wore . F

Independent Consecutive abate:

Moods in Conditional Sentences.

Definition and Classification ae
SIMPLE PRESENT OR PAstT PARTICULAR SUPPOSITION

XY
Xill
PAGE

80
80

80, 81

81-83

83, 84
84, 85
85, 80
87, 88
88-90

90, 91
91, 92

92-95
95, 96

oe)

. 99, 100

100

100, 101
102, 1038

XV1

SECTION

361-363.

369-371.

372-374.

ledet

ole.
376, S77.
378, 379.

co
oO
i
> Co
co Oo
Co bo

393.
394,

395.

596.

397.

398.

399.

400.

401.

402, 403.

404, 405.
406-417.

Bh.

CONTENTS.

THE INFINITIVE.

Origin, and Classification of Uses . . . . .. .

The

Infinitive without the Article.

IMPERATIVE INFINITIVE .°. . . . <;

INFINITIVE
INFINITIVE
INFINITIVE

ORS EUREROSE oo eee
AS AN INDIRECT OBJECT. .
On RESULT -er. ee Gee

Exceptional usages

INFINITIVE

or Noun

INFINITIVE
INFINITIVE
INFINITIVE
INFINITIVE
INFINITIVE
INFINITIVE
INFINITIVE

DEFINING CONTENT OF A PREVIOUS VERB
LIMITING ADJECTIVES AND ADVERBS .
LIMITING NOUNS
AFTER tpiv OY mpiv fj

USED ABSOLUTELY

AS SUBJECT

AS SAPPOSITIVE <0 24. os eee

AS OBJECT.

Infinitive in Indirect Disesuise Jae
Infinitive after verbs of hoping, promising, swear-
ing, commanding, etc. . . . . .

The Infinitive with the Article.

seneral Use of Infinitive with the Article

INFINITIVE
INFINITIVE
INFINITIVE
INFINITIVE
INFINITIVE
INFINITIVE
INFINITIVE
INFINITIVE
INFINITIVE

GENITIVE

WITH TO AS SUBJECT

WITH 70 AS OBJECT ee
WITH THE ARTICLE, IN APPOSITION
WITH TO ae

OF PURPOSE WITH Tov.

oF RESULT WITH Tod

AFTER ADJECTIVES

AFTER NOUNS

AFTER VERBS THAT TAKE THE

WITH Tov
WITH Tov
WITH Tov

Various constructions after Vere of hindering

INFINITIVE
INFINITIVE
SITIONS

WITH Tod AS SUBJECT OR OBJECT.
WITH THE ARTICLE GOVERNED BY PREPO-

PAGE

145-145

146
146
147
147-150
150

150, 151
151
151, 152
152
153
155
155
165, 154
154, 155

155

156
156
156
156, 157

157
157
157, 158
158
158

155,

158, 159
159
159, 160

160-165

SECTION
418.
419.

420, 421.
422,
428.

424.
425.

426.
427.

428.

429, 430.
431.

432, 433.

434.
435.
436.
437, 438.
439.
440, 441.
442.
443.
444.
445, 446.
447.

448.

CONTENTS.

THE PARTICIPLE.

General Nature of the Participle .
Classification respecting logical force

The Adjective Participle.

Definition and Classification
RESTRICTIVE ATTRIBUTIVE PARTICIPLE .
Restrictive Attributive Participle with Subject
omitted .
Noun without the ariicle ‘Timited a a Participe
with the article
Neuter Participle with the article panivalent 0 an
abstract Noun . i opal ors
EXPLANATORY ATTRIBUTIVE Buahcaeus
Order of words with Attributive Pantletple
limiting a Noun with the article . :
Attributive Participle conveying a subsidiary idea
of cause, purpose, etc. :
PREDICATIVE ADJECTIVE PARTICIPLE
Predicative Participle used to form periphrasti
tenses oh aoe Millet cb
Participles in Beedieatae in various construc-
tions .

The Adverbial Participle.

Definition . : a:
ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF Time 5
ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF CONDITION .
ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF CONCESSION
ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF CAUSE

Participle of Cause with ws .
ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF PURPOSE
ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF MEANS
ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF MANNER.
‘Qs with the Participle denoting Manner .
Participle of Manner or Means denoting same
action as that of the principal Verb
Intensive Participle — Hebraistic

XVii

PAGE
168
163, 164

- 164
164, 165

165
165

166
166

166, 167

167
167

168

168, 169

169
169
169
170
170
170, 171
171
171
ial

XVill

SECTION

449, 450.

464.

CONTENTS.

ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF ATTENDANT CIRCUM-
STANCE
More ia. one sve toca Polation implied! by
the same Participle .
Genitive Absolute .
Position of Adverbial Participle

The Substantive Participle.

Definition . sos) bee
SUBSTANTIVE PARTICIPLE AS SUBJECT
SUBSTANTIVE PARTICIPLE AS OBJECT
Substantive Participle in Indirect Disvauree
SUBSTANTIVE PARTICIPLE AS A LIMITING GENITIVE
Position of Substantive Participle .
Substantive Participle distinguished from Ad-
jective Participle used substantively

THE USE OF NEGATIVES WITH VERBS.

General Usage

NEGATIVES WITH THE INDICATIVE.

Negatives in Independent declaratory Sentences .

Negatives with a Prohibitory Future .

Negatives in Questions.

M7 ov in Rhetorical Questions

Negatives in Conditional and Conditional Relative
Clauses

Ei »7 in the sense of pee

Ov after uy as a conjunction .

Negatives in Indirect Discourse .

Negatives in Causal Clauses and in simple Relates
Clauses .

PAGE
175, 174

174
174, 175
175

175
175
176
176
176
etd

177

178

178
179
179
179

179, 180
180
181
181

181

NEGATIVES WITH THE SUBJUNCTIVE, OPTATIVE,

AND IMPERATIVE.

Negatives with the Subjunctive .
Negatives with the Optative .
Negatives with the Imperative

181, 182
182
182, 185

CONTENTS.

xix

NEGATIVES WITH THE INFINITIVE AND PARTICIPLE.

SECTION
480.
481.
482.
483.
484.

485.

486.

487, 488.
489,

General Usage of Negatives with the Infinitive

Negatives with a limitation of an Infinitive or of its
subject ;

Compound of ov si an aGnitive peeendens on a
principal verb limited by ov

Redundant uy with Infinitive after vents of ninder:
ing, denying, etc.

Negative with Ta EaE Beronient on a eu itself
negatived by ov

General Usage of Neeaives with the Participle

SUCCESSIVE AND DOUBLE NEGATIVES.

Two simple Negatives, or a compound Negative fol-
lowed by a simple Negative

Double Negative ov uy .

Negative followed by similar paarpouna Neate or
double Negative

PAGE
185

185, 184
184
184

184
184, 185

185
185, 186

186

LIST OF WORKS AND AUTHORS
REFERRED TO BY ABBREVIATION.

. American Journal of Philology.

Vito. ROS ES Henry Alford, The Greek New Testament. 4 vols.

eae (© ee ¢

don.
. Authorized Version of the New Testament.

Alexander Buttmann, A Grammar of the New Testament

Greek. Translated by J. H. Thayer. Andover, 1873.
Bib. Sac. . . . Bibliotheca Sacra.

Karl Brugmann, Griechische Grammatik, in Iwan Miil-

ler’s Handbuch der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft,

vol. II. Second Edition. Miinchen, 1890.

Cl. Rev.. . . . Classical Review.
. B. Delbriick, Syntaktische Forschungen. Halle, 1871-

i kOe Cee

ee Se, OF 8. Le:

1888.

. Apocryphal Gospel of Peter. (Verses according to the

edition of Harnack, Leipzig, 1893.)

neem tates. W. W. Goodwin, A Greek Grammar. Revised Edition.

Boston, 1892.

SAWP eas

Basil L. Gildersieeve, various papers in A.J.P. and

.. W. W. Goodwin, Syntax of the Moods and Tenses of the
Greek Verb. Revised and enlarged. Boston, 1889.

Thomas Sheldon Green, A Treatise on the Grammar of

the New Testament. New Edition. London, 1862.
. James Hadley, A Greek Grammar for Schools and Col-
leges. Revised by F. D. Allen. New York, 1884.

Races t sped Ss W. R. Harper, Elements of Hebrew Syntax. New York,
1888.
Ai Sear W. E. Jelf, A Grammar of the Greek Language.

Edition. 2 vols.. Oxford and London, 1861.

. Journal of the Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis.

Hanover, 1869-1872.

Leipzig, 1884.
xxi

Raphael Kiihner, Grammatik der Griechischen Sprache.

E. Kautzsch, Grammatik des Biblisch-Aramiischen,

xxii

EN ONO Seems

Deon eee

MUSCHscge to eae

WS.

LIST OF WORKS AND AUTHORS.

Liddell and Scott, Greek-English Lexicon, ete. Seventh
-Edition. New York, 1882.

J. B. Lightfoot, Commentaries on Galatians, on Philip-
pians, and on Colossians and Philemon.

. Martyrium Polycarpi. (See any edition of the Apostolic

Fathers. )

K. Meisterhans, Grammatik der Attischen Inschriften.
Berlin, 1885.

H. A. W. Meyer, Kommentar tiber das Neue Testament.
Gottingen, 1867-1876. English Translation, Edinburgh,
1873-1880.

. The Psalms of Solomon. (Recent edition by Ryle and

James, Cambridge, 1891.)

. The New Testament in the Revised Version of 1881.

W. H. Simcox, The Language of the New Testament.
London and New York, 1889.

J. H. Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New
Testament: Being Grimm’s Wilke’s Clavis Novi Testa-
menti, translated, revised, and enlarged. New York,
1886.

Constantinus Tischendorf, Novam Testamentum Graece.
Eighth Edition. 2 vols. Leipzig, 1869-72.

S. P. Tregelles, The Greek New Testament. London,
1857-79.

. Transactions of the American Philological Association.

G. B. Winer. See WM. and WT.

Westcott and Hort, The New Testament in the Original
Greek, the text revised by B. F. Westcott and F. J. A.
Hort. 2 vols. Cambridge and New York, 1881.

G. B. Winer, A Treatise on the Grammar of New Testa-
ment Greek. Translated by W. F. Moulton. Third
Edition. Edinburgh, 1882.

G. B. Winer, A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Tes-
tament. Seventh Edition, enlarged and improved by
Gottlieb Liinemann. Revised and authorized Trans-
lation by J. H. Thayer. Andover, 1869.

. G. B. Winer’s Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Sprach-

idioms, Achte Auflage, neu bearbeitet von D. Paul Wilh.
Schmiedel, GOttingen, 1894- (in process of publication).

For classical and Scripture writers the ordinary abbreviations are used.
References to the Old Testament are to the Septuagint Version, unless
otherwise indicated.

ro) hel (A Daa.

OF THE

Moops AND TENSES IN NEW TESTAMENT GREEK.

INTRODUCTORY.

1. Form anp Function. The following pages deal with
the various functions of the various verb-forms of the Greek
of the New Testament, so far as respects their mood and
tense. It is important that the nature of the relation between
form and function be clearly held in mind. It is by no means
the ease that each form has but one function, and that each
function can be discharged by but one form. Forms of various
origin may be associated together under one name and perform
the same function, or group of functions. Compare, e.g., the
Aorist Active Infinitives, Atdoa and ciety: these forms are of
quite diverse origin; in function they have become entirely
assimilated. The same is true of the Aorist Active Indicatives,
édega and éotnv. Forms also which still have different names,
and usually perform different functions, may have certain
functions in common. Compare the Aorist Subjunctive and
the Future Indicative in clauses of purpose (197,198). On
the other hand, and to an even greater extent, we find that a
given form, or a given group of forms bearing a common name,
performs various distinct functions. Observe, e.g., the various
functions of the Aorist Indicative (38-48).

INTRODUCTORY.

The name of a given form, or group of forms, is usually
derived from some prominent function of the form or group.
Thus the term Aorist reflects the fact that the forms thus
designated most frequently represent an action indefinitely
without reference to its progress. The name Present suggests
that the forms thus designated denote present time, which is
true, however, of the smaller part only of those that bear the
name, and of none of them invariably. The name Optative
again reminds us that one function of the forms so named is
to express a wish. While, therefore, the names of the forms
were originally intended to designate their respective fune-
tions, they cannot now be regarded as descriptive of the actual
functions, but must be taken as conventional, and to a con-
siderable extent arbitrary, names of the forms. The functions
must be learned, not from the names, but from observation of
the actual usage.

2. THe INTERPRETER’S RELATION TO GRAMMAR. Both the
grammarian as such and the interpreter deal with grammar, but
from very different points of view. The distinction between
these points of view should be clearly recognized by the in-
terpreter. It may be conveniently represented by the terms
historical grammar and exegetical grammar. Historical gram-
mar deals with the development of both form and function
through the various periods of the history of the language,
and does this in purely objective fashion. Exegetical grammar,
on the other hand, takes the forms as it finds them, and defines
the functions which at a given period each form discharged,
and does this from the point of view of the interpreter, for
the purpose of enabling him to reproduce the thought con-
veyed by the form. To investigate the process by which the
several forms were built up, to determine the earliest function
of each such form, to show how out of this earliest function

INTRODUCTORY. 3

others were developed, and how forms of different origin, and
presumably at first of different function, became associated,
discharging the same function and eventually coming to bear
the same name —all this belongs to historical grammar. To
reproduce in the mind of the interpreter, and to express as
nearly as may be in his own tongue, the exact thought
which a given form was in the period in question capable of
expressing — this is the task of exegetical grammar. Histori-
cal grammar views its problem wholly from the point of view
of the language under investigation, without reference to the
language of the grammarian. Exegetical grammar is neces-
sarily concerned both with the language under investigation
and with that in which the interpreter thinks and speaks,
since its problem is to aid in reproducing in the latter tongue
thought expressed in the former.

The results of historical grammar are of the greatest interest
and value to exegetical grammar. Our interpretation of the
phenomena of language in its later periods can hardly fail to
be affected by a knowledge of the earlier history. Strictly
speaking, however, it is with the results only of the processes
of historical grammar that the interpreter is concerned. If
the paradigm has been rightly constructed, so that forms of
diverse origin perhaps, but completely assimilated in function,
bear a common name, exegetical grammar is concerned only to
know what are the functions which each group of forms bear-
ing a common name is capable of discharging. Thus, the
diversity of origin of the two Aorists, éAvoa and éAurov, does
not immediately concern the interpreter, if it is an assured
result of historical grammar that these two forms are com-
pletely assimilated in function. Nor does it concern him that
the a at the end of the Infinitives, detéac and iévu, is the mark
of the Dative case, and that the earliest use of such infinitives
was as a verbal noun in the Dative case, except as this fact

4 INTRODUCTORY.

of historical grammar aids him in the interpretation of the
phenomena of that period of the language with which he is
dealing. The one question of exegetical grammar to which
all other questions are subsidiary is, What function did this
form, or group of forms, discharge at the period with which
we are dealing? What, e.g., in the New Testament, are the
functions of the Present Indicative? What are the uses of
the Aorist Subjunctive ?

For practical convenience forms are grouped together, and
the significance of each of the distinctions made by inflection
discussed by itself. The present work confines itself to the
discussion of mood and tense, and discusses these as far as
possible separately. Its question therefore is, What in the
New Testament are the functions of each tense and of each
mood? These various functions must be defined first of all
from the point of view of the Greek language itself. Since,
however, the interpreter whom in the present. instance it is
sought to serve thinks in English, and seeks to express in
English the thought of the Greek, reference must be had
also to the functions of the English forms as related to
those of the Greek forms. Since, moreover, distinctions of
function in the two languages do not always correspond,
that is, since what in Greek is one function of a given form
may be in English subdivided into several functions per-
formed by several forms, it becomes necessary not only to
enumerate and define the functions of a given form purely
from the point of view of Greek, but to subdivide the one
Greek function into those several functions which in English
are recognized and marked by the employment of different
forms. An enumeration of the uses of a given Greek tense
made for the use of an English interpreter may therefore
properly include certain titles which would not occur in a
list made for one to whom Greek was the language of

INTRODUCTORY. 5

ordinary speech and thought. The Aorist for the English
Perfect, and the Aorist for the English Pluperfect (46, 48)
furnish a pertinent illustration. The interests of the English
interpreter require that they be‘clearly recognized. Fidelity
to Greek usage requires that they be recognized as, strictly
speaking, true Historical Aorists.

3. The Greek verb has four moods, —the Indicative, the
Subjunctive, the Optative, and the Imperative. With these
are associated in the study of Syntax the Infinitive, which is,
strictly speaking, a verbal noun, and the Participle, which is
a verbal adjective.

The Subjunctive, Optative, Imperative, and Infinitive are
often called dependent moods.

Rem. The term dependent is not strictly applicable to these moods,
and least of all to the Imperative, which almost always stands as a prin-
cipal verb. It has, however, become an established term, and is retained
as a matter of convenience.

4. There are seven tenses in the Greek,—the Present,
Imperfect, Aorist, Future, Perfect, Pluperfect, and Future
Perfect.

Those tenses which denote present or future time are called
Primary tenses. Those tenses which denote past time are
called Secondary tenses. Since the time denoted by a tense
varies with the particular use of the tense, no fixed line of
division can be drawn between the two classes of tenses. In
the Indicative the Present and Perfect are usually, and the
Future and Future Perfect are always, Primary tenses; the
Imperfect, Aorist, and Pluperfect are usually Secondary
tenses.

THE TENSES.

5. The action denoted by a verb may be defined by the tense
of the verb

(a) As respects its progress. Thus it may be represented
as in progress, or as completed, or indefinitely, i.e. as a simple
event without reference to progress or completion.

(b) As respects its time, as past, present, or future.

The tenses of the Indicative mood in general define the
action of the verb in both these respects.

The tenses of the other moods in general define the action
of the verb only as respects its progress. HA. 821; G. 1249.

Rem. The chief function of a Greek tense is thus not to denote time,

but progress. This latter function belongs to the tense-forms of all the
moods, the former to those of the Indicative only.

TENSES OF THE INDICATIVE MOOD.

6. The significance of the tenses of the Indicative mood
may be stated in general as follows : —

As respects progress: The Present and Imperfect denote
action in progress; the Perfect, Pluperfect, and Future Perfect
denote completed action; the Aorist represents the action
indefinitely as an event or single fact; the Future is used
either of action in progress like the Present, or indefinitely
like the Aorist.

As respects time: The Present and Perfect denote present
time: the Imperfect, Aorist, and Pluperfect denote past time ;

the Future and Future Perfect denote future time.
6

THE PRESENT INDICATIVE. 7

7. The tenses of the Indicative in general denote time rela-
tive to that of speaking. Most exceptions to this rule are
apparent or rhetorical rather than real and grammatical. In
indirect discourse the point of view, as respects time, of the
original speaking or thinking is retained. Cf. 351. Of two
verbs of past time, one may refer to an action antecedent to
the other, but this fact of antecedence is implied in the con-
text, not expressed in the tense. Cf. 29 and 48. By prolepsis
also a verb of past time may refer to or include events to take
place after the time of speaking, but before a point of future
time spoken of in the context. Cf. 50. In conditional sen-
tences of the second form, the tenses are properly timeless.
Cf. 248. See Br. 154 (p. 180).

THE PRESENT INDICATIVE.

8. The Progressive Present. The Present Indicative
is used of action in progress in present time. HA. 824;
G. 1250, 1.

Matt. 25:8; ai Aaprades Hudv oBevvevtat, our lamps are going out.

Gal. 1:6; Oavpalw ore ottws taxéws petatiecbe dd Tov KadEoay-
tos upas, 1 marvel that ye are so quickly removing from him that called
you.

9. The most constant characteristic of the Present Indica-
tive is that it denotes action in progress. It probably had
originally no reference to present time (see Br. 156). But
since, in the historical periods of the language, action in
progress in past time is expressed by the Imperfect, and the
Future is used both as a progressive and as an aoristic tense
for future time, it results that the Present Indicative is chiefly
used to express action in progress in present time. Hence
in deciding upon the significance of any given instance of the
Present Indicative in the New Testament as well as in classi-

8 THE TENSES.

cal Greek, the interpreter may consider that there is, at least
in the majority of words, a certain presumption in favor of
the Progressive Present rather than any of the other uses
mentioned below.

10. The Progressive Present in Greek is not always best
translated by what is commonly called in English the “ Pro-
gressive Form.” Some English verbs themselves suggest
action in progress, and do not, except when there is strong
emphasis on the progressive idea, use the progressive form.
Thus the verb davydlw, in Gal. 1:6, is a Progressive Present,
but is best translated J marvel, the verb itself sufficiently sug-
gesting the idea of action in progress.

11. THE ConaTiIvE Present. The Present Indicative is
oceasionally used of action attempted, but not accomplished.
HA. 825; G. 1255. This use is, however, not to be re-
garded as a distinct function of the tense. The Conative
Present is merely a species of the Progressive Present. <A
verb which of itself suggests effort, when used in a tense
which implies action in progress, and hence incomplete, natu-
rally suggests the idea of attempt. All the verb-forms of the
Present system are equally, with the Present, capable of
expressing attempted action, since they all denote action in
progress. John 10:32, AOdlere, and Gal. 5: 4, duxasodoGe, illus-
trate this usage in the Present. Similar is the use of the
Present in Rom. 2: 4, dye, leadeth, i.e. such is its tendency.

For examples of the Imperfect see 25. Respecting the
resultative force of such verbs in the Aorist see 42.

12. The General or Gnomic Present. The Present
Indicative is used to express customary actions and general
truths. AA. 824,a; G. 1253, 1291.

Matt. 7:17; rav devdpov ayabov xaprovs KaXovs motel, every good tree
bringeth forth good fruit.

THE PRESENT INDICATIVE. 9

2 Cor. 9:7; tAapov yap dornv ayard 6 eds, for God loveth a cheerful
giver.

13. The Aoristic Present. The Present Indicative is
sometimes used of an action or event coincident in time
with the act of speaking, and conceived of as a simple
event. Most frequently the action denoted by the verb
is identical with the act of speaking itself, or takes place
in that act.

Acts 16:18; mapayyéAAw cou év dvopate “Incov Xpiorod, J command
thee in the name of Jesus Christ. See also Mark 2:5, ddievtrar; Acts

9: 34, ia@rar; 26:1, érerpémerar; Gal. 1:11, yvwpifw, and the numer-

ous instances of A€yw in the gospels.

Rem. This usage is a distinct departure from the prevailing use of
the Present tense to denote action in progress (cf. 9). There being in the
Indicative no tense which represents an event as a simple fact without at
the same time assigning it either to the past or the future, the Present is
used for those instances (rare as compared with the cases of the Pro-
gressive Present), in which an action of present time is conceived of
without reference to its progress.

14. The Historical Present. The Present Indicative
is used to describe vividly a past event in the presence of
which the speaker conceives himself to be. HA. 828;
G. 1252.

Mark 11:27; xai épyovrat radu eis lepoooAvpa, and they come again
to Jerusalem. See also Luke 8:49, €pyerar; John 18: 28, dyovow.
This use is very frequent in the gospels.

15. The Present for the Future. In a similar way
the Present Indicative may be used to describe vividly a
future event.

Mark 9:51; 6 vids tod dvOpwrov mapadidorat cis xeipas avOpwrun, the

Son of man is delivered into the hands of men. See also Matt. 26:18,
mow ; 27: 63, éyecpouar; Luke 3:9, éxxorrerat.

10 THE TENSES.

Rem. The term ‘‘ Present for Future’’ is sometimes objected to, but
without good reason. The arguments of Buttmann, pp. 205f., and Winer,
WT. pp. 265 ff.; WW. pp. 331 ff., are valid only against the theory of an
arbitrary interchange of tenses. It is indeed not to be supposed that
Greek writers confused the Present and the Future tenses, or used them
indiscriminately. But that the form which customarily denoted an act
in progress at the time of speaking was sometimes, for the sake of vivid-
ness, used with reference to a fact still in the future, is recognized by all
grammarians. See, e¢.g., J. 397; KH. 382,5; G.MT. 32. The whole force
of the idiom is derived from the unusualness of the tense employed.

16. The Present form y«o means I have come (John 2:4;
4:47; etc.). Similarly rdpeps (J am present) sometimes means
I have arrived (Acts 17:6; etc.). This, however, is.not a
Present for the Perfect of the same verb, but a Present
equivalent to the Perfect of another verb. The use of dxovw
meaning J am informed (cf. similar use of English hear, see,
learn) is more nearly a proper Present for Perfect (1 Cor.
11:18; 2 Thess. 3:11). Such use of the Present belongs to
a very few verbs. HA. 827; G. 1256.

17. The Present of past Action still in Progress.
The Present Indicative, accompanied by an adverbial
expression denoting duration and referring to past time,
is sometimes used in Greek, as in German, to describe -
an action which, beginning in past time, is still in prog-
ress at the time of speaking. English idiom requires
the use of the Perfect in such cases. HA. 826; G@. 1258.

Acts 15:21; Mwvojs yap €k yevedv dpxatwy Kata 7oAW Tovs Knpvo-
govtas aitov éxel, for Moses from generations of old has had in every
city them that preached him. See also Luke 13:7, épxouar; 15: 29,
dovAevw; John 5:6, éya; 2 Tim. 3:15, ofdas. This Present is
almost always incorrectly rendered in R. V.

Rem. Cf. Br. 156, ‘* Das Priisens in Verbindung mit zdpos, radar,
moré wurde seit Homer gebraucht, um eine Handlung auszudriicken, die
sich durch die Vergangenheit bis zur Zeit des Sprechens hinzieht.’’ In
the New Testament examples definite expressions of past time occur in
place of the adverbs zdpos, etc.

THE PRESENT INDICATIVE. iM

18. The Aorist Indicative, limited by an expression mean-
ing up to this time, may also be used of acts beginning in past
time and continuing to the time of speaking. Matt. 27:8;
28:15. Cf. 46, and 52.

19. Verbs in indirect discourse retain the point of view, as
respects time, of the original statement; a Progressive Present
in indirect discourse accordingly denotes action going on at
the time, not of the quotation of the words, but of the original
utterance of them. English usage in indirect discourse is
different, and from this difference it results that a Greek
Present Indicative standing in indirect discourse after a verb
of past time must often be rendered by a verb of past time.
These cases, however, involve no special use of the Greek
tense, and should not be confused with those of the Historical
Present. Cf. 351-356.

20. PeripHrastic Form oF THE PRESENT. One of the
clearly marked peculiarities of the Greek of the New Testa-
ment is the frequency with which periphrastic forms composed
of a Present or Perfect Participle (Luke 23:19 is quite excep-
tional in its use of the Aorist Participle; cf. Ev. Pet. 23),
and the Present, Imperfect, or Future Indicative, or the
Present Subjunctive, Imperative, Infinitive, and even parti-
ciple, of the verb eiué (rarely also imdpxw), are used instead
of the usual simple forms. Cf. 431, and see the full dis-
cussion with examples in B. pp. 308-313, and the list (not
quite complete) in S. pp. 131 ff.

Instances of the periphrastic Present Indicative are, how-
ever, few. The clear instances belong under the head of the
General Present.

Matt. 27:33; «is romov Aeyopevov ToAryoba, 6 éotw Kpaviov Toros

Aeyopuevos, unto a place called Golgotha, which is called Place of a
Skull. See also Matt. 1:23; Mark 5:41; 2 Cor. 2:17; 9:12.

12 THE TENSES.

THE IMPERFECT INDICATIVE.

21. The Progressive Imperfect. The Imperfect is
used of action in progress in past time. HA. 829;
G. 1250, 2. .

Mark 12:41; xat zoAAot zAovo.o EBadAov rodAG, and many that were
rich were casting in much.

Luke 1: 66; Kat yap xeip Kupiov Av pet avrod, for the hand of the Lord
was with him.

John 11: 36; ie ras épire adbrov, behold how he loved him.

22. The statement respecting the translation of the Pro-
gressive Present (cf. 10), apples to the Imperfect also.
Notice the third example above, and see also Luke 2: 51,
his mother kept [8vernpe| all these things in her heart; in Luke
24: 32, A.V., did not our heart burn within us, is better than
R.V., was not our heart burning within us. Though the verb
is a periphrastic Imperfect, xatonevyn jv, the English form
did burn sufficiently suggests action in progress to render it
adequately.

23. THe ConaTivE Imeerrect. The Progressive Imperfect
is sometimes used of action attempted, but not accomplished.
Cf 11.. HA S832); G. 1250:

Matt. 3:14; 6 d€ dvexwAvev adrov, but he would have hindered him.

See also Luke 1:59, éxaAovv; 15: 16, éd/80v; Acts 7:26, cvvpA-
Aacoeyv; 26:11, HvayKxaLov.

24. The Imperfect of Repeated Action. The Imper-
fect is used of customary or repeated action in past time.

HA. 830; G.1253, 2

Acts 3:2; dv érifovy Kal’ jpépay zpos THv Ovpav Tov iepov, whom they
used to lay daily at the gate of the temple.

THE IMPERFECT INDICATIVE. 13

25. For the use of the Imperfect, Aorist, or Pluperfect in
a condition contrary to fact, or its apodosis, see 248, 249.

26. The Imperfect and Aorist with dy are used in classical
Greek to denote a customary past action taking place under
certain circumstances. In the New Testament this usage
never occurs in principal clauses. The use of the Imperfect
and Aorist with dy in conditional relative clauses is possibly
a remnant of the usage. Cf. 315.

27. The Imperfect and Aorist are used in a clause express-
ing an unattained wish having reference to the present or past.
The Imperfect denotes action in progress. The Aorist repre-
sents the action indefinitely as a simple event. Hither tense
may refer to either present or past time. All the New Testa-
ment instances seem to refer to present time.

Rev. 3:15; ddedov Wuxpos fs 7 Seords, I would that thou wert cold
or hot. See also 1 Cor. 4:8 (Aor.) ; 2 Cor. 11:1 (imperf.).

Rem. 1. In classical Greek unattainable wishes are expressed by e@@<
or ei yap with the Indicative (HA. 871; G. 1511) or wdedov with the
Infinitive. In Callimachus, 260 B.c., w@edov is found with the Indicative
(L. & S., égpethw II. 3. fin.). In the New Testament ef yap (in this
sense) and ef@e do not occur, but 8edov, shortened form of w¢edor, is
used (as an uninflected particle) with the Imperfect and Aorist Indica-
tive. WM. p. 377; WT. p. 301, n. 2.

Rem. 2. In Gal. 5:12 8dedov is followed by the Future, but the wish
is probably not conceived of as unattainable.

28. When an Imperfect refers to an action not separated
from the time of speaking by a recognized interval, it is
best translated into English by the Perfect, using preferably
the progressive form, unless the verb itself suggests action
in progress.

14 THE TENSES.

1 John 2:7; Hv elyere ax apxns, which ye have had from the beginning.
See also Luke 2:49; Rom. 15:22; Rev. 3:2 (cited by Weymouth
in Theological Monthly, tv. 42, who also quotes examples from clas-
sical authors). Cf. 52.

29. When an action denoted by an Imperfect evidently pre-
ceded an event already mentioned, such Imperfect is sometimes
best translated into English by the Pluperfect. From the
point of view of Greek, however, this, hke the preceding
usage, is an ordinary Progressive Imperfect or Imperfect of
Repeated Action. Cf. 52.

Matt. 14:4; eXeyev yap 6 “Iwavys aita, Oix eeotiv cor éxey abryy,

Sor John had been saying to him, It is not lawful for you to have her.

See also Luke 8:27; Acts 9: 39.

30. The Imperfect of verbs denoting obligation or possi-
bility, when used to affirm that a certain thing should or
could have been done, i.e. was required or possible under the
circumstances related, is a true affirmative Imperfect. It is
incorrect in this case to speak of an omitted ay, since though
it is frequently the case that the necessary or possible deed
did not take place, the past necessity or possibility was actual,
not hypothetical or “contrary to fact.” Here belong Matt.
18:33; 23:23; 25:27; Acts 24:19; 26:52; 272 2ige2 eee
2:3, ete.

The Imperfect is also used of a past necessity or obligation
when the necessary deed did take place. Here also, of course,
the Imperfect has its usual force. Luke 13:16; 24:26;
John 4:4; Acts 1:16; 17:3.

31. Buttmann, pp. 216 f., 225 f., describes correctly the class of cases
in which the past obligation or possibility was actual, but in which the
required or possible deed did not take place, but wrongly includes in
his list several passages in which not only the fact but the obligation
or ability is hypothetical. Such are John 9:33; 1 Cor. 5:10; Heb. 9: 26,
which are to be explained in accordance with 249. The distinction

THE IMPERFECT INDICATIVE. 15

between these two classes of cases is not always easily marked in English
translation, since the English forms could, should, etc., are used both
for actual and for hypothetical obligation or ability. Cf. He could have
gone, if he had been well, and He could have gone, but did not wish
to go.

32. Through a dimming of the distinction between the
ideas of present and past obligation (which has occurred also
in English in the case of the word ought), the Imperfect with-
out dy is sometimes used to express a present obligation. The
Infinitive after such an Imperfect is. always in the Present
tense. In accordance with this usage we are probably to ex-
plain Acts 22:22; Eph. 5:4; Col. 3:18; cf. Ltt. on Col.
loc. cit. and G.MT. 416.

On these several uses of the Imperfect of verbs of obliga-
tion, etc., see G.MT. 413-423.

33. The Imperfect of verbs of wishing, without dy, is best
explained as a true Progressive Imperfect, describing a desire
which the speaker for a time felt, without affirming that he
actually cherishes it at the time of his present utterance.
This is especially clear in Philem. 13, 14, where the apostle
states in one clause what his desire —his personal prefer-
ence — was (é€BovAcuny), and in the next his actual decision
(yOeAnoa), aS over against his preference. The reason for
describing the desire as past is not always, however, that
it has been put aside. Failure to realize the desire, or the
" perception that it cannot be realized, or reluctance to express
a positive and deliberate choice may lead the speaker to use
the Imperfect rather than the Present. Similarly we some-
times say in colloquial English, I was wishing that such a
thing might happen, or even more commonly, I have sometimes
wished. Nearly the same meaning may be conveyed in Eng-
lish by the more usual potential form, I should like, I would

16 THE TENSES.

that, or I could wish. In Acts 25:22 the use of the Imperfect
€BovAopny rather than a Present softens the request for polite-
ness’ sake, and may well be rendered J should like. In Ga).
4:20 it is probably the impossibility of realizing: the wish
that leads to the use of the Imperfect, and 76edov mrapelvar
may be rendered, I would that I were present. In Rom. 9:3
nvxopnv May have been chosen because the apostle shrank
from expressing a deliberate choice in regard to so solemn
a matter, or because he thought of it as beyond the control
or influence of his wish. J could pray expresses the meaning
with approximate accuracy. In all these cases, however, what
is strictly stated in the Greek is merely the past existence of a
state of desire; the context alone implies what the present
state of mind is. Cf. G.MT. 425.

34. PeRIPHRASTIC Form or THE IMPERFECT. Periphras-
tic Imperfects, formed by adding a Present Participle to the
Imperfect of the verb ez, are frequent in the New Testament,
especially in the historical books. The large majority of
these forms denote continued action.

Mark 10:32; xat qv mpoaywv airods 6 “Inaots, and Jesus was going
before them. So also Luke 1:10, 22; John 13:23; and probably

Mark 2:18. In a few instances repeated action is referred to, as
Luke 52165 19:47 Gali): 23: (Ci4oi-

THE AORIST INDICATIVE.

35. The constant characteristic of the Aorist tense in all ©
of its moods, including the participle, is that it represents the
action denoted by it indefinitely; 7e. simply as an event,
neither on the one hand picturing it in progress, nor on the
other affirming the existence of its result. The name indefi-
nite as thus understood is therefore applicable to the tense in
all of its uses.

THE AORIST INDICATIVE. LG

As respects the point of view from which the action is
looked at, however, we may distinguish three functions of the
tense common to all of its moods.

First, it may be used to describe an action or event in its
entirety. This use of the tense, since it is by far the most
frequent, may be called by pre-eminence the Indefinite Aorist.
In the Indicative it may be called the Historical Aorist. The
Aorist of any verb may be used in this sense; thus ciety,
to say; Suxovnoa, to serve.

Secondly, it may be used to denote the inception of a
state. The Aorist thus used may be called the Inceptive
Aorist. It belongs to verbs which in the Present and Imper-
fect denote the continuance of a state ; thus ovyay, to be silent ;
avynoat, to become silent.

Thirdly, it may be used to denote the success of an effort.
The Aorist thus used may be called the Resultative Aorist.
It belongs to verbs which in the Present and Imperfect denote
effort or attempt; thus xwAvey, to hinder, obstruct ; xwAdvoat, to
prevent.

The genetic relation of eee three functions of the Aorist
tense has not been satisfactorily defined. In the Greek, both of
the classical and the New Testament periods, however, they ap-
pear side by side as co-ordinate uses. Br. 159; Del. 1v., pp. 100 f.

Rem. Respecting the force of the Indefinite Aorist, compare Brug-
mann’s statement concerning the Aorist forms: ‘‘ Am haufigsten wurden
diese Formen so gebraucht, dass man sich die Handlung in einen unge-
teilten Denkakt ganz und volistindig, in sich abgeschlossen, absolut vor-

stellen sollte. Das Factum wurde einfach constatiert ohne Riicksicht
auf Zeitdauer.’?’ Br. 159.

36. In addition to these uses which belong to the Aorist in
all its moods, the Aorist Indicative has three uses, instances
of which are comparatively infrequent. ‘These are the Gnomic
Aorist, the Epistolary Aorist, and the Dramatic Aorist.

18 THE TENSES.

The Aorist for the Perfect and the Aorist for the Pluper-
fect are, as explained below (52), not distinct functions of the
Aorist, but merely special cases of the Historical, Inceptive,
or Resultative Aorist.

37. The distinction between the Indefinite, the Inceptive,
and the Resultative functions of the Aorist is often ignored,
or its legitimacy denied. It is true that there are cases in
which it is not possible to decide certainly whether a given
verb refers to the inception of an action only, or to its entire
extent, and others in which there is a similar difficulty in
deciding whether the reference is to the action as a whole or
to its result only. It is true also that the genetic relation of
these three uses of the tense is not a matter of entire cer-
tainty, and that it is possible that, historically speaking, they
are but varying types of one usage. Especially must it be
regarded as doubtful whether the Resultative Aorist is any-
thing else than the Indefinite Aorist of verbs denoting effort.
The matter of importance to the interpreter, however, is
that, whatever the genesis of the fact, of the Aorists of the
New Testament some denote a past act in its undivided
entirety, others denote merely or chiefly the inception of an
action, and others still affirm as a past fact the accomplish-
ment of an act attempted. These distinctions, which from the
exegetical point of view it is often important to mark, are
conveniently indicated by the terms indefinite, inceptive, and
resultative. With reference to the validity of this distinction,
see Br. 159.

The Inceptive Aorist is illustrated in Acts 15:13, and after
they had become silent [pera td ovynoa] James answered. It
is evident that the Infinitive must refer to the becoming
silent, not to the whole period of silence, since in the latter
case James must have been silent while the others were silent,

THE AORIST INDICATIVE. 19

and have oegun to speak when their silence had ended. In
2 Cor. 8: 9, we must read not being rich he was poor, but being
rich he became poor; értwxevoey is manifestly inceptive. So
also in Luke 2:44, supposing him to be in the company, they
went a day’s journey, it was not the holding of the opinion that
he was in the company that preceded the day’s journey, but
the forming of it, and the participle vopiécayres is inceptive.
Contrast Acts 16:27. See other examples under 41.

Illustrations of the resultative sense are less numerous and
less clear. In Acts 7:36, however, this man led them forth,
having wrought wonders and signs in Egypt and in the Red Sea,
and in the wilderness forty years, the verb é&yyayev seems to
refer only to the result, since the signs wrought in the Red
Sea and the wilderness would otherwise have been represented
as accompanying the bringing out, and instead of zoujoas we
should have had roy. See also 42.!

38. The Historical Aorist. The Aorist Indicative is
most frequently used to express a past event viewed in its
entirety, simply as an event or a single fact. It has no

reference to the progress of the event, or to any existing
result of it. HA. 836; G. 1250, 5.

‘John 1:11; eis ra idva HAOev, Kai of (doc adtov ov rapeAafov, he came
unto his own and they that were his own received him not.

39. Since any past event without reference to its duration
or complexity may be conceived of as a single fact, the His-
torical Aorist may be used to describe

(a) A momentary action.

‘

Acts 5:5; e&apvuéev, he gave up the ghost.
Matt. 8:3; Kat éxreivas thy xelpa nWaro avtov, and having stretched
Forth his hand he touched him.

1 Cf. Mart. Polyc. 8 : 2,3, where both @eov, were persuading, and
adroruxdvres Tov metoat, failing to persuade, refer to the same event.

20 THE TENSES.

(b) An extended act or state, however prolonged in time, if
viewed as constituting a single fact without reference to its
progress.

Acts 28:30; évépetve de dueriay OAnv ev idiw prcOwpati, and he abode
two ie dea in his own hired UNE NIST

Eph. 2:4; da tiv roAAHV ayarnv aitod HY HyarnTEV pas, because
of his great love wherewith he loved us.

Matt. 22:28; wavtes yap eoxov aityy, for they all had her.
2 Cor. 11:25; tpis évavaynoa, thrice I suffered shipwreck.

40. These three uses of the Historical Aorist may for con-
venience be designated as the Momentary Aorist, the Compre-
hensive Aorist, and the Collective Aorist. But it should be
clearly observed that these terms do not mark distinctions in
the functions of the tense. An Historical Aorist, whatever the
nature of the fact affirmed, affirms it simply as a past fact.
The writer may or may not have in mind that the act was
single and momentary, or extended, or a series of acts, but the
tense does not express or suggest the distinction. The pur-
pose of the subdivision into momentary, comprehensive, and
collective is not to define the force of the tense-form, but to,
discriminate more precisely the nature of the facts to which
it is apphed as shown by the context or the circumstances.
Cf. G.MT. 56.

Rem. The term Historical Aorist is applied to the use of the Aorist
here described only by pre-eminence. In strictness the Inceptive and
Resultative Aorists are also Historical. Compare what is said concerning
the term Indefinite under 35. :

41. The Inceptive Aorist. The Aorist of a verb whose
Present denotes a state or condition, commonly denotes
the beginning of that state. HA. 841; G. 1260.

THE AORIST INDICATIVE. 2]

2 Cor. 8:9; & ipas exrwyevoey tAOVvovos wy, though he was rich, for
your sakes he became poor. See also Luke 15:32; John 4:52;
Acts 7:60; Rom. 14:9.

Rem. The Aorist of such verbs is not, however, necessarily inceptive.
The same form may be in one sentence inceptive and in another historical.
Cf. Luke 9:36 with Acts 15:12, the verb éclynoa being in the former
historical, in the latter probably inceptive.

42. The Resultative Aorist. The Aorist of a verb
whose Present implies effort or intention, commonly de-
notes the success of the effort. Cf. 11, 28. Br. 159.

Acts 27:43; 6 8€ Exarovrdpxns - . . €kwAvoev aiTovs Tod BovAnpatos,
but the centurion... prevented them from their purpose. See also
Matt. 27:20; Acts 7 : 36.

43. The Gnomic Aorist. The Aorist is used in proy-
erbs and comparisons where the English commonly uses a
General Present. HA. 840; G. 1292; G.MT. 154-161;
ioe t.: WH. pp: 346 f.; WT. p. 217; Br. 160.

1 Pet. 1:24; e&npavOn 6 xdpros, kai To avOos é€€receyv, the grass wither-

eth and the flower falleth. See also Luke 7:35; John 15:6; Jas.
1:11, 24. 4

Rem. Winer’s contention (WZ. p. 277; WM. p. 346) that the
Gnomic Aorist does not occur in the New Testament does not seem
defensible. The passages cited above are entirely similar to the classical
examples of this ancient and well-established idiom.

44. The Epistolary Aorist. The writer of a letter
sometimes puts himself in the place of his reader and de-
scribes as past that which is to himself present, but which
will be past to his reader. HA. 838.

Eph. 6:22; ov éreua mpos tuas eis adTd TodTO, whom I send to you for

this very purpose. See also Acts 28:30; 1 Cor. 5:11; Phil. 2:28;
Col. 4:8; Philem. 11.

eb THE TENSES.

45. The Dramatic Aorist. The Aorist Indicative is
sometimes used of a state of mind just reached, or of an
act expressive of it. The effect is to give to the statement
greater vividness than is given by the more usual Present.
HA. 842; (GM. 60;_K. 386, 9; Br 160:

Luke 16:4; €yvwy ré roujow, I know [lit. I knew, or I perceived] what

T shall do.

Rem. This usage is in classical Greek mainly poetical and is found
chiefly in dialogue. It is sometimes called ‘‘ Aoristus tragicus.’? Brug-
mann thus describes it: ‘' Nicht selten wurde der Aorist von dem
gebraucht, was soeben eingetreten ist, besonders von einer Stimmung,
die soeben iiber einen gekommen ist, oder von einem Urteil, das man
sich soeben gebildet hat.’ See numerous examples in K. 386, 9.

46. Tue AoRIST FOR THE (English) Perrecr. The Aorist
is frequently used in Greek where the English idiom requires
a Perfect. GMT. 58; HA. 837; B: pp: 197, 198:

Luke 19:9; onpepov cwrnpia To oikw TovTw éyevero, to-day is salvation
come to this house.

Matt. 5:21; nKxovoare drt éppeOn Tots dpxaiors, ye have heurd that it was
said to them of old time.

Phil. 4:11; eyo yap éuaboy ey ois ciui adtapKns etvat, for I have learned
in whatsoever state I am therein to be content. See also under 52.

47. The Aorist Indicative of a few verbs is used in the New
Testament to denote a present state, the result of a past act,
hence with the proper force of a Greek Perfect. Cf. 75, 86.
So the Aorists dm@avov (cf. Mark 5:35 with Luke 8:49, and
see John 8:52 et al.), é€€ornv (Mark 3:21; 2 Cor. 5:13), and
possibly éyvoy (John 7:26; cf. 1 Macc. 6:13). All these
Aorists may also be used as simple historical Aorists.

48. THe Aorist For THE (English) PiLurEerrect. The
Aorist Indicative is frequently used in narrative passages of
a past event which precedes another past event mentioned

THE AORIST INDICATIVE. 23

or implied in the context. In English it is common in such

a case to indicate the real order of the events by the use

of a Pluperfect for the earlier event. Cf. 52,53. HA. 837;

GMT. 58; B. pp. 199 f.

John 19:30; dre ovv eAaBev 70 d€0s 6 “Inoots eirev, TeréXeorat, when
therefore Jesus had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished.

Matt. 14:3; 6 yap “Hpwdns xparyoas tov “Iwavyny édyoev, for Herod
having laid hold on John had bound him. See also Matt. 27:31;
Mark 8:14; Luke 8:27; John 12:17; 13:12.

Rem. It has been much disputed whether drécre:d\ev in John 18: 24
is to be assigned to this head. ‘The valid objection to this is not in any
inappropriateness of the Aorist tense to express an event antecedent to
one already mentioned, —the Aorist is the only form that can be used if
the event is thought of simply as an event (cf. Mey. ad loc., contra), —
but in the presence of ofy, which is, in John especially, so constantly
continuative, and in the absence of any intimation in the context that
the events are related out of their chronological order.

49. From the general principles of indirect discourse in
English and in Greek it results that an Aorist Indicative in
indirect discourse after a verb of past time must usually be
rendered into English by a Pluperfect. Cf. 355. These cases
form a class entirely distinct from those that are included
above under the term Aorist for the English Pluperfect.

50. Both the Aorist and the Perfect are sometimes used
proleptically, but this is rather a rhetorical figure than a gram-
matical idiom. WM. pp. 341, 345, 347; WT. pp. 278, 277, 278.

1 Cor. 7:28; éav d€ Kai yapnons, odx yuaptes, but even if thou shalt
marry, thou hast not sinned. See also John 15:8; Jas. 2:10.

51. For the Aorist in a condition contrary to fact, see 248.
For the Aorist expressing an unattained wish, see 27.

52. EncuisH EQUIVALENTS OF THE GREEK AoRIST INDIC-
ATivE. It should be observed that the Aorist for the Perfect
and the Aorist for the Pluperfect are not variations from the

24 THE TENSES.

normal use of the Greek Aorist. Viewed strictly from the
point of view of Greek Grammar, these Aorists are simply
Historical, Inceptive, or Resultative Aorists. The necessity for
mentioning them arises merely from the difference between
the English and the Greek idiom.

The Greek Aorist corresponds to the English simple Past
(or Imperfect or Preterite, loved, heurd, etc.) more nearly than
to any other English tense. But it is not the precise equiva-
lent of the English Past; nor is the Greek Perfect the precise
equivalent of the English Perfect; nor the Greek Pluperfect
of the English Pluperfect. This will appear distinctly if we
place side by side the definitions of the tenses which in gen-

eral correspond in the two languages.

The English Perfect is used
of any past action between
which and the time of speak-
ing the speaker does not in-
tend distinctly to interpose an
interval.!

The English Pluperfect is
used to mark the fact that the
event expressed by it preceded
another past event indicated by
the context, and this whether
the earlier event is thought of
as completed at the time of
the later event, or only indefi-
nitely as a simple occurrence
preceding the later event.’

The Greek Perfect is used
to represent an action as
standing complete, 7.e. as hav-
ing an existing result, at the
time of speaking.

The Greek Pluperfect is
used to represent an action as
standing complete, i.e. as hay-
ing an existing result, at a
point of past time indicated
by the context.

1 The English Perfect and Pluperfect by their auxiliaries have and had
distinctly suggest completed action in the proper sense, viz. the posses-
sion of a thing in the condition indicated by the participle, and substan-

THE AORIST INDICATIVE. 25

The English Past is used of
any past action between which
and the moment of speaking
an interval is thought of as
existing. It affirms nothing
respecting existing result.

The Greek Aorist is used of
any past event which is con.
ceived of simply as an event
(or as entered upon, or as ac.
complished), regardless alike
of the existence or non-exist-

ence of an interval between
itself and the moment of
speaking, and of the question
whether it precedes or not
some other past action. It
affirms nothing respecting ex-
isting result.

It is evident from this comparison that the English Perfect
has a larger range of use than the Greek Perfect.

tially this is the meaning often conveyed by these tenses. Thus, J have
learned my lesson, differs but little in meaning from I have my lésson
learned. But this is by no means the only use which may be made of
these tenses in modern English. They have, in fact, ceased to be Perfect
tenses in any proper sense of that word. Compare, e.g., the Pasts and
Perfects in the following examples: The army arrived. The army has
arrived. Many men fought for their country. Many men have fought
for their country. He often visited Rome. He has often visited Rome.
Only in the first example is existing result suggested by the Perfect tense.
In each pair the distinguishing mark between the two sentences is that
while the Perfect tense places the event in the past time without defining
whether or not an interval has elapsed since the event, the Past tense
places it in the past time and suggests an interval.

Similarly, the English Pluperfect affirms only the antecedence of its
event to the other past event, leaving it to the context or the nature of
the fact to show whether at the past time referred to there were existing
results or not. Thus in the sentence, J showed him the work which T had
done, it is implied that the results of the doing remained at the time of
the showing. But in the sentence, He did not recognize the persons whom
he had previously seen, it is not implied that any result of the seeing
remained at the time of the non-recognition.

26 THE TENSES.

Thus a past event between which and the time of speaking
no interval is distinctly thought of may be expressed by the
English Perfect, whether the result of the event is thought of
as existing or not; but it can be expressed by the Greek Per-
fect only in case such result is thought of. So also the Eng-
lish Pluperfect has a wider range than the Greek Pluperfect.
For while the Greek can use its Pluperfect for an event
which preceded another past event only in case the result
of the earlier event is thought of as existing at the time
of the later event, the English freely uses its Pluperfect
for all such doubly past events, without reference to the
existence of the result of the earlier event at the time of
the later one.

On the other hand, the Greek Aorist has a wider range
than the English Past, since it performs precisely those func-
tions which the Greek Perfect and Pluperfect refuse, but
which in modern English are performed not by the Past but
by the Perfect and Pluperfect. The Greek Aorist, therefore,
in its ordinary use not only covers the ground of the English
Past, but overlaps in part upon that of the, English Perfect
and Pluperfect. Hence arise the so-called Aorist for Perfect
and Aorist for Pluperfect.

If the attempt be made to define more exactly the extent
of this overlapping, it will appear that a simple past event
which is conceived of without reference to an existing result,
and between which and the time of speaking the speaker does
not wish distinctly to suggest an interval, — the interval may
be ever so long, in fact, —will be expressed in Greek by

the Aorist, because the result is not thought of, and in. Eng-
lish by the Perfect, because the interval is not thought of.
Cases of this kind arise, e.g., when the event is said to con-
tinue up to the time of speaking, so that there is actually no
interval [Matt. 27:8; 86 éxAyjOn 6 dypos éxelvos “Aypos Atuaros

THE AORIST INDICATIVE. DAE

éws THs onpepor, therefore that field has been called Field of Blood
until this day. See also Matt. 28:15; John 16:24]; or when the
event is so recent as to make the thought of an interval seem
~ unnatural [Luke 5:26; eidapev rapddoga onpepov, we huve seen
strange things to-day.’ See also Mark 14:41; Acts 7:52, viv

. éyeveobe]; or when the time of the event is entirely
indefinite [Matt. 19:4; ov« dvéyvwre, have ye not read? See
also Rey. 17:12; exx. are frequent in the New Testament | ;
or when the verb refers to a series of events which extends
approximately or quite to the time of speaking [Matt. 5: 21;
nkovoate OTe eppeOn Tois dpxaiows, ye have heard that it was said
to the ancients; the reference is doubtless to the frequent
occasions on which they had heard such teachings in the
synagogue. See also 1 Esdr. 4: 26, 27].

Instances of the Greek Aorist for the English Pluperfect
arise when a past event which is conceived of simply as an
event without reference to existing result is mentioned out
of its chronological order, or is expressed in a subordinate
clause. The Greek employs the Aorist, leaving the context
to suggest the order; the English usually suggests the order
by the use of a Pluperfect. See exx. under 48. Cf. Beet, The
Greek Aorist as used in the New Testament, in Hxpositor, x1.
191-201, 296-308, 372-385; Weymouth, The Rendering into
English of the Greek Aorist and Perfect, in Theological
Monthly, tv. 33-47, 162-180.

53. In many cases in which the Greek Aorist is used of
an event antecedent to another past event already referred to,
English idiom permits a simple Past. A Pluperfect is strictly
required only when the precedence in time is somewhat promi-
nent. The Revisers of 1881 have used the Pluperfect spar-
ingly in such cases. It might better have been used also in
Matt. 9:25; Mark 8:14; John 12:18 (had heard).

28 THE TENSES. oe

54. An Aorist which is equivalent to an English Perfect
or Pluperfect may be either an historical, or an inceptive, or
a Resultative Aorist. If historical, it may be either momentary,
comprehensive, or collective.

In Luke 15: 32, €(yoev, and in 1 Cor. 4: 8, ér\ourjoare, are inceptive
Aorists which may be properly rendered by the English Perfect ; probably
also €SaciXevoas, in Rev. 11:17, should be rendered, thou hast become
king.

In Rom. 3 : 23, nuaprov is evidently intended to sum up the aggregate
of the evil deeds of men, of which the apostle has been speaking in the
preceding paragraphs (1:18 —3:20). It is therefore a collective historical
Aorist. But since that series of evil deeds extends even to the moment
of speaking, as is indeed directly affirmed in the wdvres, it is impos-
sible to think of an interval between the fact stated and this statement
of it. It must therefore be expressed in English by the Perfect tense, and
be classed with Matt. 5:21 as a collective Aorist for (English) Perfect.
Of similar force is the same form in Rom. 2:12. From the point of view
from which the apostle is speaking, the sin of each offender is simply a
past fact, and the sin of all a series or aggregate of facts together consti-
tuting a past fact. But inasmuch as this series is not separated from the
time of speaking, we must, as in 3:23, employ an English Perfect in
translation. This is upon the supposition that the verb nuaprov takes its
point of view from the time of speaking, and the apostle accordingly
speaks here only of sin then past, leaving it to be inferred that the same
principle would apply to subsequent sin. It is possible, however, that
by a sort of prolepsis juaprov is uttered from the point of view of the
future judgment [xpcOncovra], and refers to all sin that will then be past.
In this case the Future Perfect, shall have sinned, may be used in trans-
lation, or again the Perfect, common in subordinate clauses in English as
an abbreviation of the Future Perfect. Whether the same form in Rom.
5:12 shall be rendered in the same way or by the English Past depends
upon whether it is, like the other cases, a collective Aorist, representing
a series of acts between which and the time of speaking no interval is
interposed, or refers to a deed or deeds in the remote past in which the
“all’’ in some way participated. So far as the tense-form is concerned
there is no presumption in favor of one or the other of these inter-
pretations, both uses of the tense being equally legitimate. The nature
of the argument or the author’s thought, as learned from sources
outside the sentence itself, must furnish the main evidence by which
to decide.

THE AORIST INDICATIVE. 29

55. The Aorist evdécnoa in Matt. 8:17; 17:5; Mark 1:11; Luke
38:22; 2 Pet. 1:17, may be explained — (a) as a Historical Aorist having
reference to a specific event as its basis. J was well pleased with thee,
e.g. for receiving baptism. If all the instances were in connection with the
baptism, this would be the most natural explanation. But for those that
occur in connection with the account of the transfiguration this explana-
tion fails, and is probably therefore not the true explanation of any of the
instances. (0) as a comprehensive Historical Aorist covering the period
of Christ’s prefncarnate existence. Cf. John 17:5, 24; see W. N. Clarke,
Com. on Mark 1:11. If the passages were in the fourth gospel, and
especially if they contained some such phrase as mpd xaraBodjs Kdouou,
this explanation would have much in its favor. The absence of such
limiting phrase, and the fact that the passages are in the synoptic gospels
are opposed to this explanation. (c) asa comprehensive Historical Aorist,
having the force of an English Perfect, and referring to the period of
Christ’s earthly existence up to the time of speaking. But against this
is the absence of any adverbial phrase meaning up to this time, which
usually accompanies an Aorist verb used in this sense. Cf. 18 and 52.
(d) as an Aorist which has by usage come to have the meaning which is
strictly appropriate to the Perfect, J became well pleased with thee, and
I am [accordingly] well pleased with thee. Cf. 47. There are a few pas-
sages of the Septuagint that seem at first sight to favor this explanation.
See Ps. 101:15 ; Jer.2:19; Mal.2:17. Cf. also Matt.12:18; Luke 12:32.
The force of this evidence is, however, greatly diminished by the fact
that all these instances are capable of being explained without resort to so
unusual a use of the Aorist, that both in the Septuagint and in the New
Testament there is in use a regular Present form of this verb, and that
the Aorist in the majority of cases clearly denotes past time. (e) as an
Inceptive Aorist referring to some indefinite, imagined point of past time
at which God is represented as becoming well pleased with Jesus. But
since this point is not thought of as definitely fixed, English idiom requires
a Perfect tense. Cf. 52 (p. 27), 54. It may be described, therefore, as an
Inceptive Aorist equivalent to an English Perfect, and may be rendered,
I have become well pleased. This, however, can only be a vivid way of
saying, J am well pleased. If then this view is correct, the rendering
of the English versions is a free but substantially correct paraphrase.
A true Perfect would affirm the present state of pleasure and imply the
past becoming pleased. The Aorist affirms the becoming pleased and
leaves the present pleasure to be suggested. This explanation, therefore,
differs from the preceding (d) in that it does not suppose the Aorist
of this verb to have acquired the power of expressing an existing result,
but judges the existing result to be only suggested by the affirmation

30 THE TENSES.

of the past fact. This is rhetorical figure, on the way to become gram-
matical idiom, but not yet become such. Manifestly similar is the use
of mpocedééaro in Isa. 42:1, and of evddxnoev in Matt. 12:18. Indeed, if
Matt. 12:18 represents a current translation of Isa. 42:1, our present
passages were probably affected in form by this current rendering of the
Isaiah passage. Similar also are éxd@icav in Matt. 25:2, and Zuafoy in
Phil. 4:11. In neither case is there any clearly established usage of the
Aorist for Greek Perfect; in neither is there apparent any reference
to a definite point of past time; in both the real fact intended to be
suggested is the present state.

56. THe DisTINCTION BETWEEN THE AORIST AND THE
ImperFEcT. The difference between an Historical Aorist
and an Imperfect of action in progress or repeated being one
not of the nature of the fact but of the speaker’s conception
of the fact, it is evident that the same fact may be expressed
by either tense or by both. This is illustrated in Mark 12:41
and 44, where, with strict appropriateness in both cases, Mark
writes in v. 41, wodAot zAovown €BadAov zodAAa, and in y. 44
records Jesus as stating the same fact in the words wavres . . .
éBadrov. The former describes the scene in progress, the latter
merely states the fact.

57. From the nature of the distinction between the Imper-
fect and Aorist, it also results that the difference in thought
represented by the choice of one form rather than the other
is sometimes almost imperceptible. Cf., e.g., Mark 3:7 and
5:24; Luke 2:18 and 4:22. Some verbs use one of the two
tenses almost or quite to the exclusion of the other. The
form édeyov is used in classical Greek without emphasis on
the thought of the saying as in progress or repeated, and in the
New Testament the Aorist of this verb does not occur. <A dis-
tinction between the Imperfect €Aeyov and the Aorist eéoy is
scarcely to be drawn in the New Testament. Cf. G.MT. 56,
57, especially the following: “In all these cases the funda-
mental distinction of the tenses, which was inherent in the

THE FUTURE INDICATIVE. 51

form, remained; only it happened that either of the two dis-
tinct forms expressed the meaning which was here needed
equally well. It must not be thought, from these occasional
examples, that the Greeks of any period were not fully alive
to the distinction of the two tenses and could not use it with
skill and nicety.”

This approximation of the Aorist and Imperfect, it should
be noted, occurs only in the case of the Historical Aorist (38).
The Inceptive and Resultative Aorists are clearly distinguished
in force from the Imperfect.

THE FUTURE INDICATIVE.

58. The Predictive Future. The Future Indicative is
most frequently used to affirm that an action is to take
place in future time. Since it does not mark the distinc-
tion between action in progress and action conceived of
indefinitely without reference to its progress, it may be
either aoristic or progressive. HA. 843; G. 1250, 6;
G.MT. 638, 65; Br. 163.

59. Tue Aoristic Furure conceives of an action simply
_ as an event, and affirms that it will take place in future time.
It may be indefinite, inceptive, or resultative. As indefinite
it may be momentary, comprehensive, or collective. Cf. 35, 39.

1 Cor. 15:51, 52; mavres ob KounnOynodpeOa, wavtes 8¢ dAdaynoopueOa,
év atouw, év pirn dpOadrpor, we shall not all sleep [indefinite com-
prehensive]; or, we shall not all fall asleep [inceptive], but we shall
all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye [indefinite
momentary ].

John 14:26; €xetvos buds dda mavra Kai tropvyoe: das wavta a
elzrov byiv éyw, he will teach you all things and bring to your remem-
brance all things that I said unto you [indefinite collective].

Luke 1:33; kat Baotrevoe Eri Tov olkov ‘laxwB eis tovs aidvas, and he
shall reign over the house of Jacob forever [indefinite comprehensive ].

Luke 16:31; ot8 édv tis éx vexpdy avaory metcOnoovrat, neither will
they be persuaded if one rise from the dead [resultative].

Ay THE TENSES.

60. Tue ProGressivE Future affirms that an action will
be in progress in future time. AA. 843; G. 1250, 6.
Phil. 1:18; kai év tovtw Xaipw: adAa Kai xapyoopa, and therein I

rejoice, yea, and will [continue to] rejoice. See also Rom. 6:2;
Phill Ghee) 1G:

61. It may be doubted whether any of the distinctions indi-
cated by the subdivisions of the Predictive Future are justi-
fied from the point of view of pure grammar. It is probable,
rather, that the tense in all these cases makes precisely the
same affirmation respecting the event, viz. that it will take
place; and that it is the context only that conveys the dis-
tinctions referred to. These distinctions, however, are real
distinctions either of fact or of thought, and such, moreover,
that the writer must in most cases have had them in mind
when speaking of the facts. From the exegetical point of
view, therefore, the distinctions are both justified and neces-
sary, since they represent differences of thought in the mind
of the writer to be interpreted. The terms employed above
are convenient terms to represent these distinctions of thought,
and it is to the interpreter a matter of secondary importance
whether the distinction in question is by his writer immedi-
ately connected with the tense of the verb.

62. Since the Aoristic Future is less definite respecting
progress than the Progressive Future, the latter predicting
the act as continuing, the former making no assertion, it is
evident that any instance of the Predictive Future not clearly
progressive must be accounted as aoristic. If the writer did
not conceive the act or event as continuing, he left it in his
own mind and for the reader undefined as respects progress,
hence aoristic. Whether he left it thus undefined in his mind
must of course be determined, if at all, from the context, there
being no difference of form between a Progressive and an

THE FUTURE INDICATIVE. 33

Aoristic Future. It should be noticed that it is not enough
to show that an act will be in fact continued, in order'to count
the verb which predicts it a Progressive Future; it must ap-
pear that the writer thought of it as continuing. Every
Future form is therefore by presumption aoristic. It can
be accounted progressive only on evidence that the writer
thought of the act as continued.

Rem. There is one exception to this principle. In verbs of effort a
Progressive Future is naturally like other Progressive forms, a conative
tense. An Aoristic Future of such a verb is like the Aorist, a resultative
tense. Since the latter is the larger meaning, the context must give the
evidence of this larger meaning, and such evidence failing, it cannot be
considered established that the verb is resultative. The verb in John 12:
32 furnishes an interesting and important illustration. Since the verb
denotes effort, the Future will naturally be accounted conative if it is
judged to be progressive, and resultative if it is taken as aoristic. In the
latter case the meaning will be, J will by my attraction bring all men to

me. In the former case the words will mean, J will exert on all men an
attractive influence.

63. To decide whether a given Aoristic Future merely pre-
dicts the fact, or refers to the inception of the action, or has
reference to it as a thing accomplished, must again be deter-
mined by the context or the meaning of the word. The dis-
tinction between the indefinite and the resultative senses will
often be very difficult to make, and indeed the difference
of thought will be but shght. Here also it results from the
nature of the distinction between the indefinite use and the
other two, inceptive and resultative, that any instance of
the Aoristic Future not clearly inceptive or resultative must
be accounted indefinite. In other words, if the writer did not
define the action to his own mind as inceptive or resultative,
he left it indefinite, a mere fact.

64. The distinction between momentary, comprehensive,
and collective is in respect to the Future tense, as in respect

34 THE TENSES.

to the Aorist, a distinction which primarily has reference to
the facts referred to and only secondarily to the writer’s con-
ception of the facts. There may easily occur instances which
will defy classification at this point. A writer may predict
an event not only without at the moment thinking whether
it is to be a single deed or a series of deeds, a momentary or
an extended action, but even without knowing. Thus the
sentence, He will destroy his enemies, may be uttered by one
who has confidence that the person referred to will in some
way destroy his enemies, without at all knowing whether he
will destroy them one by one, or all at once, and whether by
some long-continued process, or by one exterminating blow.
In such cases the verb can only be accounted as an Aoristic
Future, incapable of further classification.

65. From a different point of view from that of the above
classification, the instances of the Predictive Future might be
classified as (a) assertive, and (6) promissory. The distine-
tion between the assertion that an event will take place and
the promise that it shall take place is difficult to make,
requiring delicate discrimination, but is often important for
purposes of interpretation. It is in general not indicated in
Greek, and its representation in English is complicated. by the
varied uses of the auxiliary verbs shall and will. In general
it may be said that in principal clauses shall is in the first
person simply assertive, will is promissory ; in the second and
third person will is assertive, shall is promissory, imperative,
or solemnly predictive.

R.V. employs shall almost constantly in the second and
third person, in most cases probably intending it as solemnly
predictive.

Matt. 10:42; dunv A€yw byiv, ob pH arora Tov pucOdv avrod, verily

I say unto you, he shall by no means lose his reward.

THE FUTURE INDICATIVE. 55)

Mark 11:31; éav eirwpev "KE ovpavod, épet, if we say, From heaven, he
will say.

Luke 22:61; [piv aAéxropa pwovncat onpepov arapvynon we Tpis, before
the cock crow this day, thou shalt deny me thrice. See also Matt. 11:
28, 29; 12:31; John 16:7, 13.

66. A Predictive Future is sometimes made emphatically
negative by the use of the negative ot wy, Matt. 16:22; 26:
35; Mark 14:31 (Tisch. Subjunctive) ; ef. 172.

67. The Imperative Future. The second person of the
Future Indicative is often used as an Imperative. HA. 844;
G. 1266.

Jas. 2:8; dyamynoes tov tAnoiov gov ws ceavTov, thou shalt love thy
neighbor as thyself.

Rem. 1. This idiom as it occurs in the New Testament shows clearly
the influence of the Septuagint. It occurs most frequently in prohibi-
tions, its negative being, as also commonly in classical Greek, not uy but
ov. G.MT. 69, 70; B. p. 257; WM. pp. 3896f.; WT. pp. 315f.

Rem. 2. In Matt. 15:6 the verb riujoe has the negative od uj. Some
interpreters take this as a Predictive Future, but the thought requires the
Imperative sense, and in view of the frequent use of o¥ uy with the Future
in an imperative sense in the Septuagint, and its occasional use in classi-
cal Greek, the possibility of it can hardly be denied. WM. p.686f.,n.4;
G.MT. 297.

68. One or two probable instances of the Imperative Future
in the third person occur, though perhaps no entirely certain
case. Matt. 4:4, otk ér dptw povw Cyoerat 6 avOpwros, is prob-
ably to be so regarded, though the Hebrew of the passage
quoted (Deut. 8:3) is apparently Gnomic rather than Imper-
ative. On Matt. 15:6, see 67, Rem. 2. See also Matt. 20:
26, 27.

36 THE TENSES.

69. The Gnomic Future. The Future Indicative may
be used to state what will customarily happen when occa-
sion offers.

Rom. 5:7; ports yap tép duxatov tis dmobavetra, for scarcely for a

righteous man will one die. See also Gen. 44:15; Rom. 7:3, ypnpa-
tice. Observe the Gnomic Presents both before and after.

70. The Deliberative Future. The Future Indicative
is sometimes used in questions of deliberation, asking not
what will happen, but what can or ought to be done.
Such questions may be real questions asking information,

or rhetorical questions taking the place of a direct asser-
tion. Cf. 169.

Luke 22:49; ei rata&opev év praxaipy, shall we smite with the sword ?
John 6:68; kvpve, zpos Tiva aeAcvoopueOa, Lord, to whom shall we go?

71. PeripHRastic ForM or THE Future. A Future tense
composed of a Present Participle and the Future of the verb
eiuic is found occasionally in the New Testament. The force
is that of a Progressive Future, with the thought of continu-
ance or customariness somewhat emphasized.

Luke 5:10; avOpurovus éon Cwypav, thou shalt catch men, i.e. shalt be a
catcher of men.

Luke 21:24; “IepovoaAnp eorat ratovpevyn, Jerusalem shall [continue
to] be trodden under foot.

72. MédAw with the Infinitive is also used with a force
akin to that of the Future Indicative. It is usually employed
of an action which one intends to do, or of that which is
certain, destined to take place.

Matt. 2:13; pedAAe yap ‘Hpwons Cyretv 70 ralovov Tov aoAEcal avTo,

Sor Herod will seek the young child to destroy it.

Luke 9:44; 6 yap vids rod avOpwov péedAdAee tapadidocbar eis XElpas
tov avOpwruv, for the Son of man is to be delivered up into the hands of

men. See also Matt. 16:27; 20:22; Acts 5:35; 20:38; Rom. 8:13.

THE PERFECT INDICATIVE. on

73. By the use of the Imperfect of weAAw with the Infinitive
it is affirmed that at a past point of time an action was about
to take place or was intended or destined to occur.

John 7:39; rovro dé etzev wept Tov mvEevpatos ov EueArov Aap Pavey ot

morevoavTes eis avTov, but this spake he of the Spirit which they
that believed on him were to receive. See also Luke 7:2; John 6:71.

THE PERFECT INDICATIVE.

74. The Perfect of Completed Action. In its most
frequent use the Perfect Indicative represents an action as
standing at the time of speaking complete. The reference
of the tense is thus double; it implies a past action and
affirms an existing result. HA. 847; G. 1250, 3.

Acts 5:28; wemAnpwxare tiv “lepovoadAnp ths didaxns buav, ye have
filled Jerusalem with your teaching.

Romans 5:5; dre 9 ayamn Tov Geod exxexuTat év Tals Kapdials Nur,
because the love of God has been poured forth in our hearts.

2 Tim. 4:7; rov xaddv dyOva yyovicpat, Tov Spopov TeTéAEKa, THY
miotw tetnpynKa, I have fought the good fight, I have finished the
course, I have kept the faith.

Rem. On the use of the term complete as a grammatical term, see
85. On the distinction between the Perfect and the Aorist, see 86.

75. The Perfect of Existing State. The Perfect is
sometimes used when the attention is directed wholly to
the present resulting state, the past action of which it is
the result being left out of thought. This usage occurs
most frequently in a few verbs which use the Perfect in
this sense only. HA. 849; G. 1263.

Matt. 27:43; aémouWev ext tov Oedv, he trusteth on God.
1 Cor. 11:2; ézaw@ dé ipas, Ore wavTa pod péeuvnoGe, now I praise you
that ye remember me in all things.

Luke 24:46; ovrws yéyparrat, thus it is written, i.e. stands written,
See also Rev. 19: 13.

38 THE TENSES.

76. There is no sharp line of distinction between the Perfect
of Completed Action and the Perfect of Existing State. To
the latter head are to be assigned those instances in which the
past act is practically dropped from thought, and the attention
turned wholly to the existing result; while under the former
head are to be placed those instances in which it is evident
that the writer had in mind both the past act and the present
result.

77. Tue INTENSIVE PerFrect. The Perfect is sometimes
used in classical Greek as an emphatic or intensive Present.
It is possible that under this head should be placed certain
Perfects of the New Testament more commonly assigned to
one of the preceding uses. Thus zéroa practically expresses
the thought of zeé6oua: intensified. Tezéorevxa is also clearly
a stronger way of saying moredw. John 6:69; wemorevxapev
Kai €yv@kapev OTL OD El 6 ayLos Tov Geov, we have believed and know
that thou art the Holy One of God. See also 2 Cor. 1:10.
Whether this usage is in the New Testament a survival of the
ancient intensive use of the Perfect, regarded by some gram-
marians as an original function of the tense (Del. 1v. 94 ff.,
Br. 162), or a later development from the Perfect of com-
pleted action, affirming the present existence of the result of
a past act, need not, for the purpose of the interpreter, be
decided.

78. Of the Historical Perfect in the sense of a Perfect
which expresses a past completed action, the result of which
the speaker conceives himself to be witnessing (as in the case
of the Historical Present he conceives himself to be witness-
ing the action itself), there is no certain New Testament
instance. Possible instances are Matt. 18:46; Luke 9:36;
2 Cor.12:17; Jas.1:24. Cf. Br. 162. This idiom is perhaps
rather rhetorical than strictly grammatical.

THE PERFECT INDICATIVE. 39

Kéxpayey in John 1:15 is a Perfect expressing a past fact
vividly conceived of as if present to the speaker. But since
the Perfect of the verb had already in classical Greek come to
be recognized as functionally a Present, it is from the point
of view of the current usage a Historical Present rather than
a Historical Perfect. Cf. Z. and S. s.v.

79. The Perfect in 1 Cor. 7: 39, 5é5era:, and in 1 John 2: 5, reredelw-
tat, is probably Gnomic, referring to a state that is wont to exist. If
amedndvéev in Jas. 1: 24 is Gnomic, it is with nearly the force of a Gnomic
Present or Aorist. G.MT. 154, 155.

80. THe Aoristic Perrect. The Perfect Indicative is
sometimes used in the New Testament of a simple past fact
where it is scarcely possible to suppose that the thought of
existing result was in the writer’s mind. See more fully
under 88.

2 Cor. 2:15; otk €oynKa aveow TH TvEevpaTi ov TH pay EvpEtv we TiToV,

I had no relief for my spirit because I found not Titus.

Rey. 8:5; Kai elAndev 6 ayyeAos Tov ALBavwror, Kai éyewuoev adrov, ani

the angel took the censer, and filled it. See also Matt. 25:6; 2 Cor.
ormipao ss ll 25° eb: 11'328)- Rey. 714) 19)33.

81. The Perfect Indicative in indirect discourse after a
verb of past time is regularly rendered into English by a
Pluperfect. This involves, however, no special use of the
tense, but results from the regular difference between English
and Greek in the matter of indirect discourse. Cf. 553.

82. When the Perfect Indicatiye is used of a past event
which is by reason of the context necessarily thought of as
separated from the moment of speaking by an interval, it is
impossible to render it into English adequately. English
idiom forbids the use of the Perfect because of the interval
(present in thought as well as existing in fact) between the
act and the time of speaking, while the English Past tense

40 THE TENSES.

fails to express the idea of existing result which the Greek

Perfect conveys. In most of these cases R.V. has attempted

to preserve the sense of the Greek at the expense of the Eng-

lish idiom.

Acts 7:35; tovrov 6 Oeds Kai apxovta Kai AuTpwTHy aréeaTaAKev adv
xelpi ayyeAov tov 6dOevros aired év tH Batw, him did God send
[R.V. hath God sent] to be both a ruler and a deliverer with the hand
of the angel which appeared to him in the bush. See also instances
cited by Weymouth in Theological Monthly, tv. 168 f.; Rom. 16:7,
who also were [yéyovav, R.V. have been] in Christ before me; John
6:25, R.V. correctly, when camest [yéyovas] thou here? Heb.7:
Oo; OS ce ax
These cases should not be confused with those treated under

80. Here the Greek tense has its normal force, though it can-

not be well rendered by its usual English equivalent. There

the use of the Greek tense is somewhat abnormal.

83. For the Perfect used proleptically, see 50.

84. PertpHRASTIC ForM oF THE PERFEcT. Periphrastic
Perfects, formed by adding a Perfect Participle to the
Present of the verb ciud, are frequent in the New Testament,
about forty instances occurring. In function these forms
more frequently denote existing state, though clear instances
of the Perfect denoting completed action occur. The former
use is illustrated in Luke 20:6; John 2:17; Acts 2:18;
25:10; 2 Cor. 4:3, etc.; the latter in Luke 23:15; Acts
26:26; Heb. 4:2, ete. Cf. 431.

85. It is important to observe that the term “complete”
or “completed” as a grammatical term does not mean ended,
but accomplished, i.e. brought to its appropriate result, which
result remains at the time denoted by the verb. “The Perfect,
although it implies the performance of the action in past time,
yet states only that it stands completed at the present time.”

THE PERFECT INDICATIVE. 41

G.MT. 44. “Das Perf. hatte zwei alttiberkommene Funktio-
nen. LEinerseits hatte es intensiven, beziehentlich iterativen
Sinn. ... Anderseits bezeichnete es die Handlung im Zustand
des Vollendet- und Fertigseins.” Br. 162.

An action which has ceased may be expressed in Greek by
the Aorist or the Imperfect quite as well as by the Perfect,
provided only the action is thought of apart from any existing
result of it. These tenses are indeed more frequently used
of actions which are complete in the sense of having come to
an end than is the Perfect. See, e.g., Gal. 4:8; rore pev...
edovrActcate Tols Poet pr ovat Geois, at that time... ye were in
bondage to them which by nature are no gods; and 2 Cor. 7, 8;
ov petapeAopmar*® ei Kal pereneXounv, I do not regret it, although
I did regret [was regretting] it. The Perfect, on the other
hand, affirms the existence of the normal result of the action,
and this even though the action itself is still in progress.
See, e.g., the Perfect rerjpyxa, in 2 Tim. 4:7, quoted under 74.

86. Since the Aorist and the Perfect both involve reference
to a past event, the Perfect affirming the existence of the
result of the event, and the Aorist affirming the event itself,
without either affirming or denying the existence of the result,
it is evident that whenever the result of the past action does
still exist, either tense may be used, according as the writer
wishes either to affirm the result or merely the event. In
many cases the reason of the choice of one tense rather than
the other is very evident and the distinction clearly marked,
even when in accordance with the principle of 82 both tenses
must be translated by an English Past. See, e.g., 1 Cor. 15:4;
OTe eran, Kal OTL eynyeptar TH Nuepa TH TpiTy, that he was buried,
and that he was raised on the third day. The burial is simply
a past event. Of the resurrection there is an existing result,
prominently before the mind.

42 THE TENSES.

But there are naturally other cases in which, though each
tense retains its own proper force, the two approximate very
closely, and are used side by side of what seem to be quite
codrdinate facts. Instances of this approximation of the two
tenses are especially frequent in the writings of John. See
John 5:36, 38; 1 John 1:1; 4:9, 10; cf. also ActsiG-am
and 15: 24.

87. .It might be supposed that the Resultative Aorist would
be especially near in force to the Perfect. The distinction is,
however, clearly marked. ‘The Resultative Aorist affirms that
an action attempted in past time was accomplished, saying
nothing about the present result. The Perfect, on the other
hand, belongs to all classes of verbs, not merely to those that
imply attempt, and affirms the existence of the result of the
past action, the occurrence of which it implies.

88. It should be observed that the aoristic use of the Per-
fect (80) is a distinct departure from the strict and proper
sense of the tense in Greek. The beginnings of this departure
are to be seen in classical Greek (G.MT. 46), and in Greek
writers of a time later than the New Testament the tendency
was still further developed, until the sense of difference between
the tenses was lost.

Meantime there grew up a new form of the Perfect, made
as is the English Perfect, of an auxiliary denoting possession
(in Greek éyw, as in English have) and a participle. This
periphrastic Perfect, traces of which appear even in classical
times (G.MT. 47), at length entirely displaced the simple
Perfect for the expression of completed action, and the process
by which the Perfect had become an Aorist in meaning and
been succeeded in office as a Perfect tense by another form
was complete. See Jebb in Vincent and Dickson, Modern Greek,
pp. 326-330. In the New Testament we see the earlier stages

THE PERFECT INDICATIVE. 43

of this process. The Perfect is still, with very few exceptions,
a true Perfect, but it has begun to be an Aorist. In Latin this
process was already complete so far as the assimilation of the
Perfect and the Aorist was concerned; the new Perfect had
not yet appeared. In modern English we see the process at a
point midway between that represented by the Greek of the
New Testament and that which appears in the Latin of about
the same time. Modern German represents about the same
stage as modern English, but a little further advanced.

It should be borne in mind that in determining whether a
given Perfect form is a true Perfect in sense or not, the
proper English translation is no certain criterion, since the
functions of the Perfect tense in the two languages differ so
widely. Cf. 52. The Perfect zeroiyxa in 2 Cor. 11:25 seems
evidently aoristic; that it “goes quite naturally into Eng-
lish” (S. p. 104) does not at all show that it has the usual
force of a Greek Perfect. Many Aorists even go quite natu-
rally and correctly into English Perfects. Cf. 46. The Per-
fects in Luke 9: 36; 2 Cor. 12:17; Heb. 7:13 (xpooécynkev) ;
9:18; 11:28; Rev. 3:3; 5:7 are probably also Aoristic
Perfects, though it is possible that in all these cases the
thought of an existing result is more or less clearly in mind
and gives occasion to the use of the Perfect tense. The
Perfect zérpaxey in Matt. 13:46 must be either aoristic or
historical, probably the former (see Sophocles, Glossary, etc.,
82, 4). The evidence seems to show clearly that Matthew
regularly used yéyova in the sense of an Aorist; some of the
instances cannot, without violence, be otherwise explained, and
all are naturally so explained. Mark’s use of the word is pos-
sibly the same, but the evidence is not decisive. All other
writers of the New Testament use the form as a true Perfect.

Still other cases should perhaps be explained as Aoristic
Perfects, but for the reasons mentioned in 86 it is impossible

44 THE TENSES.

to decide with certainty. While there is clear evidence that
the Perfect tense was in the New Testament sometimes an
Aorist in force, yet it is to be observed that the New Testa-
ment writers had perfect command of the distinction between
the Aorist and the Perfect. The instances of the Perfect in
the sense of the Aorist are confined almost entirely to a few
forms, éoynxa, eiAnda, éwpaka, eipynka, and yeyova, and the use of
each of these forms in the sense of an Aorist mainly to one
or more writers whose use of it is apparently almost a per-
sonal idiosyncrasy. Thus the aoristic use of yéyova belongs
to Matt.; of «Anda to John in Rev.; of évyynxa to Paul; but
see also Heb. 7:13. The idiom is therefore confined within
narrow limits in the New Testament. Cf. Ev. Pet. 23, 31.

2 Cor. 12:9 and 1 John 1:10 are probably true Perfects of
Completed Action, the latter case being explained by v. 8.
John 1:18; 5:57; 8:33; and Heb. 10:9 also probably con-
vey the thought of existing result, though the use of an adverb
of past time serves to give more prominence to the past action
than is usually given by a Perfect tense.

THE PLUPERFEOT.

89. The Pluperfect of Completed Action. The Plu-
perfect is used of an action which was complete at a point
of past time implied in the context. HA. 847; G. 1250, 4.

Acts 9:21; kat ade eis TovTo éAnAVHa, and he had come hither for this
intent.

John 9:22; 78n yap ovvereewTo of “Iovdator, for the Jews had agreed
already. See also Luke 8:2; Acts 7:44; 19:82.

90. The Pluperfect of Existing State. Verbs which
in the Perfect denote a present state, in the Pluperfect
denote a past state. HA. 849,c; G. 1268.

THE PLUPERFECT. 45

Luke 4:41; ydecav tov Xpuorov abrov etvat, they knew that he was the
Christ. See also John 18:16, 18; Acts 1:10.

91. Perrenrastic Form or THE PLUPERFECT. A _ peri-
phrastic Pluperfect formed by adding the Perfect Participle
to the Imperfect of the verb eiué is somewhat frequent in the
New Testament. In classical Greek this was already the only
form in the third person plural of liquid and mute verbs, and
an occasional form elsewhere. In the New Testament these
periphrastic forms are frequently, but not at all uniformly,
Pluperfects of existing state; about one-third of the whole
number of instances belong to the class of Pluperfects denot-
ing completed action, referring to the past act as well as the
existing result. Cf. G.MT. 45.

Matt. 26:43; qyoav yap airy of 6fOaApot BeBapnpevor, for their eyes
were heavy, lit. weighed down.

Luke 2:26; kai qv aired Keypnuaticpevov b70 Tov TvEvpaTos TOD ayiov,
and it had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit.

92. The ambiguity of the English sometimes renders it:
impossible to distinguish in translation between a Pluperfect
of Existing State and an Historical Aorist. Thus in Acts 4: 27
and 31 we must in both cases read were gathered, though the
verb in the former case is an Aorist and refers to an act, and
in the latter a Perfect and refers to a state. Cf. also the two
verbs in Luke 15: 24.

93. The simple Future Perfect does not occur in the New
Testament. Respecting Luke 19:40, see B. p. 61; and the
lexicons s.v.

94. A periphrastic Future Perfect, expressing a future
state, occurs in Matt. 16:19; 18:18; Luke 12:52; Heb.
Be Ao.

46 THE TENSES.

TENSES OF THE DEPENDENT MOODS.

95. The tenses of the dependent moods have in general no
reference to time, but characterize the action of the verb in
respect to its progress only, representing it as in progress,
or completed, or indefinitely, simply as an event. HA. 851;
G. 1272, 1273; G.MT. 85.

96. The Present of the Dependent Moods is used to
represent an action as in progress or as repeated. It may
be altogether timeless, the action being thought of without
reference to the time of its occurrence: or its time, as
past, present, or future, may be involved in the function
of the mood, or may be indicated by the context.

Phil. 3:1; ra atta ypddew iptv euol pev ovk dxvnpov, to be writing the
same things to you, to me indeed is not irksome.

Matt. 5:23; éav ovv mpoodépys 70 dapov cov éxt Td Ovawornprov, if
therefore thou shalt be offering thy gift at the altar.

Mark 12:33; xat ro dyarav airov e€ OAns Kapdias . . . TEpiToTEpoV
éorw Tavrwv Tov bAoKavTwpaTwV Kal Fvatov, and to love him with

all the heart . .. is much more than all whole burnt offerings and
sacrifices.

97. PrrIPHRASTIC FoRM OF THE PRESENT. A _periphras-
tic Present Infinitive, formed by adding a Present Participle
to the Present Infinitive of eiwé, and a periphrastic Present
Imperative, formed by adding a Present Participle to the
Present Imperative of eu, occur rarely in the New Testament.
Luke 9:18; 11:1; Matt. 5:25; Luke 19:17. CE& 20nd
431.

98. The Aorist of the Dependent Moods represents
the action expressed by the verb as a simple event or fact,

OF THE DEPENDENT MOODS. 47

without reference either to its progress or to the existence
of its result. As in the Indicative the verb may be indeti-
nite, inceptive or resultative (cf. 35), and when indefinite
may refer to a momentary or extended action or to a
series of events (cf. 39).

The time of the action, if indicated at all, is shown, not
by the tense, but by some fact outside of it.

An Aorist Subjunctive after édv, drav, éws etc. is sometimes properly
translated by a Perfect or Future Perfect, but only because the context
shows that the action is to precede that of the principal verb. In the
great majority of cases a Present Subjunctive or a Future is the best

2 9

translation. See examples under 250, 285, 303, 522.

Luke 9:54; eirwpev rip xatafjvat, shall we bid fire to come down?

John 15:9; peivate €v tH aydrn TH €uy, abide ye in my love.

Luke 17:4; xai éav éxraxis THs Auépas apapTnon cis oe. . . apyoets
aité, and if he sin against thee seven times in the day . . . thou shalt
Forgive him.

Acts 15:13; pera 8& 75 avyjoat atrois, dexpiOn TaxwBos, and after
they had become silent, James answered.

Acts 11:17; éyad ris juny Svvatos KwAtoat Tov Oedv, who was I that I
could withstand God ?

Rem. Compare the Presents and Aorists in the following examples:

Matt. 6:11; rév dptov yuav Tov émovorov dds Huiv OnpEpoV, give us
this day our daily bread.

Luke 11:3; rov dprov qpav Tov éxtovorov didov nyiv Td Kal’ nyEpay,
give us day by day our daily bread.

Acts 18:9; pi poBor, dAAa AdAE Kai py TwwmHoNs, be not in fear, but
[continue to] speak and hold not thy peace.

Matt. 5:17; ov« 7APov KataAtoat GAG TANpOoat, I came not to destroy,
but to fulfil.

John 9:4; qpas det epydlerOa Ta epya Tov méuWavTos pe Ews TUEpa
€oriv, we must work [be doing] the works of him that sent me while
it is day.

99. The Future Optative does not occur in the New Tes-
tament.

48 THE TENSES.

The Future Infinitive denotes time relatively to the time of
the principal verb. It is thus an exception to the general prin-
ciple of the timelessness of the dependent moods.

Acts 23:30; pyvvbeions 8€ por émiBovdjs eis Tov avdpa éoecOar, and
when it was shown to me that there would be a plot against the man.

100. The Infinitive peAAew with the Infinitive of another
verb dependent on it has the force of a Future Infinitive of the
latter verb. The dependent Infinitive is usually a Present,
sometimes a Future. It is regularly a Future in the New
Testament in the case of the verb e«ip/.

Acts 28:6; ot d€ mpoceddxwy attov pedAe ripmpacba 7) KaTamirrev

apvw vexpov, but they expected that he would swell or fall down sud-
denly. See also Acts 19:27; 27:10, ete.

101. The Perfect of the Dependent Moods is used of
completed action. As in the Indicative, the thought may
be directed both to the action and its result, or only to the
result. The time of the action is indicated, as in the
Present and Aorist, not by the tense but by the context or
by the function of the mood.

Acts 25:25; éyo 6 xaredaBouny pndev aétov aitov Oavatov rerpaxevat,
but I found that he had committed nothing worthy of death.
Acts 26:32; dzodcedvoba edivaro 6 advOpwros ovTos, this man might have

been set at liberty.
Mark 4:39; Qw7a, repipuwoo, peace, be still.

102. An INTENSIVE PERFECT may occur in the dependent
moods as in the Indicative.

1 Tim. 6:17; rots tAovaios €v TO Viv aidve TapayyeAXE pn tYynrAoppovety
poe HAmiKEevat eri tAOVTOV dOnACT HTL, charge them that are rich in this
present world, that they be not high minded, nor have their hope set on
the uncertainty of riches.

OF THE DEPENDENT MOODS. 49

103. PrertpHrastic Form oF THE PerFect. In the New
Testament as in classical Greek, the Perfect Subjunctive Pas-
sive is formed by adding a Perfect Participle to the Present
Subjunctive of the verb eiué. These forms are in the New
Testament most commonly Perfects of Existing State. John
16:24; 17:19; 2 Cor. 1:9; ete. See also Luke 12:35,
which furnishes an instance of a periphrastic Perfect Impera-
tive, enjoining the maintenance of the state denoted by the
Perfect Participle. Cf. 20 and 431.

104, Tenses oF THE INFINITIVE AFTER PREPOSITIONS.
The general principle that the tenses of the dependent moods
characterize the action of the verb only as respects progress
and are properly timeless holds also respecting the Infinitive
after prepositions. The Infinitive itself is properly timeless,
though the time-relation is usually suggested by the meaning
of the preposition or by this combined with that which the
tense implies respecting the progress of the action.

105. By werd with the Infinitive antecedence of the action denoted by
the Infinitive to that denoted by the principal verb is expressed, but this
meaning manifestly lies in the preposition, not in the tense of the verb.
That the Aorist Infinitive is almost constantly used (the Perfect occurs
once, Heb. 10:15) is natural, since in dating one event by another the
latter is usually conceived of simply as an event without reference to its
progress. See Matt. 26:32; Luke 12:5; Acts1:3; 1 Cor. 11:25, etc.

106. By xpé with the Infinitive antecedence of the action of the prin-
cipal verb to that of the Infinitive is expressed, and the action of the
Infinitive is accordingly relatively future. But here also the time relation
is expressed wholly by the preposition. The reason for the almost uniform
use of the Aorist (the Present efva: occurs John 17:5) is the same as in
the case of werd. See Luke 2:21; 22:15; John 1: 48.

107. After eis and pds the Infinitive usually refers to an action which
is future with respect to the principal verb. This also results from the
meaning of the prepositions, which, expressing purpose or tendency,
necessarily point to an action subsequent to that of the verb which’ the

50 THE TENSES.

prepositional phrase limits. When mpés means with reference to, the time-
relation is indicated only by the necessary relation of the things spoken
of. See Luke 18:1. All three tenses of the Infinitive occur after eds
and both Present and Aorist after mpés, the difference marked by the tense
being not of time but of progress. See Rom. 12:2; Phil. 1:25; Heb.
11:3; Matt. 6:1; Mark 13:22. Cf. 409-414.

108. After é:4 the three Infinitives distinguish the action as respects
the writer’s conception of its progress, as continued, completed, or indefi-
nite. Time relations are secondary and suggested. The Aorist Infinitive
occurs only in Matt. 24:12, where 76 rAnOuvOjvac THY advouiay apparently
refers to the multiplication of iniquity as a fact of that time without
exclusive reference to its preceding the action of the principal verb. The
Present Infinitive refers to action in progress usually shown by the con-
text to be contemporaneous with the action of the principal verb. See
Matt. 13:5, 6; Acts 12:20; Heb. 10:2; Jas.4:2. The Perfect Infini-
tive has its usual force, denoting an action standing complete. The time
of the state of completeness appears from the context ; it is usually that
of the principal verb. See Acts 8:11; 18:2; 27:9; but cf. Mark 5:4,
where dedéc@ac denotes an action whose result was existing, not at the
time of speaking, but at anearlier time. Cf. 408.

109. After év we naturally expect to find only the Present Infinitive,
the preposition by its meaning suggesting an action thought of as in
progress ; and this is indeed the more common usage. Luke, however,
who uses év with the Infinitive far more frequently than all the other New
Testament writers, has év with the Aorist Infinitive nine times, and the
same construction occurs in Hebrews twice, and in 1 Corinthians once.
Since the Aorist Infinitive conceives of an action simply as an event with-
out thought of its continuance, it is natural to take év with it in the same
sense which the preposition bears with nouns which denote an event rather
than a continued action or state (cf. 98), viz. as marking the time at which
the action expressed by the principal verb takes place. The preposition
in this sense does not seem necessarily to denote exact coincidence, but
in no case expresses antecedence. In 1 Cor. 11:21 and Heb. 3:12 the
action of the Infinitive cannot be antecedent to that of the principal verb ;
see also Gen. 19:16. In Luke 9:34 such a relation is very difficult,
and in Luke 14:1 improbable in view of the Imperfect tense following.
In Luke 2:27; 11:87; 19:15; 24:30; Acts 11:15, the action denoted
by the Infinitive, strictly speaking, precedes the action of the principal
verb, yet may be thought of by the writer as marking more or less exactly
the time at which the action of the verb takes place. As respects the

OF THE DEPENDENT MOODS. 51

relation of the action to that of the principal verb, the Aorist Infinitive
after év may be compared to the Aorist Indicative after dre, which simply
marks in general the time of the event denoted by the principal verb,
leaving it to the context to indicate the precise nature of the chronological
relation. See Matt. 12:3; 21:34; 27:31; John 19:6, 30. Similarly
indefinite is the use of the English preposition on with verbal nouns, as,
e.g., On the completion of his twenty-jirst year he becomes of legal age ;
On the arrival of the train the procession will be formed. Luke 3:21
cannot in view of the Aorist tense be rendered, while all the people were
being baptized, nor in view of the preposition év, after all the people had
been baptized, but must be understood as affirming that the baptism of
Jesus occurred at the time (in general) of the baptism of all the people.
Luke 9:36 can only mean, when the voice came, a meaning entirely
appropriate to the context. Cf. 415.

110. THe TENses oF THE DerENDENT Moops 1n_ INprI-
RECT Discourse. The Optative and Infinitive in indirect
discourse preserve the conception of the action as respects
progress which belonged to the direct discourse. The Present
Optative and Infinitive represent tense forms which in the
direct discourse denoted action in progress. Similarly the
Aorist of these moods represents forms which expressed action
indefinitely, and the Perfect stands for forms denoting com-
pleted action. The Future represents a Future Indicative of
the direct discourse. In the majority of cases each tense of
the Optative or Infinitive in indirect discourse stands for the
same tense of the Indicative or Subjunctive of the direct form.
Yet it is doubtful whether, strictly speaking, the dependent
moods in indirect discourse express time-relations. The cor-
respondence of tenses probably rather results from the neces-
sity of preserving the original conception of the action as
respects its progress, and the time-relation is conveyed by the
context rather than by the tense of the verb.

Rem. Cf. Br. 161. ‘‘ Der opt. und inf. aor. von vergangenen Hand-
lungen als Vertreter des ind. aor. in der or. ob]. entbehrten ebenso wie opt.
und inf. praes. (§ 158) des Ausdrucks der Zeitbeziehung, die nur aus der

oa THE TENSES.

Natur der in der Rede in Verbindung gebrachten Verbalbegriffe oder aus
der ganzen in Rede stehenden Situation erkannt wurde.’ Cf. G.MT.
85, contra.

111. The Present Optative in indirect discourse in the New
Testament usually represents the Present Indicative of the
direct form. Luke 1:29; 3:15; Acts 17:11; etc. Im Acts
25:16, it stands for a Present Subjunctive of the direct form.
The Optative with av is taken unchanged from the direct dis-
course. Luke 1:62; 6:11; etc. The Aorist Optative occurs
in indirect discourse only in Acts 25:16, where it represents
a Subjunctive of the direct form referring to the future.
Neither the Perfect Optative nor the Future Optative occurs in
the New Testament.

112. The Present Infinitive in indirect discourse in the
New Testament stands for the Present Indicative of the direct
form. Matt. 22:23; Luke 11:18; 20:41; Acts 4:32; 1 Cor.
7:36; 1 John 2:9. Similarly the Perfect Infinitive rep-
resents the Perfect Indicative of the direct discourse. Luke
22:34; John 12:29; Acts 14:19; 2 Tim. 2:18. The Pres-
ent Infinitive as the representative of the Imperfect, and the
Perfect Infinitive as the representative of the Pluperfect
(G.MT. 119, 125) apparently do not occur in the New Testa-
ment. The Future Infinitive is, as stated above (99), an
exception to the general rule of the timelessness of the de-
pendent moods. It represents a Future Indicative of the
direct form. John 21:25; Acts 23:30; Heb. 3:18.

118. The Aorist Infinitive occurs in the New Testament,
as in classical Greek, as a regular construction after verbs
signifying to hope, to promise, to swear, to command, ete. In
this case the action denoted by the Aorist Infinitive is, by the
nature of the case, future with reference to that of the princi-

OF THE PARTICIPLE. 53

pal verb, but this time-relation is not expressed by the tense.
The Aorist Infinitive is here as elsewhere timeless. These
instances, though closely akin in force to those of indirect
discourse, are not usually included under that head. Cf.
G.MT. 684.

114. The Aorist Infinitive referring to what is future with
reference to the principal verb also occurs in a few instances
after verbs of assertion. These must be accounted cases in
which the Aorist Infinitive in indirect discourse is timeless.
Luke 24:46; ore ovtws yéypamrat rabetv Tov xpioTov Kal avaoTHvat €k

VeKpOv TH TpiTH HuEpa, thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer,

and rise again from the dead the third day. See also Luke 2:26;

Acts 3:18. Cf. Hom. Od. 2. 171, gnpi rerAevtnPnvar aravta, the

accomplishment being still future (Carter in Cl. Rev. Feb. 1891,

p- 5). Plat. Euthyd. 278, C. éparny émvderacOar thy mporpertixny

codiay, they said that they would give a sample of the hortatory wisdom.

Protag. 316, C. rodro d€ olerai of padiora yeverOar, ci cot Evyyévorto,

and he supposes that he would be most likely to attain this if he should

associate with you; and other examples in Riddell, Digest of Platonic

Idioms, § 81; also in G.MT. 127.

There is apparently no instance in the New Testament of
the Aorist Infinitive in indirect discourse representing the
Aorist Indicative of the direct form. Cf. 390.

TENSES OF THE PARTICIPLE.

115. The participle is a verbal adjective, sharing in part
the characteristics of both the verb and the adjective; it de-
scribes its subject as a doer of the action denoted by the verb.
For the proper understanding of a participle three things must
be observed :

(a) The grammatical agreement.

(6) The use of the tense.

54 THE TENSES.

116. In grammatical agreement, a participle follows the
rule for adjectives, agreeing with its noun or pronoun in gen-
der, number, and case.

117. The logical force of the participle, usually the most
important consideration from the point of view of interpreta-
tion, will be treated at a later point. See 419 ff. The matter
now under consideration is the significance of the tense of a
participle.

118. The tenses of the participle, like those of the other
dependent moods, do not, in general, in themselves denote time.
To this general rule the Future Participle is the leading ex-
ception, its functions being such as necessarily to express time-
relations. The fundamental distinguishing mark of each of
the other tenses is the same for the participle as for the
dependent moods in general. The Present denotes action in
progress; the Aorist, action conceived of indefinitely; the
Perfect, completed action. These distinctions, however, im-
pose certain limitations upon the classes of events which may
be expressed by the participle of each tense, and thus indirectly
and to a limited extent, the tense of the participle is an indica-
tion of the time-relation of the event denoted by it. Since for
purposes of interpretation it is often needful to define the
time-relation of an event expressed by the participle, it becomes
expedient to treat the tenses of the participle apart from
those of the dependent moods in general.

THE PRESENT PARTICIPLE.

119. The Present Participle of Simultaneous Action.
The Present Participle most frequently denotes an action
in progress, simultaneous with the action of the principal
verb. HA. 856; G. 1288.

THE PRESENT PARTICIPLE. aa

Mark 16:20; éxetvor d& e&eXOovres Exnpvav mavTaxov, Tov Kupiov
ovvepyovvtos, and they went forth and preached everywhere, the Lord
working with them.

Acts 10:44; ére Aadotvros rod Iérpov ra pyyata Taira érerece TO
mvedpa TO aylov él mavTas Tovs akovovtas Tov Adyov, while Peter
was yet speaking these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which
heard the word.

Rem. The action of the verb and that of the participle may be of the
same extent (Mark 16:20), but are not necessarily so. Oftener the
action of the verb falls within the period covered by the participle (Acts
10: 44).

Even a subsequent action is occasionally expressed by a Present
Participle, which in this case stands after the verb. Cf. 145.

Acts 19:9; ddwpicev trois pabytas, Kal’ nuepav diadeyouevos ev TH
axoAy Tupavvov, he separated the disciples, reasoning daily in the

school of Tyrannus. See also Acts 17:13; 18:23.

120. The Present Participle of Identical Action.
The Present Participle not infrequently denotes the same
action which is expressed by the verb of the clause in
which it stands.

John 6:6; rodro dé eXeyey reipalwv avrov, and this he said trying him.
See also Matt. 27:41; John 21:19; Acts 9:22; Gal. 3:23.

121. The verb and the participle of identical action, though
denoting the same action, usually describe it from a different
point of view. The relation between the different points of
view varies greatly. It may be the relation of fact to method,
as in Acts 9:22; 15:24, 29; of outward form to inner sig-
nificance or quality, as in Luke 22:65; or of act to purpose
or result, as in Matt. 16:1; John 6:6.

122. A Present Participle of Identical Action, since it de-
notes action in progress, most naturally accompanies a verb
denoting action in progress. Sometimes, however, a Pres-
ent Participle accompanies an Aorist verb denoting the same

56 THE TENSES.

action; regularly so in the phrase dzexpivaro (damexpiOn) bees.
see Mark 15:9; Luke 3:16; John 1: 26; etc.

Acts 15:24; érdpagay tuas Adyors dvacKevaluvtes Tas Wuyxas tpov,
they have troubled you with words, subverting your souls. See also
Acts 1:3; 22:4; Gen. 43:6.

Similarly a Present Participle representing the action as in
progress, may accompany an Aoristic Future, which conceives
of it simply as an event. Acts 15:29; 1 Mace, 12: 22.

123. The General Present Participle. The Present
Participle is also used without reference to time or prog-
ress, simply defining its subject as belonging to a certain
class, z7.e. the class of those who do the action denoted
by the verb. The participle in this case becomes a simple
adjective or noun and is, like any other adjective or noun,
timeless and indefinite. B. pp. 296 f.; WM. p. 444; WT.
p- 393.

Acts 10:22; KopvyAwos Exarovtapxns, avip dikatos Kal poPovpevos
tov Geov, Cornelius a centurion, a righteous and God-fearing man.

Mark 5:16; was éyevero to SampoviCopevw, what had ei to the
demoniac.

Gal. 6:6; Kowwveitw de 6 KAT] XOUPEVOS Tov Adyov TH KaTyxXOdVTL €v
racw dyabots, but let him that is taught in the word communicate to
him that teacheth in all good things.

124. A class may consist of those who habitually or con-
stantly do a given act, or of those who once do the act the
single doing of which is the mark of the class. The former
case is illustrated in Matt. 5:6; the latter in Rev. 14: 13.

Matt. 5:6; paxdpioe of rewdvres Kal dupovtes THY dixacocvvyy, blessed
are they that hunger and thirst after righteousness.

Rey. 14:13; paxdpiot of vexpot ot év Kupiw aroOvycxovtes, blessed are
the dead which die in the Lord. See also Matt. 7 : 13.

THE PRESENT PARTICIPLE. 57

In the first class of cases the Present Participle only can be
used; in the second class either an Aorist (as in Matt. 23: 20;
26:52; John 16: 2, et al.) or a Present may occur, and that,
either in the plural designating the class as such, or in the
singular designating an individual of the class.

Thus ravti dvOpdrw repireuvouevy (Gal. 5:3; cf. 6:13) does not mean,
to every man that is wont to be circumcised, but, to every man that is
circumcised, i.e. that receives circumcision (R.V., correctly though not
literally). So also in Heb. 5:1 AauBavduevos does not mean, one that is
wont to be taken, but, that is taken. Being once taken is the mark of the
class here referred to, as being once circumcised is the mark of the class
referred to in Gal. 5:5. The customariness applies not to the action of
the individual member of the class, but to that of the class as a whole; as
in Heb. 5:1, the Present Indicative ca@lorarac may be rendered, is wont
to be appointed, not in the sense, each one is wont to be [repeatedly |
appointed, but, it is wont to happen to each that he is appointed. Cf. 125.
In Luke 16:18 Gs 6 dmrod\twy means not, every one that is wont to
divorce, still less, every one that has divorced, but, every one that-divorces.

125. Through the ambiguity of the English Passive form,
such Present Participles as those just referred to (124) are
easily taken by the English interpreter as equivalent to Per-
fect Participles, but always to the greater or less distortion of
the meaning of the passage."

Thus in Gal. 5:3 (see 124) reprreuvopévyis not equivalent to a Perfect,
every circumcised man. ‘The apostle is not speaking of circumcision as
an accomplished fact, but of becoming circumcised. Similarly Heb. 5:1
refers not to one that has been taken (German: ist yenommen worden),
but that is taken (German: wird genommen). In Heb. 5:4 xadovdmevos
is one that is (not, has been) called. In Luke 18:28, ef 6dlyo oi

1 This ambiguity of the English may be illustrated by the form is
written. In the sentence, Jt is written in your law, etc., is written is a
Perfect of Existing State, and is expressed by the Greek Perfect yéypamrac.
The German would be ist geschrieben. Inthe sentence, The name of each
scholar is written in the register as he enters the school, the same form
is a Present of customary action, and would be expressed in Greek by
ypaderar, and in German by wird geschrieben.

58 THE TENSES.

cwrbuevor, the participle is undoubtedly a General Present, the inquiry
being neither on the one hand as to the number of those that are already
saved (Perfect of Existing State) or that have been saved (Perfect of Com-
pleted Action) nor, on the other, with reference to those that are being
saved (Progressive Present of Simultaneous Action), but with reference
to those that are [i.e. become] saved. Cf. Luther’s version, meinst du,
dass wenige selig werden? and Weizsicker’s, sind es wenige, die gerettet
werden?

The same participle in Acts 2:47; 1 Cor.1:18; 2 Cor. 2:15, may
be understood in the same way, and be rendered, we that are (in the sense
we that become) saved, or may be taken as in R.V. as a Progressive
Present of Simultaneous Action. It cannot mean the saved in the sense
of those that have been saved. The statement of Dr. T. W. Chambers in
J.B.L. June 1886, p. 40, that ‘‘ the passive participle of the present tense
in Greek is often, if not generally, used to express a completed action,”
is wholly incorrect, and derives all its verisimilitude from the ambiguity
of the English Passive forms.

126. A General Present Participle sometimes occurs in the singular
when the person to whom it refers constitutes the class designated. This
limitation of the phrase to an individual is accomplished, however, not by
the participle, but by its limitations. John 13:11, rév rapadiddvra abrov,
probably means simply his betrayer. The participle rapadidovs alone
designates any one belonging to the class of betrayers. It is the addition
of the article and an object that restricts the participle to one person.

127. The Present Participle for the Imperfect. The
Present Participle is also sometimes used as an Imperfect

to denote a continued action antecedent to that of the
principal verb. HA. 856, a; G. 1289; G.MT. 140.

Matt. 2:20; reOvyjxaow yap ot Cytotvtes tiv Wuynv Tov ratdiov, for
they are dead that were seeking the young child’s life. See also
John 12:17; Acts 4:34 (cf. v. 37); 10:7; Gal. 1: 23.

128. The following uses of the Present Participle are
closely analogous to the uses of the Present Indicative already
described under similar names. They are of somewhat infre-
quent occurrence in the New Testament.

THE AORIST PARTICIPLE. 59

129. (a) THe Conative PRESENT.

Matt. 23:13 (WH. et al., 14); ov8€ rots civepxopevous adiere cioedOelv,
neither suffer ye them that are entering in to enter. See also Acts
28 : 23.

130. (0) Tue PresENT FoR THE FuTuRE, the action de-
noted being thought of as future with reference to the time of
the principal verb.

Acts 21:3; éxeioe yap TO mAolov jv amopoptiCopevov Tov youov, for
there the ship was to unlade her burden.

131. (c) Tue Present or Past ACTION STILL IN PROGRESS,
the action denoted beginning before the action of the principal
verb and continuing in progress at the time denoted by the
latter.

Acts 9:33; evpev 8& éxet dvOpwrov twa dvopate Aiveay €& €rov dxTo

KataKepevov eri kpaBarrov, and there he found a certain man named

Aineas, who had been lying on a bed eight years. See also Matt.
9:20; Mark 5:25; Luke 8:43; John 5:5; Acts 24:10.

THE AORIST PARTICIPLE.

132. The general statement made under 118, that the
tenses of the participle do not in general in themselves denote
time, applies also to the Aorist Participle. It is very impor-
tant for the right interpretation of the Aorist Participle that
it be borne in mind that the proper and leading function of the
tense is not to express time, but to mark the fact that the
action of the verb is conceived of indefinitely, as a simple
event. The assumption that the Aorist Participle properly
denotes past time, from the point of view either of the speaker
or of the principal verb, leads to constant misinterpretation of
the form. The action denoted by the Aorist Participle may
be past, present, or future with reference to the speaker, and

60 THE TENSES.

antecedent to, coincident with, or subsequent to, the action of
the principal verb. The Aorist Participle, like the participles
of the other tenses, may be most simply thought of as a noun
or adjective, the designation of one who performs the action
denoted by the verb, and like any other noun or adjective
timeless. The distinction of the Aorist Participle is not that
it expresses a different time-relation from that expressed by
the Present or Perfect, but that it conceives of the action de-
noted by it, not as in progress (Present), nor as an existing
result (Perfect), but as a simple fact. Such an adjective or
noun will not ordinarily be used if contemporaneousness
with the action of the principal verb is distinctly in mind,
since contemporaneousness suggests action in progress, and
action in progress is expressed, not by the Aorist, but by
the Present tense. Nor will it be used when the mind
distinctly contemplates the existence of the result of the
action, it being the function, not of the Aorist, but of
the Perfect, to express existing result. Nor, again, will
the Aorist noun be used if the writer desires distinctly
to indicate that the doer of the action will perform it in
time subsequent to that of the principal verb, the Aorist be-
ing incapable in itself of suggesting subsequence or futurity.
But, when these cases have been excluded, there remains a
considerable variety of relations to which the Aorist is appli-
cable, the common mark of them all being that the action
denoted by the participle is thought of simply as an event.
Among these various relations the case of action antecedent
to that of the principal verb furnishes the largest number
of instances. It is thus, numerically considered, the leading
use of the Aorist Participle, and this fact has even to some
extent reacted on the meaning of the tense,so that there is
associated with the tense as a secondary, acquired, and wholly
subordinate characteristic a certain suggestion of antecedence.

THE AORIST PARTICIPLE. 61

Yet this use is no more than the other uses a primary function
of the tense, nor did it ever displace the others, or force them
into a position of subordination or abnormality. The instances
in which the action denoted by the participle is not antecedent
to the action of the principal verb are as normal as that in
which it is so, and were evidently so recognized alike in clas-
sical and in New Testament Greek. The Aorist Participle of
Antecedent Action does not denote antecedence; it is used of
antecedent action, where antecedence is implied, not by the
Aorist tense as a tense of past time, but in some other way.
The same principle holds respecting all the uses of this tense.
The following section (133) is accordingly a definition of the
constant function of the Aorist Participle, while 134, 139, and
142 enumerate the classes of events with reference to which it
may be used.

Rem. Compare the following statements of modern grammarians:

‘¢Since the participle, like the other non-augmented forms of the
aorist, has nothing whatever to do with the denotation of past time, and
since time previous to a point in past time is not the less a kind of past
time, we do not here understand at once how the participle became used
in this sense. But the enigma is solved when we examine the nature of
the aorist and participle. The latter, an adjective in origin, fixes one
action in relation to another. The action which is denoted by the finite
verb is the principal one. When the secondary action continues side by
side with the principal action, it must stand [rapararixés] in the participle
of the present ; if, again, referred to the future, the proper sign of the
future is needed ; and similarly, the perfect participle serves to express
an action regarded as complete in reference to the principal action. If,
however, it is intended to denote the secondary action without any
reference to continuousness and completion and futurity, but merely
as a point or moment, the aorist participle alone remains for this
purpose. We indeed, by a sort of necessity, regard a point which
is fixed in reference to another action as prior to it, but, strictly
speaking, this notion of priority in past time is not signified by the
aorist participle.’’ — Curtius, Elucidations of the Student’s Greek Gram-
mar, pp. 216 f.

62 THE TENSES.

‘¢ An und fiir sich bezeichnet das aoristische Particip ebenso wenig als
irgend eine andere aoristische Form ausser dem Indicatiy, der in seinem
Augment ein deutliches Merkmal der Vergangenheit hat, etwas Vergan-
genes. Das Particip des kiirzesten und von uns genauer betrachteten
Aorists, dessen Stamm eben nur die Verbalgrundform selbst ist, ist also
nur Particip an und fiir sich, das heisst es bezeichnet eine Handlung, mit
der noch kein Satz als abgeschlossen gedacht werden soll; im Uebrigen
liegt sein Characteristisches fiir uns nur darin, dass es als aoristisches
Particip nicht wie das prisentische Particip auch die Bedeutung der
Dauer in sich enthilt, sondern etwas bezeichnet, bei dem die Zeitdauer,
die es in Anspruch genommen, nicht weiter in Frage kommen, oder das
iiberhaupt nur als ganz kurze Zeit dauernd bezeichnet werden soll.”
— Leo Meyer, Griechische Aoriste, pp. 124, 125,

‘“‘In siitzen wie éreidy etrev, dryer; eimav TadTa amyer; édv Te haywou,
avactynoovra (Xen. An. IV. 5, 8) erschien die syntaktisch untergeordnete
aoristische Handlung gegeniiber dem anderen Vorgang darum als vergan-
gen, weil die beiden Handlungen sachlich verschieden waren. Das Bedeu-
tungsmoment der ungeteilten Vollstiindigkeit und Abgeschlossenheit der
Handlung liess die Vorstellung, dass die Haupthandlung in den Verlauf
der Nebenhandlung hineinfalle und neben ihr hergehe (Gleichzeitigkeit),
nicht zu. Die Vorstellung der Vergangenheit in Bezug auf das Haupt-
verbum war also nicht durch die Aoristform an sich, sondern durch die
besondere Natur der beiden Verbalbegriffe, die zu einander in Beziehung
gesetzt wurden, gegeben. Man erkennt diesen Sachverhalt am besten
durch Vergleichung mit Sitzen wie E 98, cai Ba ématcoovra tuxav KaTa
dekidv Wuov, Herod. 5, 24, e& érotnoas dmixbuevos, Xen. An. I. 3, 17, Bov-
Rolunv & av &kovros amriwv Kipov dAabetvy av’rov awedOwv, Thuk. 6, 4, €recc dé
éyyitara oxTw® Kal éxarov pera Thy oerépay oixiciw Ted@ou *Axpdyavra
@xkioay, Thy wev wodLY Gwd TOO’ AKpdyovTos ToTramod dvoudcavres, oikicTas 5é
moujcavtes Apictévovv kat Ivoridov, vduiwa 5¢ ra Tedgwv ddvres, wo die
Vorstellung einer Zeitverschiedenheit darum nicht entstehen konnte,
weil es sich um ein und denselben Vorgang handelte und das Partizip
oder die Partizipien nur eine, bezichungsweise mehrere besondere Seiten
der Handlung des regierenden Verbums zum Ausdruck brachten.’’? —
Br. 161.

133. The Aorist Participle is used of an action con-
ceived of as a simple event.

It may be used with reference to an action or event in
its entirety (indefinite), or with reference to the inception

THE AORIST PARTICIPLE. 63

of a state (inceptive), or with reference to the accomplish-
ment of an attempt (resultative). When indefinite it may
be used of momentary or extended actions or of a series of
events. Cf. 35, and 39, and see examples below.

134. The Aorist Participle of Antecedent Action.
The Aorist Participle is most frequently used of an action
antecedent in time to the action of the principal verb.

Matt. 4:2; Kai vyorevoas nyepas TecoEpakovTa Kal vUKTas TeooEpa-
KovTa voTepov ezeivacev, and having fasted forty days and forty
nights, he afterward hungered.

Mark 1:31; yyepev aitny Kpatyoas THs xetpos, and taking her by the
hand he raised her up.

John 5:13; 6 d€ iabels ovk ydeu tis Eoriy, but he that had been healed
wist not who it was.

Acts 14:19; kal metoavres Tos dxAovs Kal AacavTes Tov LaddXov,
éovpov é£w THs TOAEws, and having persuaded the multitudes they
stoned Paul, and dragged him out of the city.

Acts 27:13; ddfavres ris mpobéoews KeKpatynkévat dpavtes aooov
mapedeyovto tHv Kpyrnv, supposing that they had obtained their pur-
pose, they weighed anchor, and sailed along Crete.

Rom. 5:1; dixawbévres odv éx rictews eipyvyv éxwpev pods Tov Oeor,
having therefore been justified by faith, let us have peace with God.

1 Cor. 1:4; evyapior® TO Ged . . . emi TH xaptTe Tod Beod TH dobcion
tpiv, I thank God .. . for the grace of God which was given you.

Col. 1:5, 4; ebyapicroduev TO ed . . . axovoavTes THY TidTW tpuov,
we give thanks to God . . . having heard of your faith.

2 Tim. 4:11; Mapxov dvadaBov aye peta ceavtod, take Mark and
bring him with thee.

- 135. The Aorist Participle of Antecedent Action is fre-
quently used attributively as the equivalent of a relative
clause ; in this case it usually has the article, and its position
is determined by the same considerations which govern the

position of any other noun or adjective in similar construction.
See John 5:13; 1 Cor. 1:4, above.

64 THE TENSES.

136. It is still more frequently used adverbially and is
equivalent to an adverbial clause or codrdinate verb with and ;
in this case the article does not occur, and the participle
usually precedes the verb, but sometimes follows it. See
Rom. 5:1; and Col. 1:5, 4 (134).

137. In some instances of the Aorist Participle of Ante-
cedent Action, it is the inception of the action only which pre-
cedes the action of the principal verb. And this occurs not
only in verbs of state (cf. 35, and see Mark 5:33; Acts 25:1),
but also in verbs of action, which in the Indicative are not
inceptive. Acts 27:13 (134); 13:27; 2 Tim. 4:10.

138. The Aorist Participle of Antecedent Action is by no
means always best translated into English by the so-called
Perfect Participle. The English Present Participle is very
frequently placed before a verb to express an antecedent ac-
tion, and that, too, without implying that the action is thought
of as in progress. It is accordingly in many cases the best
translation of an Aorist Participle. See Mark 1:31 (154);
also Mark 5:36; Acts 13:16, R.V. Frequently also the
Aorist Participle of the Greek is best reproduced in English
by a finite verb with and. See Acts 14:19; 27:13; 2 Tim.
4:11 (134); also Luke 21:1; Acts 21:1; Acts 10: 23, R.V.

139. The Aorist Participle of Identical Action. The
Aorist Participle agreeing with the subject of a verb not

infrequently denotes the same action that is expressed
by the verb. HA. 856, b; G. 1290; G.MT. 150.

Matt. 27:4; ypaptov rapadovs ata dixatov, I sinned in that I betrayed
innocent blood.

Acts 10:33; ov Te Kad@s ézoinoas rapayevopuevos, and thou hast well
done that thou hast come. See also Matt. 19:27 (and the numerous
instances of the phrase dzroxptGels eizev); Acts 27:3; 1 Cor. 15:18;
Eph. 1:9; Heb. 7:27; Gen. 43 : 5:

THE AORIST PARTICIPLE. 65

140. The verb and the participle of identical action, though
denoting the same action, usually describe it from a different
point of view. Respecting this difference in point of view,
see 121.

141. An Aorist Participle of Identical Action most fre-
quently accompanies an Aorist verb, both verb and participle
thus describing the action indefinitely as a simple event. It
occurs also with the Future, with which as an aoristic tense
it is entirely appropriate (Luke 9:25; 3 John 6), with the
Present and Imperfect (Mark 8: 29; Acts 7:26), and with the
Perfect (Acts 13:33; 1 Sam. 12:19). ;

142. The Aorist Participle used attributively as the equiva-
lent of a relative clause sometimes refers to an action subse-
quent to that of the principal verb, though antecedent to the
time of the speaker. Instances occur both in classical Greek
(see G.MT. 152; Carter and Humphreys in Cl. Rev. Feb. 1891)
and in the New Testament.

Acts 1:16; nv mpoetre TO rvetpa TO dyvov dua ctoparos Aaveid rept
Tovda rod yevomevov ddnyod Tots cvAAaBodtow “Ingodv, which the Holy
Spirit spake before by the mouth of David concerning Judas who be-
came guide to them that took Jesus. See also Matt. 10:4; 11:21;
Jonnie 2e) Cole 1218:

143. It should be clearly observed that the participle in
these cases does not by its tense denote either antecedence to
the time of speaking or subsequence to that of the principal
verb. The participle is properly timeless, and the time-rela-
tions are learned from the context or outside sources.

144. Whether the Aorist Participle used adverbially, as the
equivalent of an adverbial or coérdinate clause, ever refers to
an action subsequent to that of the principal verb is more
difficult to determine. No certain instance has been observed
in classical Greek, though several possible ones occur. See

66 THE TENSES.

Dem. XIX. (F.L.) 255 (423) cited by Carter, and Thue. II.
49. 2, cited by Humphreys, in Cl. Rev. Feb. 1891. See also
Hom. Il. E. 369; N. 35, and Pindar, Pyth. IV. 189.

145. The New Testament furnishes one almost indubitable
instance of an Aorist Participle so used if we accept the best
attested text.

Acts 25:18, ’Aypimmas 6 BaoWeds Kai Bepvixn xatyvrnoay cis Katoa-
play doracapevor Tov Ppatov, Agrippa the King and Bernice arrived
at Cesarea and saluted Festus.

The doubt concerning the text rests not on the insufficiency
of the documentary evidence, but on the rarity of this use of
the participle. Cf. Hort in WH. II. App. p. 100. “The
authority for -duevo. is absolutely overwhelming, and as a
matter of transmission -duevo. can only be a correction. Yet
it is difficult to remain satisfied that there is no prior corrup-
tion of some kind.” With this case should also be compared
Acts 16: 23; 22: 24; 23:35; 24:23, where the participle,
which is without the article and follows the verb, is most
naturally interpreted as referring to an action subsequent in
thought and fact to that of the verb which it follows, and
equivalent to xaé with a codrdinate verb. These instances are
perhaps due to Aramaic influence. See Ha. § 76.d; and ef.
Dan. 2 : 26, 27; 3: 13, 24, 26, 27, ete.

In Rom. 4:19, cai wh dobevioas rH mlorer Katevdnoev 7d éavTod cua
[76] vevexpwuévov, the participle dodevicas, though preceding the verb, is
naturally interpreted as referring to a (conceived) result of the action
denoted by xatevénoev. It is in that case an inceptive Aorist Participle
denoting a subsequent action. Its position is doubtless due to the
emphasis laid upon it. In, Heb. 9 : 12 the symmetry of the figure is best
preserved if edpduevos is thought of as referring to an action subsequent to
that of eic7dGev. But it is possible that efc#Gev is used to describe the
whole highpriestly act, including both the entrance into the holy place and

the subsequent offering of the blood, and that edpduevos is thus a participle
of identical action. In either case it should be translated not having

THE AORIST PARTICIPLE. OT

obtained as in R.V., but obtaining or and obtained. In Phil. 2: 7 yevduevos
is related to \aBwy as a participle of identical action ; the relation of \aBdv
to éxévwoev is less certain. It may denote the same action as éxévwoev
viewed from the opposite point of view (identical action), or may be
thought of as an additional fact (subsequent action) to éxéywoev. In Rom.
4:21 the participles dovs and rAnpodopydeis may be understood as together
defining éveduvaynd0n 77 riore, though dovs is strictly subsequent to éveduva-
4m. Somewhat similar is 1 Pet. 3:18, where (woroindels is clearly subse-
quent to aré@avev [or €radev|, but is probably to be taken together with
OavarwOeis as defining the whole of the preceding clause Xpicrds drat rrepi
dpuapriay amrédavev, Sixatos brép adlkwy, iva buds mpocayayyn TH Oew.

146. The Aorist Participle used as an integral part of the
object of a verb of perception represents the action which it
denotes as a simple event without defining its time. The ac-
“tion may be one which is directly perceived and hence coinci-
dent in time with that of the principal verb, or it may be one
which is ascertained or learned, and hence antecedent to the
action of the principal verb. In the latter case it takes the
place of a clause of indirect discourse having its verb in
the Aorist Indicative.

Acts 9:12; xai eidev dvdpa . . . ‘Avaviav dvoparte cioeAovra Kai émt-
Gera aire xelpas, and he has seen a man named Ananias come in
and lay hands upon him. See also Luke 10:18; Acts 10:3; 11:3;
26:13; 2 Pet. 1:18.

Luke 4:23; dca nKxovoapev yevoueva, whatever things we have heard
to have been done.

147. The Aorist Participle with AavOdévw denotes the same
time as the principal verb. It occurs but once in the New
Testament (Heb. 13:2), the similar construction with P0avw
and rvyxavw, not at all. HA. 856, b; G@. 1290.

148. The categories named above, Aorist Participle of An-
tecedent Action, of Identical Action, ete., which, it must be
remembered, represent, not diverse functions of’ the tense, but
only classes of cases for which the Aorist Participle may be

68 THE TENSES.

used, do not include absolutely all the instances. There are,
for example, cases in which the time-relation of the action of
the participle to that of the verb is left undefined. John
16:2, 6 dzoxreivas [ipas | d0€) AaTpEetav rporhepev TH Hed, means,
every slayer of you will think, etc. Whether he will have such
thought before he shall slay, when he slays, or after he shall
have slain, is not at all defined. Cf. Gen. 4:15.

149. Very rarely also the Aorist Participle used adverbially
refers to an action evidently in a general way coincident in
time with the action of the verb, yet not identical with it.

“ x» a > 2
Heb. 2:10; ézperev yap aira, 8 ov ta mavta Kai & ov ta zavTa,

‘ C88: > , 3 , A > . lol ta Sine
moAXovs viovs cis O0€av ayayovTa TOV dpxnyov THS TwTnplas avTav-

da tabnpatwv TeAawoa, for it became him, for whom are all things,

and through whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to _

make the author of their salvation perfect through sufferings. The
participle dyayovra is neither antecedent nor subsequent to reAeo-
gat, nor yet strictly identical with it. Nearly the same thought
might be expressed in English by when he brought or in bringing,
and in Greek by ore yyayev or év To ayayetv (cf. 109).

The choice of the Aorist Participle rather than the Present
in such cases is due to the fact that the action is thought of,
not as in progress, but as a simple event or fact. Concerning
a similar use of the Aorist Participle in Homer, see Leo Meyer,
Griechische Aoriste, p.125; T. D. Seymour in T.A.P.A., 1881,
pp. 89, 94. The rarity of these instances is due not to any
abnormality in such a use of the tense, but to the fact that
an action, temporally coincident with another and subordinate
to it (and not simply the same action viewed from a different
point of view), is naturally thought of as in progress, and
hence is expressed by a Present Participle. Cf. exx. under 119.

150. As an aid to interpretation it may be observed that the Aorist
Participle with the article may sometimes be used instead of a relative

———————Ee

THE AORIST PARTICIPLE. 69

clause with the Aorist Indicative, sometimes instead of such a clause with
the verb in the Aorist Subjunctive.t But it should not be supposed that
from the point of view of the Greek language these were two distinct
functions of the Aorist Participle. The phrase os é\aBe referred in Greek
to past time, 6s av AdBy to present or future time. It is not probable that
in the mind of a Greek 6 \aBwy was the precise equivalent of both of
these, standing alternately for the one or the other, so that when he wrote
6 AaBwyv he sometimes thought os €\aBe, sometimes os dv A4By. The fact is
doubtless rather that the Aorist Participle was always, strictly speaking,
timeless, and that 6 \a8av meant simply the receiver, the act of receiving
being thought of as a simple fact without reference to progress. Thus for
6 \aBdy in Matt. 25 : 16 os €\aBe might have stood, and it may be trans-
lated, he that received; while for 6 duécas in Matt. 23 : 20 ds av dudon
might have stood, and it may be translated, whoever sweareth ; and for
6 Urouelvas in Matt. 24:15 os av bropetvy might have stood, and it may
be translated, whoever shall endure. Cf. Luke 12: 8-10. But these
differences are due not to a difference in the force of the tense in the
three cases. In each case a translation by a timeless verbal noun —
receiver, swearer, endurer— would correctly (though from the point
of view of English rather awkwardly) represent the thought of the
Greek. As respects the time-relation of the action of the participle
to that of the principal verb 6 AaBwy and 6 vropelvas are participles
of antecedent action, 6 duécas is a participle of identical action. But
these distinctions, again, as stated above, are made, not to mark different
functions of the Greek tense, but to aid in a fuller interpretation of the
facts of the case.

151. Some scholars have endeavored to explain all participles with
the article as equivalent to the relative pronoun with the corresponding
tense of the Indicative. It is true that such participial phrases may often
be resolved in this way and the sense essentially preserved. But that
this is not a general principle will be evident from a comparison of the
function of the tense in the Indicative and in the participle.

(a) All the tenses of the Indicative express time-relations from the
point of view, not of the principal verb, but of the speaker. This principle
holds in a relative clause as well as in a principal sentence. An Aorist
verb standing in a relative clause may indeed refer to an action antece-
dent to the time of the principal verb, but this antecedence is not expressed
by the tense of the verb. All that the Aorist tense does in respect to

1W. G. Ballantine, Attributive Aorist Participles in Protasis, in Bib.
Sac. Apr. 1889.

T0 THE TENSES.

time is to place the action in past time; its relation in that past time to
the action of the principal verb must be learned from some other source.
The corresponding thing is true of the Present tense, which in a relative
clause denotes time not contemporaneous with the action of the principal
verb, but present from the point of view of the speaker. See, e.g., Matt.
ihkR be we yaae

(6) The participle, on the other hand, is in itself timeless, and gains
whatever suggestion of time-relation it conveys from its relation to the
rest of the sentence. It is not affirmed that the Aorist Participle denotes
time relative to that of the principal verb, but that its time-relations are
not independent, like those of the Indicative, but dependent.

It is thus apparent that the whole attitude, so to speak, of the parti-
ciple toward time-relations is different from that of the Indicative, and no
formula of equivalence between them can be constructed. A timeless
noun or adjective cannot by any fixed rule be translated into a time-
expressing verb.

Somewhat less of error is introduced if the rule is made to read that
the participle may be translated into English by a relative clause using
that tense of the English Indicative which corresponds to the tense
of the Greek participle. Relative clauses in English frequently use the
tenses apparently to denote time relative to that of the principal verb.
Thus in the sentence, When I am in London I will come to see you, the
present tense, am, really denotes time future with reference to the speaker,
time present relative to that of the principal verb. Similarly in the
sentence, They that have done good shall come forth to the resurrection of
life—have done is past, not with reference to the time of speaking, but
to that of the principal verb. But such uses of tenses in English are
merely permissible, not uniform. Shall have done would be more exact
in the last sentence. Moreover, the rule as thus stated is false in principle,
and not uniformly applicable in fact. It would require, e.g., that a
Present Participle, standing in connection with an Aorist verb, should be
rendered by an English Present, instead of by an English Past as it
should usually be. See John 2:16; Acts 10: 35.

THE FUTURE PARTICIPLE.

152. The Future Participle represents an action as
future from the point of view of the principal verb. HA.
856; G. 1288.

eeeeEEOeeeeEEEeEeEeEeEeEOeeEeEeEeEeEeEeEeEeEeEEeEeEeEeEeEEeEeeee—e———EE

THE PERFECT PARTICIPLE. (ipl

Acts. 24:11; ot rAcdous eioty pou yyepar Sidexa ad’ Hs aveBnv mpockv-
vyocwv eis “lepovoaAnp, it is not more than twelve days since I went
up to worship at Jerusalem.

1 Cor. 15:37; od 76 cpa TO yevnoopevov areipets, thou sowest not the
body that shall be.

Rem. The Future Participle is of later origin than the participles of
the other tenses, and is a clearly marked exception to the general time-
lessness of the participle. While its function was probably not primarily
temporal, the relations which it expressed necessarily suggested subse-
quence to the action of the principal verb, and hence gave to the tense a
temporal force. Del. 1v. pp. 97 ff. ; Br. 163.

153. The Present Participle péAdwv followed by an Infini-
tive of another verb is used as a periphrasis for a Future
Participle of the latter verb, but with a somewhat different
range of use. To express that which is to take place, either
form may be used. But péddrAwv is not used to express the
purpose of an action, and is used, as the Future Participle is
not, to express intention without designating the intended
action as the purpose of another act. SeeJohn 12: 4 (ef. John
6 : 64); Acts 18:14; 20: 3, 7.

THE PERFECT PARTICIPLE.

154. The Perfect Participle is used of completed ac-
tion. Like the Perfect Indicative it may have reference
to the past action and the resulting state or only to the
resulting state. The time of the resulting state is usually
that of the principal verb. HA. 856; G. 1288.

Acts 10:17; ot dvdpes of dreotadpevor . . . eréatnoav emt Tov TvAGva,
the men who had been sent . . . stood before the gate.

Rom. 15:14; mreTAnpwpLevot TAaONS THS yvoorews, filled with all knowledge.

Luke 8:46; é€yvwv dvvapu éeAnAvOviav aw Euov, I perceived that power
had gone forth from me.

4 THE TENSES.

155. The Perfect Participle stands in two passages of the New Testa-
ment as the predicate of the participle ov. The effect is of a Perfect
Participle clearly marked as one of existing state. See Eph. 4:18;
Colale2ir

156. The Perfect Participle is occasionally used as a Plu-
perfect to denote a state existing antecedent to the time of the
principal verb. The action of which it is the result is, of
course, still earlier.

John 11:44; é&pAOev 6 reOvnkws dedenevos Tos Todas Kal Tas xElpas

Keipiats, he that was [or had been] dead came forth bound hand and

foot with grave-clothes. See also Mark 5:15, éoynxora, noting the

Present Participle in the same verse and the Aorist Participle
in v. 18; also 1 Cor. 2:7, doxexpuppevnv, comparing v. 10.

THE MOODS.

MOODS IN PRINCIPAL CLAUSES.

THE INDICATIVE MOOD.

157. The Indicative is primarily the mood of the un-
qualified assertion or simple question of fact. HA. 865;
G. 1317.

John 1:1; €v apxy Hv 6 Aoyos, in the beginning was the Word.

Mark 4:7; xat xapzov ov« édwxer, and it yielded no fruit.

Matt. 2:2; mov €oriv 6 Texbeis Baotreds Tov lovdaiwy, where is he
that is born King of the Jews ?

John 1:58; ri Cyretre, what are ye seeking ?

158. The Indicative has substantially the same assertive
force in many principal clauses containing qualified assertions.
The action is conceived of as a fact, though the assertion of
the fact is qualified.

John 15:8; éav py vip oe, ok exes pepos pet’ enor, if I wash thee not,
thou hast no part with me.

159. (a) When qualified by particles such as ay, «Oe, etc.,
the Indicative expresses various shades of desirability, improb-
ability, etc. Respecting these secondary uses of the Indicative
in principal clauses, see 26, 27, 248.

(b) Respecting the uses of the Future Indicative in other
than a purely assertive sense, see 67, 69, 70.

79
ip

74 THE MOODS.

Rem. The uses of the Indicative described in 157 and 158 are substan-
tially the same in English and in Greek and occasion no special difficulty
to the English interpreter of Greek. The uses referred to in 159 exhibit
more difference between Greek and English, and each particular usage
requires separate consideration.

THE SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD.

The uses of the Subjunctive in principal clauses are as
follows :

160. The Hortatory Subjunctive. The Subjunctive
is used in the first person plural in exhortations, the
speaker thus exhorting others to join him in the doing of
an action. HA. 866,41; G. 1344; B. p.209; WM. p. 355;
G.MT. 255, 256.

Heb. 12:1; 80 tropovns tpéxwpev Tov mpoKeipevov Huiv ayava, let us
run with patience the race that is set before us.

1 John 4:7; ayamntoi, ayar@pev adAnXovs, beloved, let us love one
another. ‘

161. Occasionally the first person singular is used with
ages Or dedpo prefixed, the exhortation in that case becoming a
request of the speaker to the person addressed to permit him
to do something.

Matt. 7:4; ages €xBadw TO Kapdos éx Tov 6Pbarpov cov, let me cast
out the mote out of thine eye. See also Luke 6:42; Acts 7:34.

The sense of ages in Matt. 27:49 and of dere in Mark 15: 36 is doubt-
ful (see R.V. ad loc. and Th., agin, 2, E.).

In Matt. 21:38 (Mark 12:7) dedre is prefixed to a hortatory first per-
son plural without affecting the meaning of the Subjunctive.

THE SUBJUNCTIVE. yo

In none of these cases is a conjunction to be supplied before the Sub-
junctive. Cf. the use of dye, dépe, etc., in classical Greek. G.MT. 257;
B. p. 210; WM. p. 356.

162. The Prohibitory Subjunctive. The Aorist Sub-
junctive is used in the second person with yx to express a
prohibition or a negative entreaty. HA. 866, 2; G. 1346;
G.MT. 259.

Matt. 6:34; py odv peptuvycnre eis Tv avptov, be not therefore anxious
Sor the morrow.

Heb. 3:8; px oxAnpivyrte Tas Sees tpov, harden not your hearts.

Matt. 6:13; Kai py eiceveykns Huds eis metpacpov, and bring us not into
temptation.

163. Prohibitions are expressed either by the Aorist Sub-
junctive or by the Present Imperative, the only exceptions
being a few instances of the third person Aorist Imperative
with py. The difference between an Aorist Subjunctive with
py and a Present Imperative with py is in the conception of
the action as respects its progress. HA. 874. Thus

164. (a) The Aorist Subjunctive forbids the action as a
simple event with reference to the action as a whole or to its
inception, and is most frequently used when the action has
not been begun.

Acts 18:9; AdXAet Kai py owwryjoys, speak and hold not thy peace.
Rev. 7:3; pa dduxnonte tHv yqv, hurt not the earth.

165. (b) The Present Imperative (180-184) forbids the
continuance of the action, most frequently when it is already
in progress; in this case, it is a demand to desist from the
action.

Mark 6:50; éyw eiys, py poBetode, it is T, be not afraid.
John 5:14; pnxére apaprave, sin no more.

76 THE MOODS.

When the action is not yet begun, it enjoins continued
abstinence from it.
Mark 13:21; xai rore éav tis tyiv ein “Ide wde 6 xpiotds “Ide

éxel, py muorevere, and then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here
is the Christ; or, Lo, there; believe it not. Cf. Matt. 24 : 23.

166. The Prohibitory Subjunctive occurs rarely in the third
person. 1 Cor. 16:11; 2 Thess. 2:3.

167. The strong negative, od wy, occurs rarely in prohibi-
tions with the Aorist Subjunctive.

Matt. 13:14 and Acts 28 : 26, from Septuagint, Isa. 6:9, are probably
to be understood as prohibitory (as in the Hebrew of the passage in Isa.),
rather than emphatically predictive,asin R.V. Cf. Gen. 3:1, od uh paynre,
which is clearly prohibitory. G.MT.297. Cf. 162.

In Matt. 21:19, on the other hand, the emphatic predictive sense, there
shall be no fruit from thee henceforward forever, is more probable, being
more consistent with general usage and entirely appropriate to the con-
text. The imperative rendering of the R.V. makes the passage doubly
exceptional, the Imperative Subjunctive being rare in the third person,
and ov uy being unusual in prohibitions.

168. The Deliberative Subjunctive. The Subjunctive
is used in deliberative questions and in rhetorical questions
having reference to the future. HA. 866, 3; G. 1358.

Luke 3:10; ré odv roijowper, what then shall we do?
Luke 11:5; ris €& ipov ee dirov . . . kal ein aire, which of you
shall have a friend . . . and shall say to him?

169. Questions may be classified as questions of fact and
questions of deliberation. In the question of fact the speaker
asks what is (or was or will be). In the question of delibera-
tion, the speaker asks what he is to do, or what is to be done ;
it concerns not fact but possibility, desirability, or necessity.
But questions may be classified also as’ interrogative or real
questions, and rhetorical questions. The former makes a real

THE SUBJUNCTIVE. (otf

inquiry (for information or advice) ; the latter is a rhetorical
substitute for an assertion, often equivalent to a negative
answer to itself, or, if the question is negative, to a positive
answer.

Since both questions of fact and questions of deliberation
may be either interrogative or rhetorical, it results that there
are four classes of questions that require to be distinguished
for purposes of interpretation.

(a) The interrogative question of fact.

Matt. 16:13; riva A€yovow ot avOpwroi elvar Tov viov Tod dvOpwrov,
who do men say that the Son of man is? See also Mark 16:3;
John 7:45; Acts 17: 18.

(6) The rhetorical question of fact.

1 Cor. 9:1; ov« eit ardcTtodos, am I not an apostle ?

Luke 23:31; dre ei ev typo EvAw TadTa roLotow, év TH Enp@ Ti yevyTat,
for if they do these things in a green tree, what will be done in the dry?
See also Luke 11:5; 16:11.

Mark 12:14; ddpev, 7 py ddpev, shall we give, or shall we not give? See
also Matt. 6:31; 18:21; Luke 22: 49.
(d) The rhetorical deliberative question.

Rom. 10:14; was ovv émixadéeowvTat eis Ov OvK érioTevoay; Tas SE
TUTEVTWOW OV OK HKOVTAV; . . . TMs de KNpVEWoLW edy pa) amTroTTA-
AGow, how then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed ?
how shall they believe in him whom they have not heard? .. . how
shall they preach except they be sent? See also Matt. 26:54; Luke
14:34; John 6: 68.

Interrogative questions of fact, and rhetorical questions of
fact having reference to the present or past, employ the tenses
and moods as they are used in simple declarative sentences.
Rhetorical questions of fact having reference to the future,
and all deliberative questions, use either the Subjunctive or
the Future indicative.

78 THE MOODS.

170. The verb of a deliberative question is most frequently
in the first person; but occasionally in the second or third.
Matt. 23:33; Rom. 10:14. The verb of a rhetorical question
may be of any person.

171. The Deliberative Subjunctive is sometimes preceded
by OeAas, OeAere, or BovAcoGe. No conjunction is to be supplied
in these cases. The verb OeAav is sometimes followed by a
clause introduced by iva, but tva never occurs when the verb
GeXew is in the second person, and the following verb in the
first person, 7.e. when the relations of the verbs are such as to
make a Deliberative Subjunctive probable.

Luke 22:9; ov Peres Erounaowpev, where wilt thou that we make ready ?
See also Matt. 26:17; 27:17, 21; Mark 10: 36, 51; 14:12; 15:9;
Luke 9: 54; 18:41; 1 Cor. 4:21 (N.B.), and cf. (iva) Matt. 7:12;
Mark 6:25; Luke 6:31; 1 Cor. 14:5.

172. The Subjunctive in Negative <Assertions. The
Aorist Subjunctive is used with ov uy in the sense of an
emphatic Future Indicative. HA. 1032; G. 1360.

Heb. 13:5; od py oe dv@ ovd ov py oe éyxatadcra, I will in no wise
fail thee, neither will I in any wise forsake thee. See also Matt. 5:18;
Mark 13:30; Luke 9:27, et freg. Cf. Gild. in A.J.P. m1. 202 f.

Rem. In Luke 18:7 and Rey. 15:4 the Subjunctive with ov uy is used
in a rhetorical question. The Subjunctive may be explained as occasioned
by the emphatic negative or by the rhetorical nature of the question.

173. This emphatically predictive Subjunctive is of frequent occurrence
in Hellenistic Greek. The Present Subjunctive is sometimes used with
ot uw in classical Greek, but no instance occurs in the New Testament.
Concerning the rare use of the Future with od u7 see 66; cf. Gild. ws.

THE OPTATIVE. 79

THE OPTATIVE MOOD.

174. The Optative Mood is much less frequent in the New
Testament, and in Hellenistic writers generally, than in clas-
sical Greek. Cf. Harmon, The Optative Mood in Hellenistic
Greek, in J.B.L. Dec. 1886.

It is mainly confined to four uses, two of which are in prin-
cipal clauses.

175. The Optative of Wishing. The Optative is used
without av to express a wish. HA. 870; G. 1507.

1 Pet. 1:2; yapis tty Kai eipnvy tAnOvvOein, grace to you and peace
be multiplied.

2 Thess. 3:16; adros d€ 6 Kuptos THs eipyvys dwn tpiv THv eipyyny,
now the Lord of peace himself give you peace.

176. The Optative of Wishing occurs thirty-five times in the New
Testament: Mark 11:14; Luke 1:38; 20:16; Acts 8:20; Rom. 38:4;
Delds SeGils GRA, WHS (Gi, ee ealebealal Sale wll ako las alss eal (Oxora, ie ils) -
Gilgoiso: 21> 6214; 1 Thess. 3: 115 12) 52/23'5 2 Mhess,2:: 17 + 325,
Gre Zebime 16; 18) Philem, 20); Heb: 137213 1 Pet. 1:22 Pet. 1: 2)
always, except Philem. 20, in the third person singular. It most frequently
expresses a prayer. Mark 11:14 and Acts 8:20 are peculiar in being im-
precations of evil.

177. The phrase py yévoro is an Optative of Wishing which strongly
deprecates something suggested by a previous question or assertion.
Fourteen of the fifteen New Testament instances are in Paul’s writings,
and in twelve of these it expresses the apostle’s abhorrence of an inference
which he fears may be (falsely) drawn from his argument. Cf. Mey.
on Rom. 5:4, and ZLtft. on Gal. 2:17. On Gal. 6:14 cf. 1 Mace. 9: 10.

178. The Potential Optative. The Optative with dv
is used to express what would happen on the fulfilment of
some supposed condition. It is thus an apodosis correla-

80 THE MOODS.

tive to a protasis expressed or implied. It is usually to be
translated by the English Potential. HA. 872; G@. 1327 ff.

Acts 8:31; mds yap dv dvvatuny éav pn tis ddnynoe pe, how should I be
able unless some one shall guide me ?

Acts 17:18; ti av Gedo 6 azrepporcyos oTos A€yewv, what would this
babbler wish to say ?

179. The Optative with dy occurs in the New Testament only in Luke’s
writings: Luke *1: 62; *6:11; *9:46; [*15:26; 18:36]; Acts *5:24;
8:31; *10:17; +17:18; [26:29]. Of these instances the six marked
with * are in indirect questions; the two marked with ¢ are in direct
questions ; those in brackets are of doubtful text; others still more
doubtful might be added. In only one instance (Acts 8:31) is the con-
dition expressed.

THE IMPERATIVE MOOD.

180. The Imperative Mood is used in commands and
exhortations. HA.873; G. 13842.

Matt. 5:42; 7@ airotvri oe 80s, give to him that asketh thee.
1 Thess. 5:19; ro wvedpa py oBevvuTe, quench not the spirit.

Rem. Respecting other methods of expressing a command, see 67,
160-167, 364.

181. THe ImpeRAtTIveE Moop is also used in entreaties and
petitions.

Mark 9:22; GAN’ e& te divy, BonOynoov qpiv orrayxvicbeis eh TGs,
but if thou canst do anything, have compassion on us and help us.
Luke 17:5; kai etrav ot drootodo TH Kupio Ipdcbes qyiv riotw,

and the apostles said to the Lord, Increase our faith.
John 17:11; zarep aye, thpnoov aitovs év TO dvopati gov, holy
Father, keep them in thy name.

182. THe Imperative Moop is also used to express con-
sent, or merely to propose an hypothesis.

FINITE MOODS IN SUBORDINATE CLAUSES. 81

Matt. 8:31, 32; ot d& dacuoves rapexarouv airov A€yovres Hi €xBar-
Aes mas, arrooretAov Huas eis THY ayéAnV TOV xXOipwy. Kal ElrreV
avtots “Yaayere, and the demons besought him saying, If thou cast
us out, send us away into the herd of swine. And he said unto
them, Go.

John 2:19; daexpiOn “Incots Kai cirev aitois Avoate tov vaov TodTov
Kal [év] tpioiv npepais eyep® avrov, Jesus answered and said unto
them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.

(1 Cor. 7:36; Kat (ei) ovtws deiher yiverOar, 6 Gere sroveiTw* ov
apaptave.* yapeirwoav, and if need so require, let him do what he
will; he sinneth not; let them marry.

183. An Imperative suggesting a hypothesis may or may
not retain its imperative or hortatory force.

Luke 6:37; pa xpivere, kal ov pn KpiOnre, judge not, and ye shall not
be judged. Cf. John 2:19, above.

184. Any tense of the Imperative may be used in positive
commands, the distinction of force being that of the tenses of
the dependent moods in general. Cf. 95 ff. In prohibitions,
on the other hand, the use of the Imperative is confined almost
entirely to the Present tense. A few instances only of the
Aorist occur. Cf. 163.

FINITE MOODS IN SUBORDINATE CLAUSES.

185. Many subordinate clauses employ the moods and
tenses with the same force that they have in principal
clauses. Others, however, give to the mood or tense a force
different from that which they usually have in principal
clauses. Hence arises the necessity for special treatment of
the moods and tenses in subordinate clauses. Principal clauses
also require discussion in so far as their mood or tense affects
or is affected by the subordinate clauses which limit them.

82 THE MOODS.

186. Clauses considered as elements of the sentence may be classified
as follows:

I. SUBSTANTIVE.

(1) As subject or predicate nominative (211-214, 557-560).
(2) As object in indirect discourse (534-356).

(3) As object after verbs of exhorting, etc. (200-204).

(4) As object after verbs of striving, etc. (205-210).

(5) As object after verbs of fear and danger (224-227).

II. ADJECTIVE.

(1) Appositive (211, 213).
(2) Relative (289-353, in part).
(3) Definitive (215, 216, in part).

III. Apversrar, denoting

(1) Time (289-316, in part ; 821-555).

(2) Place (289-316, in part).

(8) Condition (238-277, 296-315).

(4) Concession (278-288).

(5) Cause (228-2338, 294).

(6) Purpose ({188-196], 197-199, 317).

(7) Indirect object, etc. (215, 217, in part ; 518, 319).
(8) Result (218, 219, 234-237).

(9) Manner (217, 289-516, in part).
(10) Comparison, expressing equality or inequality (289-316,

in part).

Rem. Conditional relative clauses introduced by relative pronouns,
and relative clauses denoting cause and purpose introduced in the same
way, partake at the same time of the nature of adjective and of adverbial
clauses.

187. The arrangement of the matter in the following sections (188-
347) is not based upon a logical classification of clauses, such as is indi-
cated in the preceding section, but in part on genetic relationships, and
in part on considerations of practical convenience. The following is the
general order of treatment :

Moods in clauses introduced by final particles. . 188-227.
Moods in‘clauses of cause ~~. 2 6S). 9) pees ares
Moods in clausesiof result =~ 2 3) a) ee eeekeeone

CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY FINAL PARTICLES. 83

Moods in conditional sentences. . . . . . . 288-277.
Moods in concessive sentences. . . . . . . 278-288.
Moods in relative clauses. ... . . . . . 289-333.
Definite relative clauses ... . . . . 292-295.
Conditional relative clauses ... . . . 296-816.
Relative clauses expressing purpose. . . . 3817-320.
Relative clauses introduced by éws, etc. . . 321-535.
IndirectDiscourse - 5 2. . =. . «© . . 4 « 804-556.
Construction after kai éyévero, etc. . . . . . 857-3860.

MOODS IN CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY FINAL PARTICLES,

188. Criassirication. Under the general head of clauses
introduced by final particles are included in New Testament
Greek :

(1) Pure final clauses.

(2) Object clauses after verbs of exhorting, etc.
(3) Object clauses after verbs of striving, etc.
(4) Object clauses after verbs of fearing.

(5) Subject, predicate, and appositive clauses.
(6) Complementary and epexegetic clauses.
(7) Clauses of conceived result.

189. General Usage. ‘The relations expressed by the
clauses enumerated in 188 are in classical Greek expressed
in various ways, but, in the New Testament, these differ-
ences have, by a process of assimilation, to a considerable
extent disappeared. Clauses modeled after final clauses
take the place of Infinitives in various relations ; the Opta-
tive disappears from this class of clauses ; the distinction be-
tween the Subjunctive and the Future Indicative is par-
tially ignored. It results that the seven classes of clauses
named above conform in general to one rule, viz. :

&4 THE MOODS.

Clauses introduced by a final particle usually employ the
Subjunctive after both primary and secondary tenses, less
frequently the Future Indicative.

Rem. Concerning the Present Indicative after iva, see 198, Rem.

190. Final Particles. The New Testament employs as
final particles iva, o7rws, and p7.

Rem. The usage of the final particles in classical Greek is elaborately
discussed by Weber in Schanz, Beitriige zur historischen Syntax der
griechischen Sprache, Hefte IV., V., and by Gild. (on the basis of Weber’s
work) in A.J. P. IV. 416 ff., VI. 53 ff.

191. New Testament USE oF iva. “Iva occurs very fre-

quently in the New Testament, and with a greater variety of
usage than in classical Greek. Not only does it assume in
part the functions which in classical Greek belonged to the
other final particles, but clauses introduced by it encroach
largely upon the function of the Infinitive. This extension
of the use of fva is one of the notable characteristics of the
Greek of the New Testament and of all later Greek. “Iva oe-
curs in the New Testament in

(1) Pure final clauses.

(2) Object clauses after verbs of exhorting, etc.
(3) Object clauses after verbs of striving, ete.
(4) Subject, predicate, and appositive clauses.
(5) Complementary and epexegetic clauses.
(6) Clauses of conceived result.

Of these clauses, the first class is the only one that regularly
employs iva in classical Greek. Cf. G.MT. 311.

192. New TestaMENT UsE OF 6ros. "Ozws occurs in the
New Testament, as in classical Greek, in

—e

CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY FINAL PARTICLES. 85

(1) Pure final clauses.

(2) Object clauses after verbs of eahorting, etc.

(3) Object clauses after verbs of striving, etc. Cf. G.MT.
313.

193. New Testament UsE oF py. M7 is used in the New
Testament, as in classical Greek, in

(1) Pure final clauses.

(2) Object clauses after verbs of striving, ete.

(3) Object clauses after verbs of fearing. Cf. G.MT.
307-310, 339, 352.

194. ‘Os, which occurs as a final particle in classical prose,
appears in a final clause in the New Testament in only one
passage and that of doubtful text, Acts 20:24. "”Odpa, which
was used as a final particle in epic and lyric poetry, does not
occur in the New Testament. Cf. G.MT. 312, 314.

195. In classical Greek, final clauses and object clauses after verbs
of striving, etc., frequently have érws dv or ws dv. G.MT. 328; Meist.
p. 212. According to Gild. &v gives to the clause, except in the formal
language of inscriptions, a relative or conditional force, érws dv being
equivalent to nv mws. A.J. P. 1v. pp. 422, 425; vi. pp. 58-73; L. and 8.
érws. In the New Testament érws &v occurs four times (dws alone forty-
nine times), always in a final clause proper. In Luke 2:35; Acts3: 19;
15:17 the contingent color may perhaps be detected ; but in Rom. 3:4,
quoted from the Septuagint, it is impossible to discover it.

196. “Orws after verbs of fearing, which is found occasionally in
classical Greek, does not occur in the New Testament.

197. Pure Final Clauses. A pure final clause is one
whose office is to express the purpose of the action stated
in the predicate which it limits.

In classical Greek, final clauses take the Subjunctive

86 THE MOODS.

after primary tenses; after secondary tenses either the
Optative or the Subjunctive. HA. 881; G. 1865.

In the New Testament, the Optative does not occur.
The Subjunctive is regularly used after primary and sec-
ondary tenses alike.

Matt. 7:1; pn xpivere, va py KpiOnre, judge not, that ye be not judged.

Rom. 1:11; éiro6 yap idetv tpas, iva Te peTad® xapiopa tpiv mvev-
parixov, for I long to see you, that I may impart unto you some spiritual
gift.

Rom. 9:17; €is atro rotro e&nyeipa oe Orws evdetEwpar €v got THY
dvvapiv pov, for this very purpose did I raise thee up that I might
show in thee my power.

Acts 28:27; xat tovs ép6adpovs aitav éxxdppvoav’ pH Tore iowow
tots opGadpois, and their eyes they have closed ; lest haply they should
perceive with their eyes.

198. Pure final clauses occasionally take the Future Indica-
tive in the New Testament asin classical Greek. HA. 881, c;
G. 1366; B. pp. 234 f.; WM. pp. 360f.; WT. pp. 289 f.

Luke 20:10; dréoretAev mpos Tovs yewpyors dovAov, iva . . . dwcovary,
he sent to the husbandmen a servant, that they might give. See also 199.

Rem. Some MSS. give a Present Indicative after iva in John 5:20;
Gal. 6:12; Tit. 2:4; Rev. 12:6; 13:17. In 1 John 5:20 yiweoxoper is
probably pregnant in force, ‘‘that we may know, and whereby we do
know.’ Zndodre in Gal. 4:17, and guovotebe in 1 Cor. 4: 6 are regarded
by Hort (WH. II. App. p. 167), Schmiedel (WS. p. 52), and Blass
(Grammatik, p. 207), as Subjunctives. On John 17:5 see 213, Rem.

199. The Future Indicative occurs in pure final clauses in classical
Greek chiefly after érws, rarely after uy, ws, and éppa, never after iva.
G.MT. 324; Weber, u.s.; Gild. u.s. The New Testament instances are
chiefly after tva ; a few instances occur after «7 (ujmore) and one after dws.
The manuscripts show not a few variations between Subjunctive and Future
Indicative, and both forms are sometimes found together, after the same
conjunction. The following passages contain the Future, or both Future
and Subjunctive: Matt. 7:6; 13:15; Mark 14:2; Luke 14:10; 20: 10;
John 7:3; 17:2; Acts 21: 24; 28:27; Rom. 3:4; Gal. 2:4; 1 Pet. 3:1.

CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY FINAL PARTICLES. 87

200. Object Clauses after Verbs of Exhorting, ete.
In classical Greek, verbs of exhorting, commanding, entreat-
ing, and persuading are sometimes followed by an object
clause instead of the more usual Infinitive. Such a clause
usually employs é7@s and the Future Indicative, sometimes
the Subjunctive. G. 13738; G.MT. 355.

In the New Testament, object clauses after such verbs
are frequent; they use both iva and és; and employ
the Subjunctive to the exclusion of the Future Indicative.
Mark 5:18; zapexadre. atrov 6 datmoviabels iva pet adtod 7, he who

had been possessed with a demon besought him that he might be with him.
Luke 10:2; den6yre oty tov Kupiov Tov Oepispod Orws éepyatas éxBady

eis TOV Depiopov avrov, pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest that

he send forth laborers into his harvest. See also Matt. 4:5; 14:36;

lire eActseco loves Cor, bel0ky 29Cor, 8165 Markelsi18

(cf. Matt. 24:20); Luke 22:46 (cf. v. 40).

Rem. In Eph. 1:17 6&7 (Subjunctive) should be read rather than 6g
(Optative). Cf. 225, Rem. 2.

201. The use of wa in an object clause after a verb of exhorting is

almost unknown in classical Greek. G.MT. 357. In the New Testament
tva occurs much more frequently than é7ws in such clauses.

202. The regular construction in classical Greek after verbs
of exhorting, etc.,is the Infinitive. This is also in the New
Testament the most frequent construction, occurring nearly
twice as often as the wa and dws clauses. Kedevw and the
compounds of racow take only the Infinitive. "“EvréAAopac
employs both constructions.

203. Under the head of verbs of exhorting, etc., is to be in-
cluded the verb #€Aw when used with reference to a command
or request addressed to another. It is frequently followed by
an object clause introduced by wa. Here also belongs the verb

88 THE MOODS.

eirov, used in the sense of command; also such phrases as
kaprtw ta yovata (Eph. 3:14), and pyecav rovodpar eri rav
mpocevyoy (Eph. 1:16; Philem. 4; cf. Col. 4:12), which are
paraphrases for rpocevyouat.

204. In many cases a clause or Infinitive after a verb of commanding
or entreating may be regarded as a command indirectly quoted. It is
then a species of indirect discourse, though not usually included under
that heaa. Cf. 337, and G.MT. 684. Matt. 16:20; Mark 9:9; 18:34.

205. Object Clauses after Verbs of Striving, ete. In
classical Greek, verbs signifying to strive for, to take care,
to plan, to effect, are followed by éa@s with the Future
Indicative, less frequently the Subjunctive, after both pri-
mary and secondary tenses. HA. 885; G. 1872.

In the New Testament, the Subjunctive occurs more
frequently than the Future Indicative, and iva more fre-
quently than d7res.

John 12:10; éBovretcavro S€ of apxtepets iva Kai tov Adlapov dzro-

KTeivwow, but the chief priests took counsel to put Lazarus also to death.
Rev. 3:9; idod romjow aitods tva novow Kal mpooKvvycovow évwrvov

TOV Toda Gov, Kal yv@ow OTL éyw yyarnoa oe, behold, I will make

them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved
thee. See also 1 Cor. 16:10; Col. 4:16, 17; Rev. 13:12, 16.

206. When the object clause after a verb meaning to care
for, to take heed, is negative, classical Greek sometimes uses
uy (instead of ozws pn) with the Subjunctive, or less fre-
quently with the Future Indicative. G. 13875; G.MT. 354.
This is the common New Testament usage. See Matt. 24:4;
Acts 13:40; 1 Cor.8:9; 10:12; Gal.6: 1; Col. 2:82 there
bi 15% Heb, 32 12.

"Orws wy With the Future in classical Greek, and iva py with
the Subjunctive in New Testament Greek, also occur. John
11:37; 2 John 8.

CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY FINAL PARTICLES. 89

207. “Orws occurs in the New Testament in such clauses (205) only
in Matt. 12:14; 22:15; Mark 3:6, and in all these cases after a phrase
meaning to plan. The clause thus closely approximates an indirect de-
liberative question. Cf. Mark 11:18. See Th. dws, II. 2.

208. The Optative sometimes occurs in classical Greek after a
secondary tense of verbs of striving, etc., but is not found in the New
Testament.

209, It is sometimes difficult to say with certainty whether yw with
the Subjunctive after dpa or opare is an objective clause or an independent
Prohibitory Subjunctive. In classical Greek the dependent construction
was already fully developed (cf. G.MT. 354, 307); and though in the
New Testament épa is sometimes prefixed to the Imperative (Matt. 9: 30;
24:6), showing that the paratactic construction is still possible, a7 with
the Subjunctive in such passages as Matt. 18:10; 1 Thess. 5:15 is best
regarded as constituting an object clause.

M7 with the Subjunctive after BAérw is also probably to be regarded as
dependent. It is true that Bdérw does not take an objective clause in
classical Greek, that in the New Testament only the Imperative of this
verb is followed by a clause defining the action to be done or avoided, and
that in a few instances the second verb is an Aorist Subjunctive in the
second person with wu, and might therefore be regarded as a Prohib-
itory Subjunctive (Luke 21:8; Gal. 5:15; Heb. 12:25). Yet in a
larger number of cases the verb is in the third person (Matt. 24: 4; Mark
13:5; Acts 13:40; 1 Cor. 8:9, etc.), and in at least one instance is in-
troduced by iva (1 Cor. 16:10). This indicates that we have not a coor-
dinate imperative expression, but a dependent clause. In Col. 4:17
Bdére, and in 2 John 8 Bdézere, is followed by iva with the Subjunctive ;
the clause in such case being probably objective, but possibly pure final.
In Heb. 3:12 the Future Indicative with u% is evidently an objective
clause.

Rem. Concerning Luke 11:35, see B. p. 248; WM. p. 374, foot-note,
and p. 681; WT. p. 503; Th. wy, II. 2; R.V: ad loc.

210. Verbs of striving, etc., may also take the Infinitive as
object. With Matt. 26:4, and John 11:53, cf. Acts 9:23;
with Rev. 13: 12 cf. 13: 13.

The verbs fyréw and ddinm, which are usually followed by

90 THE MOODS.

an Infinitive, are each followed in one instance by iva with the
Subjunctive. See Mark 11:16; 1 Cor. 14:12; cf. also 1 Cor.
A 2.

211. Subject, Predicate, and Appositive Clauses intro-
duced by iva. Clauses introduced by iva are frequently
used in the New Testament as subject, predicate, or appos-
itive, with a force closely akin to that of an Infinitive.
The verb is usually in the Subjunctive, less frequently in
the Future Indicative.

These clauses may be further classified as follows:

212. (a) Sussecr of the passive of verbs of exhorting,
striving, ete., which in the active take such a clause as object,
and of other verbs of somewhat similar force. Cf. 200, 205.

1 Cor. 4:2; fyretrau ev rots oixovopos iva muotds Tis evpeOy, it is
required in stewards that a man be found faithful.

Rev. 9:4; Kai éppéOn attats va pa adixnoovaw Tov xXoptov THS ys;
and it was said unto them that they should not hurt the grass of the
earth. See also Mark 9:12 (yéypamrrat implies command or will);
Rey. 9:5.

213. (b) SuBsect, PREDICATE, OR APPOSITIVE with nouns
of various significance, especially such as are cognate with the
verbs which take such a clause as object, and with pronouns,
the clause constituting a definition of the content of the noun
or pronoun.

John 4:34; é€udv Bpopa eorw iva roujow 7d OeAnpa Tov mTépavTos
pe Kal TeAELwWow TO Epyov avTov, my meat is to do the will of him
that sent me and to accomplish his work.

John 15:12; avr éoriv évrodAy 7 enn, iva dyamare adAnAovs, this
is my commandment, that ye love one another. See also Luke 1:43;
John 6: 29, 39, 40; 15:8, 138; 18:39; 1 Cor. 9:18; 1 John 3:1;
2 John 6; 3 John 4.

CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY FINAL PARTICLES. 91

Rem. The Present Indicative occurs in MSS. of John 17:3 and is
adopted by Zisch. and Treg. (text).

214. (c) Sussecr of phrases signifying it is profitable, it is
sufficient, etc.
Matt. 10:25; dpxerov to pabyty iva yevytat ws 6 didacKados avrod,

it is enough for the disciple that he be as his master. See also Matt.
Sreaeoo; 18:6; Luke 17:2; John 11:50; 16:7; 1 Cor. 4:3.

215. Complementary and Epexegetic Clauses intro-
duced by iva. Clauses introduced by iva are used in the
New Testament to express a complementary or epexegetic
limitation, with a force closely akin to that of an Infinitive.
The verb of the clause is usually in the Subjunctive, some-
times in the Future Indicative.

These clauses may be classified as follows:

216. (a) Complementary limitation of nouns and adjec-
tives signifying authority, power, fitness, need, set time, ete.

Mark 11:28; 7 tis cou ddwxey tHv eLovoiay tavTnv iva TadTa Toujs,
or who gave thee this authority to do these things ?

John 12:23; €AnAvdev 7 wpa tva dogacO7 6 vids Tod avOpwrov, the
hour is come that the Son of man should be glorified. See also Matt.
Seo uuke/:65. John 1:27; 2:325% 16:2, 32: 1.John 2327;
Rey. 21: 23.

217. (b) Complementary or epexegetic limitation of verbs
of various significance ; the clause defines the content, ground,
or method of the action denoted by the verb, or constitutes an
indirect object of the verb.

John 8:56; "ABpadp 6 ratnp tpav yyadAAuacato iva idy Tv pu€pay
Thv €unv, your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day.

92 THE MOODS.

Phil. 2:2; wAnpwoaré pov thy xapav iva TO aito povyre, fulfil ye
my joy, that ye be of the same mind. (See an Infinitive similarly
used in Acts 15:10.) See also John 9:22; Gal. 2:9; in both
these latter passages the fva clause defines the content of the agree-
-ment mentioned in the preceding portion of the sentence. See also
John 5:7. Cf. Martyr. Polye. 10. 1.

218. Clauses of Conceived Result introduced by iva.
Clauses introduced by iva are used in the New Testament
to express the conceived result of an action.

John 9:2; tis npaptev, ovTos 7 ot yovets avrov, iva tupAds yevvny,
who did sin, this man or his parents, that he should be born blind ?

1 Thess. 5:4; tpets dé, adeAdol, otk é€ore ev oKOTE, iva y HuEpa
twas ws KAerras katadaBn, but ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that
that day should overtake you as thieves. See also 1 John 1:9 (ef.

Heb. 6:10 — Infinitive in similar construction); 2 Cor. 1:17; Rey.
9:20 (cf. Matt. 21:32); 14:18; 22:14.

219. The relation of thought between the fact expressed in
the principal clause and that expressed in the clause of con-
ceived result introduced by ta is that of cause and effect, but
it is recognized by the speaker that this relation is one of
theory or inference rather than of observed fact. In some
eases the effect is actual and observed, the cause is inferred.
So, e.g., John 9:2. In other cases the cause is observed, the
effect is inferred. So, eg.,1 Thess. 5:4. In all the cases the
action of the principal clause is regarded as the necessary con-
dition of that of the subordinate clause, the action of the sub-
ordinate clause as the result which is to be expected to follow
from that of the principal clause.

It is worthy of notice that in English the form of expres-
sion which ordinarily expresses pure purpose most distinctly
may also be used to express this relation of conceived result.
We say, He must have suffered very severe losses in order to be
so reduced in circumstances. Such forms of expression are

CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY FINAL PARTICLES. 93

probably the product of false analogy, arising from imitation
of a construction which really expresses purpose. Thus in the
sentence, He labored diligently in order to accumulate property,
the subordinate clause expresses pure purpose. In the sen-
tence, He must have labored diligently in order to accumulate
such «a property, the sentence may be so conceived that the sub-
ordinate clause would express purpose, but it would usually
mean rather that if he accumulated such a property he must
have labored diligently ; that is, the property is conceived of
as a result the existence of which proves diligent labor. This
becomes still more evident if we say, He must have labored
diligently to have accumulated such a property. But when we
say, He must have suffered severe losses to have become so re-
duced in circumstances, it is evident that the idea of purpose
has entirely disappeared, and only that of inferred result
remains. Actual result observed to be the effect of observed
causes is not, however, thus expressed except by. a rhetorical
figure. With these illustrations from the English, compare
the following from the Greek. Jas. 1:4; 9 8& trouovm épyov
Teeov €xeTw, iva NTE TéAELoL Kal SAOKAnpoL, and let patience have
its perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire. Heb. 10:56;
bropmovns yap €xeTe xpeiay iva TO OeAnpa Tod Geod roinsavTes Kopiona Oe
Thy erayyediav, for ye have need of patience, that, having done the
will of God, ye may receive the promise. In the first sentence
the iva clause expresses the purpose of éyérw. In the second,
though the purpose of izopuovy is contained in the clause iva

. €rayyeAiay, yet the function of this clause in the sentence
is not telic. Its office is not to express the purpose of the
principal clause, but to set forth a result (conceived, not act-
ual) of which the possession of izouovy is the necessary condi-
tion. In John 9:2 the idiom is developed a step further, for
in this case the iva clause in no sense expresses the purpose of
the action of the principal clause, but a fact conceived to be

94 THE MOODS.

the result of a cause concerning which the principal clause
makes inquiry.

This use of tva with the Subjunctive is closely akin in force
to the normal force of cre with the Infinitive. Cf. 370, c, and
especially G.MT. 582-584.

220. Some of the instances under 215-217 might be considered as ex-
pressing conceived result, but the idiom has developed beyond the point
of conceived result, the clause becoming a mere complementary limita-
tion. The possible course of development may perhaps be suggested by
examining the following illustrations: John 17:2; Mark 11:28; Luke
7:6; 1 John 2:27. In the first case the clause probably expresses pure
purpose. In the last the idea of purpose has altogether disappeared.

221. In all these constructions, 211-218, which are distinet
departures from classical usage, being later invasions of the
iva clause upon the domain occupied in classical Greek by
the Infinitive, the Infinitive remains also in use in the New
Testament, being indeed in most of these constructions more
frequent than the (va clause.

222. There is no certain, scarcely a probable, instance in
the New Testament of a clause introduced by wa denoting
actual result conceived of as such.

Luke 9:45 probably expresses pure purpose (cf. Matt. 11: 25; WM.
p. 574; WT. p. 459). Gal. 5:17 is also best explained as expressing the
purpose of the hostility of the flesh and the Spirit, viewed, so far as the
iva clause is concerned, as a hostility of the flesh to the Spirit. So, ap-
parently, R.V. Rev. 13:13 is the most probable instance of iva denoting
actual result ; iva... moq is probably equivalent to ware rovetv, and is
epexegetic of ueyadda. It would be best translated, so as even to make.

Respecting iva rnpw67, Matt. 1:22 and frequently in the first gospel,
there is no room for doubt. The writer of the first gospel never uses
iva to express result, either actual or conceived; and that he by this
phrase at least intends to express purpose is made especially clear by his
employment of érws (which is never ecbatic) interchangeably with iva.
With 1:22; 2:15; 4:14; 12:17 ;. 2124 26:56; ci. 2-235 Siaipeomer:

CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY FINAL PARTICLES. 95

223. Concerning the post-classical usage of iva in general see Jebb in
Vincent and Dickson, Modern Greek, pp. 519-321. Concerning whether
iva in the New Testament is always in the strict sense telic, and whether
it is ever ecbatic (two distinct questions not always clearly distinguished),
see Meyer on Matt. 1:22: ‘"Iva ist niemals éxBarixdy, so dass, sondern
immer redcxdv, damit,’? —the first half of which is true, the second half
far from true. Fritzsche on Matt. pp. 836 ff.; WT. pp. 457-462; WM.
pp. 573-578 ; B. pp. 285-240: ‘*‘ And although it [ta] never stands in
the strict ecbatic sense (for wore with the finite verb), it has nevertheless
here reached the very boundary line where the difference between the
two relations (the telic and the ecbatic) disappears, and it is nearer to the
ecbatic sense than to its original final sense. Necessary as the demand is,
that in a systematic inquiry into the use of the particle, even within a
comparatively restricted field, we should always make its original telic
force, which is the only force it has in earlier Greek writers, our point
of departure, and trace out thence the transitions to its diverse shades of
meaning ; the interests of exegesis would gain very little, if in every in-
dividual passage of the N.T. even (the language of which has already
departed so far from original classic Greek usage) we should still take
pains, at the cost of the simple and natural sense, and by a recourse to
artificial means, always to introduce the telic force,”’ p. 239. Hunzinger,
‘Die in der klassischen Griicitiit nicht gebriiuchliche finale Bedeutung
der Partikel iva im neutestamentlichen Sprachgebrauch,’’ in Zeitschrift
fiir Kirchliche Wissenschaft, 1883, pp. 632-645 — a valuable article which
elaborately disproves its own conclusion —‘‘dass iva im N.T. in allen
Fiillen final verstanden werden kann,’’ unless a very broad and loose
sense be given to the term jinal.

224. Object Clauses after Verbs of Fear and Danger.
In classical Greek, clauses after verbs of fear and danger
employ m7 with the Subjunctive after primary tenses; the
Optative, more rarely the Subjunctive, after secondary
tenses. HA. 887; G. 1878.

In the New Testament the Subjunctive only is used.

2 Cor. 12:20; PoBotpa yap py ws eADwy ovy olovs GEAw EVpw buas, for

I fear, lest by any means, when I come, I shall find you not such as I
would. See also Acts 23:10; 27:29; 2 Cor. 11:3; Heb. 4:1.

Rem. 1. Acts 5:26 may be understood as in R.V., Tov \ady denoting
the persons feared, and wh A\acdGow the thing feared (cf. the familiar

46 THE MOODS.

idiom with oiéa illustrated in Mark 1:24; see also Gal. 4: 11), so that the
meaning would be expressed in English by translating, for they were
afraid that they should be stoned by the people; or époBotvro .. . \adv May
be taken as parenthetical, and uy AacASoww made to limit. Hyev avrous,
ov peta Bias; so Tisch. and WH.

Rem. 2. Some MSS. and editors read a Future Indicative in 2 Cor.
1PsoeA lA

225. The verb of fearing is sometimes unexpressed, the idea
of fear being suggested by the context; so, it may be, in Acts
5 : 39, and Matt. 25 : 9.

Rem. 1. 2 Tim. 2:25, un more dun adrots 6 Beds uerdvoray is probably
best explained in the same way. For the gentleness and meekness in
dealing with those that oppose themselves, which he has enjoined, the
apostle adds the argument, [ fearing] lest God may perchance grant them
repentance, i.e. lest on the assumption that they are past repentance you
be found dealing in harshness with those to whom God will yet grant
repentance.

Rem. 2. Ady (Subjunctive) is to be preferred to 5g (Optative) in
this passage as in Eph. 1:17. See the evidence in WS. p. 120 that this
form occurs as a Subjunctive not only in the Old Ionic language, but in
inscriptions of the second century s.c. Cf. WH. Il. App. p. 168.

226. It is evident that object clauses after verbs of fear are closely
akin to negative object clauses after verbs signifying to care for. G.MT.
354. Some of the instances cited under 206 might not inappropriately be
placed under 224. On the probable common origin of both, and their
development from the original parataxis, see G.MT. 307, 352.

227. When the object of apprehension is conceived of as
already present or past, i.e. as a thing already decided, al-
though the issue is at the time of speaking unknown, the In-
dicative is used both in classical and New Testament Greek.
HA. 888; G. 1380.

Gal. 4:11; poBotpa tyas py tws ix Kexoriaxa eis twas, I am afraid

I have perhaps bestowed labor upon you in vain. See also Gal. 2:2;
1 Thess. 3:5; Gen. 45:11.

MOODS IN CLAUSES OF CAUSE. 97

MOODS IN CLAUSES OF CAUSE.

228. A causal clause is one which gives either the cause or
the reason of the fact stated in the principal clause. Causal
clauses are introduced by dru, ddr, exe’, eretdy, erednrep, Ep &,
ete. HA. 925; G. 1505.

229. Moods and Tenses in Causal Clauses. The
moods and tenses are used in causal clauses with the same
force as in principal clauses.

John 14:19; ore éyo C0 kai tpets Cyoere, because I live, ye shall live also.

1 Cor. 14:12; éwei CyAwral éore Tvevpdtwv, Tpds THV oiKOdopAV THS
€xkAnotas Cyteire va repiocetyre, since ye are zealous of spiritual
gifts, seek that ye may abound unto the edifying of the church. See
also Luke 1:1; Acts 15:24; Rom. 5:12.

230. From the significance of a causal clause it naturally
results that its verb is usually an Indicative affirming a fact.
Any form, however, which expresses or implies either qualified
or unqualified assertion may stand after a causal conjunction.
Thus we find, eg., a rhetorical question, or an apodosis of a
conditional sentence. In the latter case the protasis may be
omitted. In the following instances all three of these phe-
nomena coincide ; the causal clause is an apodosis, its protasis
is omitted, it is expressed in the form of a rhetorical
question.

1 Cor. 15:29; érei ri roujcovow ot Barrilopevor brep TOV vexpar, else
what shall they do which are baptized for the dead? 1.e., since [if the
dead are not raised] they that are baptized for the dead are baptized
to no purpose.

Heb. 10:2; éei ovk dv éxavoavto rpoadepopevat, else would they not
have ceased to be offered? i.e., since [if what was said above were not
true] they would have ceased to be offered. Cf. also Acts 5:38.

98 THE MOODS.

231. From the nature of the causal clause as making an
assertion, it results that it is easily disjoined from the clause
which states the fact of which it gives the cause or reason,
and becomes an independent sentence.

Matt. 6:5; cai orav mpocevxynabe, ovk écecbe ws of iroKpitai* Ott
pirovow €v Tals ouvvaywyals Kal €v Tals ywviats TOV mAaTELOv
eaTates tpocevxyecGar, and when ye pray, ye shall not be as the
hypocrites: because they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and
in the corners of the streets (cf. 6:16, where in a closely similar
sentence, yap is used instead of 6rv). See also Luke 11:32;
1 Cor. 1: 22, and cf. v. 21, where the same conjunction ézeudy intro-
duces a subordinate clause.

232. The distinction between a subordinate causal clause and an
independent sentence affirming a cause or reason is usually one of the
degree of emphasis on the causal relation between the two facts. When
the chief thing asserted is the existence of the causal relation, as happens,
e.g., When one fact or the other is already present as a fact before the
mind, the causal clause is manifestly subordinate. When the emphasis
is upon the separate assertions as assertions, rather than on the relation
of the facts asserted, the causal clause easily becomes an independent
sentence. Thus in Rey. 3:16, because thou art lukewarm, and neither
hot nor cold, I will spew thee out of my mouth, the causal clause is subor-
dinate. So also in John 16:5, and these things they will do, because they
have not known the Father nor me, where the words these things refer
to an assertion already made, and the intent of the sentence is to state
why they will do these things. See also John 20:29. On the other hand,
in Matt. 6:5; Luke 11:32; 1 Cor. 1:22 (see 231) ; and in 1 Cor. 15:29;
Heb. 10:2 (see 280), the casual clause is evidently independent, and the
particles 671, éwei, éredn have substantially the force of ydp.

233. Causal relations may also be expressed by a relative
clause (294), by an Infinitive with the article governed by da
(408), and by a participle (439).

MOODS IN CLAUSES OF RESULT. 99

MOODS IN CLAUSES OF RESULT.

234. A consecutive clause is one which expresses the result,
actual or potential, of the action stated in the principal clause
or a preceding sentence.

In the New Testament consecutive clauses are introduced
by wore. HA. 927; G. 1449.

235. A consecutive clause commonly takes either the Indic-
ative or the Infinitive. The Indicative properly expresses the
actual result produced by the action previously mentioned, the
Infinitive the result which the action of the principal verb
tends or is calculated to produce. Since, however, an actual
result may always be conceived of as that which the cause in
question is calculated or adapted to produce, the Infinitive
may be used when the result is obviously actual. Thus
if senselessness tends to credulity, one may say ovtws avoyroi
€oTe WOTE TO AdvVaTOV TLOTEVETE OF OUTWS aVONTOL EGTE WOTE TO adU-
vatov muorevev, With little difference of meaning, though strictly
the latter represents believing the impossible simply as the
measure of the folly, while the former represents it as the act-
ual result of such folly. G.MT. 582, 583; HA. 927; G. 1450,
1451.

The use of the Infinitive is the older idiom. Attic writers show on
the whole a tendency to an increased use of the Indicative, Aristophanes
and Xenophon, e.g., using it more frequently than the Infinitive. See
Gild. A.J. P. vit. 161-175 ; x1v. 240-242. But in the New Testament the
Infinitive greatly predominates, occurring fifty times as against twenty-
one instances of the Indicative, but one of which is in a clause clearly
subordinate.

On wore introducing a principal clause see 237. On different concep-
tions of result, and the use of the Infinitive to express result, see 369-371.

236. The Indicative with oore expresses actual result.

John 3:16; ovtws yap yyamrnoev 6 Oeds Tov KOopov wate TOV vidv TOY
povoyevn edwxev, for God so loved the world that he gave his only
begotten Son.

100 THE MOODS.

Rem. With John 3:16, which is the only clear instance in the New
Testament of dore with the Indicative so closely joined to what precedes
as to constitute a subordinate clause, is usually reckoned also Gal. 2: 13.

237. The clause introduced by wore is sometimes so dis-
joined from the antecedent sentence expressing the causal fact
that it becomes an independent sentence. In such cases sore
has the meaning therefore, or accordingly, and the verb intro-
duced by it may be in any form capable of standing in a prin-
cipal clause. HA. 927,a; G. 1454.

Mark 2:28; wore kvptos éotw 6 vids Tov avOpwrov kai Tod caf3Barov, so
that the Son of man is lord even of the sabbath.

1 Cor. 5:8; wore éopralwpev, wherefore let us keep the feast.

1 Thess. 4:18; wore wapaxadetre dAAHAOVS év Tols AGyols TovTOLS,
wherefore comfort one another with these words.

MOODS IN CONDITIONAL SENTENCES.

238. A conditional sentence consists of a subordinate clause
which states a supposition, and a principal clause which states
a conclusion conditioned on the fulfilment of the supposition
stated in the subordinate clause. The conditional clause is
called the protasis. The principal clause is called the apodosis.

239. Suppositions are either particular or general. When
the protasis supposes a certain definite event and the apodosis
conditions its assertion on the occurrence of this event, the
supposition is particular. When the protasis supposes any
occurrence of an act of a certain class, and the apodosis states
what is or was wont to take place in any instance of an act of
the class supposed in the protasis, the supposition is general.

Thus in the sentence, Jf he believes this act to be wrong, he will not

do it, the supposition is particular. But in the sentence, Jf [tn any in-
stance] he believes an act to be wrong, he does not [is not wont to] do it,

MOODS IN CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. 101

the supposition is general. In the sentence, Jf he has read this book, he
will be able to tell what it contains, the supposition is particular. But
in the sentence, Jf he read a book, he could always tell what it contained,
the supposition is general.

240. It should be noted that the occurrence of an indefinite pronoun
in the protasis does not necessarily make the supposition general. If the
writer, though using an indefinite term, refers to a particular instance,
and in the apodosis states what happened, is happening, or will happen
in this case, the supposition is particular. If, on the other hand, the
supposition refers to any instance of the class of cases described, and
the apodosis states what is or was wont to happen in any such instance,
the supposition is general. Thus, in the sentence, Jf any one has eaten
any of the food, he is by this time dead, the supposition is particular.
In the sentence, Jf any one [in any instance] ate any of the food, [it was
wont to happen that} he died, the supposition is general. In 2 Cor. 2:5,
but if any one hath caused sorrow, he hath caused sorrow not to me, but

. . to you all, the supposition refers to a specific case, and is particular.
Even the mental selection of one of many possible instances suftices to
make a supposition particular. So in 1 Cor. 3:12, it is probable that we
ought to read, if any man is building, and in 3:17, if any man is destroy-
ing, and take the clauses as referring to what was then, hypothetically,
going on rather than to what might at any time occur. On the other
hand, in John 11:9, if a man walk in the day, he stuwmbleth not, the sup-
position refers to any instance of walking in the day, and is general.

Concerning a protasis which refers to the truth of a general principle as
such, see 243.

241. Of the six classes of conditional sentences which are
found in classical Greek, five occur in the New Testament, not
however without occasional variations of form.

Rem. 1. The classification of conditional sentences here followed is
substantially that of Professor Goodwin. The numbering of the Present
General Suppositions and Past General Suppositions as fifth and sixth
classes respectively, instead of including them as subdivisions under the
first class, is adopted to facilitate reference.

Rem. 2, It should be observed that the titles of the several classes of
conditional sentences describe the suppositions not froin the point of view
of fact, but from that of the representation of the case to the speaker’s
own mind or to that of his hearer. Cf., e.g., Luke 7:39; John 18: 30.

102 THE MOODS.

242. A. Simple Present or Past Particular Supposi-
tion. The protasis simply states a supposition which refers
to a particular case in the present or past, implying
nothing as to its fulfilment.

The protasis is expressed by ed with a present or past
tense of the Indicative ; any form of the finite verb may
stand in the apodosis. HA. 893; G. 1390.

John 15:20; ef €ue ediway, cai twas dwwéovow, if they have persecuted
me, they will also persecute you.

Gal. 5:18; ef 8& rvevpate adyeobe, ok eore id vopov, but if ye are led
by the Spirit, ye are not under the law. See also Matt. 4:3; Luke
I6=2 11s Acts 5:39); Rom: 4-2) 8): 10. Galv2 = 1 Revaco less

Rem. Concerning the use of the negatives 47 and od in the protasis of
conditional sentences of this class, see 469, 470.

243. When a supposition refers to the truth of a general
principle as such, and the apodosis conditions its assertion
on the truth of this principle, not on the occurrence of any
instance of a supposed class of events, the supposition is
particular. It is expressed in Greek by e& with the Indica-
tive, and the sentence belongs to the first class.

Matt. 19:10; ei ovtws éoriv 7 aitia Tov avOpwrov peta THS yuvatKds, ov
ouppepea yapnoat, if the case of the man is so with his wife, it is not
expedient to marry. See also Matt. 6:30; Gal. 2:21; cf. Plat. Prot.
340, C. In Rom. 4:14; 8:17; 11:6, the verb is omitted. The

use of ef and the nature of the sentence, however, easily suggest
what form of the verb would be required if it were expressed.

244. Conditional clauses of the first class are frequently
used when the condition is fulfilled, and the use of the hypo-
thetical form suggests no doubt of the fact. This fact of ful-
filment lies, however, not in the conditional sentence, but in the
context. John 3:12; 7:23; Rom. 5:10.

MOODS IN CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. 103

245. On the other hand, conditional clauses of the first class
may be used of what is regarded by the speaker as an unful-
filled condition. But this also is not expressed or implied by
the form of the sentence, which is in itself wholly colorless,
suggesting nothing as to the fulfilment of the condition.
Luke 23: 35, 37; John 18:23; Rom. 4:2; Gal. 5:11.

246. Even a Future Indicative may stand in the protasis of
a conditional sentence of the first class when reference is had
to a present necessity or intention, or when the writer desires
to state not what will take place on the fulfilment of a future
possibility, but merely to affirm a necessary logical consequence
Of a future event. 1 Cor.9:11. Cf. GMT. 407.

247. In a few instances édv is used with the Present Indicative in the
protasis of a conditional sentence, apparently to express a simple present
supposition. 1 Thess. 3:8; 1 John 5: 15.

248. B. Supposition contrary to Fact. The protasis
states a supposition which refers to the present or past,
implying that it is not or was not fulfilled.

The protasis is expressed by e¢ with a past tense of the
Indicative ; the apodosis by a past tense of the Indicative
with av. HA. 895; G. 1397.

The Imperfect denotes continued action; the Aorist
a simple fact; the Pluperfect completed action. The
time is implied in the context, not expressed by the
verb.

John 11:21; Kupte, ei 7s ade odk dv deOaver 6 ddeAdds pov, Lord, if
thou hadst been here, my brother would not have died.
Gal. 1:10; «i éru avOparos rpecxov, Xpirtod SodAos odk av juny, if I

were still pleasing men, I should not be a servant of Christ. See also
John 14:28; Acts 18:14; Heb. 4:8; 11:15.

104 THE MOODS.

249. “Avy is sometimes omitted from the apodosis. Cf. 30.
B. pp. 216 £., 225f.; WM. pp. 382 f.; WT. pp. 305 f.;-cf. GMT.
pp. 415 ff., esp. 422, 423.

John 9:33; ef py jv ovtos mapa Geod, ovk Advvato rovety odder, if this

man were not from God, he could do nothing. See also Matt. 26: 24;
John 15:22 19% 145-1 Cor, 52105 Gal 4:15; Heb. Sze

250. C. Future Supposition with More Probability.
The protasis states a supposition which refers to the
future, suggesting some probability of its fulfilment.

The protasis is usually expressed by éav (or av) with
the Subjunctive; the apodosis by the Future Indicative or
by some other form referring to future time. HA. 898;
G. 1405.

Matt. 9:21; édy povoy GYwpat Tod ipariov aitod cwbyoopat, if I shall
hut touch his garments, I shall be made whole.

Jol 12:26: SYP. + > A é - , > ‘\ e , .

ohn 12:26; éav tis euot diaxovy Tiwnoe avTov o TraTyp, if any man

serve me, him will the Father honor.

John 14:15; éav ayarareé pe, Tas €vToAas Tas euas Tnpynoere, if ye love
me, ye will keep my commandments. See also Matt. 5:20; 1 Cor.
4:19; Gal. 5:2; Jas. 2:15, 16.

251. In addition to ééy with the Subjunctive, which is the
usual form both in classical and New Testament Greek, the
following forms of protasis also occur occasionally in the New
Testament to express a future supposition with more proba-
bility :

252. (a) Ei with the Subjunctive.

Luke 9:13; ov« eioiv quiv rAciov dptou wevre Kal ixOves S¥o, et pyTe
ropevOevtes Huets ayopdowpev eis TavTAa TOV Aadv TovTOV Bpwpara,
we have no more than five loaves and two fishes; unless we are to go
and buy food for all this people. See also 1 Cor. 14:5; 1 Thess.
9:10; Judg. 11:9.

——— eee eee

MOODS IN CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. 105

253. This usage also occurs in Homer and the tragic poets, but is very
rare in Attic prose. It is found in the Septuagint and becomes very com-
mon in later Hellenistic and Byzantine writers. G.MT. 455, 454; Clapp in
T.A. P.A. 1887, p. 49 ; 1891, pp. 88 f.; WT. pp. 294 f.; WAL pp. 368, 374, f.n.

For the few New Testament instances there is possibly in each case a
special reason. ‘Thus in Luke 9:15 there is probably a mixture of a con-
ditional clause and a deliberative question: wnless indeed — are we to yo?
i.e., unless indeed we are to go. In 1 Cor. 14:5 and 1 Thess. 5:10 a
preference for the more common e/ uy andeire. . . ere over the somewhat
unusual éav wy and édvte .. . édvre may have led to the use of the former
in spite of the fact that the meaning called for a Subjunctive. 1 Thess.
5: 10 can hardly be explained as attraction (B. and W.), since the nature
ot the thought itself calls for a Subjunctive. On Phil. 3:11, 12, cf. 276.
It is doubtful, however, whether the discovery of any difference in force
between ef with the Subjunctive and éay with the Subjunctive in these
latter passages is not an over-refinement.

254. (b) Ei or éay with the Future Indicative.

2 Tim. 2:12; «i dpvyodpeba, Kaxeivos apvycetar nas, if we shall deny
him, he also will deny us.

Acts 8:31; éav pn tis odnynoe pe, unless some one shall guide me.
See also Luke 19: 40.

255. Ei with the Future Indicative occurs as a protasis of a condition
of the third form not infrequently in classical writers, especially in
tragedy. G.MT. 447. Of the New Testament instances of e followed
by a Future (about twenty in number), one, 2 Tim. 2: 12, illustrates the
minatory or monitory force attributed to such clauses by Gild., T.A.P_A.
1876, pp. 9 ff.; A.J.P. XIII. pp. 128 ff. Concerning the other instances,
see 246, 254, 272, 276, 340.

256. (c) Ei with the Present Indicative. The protasis is
then apparently of the first class (242). ‘The instances which
belong here are distinguished by evident reference of the prot-
asis to the future.

Matt. 8:31; ef €kBdAXAes Huds, drooreAov yuas eis THY ayeAnv TOV
xotpwr, if thou cast us out, send us away into the herd of swine. See

also 1 Cor. 10°: 27 (cf. v. 28); 2 John 10; Gen. 4:14; 20:7;

44:26; and as. possible instances Matt. 5:29, 30; 18:8, 9;
uke 14°26 2’ Tim. 2); 12.

106 THE MOODS.

257. There is no distinction in form either in Greek or in English
between a particular and a general supposition referring to the future.
The distinction in thought is of course the same as in the case of present
or past suppositions (239). Thus in Matt. 9:21, if I shall but touch his
garment, I shall be made whole, the supposition evidently refers to a spe-
cific case, and is particular. But in John 16: 23, if ye shall ask anything
of the Father, he will give it you in my name, the supposition is evidently
general. A large number of the future suppositions in the New Testa-
ment are apparently general. It is almost always possible, however, to
suppose that a particular imagined instance is mentally selected as the
illustration of the class. Cf. 240, 261.

258. When a conditional clause which as originally uttered
or thought was of the first or third class and expressed by
ei with the Indicative or éay with the Subjunctive is so
incorporated into a sentence as to be made dependent on a
verb of past time, it may be changed to e with the Optative.
This principle applies even when the apodosis on which the
protasis depends is not itself strictly in indirect discourse.
Cf. 334-347, esp. 342, 347. See G.MT. 457, 694 ff.

Acts. 20:16; €omevdev yap ei duvarov etn aire Thy uépav THS TEVTH-
KooTHs yeveoOa eis “IepoooAupa, for he was hastening, if it were pos-
sible for him, to be at Jerusalem the day of Pentecost. In this
sentence ei duvarov ein represents the protasis of the sentence éay
dvvarov 4 yevnoopeba which expressed the original thought of Paul,
to which the writer here refers. The same explanation applies to
Acts 24:19, and to 27:39 (unless ef dvvawro is an indirect ques-
tion); also to Acts 17:27 and 27:12, but on these cases see
also 276.

259. D. Future Supposition with Less Probability.
The protasis states a supposition which refers to the future,
suggesting less probability of its fulfilment than is sug-
gested by éav with the Subjunctive.

The protasis is expressed by ef with the Optative; the
apodosis by the Optative with av. HA. 900; G. 1408.

MOODS IN CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. 107

There is no perfect example of this form in the New 'Testa-
ment. Protases occur in 1 Cor. and 1 Pet., but never with a
regular and fully expressed apodosis. Apodoses occur in Luke
and Acts, but never with a regular protasis.

1 Pet. 3:17; xpetrrov yap ayaoroodvtas, ei OeAou TO OéeAnpa Tov Geor,
Traoxew 7 KaKoTroLovvTas, for it is better, if the will of God should so
will, that ye suffer for well doing than for evil doing. See also 1 Cor.
WeOr Lod"; 1 Pet. 3 714.

260. E. Present General Supposition. The supposi-
tion refers to any occurrence of an act of a certain class in
the (general) present, and the apodosis states what is wont
to take place in any instance of an act of the class referred
to in the protasis.

The protasis is expressed by éav with the Subjunctive,
the apodosis by the Present Indicative. HA. 894,1; G.
1393, 1.

John 11:9; €dv tis repiraty év TH WuEpa, OV TpocKOTTEL, if a man
walk in the day, he stumbleth not.

2 Tim. 2:5; €av d€ Kal arn Ts, ov oreduvodtar eav py vouipws
a0Anon, and if also a man contend in the games, he is not crowned,
unless he contend lawfully. See also Mark 3:24; John 7:51;
12:24; 1 Cor. 7:39, 40.

261. Ei with the Present Indicative not infrequently
occurs in clauses which apparently express a present general
supposition. G.MT. 467. Yet in most New Testament pas-
sages of this kind, it is possible that a particular imagined
instance in the present or future is before the mind as an illus-
tration of the general class of cases. Cf. 242, 256. It ‘is
scarcely possible to decide in each case whether the supposi-
tion was conceived of as general or particular.

108 THE MOODs.

Luke 14:26; & tus épxerar pos pe Kai ov puced .. . THv Woxi
EavTov, ov dvvatae civat pov pabyrys, if any man cometh unto me, and
hateth not . . . his own life, he cannot be my disciple. Cf. John 8 : 51;
12:26; where in protases of apparently similar force ééy with the
Subjunctive occurs, and the apodosis refers to the future.

Rom. 8:25; ei d€ 6 od BA€ropey eAriLopev, 80 ixopovas amexdexo.e0a.,
but if we hope for that which we see not, then do we with patience wait
for it. See also Jas. 1: 26.

262. The third and fifth classes of conditional sentences are very
similar not only in form, but also in meaning. When the subject or other
leading term of the protasis is an indefinite or generic word, the third
class differs from the fifth only in that a sentence of the third class tells
what will happen in a particular instance or in any instance of the fulfil-
ment of the supposition, while a sentence of the fifth class tells what
is wont to happen in any such case. Cf., e.g., Mark 3: 24 with 25; also
the two sentences of Rom. 7: 3.

263. It should be observed that a Present Indicative in the principal
clause after a protasis consisting of é4y with the Subjunctive does not
always indicate that the sentence is of the fifth class. If the fact stated
in the apodosis is already true at the time of speaking, or if the issue
involved has already been determined, though not necessarily known, the
Present Indicative is frequently used after a protasis referring to future
time. The thought would be expressed more fully but less forcibly by
supplying some such phrase as it will appear that or it will still be true
that. In other instances the true apodosis is omitted, that which stands
in its place being a reason for the unexpressed apodosis. In still other
cases the Present is merely the familiar Present for Future (15).

John 8:31; éav tpets petvynte ev TO AOyw TO Eno, GAnOGs pabytal pov
€ote, if ye shall abide in my word, [ye will show that] ye are truly
my disciples. Observe the Future in the next clause.

1 John 1: 9; €av oporoyGuev Tas dpaptias nov, mLeTOs €oTW Kal
dikavos (va addy quiv Tas apaptias, if we shall confess our sins, [he
will forgive us, for| he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins.
See also Mark 1:40; John 19:12; Acts 26:5.

264. The difference in force between the fifth class of suppositions and
the class described under 243 should be clearly marked. There the issue
raised by the protasis is as to the truth or falsity of the principle as a gen-

MOODS IN CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. 109

eral principle, while the apodosis affirms some other general or particular
statement to be true if the general principle is true. Here the protasis
raises no question of the truth or falsity of the general principle, but
suggests as an hypothesis, that a general statement is in any single case
realized, and the apodosis states what is wont to take place when the
supposition of the protasis is thus realized. Thus in Matt. 19:10 (248)
the disciples say that if the principle stated by Jesus is true, it follows as
a general principle that it is not expedient to marry. On the other hand,
édv ourws &x7n, ob cumpéper Yauqoae would mean, Tf in any instance the case
supposed is realized, then it is wont to happen that it is not expedient to
marry. Cf. examples under 260.

265. F. Past General Supposition. The supposition
refers to any past occurrence of an act of a certain class,
and the apodosis states what was wont to take place in any
instance of an act of the class referred to in the protasis.

The protasis is expressed by ef with the Optative, the
apodosis by the Imperfect Indicative. HA. 894,2; G.
1398, 2.

There is apparently no instance of this form in the New
Testament.

266. Peculiarities of Conditional Sentences. Nearly
all the peculiar variations of conditional sentences men-

tioned in the classical grammars are illustrated in the New
Testament. See HA. 901-907; G. 1413-1424.

267. (a) A protasis of one form is sometimes joined with
an apodosis of another form.

Acts 8:31; m@s yap dv duvatunv éav pn tis odnynoer pe, how can I,
unless some one shall guide me ?

268. (b) An apodosis may be accompanied by more than
one protasis; these protases may be of different form, each
retaining its own proper force.

110 THE MOODS.

John 13:17; e ratra oldare, waxaptoi éore av roinTe ata, if ye know
these things, blessed are ye if ye do them. See also 1 Cor. 9:11.

269. (c) The place of the protasis with « or éay is some-
times supplied by a participle, an Imperative, or other form of
expression suggesting a supposition.

Matt. 26:15; Ti Oéderé por dotvat Kayo piv rapadwow aitov, what are
ye willing to give me, and I will deliver him unto you.

Mark 11:24; rdavra 60a zpocevxyecOe kai aiteiobe, mucteveTe Gti €Aa-
Bere, kai €orat iptv, all things whatsoever ye pray and ask for, believe
that ye have received them, and ye shall have them. See also Matt.
7:10; Mark 1:17; and exx. under 436.

Rem. In Jas. 1:5, airefrw is the apodosis of ef 6é Tis buadv Nelwerac
copias, and at the same time fills the place of protasis to do@jcera.
See also Matt. 19:21.

270. (d) The protasis is sometimes omitted. Luke 1: 62;
Acts U7: 18.

271. (e) The apodosis is sometimes omitted.

Luke 13:9; kav pev rouon Kaprov eis TO weAAov — ei OE pupye. ExKoWers
aitny, and if it bear fruit thenceforth, — but if not, thou shalt cut it
down. See also Luke 19:42; Acts 23:9.

272. Ei with the Future Indicative is used by Hebraism
without an apodosis, with the force of an emphatic negative
assertion or oath. Cf. Hr. 48, 9, a.

Mark 8:12; dpnv A€yo, ei SoOjoerar TH yeved Tatty onpetov, verily I

say unto you, there shall no sign be given unto this generation. See
also Heb. 3:11; 4:3, 5. On Heb. 6:14 see Th. ei, ut. 11.

273. (f) The verb of the protasis or apodosis may be
omitted.

Rom. 4:14; e& yap of €x vouov KAnpovopol, Kexévwtat 4} TioTis Kal
Katnpyntae 9 érayyedia, for if they which are of the law are heirs,

MOODS IN CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. nis i

Faith is made void, and the promise is made of none effect. See also
Romina lal Geel Com do;os Le slo: IPet, ova. In2iCor:
11:16 kav stands for xai éav deEnobe.

274. (g) Hi wy without a dependent verb occurs very fre-
quently in the sense of except. It may be followed by any
form of expression which could have stood as subject or as
limitation of the principal predicate. The origin of this usage
was of course in a conditional clause the verb of which was
omitted because it was identicalywith the verb of the apodosis.
Both in classical and New Testament Greek the ellipsis is un-
conscious, and the limitation is not strictly conditional, but ex-
ceptive. Like the English except it states not a condition on
fulfilment of which the apodosis is true or its action takes
place, but a limitation of the principal statement. It is, how-
ever, never in the New Testament purely adversative. Cf.
Lift. on Gal. 1:7, 19.

275. (h) Ei de py and ei 8 pyye are used elliptically in the
sense of otherwise, i.e. if so, or if not, to introduce an alterna-
tive statement or command. Having become fixed phrases,
they are used even when the preceding sentence is negative ;
also when the nature of the condition would naturally call for
éav rather than ei. Matt.9:17; Luke 10:6; 13:9; Rev. 2:5.
GMT. 478; B. p. 393.

276. (i) An omitted apodosis is sometimes virtually con-
tained in the protasis, and the latter expresses a possibility
which is an object of hope or desire, and hence has nearly the
force of a final clause. In some instances it approaches the
force of an indirect question. G.MT. 486-493. In classical
Greek such protases are introduced by «i or édv. In the New
Testament they occur with ¢ only, and take the Subjunctiye,
Optative, or Future Indicative.

a ld THE MOODS.

Phil. 3:12; dvoxw b€ ei Kat xatadaBw, but I press on, if so be that I
may apprehend.

Acts 27:12; ot wAcioves eHevto PBovdrjy dvaxOjvar éxeiBev, ei Tus
dvvawvTo Katavtyoavtes eis Poivika mapaxepacat, the more part
advised to put to sea from thence, if by any means they could reach
Phenix, and winter there. See also Mark 11:13; Acts 8: 22; 17:27;
Rom: 12 10-911-44- Pink, oi:

277. (j) After expressions of wonder, etc., a clause intro-
duced by « has nearly the force of a clause introduced by 6ru.
Mark 15:44; Acts 26:8; ef. 1 John 3:13.

MOODS IN CONCESSIVE SENTENCES.

278. A concessive clause is a protasis that states a sup-
position the fulfilment of which is thought of or represented
as unfavorable to the fulfilment of the apodosis.

The force of a concessive sentence is thus very different
from that of a conditional sentence. The latter represents
the fulfilment of the apodosis as conditioned on the fulfilment
of the protasis; the former represents the apodosis as fulfilled
in spite of the fulfilment of the protasis. Yet there are cases
in which by the weakening of the characteristic force of each
construction, or by the complexity of the elements expressed
by the protasis, the two usages approach so near to each other
as to make distinction between them difficult.

In Gal. 1:8, eg., the fulfilment of the element of the
protasis expressed in zap’ o etnyyeAvoapeba is favorable to the
fulfilment of the apodosis dvafeya éorw, and the clause is so
far forth conditional. But the element expressed in mpets 7
ayyedos e€ otpavod, Which is emphasized by the xa/, is unfavor-
able to the fulfilment of the apodosis, and the clause is so far
forth concessive. It might be resolved into two clauses, thus,

MOODS IN CONCESSIVE SENTENCES. 113

If any one shall preach unto you any gospel other than that we
preached unto you [let him be anathema] ; yea, though we or an
angel from heaven so preach, let him be anathema.

279. A concessive clause is commonly introduced by «i (édv)
kat OF kal ei (€av). But a clause introduced by «i or éay alone
may also be in thought concessive, though the concessive
element is not emphasized in the form. Matt. 26: 33 (cf. Mark
14: 29); Mark 14: 31 (cf. Matt. 26: 35).

280. Ei (éav) xaé concessive in the New Testament generally
introduces a supposition conceived of as actually fulfilled or
likely to be fulfilled. See examples under 284, 285. Yet,
in concessive as well as in conditional clauses (cf. 282),
cai may belong not to the whole clause but to the word next
after it, having an intensive force, and suggesting that the
supposition is in some sense or respect an extreme one, ¢.g.,
' especially improbable or especially unfavorable to the fulfil-
ment of the apodosis. So probably Mark 14: 29.

281. Kai «i (éav) concessive occurs somewhat rarely in the
New Testament. See Matt. 26:35; John 8:16; 1 Cor. 8:5;
Gal. 1:8; 1 Pet. 3:1 (but cf. WH.).. The force of the xai is
apparently intensive, representing the supposition as actually
or from a rhetorical point of view an extreme case, improbable
in itself, or specially unfavorable to the fulfilment of the
apodosis.

Rem. Paley, Greek Particles, p. 31, thus distinguishes the force of ed
kai and xai ei, ‘‘ generally with this difference, that e¢ caf implies an ad-
mitted fact ‘even though,’ «ai ef a somewhat improbable supposition ;
‘éven if’? See other statements and references in Th. ei III. 7; and
especially J. 861. It should be observed that a concessive supposition
may be probable or improbable ; it is not this or that that makes it con-
cessive, but the fact that its fulfilment is unfavorable to the fulfilment of
the apodosis.

114 THE MOODS.

282. Carefully to be distinguished from the cases of cai ef (é4v) and ei
(€dv) kal concessive are those in which ei (édv) is conditional and xai means
and (Matt. 11:14; Luke 6 : 32, 33, 34; John 8: 55, etc.), or also (Luke
11:18; 2 Cor. 11: 15), or is simply intensive, emphasizing the following
word and suggesting a supposition in some sense extreme (1 Cor.4:7; 7:
11). Suchasupposition is not necessarily unfavorable to the fulfilment of
the apodosis, and hence may be conditional however extreme. Cf. 280.

283. Moods and Tenses in Concessive Clauses. In
their use of moods and tenses concessive clauses follow in
general the rules for conditional clauses. The variety of
usage is in the New Testament, however, much less in the
case of concessive clauses than of conditional clauses.

284. Concessive clauses of the class corresponding to the
first class of conditional sentences are most frequent in the
New Testament. The event referred to in the concessive
clause is in general not contingent, but conceived of as actual.
2 Cor. 7:8; dre ei Kat eAvmyoa tpas ev TH ErioTOAH, Ov perapeAopat,

for, though I made you sorry with my epistle, I do not regret it. See

also Luke 18:24: 2)Cor, 4:16; 7 222) 11): Gs 122 Cena

Col. 2:5; Heb. 6: 9.

285. Concessive clauses referring to the future occur in
two forms.

(a) They take ¢ xaé or ei, and a Future Indicative referring
to what is regarded as certain or likely to occur. In logical
force this construction is closely akin to that discussed
under 246.

Luke 11:8; ei xal ov ddéce attad dvactas ba TO elvan pidov avrov, dud
ye tiv dvadiav adrod éyepbeis dace avto dowv xpyle, though he will
not rise and give him because he is his friend, yet because of his

importunity he will arise and give him as many as he needeth. See
also Matt. 26:33; Mark 14:29.

MOODS IN CONCESSIVE SENTENCES. iD

(b) They take éav kai, cai éav, or éav, with the Subjunctive
referring to a future possibility, or what is rhetorically con-
ceived to be possible. Kai éay introduces an extreme case,
usually one which is represented as highly improbable.

Gal. 6:1; €av Kat rpoAnupOy avOpwros &y Tut TaparTwpatt, VpEis ot
mvEevpatixo. Kataprilere Tov ToLOvTOY ev mvEvpaTL mpaiTyTos, even if
a man be overtaken in any trespass, ye which are spiritual, restore such
a one in a spirit of meekness.

Gal. 1:8; dAdG Kal éiv quets } dyyedos €€ ovpavod eayyedonrat
[opty] wap’ o evnyyeAwwapeba ipiv, avibena éorw, but even if we, or
an angel from heaven, preach unto you any gospel other than that
which we preached unto you, let him be anathema. See also Luke
2:67, 68; John 8:16; 10:38; Rom. 9: 27. °

Rem. The apodosis after a concessive protasis referring to the future,
sometimes has a Present Indicative, affirming what is true and will still
be true though the supposition of the protasis be fulfilled. See John
8:14; 1 Cor.9:16. Cf. 263.

286. The New Testament furnishes no clear instance of a concessive
clause corresponding to the fourth class of conditional clauses. In 1 Pet.
3:14, ef kal mdoxorre Gia Sikacocvynv, waxdpro., the use of cai before racxore
suggests that the writer has in mind that suffering is apparently opposed
to blessedness. Yet it is probable that he intends to affirm that blessed-
ness comes, not in spite of, but through, suffering for righteousness’ sake.
(On the thought cf. Matt. 5:10f.) Thus the protasis suggests, even
intentionally, a concession, but is, strictly speaking, a true causal con-
ditional clause. Cf. 282.

287. The New Testament instances of concessive clauses correspond-
ing to the fifth class of conditional clauses are few, and the concessive
force is not strongly marked. See 2 Tim. 2: 5 (first clause) under 260 ;
2 Tim: 2513.

288. Concessive clauses in English are introduced by
though, although, and even if, occasionally by if alone. Even
if introduces an improbable supposition or one especially
unfavorable to the fulfilment of the apodosis. Though and

116 THE MOODS.

although with the Indicative usually imply an admitted fact
With the Subjunctive and Potential, with the Present Indica-
tive in the sense of a Future, and with a Past tense of the
Indicative in conditions contrary to fact, though and although
have substantially the same force as even if. Even if thus
corresponds in force very nearly to kai ei; though and although

to ef Kat.
MOODS IN RELATIVE CLAUSES.

289. Relative Clauses are introduced by relative pronouns
and by relative adverbs of time, place, and manner.
They may be divided into two classes :

I. Definite Relative Clauses, z.e. clauses which refer to a
definite and actual event or fact. The antecedent may be ex-
pressed or understood. If not in itself definite, it is made so
by the definiteness of the relative clause.

II. Indefinite or Conditional Relative Clauses, i.e. clauses
which refer not to a definite and actual event, but to a sup-
posed event or instance, and hence imply a condition. The
antecedent may be expressed or understood ; if expressed, it is
usually some indefinite or generic word.

290. It should be observed that the distinction between the definite
and the indefinite relative clause cannot be drawn simply by reference
to the relative pronoun employed, or to the word which stands as the
antecedent of the relative. A definite relative clause may be introduced
by an indefinite relative pronoun or may have an indefinite pronoun as
its antecedent. On the other hand, an indefinite relative clause may

have as its antecedent a definite term, e.g., a demonstrative pronoun, and

may be introduced by the simple relative. A clause and its antecedent
are made definite by the reference of the clause to a definite and actual
event; they are made indefinite by the reference of the clause to a sup-
posed event or instance. Thus if one say, He received whatever profit
was made, meaning, In a certain transaction, or in certain transactions,
profit was made, and he received it, the relative clause is definite, because

MOODS IN RELATIVE CLAUSES. U7

it refers to an actual event or series of events. But if one use the same
words meaning, Jf any profit was made, he received it, the relative clause
is indefinite, because it implies a condition, referring to an event — the
making of profit— which is only supposed. In John 1:12, but as many
as received him, to them gave he the right to become children of God, we
are doubtless to understand the relative clause as definite, not because
of the expressed antecedent, them, but because the clause refers to a
certain class who actually received him. In Rom. 8:24, on the other
hand, who hopeth for that which he seeth ? the relative clause apparently
does not refer to a definite thing seen and an actual act of seeing, but
is equivalent to a conditional clause, if he seeth anything. In Mark 3:11,
whensoever they beheld him, they fell down before him, the form of the
Greek sentence shows that the meaning is, Jf at any time they saw him,
they were wont to fall down before him. That is, while the class of events
is actual, the relative clause presents the successive instances distribu-
tively as suppositions. These examples serve to show how slight may
be the difference at times between a definite and an indefinite relative
clause, and that it must often be a matter of choice for the writer whether
-he will refer to an event as actual, or present it as a supposition.

291. Relative clauses denoting purpose, and relative clauses
introduced by éws and other words meaning wntil, show special
peculiarities of usage and require separate discussion. For
purposes of treatment therefore we must recognize four classes
of relative clauses.

I. Definite relative clauses, excluding those which express
purpose, and those introduced by words meaning until.

II. Indefinite or Conditional relative clauses, excluding
those which express purpose, and those introduced by words
meaning until.

Ill. Relative clauses expressing purpose.

IV. Relative clauses introduced by words meaning watil.

I. DEFINITE RELATIVE CLAUSES.

292. Under the head of definite relative clauses are included
not only adjective clauses introduced by relative pronouns, és,

118 THE MOODS.

doTts, olos, ovos, but all clauses of time, place, manner, and com-
parison, such clauses being introduced by relative words, either
pronouns, or adverbs, ore, ws (expressing either time or man-

ner), O7rov, wOoTeEp, ete.

293. Moods in Definite Relative Clauses. Definite
relative clauses in general (excluding III. and IV. above)
show no special uses of mood and tense, but employ the
verb as it is used in principal clauses. HA. 909; G. 1427.

John 6:63; ta pyyata a éyo eAGAnKa tpiv wvedpa eoTw Kal Con
eat, the words that I have spoken unto you are spirit, and are life.

John 12:36; ws To has Eexere, micTevere eis TO POs, while ye have the
light, believe on the light.

Gal. 4:4; dre d€ 7AGev TO tANpwpa Tod Xpovov, eLamréaretrev 6 Geds
Tov viov avTod, but when the fulness of the time came, God sent forth
his son.

Jas. 2:26; dorep To cpa Xwpis wvevpatos veKpov EoTLV, OVTWS Kal
H mloTls Xwpis épywv vexpa éatw, as the body apart from the spirit
is dead, even so faith apart from works is dead.

Rey. 3:11; xparet 6 €xets, hold fast that which thou hast.

Rey. 21:16; xai 70 wjKos aitys daov TO tAaTos, and the length thereof
is as great as the breadth. Cf. Heb. 10:25. See also Matt. 26:19;
Col. 2:6.

294. A definite relative clause may imply a relation of
cause, result, or concession, without affecting the mood or tense
of the verb. HA. 910; G. 1445.

Rom. 6:2; oirwes dmeOdvopev TH apaptia, TOs ere Cyoopev ev avry,
we who died to sin, how shall we any longer live therein?

Jas. 4:13, 14; dye vovtot éyovres Syuepov 7) avptov ropevooueba
cis Tivde THY TOAW Kal ToIoopeV exe eviavToV Kai Euzropevoopeba
kal Kepdnoopev* olives ovk exictacbe THs avptov Toia Con byuav,
go to now, ye that say, To-day or to-morrow we will go into this city,
and spend a year there and trade and get gain; whereas (i.e.
although] ye know not of what sort your life will be on the morrow.

MOODS IN RELATIVE CLAUSES. 119

295. All relative clauses whether adjective or adverbial may
be distinguished as either restrictive or explanatory. <A re-
strictive clause defines its antecedent, indicating what person,
thing, place, or manner is signified. An explanatory clause
adds a description to what is already known or sufficiently
defined. The former identifies, the latter describes.

Restrictive clauses: John 15:20; pvnpovevere tov Adyou ov eye) Eizov
butv, remember the word that I said unto you.

Matt. 28:6; detre Sere Tov TOroV Grou éxeiTo, come, see the place where
he lay.

Mark 2:20; €Aevoovrar b€ juepar orav anapOy ax aitav 6 vupdios,
but days will come when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them.

Explanatory clauses: Luke 4:16; xai 7AGev eis Naapa, ov Hv teOpap-
peévos, and he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up.

Eph. 6:17; tyv paxatpav tov mvevpartos, 6 é€otw pyya Geod, the sword
of the Spirit, which is the word of God.

II. ConpiTionaAL RELATIVE SENTENCES.

296. An indefinite relative clause, since it refers to a sup-
posed event or instance, imphes a condition, and is therefore
ealled a conditional relative clause. HA. 912; G. 1428.

Mark 10:43; 6s av OeAn péeyas yeveoOar ev ipiv, éotar tov duaxovos,
whosoever would become great among you, shall be your minister. Cf.
Mark 9:35; «& tis Ode mpOros civar eotat wavTWV ~oyaTos Kal
mavtwy uakovos. It is evident that the relative clause in the former
passage is as really conditional as the conditional clause in the
latter.

297. Since a conditional relative clause implies a supposi-
tion, conditional relative sentences may be classified according
to the nature of the implied supposition, as other conditional
sentences are classified according to the expressed sup-
position.

120 THE MOODS.

298. The implied supposition may be particular or general.
When the relative clause refers to a particular supposed event
or instance, and the principal clause conditions its assertion on
the occurrence of this event, the implied supposition is partic-
ular. When the relative clause refers to any occurrence of an
act of a certain class, and the principal clause states what is
or was wont to take place in any instance of an act of the
class supposed, the implied supposition is general.

Thus in the sentence, The act which he believes to be wrong he will not
do, if reference is had to a particular occasion, or to one made particular
in thought, so that the sentence means, Jf on that occasion, or a certain
occasion, he believes an act to be wrong, he will not do it, the implied
supposition is particular. But in the sentence, Whatever act he [in any
instance | believes to be wrong, he does not [is not wont to] do, the implied
supposition is general. Cf. 259.

299. The distinction between the relative clause implying a particular
supposition and the relative clause implying a general supposition is not
marked either in Greek or in English by any uniform difference in the
pronouns employed either in the relative clause or in the antecedent
clause. The terms particular and general apply not to the relative or its
antecedent, but to the implied supposition. Thus if one say, He received
whatever profit was made, meaning, Jf [in a certain transaction] any
projit was made, he received it, the relative clause implies a particular
condition. But if one use the same words, meaning, Jf [in any transac-
tion | any profit was made, [it was wont to happen that] he received it, the
implied condition is general. So also in John 1:38, upon whomsoever
thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and abiding upon him, the same is
he that baptizeth with the Holy Spirit, we have not a general principle
applying to any one of many cases, but a supposition and ar assertion
referring to a particular case. But in 1 John 3: 22, whatsoever we ask, we
receive of him, the supposition refers to any instance of asking, and is
general.

Whether the implied supposition is particular or general can usually
be most clearly discerned from the nature of the principal clause. If
this states what is true in a particular case, or expresses a command with
reference to a particular case, the implied supposition is particular. If
it states g oonera! principle, or expresses a general injunction which

MOODS IN RELATIVE CLAUSES. 121

applies in any instance of the event described in the relative clause, the
implied supposition is usually general. Cf. 240.

300. Of the six classes of conditional relative sentences
found in classical Greek, but four occur in the New Testament,
and these with considerable deviation from classical usage.
They are designated here according to the kind of condition
implied in the relative clause.

301. A. Simple Present or Past Particular Suppo-
sition. The relative clause states a particular supposition
which refers to the present or past. It has a present or past
tense of the Indicative. The principal clause may have
any form of the verb. HA. 914, A; G@. 1480.

Rom. 2:12; dco yap avopws ypaptov, avopuws Kal dmoAobvTaL’ Kai
ooo €v vow HuapTov, Oa voOpov Kp\OncovTa, for as many as have
sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have
sinned under law shall be judged by law.

Phil. 4:8; 70 Aourov, ddeAGoi, 60a eotiv adnOy, doa cEpva, doa diKaLa,
60a ayva, 60a TpooPiAH, doa Evpypa, EL Tis GpETI) Kai El TLS EraLVOS,
tavta AoyileaGe. See also 2 Cor. 2:10.

Rem. Respecting the use of the negatives 47 and od in relative clauses
of this class, see 469, 470.

302. B. Supposition contrary to Fact. The rela-
tive clause states a supposition which refers to the present
or past implying that it is not, or was not, fulfilled. It
has a past tense of the Indicative. The principal clause has
a past tense of the Indicative with av. HA. 915; G. 1435.

No instance occurs in the New Testament.

303. C. Future Supposition with More Probability.
The relative clause states a supposition which refers to the

BID.) THE MOODS.

future, suggesting some probability of its fulfilment. It

has the Subjunctive with av. The principal clause may

have any form referring to future time. HA. 916; G. 1434.

Matt. 5:19; ds 0 av zoijon Kat ddan, odtos péyas KAnOjoEeTaL ev TH
Bactrela TOV ovpavdy, but whosoever shall do and teach them, he shall
be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Mark 13:11; xat drav dywow tpas tapadidovres, pry Tpopepysvare TL
AaAnonre, GAN 6 dy S067 byiv ev exeivy TH pa TovTO AaXetre, ov
yap €oTe tpeis of AadovvTes GAAA TO mVEdWAa TO ayov, and when
they lead you to judgment, and deliver you up, be not anxious before-
hand what ye shall speak: but whatsoever shall be given you in that
hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost.
See also Luke 13:25; Rev. 11:7; instances are very frequent in
the New Testament.

304. In the New Testament édv not infrequently stands in a condi-
tional relative clause instead of the simple dy. Matt. 7:12; Mark 5:28;
Luke 9:57; Acts 2:21, etal. See WH. 11. App. p. 178.

305. The Subjunctive with dy in a relative clause is in the
New Testament usually retained in indirect discourse, or in a
sentence having the effect of indirect discourse, even after a
past tense. Matt. 14:7; Rev. 12:4. Cf. 251. On Acts 25:16
see 333, 344, Rem. 1.

306. In addition to the relative clause having the Subjunc-
tive with dv (303), which is the regular form both in classical
and New Testament Greek, the following forms of the relative
clause also require mention as occurring in the New Testa-
ment to express a future supposition with more probability:

307. (a) The Subjunctive without dv. This is very unusual -
in classical Greek in relative clauses referring to the future.
In the New Testament also it is rare. Jas. 2:10 probably
belongs here; Matt. 10: 33 also, if (with Treg. and WH. teat)

we read dotis d€ dpvnontal pe . . . apvycopat.

MOODS IN RELATIVE CLAUSES. 123

308. (») The Future Indicative with or without dy.

Matt. 5:41; doris oe dyyapetoe: pidvov ev, Uraye wer avrov dvo, who-
saever shall compel thee to go one mile, go with him two, See also
Matt: 10:32 (cf. v. 33); 18:4 (cf. v. 5); 23:12; Mark 8:35;
Luke 12:8, 10; 17:31; Acts 7:7; Rev.4:9. Cf. WH. u. App.
p. 172.

309. (c) The Present Indicative with or without dv.

Mark 11:25; drav oryxete mpocevydpevor, aiere, whensoever ye stand
praying, forgive. See also Matt. 5:39; Luke 12:34; John 12:26;
14:3.

310. There is no distinction in form either in Greek or in English
between a relative clause implying a particular supposition, and a relative
clause implying a general supposition, when the supposition refers to the
future. The difference in thought is the same as that which distinguishes
particular and general suppositions referring to the present or past. Cf.
298, 299. In Matt. 26:48, whomsoever I shall kiss, that is he, the sup-
position is particular, referring to a specific oceasion and event. So also
in 1 Cor. 16:3. But in Luke 9:4, into whatseever house ye enter, there
abide, and thence depart, the supposition. is general, referring to any one
of a class of acts. A large part of the conditional relative clauses referring
to the future found in the New Testament are apparently general. See,
e.g., Matt. 5:19; 10:14; 16:25; Mark 11:23; Luke 8:18, etc. Yet
in many cases it is possible to suppose that a particular imagined instance.
was before the mind of the writer as an illustration of the general class
of cases.

311. D. Future Supposition with Less Probability.
The relative clause states a supposition which refers to the
future, suggesting less probability of its fulfilment than is
implied by the Subjunctive with av. It has the Optative
without dv. The principal clause has the Optative with
av. HA. 917; G. 1436.

No instance oceurs in the New Testament.

312. E. Present General Supposition. The relative
clause refers to any occurrence of a class of acts in the

124 THE MOODS.

general present, and the principal clause states what is,
wont to take place in any instance of the act referred to
in the relative clause. The relative clause has the Sub-
junctive with dy, the principal clause the Present In-

dicative. HA. 914.6.) 9G. 143164:

1 Cor. 11:26; dcdxis yap éav éoOinre Tov dptov TovTov Kal TO OTH pLOV
mivnte, Tov Oavatov Tod Kupiov KaTayyéAXETE, axpt ov EAOn, for as
often as ye eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye proclaim the Lord’s
death, till he come. See also Matt. 15:2; Mark 10:11; Rey. 9:5.

Rem. Concerning the use of éay for dv, see 304.

313. The Present Indicative not infrequently occurs in con-
ditional relative clauses which apparently imply a present
general supposition. G.MT. 554. Yet in most such passages
in the New Testament, it is possible that a particular imagined
instance in the present or future is before the mind as an
illustration of the general class of cases. Cf. 301, 309. It is
scarcely possible to decide in each case whether the supposi-
tion is particular or general. The difference of meaning is in
any case slight.

Luke 14:27; darts ov Baoraler tov oravpov éavtod Kal épxerat driow
pov, ov dvvaTat elval pov pabyrys, whosoever doth not bear his own
cross and come after me, cannot be my disciple. See also Matt. 10:38;
13:12 (cf. Luke 8:18); Luke 7:47; John 3:8; Rom. 6:16; 9:18;
1 Cor. 15:36, 37; Heb. 12:6.

314. Concerning the similarity of the third and fifth classes of condi-
tional relative clauses, cf. 262. The statements there made respecting
ordinary conditional sentences are applicable also to conditional relative
sentences. See Mark 5:28, 29; Luke 9:24, 48; 1 John 3:22.

315. F. Past General Supposition. The relative clause
refers to any occurrence of a certain act or class of acts,
and the principal clause states what was wont to take

MOODS IN RELATIVE CLAUSES. 125

place in any instance of the act referred to in the relative

clause. In classical Greek, the relative clause has the Op-

tative without av, the principal clause the Imperfect Indic-
ative. HA. 914, B. (2); G. 1481, 2. :

In the New Testament, the Optative does not occur
in such clauses, the Imperfect or Aorist Indicative with
av being used instead. Cf. 26.

Mark 3:11; xat ra rvevpata Ta axdbapra, Otay airov éGewpovv, mpov-
€mimtov av’t@ Kai éxpafov, and the unclean spirits, whensoever they
beheld him, were wont to fall down before him and cry out. See also
Mark 6:56; 11:19; Acts 2:45; 4:35; 1 Cor. 12:2; cf. Gen.
Zoe eSam. 2): 13, V4:

316. In the New Testament, relative clauses conditional in
form are sometimes definite in force.

Mark 2:20; €Aevoovrar d€ qyepar Grav dmapOy dx avTav 6 vupdios,
but days will come when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them.
See also Luke 5:35; 15:28; Rev. 8:1.

III. RELATIVE CLAUSES EXPRESSING PURPOSE.

317. Relative Clauses of Pure Purpose. Relative
clauses expressing purpose take the Future Indicative
both in classical and New Testament Greek. HA. 911;
G. 1442; B. p. 229; WIM. p. 386, f. n.

Matt. 21:41; rov dpredAdva exddcerar GAXos yewpyols, olrivEes arro-
decovow avTo Tos Kaprovs, he will let out the vineyard unto other
husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits. See also Acts 6:3.

318. Complementary relative clauses expressing that for
which a person or thing is fitted, or other similar relation, take
the Subjunctive or the Future Indicative both in classical and
New Testament Greek. G.MT. 572; Hale in T.A.P.A. 1893,
pp. 156 ff. ,

126 THE MOODS.

Heb. 8:3; d0ev dvayxatov éxey Te Kal TodTov 6 mpoceveyKy, wherefore
it is necessary that this high priest also have somewhat to offer. See also
Mark 14:14; Luke 11:6; 22:11. In Luke 7:4 a complementary
relative clause limiting the adjective aos has the Future Indicative.

319. The clauses referred to in 318 are to be distinguished from true
relative clauses of purpose in that they do not express the purpose with
which the action denoted by the principal clause is done, but constitute a
complementary limitation of the principal clause. Cf. the clause with
iva (215-217) and the Infinitive (868) expressing a similar relation.

The Subjunctive in such clauses is probably in origin a Deliberative
Subjunctive. Thus in Mark 14:14, rod éoriv rd xatdduud pou Sov 76
wdoxa peTa TOV pabnTaGv pov gpayw, the relative clause érov... ddyw
reproduces in dependent construction the thought of the deliberative
question rod... ¢dyw. The same explanation doubtless applies, though
less obviously, to the Subjunctive in Acts 21:16, and to the Future in
Luke 7:4. In both instances the thought of a deliberative question is
reproduced in the relative clause. Cf. the clauses similar in force, but
employing an interrogative pronoun, 346. See Tarbell in Cl. Rev. July
1891, p. 302 (contra, Earle in Cl. Rev. March 1892, pp. 93-95); Hale
in T.A. P.A., 1893.

320. The Optative sometimes occurs after a past tense in these delib-
erative relative clauses in classical Greek. There are, however, no New
Testament instances of the Optative so used.

IV. RevativE Cruauses INTRODUCED BY Worps MEANING

UntiL, WHILE, AND BEFORE.

321. “Ews is properly a relative adverb which marks one
action as the temporal limit of another action. It does this
in two ways, either (a) so that the beginning or simple occur-
rence of the action of the verb introduced by éws is the limit
of the action denoted by the principal verb, or (b) so that the
continuance of the former is the limit of the latter. In the
former case éws means until, in the latter, while, as long as,

On the classical use of éws and similar words, see HA, 920-
924; G. 1463-1474; G.MT. 611-661; Gild. in AJP. Iv.

MOODS IN RELATIVE CLAUSES. 127

416-418. On éws in Hellenistic Greek see G. W. Gilmore in
J.B.L., 1890, pp. 155-160.

322. Clauses Introduced by éws and referring to the
Future. When the clause introduced by éws depends on
a verb of future time, and refers to a future contingency, it
takes the Subjunctive with av both in classical and New
Testament Greek.

Mark 6:10; éxed pevere ews dv e&€dOnre exetOev, there abide till ye

depart thence. See also Matt. 5:18; 12:20; Luke 9:27; 1 Cor. 4:5.

323. In classical Greek, especially in tragic poetry, the
Subjunctive without ay sometimes occurs with éws after a
verb of present or future time. G.MT. 620. In the New
Testament this construction is frequent.

Luke 15:4; kat ropeverae éri To drroAwdds Ews Evpy avTO, and goeth

after that which is lost, until he find it. See also Matt. 10:23; Luke
Pa oo): 22's 34. j

324. Clauses Introduced by éws and referring to
what was in Past Time a Future Contingency. When
the clause introduced by éws depends on a verb of past
time and refers to what was at the time of the principal
verb conceived of as a future contingency, it takes the
Optative without av in classical Greek. In the New Tes-
tament it takes the Subjunctive without av.

Matt. 18:30; €Badrev avrov eis pvdakyny ews drode TO dpetrdpevor,
he cast him into prison till he should pay that which was due.

325. The Subjunctive after ws in the New Testament is always an
Aorist, the action denoted being conceived of as a simple event, and éws
meaning properly wntil. Thus the accurate translation of Mark 14:32
(Matt. 26:36 is similar), kadlicare wie ws mpoceviwuan, is, Sit ye here till

128 THE MOODS.

I pray, or have prayed (cf. 98). While I pray (R.V.) is slightly para-
phrastic. Cf. Luke 17: 8.

326. Clauses Introduced by éws (until) and referring
to a Past Fact. When éws means until and the clause
introduced by it refers to an actual past occurrence, the
verb of this clause is in a past tense of the Indicative, as in
an ordinary relative clause referring to past time.

Matt. 2:9; 6 doryp . . . mponyev airods, Ews EADdv €otdOn Exavw ob
nv TO matdiov, the star... went before them, till it came and stood
over where the young child was.

327. Clauses Introduced by éws (while) and referring
to a Contemporaneous Event. When éws means while
and the clause introduced by it refers to an event contem-
poraneous with that of the principal verb, it has the con-
struction of an ordinary relative clause. Cf. 2953.

John 9:4; quas det épyalerOar Ta Epya Tov méeuPavTos pe Ews Huepa
€oriv, we must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day.

328. In John 21:22, 23; 1 Tim. 4: 13, the exact meaning of éws
€pxouac is probably while I am coming, the coming being conceived of as
in progress from the time of speaking. Cf. Luke 9:13. In 1 Cor. 4:5
on the other hand it is thought of as a future event. In Mark 6: 45 éws
drodve. represents €ws dmodvw of the direct form (cf. 347), the original
sentence meaning, go before me while I am sending away, etc.

329. When the éws clause refers to the future or to what was at the
time of the principal verb the future (3822-526), it frequently has the
force of a conditional relative clause. See Matt. 18:30; Luke 15:4.
When it refers to an actual event (327, 328), it is an ordinary temporal
clause (293), requiring special mention here only to distinguish these
usages from those described above.

330. In the New Testament éws is sometimes followed by of or érov.
“Ews is then a preposition governing the genitive of the relative pronoun,

MOODS IN RELATIVE CLAUSES. 129

but the phrase gws ot or éws drov is in effect a compound conjunction hay-
ing the same force as the simple éws. The construction following it is
also the same, except that dy never occurs after éws od or éws drov. See
Matt. 5:25; 13:33; John 9:18; Acts 23: 12.

331. Clauses introduced by dypr, axpe ob, apr ys Nuepas, wexpe
and péxpis ob have in general the same construction and force
as clauses introduced by éws, éws ov, and éws drov.

Mark 13:30; ov py mapedAOn Hy yevea avTn péxpls Ov Tatta TavTa
“yevyrat.

Acts 7:18; nv&oev 6 aos Kal exAnOiwOn ev Aiyirto, dxpt ov
dveotn Bactreds Eerepos éx Alyumrov. See also Rey. 15:8; 20:3;
Luke 17:27; Acts 27:33.

Rey. 7:3; pa ddiucnonte thy ynv . . . dxpt oppayicwpev Tovs dovAovs
Tov Geov.

332. Gal. 3:19 [ WH. text] furnishes one instance of dxpis dv with a
word meaning wntil after a verb of past time [ WH. margin, Tisch., and
Treg. read d&xpis ot]; cf. 324.- Rev. 2:25 contains the combination a&xpu
ov dy with the Future Indicative ; cf. 330. Rev. 17:17 contains a Future
Indicative with &yp. after a past tense.

333. Clauses introduced by zpiv and employing a finite
mood have in general the same construction as clauses intro-
duced by éws.

The New Testament, however, contains but two instances of a finite
verb after mpiv, Luke 2:26; Acts 25:16. In both cases the clause is in
indirect discourse, and expresses what was from the point of view of the
original statement a future contingency. In Luke 2: 26 the Subjunctive
with dy is retained from the direct discourse. In Acts 25:16 the Optative
represents a Subjunctive with or without &y of the direct discourse.
Cf. 341-344.

Rem. 1. The employment of a finite mood rather than an Infinitive
in these instances is in accordance with classical usage. Cf. 382, and
G. 1470.

Rem. 2. In Acts 25:16 7 occurs after piv, and in Luke 2: 26 it
appears as a strongly attested variant reading. Attic writers used the
simple piv with the finite moods. Cf. 381.

130 THE MOODS.

MOODS IN INDIRECT DISCOURSE.

334. When words once uttered or thought are afterward
quoted, the quotation may be either direct or indirect. Ina
direct quotation the original statement is repeated without
incorporation into the structure of the sentence in the midst of
which it now stands. In an indirect quotation the original
sentence is incorporated into a new sentence as a subordinate
element dependent upon a verb of saying, thinking, or the like,
and suffers such modification as this incorporation requires.
The following example will illustrate :

Original sentence (direct discourse), J will come.

Direct quotation, He said, “ I will come.”
Indirect quotation, He said that he would come.

Rem. The distinction between direct discourse and indirect is not one
of the exactness of the quotation. Direct quotation may be inexact. In-
direct quotation may be exact. Suppose, for example, that the original
statement was, There are good reasons why I should act thus. Tf onesay,
He said, ** I have good reasons for acting thus,’’ the quotation is direct
but inexact. If one say, He said that there were good reasons why he
should act thus, the quotation is exact though indirect.

335. Direct quotation manifestly requires no special diseus-
sion, since the original statement is simply transferred to the
new sentence without incorporation into its structure.

336. Indirect quotation, on the other hand, involving a re-
adjustment of the original sentence to a new point of view,
calls for a determination of the principles on which this re-
adjustment is made. Its problem is most simply stated in
the form of the question, What change does the original form
of a sentence undergo when incorporated into a new sentence
as an indirect quotation? All consideration of the principles

MOODS IN INDIRECT DISCOURSE. 131

of indirect discourse must take as its starting point the origi-
nal form of the words quoted.

For the student of Greek that expresses his own thought in
another language, it will also be necessary to compare the
idiom of the two languages. See 351 ff.

337. The term indirect discourse is commonly applied only
to indirect assertions and indirect questions. Commands,
promises, and hopes indirectly quoted might without impro-
priety be included under the term, but are, in general, ex-
cluded because of the difficulty of drawing the line between
them and certain similar usages, in which, however, no direct
form can be thought of. Thus the Infinitive after a verb of
commanding might be considered the representative in indi-
rect discourse of an Imperative in the direct discourse; some-
what less probably the Infinitive after a verb of wishing might
be supposed to represent an Optative of the direct; while for
the Infinitive after verbs of striving, which in itself can
scarcely be regarded as of different force from those after
verbs of commanding and wishing, no direct form can be
thought of.

338. Concerning commands indirectly quoted, see 204. Con-
cerning the Infinitive after verbs of promising, see 391.
339. Indirect assertions in Greek take three forms:

(a) A clause introduced by 6ére or us. In the New Testa-
ment, however, ws is not so used.

(6) An Infinitive with its subject expressed or understood.
See 390.

lee THE MOODS.

340. Indirect Questions are introduced by e or other inter-
rogative word; the verb is in a finite mood. HA. 930; G.
1605.

341. Classical Usage in Indirect Discourse. In indi-
rect assertions after 67. and in indirect questions, classical
usage is as follows :

(a) When ‘the leading verb on which the quotation de-
pends denotes present or future time, the mood and tense
of the direct discourse are retained in the indirect.

(6) When the leading verb on which the quotation de-
pends denotes past time, the mood and tense of the direct
discourse may be retained in the indirect, or the tense may
be retained and an Indicative or Subjunctive of the direct
discourse may be changed to an Optative. HA. 952; G.
1497.

342. The above rule applies to all indirect quotations in
- which the quotation is expressed by a finite verb, and includes
indirect quotations of simple sentences and both priticipal and
subordinate clauses of complex sentences indirectly quoted.
The classical grammars enumerate certain constructions in which an
Indicative of the original sentence is uniformly retained in the indirect
discourse. These cases do not, however, require treatment here, the gen-

eral rule being sufficient as a basis for the consideration of New Testament
usage.

343. New Testament Usage in Indirect Discourse. In
indirect assertions after 67 and in indirect questions, New
Testament usage is in general the same as classical usage.
Such peculiarities as exist pertain chiefly to the relative
frequency of different usages. See 544-549.

MOODS IN INDIRECT DISCOURSE. 133

John 11:27; éyo memiorevxa ore ot & 6 ypiotos 6 vids Tov Geo,
I have believed that thou art the Christ, the Son of God.

Gal. 2:14; efdov ore ovK épOorodotow, I saw that they were not walking
uprightly.

Matt. 20:10; €A@dvres of mp@rou évopuoay Ore wAEiov Ajnpovrat, when
the first came, they supposed that they would receive more.

Mark 9:6; ov yap yde ti dmoxpiOy, for he wist not what to answer.

Luke 8:9; éypwrtwv d€ avtov ot pabytai airod ris avty ein 7) Tapa-
Body, and his disciples asked him what this parable was.

Luke 24:23; 7AOav A€yovoa Kai drtaciay dyyéAwv Ewpaxevat, ot
A€yovow aittov Cyv, they came saying that they had also seen a vision
of angels, which said that he was alive. In this example the principal
clause of the direct discourse is expressed in the indirect discourse
after a verb of past time by an Infinitive, while the subordinate
clause retains the tense and mood of the original.

Acts 5:24; dinropovy repi aitav ti dv yévouto rovro, they were per-
plexed concerning them whereunto this would grow. But for dy in
this sentence, it might be thought that the direct form was a
deliberative question having the Subjunctive or Future Indicative.
But in the absence of evidence that av was ever added to an
Optative arising under the law of indirect discourse, it must be
supposed that the indirect discourse has preserved the form of
the direct unchanged, and that this was therefore a Potential
Optative with protasis omitted. See also Luke 6:11; 15:26;
Acts 10:17.

344. The Optative occurs in indirect discourse much less
frequently in the New Testament than in classical Greek.
It is found only in Luke’s writings, and there almost exclusive-
ly in indirect questions.

Rem. 1. Acts 25:16 contains the only New Testament instance of an
Optative in the indirect quotation of a declarative sentence. (But ct.
347 and 258.) It here stands in a subordinate clause which in the direct
discourse would have had a Subjunctive with or without &y. If the dy be
supposed to have been in the original sentence (cf. Luke 2 : 26), it has
been dropped in accordance with regular usage in such cases. HA. 934;
G. 1497, 2.

154 THE MOODS.

Rem. 2. The clause ujrore dyn [or dy] abrots 6 Beds werdvoay in 2 Tim.
2:25is regarded by B. p. 256, Moulton, WM. pp. 374, 631, foot notes,
as an indirect question. But concerning the text and the interpretation,
see 225.

345. In quoting declarative sentences the indirect form is
comparatively infrequent in the New Testament, the direct
form either with or without 67. being much more frequent.
The presence of 67. before a quotation is in the New Testament
therefore not even presumptive evidence that the quotation is
indirect. The or is of course redundant.

Luke 7:48; eizey d€ airy “Adewvrai cov ai apaptia, and he said

unto her, Thy sins are forgiven.
John 9:9; éxeivos éXeyev ore “Eyu) eign, he said, I am he.

Rem. The redundant 67: sometimes occurs even before a direct ques-
tion. Mark 4: 21, et al.

346. Indirect deliberative questions are sometimes found
after €yw and other similar verbs which do not properly take a
question as object. The interrogative clause in this case serves
the purpose of a relative clause and its antecedent, while retain-
ing the form which shows its origin in a deliberative question.
Mark 6:36; Wa... ayopacwow éavtois ti paywou, that . . . they

may buy themselves somewhat to eat.

Luke 9:58; 6 8€ vios Tod avOpwrrov obk exer rod THv KEepadny KAivy,
but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head. See also Matt.

8220- Mark 8): 12: Wokeml 2/17.

347. The principles of indirect discourse apply to all sub-
ordinate clauses which express indirectly the thoughts of
another or of the speaker himself, even when the construc-
tion is not strictly that of indirect discourse. HA. 937; G.
1502. See New Testament examples under 258.

348. Both in classical and New Testament Greek, the Im-
perfect occasionally stands in indirect discourse after a verb of

MOODS IN INDIRECT DISCOURSE. 135

past time as the representative of a Present of the direct dis-

course, and a Pluperfect as the representative of the Perfect.

Thus exceptional Greek usage coincides with regular English

usage. JA. 936; G. 1489.

John 2:25; atros yap éyivwoxev ti Hv év TO avOpurw, for he himself
knew what was in man. See also Acts 19 : 32.

349. In classical Greek, oors is used in introducing indirect
questions. HA.1011; G. 1600. In the New Testament it is
not so employed, but there are a few passages in which it is
apparently used as an interrogative pronoun in a direct ques-
tion.

It is so taken by Mey., B., WH., et al. in Mark 9: 11, 28, and by WH.
in Mark 2:16. See B. pp. 252f.; Th., dors, 4; also (contra) WM. p.
208, f.n.; WT. p. 167.

350. The simple relative pronouns and adverbs are some-
times used in indirect questions in the New Testament as in
classical Greek. HA. 1011,a; G. 1600; J. 877, Obs. 3; B.
pp. 250 f.

Luke 8:47; & nv airiay yWato airod amnyyerev, she declared for
what cause she had touched him. See also Mark 5:19, 20; Acts
aos lo: 14.

351. InprrEcT DiscourRsE IN ENGLISH AND IN GREEK.
From what has been said above, it appears that the tense of a
verb standing in a clause of indirect discourse in Greek does
not express the same relation between the action denoted and
the time of speaking as is expressed by a verb of the same
tense standing in a principal clause ; or, to speak more exactly,
does not describe it from the same point of view. A verb in
a principal clause views its action from the point of view of
the speaker. A verb in an indirect quotation, on the other
hand, views its action from the point of view of another person,
viz. the original author of the words quoted. It has also

136 THE MOODS.

appeared that in certain cases the mood of the Greek verb is
changed when it is indirectly quoted. Now it is evident that
in order to translate the Greek sentence containing a clause of
indirect discourse into English correctly and intelligently, we
must ascertain what English usage is in respect to the tenses
and moods of the verbs of indirect discourse; otherwise we
have no principle by which to determine what English tense
and mood properly represent a given Greek tense and mood
in indirect discourse. Furthermore, since Greek usage has
been expressed in terms of the relation between the original
utterance and the quotation, it will be expedient to state Eng-
lish usage in the same way. An example will illustrate at the
same time the necessity of formulating the law and of formu-
lating it in terms of relation to the direct form.

(1) He has seen a vision. (2) értaciay Ewpakev.
(3) They said that he had seen a vision. (4) eiov ott 6rtaciav Ewpakev.

The sentences marked (1) and (2) express the same idea
and employ corresponding tenses. The sentences marked (3)
and (4) represent respectively the indirect quotation of (1)
and (2) after a verb of past time, and express therefore the
same meaning. They do not, however, employ corresponding
tenses, the Greek using a Perfect, the English a Pluperfect.
It is evident therefore that the principle of indirect discourse
is not the same in English as in Greek, and that we cannot
translate (4) into (3) by the same principle of equivalence of
tenses which we employ in direct assertions. To translate
(4) we must first restore (2) by the Greek law of indirect dis-
course, then translate (2) into (1), and finally by the English
law of indirect discourse construct (3) from (1) and the trans-
lation of the Greek efrov. This process requires the formula-
tion of the law of indirect discourse for English as well as for
Greek.

MOODS IN

INDIRECT DISCOURSE. sy

352. English usage in indirect discourse is illustrated in the

following examples :

Direct form .
Indirect, after ache ince

55 * future °“

‘ “ past “
Direct form . ;
Indirect, after present danke

ei -rature:.. ~

a “ee past “
Direct form . :
Indirect, after present tense

a “ future «“

se past “
Direct form . t= Ne
Indirect, after resent tense

W SeehUGUMe mn ce

“ “ past “

I see the city.

He says that he sees the city.

He will say that he sees the city.

He said that he saw the city.

I saw the city.

He says that he saw the city.

He will say that he saw the city.

He said that he had seen the city.

I shall see the city.

He says that he shall see the city.
He will say that he shall see the city.
He said that he should see the city.
I may see the city.

He says that he may see the city.
He will say that he may see the city.
He said that he might see the city.

From these examples we may deduce the following rule for

indirect discourse in English:

(a) After verbs of present or future time, the mood and tense
of the direct discourse are retained in the indirect discourse.

(b) After verbs of past time, the mood of the direct dis-
course is retained, but the tense is changed to that tense which
is past relatively to the time of the direct discourse.

Thus, see becomes saw; saw becomes had seen; shall see becomes
should see (the change of mood here is only apparent); may see

becomes might see, etc.

Rem. In questions and in conditional clauses a Present Indicative of
the direct form may become a Past Subjunctive in indirect quotation after
a verb of past time. See Luke 3:15; Acts 10:18; 20:17, E.v.

353. Comparing this with the Greek rule, we may deduce
the following principles for the translation into English of
clauses of indirect discourse in Greek :

188 THE MOODS.

(a) When the quotation is introduced by a verb of present
or future time, translate the verbs of the indirect discourse
by the same forms which would be used in ordinary direct
discourse.

(6) When the quotation is introduced by a verb of past
time, if there are Optatives which represent Indicatives or
Subjunctives of the direct discourse, first restore in thought
these Indicatives or Subjunctives, then translate each Greek
verb by that English verb which is relatively past to that
which would correctly translate the same verb standing in
direct discourse.

354. The statement of English usage in indirect discourse
is presented in the form adopted above for the sake of brevity
and convenience of application. It is, however, rather a for-
mula than a statement which represents the process of thought.
In order to apprehend clearly the difference between English
and Greek usage it must be recognized that certain English
tenses have, not like the Greek tenses a two-fold funetion, but
a three-fold. They mark (1) the temporal relation of the point
of view from which the action is deseribed to the time of
speaking; (2) the temporal relation of the action described to
this point of view; (3) the conception of the action as re-
spects its progress. Thus in the sentence, J had been read-
ing, (1) the point of view from which the act of reading is
viewed is past, (2) the action itself is previous to that point of
view, and (3) it is viewed as in progress. He will not go is a
Future from a present point of view presenting the action as a
simple event. In the sentence, When he came, I was reading,
I was reading would be more accurately described as a Present
progressive from a past point of view, than as a Past progres-
sive from a present point of view. In other imstanees- the same
form might be a Past from a present point of view. These

MOODS IN INDIRECT DISCOURSE. 159

triple-function tenses have perhaps their chief use in English
in indirect discourse, but are used also in direct discourse.
Many of them are derived by the process of composition, out
of which so many English tenses have arisen, from verb-forms
which originally had only the two-fold function, but their
existence in modern English is none the less clearly estab-
lished. Professor W. G. Hale? in A.J.P., vol. vii. pp. 66 ff.,
has set forth the similar three-fold function of the Latin tenses
in the Indicative Mood. But it should be noticed that the
' English has developed this three-fold function more clearly
even than the Latin. For example, the antecedence of an
action to a past point of view is in Latin only implied in the
assertion of its completeness at that past point of time. But
in English this antecedence may be affirmed without affirming
the completeness of the act.

Bearing in mind this three-fold function of certain English
tenses, the difference between Greek and English usage in in-
direct discourse may be stated comprehensively as follows:

The Greek, while adopting in indirect discourse the point of
view of the person quoting as respects the person of verbs and
pronouns, and while sometimes after a verb of past time mark-
ing the dependent character of the statement by the use of the
Optative in place of an Indicative or Subjunctive of the origi-
nal statement, yet as respects tense, regularly carries over into
the indirect discourse the point of view of the original state-
ment, treating it as if it were still present. What was present
to the original speaker is still treated from his point of view,
as present; what was past, as past; what was future, as future.

In English, on the other hand, in quoting a past utterance,

1 Professor Hale’s article furnished the suggestion for the view of the
English tenses presented here.

140 THE MOODS.

the fact that it is past is not only indicated by the past tense
of the verb which introduces the quotation, but still further
by the employment of a tense in the quotation which marks the
point of view from which the act is looked at as past. Thus
in Greek a prediction expressed originally by a Future tense,
when afterward quoted after a verb of past time, is still ex-
pressed by a Future, the act being viewed as future from the
assumed point of view, and this point of view being treated as
present or its character as past being ignored. But in English
such a prediction is expressed by a Past-future, i.e. by the
English tense which describes an action as future from a past
point of view. Thus in quoting dyoua, I shall see, in indirect
discourse, one says in Greek, efev dru dferar; but in English, he
said that he should see. Similarly, a statement made originally
by the Perfect tense, when quoted after a verb of past time,
is still expressed by a Perfect tense in Greek, but in English
by a Pluperfect. Thus jpdpryxa, I have sinned; ere ore
nuaptyker, he said that he had sinned.

When we pass to quotations after verbs of present time, the
usages of the two languages naturally coincide, since the differ-
ence between the point of view of the original utterance and
the quotation, which in English gave rise to a change of tense
not however made in Greek, disappears. The point of view of
the original statement is in both languages retained and
treated as present, because it is present. Thus €Aevoouat, I shall
come, requires only a change of person in quotation after a verb
of present time, A€yer dre €Aedoerat, he says that he shall come.

It might naturally be anticipated that in quotations after
verbs of future time, where again the time of the original
statement differs from that of the quotation, there would arise
a difference of usage between English and Greek. Such how-
ever is not the case. What the Greek does after a verb of

MOODS IN INDIRECT DISCOURSE. 141

past time, the English as well as the Greek does after a verb
of future time, viz. treats the point of view of the origina!
utterance as present. ‘Thus let us suppose the case of one
predicting what a person just now departing will say when he
returns. He has not yet seen anything, but itis imagined that
when he returns he will say, J have seen all things. The asser-
tion of this by he will say, takes the form he will say that he
has seen all things; just as in Greek one quoting éwpaxa wavra
after €pet says épet dru éwpaxey ravta. Thus the person quoting
does not describe the event from his own point of view — this
would require he will see, nor does he mark the fact that the
point of view of the utterance is different from his own — this
would require he will have seen; but treats the point of view
of the person whose expected language he quotes in advance,
as if it were present. Thus while the Greek is consistent in
simply adopting the conceived point of view of the future
statement, the English departs from the principle which it fol-
lows after past tenses, and follows here the same method as
the Greek.

355. These facts enable us to see that it would be incorrect to say
that the tense of the direct discourse is in Greek determined from the
point of view of the original speaker, in English from the point of view of
the person who makes the quotation. The correct statement is that in
both languages the act is looked at from the point of view of the original
speaker, but that the two languages differ somewhat in their method of
indicating the relation of this point of view to the time of the quotation.
This difference, however, pertains only to quotations whose point of view
is past. Its precise nature has already been stated (354). When the
point of view is present or future the usage of the two languages is
identical.

356. The comparison of English and Greek usage may
be reduced to articulated statement as follows: English usage
is like Greek usage in three respects, and different in two
respects.

142 THE MOODS.

I. It is like Greek in that,

(a) It adapts the person of the pronouns and verbs of the
original utterance to the point of view of the quoter.

(b) It looks at the act described in the quotation from the
point of view of the original statement.

(c) After a verb of present or future time this point of view
of the original utterance is treated in the quotation as present,
as after verbs of present time it is in fact.

II. It differs from Greek in that,

(a) While it looks at the act from the point of view of the
original statement, if that point of view is past it designates
it as past, using a tense which describes the action from a past
point of view. A Past of the original utterance becomes in
the quotation a Past-past; a Future becomes a Past-future,
ete. This the Greek does not do, having in general no tense
which has this double temporal power.

(b) It does not as a rule change the original mood of the
verb in quotation. Most apparent changes of mood, such as
will to would, are changes of tense. But ef. 352, Rem.

CONSTRUCTION AFTER Kai éyéveto.

357. Clause or Infinitive as the Subject of éyévero.
By a Hebraism «ai éyévero and éyévero dé, Septuagint ren-
derings of "7", are used in the New Testament (Matt.
Mark, Luke, Acts) to introduce a clause or an Infinitive
which is logically the subject of the éyévero. The éyéveto
is usually followed by a phrase or clause of time ; the event
to be narrated is then expressed by «ai with an Indicative,
or by an Indicative without «at, or by an Infinitive. It
thus results that the construction takes three forms:

THE INFINITIVE. 143

358. (a) Kai éyevero, or éyévero dé, and the phrase of time are
followed by xa¢é with an Indicative.

Luke 5:1; éyevero d€ év TH Tov dxAoV emixeiobar avT® Kal akOveELy
tov Adyov Tod Beod Kai adros Hv EoTos Tapa Tiv ACuwnv Vevvyoa-
pet, now it came to pass, while the multitude pressed upon him and
heard the word of God, that he was standing by the lake of Gennesaret.

359. (b) Kai éyévero, or éyévero dé, and the phrase of time are
tollowed by an Indicative without kad.
Mark 1:9; Kai éyévero év éxeivats tats nuépats AOev "Inoots ard
Na€aper ths TadtAaias, and it came to pass in those days, that Jesus
came from Nazareth of Galilee.

360. (c) Kai éyevero, or éyevero dé, and the phrase of time are
followed by an Infinitive, the narrative being continued either
by an Infinitive or an Indicative.

Acts 9:32; éyévero de Ierpov duepxopevov dia ravtwv KaredOeiv, and

it came to pass, as Peter went throughout all parts, he came down.
See also Mark 2:23; Luke 6:12. B. pp. 276-278.

THE INFINITIVE.

361. That the Infinitive in Greek had its origin as respects
both form and function in a verbal noun, and chiefly at least in
the dative case of such a noun, is now regarded as an assured
result of comparative grammar. At the time of the earliest
Greek literature, however, the other cases of this verbal noun
had passed out of use, and the dative function of the form that
remained had become so far obscured that, while it still re-
tained the functions appropriate to the dative, it was also used
as an accusative and as a nominative. Beginning with Pindar
it appears with the article, at first as a subject-nominative.
Later it developed also the other cases, accusative, genitive,
and dative. By this process its distinctively dative force was
obscured while the scope of its use was enlarged. In Post-

144 THE MOODS.

Aristotelian Greek, notably in the Septuagint and the New
Testament, another step was taken. The Infinitive with the
article in the genitive began to assume some such prominence
as at a much earlier time the dative had acquired, and as
before, the sense of its case being in some degree lost, this
genitive Infinitive came to be used as a nominative or accusa-
tive. We mark therefore four stages of development. First,
that for which we must go back of the historic period of the
Greek language itself, when the Infinitive was distinctly a
dative case. Second, that which is found in Homer: the Infin-
itive begins to be used as subject or object, though the strictly
dative functions still have a certain prominence, and the arti-
cle is not yet used. Third, that of which the beginnings are
seen in Pindar and which is more fully developed in classical
authors of a later time: the Infinitive without the article,
sometimes with dative functions, sornetimes with the foree of
other cases, is used side by side with the articular Infinitive
in the nominative, genitive, dative, and accusative singular.
Fourth, that which appears in the Septuagint and the New
Testament: all the usages found in the third stage still con-
tinuing, the Infinitive with the article in the genitive begins
to lose the sense of its genitive function and to be employed
as a nominative or accusative.

From the earliest historic period of the Greek language the
Infinitive partakes of the characteristics both of the verb and
the noun. As a verb it has a subject more or less definite, and
expressed or implied, and takes the adverbial and objective
limitations appropriate to a verb. As a noun it fills the office
in the sentence appropriate to its case. Many of these case-
functions are identical with those which belong to other sub-
stantives ; some are peculiar to the Infinitive.

Rem. Concerning the history of the Infinitive, see G.MT. 742, 788;
Gild. in T.A.P. A. 1878, and in A.J.P. III. pp. 193 ff. ; IV. pp. 241 ff.,

THE INFINITIVE. 145

pp. 418 ff.; VIII. p. 329; Birklein, Entwickelungsgeschichte des sub-
stantivierten Infinitivs, in Schanz, Beitriige zur historischen Syntax der
griechischen Sprache, Heft 7.

362. In the Greek of the classical and later periods, the functions of
the Infinitive as an element of the sentence are very various. They may
be classified logically as follows :

I. As a Principat VERB (364, 365).

II. As a SuspsrantTivE ELEMENT.
(1) As subject (384, 385, 390, 395, 404).
(2) As object in indirect discourse (890).
(3) As object after verbs of exhorting, striving, promising,
hoping, etc. (887-389, 391, 594, 404).
(4) As object after verbs that take a genitive (401-403).

lil. As an ADJECTIVE ELEMENT.
(1) As appositive (586, 395).
(2) Expressing other adnominal limitations (378, 379, 400).

IV. As an ApVERBIAL ELEMENT, denoting,
(1) Purpose (366, 367, 3870 (d), 3871 (d), 372, 397).
(2) Indirect object (368).
(3) Result (369-871, 398).
(4) Measure or degree (after adjectives and adverbs) (576, 599).
(5) Manner, means, cause, or respect (575, 377, 396).
(6) A modal modification of an assertion (883).

The articular Infinitive governed by a preposition (406-417) expresses
various adverbial relations, the precise nature of which is determined by
the meaning of the preposition employed. Similarly ply or rpiv 7 with
the Infinitive (380-382) constitutes an adverbial phrase of time, the
temporal idea lying in zpév rather than in the Infinitive.

363. To arrange the treatment of the Infinitive on the basis of such a
logical classification as that given above (362) would, however, disregard
the historical order of development and to some extent obscure the point
of view from which the Greek language looked at the Infinitive. It seems
better, therefore, to begin with those uses of the Infinitive which are most
evidently connected with the original dative function, and proceed to
those in which the dative force is vanishing or lost. This is the general
plan pursued in the following sections, though it is by no means aftirmed
that in details the precise order of historical development has been
followed.

146 THE MOODS.

THE INFINITIVE WITHOUT THE ARTICLE.

364. The Imperative Infinitive. The Infinitive with-
out the article is occasionally used to express a command
or exhortation. This is the only use of the Infinitive as a
principal verb. It is of ancient origin, being especially
frequent in Homer. HA. 957; G. 1586.

The New Testament furnishes but one certain instance
of this usage.

Phil. 3:16; wApv eis 0 €fOacapev, TO aita croryeiv, only whereunto
we have attained, by the same rule walk.

365. Rom. 12: 15 affords another probable instance of the imperative
use of the Infinitive. Buttmann supposes an ellipsis of \éyw, and Winer
a change of construction by which the writer returns from the independ-
ent Imperatives used in v. 14 to the construction of an Infinitive dependent
on \éyw employed in v.38. This explanation of change of construction
probably applies in Mark 6:9 (cf. the even more’ abrupt change in
Mark 5:28) ; but in Rom. ch. 12 the remoteness of the verb \éyw (in v.
3) from the Infinitive (in v. 15) makes the dependence of the latter upon
the former improbable. B. pp. 271 f.; WM. pp. 897 f.; WT. 316.

366. The Infinitive of Purpose. The Infinitive is used

to express the purpose of the action or state denoted by
the principal verb. HA. 951; G. 1532.

Matt. 5:17; pay vouionre ore HAOov Katadtoa Tov vopov 7 TOvS Tpo-
gytas* otk HAPov Katadtdoat GAAG wANpGoat, think not that I came
to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil.

Luke 18:10; avOpwrou dv0 avéByoay eis TO tepov rpocevEacba, two
men went up into the temple to pray.

Acts 10:33; viv otv ravtes qpuets évwriov Tod Oeod mdépecpev aKkovoat
TaVTA TA TPOOTETAYpPEVA ToL iO TOU KUpLov, now therefore we are
all here present in the sight of God, to hear all things that have been
commanded thee of the Lord.

367. The Infinitive expressing purpose is sometimes intro-
duced by wore or ws. See 370 (d), 371 (da), 372.

THE INFINITIVE WITHOUT THE ARTICLE. 147

368. THe Inrinitrve As AN INDIRECT OxssEctT. Closely
akin to the Infinitive of Purpose is the Infinitive of the indi-
rect object. The former is a supplementary addition to a
statement in itself complete, and expresses the purpose had in
view in the doing of the action or the maintenance of the state.
The Infinitive of the indirect object on the other hand is a
complementary limitation of a verb, expressing the direct ten-
dency of the action denoted by the principal verb, or other
similar dative relation. Some of the instances of this usage
are scarcely to be distinguished from the Infinitive of Purpose,
while in others the distinction is clearly marked.

Luke 10:40; Kvpue, od perder vor ore 7 ddEAHH pov povynv pe KaTeAeuTev
dvaxovetv, Lord, dost thou not care that my sister has left me to serve alone?
Acts 17:21; “A@nvaior 8& mavres Kal of éridnuodvtes E€vou eis ovdev
€repov nukaipovv 7 A€yew Te 7» aKovEy TL KatvOTEpov, now all the

Athenians and the strangers sojourning there spent their time in nothing

else than either to tell or to hear some new thing. See also Mark 4: 23;

6:31; 10:40; Luke7:40; 12:4; Acts4:14; 7:42; 23:17, 18,19;

Pome lit. 2 3S:

369. The Infinitive of Result. The Infinitive may be
used to denote the result of the action expressed by the

principal verb. When so used it is usually introduced by
@ate. HA. 9538; G. 1449.

Mark 4:57; xal ra Kvpata éreBaddAev cis TO mAolov, wore HON yeEul-
CecGat T6 mAotov, and the waves beat into the boat, insomuch that the
boat was now filling.

1 Thess. 1:8; €v ravti rorw 4% Tiotis tuav » mpos Tov Oeov e&eAr-
AvOev, ore pn xpeav exe Huas AadAely TL, in every place your
faith to God-ward is gone forth, so that we need not to speak anything.

370. Under the general head of expressions of result it is
necessary to distinguish three different conceptions :

(a) Actual result, conceived of and affirmed as actual; in this
case classical Greek uses ore with the Indicative. See 236.

148 THE MOODS.

(0) Tendency or conceived result which it is implied is an
actual result. In this case the result is thought of as that
which the action of the principal verb is adapted or sufficient
to produce, and it is the context or the nature of the case only
which shows that this result is actually produced. In this
case classical Greek uses dare with the Infinitive.

(c) Tendency or conceived result thought of and affirmed
simply as such. In this case the result is one which the
action of the principal verb is adapted or sufficient to
produce, though the actual production is either left in doubt,
or is indicated by the context not to have taken place. Clas-
sical Greek employs ore with the Infinitive (in Homer the
Infinitive without dove).

To these three may be added as a closely related conception
which the Greek also expressed by wore with the Infinitive:

(d) Purpose, i.e. intended result.

The constructions by which these several shades of meaning
are expressed are substantially the same in the New Testament
as in classical Greek, except that the construction appropriate
to the second meaning has apparently encroached upon the
realm of the first meaning, and the line of distinction between
them has become correspondingly indistinct. “Qore with the
Indicative occurs very rarely except with the meaning there-
fore, introducing a principal clause; and this fact, together
with the large number of instances in which oore with the
Infinitive is used of a result evidently actual, makes it probable
that the use of écre with the Infinitive is no longer restricted,
as in classical Greek, to instances in which the result is thought
of as theoretical, but is used also of result in fact and in
thought actual. Cf. G.MT. 582-584. There remain, however,
instances entirely similar to those found in classical Greek, in
which a result shown by the context to be actual is apparently

THE INFINITIVE WITHOUT THE ARTICLE. 149

presented simply as one which the event previously expressed
tends to produce. Between these two classes it is evidently
impossible to draw a sharp line of distinction. Cases of the
third class are expressed in the New Testament by the Infini-
tive with or without wore. Cf. also 218 and 398.

371. The following examples illustrate New Testament
usage :

(a) Actual result conceived and affirmed as such.
Indicative after acre.

John 3:16; ovtws yap yyarnoev 6 Beds Tov Kdopov wore TOV viOdV
Tov povoyevn édwxev, for God so loved the world that he gave his only
begotten Son.

Infinitive after oore.

Mark 9:26; éyevero woel vexpos wore Tovs moAAOUs A€yelv OTL dzre-
Gavev, he became as one dead ; insomuch that the more part said that
he was dead.

(6) Tendency, by implication realized in actual result. In-
finitive, usually after dore.

Luke 12:1; é€v ots émovvaxbecav tov pupiaddwy Tod dxAov, wore
Katamatety adAnAovs, in the meantime, when the many thousands of the
multitude were gathered together, so as to tread one upon another.

Rev. 5:5; idov éviknoev 6 A€wy 6 €k THs HvaAts “Iovda, H fila Aaveid,
dvoigar Td BiBAcov, behold the lion that is of the tribe of Judah, the
Root of David, hath overcome, to open the book. See also Acts 1:25;
BiGors 18382) Thess: 2):/4.

1 Cor. 13:2; Kav é€yw racav tHv riotw woTe Opn peOotdvev, and if
I have all faith, so as to remove mountains.

Matt. 10:1; €dwxey airots eLovoiav rvevpatwv axabdprwv wore éx-
BadrXrew ara, he gave them authority over unclean spirits to cast them
out. Here probably belongs also Rom. 1:10. See also 2 Cor. 2:7;
Rev. 16:9.

150 THE MOODS.

Rem. The Infinitive in Heb. 6: 10, ob yap déikos 6 Beds emihabécBat,
must also be accounted an Infinitive of conceived result. The origin of
this idiom may be an impersonal construction (cf. G.MT. 762), but it
has departed in meaning as well as in form from its original. The mean-
ing of this sentence is not, Jt would not be unjust for God to forget, but,
God is not unjust so as to forget.

(d) Purpose, i.e. intended result.

Luke 4:29; kai yyayov airdv éws ddpvos tod dpovs woTe KaTa-
Kpnpvicat avrov, and they led him unto the brow of the hill that
they might throw him down headlong. See also Luke 20 : 20.

Rem. In Matt. 27:1, oo7e with the Infinitive stands in definitive appo-
sition with cvpBov\or, defining the content of the plan, rather than ex-
pressing the purpose of making it.

372. The Infinitive is used with ws in Luke 9:52 according to the
reading adopted by WH. (most editors read wore) and in Acts 20: 24
according to the generally adopted reading (WH. read a Subjunctive).
In both cases the phrase denotes purpose. No instance of ws with the
Infinitive denoting result occurs in the New Testament. See Th, ws, III.,
and references cited there, and cf. G. 1456. In 2 Cor. 10:9 ws dy is used
with the Infinitive. This usage also occurs rarely in classical and later
Greek. See Alf. ad loc. and Gr. p. 230. The phrase is elliptical, the In-
finitive most probably expressing purpose and ws dy modifying it in the
sense of quasi. WWM. p. 390; WT. p. 310.

373. In the New Testament the Infinitive is not used either with wore
or é¢? & or éf gre-in the sense on condition that. HA. 953, b; G.
1453, 1460.

374. The classical usage of an Infinitive (of conceived result) with 7,
or 7 wore. OY 7 ws, after a comparative, does not occur in the New Testa-
ment. The Infinitive after 7 in the New Testament is used as the correla-
tive of some preceding word or phrase, and usually as a nominative. See
Luke 18: 25; Acts 20:35. On Acts 17: 21 cf. 368.

375. Somewhat akin in force to the Infinitive of (conceived)
result, but probably of Hebraistic origin, is the Infinitive used
to define more closely the content of the action denoted by a
previous verb or noun. Cf. Hr. 29, 3, e. i

THE INFINITIVE WITHOUT THE ARTICLE. 151

Acts 15:10; viv otv ri meipagere tov Oeov, éemiBetvar Cuyov ext Tov
TpaxyAov Tov palytav, now therefore why tempt ye God, that ye
should put (i.e. by putting, or in that ye put) a yoke upon the neck
of the disciples? Cf. Ps. 78:18 (Hebrew).

Heb. 5:5; ovtws kal 6 ypiotds ovx EavTov eddfacev yevnOjvar apxtepea,
so Christ also glorified not himself to be made a high priest. See also
Luke 1:54, 72; cf. 1 Sam. 12:23, dvtevor; 22:18; Ps. Sol. 2: 28,

39, 40. See Ryle and James, Ps. Sol. p. Ixxxiii.

. 376. The Infinitive limiting Adjectives and Adverbs.
The Infinitive is used with adjectives and adverbs of abil-
ity, fitness, readiness, etc., to denote that which one is or is
not able, fit, or ready to do. HA. 952; G. 1526.

Mark 1:7; ov ovk eiui txavos kvas Atoar Tov twavTa TOV UrodnpaTwv
avrov, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and
unloose.

2 Tim. 2:2; otrwves ixavot écovrat Kat érepovs didaga, who shall be able
to teach others also.

Rev. 4:11; d&tos ef, 6 Kvptos Kal 6 Oeds qudv, AaBety tHv dofav Kal
TV Tynv Kal THY Svvapty, worthy art thou, our Lord and our God, to
receive the glory and the honor and the power. See also Luke 14:31;
2 Cor. 12: 14.

377. The Infinitive may be used after any adjective to limit
its application to a particular action. HA. 952; G. 1528.
Heb. 5:11; rept od odds july 6 Adyos Kal SvcEppnvevtos A€yeL,

of whom we have many things to say, and hard of interpretation—a

felicitous free translation. More literally it would read, concerning

whom our discourse is much, and hard of interpretation to state, i.e.
hard to state intelligibly.

378. The Infinitive limiting Nouns. The Infinitive is
used with abstract nouns of ability, authority, need, hope,
etc., to denote that which one has, or has not, ability,
authority, need, etc., to do. Here may also be included

152 THE MOODS.

the Infinitive after @pa, which implies a necessity. HA.
952; G. 1521.

Matt. 3:14; eyo ypetav éxw tro cod Bartichjva, I have need to be
baptized of thee.

John 1:12; edwxev avrois éovoiay réxva Oeod yeverOar, to them gave
he the right to become children of God.

Rom. 13:11; xat rovro eiddres Tov Katpov, OTL Wpa On vmas e€ UmvOU
éyepOjvat, and this, knowing the season, that now it is high time for you
to awake out of sleep. See also 2 Cor. 10:15; Rev. 9:10.

379. The Infinitive is also occasionally used after con-
crete nouns cognate with verbs which take an object In-
finitive.

Gal. 5:3; deaderns €ortiv ddAov Tov vouov romoat, he is a debtor to
do the whole law.

380. The Infinitive is used after tpiv or rpiv 7. HA.
955; G. 1469-1474.

Mark 14:30; zpiv 7 dis dAextopa dwvncat tpis pe arapvnon, before
the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice.

John 4:49; xipie, kara Bn& mpiv amobavely ro maidiov pov, Sir, come
down ere my child die.

381. The use of 7 after piv, which occurs twice in the Iliad, fre-
quently in Herodotus, and rarely in Attic writers, is well attested in three
of the thirteen instances in the New Testament in which piv is used
with the Infinitive, and occurs as a variant in other passages. G. 1474.

382. As respects the mood which follows rpiv or mpiv 7, New Testa-
ment usage is the same as that of Post-Homeric Greek in general, in that
the Infinitive is generally (in the New Testament invariably) used when
the leading clause is affirmative ; the Subjunctive and Optative occur only
after a negative leading clause. The Indicative after piv which some-
times occurs in classical Greek, chiefly after a negative leading clause, is
not found in the New Testament. HA. 924,a; G. 1470.

THE INFINITIVE WITHOUT THE ARTICLE. 153

383. The Infinitive used absolutely in a parenthetie clause
occurs but once in the New Testament. HA. 956; G. 1554.

Heb. 7:9; ws émos eimety, so to speak.

384. The Infinitive as Subject. The Infinitive may
be used as the subject of a finite verb. HA. 949, 959;
G. 1517.

Matt. 3:15; odtw yap mpeérov eotiv quiv tAnpOoa Tacav dSiKaLocvvny,

Jor thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness.

Luke 18:25; evxorwrepov yap éotw KapnAov da Tpyyatos Bedovys
ciceOeiv, for it is easier for a camel to enter in through a needle’s eye.

See also Mark 3:4; Luke 16:17; 20:22; Gal. 4:18.

385. The Infinitive with subject accusative sometimes
stands as the subject of an impersonal verb (doxe?, etc.). Fre-
quently, however, the personal construction is employed, that
which is properly the subject of the Infinitive being put in the
nominative as the subject of the principal verb. But the logi-
cal relation is the same in either case. HA. 944.

In the New Testament the personal construction is regularly
employed with doxei.

Acts 17:18; €vwv daipoviwy doxed xatayyeAeds civat, he seemeth to be
a setter forth of strange gods. See also Gal. 2:9; Jas. 1: 26, etc.

Rem. Concerning the Infinitive as subject of éyévero, see 357, 360.

386. The Infinitive as Appositive. The Infinitive may
stand in apposition with a noun or pronoun. HA. 950:
Glo T.

Jas. 1:27; Opyoxeia xafapa Kat dpiavros . . . avtn €oTiv, €mt-
oxertecOar dppavors Kal ynpas év TH Odie aitay, pure religion

and undefiled .. . is this, to visit orphans and widows in their afflic-
tion. See also Acts 15:28; 1 Thess. 4:3.

387. The Infinitive as Object. The Infinitive may be
used as the object of a verb. The verbs which are thus

154 THE MOODS.

limited by an Infinitive are in part such as take a noun or
pronoun in the accusative as object, in part such as take a
noun or pronoun in the genitive as object, in part verbs
which cannot take a noun or pronoun as object but require
an Infinitive to complete their meaning. HA. 948; G.
1518, 1519.

Matt. 19:14; agere ra maidia Kai pr KwAvere aita edAGely zpos pe,
suffer the little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me.

Mark 12:12; xai é{ytovy aitov kparnoa, and they sought to lay hold
on him.

Luke 16:3; oxazrewy ovk icxvw, éraiteiv aicxvvopat, I have not strength
to dig; to beg I am ashamed.

Heb. 7:25; oOev xai owlew eis TO ravtedes Sivarat, wherefore also he
is able to save to the uttermost. See also Matt. 1:19; John 5:18;
Rom. 14:2; Gal. 3:2, et freq.

388. The Infinitive xa/pew in salutations is to be regarded

as the object of an unexpressed verb of bidding.

Acts 23:26; Kdavédios Avoias TH Kpatiota yyenove PyArke yxaipecy,
Claudius Lysias unto the most excellent g governor Felix, greeting.

Jas. 1:1; "IdkwBos . . . tals dadexa pvdAats tats ev TH duacropa
xatpew, James . . . to the twelve tribes which are of the Dispersion,
greeting.

389. The verbal idea governing the Infinitive is sometimes implied
rather than expressed. The Infinitive rexe?y in Rev. 12:2 is doubtless an
object Infinitive governed by the idea of desire implied in the preceding
participles. The Infinitive Yevoacda in Acts 5:3 may be regarded as an
object Infinitive governed by the idea of persuading uae in érAnpwoev
Thy Kapdlav, or as an Infinitive of conceived result. f. 570 (c).

390. The Infinitive in Indirect Discourse. The Infini-
tive is frequently used in the indirect quotation of asser-
tions. It is usually the object of a verb of saying or of
thinking, or the subject of such a verb in the pachige
voice. HA. 946; G. 1522.

THE INFINITIVE WITH THE ARTICLE. a5

Mark 12:18; ofrwes A€yovow avacracw py eivar, which say that there is
no resurrection.

John 21:25; ov8 adrdv olpar tov Koopov xwpnoev Ta ypadopeva
BuBAXLa, I suppose that even the world itself will not contain the books
that will be written.

Heb. 11:5; po yap rhs perabécews pepaptipynrar evapertnKevar Tw
Ged, for before his translation he had witness borne to him that he
had been well-pleasing unto God. See also Luke 2:26; 22:54;
24:46 (?); John 12:29; Acts 16:27; Rom. 15:8; 2 Tim. 2:18;
1 John 2: 9.

Rem. 1. Respecting the force of the tenses of the Infinitive in indirect
discourse, see 110-114.

Rem. 2. Respecting the use of negatives with the Infinitive in indirect
discourse, see 480-482.

391. The Infinitive occurs frequently as object after verbs
of hoping, promising, swearing, and commanding, with a force
closely akin to that of the Infinitive in indirect discourse.
Such instances are not, however, usually included under that
head. Cf. 337, and G.MT. 684.

THE INFINITIVE WITH THE ARTICLE.

392. The prefixing of the article to the Infinitive tends to
the obscuring of its original dative force, while it emphasizes
its new substantive character as anoun which can be used in
any case. Some of the uses of the Infinitive with the article
differ from those without the article only by the greater em-
phasis on the substantive character of the form. This is the
case with its use as subject and object. Others express nearly
the same relations which were expressed by the Infinitive
without the article, but with a different thought of the case-
relation involved. Thus the use of the Infinitive without the
article after adjectives of fitness, worthiness, etc., doubtless

156 THE MOODS.

sprang originally from the thought of the Infinitive as a dative.
The Infinitive with the article after such adjectives is thought
of as a genitive, as is evident from the use of the article rod.
The difference in meaning is, however, very slight. Compare
the English worthy to receive and worthy of receiving. Still
other uses of the Infinitive with the article are wholly new,
being developed only after the Infinitive had begun to be used
with the article. To this class belongs the use of the Infini-
tive after prepositions. .

Rem. ‘The Infinitive with the article being by means of that article

practically a declinable noun, the various uses are grouped in the follow-
ing sections according to cases.

393. The Infinitive with To as Subject. The Infinitive
with the article to is used as the subject of a finite verb.
HA. 959; G. 1542. :

Matt. 15:20; rd 6€ avirtos yepoiv payely ov Kowot Tov avOpwrov,

but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not the man. See also Matt.
20:23; Mark 9:10; 12:33; Rom. 14:21.

394. The Infinitive with to as Object. The Infinitive
with the article to is used as the object of a transitive
verb. This usage is far less common than the object
Infinitive without the article. HA. 959; G. 1548.

Acts 25:11; ot mapartotpat to arobavelv, I refuse not to die. See
alsor2 Corn dalle enti.) <6:

395. The Infinitive with the Article, in Apposition.
The Infinitive with the article may stand in apposition with
a preceding noun or pronoun.

Rom. 4:13; ov yap dia vopov 4 érayyeAta TO “ABpaap 7) TO o7ep-
pate avTov, TO KAnpovopov avTov €ivat Koopov, for not through the

law was the promise to Abraham or to his seed, that he should be heir
of the world.

THE INFINITIVE WITH THE ARTICLE. Loe

ila.) O ” ‘ > a A ‘ ‘ , > , . ae

2 Cor. 2:1; €xpiva yap €uavtw TovTo, TO py madww €év AVTH TpOS LpasS
eXGeiv, for I determined this for myself, that I would not come again to
you with sorrow. See also Rom. 14:15.

396. The Infinitive with +o. The Infinitive with the
article 7é is used in classical Greek to express cause, man-
ner, means. In the New Testament it is used to express

cause. Its only other use is after the preposition év. HA.
959; G. 1547. .

2 Cor. 2:13; ro py ebpety pe Titov tov adeAgov pov, because I found
not Titus my brother.

397. The Infinitive of Purpose with tov. The Infini-
tive with the article tod is used to express the purpose of
the action or state denoted by the principal verb. HA.
960; G. 1548.

Matt. 2:13; peddrAe yap “Hpwdys Cyreiv t6 raidiov tot dod€oat avo,
for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him. See also Matt.
24:45; Luke 2: 24, 27; Acts 26:18; Phil. 3:10.

Rem. That the Infinitive with rod expresses purpose with substan-
tially the same force as the simple Infinitive appears from the joining of
the two together by kai.

Luke 2 : 22, 24; avnyayov avrov eis “IepocoAvpa tapacryga TH Kupio,

. Kat Tod dodvat Ovoiav, they brought him up to Jerusalem, to pre-

sent him to the Lord, and to offer a sacrifice. Cf. also Luke 1: 76,
Ui BEA

398. The Infinitive of Result with tod. The Infinitive
with the article tod is occasionally used in the New Tes-
tament to express conceived result. Cf. 218 and 369-371.
Matt. 21:32; tpets d& idovres ovde pereueAnOnTE VoTEpoy Tod mTTED-

gat avt@, and ye, when ye saw it, did not even repent afterward,

so as to believe him. See also Acts 7:19; Rom. 7:3; probably also
Mets 10: cf. Gen. 512225 193215 34217, 22 > Isa. 5.214. ?

158 THE MOODS.

Rem. Meyer takes the Infinitive phrase rod wy eivac in Rom. 7:5 as
expressing a divine purpose, and adds that rod with the Infinitive never
expresses result, not even in Acts 7:19. But this is grammatical purism
not justified by the evidence. The uniformly telic force of rod with the
Infinitive can be maintained only by evasive definition or forced inter-
pretation.

399. The Infinitive with rod after Adjectives. The
Infinitive with the article rod is used with such adjectives
as may be limited by a simple Infinitive. HA. 959; G.
1547. Cf. 376.

Acts 23:15; €rowot éopev Tov aveAety avtov, we are ready to slay him.
See also Luke 24 : 25.

400. The Infinitive with tod after Nouns. The Infini-
tive with the article rod is used to limit nouns. The rela-
tions thus expressed are very various and are not always
easy to define exactly. Instances occur not only, as in
classical Greek, of the objective genitive, but also of the
genitive of characteristic, the genitive of connection, and
the appositional genitive. HA. 959; G. 1547.

Heb. 5:12; wadw ypetav €xere tov didacxew ipas, ye have need again
that some one teach you.

Luke 2:21; xat dre éxAnoOnoav jyepar dxtd Tov TepiTEneiv avTOr,
and when eight days were fulfilled for circumcising him.

Rom. 11:8; édaxev avrois 6 Geds rveipa xatavisews, oPGadrpovs TOU
py Brera Kat ata Tov pa) axovery, God gave them a spirit of stupor,
eyes that see not, and ears that hear not. See also Luke 1:57, 74;

6723:65:.10::19; 21: 22;522:6; Acts 14°: 9; .20 =3; ‘Rom. 2224;

. Cor. 9:10; 2 Cor. 8:11; 1 Pet. 4:17; cf. Gen.16:3; 1 Sam. 2’: 24.

401. The Infinitive with 7rov after Verbs that take the
Genitive. The Infinitive with rod is used as the object of
verbs which take a noun in the genitive as object, especially
of verbs of hindering, etc. HA. 959, 963; G. 1547, 1549.

THE INFINITIVE WITH THE ARTICLE. 159

Luke 1:9; €daxe rod Ovpudoa, it was his lot (prop. he obtained by lot)
to burn incense.

2 Cor. 1:8; dare eSaropyOjvar nas Kai tov Syv, insomuch that we de-
spaired even of life.

Rom. 15:22; &6 Kai évexortopnv Ta modAa Tod €ADeiv pds tpas,
wherefore also I was hindered these many times from coming to you.
Cf. Gen. 34:19; Ps. Sol. 2 : 28, 29.

402. In classical Greek, verbs of hindering are followed by
three constructions, (a) Infinitive without the article, (b) In-
finitive with rot, (c) Infinitive with ro. My may be used or
omitted with the Infinitive without difference of meaning.
HA. 963; G. 1549, 1551; G.MT. 791 (exx.). In the New
Testament, all these constructions occur except that with 76 pn.
See Matt. 19:14; Rom. 15:22; 1 Cor. 14:39; Gal. 5:7;
Acts 10: 47.

403. The Infinitive with rod u4 after verbs of hindering is closely akin
to the Infinitive of Result. Cf. Luke 24:16; Acts 14: 18.

Rem. Meyer’s interpretation of rod uh émvyvdvac adrév in Luke 24: 16
as expressing a divine purpose (the English translation does not correctly
represent the meaning of the German original), is not required by New
Testament usage. The Greek most naturally means, Their eyes were
held from knowing him. Cf. 398, Rem.

404. The Infinitive with tod as Subject or Object.
The Infinitive with rod is used even as the subject of a
finite verb or as the object of transitive verbs which regu-
larly take a direct object. This is a wide departure from
classical usage, and indicates that the sense of the genitive
character of the article rod before the Infinitive was partly
lost in later Greek. B.p.270; WM. pp. 411f.; WZ. pp. 327.
Acts 27:1; €xpi@y rov drorXetv Has eis THY IraXiay, it was determined

that we should sail for Italy. See also Luke 4:10; 5:7; Acts 3:12;

10:25; 15:20;, 21:12; 23220; 1: Sam. 12:28; Eecel, 4:18.17;
1 Macc. 3: 15.

160 : THE MOODS.

405. The origin of this use of the Infinitive with rod is perhaps in such
usages aS appear in Luke 17:1; 1 Cor. 16:4; and still more in such as
that in Luke 4:10. In Luke 17:1 the genitive is apparently suggested
by the idea of hindering or avoiding in the adjective dvévdexrov; in
1 Cor. 16:4 it is the adjective d&ov which gives occasion to the genitive ;
but in both cases the Infinitive seems to be logically the subject of the
copulative verb, the adjective being the predicate. Whether this con-
struction represents the thought in the mind of the writer, or whether
the expression is rather to be regarded as an impersonal one, the Infini-
tive being dependent on the predicate adjective, cannot with confidence
be decided. Such usages as Luke 4:10 and 5:7 doubtless owe their
origin to the same mental process by which a clause introduced by iva
came to stand as the object of a verb of exhorting. Ps. Sol. 2:28 com-
pared with Luke 12:46 is also suggestive. It is doubtless the idea of
hindering in xpovifw that gives rise to the genitive in the former passage ;
in the latter the Infinitive is a direct object.

406. The Infinitive with the Article governed by
Prepositions. The Infinitive with the article ro, rod, To
is governed by prepositions. HA. 959; G. 1546.

The prepositions so used in the New Testament are:
with the accusative, dva, els, weTa, mpos; with the genitive,
avTi, dud, x, Evexev, Ews, mpd; with the dative, év.

Mark 4:6; kat dua To py éxew pilav eEnpavOny, and because it had no
root, it withered away.

1 Thess. 3:5; érepia eis TO yvovar THv riot bpor, I sent that I might
know your faith.

Mark 14:28; ddAa pera TO eyepOnval pe tpodéw pas cis tTHv Tadt-
Aatav, howbeit, after I am raised up, I will go before you into Galilee.

Matt. 6:1; mpocéyere [8] THV dtxatocvvyy tuov py Tovety E€urpoobev
tov avOpwrwv pos TO Oeabjvar avtois, take heed that ye do not your
righteousness before men, to be seen of them.

Gal. 3:23; apo tod de eAOety tHy riot id vopov éppovpovpeGa, but
before faith came, we were kept in ward under the law.

Luke 24:51; Kai éyevero €v To evroyelv avTov avTovs dueoTy az
avtov, and it came to pass, while he blessed them, he parted from them.

407. These prepositions vary greatly in frequency in the
New Testament. Eis occurs with the Infinitive 63 times

THE INFINITIVE WITH THE ARTICLE. 161

(Infinitives 72); ev 52 times (Infinitives 56); da with the
Accusative 27 times (Infinitives 51); pera 15 times; mpos 12
times; zpo 9 times; each of the others once (WH. text). See
Votaw, Infinitive in Biblical Greek, p. 20; cf. G.MT. 800-802.

408. Ad governing the Infinitive with 7é denotes cause, and is nearly
equivalent to érc or 6.67. with the Indicative, differing in that the Infini-
tive gives in itself no indication of the time of the action.

Jas. 4:2,3; ov éxere dia TO py airetoOar tpas: aireire Kai ov ap-
Bavere, ditt Kak@s airetabe, ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye
ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss.

In Mark 5:4 6:4 with the Infinitive expresses the evidence rather than
the cause strictly so called.

409. Eis governing the Infinitive with 76 most commonly expresses
purpose. It is employed with special frequency by Paul, but occurs also
in Heb., 1 Pet., and Jas.

Rom. 8:29; dru ovs zpoeyvw, kal mpowpicev cuppophovs THs €ikovos
TOV Viod aUTOD, Eis TO Elval AUTOV TpwTOTOKOV ev TOAAOIS adEAPors,
for whom he foreknew, he also foreordained to be conformed to the
image of his Son, that he might be the first-born among many brethren.
See also Rom. 1:11; 3:26; 7:4; Eph. 1:12; Phil. 1:10; Heb.
Pema edass les LSsle Reta: i

410. Eis with the Infinitive is also used, like the simple Infinitive, to
represent an indirect object. Cf. 368.

1 Cor. 11:22; pay yap oikias ovK éxere eis TO eoOiew Kai rive, what?
have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? See also Matt. 20:19;
26:2.

411. Eis with the Infinitive also expresses tendency, measure of effect,
or result, conceived or actual.

Heb. 11:3; miorec voodpev xarnpricba rors aidvas pyyate Oeor, eis
TO py €K atvonevwv TO BAEroOpevov yeyovevat, by faith we under-
stand that the worlds have been framed by the word of God, so that
what is seen hath not been made out of things which do appear. See
also Rom. 12:3; 2 Cor..8:6; Gal. 3:17; 1 Thess. 2: 16,

162 THE MOODS.

Els 76 écGiev in 1 Cor. 8:10 either expresses measure of effect or is the
indirect object of ofkodounOnoerar. Eis 76 eivar adrovs dvamoNoyyrous in
Rom. 1:20 might appropriately be interpreted as expressing purpose but
for the causal clause which follows. This clause could be joined to an
expression of purpose only by supposing an ellipsis of some such expres-
sion as kai oUrws eiciv, and seems therefore to require that eés 76 evar be
interpreted as expressing result.

Rem. Meyer’s dictum (see on Rom. 1:20) that eés with the articular
Infinitive is always telic, is, like his similar dictum respecting rod with
the Infinitive, a case of grammatical purism, not justified by the evidence.

412, Eis with the Infinitive is also used, like tva with the Subjunctive,
or the simple Infinitive, as the direct object of verbs of exhorting, etc.
1 Thess. 2:12; 3:10; 2 Thess. 2: 2.

413. Eis with the Infinitive is still further used, like the simple Infini-
tive, to limit an adjective, as in Jas. 1: 19, or a noun, as in Phil. 1: 28.

414. Ilpés governing the Infinitive with 76 usually expresses purpose ;
it is occasionally used with the sense, with reference to.

Matt. 6:1; zpooéyere [de] THv dtxavootvyny bpav pH moveiv EurrpooGev
Tov avOpwrwv pos TO Geabjvar avtots, but take heed that ye do not
your righteousness before men, to be seen of them.

Matt. 26:12; Badotoa yap avtyn TO pipov TodTo ext TOD THpaTOs ov
mMpos TO €vTapiacar pe erroinoev, for in that she poured this ointment
upon my body, she did it to prepare me for burial. See also Matt.
5:28; 13:30; 2Cor.3:15; Eph. 6:11, ete. (purpose); Luke 18:1
(reference).

415. °Ey governing the Infinitive with r¢ is most commonly temporal,
but occasionally expresses other relations, such as manner, means, or
content. This construction is especially frequent in Luke and Acts.
Luke 8:5; xai év TO o7eipew avtov 6 pev éxecev Tapa THYy ddov, and

as he sowed, some fell by the way side.

Acts 3:26; iptv mpOrov avactycas 6 Geds Tov ratda avTod améoretAev
avTov evAoyotvTa tpas ev TO amoaTpEepEew ExaoTov azo THY ToVY-
pov [tpav], unto you first God, having raised up his Servant, sent him
to bless you, in turning away every one of you from your iniquities.
See also Luke 1:8; Acts 9:3; 11:15; Ps. Sol. 1:1 (temporal);
Luke 12:15; Acts 4:30; Heb. 2:8; 3:12.15; Ps. Sol. 1:3; Gen:
19:16; 34:15.

THE PARTICIPLE. 163

416. The force of the other prepositions used with the Infinitive
scarcely needs special definition, the meaning of each being in genera!
the same as that of the same preposition governing nouns. Respecting
the force of the tenses after prepositions, see 104-109.

417. Concerning the Infinitive without the article governed by prepo-
sitions, see G.MT. 805, and cf. Gen. 10:19. The Infinitive yivec@ac in
Acts 4:30, which is by R.V. taken as the object of 66s is more probably
governed by the preposition év. It is however not strictly without the
article, the 7@ which precedes éxreivey belonging in effect also to ylveoOac.

THE PARTICIPLE.

418. The Participle is a verbal adjective, sharing in part
the characteristics of both the verb and the adjective. As a
verb it has both tense functions and functions which may be
designated as modal functions, being analogous to those which
in the case of verbs in the Indicative, Subjunctive, or Optative
belong to the mood. For the proper understanding of a par-
ticiple, therefore, it is necessary to consider (a) The grammat-
ical agreement, (b) The use of the tense, and (c) The logical
force or modal function. The first and second of these have
already been treated, grammatical agreement in 116, the uses
of the tenses in 118-156. It remains to consider the logical
force or modal function of the participle. From the point of
view of the interpreter this is usually the matter of most
importance.

419. In respect to logical force, participles may be classified
as Adjective, Adverbial, and Substantive.

Rem. 1. The terminology here employed for the classification of parti-
ciples differs somewhat from that commonly employed. It is adopted
substantially from the article of Professor Wm. Arnold Stevens, ‘* On
the Substantive Use of the Greek Participle’’ in 7.A.P.A. 1872. The
Adjective Participle corresponds nearly to the Attributive Participle

164 THE MOODS.

as treated in G. and HA., the Adverbial Participle to the Circum-
stantial Participle, and the Substantive Participle to the Supplementary
Participle.

Rem. 2. Respecting the use of the negatives uy and ov with partici-
ples, see 485.

THE ADJECTIVE PARTICIPLE.

420. The Adjective Participle limits its subject directly
and exclusively. It attributes the action which it denotes
to the subject as a quality or characteristic, or assigns the
subject to the class marked by that action. HA. 965; G.
1559.

Acts 10:1, 2; avip 8€ tis év Katoapia évopatt KopvynAuos, éxatovrap-
xys €k o7eipns THS Kadovpevyns “IraduKns, etoeBns Kal pofovpevos
tov Gedy olv TavTi TO oikw adtov, Tomy e€AEnwoovvas woAAGs TO
Aad kat Sedpevos Tod Geod dia mavtTds, now there was a certain man
in Cesarea, Cornelius by name, a centurion of a band called the
Italian band, a devout man and one that feared God with all his house,
who gave much alms to the people and prayed to God alway. The
four participles in this sentence are all Adjective Participles, de-
scribing their subject. This is especially clear in the case of doBov-
pevos, Which is joined by kad to the adjective etoeBys. For other
similar examples see Col. 1:21; Jas. 2:15; see also examples
under the following sections.

421. The Adjective Participle may be used attributively or
predicatively. When used attributively it may be either re-
strictive or explanatory.

422. The Restrictive Attributive Participle. An at-
tributive Adjective Participle may be used to define or
identify its subject, pointing out what person or thing is
meant. It is then equivalent to a restrictive relative clause.

Cf.. 295.

THE ADJECTIVE PARTICIPLE. 165

John 6:50; odrds éorw 6 dptos 6 €k Tov otpavod Katafsaivwy, this is
the bread which cometh down out of heaven.

Jude 17; pyyoOnte tov pyyatwv TOV mpoelpypevwy bro TOV aro-
oToAwy TOU KUpiov Nuav “Incod Xpiorov, remember the words which
have been spoken before by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ.

423. The subject of the Restrictive Attributive Participle is
often omitted. The participle is then an Adjective Participle
used substantively. Such a participle usually has the article,
but not invariably. HA. 966; G. 1560.

Matt. 10:37; 6 piAdv watépa 7 pytepa irép eye ovK Eat pov aétos,
he that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me.

Acts 5:14; mpoceribevto muorevovres TH Kupiw TANOn avdpOv TE Kal
yuvatkar, believers were added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and
women.

Acts 10:35; ddN év marti Over 6 PoBovpevos airov Kat épyalouevos
dixatoovvnv Sextos ait@ éoriv, but in every nation he that feareth
him, and worketh righteousness, is acceptable to him.

Rev. 1:35; paxdpios 6 avaywwokwv Kal ot axovovtes Tovs Adyous THs
mpopyteias Kal TypovvrTes TA Ev avTH yeypappeva, blessed is he that
readeth, and they that hear the words of the prophecy, and keep the
things which are written therein.

424. A noun without the article, or an indefinite pronoun, is
sometimes limited by a participle with the article. The article
in this case does not make the noun strictly definite. The
person or thing referred to is placed within the class charac-
terized by the action denoted by the participle, and the atten-
tion is directed to some one or to certain ones of that class,
who are not, however, more specifically identified. Nearly the
same meaning is expressed by a participle without the article,
or on the other hand by a relative clause limiting an indefinite
substantive. For classical examples of this usage see WM. p.
136; 7 Lepp. 109 f. .

Col. 2:8; Brérere py tis ipas €orat 6 ovdrayayov Sua THs piAogo-
pias, take heed lest there shall be any one that maketh spoil of you

through his philosophy. See also Acts 5:17; 10:41; Gal. 1:7.

166 THE MOODS.

425. A neuter participle with the article is sometimes
equivalent to an abstract noun. It is then limited by a geni-
tive like any other abstract noun. HA. 966, b.; G. 1562.
Phil. 3:8; di rd trepexoy tis yvooews Xpictod “Incod tod Kupiov

pov, because of the excellency [superiority] of the knowledge of Christ

Jesus my Lord. See also the similar use of neuter adjectives in

Rom. 2: 4; -1 Cor. 1: 25; Phil. 4:5; Heb. 6:17. . Wi ppr2eaae-

WT. pp. 234 f.

426. The Explanatory Attributive Participle. An
attributive Adjective Participle may be used to describe a
person or thing already known or identified. It is then
equivalent to an explanatory relative clause. Cf. 295.

2 Tim. 1: 8,9; xara dvvapww Geot, rod cwaavtTos Auas Kai KadécayTos
KAnoe ayia, according to the power of God ; who saved us, and called
us with a holy calling.

1 Thess. 1:10; “Incoty rov pvopevov nuas x THs Opyns THs €pxonerns,
Jesus, which delivereth us from the wrath to come. In this example

pvopevoy is explanatory, épyouevns is restrictive. See also Acts
20:32; Heb: 7:9:

427. An Attributive Participle when used to limit a noun
which has the article, stands in the so-called attributive posi-
tion, 7.e. between the article and the noun, or after an article
following the noun; but when the participle is hmited by an
adverbial phrase, this phrase may stand between the article
and the noun, and the participle without the article follow the
noun. It thus results that all the following orders are possi-
ble:

(1) article, participle, modifier of the participle, noun ;
(2) art., mod., part., noun ;

(3) art., mod., noun, part. ;

(4) art., part., noun, mod. ;

(5) art., noun, art., mod., part. ;

THE ADJECTIVE PARTICIPLE. 167

(6) art., noun, art., part., mod. See Professor Charles Short’s
essay on The Order of Words in Attic Greek Prose, in Yonge’s
English-Greek Lexicon, pp. xlix. f.; A. 464, 8; ALA. 667, a.

Acts 13:32; xai qpels tuas ebayyeAlopeOa tiv mpds Tovs maTépas
erayyeAtav yevouevny, and we bring you good tidings of the promise
made unto the fathers. See also Acts 12:10; 26:4,6; Heb. 2:2;
and especially Rom. 2:27, where 7 €k @vcews axpoBvatia Tov vowov
teAovoa should doubtless be rendered, the uncircumcision which
by nature fulfils the law (cf. v. 14).

428. An Attributive Participle equivalent to a relative
clause, may like a relative clause convey a subsidiary idea of
cause, purpose, condition, or concession (cf. 294, 296 ff., 317
ff.). It then partakes of the nature of both the Adjective
Participle and the Adverbial Participle. Cf. 434.

Rom. 3:5; py adios 6 Oeds 6 emihepwv tiv dpynv, is God unright-
eous, who [because he] visiteth with wrath ?

Matt. 10:39; 6 eipwv thy Wuynv adbrod amoX€oe: aitynv, Kai 6 dzroXe-
cas THv Wuxnv avrov EeveKev Eu“od evtpynoa aityy, he that findeth his
life shall lose it, and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.
See also vss. 37, 40, 41; cf. vss. 38, 42, and Luke 14: 26.

429. The Predicative Adjective Participle. A_parti-
ciple may be used as the predicate of the verb e¢ud or other
copulative verb.

Matt. 3:15; ovtw yap perov éotiv nulv tAnpOoa Tacav diKaLoc ivy,

Sor thus it is becoming for us to fulfil all righteousness.

Gal. 1:22; yynv S€ dyvootipevos TH tpotwrw Tals exkAnoias THs

*Tovdaias, and I was unknown by face unto the churches of Judea.
Rev. 1:18; xat €yevounv vexpos kat idov Cav eipi eis Tos ai@vas Tov

aiwvwy, and I became dead, and behold, I am alive for evermore.

430. The Predicative Participle always stands in the so-
called predicative position, i.e. not in attributive position,
which is between the article and its noun or after an article
following the noun. Cf. 427.

168 THE MOODS.

431. Under the head of the Predicative Participle belong
those Present and Perfect Participles which, with the Present,
Imperfect, and Future of the verb, form periphrastic Presents,
Imperfects, Perfects, Pluperfects, Futures, and Future Perfects.
Cf. 20, 34, 71, 84, 91,97; G.MT. 45, 830, 831; B. pp. 308-318;
S. pp. 131 ff. See Rev.1:18; Matt. 27:33; Mark 2:18; Luke
1:21; 13:10; Jas.5:15; 2 Cor. 9:3; Luke 2:26; John 13:5;
Matt. 18:18.

432. To the Greek mind there was doubtless a distinction
of thought between the participle which retained its adjective
force and its distinctness from the copula, and that which
was so joined with the copula as to be felt as an element
of a compound tense-form. This distinction can usually be
perceived by us; yet in the nature of the case there will
occur instances which it will be difficult to assign with cer-
tainty to one class or the other. Since, moreover, an Adjec-
tive Participle used substantively without the article may
stand in the predicate, this gives rise to a third possibility.
A participle without the article standing in the predicate is
therefore capable of three explanations :

(a) It may be an Attributive Participle used substantively.
So probably

Mark 10:22; jv yap éxwv xtypata roAXa, for he was one that had
great possessions. See also John 18: 30.

(5) It may be a Predicative Participle retaining its adjec-
tive force. So probably the examples under 429, especially
Gal. 1; 22.

Luke 5:17; xat éyévero év ud Tov Huep@v Kal avros qv didacKur,
and it came to pass on one of those days that he was teaching.

THE ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE. 169

433. An Adjective Participle used substantively with the
article may of course occur as a predicate with a copula. This,
however, is not properly a Predicative Participle. The presence
of the article makes its use as a noun easily evident. The
participle without the article may be as really substantive
(482, a), but is not so easily distinguished as such.

Luke 7:19; ov ef 6 €pxopevos; art thou he that cometh? See also
Luke 16:15; 22:28.

THE ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE.

434. The Adverbial Participle logically modifies some
other verb of the sentence in which it stands, being equiva-
lent to an adverbial phrase or clause denoting time, condi-
tion, concession, cause, purpose, means, manner, or attend-
ant circumstance. HA. 969; G. 1563. Thus we find:

435. The Adverbial Participle of Time, equivalent to
a temporal clause.

Luke 24:36; radra d€ aitav AaAoWTwv aitos EoTH ev pEeTw aiTOY,
and as they spake these things, he himself stood in the midst of them.
John 16:8; Kai €AOwv exeivos eAéeyEer Tov Koopov, and he, when he is

come, will convict the world.

-436. The Adverbial Participle of Condition, equiva-
lent to a conditional clause.

Heb. 2:3; mis qpets expevéoucba tyrLtKavtns aeAnoavres TwTypias,
how shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation ?

1 Tim. 4:4; 6re wav xtiopa Oeod Kadov, Kai ovdey ardBAnTov pera
eixapiotias AapBavopevov, for every creature of God is good, and
nothing is to be rejected, if it be received with thanksgiving. See also
I Cor. 11:29; Gal. 6:9.

170 THE MOODS.

437. The Adverbial Participle of Concession, equiva-
lent to a concessive clause. The concessive force is some-
times emphasized by prefixing xaimep or kai ye to the
participle.

Acts 13:28; Kat pndepiav airiay Oavarov evpovtes ytnoavto LeAGarov
dvaipeOnvar avtov, and though they found no cause of death in him,
yet asked they of Pilate that he should be slain.

Heb. 5:8; xairep Ov vies, euabev ad dv éxabev thy ixaxony, though
he was a Son, yet he learned obedience by the things which he suffered.
See also Matt. 14:9; Mark 4:31; Acts 17: 27.

438. A concessive participle refers to a fact which is
unfavorable to the occurrence of the event denoted by the
principal verb. Cf. 278. It should be distinguished from the
participle which is merely antithetical. A participle denoting
accompanying circumstance, or even condition or cause, may
be antithetical. See 1 Cor. 4:12, doxdwevor dvexoueba ; 2 Cor.
S29 Gali2= 3:

439. The Adverbial Participle of Cause, equivalent
to a causal clause.

Col. 1:3, 4; ebxapiorodpev TO Ged . . . axovoavtes Ti riaTW pov ev
Xpicte “Inaov, we give thanks to God . . . having heard (because

we have heard) of your faith in Christ Jesus.

1 Tim. 4:8; 9 8€ edoéBera rpds ravta operAmos eoriv, erayyediav
éxovoa Cons THs viv Kai THS pmeAAOVonS, but godliness is profitable
Jor all things, having promise of the life which now is, and of that which
is to come. See also Matt. 2:3, 10; Acts 9: 26.

440. ‘Os prefixed to a Participle of Cause implies that the
action denoted by the participle is supposed, asserted, or pro-
fessed by some one, usually the subject of the principal verb,
to be the cause of the action of the principal verb. The
speaker does not say whether the supposed or alleged cause
actually exists. HA. 978; G. 1574.

THE ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE. 171

1 Cor. 4:18; ws py epXopmevov S€ pov mpds tpuas epvowOynoav tives,
but some are puffed up, as though I were not coming to you, i.e. be-
cause (as they suppose) I am not coming. See also Acts 23:15,
Bea 2005 28:19; 1 Pet. 4: 12.

441. The origin of this idiom is probably in a clause of manner con-
sisting of ws and a finite verb, the latter modified by a Participle of Cause.
Thus xoddfers we Ws kaxowoijoavra, you punish me as having done evil, i.e.
you punish me because, as you allege, I have done evil, may have its
origin in such a sentence as xoddfers we Ws KoNd fers TLva KaKoTOLnoArTaA, YOU
punish me, as you punish one who has (or because he has) done evil. Yet
it is not to be supposed that the Greek any more than the English required
the supplying of a finite verb after ws. Such phrases in classical Greek
or in the New Testament are, as they stand and without the addition of
other words, expressions of cause, the use of ws indicating that the phrase
describes the opinion or assertion of the subject of the sentence rather
than of the speaker.

442. The Adverbial Participle of Purpose, equivalent
to a final clause. This is usually, but not invariably, in
the Future tense.

Acts 8:27; [os] eAnAvOa zpooxvvyjcwv eis “IepovoaAnp, who had come
to Jerusalem to worship.
Acts 3:26; améoreiAev avrov evAoyotvTa tyas, he sent him to bless you.

443. The Adverbial Participle of Means. This can-
not usually be resolved into a clause.
Matt. 6:27; ris d¢ €& ipdv pepysvdv Sivatac mpoobeivac eri THv

HAtKiay avtod mHXvV Eva, and which of you by being anxious can
add one cubit unto his stature? See also Acts 16:16; Heb. 2:18.

444. The Adverbial Participle of Manner, describing
the manner in which the action denoted by the verb is
done.

Acts 2:13; érepou d€ duayAevalovtes €Aeyov, but others mocking said.
See also Luke 19: 48.

YZ THE MOODS.

445. The manner of an action is frequently expressed by
ws With the participle.

Mark 1:22: qv yap didacxwv avrovs ws eEovotavy éxwv Kal ovx Ws ot
ypapparets, for he taught them as one having authority, and not as the
scribes.

1 Cor. 9:26; ovTws ruKTEevw ws ovK dépa d€épwv, so fight I as not beat-
ing the air.

2 Cor. 5:20; tr%p Xpicrod ovy mpecBevouev ws Tod Geod rapaxadorv-
tos Ot nuav, we are ambassadors therefore on behalf of Christ, as
though God were intreating by us.

446. When us with the participle is used to express manner, the parti-
ciple itself may be either an Adjective Participle used substantively or an
Adverbial Participle of Manner. The origin of such expressions is doubt-
less, in either case, in a clause of manner consisting of ws and a finite verb
similar to the principal verb, the participle being either the subject of
such a verb or an adverbial (or other) limitation of it. Thus dddoKe ws
éxwv éfovciay is equivalent to diddoKer ws Exwv eLovelay didaoKe, he teaches
as one having authority teaches, or dddoKe ws Tis diddoKer Exwv eLovelay, he
teaches as one teaches having authority. Yet in neither case is it to be
supposed that the Greek, any more than the English, required the sup-
plying of a finite verb after ws. The phrase as it stood was an expres-
sion of manner. That the participle, however, was in some cases still
felt as a substantive (Adjective Participle used substantively) seems
probable from its being used correlatively with an adjective or noun and
from the occasional use of the participle with the article. See Mark 1: 22
above; also 1 Cor. 7:25; 2 Cor. 6:9, 10; 1 Pet. 2:16; and cf. Mark
6:34; Luke 22:26, 27. That this is not always the case, but that the
participle itself is sometimes adverbial is evident from such cases as 2 Cor,
5:20 (see above, 445).

447. The participle expressing manner or means often
denotes the same action as that of the principal verb, deserib-
ing it from a different point of view. In this ease the participle
is as respects its tense a (Present or Aorist) Participle of
Identical Action (ef. 120, 189), while as respects its modal
function it is a participle of manner or means.

THE ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE. 173

Acts 5:30; 6 Oeds r&v marépwv qpav yyepev “Inoodty, ov tpeis
duexeipioagGe Kpeudoavres emi EvAov, the God of our fathers raised
up Jesus, whom ye slew by hanging him on a tree. See also Acts
Ge22= 10733); 1 Dim, 5): 21.

448. In quotations from the Old Testament a participle is
sometimes placed before a personal form of the same verb.
The idiom arises from an imitation of the Hebrew construction
with the Infinitive Absolute. The force of the participle is
in general intensive. Hr. 28, 3, a; B. pp. 313 £.; WM. pp.
445 f.; WT. pp. 354 f.

Heb. 6:14; evAoyav evAoynow ce Kai TANOivwov TANOvVG oe, blessing
I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee.

449. The Adverbial Participle of Attendant Circum-
stance.

Mark 16:20; éxetvor d&€ e&eAOovres exnpvéay mavtaxov, Tov Kupiov
guvepyouvtos Kai Tov Adyov BeBatotvros, and they went forth and
preached everywhere, the Lord working with them and confirming the
word.

Luke 4:15; kai avros edidacxev év tals cvvaywyats avtov, dogalo-
pevos Uro tavTwv, and he taught in their synagogues, being glorified
of all.

Acts 15:22; rore éd0€€ trois drooroAos Kai Tois mpeaBuréepos . . .
exArcapevovs avdpas €€ avtav mépipae eis Avtidyevay, then it seemed
good to the apostles and the elders . . . to choose men out of their com-
pany and send them to Antioch.

Acts 18:18; 6 8@ TatAos . . . e&€rAer eis THv Supiav, kai ov ata
IIpioxtAXa Kai “AxvAas, Ketpapevos ev Kevxpeats tiv xepadnv, and
Paul . . . sailed thence for Syria, and with him Priscilla and Aquila ;

having shorn his head in Cenchree.
2 Tim. 4:11; Mapxov avadAaBov aye pera ceavtov, take Mark and
bring him with thee. See also Luke 5:7; 11:7.

450. The term ‘attendant’ as used above does not define the tem-
poral relation of the participle to the verb, but the logical relation. The
action of a Participle of Attendant Circumstance may precede the action

174 THE MOODS.

of the principal verb, accompany it, or even follow it. But as respects
logical relation, it is presented merely as an accompaniment of the action
of the verb. It does not, e.g., define the time or the cause, or the means
of the action of the principal verb, but simply prefixes or adds an asso-
ciated fact or conception. It is thus often equivalent to a codrdinate verb
with xai. Though grammatically not an independent element of the
sentence, the participle in such cases becomes in thought assertive,
hortatory, optative, imperative, etc., according to the function of the
principal verb.

The position of the Participle of Attendant Circumstance with refer-
ence to the verb is not determined by any fixed rules, but by the order
of the writer’s thought, this being in turn governed of course to a certain
extent by the order of the events. If the action of the participle is ante-
cedent to that of the verb, the participle most commonly precedes the verb,
but not invariably. Such a participle is usually in the Aorist tense (154),
but occasionally in the Present (127). If the action of the participle is
simultaneous with that of the verb, it may either precede or follow the
verb, more frequently the latter. It is of course in the Present tense
(119). If the action of the participle is subsequent to that of the princi-
pal verb, it almost invariably follows the verh, the tense of the participle
being determined by the conception of the action as respects its progress.
The instances of this last-named class are not frequent in the New Testa-
ment and are perhaps due to Aramaic influence. Cf. 119, Rem.; 146.

451. The various relations of time, cause, manner, etc., being
not expressed, but implied by the participle, cases arise in
which it is impossible to assign the participle unquestionably
to any one of the above heads. Indeed, more than one of these
relations may be implied by the same participle.

452. Tue GenitivE AgpsoLute. An Adverbial Participle
may stand in agreement with a noun or pronoun in the geni-
tive without grammatical dependence upon any other part of
the sentence, the two constituting a genitive absolute phrase
and expressing any of the adverbial relations enumerated in
435-449. HA. 970, 971; G. 1568.

Rom. 9:1; dAnbeav A€yw ev Xprord, ov Wevdouat, cvvpaptupovons
poe THS TvvEldnoEws pov ev mvEvpaT ayiw, I say the truth in Christ,

T lie not, my conscience bearing witness with me in the Holy Ghost.

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Syntax of the moods and tenses in New Testament Greek"

See other formats