Km^";^■' '- 
 
pitilolosical Seminarg l:ibirairg 
 
 THE GIFT OF 
 
 Henrg W. Sage 
 
 OF ITHACA. 
 
 Cinornetl 1i!lttiti«i'sitg 
 
Cornell University Library 
 PA 813.B98 1873 
 
 3 1924 021 607 159 
 

 ™) 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/cletails/cu31924021607159 
 
A GRAMMAR OF m^Y TESTAMENT GREEK. 
 
' MeLANCTHOKIS hoc DICTITM EST: SORIFTQRAM NOK POBBB IKTBLLXOI THBOLOGIC K, 
 HIGI ANTBA SIT IHTELLBCTUM' GRAMMATICS," 
 
GRAMMAR 
 
 NEW TESTAMENT GREEK. 
 
 B/ 
 
 ALEXANDER BUTTMANN. 
 
 AUTHORIZED TRANSLATION, 
 WITH NUMKKOUS ADDITIONS AKD COKEECTIONS BY THE AUTHOR. 
 
 ^ 
 
 WARREN F. DRAPER, PUBLISHER. 
 
 mAIir STREET. 
 
 1880. 
 
Entered according to Act of I'ongress, in the year 1873. by 
 
 WAEREN ^ DRAPER, 
 !n the OflSce of the Librarian of Congress at Washington, 
 
 AWDOVER: PRINTED BY WARRKS P. DRAl'BB. 
 
TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE. 
 
 It is to be hoped that the reproduction of the following work ia 
 English will not be regarded as a superfluous labor. The day has gone 
 by, indeed, when the extravagant maxim could find acceptance, "The 
 better grammarian, the worse logician and theologian ; " but the some- 
 what indiscriminate depreciation of the study of the dead languages at 
 the present day is not without injurious influence upon those who are 
 preparing themselves to be expounders of the Divine Word. Even in 
 that land which is reputed to be the home of philological studies, the 
 prince of New Testament expositors has recently said : " We theo- 
 logians are still far too deficient in a comprehensive and positive 
 knowledge of Greek Grammar."^ The sense of such a deficiency 
 which the general progress of hnguistic science must sooner or later 
 awaken, and especially the recognition (which the growing tendency to 
 break away from traditional opinions will force upon theologians) 
 of the need of taking a new inventory of the biblical data, as preliminary 
 to a revision of the scientific statements of the Christian faith, will 
 eventually secure a welcome for works like the present. 
 
 Its author is the youngest son of the late Philip Buttmann, whose 
 Grammars, which have been in use now for more than eighty years, 
 have rendered the name familiar wherever Greek is studied. After 
 completing his training at the universities of Berlin and Bonn, he 
 became, in 1837, a teacher in the gymnasium at Potsdam, where, by 
 successive promotions, he attained, in 1854, to the rank of Professor. 
 But in the same year he resigned his office, in order to secure the 
 leisure needed for his hterary labors ; and he has lived since in retire- 
 ment, except that he has held the position of " Schubath," to which the 
 city appointed him in 1864. 
 
 Intrusted by the other members of the family with the care of his 
 
 father's grammatical works, he has edited at least eight editions of the 
 
 so-called Intermediate Grammar (which in its eighteenth edition was 
 
 translated into English by the late Dr. Edward Eobinson), and seven 
 
 1 Meyer's Commentary on the Ep. to the Romans (5th ed.). Pref. p. yii note. 
 
vi TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE. 
 
 editions of the School Grammar. Under his hand these works have 
 undergone essential changes, especially in the syntax, and have been so 
 judiciously adapted to the steady progress ia grammatical science, as 
 still (forty-four years after the death of theii- ai/thor) to be able to 
 maintain themselves in many German sc iools and universities against 
 the competition of recent Grammars, like those of Curtius and 
 Kriiger. 
 
 Besides many essays upon grammatical, critical, and exegetical topics, 
 which Professor Buttmann has prepared from time to time for the 
 Studien und Kritiken, and other periodicals, he published, in 1856, a 
 book on " German Names of Places." But his chief work, and that 
 especially for the preparation of which he withdrew from the labor of 
 teaching, is his N. T. Grammar. This is confessedly the most important 
 treatise on the subject which has appeared since Winer's. The author 
 makes generous acknowledgments of indebtedness to Winer ; but a 
 slight examination of the book will convince the reader that it has a 
 valid claim to be regarded as an original work. In fact, the general 
 attitude and drift of the two writers differ perceptibly. While Winer 
 — owing, doubtless, to the lax views respecting the N. T. language 
 which prevailed when he began to, write — seems loath to recognize 
 incipient departures from classic usage. Prof. Buttmann, on the other 
 hand, is quick to concede and to trace out the general tendency of the 
 language to degenerate from the classic standard, is inclined to give 
 greater prominence than Winer to the influence of the Septujigint, and 
 even to detect traces of the Latin in the syntax of the N. T. Hence 
 it comes to pass that respecting several details, such as the unemphatic 
 use of avTO's in the Nom. (p. 107), the use of periphrases for the Geni- 
 tive (p. 156), of the Indie. Pres. for the Subjunc. in deliberative 
 questions (p. 208 sq.), etc., his views vary materially from those of his 
 predecessor. On other and broader topics, too, such as the use of the 
 Art. (cf. pp. 90, 93), the apparently indiscriminate employment of Aor. 
 and Perf. (p. 197), the so-called Gnomic Aor. (pp. 201 sqq.), the use 
 and force of the particle Iva (pp. 235 sqq.) and of the Infin. with rov 
 (pp. 266 sqq.), his clear and thorough discussions will be read with 
 interest ; while liis full exhibition of grammatical forms,' especially those 
 of the verb, will prove to be specially helpful. And as his discussion of 
 the principles of the N. T. language, both supplementing and qualifying, 
 as it does, the views of Winer, will interest the student of grammar ; 
 so his extended application of these principles in elucidating obscure 
 
 1 Cf. Tischendorf's commendatory rema ik in his N. T. ed. Sept. Crit. Maj 
 Prolegg. p. Ix. 
 
TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE. vii 
 
 passages will be welcomed by those who care for little more than the 
 results of exegesis. 
 
 The form which the author thought best to give his treatise, viz. that 
 of an Appendix to Ph. Buttmann's Griechische Grammatik (the work 
 which Dr. Robinson translated), has doubtless retarded its circulation.^ 
 By adopting that form, he was enabled, while devoting, at the most, 
 but a passing remark to those points which the language of the N. T. 
 has in common with classic Greek, to exhibit what is peculiar to the 
 N. T. in a more sharp and consecutive treatment than would have been 
 possible otherwise. But the scientific precision of the plan is counter- 
 balanced, in the result, by the practical inconveniences to which those 
 students are subjected who are not familiar with the . grammatical 
 method of Buttmann. It seemed desirable to the translator, therefore, 
 while, on the one hand, retaining as far as possible the author's exclusive 
 treatment of his department, on the other hand, to adapt the work to 
 the easy use of students drilled in other grammatical text-books. In 
 order to accomplish this twofold object, I have introduced into the trans- 
 lation so much only from Buttmann's classical Grammar as was neces- 
 sary, in every case, to render the matter under discussion intelligible to 
 the student without recourse to that work ; and, on the other hand, I 
 have added to the references to that Grammar (which is designated by 
 the letter B.) running references to the other classical Grammars most 
 in use in this country and in Great Britain, viz. to those of Hadley, 
 Crosby, Donaldson, Jelf. These Grammars, as well as Buttmann's, 
 are referred to by sections,^ and designated respectively by the initials 
 H., C, D., J. 
 
 Owing to diversity in the arrangement and treatment of topics, these 
 references will not be found to be all equally pertinent. But in making 
 them I have been governed by the conviction that a reference to a 
 familiar work, and one at hand, is more serviceable, especially to a be- 
 ginner, than a reference, though better in itself, to a work less accessible 
 or less easily understood. 
 
 In addition to the Grammars already named, references have been 
 given to Prof. Goodwin's Syntax of Moods and Tenses, to Winer's 
 
 1 Since the arrangements for this translation were completed with Prof. Butt- 
 mann and his publisher, large use of the original has been made in the notes of 
 Prof. Moulton's excellent translation of the Sixlh edition of "Winers N. T. Gram- 
 mar. But it is believed that those who obtain their knowledge of it through that 
 medium can hardly fail to desire to possess the entire work in English. 
 
 2 Occasionally it has been convenient to refer to Buttmann's Classical Grammar 
 by pages. In that case the page given is that of Dr. Robinson's translation of ths 
 eighteenth German edition, published in 1851, by Harper and Brothers, N. Y. 
 
viii TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE. 
 
 N. T. Grammar, and occasionally to Prof. Short's Essay on the Order 
 of "Words in Attic Greek Prose.^ These works are represented by G., 
 W., and S. respectively. The references to Winer are to the pages of 
 the authorized translation of the Seventh German edition, and are fol- 
 lowed in each case by the number of the corresponding page in the 
 original, inclosed within a parenthesis. The references to the " Lehrge- 
 baude " of Gesenius have been supplemented, so far as possible, by 
 references to the corresponding matter in his Hebrew Grammar. The 
 general references to Pape and to Walil have, for the most part, been 
 retained. But the sixth edition of Liddell and Scott will ordinarily 
 serve the student quite as well as the former ; and the revised edition 
 of Dr. Eobinson's N. T. Lexicon, or, still better, Prof. Grimm's edition 
 of WUke's Clavis '' may be substituted for the latter. 
 
 The matter incorporated from Buttmann's classical Grammar, and 
 the references to the other grammatical works above mentioned, are 
 generally introduced without any distinctive mark ; but all other addi- 
 tions made by me are carefully distinguished from the original by square 
 brackets. 
 
 With the exception of the slight modification of the plan of the work 
 which has been already described, and the omission of a paragraph from 
 the author's Preface which this modification rendered irrelevant, the 
 translation reproduces the original in full and without change. But 
 Prof. Buttmann has very kindly furnished me with two hundred and 
 sixty-one manuscript additions and corrections for this edition — many 
 of them of considerable length and much importance. In weaving 
 them into the text, I have taken paina not to obscui-e the author's change 
 of opinion, when any has occurred. 
 
 The Greek text of the N. T. generally adopted by the author is that 
 of Lachmann's larger edition ; see the remarks on this subject at the 
 close of the Introduction, p. 4. In the same place, the reader wiU 
 discover that the printing of this book was begun nearly two years ago. 
 But the delay is the less regretted, because in the interim the eighth 
 editioa of Tischendorf's text and the Greek Testament of Tregelles 
 have both been completed, so that in passages where allusion is made 
 
 1 Prefixed to Dr. Drisler's edition of Yonge's English-Greek Lexicon. N. Y. 
 Harper and Brothers. 1870. 
 
 '■^ The translation of Prof. Grimm's Lexicon which was promised in the Bib- 
 liotheca Sacra for October, 1864, has been lying in manuscript now for many 
 months. The protracted work of verifying the references is drawing towards a 
 close, and the book will be published as soon as leisure can be found for the edi 
 torial labor requisite to adapt it to the needs of English-speaking students. 
 
TRANSLA'.rOE'S PREFACE. ix 
 
 to variation in the text, the reading adopted by both these editors has 
 been indicated. To accomplish this at the least expense of alteration 
 in the plates, the ordinary abbreviations Tdf. and Treg. have occasion- 
 ally been superseded by the simple T. and Tr. respectively. For the 
 same reason the codex Sinaiticus has been referred to by cod. Sin., Sin., 
 and N indifferently. 
 
 The Biblical references have all been carefully verified. The N. T. 
 Index has been enlarged so as to include all the passages from the 
 N. T. referred to in the Grammar; and a separate index has been 
 added, comprising the passages cited from the Septuagint. For the 
 labor which these improvements involved, as well as for valuable 
 assistance in correcting the press, my grateful acknowledgments are 
 due to my friend Rev. Geo. B. Jewett, D.D. 
 
 The other indexes have been materially augmented ; the cross- 
 references have been multiplied; chapter and verse added to many of 
 the fragmentary quotations from the N. T. ; the pagination of the 
 German original has been given in the margin ; and at the end of the 
 book a Glossary of technical terms encountered more or less frequently 
 in commentaries and grammatical works has been added for the con- 
 venience of studeuts. 
 
 Finally, I would reiterate the closing words of the author's Preface, 
 in reliance upon the promise made to those who shall agree as touching 
 what they ask. 
 
 J. H. TIIAYER. 
 
 Theological Seminaet, Aitdovbe, Mass. 
 August. 1878. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 As long ago as the appearance of the nineteenth edition of my 
 father's Greek Grammar, I designed to give, as an Appendix for the 
 [iractical purposes of schools, a summary of the grammatical usage of 
 the N. T. in so far as it differs from ordinary usage, in order subse- 
 quently to follow it with a copious and scientific exposition of the 
 entire department. To this twofold undertaking I was led by the per- 
 suasion that Winer's Grammar is, on the one hand, too comprehensive 
 and learned for school use ; and that on the other hand, for those who 
 have been taught according to the plan of Buttmann's Grammar, it pre- 
 pares manifold difficulties by its arrangement and whole method of 
 treatment, and requires for its correct understanding almost an inde- 
 pendent training of its own. But my work also grew under my hands. 
 The further I entered upon my theme, the more I perceived that such 
 a summary as I had originally designed could only get a sure founda- 
 tion and make claim to scientific worth in case the entire department 
 had previously been explored as far as possible in all directions, and 
 received a sustained exposition ; and that, at any rate, it is a more 
 correct and safe procedure to let a practical outline follow a larger work, 
 executed on scientific principles, than the reverse. Thus arose this 
 Grammar. That I venture to present it to the learned pubhc in face 
 of the many and undisputed excellences of Winer's, does not arise from 
 the mistaken and self-complacent opinion that the work of my respected 
 , predecessor ought to be supplanted by a new one. On the contrary, it 
 is my firm persuasion that Winer's work will long continue to maintain 
 its honorable position in philological as well as theological science ; and 
 ' it is my highest wish that my work may only succeed in winning for 
 itself a modest place in this department of literature behind, or by the 
 ■side of, its predecessDr and master. 
 
 Winer's Grammar originated at a time when modern pliilological 
 
 ■criticism, especially as applied by Lachmann and Tischendorf, had not 
 
 yet given to the text of the N. T. that form which it now has in most 
 
 ■ of the editions used in schools and universities. It is true, the recent 
 
PREFACE. xi 
 
 revisions of the text remained by no means unnoticed by Winer. 
 On the contrary, the indefatigable labors of "the man in this particular 
 are shown by the circumstance that almost every new edition of his 
 Grammar underwent the most important and radical alterations, in order 
 to conform it to the stage of criticism at the time. But the work as a 
 whole acquired by these frequent changes a somewhat ragged look, and 
 a form often extremely inconvenient for practical use, especially for 
 citation. Since, too, hardly any performance within his department 
 escaped the notice of this thorough investigator, inasmuch as he took 
 notice of all publications in any way relating to it, — as well those of spe- 
 cifically theological science as of philological, both oriental and classical, — 
 and wrought the acquired results into his work, he imparted to it by 
 degrees such a character that it may be regarded almost as a grammati- 
 cally arranged Commentary on the N. T. ; a commentary which, by its 
 copious wealth and its searching treatment of many particular passages, 
 is, and will remain, indispensable to every member of the theological 
 profession. But on the other hand it is not to be denied, that by the 
 accumulation (often unlimited) of learned material the clear grammati- 
 cal outlook was frequently cut off. Furthermore, as the work did not 
 adopt any given system of classical Greek grammar, but traversed anew, 
 in the syntax at least, the entire realm of grammatical phenomena, 
 much was of necessity given which strictly belonged to the general 
 grammar, or at least might have been assumed as sufficiently well-known 
 already. The inevitable consequence of this was, that for an unprac- 
 tised eye what is distinctive and peculiar in N. T. usage is not discrimi- 
 nated sharply enough from what, as being common property to all who 
 spoke and wi-ote Greek, pertains to Greek grammar in general. 
 
 Taking, then, the critical investigations of the recent editors as my 
 basis, and adopting the philological views which underlie Buttmann's 
 Greek Grammar, particularly the nineteenth and following editions 
 edited by me, I have given my N. T. Grammar the form of an Appendix 
 to that work. In this way the first part of my book, which relates to 
 Forms and Inflection, has acquired, it must be confessed, a somewhat 
 fragmentary aspect, as the honored reviewer in Zarncke's literary 
 " Centralblatt " correctly remarks. Since, however, the deviations, in 
 the matter of Forms, of the language of the N. T. vn-iters, (with the 
 exception, perhaps, of the text of the Apocalypse as established by 
 modern criticism) from the current literary language, especially the 
 then prevalent Koivrj, so-called, are by no means very important, a 
 work undertaking to bring out only what is distinctive in the N. T. 
 language cannot assume any other shape ; — just as the same description 
 
Xii PREFACE. 
 
 holds true of ttat portion of Winer's Grammar also which treats of 
 Forms. 
 
 As respects Syntax the case is different. Here what is characteristic 
 and peculiar is incomparably more marked, in consequence of the nature 
 of the contents of the N. T. books on the one hand, and of many foreign 
 influences on the other. That the mental impulse given by the new doc- 
 trine must produce a noticeable effect upon language, does not need to 
 be shown at length. Of the foreign influences which impart to the 
 Greek of the N. T. that complexion which distinguishes it so noticeably 
 from the classic tongue, there are in particular four: First, the influence 
 of the linguistic spirit of the Orient, especially of the O. T. Hebrew 
 and of the Aramaic of the Palestinian Jews of that day (Hebraisms) ; 
 Secondly (and closely connected with this), the influence of the Greek 
 translation of the Bible by the Seventy interpreters, generally diffused 
 as it was among the Jews of that region and so much in use (the Sep- 
 tuagint) ; Thirdly, the iofluence commg from the popular language 
 prevalent in all portions of the Greek world of that day, as distinguished 
 from the literary diction of the repositories of classic Greek literature 
 and culture (the Common or Colloquial language) ; Fourthly, the in- 
 fluence of the Latin language upon the later Greek or so-called koiv-^ 
 (Latinisms). 
 
 4r ^ Tf TT ^ ^ 
 
 A complete exhibition of the linguistic peculiarities of the N. T. 
 would comprise a discrimination between the styles peculiar to the 
 different N. T. authors. For it is not to be overlooked, that (leaving the 
 Apocalypse aside) there exists a difference not only between the historic 
 writings and the epistolary, but also within these main divisions, between 
 the synoptists and John ; between the Pauline and the Catholic epistles ; - 
 between individual Evangelists ; in fact, between the several writings 
 of one and the same author ; — an assertion which is true, for example, 
 of the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts. A detailed exposition of 
 these differences, however, would carry us quite too far, and lies beyond 
 the limits of this Grammar, which is primarily concerned only with 
 grouping as far as possible all characteristics together, and so taking a 
 combined view of the N. T. diction and style. The compass of the 
 several writkigs, also, is too small to afford a basis for separate exposi- 
 tions of the various pecuharities in language ; and an author must be 
 satisfied to treat this subject in a fragmentary way as opportunity offers. 
 Moreover, a minute elaboration of this topic falls rather to the depart- 
 ment of N. T. stylistics, or oi exegesis, whose business it is to examine 
 and elucidate the individual writings on all sides. The reader, diere- 
 
fr£jFACS> xiii 
 
 fore, may be the more readily referred to these exegetical works, as 
 more thorough treatment and careful investigation have already been 
 bestowed upon the subject by the recent commentators ;^ and in conse- 
 queflce of the critical renovation of the text will continue to be given 
 it in the future. Whatever grammatical results, however, could already 
 be mentioned, I have carefully endeavored to note : by speaking of 
 them in their place as special peculiarities, and by giving as complete a 
 list of them as possible in the Index under the head of the respective 
 N. T. authors. The same has been done in reference to the four aspects 
 of the language previously mentioned, with regard to which the Index 
 may be consulted under the topics, Hebraisms, Septuagint, Language 
 (popular and later Greek), Latinisms. 
 
 On two other points it seems to me necessary to say a word in this 
 place, viz. the proper attitude and relations of New Testament Grammar 
 to Exegesis and to Lexicography. The contents of the N. T., especially 
 of the Epistles, are so exceptional both as respects difficulty and impor- 
 tance, and the compass of the several books is so small, that in the 
 domain of interpretation the most diverse results could not faU to be 
 brought to light. Evidence of this is afforded by the extremely numer- 
 ous and voluminous exegetical writings, the like of which in amount can 
 probably be shown by no literary productions of ancient or modem 
 times. Owing to the variety of religious parties and theological sects, 
 which from the first centuries down have been so numerous and change- 
 ful, as weU as in consequence of the restricted views or one-sided parti- 
 zanship ot£ individuals, the diversity of £xegetical principles is very 
 considerable ; — in fact there are for many passages almost as many 
 different interpretations as interpreters (see ex. gr. Winer on Gal. iii. 
 20). And to what assaults from the same quarter and for the same 
 reasons the sacred text itself has been exposed from the very earliest 
 times, the collection of various readings affords many a striking proof ; 
 (see ex. gr. 1 Tim. iii. 16 ; 1 John v. 7 ; 1 Cor. xv. 51, etc.). Nowhere, 
 however, do the opinions of interpreters diverge more widely than where 
 a knowledge of grammatical principles was wanting, and consequently 
 the caprice of the private understanding had free course, so that often 
 N. T. Grammar was made responsible for the strangest hypotheses and 
 chimeras. Although the knowledge of grammar is not the only, still 
 
 1 Among many others I may mention the commentaries of Bleek on the Episile 
 to the Hebrews, of Liicke and Tholuck on John, of Fritzsche on the first two 
 Gospels, of the same author and of Ruckert and Reiche on the Epistles to the 
 Romans and the Corinthians, of de Wette and Meyer on all t te books of the N. T 
 the numerous N. T. Introductions, etc. 
 
XIV 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 it is the primary and the main, foundation of interpretation ; at any 
 rate, it is a check to subjective caprice and inordinate excesses. With- 
 out this foundation there can be no talk about certainty in explaining 
 the Scriptures ; for we possess no inspired interpretation. Linguistic 
 products, even the most sacred, are like all others, subject to the restraint 
 of linguistic laws, which, be they ever so special, are nevertheless Laws, 
 whj.ch every author spontaneously and unconsciously obeys. To establish 
 such definite linguistic laws, together with the just as definitely-limited 
 exceptions (so far forth as the latter either rest upon analogies in ordi- 
 nary usage, or at least group themselves together under a distinctly 
 traceable special analogy), and to combine all these phenomena into 
 one systematic whole, is the business of a special grammar. 
 
 Many passages of Scripture, however, are of such a kind that, owing 
 to the limited extent of the several books, they are destitute of any 
 other analogy. These, to be sure, must then be explained from them- 
 selves, from the context and the tenor of Scripture, or by the aid of 
 ancient tradition (which must have for us the greater authority the 
 nearer it stands to the time of composition of the Scriptures), in a word, 
 historically rather than grammatically. Such cases must be left prin- 
 cipally to Exegesis. If Grammar notices them, it does so rather inci- 
 dentally, and for the sake of completeness ; their value to Grammar 
 can only be determined by their relation to analogies already estab- 
 lished. For she can adopt, and work up as solid portions of the system 
 she would found, only those results of Hermeneutics which rest upon 
 analogies, if she will not run the risk of being compelled to puU to 
 pieces to-morrow what she to-day perhaps has laboriously built up, and 
 to cast away as useless material what she has over-hastily made the 
 corner piUar of her structure. On the other hand, it would be just as 
 erroneous, if she in haughty self-sufficiency should wish utterly to 
 seclude herself from the results of Hermeneutics. Both sciences must 
 continually go hand in hand. As Hermeneutics has in Grammar her 
 constant monitor and the touchstone of her results, so Grammar receives 
 from the discreet critico-historical inquiry of Exegesis perpetually new 
 enrichment. It is an imscientific, irrational demand, — and one which 
 misjudges man's powers, — that the one science should not begin to act 
 tUl after the other has finished its work ; since, on the contrary, they 
 are hoth at the same time called and commissioned for. the understanding 
 of the Scriptures. By progressive discernment, with the help of Gram 
 mar and under the guidance of critico-historical research, continually to 
 diminish the number of passages which refuse to submit to any linguis- 
 tic analogy (and consequently as to whose meaning commentators 
 
PREFACE. XV 
 
 generally diverge in all directions) is one of the leading and abiding 
 aims of Hermeneutics. 
 
 Further : it is diflBcult to draw a sharp boundary line between Lexi- 
 cography and the explanation of words (Semasiology) on the one hand, 
 and Grammar on the other; since both departments often encroach 
 upon each other, and stand in relations of reciprocity. Indeed, from a 
 scientific point of view every syntactic phenomenon connected with a 
 word ought to be included in syntax, of whatever nature that phenome- 
 non may be : for example, the different significations of a word so far 
 forth as they proceed from a difference of construction, or on the other 
 hand occasion a different construction. But a particular grammar, like 
 that of the N. T., always subserves, in the main, practical necessities ; 
 and it would be obliged to extend its limits far too wide, if in the respect 
 imder consideration it would attain to merely relative completeness even. 
 Here also, therefore, a separation must take place between what can 
 be traced back to defiinite laws and perceptible analogies, and what as 
 an isolated peculiarity can be conveniently left to the dictionaries. It 
 is true, the general lexicons in common use in the schools, as they are 
 all based on classical usage, are not sufficient in many cases for the 
 understanding of the N. T. (compare ex. gr. the words TruTreuav, cXtti- 
 ^eiv, o/xoAoyciv ; the prepositions cv, chs, otto, etc.) ; and accordingly, a 
 great number of special dictionaries have been prepared by scholars, 
 among which may be named those of Schottgen, Schleusner, Wahl, 
 Bretschneider, Wilke, ScMrlitz, etc. Grammar, however, obliged as 
 it is continually to unpose upon itself firm restrictions, cannot possibly 
 include all that is lexically important — unless the fulness of details is 
 to destroy the evident perspicuity of the whole, but must regard its task 
 as completely performed when aU the combinations and constructions 
 occurring in the N. T., especially those relating to cases and verbs, are 
 linguistically accounted for. The possession of a special dictionary, 
 therefore, wiU always be requisite to theologians and every one who 
 deskes to investigate the N. T. writings minutely. 
 
 These are the principles and the most important aims which have 
 guided me in the composition of this work. Whether I have a right to 
 appear before tJie literary public with a book which originated in this 
 way and has been wrought out according to these principles, those must 
 judge who join to linguistic knowledge an unprejudiced view of the 
 great difficulties to be overcome. Whether I hereafter venture to make 
 an abridgment of this work for the use of schools, will depend upon 
 the invitation especially of those gentlemen who have charge of religious 
 instruction in the Gymnasia. 
 
Xvi PliEFACE. 
 
 Tn conclusion, let me oe permitted, with allusion to the closing words 
 of Winer's Preface to the last [i.e. the 6th] edition of his Grammar, to 
 utter the deep-felt desire, that under God's assistance it may be reservei^ 
 for this book also (in fellowship with the work of my honored pre- 
 decessor, to which it owes very much, indeed the greatest part, of its 
 value) to further the knowledge of Biblical truth so far as any such 
 work can. 
 
 POTSDAU, Nov. 1858. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PART FIRST: FORMS. 
 
 PAOX 
 
 Introduction, 1 
 
 Orthography, Orthoepy, Euphony, etc., 5 
 
 Declension : The Dual, 11 
 
 First Declension, . 11 
 
 Second Declension, 12 
 
 Third Declension, 13 
 
 Declension of Foreign Proper Names, 15 
 
 Anomalous Declension, . 22 
 
 Comparison, 27 
 
 Numerals, 28 
 
 Pronouns, 31 
 
 The Verb, 32 
 
 Syllabic Augment, 32 
 
 Temporal Augment, 33 
 
 The Augment in Composition, 35 
 
 Future Subjunctive, • 35 
 
 Circumflexed Future, 37 
 
 Alexandrian Aorist 39 
 
 Verbs in X, )i., v, p, 41 
 
 Verbals in tos, .41 
 
 Barytone and Contract Verbs, 42 
 
 Verbs in |ii, 44 
 
 Deponents Passive, 51 
 
 List of Anomalous Verbs, 53 
 
 Adverbs, 69 
 
 Particles of Place, 70 
 
 Changes of Form in Particles, 72 
 
 Formation of Words, 73 
 
 e svii 
 
xviii CONTENTS. 
 
 PART SECOND: SYNTAX. 
 
 pAoa 
 
 Introduction, 75 
 
 Substantives and Adjectives, 76 
 
 Apposition, 77 
 
 Constr. ad Synesin, 80 
 
 Omission of tlie Substantive, 81 
 
 Adjectives used for Adverbs 82 
 
 Comparative and Superlative, 83 
 
 The Article, 85 
 
 The Definite Article, 85 
 
 Omission of the Article, 88 
 
 Use of the Article with more closely defined Substantives, . . 90 
 
 The Article with a Substantive to be supplied, 94 
 
 The Article before entire Sentences 96 
 
 The Article with several connected Substantives, .... 97 
 
 The Article as a Demonstrative, ZOl 
 
 Ironouns, 103 
 
 ovTos and iiSe, ckcIvos, . . . . . . . .103 
 
 Constr. ad Synesin with Demonstratives, 105 
 
 Use of a^Tos, 107 
 
 The Reflexive Pronoun, HO 
 
 tIs, t£s, fio-Tis, 114 
 
 Possessives, and the use of the Personals and of (Sios for the same . 115 
 
 Pronouns with the Article, 119 
 
 Periphrastic Forms of the Negative Pronouns, 121 
 
 Neuter Adjectives, 122 
 
 Subject and Predicate, 123 
 
 Their Agreement in Number and Gender, , . . . . .125 
 
 Constr. ad Synesin in the Predicate 129 
 
 Adverbs as Predicates, 131 
 
 Unexpressed Subjjct, 132 
 
 Omission of the Ctpvla, ......... 136 
 
 The Cases, 138 
 
 Nominative and Vocative, 138 
 
 The Oblique Cases — particularly tie Object, . . . • . 141 
 
 The Accusative, 146 
 
 The Genitive, 154 
 
 The Dative, 171 
 
CONTENTS. xix 
 
 PAGE 
 
 The Verb, 187 
 
 The Passive, 187 
 
 Verbal Adjectives, 19CI 
 
 The Middle, ... 191 
 
 The Tenses, 194 
 
 The Moods, 207 
 
 The Subjunctive, 208 
 
 The Optative, 214 
 
 The Particle &v, • . . 216 
 
 A. Conditional Sentences, 220 
 
 B. Kelative Sentences, . . . • 227 
 
 C. Temporal Sentences, 230 
 
 D. Causal Sentences, 232 
 
 E. Final Sentences (use of Sva in N. T.), 233 
 
 F. Blative Sentences, 243 
 
 G. Declarative Sentences, 245 
 
 H. Interrogative Sentences, 246 
 
 General Remarks on the Moods, 256 
 
 The Imperative, 257 
 
 The Infinitive 258 
 
 The Article (ti5) with the Infinitive, 261 
 
 The Infinitive with tov, 266 
 
 The Infinitive for the Imperative, 271 
 
 The Accusative and Infinitive, 272 
 
 KcXcveiv, etc., with the Infinitive, 275 
 
 Kal. i-^ivero followed by Infinitive, etc., 276 
 
 Attraction with the Infinitive, 278 
 
 Construction of Relative Sentences, 280 
 
 Constructio ad Synesin with the Relative 281 
 
 Attraction in Relatiye Sentences, 285 
 
 The Participle, 283 
 
 The Participle with etvoi, 30S 
 
 Redundant Participles, 313 
 
 Cases Absolute, .... 314 
 
 Adverbs, 319 
 
 Prepositions, 321 
 
 Prepositions with the Genitive, 321 
 
 Prepositions with the Dative 328 
 
 Prepositions with the Accusative, 331 
 
 Prepositions with the Genitive and Accusative, 334 
 
XX CONTENTS. 
 
 PAOB 
 
 Prepositions {continued), 335 
 
 Prepositions with all three Cases, 335 
 
 Position, etc., of Prepositions, 341 
 
 Negatives, 344 
 
 (Other) Particles, 357 
 
 Certain Peculiar Constructions, 376 
 
 I. Attraction, 376 
 
 II. Anacoluthon, 378 
 
 III. Inversion (Hjperbaton) . 387 
 
 IV. Ellipsis (Brachylogy, Pregnant Construction), .... 390 
 
 V. Aposiopesis, 396 
 
 VI. Pleonasm, 397 
 
 VII. Epexegesis, 399 
 
 VIII. Zeugma 400 
 
 IX. Asyndeton (Polysyndeta), 401 
 
 I. Index of Subjects, 405 
 
 II. Index of Greek Words and Porms, 414 
 
 III. Index of Passages cited from the 0. T., 428 
 
 IV. Index of Passages in the N. T. explained or cited, . . . . 431 
 Glossary of Technical Terms, 470 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 B. §1, N. 8; C. §88; H. §4f.; D. §18. 
 
 1. The basis of the Hellenistic language of the N. T. is th(3 
 so-called Macedo-Alexandrian dialect, which, as is well 
 known, became current in the time of the Ptolemies, especially 
 at Alexandria, then the seat of culture ; and this again was 
 founded upon the kowt] BtaXeKTof which sprang from the Attic 
 dialect. From Alexandria Greek speech and culture spread 
 over the Asiatic kingdoms which arose from the Macedonian 
 conquest, and accordingly over Syria. Here, of course, much 
 that was local and foreign was mixed with it, not only in the 
 mouth of the people, but also of the educated who wrote for 
 the people. Consequently, in the language of the N. T. when 
 compared with - the Attic dialect, — the general basis of the 
 (prose) literary language, — we may distinguish, first, the pecu- 
 liarities belonging to the Alexandrian (Macedonian) dialect; 
 and secondly, especially in the Syntax, the so-called Hebraisms 
 (Aramaisms). 
 
 Remark. Since the N. T. writings, however, are (perhaps with 
 the exception of Matthew) the free products of authors who thought 
 and spoke in Greek, they do not exhibit nearly as many Hebraisms as 
 the language of the Seventy, who translated immediately from the 
 Hebrew ; they consequently constitute an independent idiom. But as 
 Ihu translated Scriptures of the O. T. exercised' a manifold influence 
 upon the composition of the N. T. books — being referred to very often 
 by the N. T. writers, who inwove into their language quotations from 
 them, now literal, now free, — a N. T. Grammar must often take notice 
 of the language of the Septuagint. 
 
 2. The language of the several books of the N. T. again 2 
 varies according as every individual writer 1) has his peculiar 
 modes of expression, 2) and even certain dialectic peculiarities, 
 3) and approximates more or less to the Hebrew style. In 
 particular the historic books differ from the epistolary in 
 consequence of their differing aim and contents ; inasmuch 
 
 1 
 
2 INTEODUCTION. 
 
 as the historic, especially the Gospels of MattheTV, Mark, and 
 John, approximate more to the CAramaizing) language of 
 the people ; the Epistles, on the other hand, particularly those 
 written by Paul to Greek-speaking churches and persons in 
 Europe and Asia, are connected as respects language with 
 the literary Greek then in use, yet not without noticeable 
 deviations in construction and in the formation and meaning 
 of words, since the common Greek habits of thought and 
 speech were not adequate to the expression of the new ideas. 
 The strictly Greek style of writing is approximated most closely 
 by the writings of Luke, especially by the Acts, of which the 
 diction and entire mode of expression is often suggestive of 
 Attic elegance and is full of genuine Greek turns and construc- 
 tions, although instances of the opposite are not wanting in 
 them. Lastly, the language of the Apocalypse is distinguished 
 from all the rest by great and sometimes very anomalous 
 peculiarities in word and structure. 
 
 3. Since the Alexandrian dialect arose from the Koivrj, it is 
 not surprising that writers speak even of so-called lonisms, 
 Dorisms, etc. (though very limited in number) in the N.T. also. 
 But neither the language of the N. T., nor that of the kolvoi 
 in general, can be regarded as a mixture, as is sometimes 
 assumed, of the various Greek dialects ; since all the dialectic 
 phenomena in question are in part quite isolated and in part 
 of doubtful origin. 
 
 4. Although we possess a large number of MSS.^ of the 
 N. T. Scriptures, some of which are very old, and the writings 
 of the oldest church fathers bear witness largely to the text 
 current in their times, yet very divergent forms of the text 
 have come down to us. This makes it often very difficult — 
 indeed, owing to the equal authority for the readings, almost 
 impossible — to distinguish between what originally belonged 
 
 1 The most important among the so-called uncial Codices (i.e. mss. written in 
 uncial letters) are the Cod. Alexandrinus (A) now in the British Museum, Lon- 
 don, Cod. Vaticanus (B) in Rome, Cod. rescriptus Ephrasmi (C) in Paris, Cod. 
 Cantabrigiensis (D),etc. To these must now be added the Cod. Sinaiticus (J<) in 
 St. Petersburg (recently discovered by Tischendorf in the Convent of Mt. Sinai). 
 The oldest mss. are Codd. Vat. and Sin., both of the 4th century. See, for 
 details concerning the mss., the Prolegtmena of Tischendorf and Scholz, tho 
 Introductions of Hug, [Tregelles, Scrivt oer], Griesbach's Symb. Crit., [Smith's 
 Bible Diet. Art. New Testament, especial y in the Am. ed.], etc. 
 
JNTRODUCIION. 8 
 
 to the author, and what to the transcribers and the time in 
 which and for wliich they wrote. Tlie earlier editions of the 
 N. T. — as the editio princeps which appeared (at Alcala) in 
 Spain, (tlie so-called Complutensian); then the various editions 
 by Erasmus which appeared in the sixteenth century (and 
 which Luther used in his translation), and particularly that 
 by Robert Stephens (1550), Theodore Beza (1565), and the 
 Elzevirs (1624, — which last gradually acquired general cur- 
 lency in the Western Church, and hence its text is called the 
 Toxtus Receptus) — all rest more or loss upon a very imper- 
 fect, in fact, arbitrary, collation of a number of Mss. appar- 
 ently for the most part the more modern. In the 17th century, 
 accordingly, and particularly in the 18th, a great multitude 
 of various readings was collected through tlie more careful 
 collation of the most important of the older mss., and by the 
 labors of many scholars, as Bengel, Wetstein, Bentley, Birch, 
 Griesbach, etc. ; but the text of most of the subsequent 
 editions ^ differed in the main but little from the textus recep- 
 tus, since the editors (generally theologians) did not venture 
 to depart too far from that to which usage had given a kind of 
 ecclesiastical sanction. Hence the need of a text founded 
 upon a purely philological process became more and more 
 pressing. The merit of having prepared the way for such a 
 thorough revision of the text upon critical and philological 
 principles, belongs unquestionably to Carl Lachmann (Lchm.), 
 who first in 1831 prepared a smaller edition of the N. T. and 
 subsequently in 1842 a larger edition^ furnished with a critical 
 apparatus 'and Jerome's Latin version, the so-called Vulgate. 
 Almost at the same time and in pursuance of essentially the 
 same method, — yet often reaching different results, partly 
 because starting with other critical Tiews,^ partly in conse- 
 quence of using a much greater number of MSS., collations, 
 and critical helps of every kind — L. F. C. Tischendorf (Tdf.) 
 
 1 The greatest reputation among those of more recent date was won by the edi- 
 tions of Griesbach which were prepared with judicious criticism and great care: 
 bmaller cd. Leips. 1825 ; larger ed. "Vol. I. Halle, 1796 {3d ed. care of David Schuiz, 
 Berlin^ 1827), Vol. II. Hal. 1806. 
 
 ^ Novum Testamentum gr. et lat. Car. Lachmannus rec, Ph. Buttmannus 
 Grajca! lect. auctori tales apposuit. Berol. 1842, 1850. 
 
 8 On tlie critical principles of the tTTO editors see tie Prefaces to their respective 
 editions, and the discussions and er positions in the theol. Stud. u. Krit. there 
 referred to. 
 
4 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 s 
 
 undertook to restore the text in a series of editions of the N.T., 
 the first of which appeared in 1841. After making several 
 journeys expressly for this purpose, collating for himself 
 nearly all the most important Codices, and publishing several 
 ancient and newly-discovered manuscript documents,^ he pre- 
 pared a second larger edition [1849] ,2 provided with a copious 
 critical apparatus, which was followed (in 1854) by the 
 Triglot edition, comprising the Greek text, the Vulgate and 
 the oldest Lutheran translation [cf. note ^ below]. Eespect- 
 ing other modern editions, as that of Scholz, Ed. von Muralt, 
 the Acts by Bornemann, see Tisch. pref. [Tregelles, on the 
 Printed Text of the Gr. N. T. 1854 ; cf. the Introductions, etc., 
 referred to p. 2, note i]. The present work will in the main 
 take as its basis the text of Lachmann's large edition, yet con- 
 stant regatd is paid to the readings of Tischendorf ; ^ and, 
 where it seemed necessary, to those of Griesbach (Grsb.) also, 
 as well as of the textus receptus (Rec). [In disputed passages 
 'the reading adopted by Tregelles (Treg.), in his Greek New 
 Testament (exclusive of the Revelation, which is not yet pub- 
 lished-*), 1857-70, will also be indicated.] 
 
 1 See the list of them given in the Preface to the editions of 1849 and 1854 
 [more fully in his 7th cd. 1859], and at the end of his second edition of the Sept. 
 (Lips. 1856), [4th ed. 1869]. 
 
 2 Novum Testamentum Graece. Ad. antiq. testes rec, appar. crit. apposuit, 
 etc. C. Tischendorf ed. II. Lips. 1849. 
 
 8 There is just appearing [1855 sqq.] in separate numhers, a new (7th) edition 
 of Tischendorf 's text of 1849, considerably modified in the text, but more espe- 
 cially furnished with the critical Commentary of the edition of 1849 greatly 
 enlarged and perfected, so that the reader is now enabled in every single case to see 
 the entire stock of variants, and the kind of support given to every reading (even 
 to those not received) by Mss., versions, fathers, etc. ; the compendious nature of 
 the former Commentary rendered this often quite impossible, at least very trouble- 
 some and uncertain. Eegard will be paid to this edition also as far as it has already 
 appeared. [Of his most recent {8th) critical edition (1864 sqq.), eight parts (ex- 
 tending to 1 Cor. V. 7) have already (Sept. 1871) been published. Unless some 
 indication to the contrary be given, this is the text of Tischendorf uniformly re- 
 ferred to. He has edited besides, N. T. Gr. ex cod. Sin. Lips. 1865, and N. T. Vat- 
 icanum, Lips. 1867 ; to both of these reference will be occasionally made when the 
 text of a passage is in question.] [The text of Tdf.'s 8th ed. is now complete.] 
 [* It has appeared since the printing of this book was hegun, and its readings 
 will be referred to so far as practicable.] 
 
ETYMOLOGY. 
 
 pRONDNCIATlOir, OrTHOGKAPHT. 
 B. § 8, 2 ; C. § 79 i W. p. 48 (47) ; Tdf. ed. 7 Prol. xxxvil. eq. 1. Bqq. 
 
 The letter t is often represented in the mss. of the N. T. by 
 ft ; yet no inference can be drawn from this respecting its 
 quantity, for the change occurs in the case of long vowels 
 (0\etT|rt?, yetvcoaKo)') and of short (^rjjyeiKev, Kadeiaa';') alike. 
 Under the injfluence of Itacism also it is often -reproduced by 
 7} (as KrjfKttcia, irptoroKXricna, ^pa'yrjovC), and on the other hand 
 €( is represented by t, (^a-irecmXev, amerdai D). In foreign 
 words the use of et for i has been in part adopted into the text 
 (see p. 6 note ^). In genuine Greek words the usual spell- 
 ing is followed in the printed editions. But in Matt, xxviii. 3 
 all the (older) mss. give elSia for iSia (Lchm.) ; and it has 
 consequently been received into the text by Tischendorf [and 
 Tregelles]. This was the general mode of writing the word. 
 Hence even Suidas so spelt it, adding expressly ol vvv Si.a rov I 
 ypd^ovai ; cf. Bhdy. praef. ad Suid. p. 39 ; Fischer on Plat. 
 Euthyphr. p. 125. 
 
 A similar vacillation is found in the MSS. between e and ai 
 (several instances of which are given on p. 40," note ^) and 
 other vowels, especially between ot and v (thus, almost always 
 fivvytjv for rjvoi'yrjv') . On the various Itacistic interchanges in 
 the MSS. see Tdf. praef. ad Vet. Test. pp. 72, 80 [ed. 3, and N.T. 
 as above] ; Sturz, Dial. Alex. p. 117 sq. Before /i, f is often 
 written instead of a, as Z/j,vpvr)<; (adopted by Tdf. [ed. 8, Rev. 
 i. 11 and ii. 8]), which spelling, according to Lucian (jud. voc. 
 9), must have been pretty general. 
 
 Tekminal Letters. 
 B §4,5; H. §748q.i O.§160;D. §83aq. 
 
 Hebrew proper nouns in the Greek text, either, 1) appear 
 unaltered (and are then indeclinable), so- that the eye must 
 
 5 
 
6 TERMINAL LETTERS ENCLITICS. 
 
 accustom itself to a multitude of unusual terminal letters, as 
 in JaveiS, 'Paxd^, Boo^, Na^apde, etc.i; or, 2) they receive a. 
 Greek termination (and are then inflected according toanal- 
 Ogy), as Moivarjt;, 'Ha-ata^, 'lepe/jLiw;, 'Ia>va<;, 'Irjo-ow ; or, 3) 
 they appear in both forms, the foreign form then always being 
 indeclinable ; e.g. r/ 'lepovaaXijfi and to, ' lepoa-oXv/ui, Mapid/M 
 and Mapia, 'laicco^ (so always of Jews, Matt. i. 15, etc.) and 
 'laKco^o^ (so of the various Christians), SaovX (so of the son 
 of Kish, Acts xiii. 21) and SavXo'i (so always, in narration, 
 of the apostle before he took the name of JIaCXo? ; but even 
 then, whenever he is addressed, the national form SaovX is 
 uniformly used, Acts ix. 4, etc.). Latin names are always 
 Grecized, as IIiXaTO';,^ 'IovaTo<s, ^fj\i^, etc. Concerning the 
 inflection of Grecized proper names see p. 15 sq. below. 
 
 Enclitics. 
 B. 14, 4. andN. 1; H. §106sq.; 0. §787sq.; J. §64ob9, 1; D. §55. 
 
 The genei'al laws of Inclination hold to their full extent in 
 the N. T. writings; — that is to say, this method of accentua- 
 tion has been carried out consistently in the N. T. because 
 there was no reason for following there different rules in 
 reference to the accents from those followed in all other Greek 
 
 1 As respects the spelling of foreign names there is naturally enough consider- 
 able diversity, not only in the Mss., but also in the several editions. Thus Lach- 
 mann, for instance, gives the name Nazareth not only in the form Na(apdB Matt, 
 iv. 13, but also Nofape'fl ii. 23 and NofopeV Mark i. 9 ; [Tdf. and Treg. use the 
 forms in -efl and -€t, and also (Matt. iv. 13) the form Nofapa. Tdf. in his 7th ed. 
 (see Prol. p. Iv. note) had decided that -efl was the form everywhere to be used in 
 Matt, and -ct in John. In the note on Luke i. 26 in his 8th ed. he thinks this evan- 
 gelist used the form in -e6, with the exception of -pd in iv. 16]. Thp name David 
 (in the mss. commonly written AoS) appears now in Lachmann in the form 
 
 ■AnueiS tlux)ughout (not AaulS or AojSi'S), and Tdf. [and Treg.] have followed him 
 in this respect. In reference to other names there is no such harmony between the 
 editions, e.g. K(j and Kels [Lchm. with whom Tdf. now and Treg. agree], Xopa(iv 
 [Lchm.] and -feiV [Tdf. Treg.], ^affpi [Lchm. Treg.] and pa0Pel [Tdf., ef. Prol. 
 ed. 7, p. li.], Xfpov^liM and xepov^elv Lchm. [Tdf. ed. 8 ; Treg.] Heb. ix. 5. The 
 Greek mode of writing the name Beelzebub (as Luther [so A. V.] has it after the 
 Vulgate) is Bet\ff 3ou\, that of Belial is more probably Bf Aiop 2 Cor. vi. 1 5 Tdf. 
 [ed. 8 ; Treg.]. See on this subject Tdf. ed. 2. p. 34 [Alf. N.T. Vol. L prol. p. 
 94sq.J. 
 
 2 As respects the accentuation Tli\iTos see Fritzsche on Mark p. 671 ; Winer p. 
 52 (51). Bekker in his edition of Joscphus always marks this and similar proper 
 names with the circumflex ; and the recent editors of the N. T. have decided in 
 favor of this mode of writing. See Tisch. pref. p. 36 [ed. 7, p. Ixi. In ed. 8 he 
 writes neiA-Sroj ; see his note on Matt, xxvli. 2]. Elsewhere the long o in words 
 
 'of Latin origin appears marked simply with the acute (not circumflex) ; as, o-ewiTo. 
 (Pint. Romul. 13), Kiyipe, iA\iydpf (26), Kuneaffdror (Moral, p. 726). 
 
MUTATIONS OF THE CONSONANTS ; ASPIRATES. 7 
 
 writings.^ Dissyllables after perispomeiia are not marked as 
 enclitic ; hence valt ianu, ywaiicav riviav, etc. Cf. Herm. de 7 
 emend, rat. I. 71, 73. 
 
 Mutations op the Consonants. 
 B § 16, N. 3; H. §§ 41 sq. 60) C. § 151 sqq. ; J. §§ 34. 33; 
 
 The use of a-a- for tt, described as mainly Ion: b, is in the 
 N. T. the only traditional spelling with most words, as Trepto-o-o?, 
 QdXaa-aa, yKmcraa, Tacra-eo, etc. In the Comparative, the forms 
 iepel(T(7(ov, ikdcraeov are interchanged with KpebTrayv, iXdrTeov ; 
 and in certain words derived from them the tt has become 
 established, as eXarToco, iXuTToveeo, '^TT7]/ia, ■^TTacrdai. 
 
 The combination pp is exchanged with pa, e.g. Oappea and 
 Oapaem (see Wahl, clav. min.). But instead of a.pp7]v Lchm. 
 has everywhere (even in Rev. xii. 5, 13) restored the form 
 with p(T [so Treg. ; and Tdf. also except in Rom. i. 27]. 
 
 Aspirates. 
 B. §17, N. 1; H. §72; C. §167; J. § 23. 
 
 The use of an aspirate before a smooth breathing conflicts, 
 indeed, with tlie general rules of orthography, which are ob- 
 served also in the N. T., yet in several instances is pretty well 
 established. ,Thus we have, e.g. e^tSe Acts iv. 29 [eVtSe Tdf.], 
 a<l>iha> Phil. ii. 28, i^elhev Luke i. 25 Tdf. [ed. 7] , a(^eX7ri?bi/Tes 
 vi. 35 Lchm., ov^ ' lovSaiicm Gal. ii. 14 (Tdf. ov)(^, as cod. A has, 
 e.g. in ov'x^' o-^lrea-de Luke xvii. 22) — to write it thus with the 
 apostrophe was the almostuniversal usage, see Schneider on Plat. 
 Rep. p. 455 ; Anecd. Bekk. p. 688 sq. On the other hand, in . 
 the MSS. we also find often ovKevpov (Exod. xvi. 27), ovk evexa 
 in Herraas, etc. ; but see below p. 10. On the omission of as- 
 piration (pvK eaTTjKev} see Tdf.'s note on John viii. 44. [He 
 writes iirla-TaTai, for i^LaTaTM in 1 Thess. v. 3.] Further 
 ef eXTTi'St Acts ii. 26 [(Tdf. 6\7r.) ; Rom. viii. 20 Tdf. ; iv. 18 
 Lchm.], ovx ri'ydirr)aav Rev. xii. 11, oiix IBov Acts ii. 7, ov^ 
 6\i'^o<; xix. 23 Lchm., cf. xii. 18 ; see Lachmann's pref. p. 42. 
 The aspiration eXTrt? occurs also in inscriptions ; see Franz, 
 Epigr. 111. It is possible that the retention of the digamma in 
 single words (cf. the Lat. video) occasioned these irregularities, 
 which occur elsewhere also, see Winer p. 45 (44). 
 
 B.'§18, N. 2; H. §65, c; C. §159, d.; J. §31, a.; W. p. 44. 
 
 The form edvdr], which formerly stood in the text (1 Cor. 
 v. 7) lias now given place again to the regular form eVu^i?. 
 > The oldest manuscripts have in general few or no accents ; s e Hug, Einl. 5 50. 
 
DOUBLING OF CONSONANTS; CHANGES OF v. 
 
 Doubling or Consonants. 
 B. §21, 3; H. §40b.; C. §169; D. §98; J. §22,8. 
 
 Lachmann, following manuscripts, has often introduced again 
 in spelling proper names 66 instead of t6, and Tischeudorf 
 [and Tregelles also] has in part followed him in this. Thus 
 in Lchm. [Tdf. Treg.J we always find Ma6ealo<; (even in Acts 
 i. 13) Ma66dv, but in Lchm. [Treg.] Marddr Luke iii. 24 
 [Tdf Ma60d6 ; Treg. MaOddr in Luke iii. 29] ; and in Lchm. 
 Mareia<i Acts i. 23 [Treg. Tdf. Madd.l. Since in matters of 
 orthography no uniformity can be attained either by following 
 Mss. or inscriptions, it seems advisalble here, where the two 
 modes of writing cannot have been governed by any difference 
 in sound (cf. Lchm. pref. p. 40), to follow out consistently 
 either the spelling with 66 (which occurs here and there in 
 inscriptions also), or that with tO as the grammarians prescribe. 
 
 The name Zacchaeus is written ZaK'x,aio<; by all ; on the other 
 hand, the spelling of 'A-jr^ia Philem. 2, SdTrtpeipa Acts v. i, is 
 doubtful. 
 
 On the neglect to double p see p. 32. 
 
 Changes or v. 
 B. §25, N. 3; H. §62; C. §166; D. §101; J. 28; W. p. 48; Tdf. ed. 7, Prol. p. xlvii sq. 
 
 The rule that aw in composition, before a followed by 
 another consonant, and before f, drops its v, is often disregarded 
 in the N. T. ; thus we always find awaTavpovv, avvaTpaTuinrji;, 
 (Tvv^iV, (Tvv^rjTelv, a-vv^vyo?. In other words, however, the omis- 
 sion is made, e.g. <7va-TaTiK6<;, crvaTevd^co, crvarqi'^eiv, avaTpe<poo, 
 crvaTpocjirj, avcr'xrjix.aTl^eiv. See Wahl's clavis, and Lachmann's 
 pref. p. 40. Further, the oldest (uncial) mss. often omit the 
 •assimilation of the v in the two prepositions aw and iv before 
 labials and palatals, sometimes also before \ and a, thus 
 avvTrapaXa^elv, avvp,a67)Tr)'s, awKadiadvTOJV, evicaicelv, ivyeypafi- 
 p,evo<;, crwXinrovp.evo'i, awaw/Ma, etc., and likewise in separated 
 words kv p,eaa (only in the Apocalypse does Tdf. [ed. 7 ; cf. 
 Prol. to Sept. ed. 4, p. Ixxii] write them always as one word : 
 Sfifieao)'), iv Kava. In particular it may be noticed that in com- 
 pounds with iv and avv cod. Vat. (and Sin.) almost always neg- 
 lects assimilation when these prepositions preserve their proper 
 signification ; see Bttm.'s Kev. of Kuenen and Cobet's ed. of 
 cod. Vat. in the theol. Stud. u. Krit. for 1862 p. 180. Oa the 
 
MOVABLE FINAL LETTERS. 9 
 
 other hand, the mode of writing as one word is often found, as 6/*- 
 fiecro), iyKava, ffv/jivda-i, etc. [Tdf. writes evTrpoaOev in Rev. iv. 6.] 
 
 Movable Final Letters. 
 B. §26. 2 and 4; H. §78sq.; C. §162sq.; D. §85j J. §20.2; W. p. 41sq. 
 
 In the earlier editions the rules of the grammarians in ref- 
 erence to V kcj)6\KV(TTi,K6v Were followed. These, however, were 
 found to be so seldom sustained by the manuscripts, that at 
 present Tischendorf has retained v e^eKxvcrnKov before every 
 consonant without exception, and has carried out tliis rule 
 consistently, with very few exceptions, throughout the N. T. 
 [i.e. in ed. 7, cf. Prol. p. liii; in ed. 8 he has dropped it in 
 seve-al cases, following the best Mss. ; see the note below.] 
 Lachmann (in his large edition) also writes it before all the 
 consonants ; yet in particular cases, following the Mgs., he has 
 not admitted it ; these, however, almost disappear in the mul- 
 titude that remain : e.g. Matt. vi. 24 ; John ix. 30, 32 ; Acts ii. 
 6, 22, 40 ; vii. 25 ; ix. 22 ; x. 40 ; xii. 6 ; xxi. 33 ; Rom. ii. 8 ; 
 Rev. xix. 17 ; Luke ivii. 29, etc.^ 
 
 The numeral eUoai appears everywhere, even at the end of 9 
 a sentence and before a vowel (Acts i. 15 [yet Treg. -aivY), 
 without V i<l>eXKv<TTiK6p. So too in the 0. T., see Tdf 's. ed. 
 praef. p. xxxiv. [ed. 4; cf. N. T. ed. 7, p. liv.]. 
 
 Precisely the same procedure occurs in connection with 
 ovTco^, so that the other form oStoo is at present almost com- 
 pletely banished from the text [cf. Tdf. ed. 7, p. liii]. There 
 are rare exceptions again in Lchm. ; as, Phil. iii. 17 ; Acts xxiii. 
 11 ; Rom. i. 15 ; vi. 19, etc. 
 
 ' Perhaps we can hardly hope ever to succeed in clearing up this point, since, as 
 '.he liberty of later times in the use of v was manifestly unrestrained, and the thing 
 itself is so trivial,' the transcribers (learned and unlearned) of the N. T. books felt 
 little hesitation in employing or omitting it at option. Consequently the consis- 
 tent introduction of the f i<pe\Kv(TTiK6v throughout may be justified as a silent con- 
 fession of the impossibility of tracing out the original mode of spelling of the 
 authors themselves ; and so much the more, as the cases in which all the Mss. em- 
 ploy V contrary to the grammatical rule appear to be very frequent, while cases of 
 the other class (in which ail mss. omit it), are extremely rare. It would only be 
 necessary, then, to bring one's self to use the t> in these rare cases contrary to the 
 MSS., as in Luke xvi. 13 ; Matt. vi. 24 {Svai Tdf. [so too Treg.] even in ed. 7, with 
 the remark: sic codd. unc. omnes, ut videtur [cf note on Luke 1. c. ed. 8]). If we are 
 unwilling to do this, then Lachmann's [and Tdf.'s ?] method of allowing here as 
 elsewhere the authority of the oldest mss. to decide, deserves uuqualificdly the 
 preference, as affording the only stable anchorage in the matter. To be sure, we 
 sbonld need in that case a more careful collation of the manuscripts in reference 
 to this particular than we now possess. 
 
 a 
 
10 CEASIS AND ELISION. 
 
 The case is quite different with respect to /^exft? and a%/3t?. 
 Both these forms never occur before consonants, out always 
 fiexpi and dxpi- On the other hand, fjLe'xpt<; is regularly used 
 before vowels, e.g. /ie%pt? o5, f^e'^pi^ a"paTo<; Heb. xii. 4. Only 
 dxpi stands several times even before vowels ; but not always 
 without reason. For while in the common phrase d'xpi'i o5 
 the word remains everywhere unaltered, a%pt is everywhere 
 used, manifestly to avoid cacophony, in the phrase dxpi' ^? 
 fjfjiepa^: Matt. xxiv. 38 ; Luke i. 20 ; xvii. 27; Acts i. 2,cf. xxiii. 1. 
 Elsewhere the two forms are interchanged before vowels, as 
 axpi? [-/otTreg. Tdf.] 0^77)9 Acts xx. 11, a^jot? {-pi Treg. Tdf.] 
 Jl-rririov (jxipov xxviii. 15, d^i, (Ji^Xf^ Roc.) ■^/Mepmv irevTe xx. 6. 
 
 B. §2T, N. 1; H. §24 D. c; C. §130c.; J. §10, ob3. 2; W. p. 43. 
 
 Instead of evexa, eveKev (p. 72), the Ionic form e'LvsKev some- 
 times occurs (which is not unknown to the Attics also, see 
 Buttmann's ausf. Sprachl.), as ov eiveKev Luke iv. 18, eivcKev 
 Tri<; ho^rjt 2 Cor. iii. 10. As respects termination, the forms 
 evsKfv and eXveKeu stand before vowels and consonants, but ej/e/ca 
 only before consonants (Matt. xix. 6 ; Acts xxvi. 21, of. the 
 variant in Mark xiii. 9). 
 
 Cbasis and Elision. 
 B. §§ 29. 30; H. §§ 68. 70; C. §§ 124. 127; D. §§ 130. 138; J. §§ 13. 17; W. p. 46. 
 
 Since the writers of the New Testament were far from feeling 
 such a dislike to hiatus, as, for example, the Attic orators felt, 
 1 the two means of preventing it, viz. Crasis and Elision, are no 
 longer employed in all the cases mentioned in the Grammars. 
 
 As respects Crasis, although it is by no means wanting in 
 the N.T., yet it is restricted to a number of customary instances, 
 very common in other writings also ; and even in these it is far 
 from being uniform. Thus we find, for example, Kufioi and 
 Kal cfioi, Koyo) and Koi iyco, xaKei and kuI ixei, Tavrd and rd 
 avrd ; further, rovvavriov, Tovvofia, xdv for /cat idv (for so it is 
 to ":)e taken even in Mark vi. 56, — for details respecting xdv see 
 the Syntax, p. 360), etc. In the recent printed editions, how- 
 ever, there is little agreement in this particular, because the 
 manuscripts very often exhibit both modes of writing. 
 
 Elision continues to be most frequently observed with dWd 
 and the pi-epositions, as diro, Bm, etc. Yet the elided and the 
 full mode of writing are constantly interchanged ; and indeed, 
 
THE DECLENSIONS. 11 
 
 tb.sis more or less the case in profane authors also. As re- 
 spects other words, frequently written elsewhere with the 
 apostrophe, as Si, re, 7^, ovSe, &<;t6, dpa, Xva, thus much at least 
 may be positively affirmed : that elision has passed almost com- 
 pletely out of use ; hence these words are regularly written in 
 full, even where ordinary prose certainly would not have 
 neglected elision. However, in such a matter as elision (and 
 crasis) it is not advisable to proceed with rigorous consistency, 
 as Winer maintains [p. 40], since every writer must be allowed 
 the liberty of occasionally employing elision at his option, even 
 in cases where he ordinarily neglects it (Matt, xxiii. 16 ; 1 John 
 ii. 5 ; Acts xix. 2; Heb. viii. 4 ; ix. 25 ; Rom. ix. 7, etc.). 
 
 Eemaek. The quotation from Menander in 1 Cor. xv. 33 is written 
 by Tdf. [so N] in full (xpi?o-T(£ [Treg. ;)(p^oTa]), according to the mss., 
 by Lchm. with the apostrophe yp-lfiff (as a quotation), but not as the 
 earlier editions have it yprifjff, contrary to the rule (B. § 30, 3 ; H. 
 § 100 ; C. § 774 ; D. § 138 ; J. § 63, 2). 
 
 The current formula tovt toTw is always written with the apostrophe, 
 and by many (Lchm. also [Treg. in the majority of instances]) as a 
 single word, because it had become a complete adverb(like S-qkovon, etc.). 
 
 Declension : The Dual. 
 B. §33,3; H. §115; C..§178; D.S149; J. §72. 
 
 The Dual, in the language of the N. T. as in Latin, has 
 wholly passed out of use, in nouns as well as in verbs. 
 
 FiBST Declension. 
 B. §34,2; H. §134; C. §194sq.; D. §161; J. §78. 
 
 The rule that after p the Gen. ends in at is sometimes dis- 
 regarded: as, ar'Treiprii, irpaprii (Acts xxvii. 30 Lchm. [Tdf.]), 
 r\r]/j,iivprj<; Luke vi. 48 [Treg.] Tdf. (cod. Sin.), fiaxaipr]^, -prj, 
 but not throughout (Acts xii. 2 etc. [Lchm.]), SaTr^eipy Acts ' 11 
 V. 1 Tdf. [«*]. This is not to be looked upon as an lonism 
 oUierwise the Nom. also would be (nrelpr), irpwprj. But p in 
 these words has only the influence of any other consonant 
 before a ; that is to say, it allows the flexion in 77 to follow in 
 the Gen. and Dat. Now as these words according to the rule 
 for quantity (B. § 34, N. II, 1.) have a short in the Nom., the 
 ac lentuation must be aTrelpa and also by consequence irpSypa 
 (Ijchm. [Tdf.] irpapa Acts xxvii. 41, — on this spelling, which 
 is common in MSS., see Dindorf in Steph. Thesaur. sub voce ; 
 Etym. Magn. 692 ; Cobet, Praef. ad N. T. Vat, p. 12 ; Nov. 
 Lect. 204.) ; see besides, Lchm. pref. I. p. 48. 
 
12 CONTRACTS. 
 
 Quite isolated, yet sufficiently attested by mss. [Sin. also], 
 is the Gen. in 17? also from a pure in tTvvei,Sviri^ Acts v. 2 ; cf. 
 Tdf. pref. (1849) p. xxiv, note 1, [ed. 7, p. liv], Exod. viii. 
 21. 24 ; 1 Sam. xxv. 20 (Vat.). 
 
 To the examples of abstract substantives in ela with a long 
 may be added from the N. T. the following : ipiOeia working 
 for hire — commonly accented falsely, and apeaicda desire to 
 please, from epiOevo/Mai and apeaxevofjMi, (apeaKeia Col. i. 10 
 Lchm. Tdf. [eds. 2, 7 ; Treg. ; Tdf. ed. 8 -KutJ). 
 
 Concerning the Doric Genitive in a of proper names in as see below, 
 p. 20. 
 
 Second Declension. 
 B. §35; H.§138sq.; C. §199; D. §166 sq.; J. §85sq. 
 
 Several substantives in o?, which ordinarily have but one 
 gender, occur in the N. T. now as Masculine, now as 
 Feminine. Thus: 
 
 1) r) \tfj,6<; /amine, — a use noted as Doric by old gram- 
 marians, and common also in the Sept., see Is. viii. 21. As 
 Fem. it appears in Luke xv. 14 ; Acts xi. 28 (where formerly the 
 Masc. stood, and some mss. give even Xi/j,6v fieyav . . . ^ti<;, re- 
 specting which see in the Syntax, p. 81); as Masc. in Luke iv. 25. 
 
 2) ij /Saro? bramble, elsewhere also the current form (see 
 Pape) Luke xx. 37 ; Acts vii. 35. On the other hand tou ^utov 
 (t?5? ^cltov Rec.) Mark xii. 26. 
 
 3) Respecting 6 and t] Xrjvo'i see § 123, 7, p. 81. 
 
 To the feminines which are properly Adjectives add from 
 the N. T. ■^ a^vcrcro^ bottomless deep, in the earlier writers only 
 an adjective ; see Pape. 
 
 The Voc. in e of words in o? is very common in the N. T., 
 as Kvpie, SiMa-KoXe, ^apiaale, Tvj>\e, etc. Yet the other form 
 also (like the Nom.) is not rare, as vio<: AavelB Matt. i. 20, etc. ; 
 and it is the less so, since, as will be shown in § 129 a. 5, p. 140, 
 even tlie full form of the Nom. with the Article takes the place 
 12 of the Voc, as 6 6e6<i, etc. As a rare exception must be noted 
 See fj,ov Matt, xxvii. 46, found also in the Sept., e.g. 2 Bsdr. 
 ix. 6 ; Judd. xvi. 28 ; xxi. S ; Sap. ix. 1. 
 
 CONTKACTS. 
 
 B. §86; H. §144; C. §200; D. §169; J. §85,2. 
 
 The regular forms of the Gen. and Dat. of vovv (^i>ov, j/^j) are 
 quite unknown to the writers of the N. T., and the heteroclitc 
 
THE DECLENSIONS. 13 
 
 forms of the 3d Declension, in general more current in the 
 later language (Ausf. Sprachl. I. p. 154), are the only ones in 
 use : Tov vo6<i, t^ vol; see Wahl, The Gen. of ttXous also is 
 7r\oo9 in Acts xxvii. 9. 
 
 Of oo-TotJv (John xix. 36) in the Plural only the uncontracted 
 forms oarea, ocnkav occur : Matt, xxiii. 27 ; Luke xxiv. 39 ; 
 Heb. xi. 22. 
 
 Attic Declension. 
 B. § 37; H. § 146; C. § 200; D. § 170; J. § 86. 
 
 The forms Xeco?, i/ew? (from which comes rew/eopo? Acts xix. 
 35) of the Attic Declension are wholly unused in the N. T. ; 
 Xaxt'i, vaof are always used instead. Concerning proper names 
 in -w? see p. 20 below. The N. T. form for avmyeoiv (derived 
 from dva and 7^) is avar/aiov Lchm. Tdf. [Treg.], or dvayaiov 
 Tdf. [only in ed. 2 in Mark] , Mark xiv. 15 ; Luke xxii. 12, — a 
 Dorism (see An. Cram. II. p. 131, 14, and cf. Mullach, Gr. 
 Vulgarspr. p. 21 ; Ahrens, Dial. Dor. p. 187). Cf. Kreivco p. 61. 
 
 Third Declension. 
 B. §41, N. 2; H. §164. 
 
 Respecting the (later) accentuation ipoivt,^, Krjpv^ (1 Tim. ii. 7) 
 see Winer p. 50 (49) and the works there referred to [also 
 Lipsius, Gram. Untersuch. p. 36 sq.; Tdf.(eds. 7,8) and Treg. 
 write KTjpv^']. Like Krjpv^ we must then, with Tdf. [Treg.], 
 accent $^\t| also (Acts xxiv. 3, etc.). 
 
 Accusative Singular. 
 B. §44; H. §157; C. §204; D. p. 102; J. §92,3sq. 
 
 From %a/3t9 the (rare and later) Accusative %a/3tTa twice 
 occurs: Jade 4; Acts xxiv. 27 Lchm. [now Tdf. also, and Treg.], 
 cf. XXV. 9. 
 
 As a peculiarity of the Alexandrian dialect in general is to be noticed 
 the appending of the Ace. v to the regularly formed Ace. in a, of which 
 a great number of examples from the Sept. may be seen in Sturz, Dial. 
 Alex. p. 1 27; on v i^ekn. with the Ace. cf. Lob. Parall. p. 1 42 sq. ; Tdf. 
 7 [cf. 8] on Heb. vi. 19 [and ed. 7 prol. p. Iv]. Recent editors have 
 with reason hesitated to adopt this form of the Case in the N. T. where 
 it has been transmitted in a few instances, particularly by cod. Alex. (e.g. 
 Rom. xvi. 11 (Tvyyevriv [Treg.]), because it is not sufficiently guaranteed 
 by other MSS. Lchm. [Tdf. ed. 7, not 8] has admitted it only in the 
 Apocalypse, e.g. apa-evav xii. 13, flKovav xiii. 14, [irjvav xxii. 2, ttoStJpi;!' 
 i. 13 [Lchm. in ed. min. only]. In Heb. vi. 19 also, some [Tdf. ed. 7 ; 
 
14 CONTRACTS. 
 
 Treg.] would read a(T<j)aXrjv ; this form, however, Lchm, has not 
 adopted (as Winer asserts p. 69 (67) — [yet correctly, as respects 
 Lachmann's stereotype ed.]) as [in his larger ed.] he there accents 
 do-^aXiji/, and consequently takes it as a metaplasm after the 1st 
 13 declension. Tdf. [2, 8] has a(7(l>aX7j with cod. Vat.' [and Sin.J, which 
 is perhaps to be preferred (cf. aKXivrj x. 23, ixovoyevrj xi. 17). The 
 Ace. Aiav (from Zeus) Acts xiv. 12 Tdf. ed. 7, is not sustained by 
 codd. Vat. and Sin. 
 
 CONTEACTS. 
 B. §49, N. 3; H. §176 8q.; C. §207; D. §181; J. §111, lb. 
 
 The Genitive Plural of neuters in 09, whenever it occurs in 
 the N. T., retains the uncontracted form opicov Rev. vi. 15, 
 XetXewv Heb. xiii. 15. But that of eVos, year, is always eruv ; 
 see the Lexx. 
 
 Partial Contraction. 
 B. §60; H. §185sq.; 0.§219; D. §186 8q.; J. §100. 
 
 The contraction of this class of words (which was often 
 neglected by Attic writers, B. § 50, N. 3) is wholly omitted in the 
 N. T., — and that not only in the Nominative (t^^^ue? Luke 
 ix. 13), but also in the Accusative Plural IxSvas Matt. xiv. 17, 
 crd'xya'; xii. 1, /36a9 Jno. ii. 14, 15, ^6Tpva<s Rev. xiv. 18, etc. ; 
 see Wahl. 
 
 Contracts in is etc Gbn. eus. 
 B. §61; H. §185 8q.; C. §220; D. §186sq.; J. §101. 
 
 Words of this class are uniformly contracted in the N. T. ; 
 indeed, contractions like 'n-tjx'*>v ^'^d Gen. r^fiia-ovi Plur. ra 
 fiiilarj (B. § 51, N. 5) from the later and less pure Attic seem to 
 have been the only forms in use in the language of the N. T., 
 thus TM!^ ■jrrf)(a)v John xxi. 8 ; Rev. xxi. 17, ■^fiia-ov; Mark vi. 23, 
 probably also to, rifiiaTj Luke xix. 8 (7]p,lcTea Lchm. rjfjila-eia Tdf. 
 [Treg.]). On the origin of the spelling ra rffiiaeia (for which 
 codd. Vat. and Sin. itacistically give ■^p.icna) see Bttm.'s Rev. 
 of Kuenen and Cobet in the theol. Stud. u. Krit. 1862, p. 194. 
 
 The Genitive in -ew? of neuter nouns of this class is used also 
 in the N. T. ; as, crtmTretas Matt. xiii. 31 and often. 
 
 Contracts in €i1s. 
 B. §62; H. §189; C. §220; D. §190; J. § 97. 
 
 The Ace. Plural in ea?, as it is not found at all in later Greek, 
 ■so too it does not occur in the language of the N. T., and the 
 form in et? is the only one current ; accordingly, dp'^i6pei<s 
 jpaiMjjiaTeif yovei'}, liTTreK, etc. ; see Wahl. 
 
THK DECLENSIC NS. 15 
 
 Varying Contraction. 
 B. § 53; H. § 178; C. § 213 c. ; J. § 129, 2. 
 
 Tlie Acc. of 1)71779 which occurs four times (see W'ahl) is 
 never vr^ia, but always v^tr], as sometimes also even in the 
 earlier writers. 
 
 Neuters in as. 
 B. §64; H. § 168, 182 D. ; C. §222e.; D. §181; J. §103, 2Bq. 
 
 The contracted forms of /ce/sa? and re/jas are wholly unknown 
 to the language of the N. T., as in general to the Alexandrian 
 dialect ; hence always Kepara, Tepara, Kepdrtai/, etc. see Wahl. 
 The Plural of xpeav, on the other hand, is to, xpea, Rom. xiv. 
 21 etc. 
 
 The Ionic change of a into c occurs once (Luke i. 36) in the Dative 
 ■y^pet, which the Text. Recept. against all the mss. has altered into 14 
 
 Contracts in av. 
 B. §66; H. §175; C. §211; D. §184; J. §129, Obs. 2. 
 
 The uncontracted forms of Comparatives in cov are, even in 
 the Nom. Plur. (e.g. Acts xxvii. 12), used indiscriminately 
 with the contracted forms (xix. 32 etc.). 
 
 Anomalous Declension. 
 B. §56, N. 1; H. §197sq. ; C. §223sq. 
 
 It seems to be expedient for convenience of reference to 
 bring together here under a single head what is to be said 
 respecting the declension of 
 
 Foreign Proper Names, , ' 
 as well as of certain other names of persons and foreign (i.e. 
 not Greek) words. 
 
 1. As was remarked above, p. 5 sq., proper names which re- 
 main unaltered dispense with all inflection, even when their 
 ending seems to render them capable of it, as 'lepi^co, ^apaeo 
 (Acts vii. 10), 'Efi/j,aov^, 'Evmv, Tedar^fiavrj (Lchm. [Treg.J 
 -vel [Tdf. -vei, cf. ed. 7 Prol. p. Ixi]), Br/dcpa/yfj [Lchm., Treg. 
 (except Luke xix. 29) ; Tdf. -yij, cf. also ed. 7, Prol. p. Iv, Ixi] ; 
 many in -oov, as 'Aapdov, 'Eapcop, Za^ovkaw, Safi-\lrcov, Suop, 
 PeSecoj'-', and in -a, as Xapa, Iliva, /idwa, Br]dearBd, SipeTrra, 
 TdXrfoOa, Kava, etc. 
 
 2. As soon, however, as the word undergoes a change, 
 
 1 That the inflection of 'the Lexicons VeSe<iy, -&vos, is incorrect see Heb. xi. 33,, 
 and cf. in the O. T. Judges vii. 14, 18 etc. 
 
IQ FOEEIGN NAMES. 
 
 especially such k change as gives it a declinable ending, ia- 
 flection takes place according to analogy. It is not to be 
 overlooked that names well-known and of frequent occurrence, 
 such as Jesus, Moses, Solomon, Jerusalem, etc., have accom- 
 modated themselves in popular usage to the Greek vocal laws 
 much more frequently than names less familiar. Of. the 
 Genealogies. 
 
 3. The transformation into Greek took place most simply 
 with nouns which already had an ending resembling Greek, or 
 whose ending allowed itself easily to be made such. So in 
 particular with proper names in av. These have ordinarily 
 Gen. -covo<;, etc., as Sapdv Ace. Sap&va Acts ix. 35 (Tdf. Hdpava 
 [Treg. -m]), SiScov -&vo<;, Sif^cov -wi/o?, (on the other hand the 
 less altered nam~e Sv/iecov is indeclinable, Rev. vii. 7). But 
 the name Solomon has a twofold inflection : As it took in 
 Greek the form SoXop^aiv, there resulted according to the 
 analogy of similar well-known names, like 'Bevo<^5iv, the in- 
 
 15 flection SoXofi&v (for so the Nom. must then be accented) 
 5'oXo/iwj.To?, etc. ; or, according to the analogy of Ba^v\d>v. the 
 inflection SoXo/mov, -&vo<i, etc. Both modes of inflection have 
 been received into the text in Lachmann's edition, even in the 
 same writer (e.g. Matt. i. 6 and xii. 42), — a phenomenon 
 which occurs several times in the case of such familiar names ; 
 see Moses, Jerusalem, etc. below. Tdf., however, has given 
 the preference everywhere [except Acts iii. 11 and v. 12 ; in vii. 
 47 he writes SaXcofJt,a)v ; cf. his note on Matt. vi. 29, and ed. 7, 
 p. liv] to the inflection -ww?, etc. [so Treg., yet Acts vii. 47 
 -fiwvl . With the twofold inflection of SoXofi&v cf. that of the 
 old Greek name SapirrjSSv Gen. SapvTjSdvo'; and HapTTTjSovTci;. 
 
 4. Latin words and proper names, likewise, are shaped ac- 
 cord'ng to analogy ani inflected agreeably to Latin declension, 
 as Xeyewv (legio') Xery.-wi'o?, Matt. xxvi. 53 [Treg. also] ; Luke 
 viii. 30, on the other hand Xejimv Mark v. 9, 15 (the spelling 
 Xeryicov has on the whole the greatest ms. authority in its favor 
 [cod. Sin. also] ; so Tdf. everywhere, see ed. 7, Prol. p. 1 
 [and note on Mark v. 9 in ed. 8]); evpaKvKcov (Vulg. euroaquih, 
 it is wanting in the lexicons) Acts xxvii. 14 Lchm. [Treg. Tdf.] 
 Northeast wind, formed like euroauster, evpovoro's ; ^rfXt,^ 
 -«:o9, Kalaap -09, etc. Nouns in ens receive in the Nom., in 
 accordance with Greek vocal laws (B. § 25), the form in -ijj, 
 
POEEIGN NAMES. 17 
 
 as Rki]firj<!, Kpri(yK7]<s, IIovBiji, and are declined KKrifitvro<;, etc. 
 Phil. iv. 3. 
 
 •5. Further, the following nouns are Grecized by appending 
 to them (or coining for them) Greek final syllables : ^ 
 
 Peminines in a Gen. -i;?, etc. ; for example, Pa^x (Gen. -t;?, 
 Dat. -17 in the 0. T., as, Zech. ix. 5 ; Josh. xi. 22) Ace. -av. 
 Further, yeevva, ryeivvr]';, etc. ; from Latin, fiefi^pdva Ace. plural 
 -va<;, at ra^epvai, etc. 
 
 6. Feminines in a Gen. -a?, as Mapia, -a?, -a, -av. In this 
 noun, however, the inflected form is constantly interchanged 
 with the indeclinable form Mapidfi [yet according to Tdf. ed. 
 7, p. XXXV, the best mss. favor the former] : Nom. Matt. xiii. 
 55; Luke i. 27; ii. 19 (John xi. 32; xx. 18, Tdf. [Treg.]), 
 Dat. Luke ii. 5 (Acts i. 14 Tdf. [Treg.]), Ace. Matt. i. 20; 
 Luke ii. 16 ; John xi. 19 (Rom. xvi. 6 Tdf.), Voc. Luke i. 30 
 (John XX. 16 Tdf. [Treg.]). Further, Sa/j,dpeia (not -eia, Acts 
 viii. 14) [Tdf. now everywhere Xafiapui] -etas, -eia, BijOavia, 
 -ia<;, -la. Mdpda John xi. 1 (to which Wahl incorrectly gives 
 the Gen. -17?) and probably "Avva also (to judge from the Dative 
 ''Awa in the 0. T. 1 Sam. i. 2, 6, etc.) and Eva (not Eva') 
 Evav have the Genitive in -09, contrary to the main rule, but 
 in accordance with the inflection of other Greek proper names 
 as AijSa, etc. (B. § 34, 2 ; H. § 126 ; C. § 195). OlSovadwa, and 
 'Icodwa none of the inflected forms occur in the N. T.^ BtjO- 
 a-alSd forms its Accusative in -dv Mark vi. 45, etc., but is 16 
 otherwise indeclinable : John i. 45 ; xii. 21. From the Latin 
 KOvarcoSia, -a?, etc. 
 
 Feminines in rj Gen. -179 : -57 ^Iott-tttj, XaXmp.r), etc. 
 
 7. Masculines in 779, -ov, -17, -riv, e.g. 'lQ)dwr]<!, 'lopSdvr]';, 
 and, from the Latin, KoSpdvTr)<; (jquadrans), <j}aiK6v'r]<; (^paenula 
 <^aLvoK7)<; Poll.). 'I(odvv7j<; (in cod. Vat. almost always, in Sin. 
 often written with one v : 'ladvrfi') forms its Dat. according to 
 the same mss. also 'Imdvvei (^IwdveC), — heteroclitically there- 
 fore ; cf. Ma}vari<i No. 11, p. 19. 
 
 8. Masculines in as, -ov, -a, -av. This inflection appears 
 in many words, but always with a preceding vowel, v or e, as 
 'Iep€fiia<;, 'Haata^, BapaxM<;, 'E^eKia^ (Lchm. -6ia9 ; Gen. -ov 
 
 1 In other writers, as Josephus, etc., this is done with a far larger number of 
 names than in the Old and New Test. 
 
 2 On the other hand, in the O. T. the Gen. of Sairdvva {'SoMrdvi'ris) occurs in 
 Sus. 27. 
 
18 FOREIGN NAMES. 
 
 2 Kings xviii. 13, etc.), Zaxap^a-';, 'HXia'i, 'Ie%owa? (Gen. -ov 
 1 Chrou iii. 17, -a Bar. i. 8), 'Iwala^ Q-ov 2 Kings xxiii. 34, -a 
 Jer. xxT. 1), MoTTa^tW, Ovpia';, 'AvSpea<;; and probably also 
 Meaaia<i, MaTeia<;, '0^ia<;, 'lovvia'i, of none of which has the 
 Gen. been preserved. Respecting 'Avavlw; see below, 13,c) p. 20. 
 
 9. Masculines and Peminines in 09, -ou, etc. ; as, 'la/cw^o?, 
 Sav\o<i see p. 6, Zaic')(tuo<i, Ma66a2o<;, 'Idei.po';, rj Aap.a(TK6<i, etc., 
 and those formed by change of the Latin ending us : n6vTio<; 
 HtXaro?, KovdpTo<;, UoTrXto?, UotloXol (^Puteoli), X(bpo<; i.e. 
 Caurus or Corus Northwest wind (wanting in Pape) Acts 
 xxvii. 12. 
 
 Neuters in 01^ from the Latin : ^par/eXKiov flagellum John ii. 
 15, aovBdpLov, fiiXiov a mile, etc. 
 
 10. Neuters in a, -cov, -ot?, -a. This inflection is followed 
 by several names of cities, formed after the analogy of tA 
 'A^Srjpa, Qvdreipa, etc., — especially by Jerusalem : ra 'lepoao- 
 Xvfia, -cov, -o« ; this inflected form, however, is constantly in- 
 terchanged (often in close proximity) with the 0. T. indeclinable 
 form rj 'lepovaaXrjfi, e.g. Luke ii. 22 and 25, 42 and 43. In 
 address the Jewish form is always used (Matt, xxiii. 37, etc.). 
 John iises only the first form tA 'I. (see Heydler, iiber die 
 Namen Hierosolyma, etc., Progr., Frankf. 1856). The third 
 form given in the lexicons is found in only a single passage in 
 the whole Bible : Matt. ii. 3 Trao-a ' lepoaoXvfia. Yet we cannot 
 infer from this an inflection in -iy?, -77, etc. as given in the lex- 
 icons, since in this passage ' lepocroXvfia seems to be used more 
 like the indeclinable ' lepovaaXrjfjj (moreover Tracra is wanting 
 in cod. D), and consequently, as the name of a city, has been 
 construed as feminine. Such a combination certainly would 
 have been impossible to a native Greek author. 
 
 On the other hand Tofioppa has both inflections : Gen. -a?, 
 and -tov Dat. -oi<;. In the 0. T. the forms in -tov and -ot? do not 
 occur (but Nom. and Ace. -a Gen. -a?) so that these forms seem 
 to have been first developed in the N. T. by the word's being 
 1 7 frequently connected with rd SoSo/jm Q-av, -ot?) which is always 
 neuter. 
 
 AvBBa has -?;? in the Gen. (Acts ix. 38 [Tdf. Treg. give -a?]), 
 but just b'efore it twice occurs inflected like a Neuter in a : Ace. 
 AvSSa vs. 32, 35 ; Josephus (B. J. 1, 15, 6 ad fin.) uses it as a 
 Neut. Plur. ; of. I'jfioppa in the 0. T. Qvareipa on the other 
 
FOREIGN NAMES. 19 
 
 hand (of which the Gen. in -av occurs Acts xvi. 14, the Dat. 
 in -ot? Rev. ii. 18) has once the Ace. in -av, Rev. i. 11 ; and 
 Avarpa in Lycaonia lias its Dat. in -ot?, but for its Aco. rrjv 
 Avarpav Acts xiv. 6, 8, 21, etc. 
 
 11. Masculines in 97? of the third declension. Here belongs 
 especially the name Mtouo-j}?. Its first syllable is in recent 
 editions almost uniformly written euu, and probably therefore 
 in the solitary passage where Lchm. has left the simple w 
 (Rom. ix. 15), the other spelling av is with Tdf. [Treg., so ij 
 also] to be restored [Tdf.' puts a diaeresis over the v, see 
 ed. 7, p. Ixii ; and cf. Grimm's Lexicon]. The common inflec- 
 tion is Gen.(uniformly)-e«o?,Dat. -el, Ace. -ea (Luke xvi. 29), — 
 .thus quite after the analogy of the Greek word "Apr]<i ; hence 
 it is idle to assume an unused Nominative form in eu?, as is 
 generally done in the lexicons. In addition to these forms 
 there have been preserved (according to the Declension which' 
 follows) a Dative in -y twice, Rom. ix. 15 (Tdf. Mavael [Treg. 
 -64] Acts vii. 44, and an Accusative -^v four times, Acts vi. 11 ; 
 vii. 35 ; 1 Cor. x. 2 ; Heb. iii. 3. On the derivation and 
 spelling of the word see also Pr. on Rom. ix. 15, and cf. Joseph, 
 adv. Ap. 1. 31. 
 
 Further Mavaaa-i)';, — the Ace. of which ends in -rj Matt. i. 10 
 (Gen. -7] Sept.), and 'Ieaarj<; with a twofold inflection 'Icoai^ro'; 
 (Mark vi. 3 ; xv. 40) and 'Iioai] in accordance with the Declen- 
 sion which follows. 
 
 12. There still remain a large number of foreign names and 
 words, which follow none of the modes of inflection described 
 above, yet among which there exists a great and obvious 
 analogy. Mehlhorn (Gr. Gram. p. 182) appropriately proposes 
 for all these words a special declension, which on account of 
 the simplicity of its endings he calls the weak inflection. Tlie 
 following is the Table : 
 
 a? a a av a 
 
 w? 0} a (ov CO 
 
 ov? ov ov ovv ov 
 The first two series, it will be noticed, are founded on the first 
 declension, the remaining two upon the second. This inflec- 
 tion is ordinarily, but not in variably, distinguished by the 
 circumflex on the last syllable. 
 
20 FOREIGN NAMES. 
 
 13 A. Words in a?. The inflection of these, especially 
 when they are not perispomena, agrees closely with that of 
 words which have the Doric Genitive (p. 12 ; cf. H. § 136 
 Rem. d.), as 'Avvi^as etc., and has manifestly been formed after 
 
 18 the analogy of this declension. In later times this was the 
 most usual inflection of foreign proper names, and of such as had 
 undergone a violent abbreviation (as '^Xe^a? from 'A\,e^avSpo<;'); 
 and many newly-formed words followed it. Here belong 
 
 a) All circumflexed proper names, as 'Icovci'i, ©cu/xa?, Bap- 
 pa^d<;, Bapaal3d<:, Kr]^d^, KXwTra? (John xix. 25), Xov^as ; 
 further 'Aprep-d'}, ArjpM';, 'Eiracjipd';, 'Epp,d<i, Zrjvd<;, @evBd<;, 
 AovKd<s, Me\ed<;, 'OXvp.ira.'i, JJapp.evd';, SKevd<;, Hrei^avd';, sup- 
 posed to be mere abbreviations of current Greek names, as 
 'ApTep.iSaypo'i, Arjp,ijTpio<;, 'ETTa<j}p6Sno';, Z7]v6Bcopo<; (Anec. Bek. 
 p. 857), AovKiavo'i, MeX,icuypo^, JJapp^piSr)^, etc. 
 
 b) Circumflexed appellatives of foreign origin, e.g.Kop^ava/i, 
 aaravd';, p.apMvd<; Gen. -a, etc. 
 
 c) Barytone proper names whose last syllable is preceded 
 by a consonant, as "Avva<;, 'Aperai;, Bapvd^a<;, 'lovSw; Luke i. 
 39 ; Mark vi. 3, etc.), Kald^a^ (or Kat<[)a<; Luke iii. 2 Lchm.) ; 
 from the Latin, ' Ajpi'inra<i Agrippa. The same analogy, 
 doubtless, was followed also by 'Avriira^ (^Avri'rraTpo'i't), 
 KXeoTra'! (KXeoTrar/sos ? Luke xxiv. 18), 'EXvp.a<;; and from 
 the Latin, ^AKiiXas Aquila, 5'iXa? (Acts xv. 22, etc., always 
 called by Paul HtXovavo^ Silvanus, 2 Cor. i, 19, etc.), — of 
 which no Genitive is found. ^AvavLa<i is generally given in 
 the lexicons with Gen. -a, contrary to analogy (see No. 8, above), 
 but in the N. T. no Gen. is found ; in the 0. T., indeed, occurs 
 the Gen. ''Avavia (Neh. iii. 23), but also the regular ^Avaviov 
 Tob. V. 12 (13). Cf. 7<Bo-ta?, etc. in No. 8, p. 18, above. 
 
 14 B. Words in ri<;. The proper name ^iXrj<;, -tj, etc. serves 
 as the paradigm. From the N. T. are to be referred to this 
 class only a few isolated forms, as the collateral forms of 
 Mavcfj'i given above, p. 19, and the Gen. 'leoarj from 'I&jotj? ' 
 (Matt, xxvii. 56 [Tdf. reads 'Icoa-^cj), after j< etc.]). The proper 
 names • 'lavvrji; and ^lap.^prji have no oblique cases extant ; 
 yet according to Suidas (sub vope ) the Gen. of 'lap./Spfj'; was 
 'la/j-^pov. The Ace. 'Iap-/3p7]v occurs in Apocryphal writings. 
 
 15 C. Words In tas. These, according to Mehlhorti, ought 
 properly all to bo accented as perispomena, as is still done, for 
 
FOREIGN NAMES. 21 
 
 example, in raws, raw (B. § 58), according to the direction of 
 the ancient grammarians. Commonly, however, this rule is 
 not observed in the editions (and mss.), but the words are 
 accented as oxytones, and thus made to agree perfectly with 
 the so-called Attic second Declension (B. § 37). And in gen- 
 eral, amid the variety of views concerning this declension, even 
 among the ancients, harmony can hardly be attained. 
 
 Accordingly, the proper name ^AiroKKo)^ is inflected in the 19 
 N. T. after the Attic 2d Declension, thus Nom. 'AttoWoxs 
 Acts xviii. 24, Gen. -w 1 Cor. i. 12, but likewise Ace. -m Acts 
 xix. 1, yet in 1 Cor. iv. 6 Ace. 'AttoXKcov (after A, B, N) ; so 
 too Kw? the name of an island, Ace. Kw Acts xxi. 1. 
 
 16 D. Words inav'i. In the N. T. only 'Irjcrov'i, -ov, -ov, -ovv, 
 -ov. Lastly, the analogy of all these words is closely followed 
 by the inflection of 
 
 E) Aevt<; [-«'?, etc. Tdf. (except in Rev. vii. 7, ed. 7), Treg.J 
 Luke V. 29, Gen. Aevt iii. 24, Ace. Aevtv v. 27. 
 
 17. The Oender of Proper Names in the case of persons 
 follows the sex. As a specialty it is to be noticed, that the 
 name of tlie heathen god BdaX has the feminine article in a 
 quotation by Paul from the 0. T. (Rom. xi. 4). In the 0. T. 
 6 and r) BdaX occur ; see Winer 179 (168). 
 
 Xepov^i/M (Lchm. [Tdf. 7, 8 ; Treg.] -/SetV) is construed as a 
 neuter plural in Heb. ix. 5. 
 
 18. Names of cities, even when indeclhiable, follow tlie 
 general rule, that is to say, are feminine ; as, i; 'lepovaaKrifi,, r] 
 BrjdXee/M, r) Kavd, etc. (John iv. 46, etc.). But if they are de- 
 C/linable the general rules hold ; as, rd ^oSofia, ol ^iXnnroi, etc. 
 On 7) ' lepoa-oXvfj^a see No. 10 above, p. 18. 
 
 In like manner the names of rivers are Masculine, according 
 to the general rule, as 6 'IppSavr]'} ; so, too, when indeclinable : 
 o KeSpwv (John xviii. 1 Lchm.), 6 ^CKcodp, John, Luke, (in 
 Josephus also ^ HiK. sc. 7r9j7»/, B. J, 5, 4, 2 ; 12, 2). 
 
 19. The names of the mountains Sivd and Sioov are given 
 in the lexicons as masculine. Their gender is not evident 
 from the N. T., since they occur either without the article or 
 in connection with to opo<i, and to 5'M'a (Gal. iv. 25 Lchm.) 
 may be explained by the rule that a word regarded as an 
 independent object is made neuter. When we consider, how- 
 ever, that ptoper names frequently take the gender of the most 
 
22 ANOMALOUS DECLENSION. 
 
 current appellative belonging to them (here, therefore, ro 0/309), 
 it is much more probable that these indeclinable names of 
 mountains are also neuter. With this agrees the current 0. T. 
 phrase to opo'i to Siva (Exod. xix. 11, 18, etc.), and there is 
 no reason for giving a different explanation of this combination 
 from that of t6v ■n-oTafj.ov tov EixppaT'^v (Rev. xvi. 12) . Further, 
 Socuv when, as is so often the case, it stands for ^11 Jerusalem, 
 is always feminine in the prophetic writings of the 0. T., as 
 Ps. cxxxii. 13 ; Lam. i. 17 ; Zech. viii. 2, etc.^ 
 20 The Mt. of Olives, commonly called to opos twv eXai,ci>v (Matt, 
 xxi. 1 etc.) also has the single name 'EXaiwv, Gen. -cow? (Acts 
 i. 12 d-n-o opov<; rov KaXovfj,hov 'EXatww?) , and must accordingly, 
 like Greek names of motintains of the same form (KiOaipdnv, 
 '£\tK(Bz^, etc.), be masculine. Nevertheless, in Luke xix. 29; 
 xxi. 37 it is treated as indeclinable, consequently as neuter : 
 Trpo? TO opo<; to KoXovfievov ^EXulcov ; so, too, in^ Josephus (e.g. 
 Antiq. 20, 8, 6; B. J. 5, 2, 8). Recent editors have, accord- 
 ingly, rejected the former accentuation -&v and write ^Ekauov, 
 to distinguish it from the other designation tmv eXato)]/, which 
 Luke also uses just afterwards : xix. 37 ; xxii. 39. Cf. Pritzsche 
 ad Marc. Exc. III. 
 
 Anomalous Declension. 
 B. §66, N. 2; H. §197; C. §223sq.; J. §116 8q. 
 
 The word ct/ooto?, which so frequently occurs, is of the neuter 
 gender throughout the N. T. The statement in Wahl that it 
 is also masc. is supported only by the reading — long ago dis- 
 carded — of the Rec. in Heb. xii. 18 (toJ o-/<;6t&)). 
 
 "EXeos, of the masculine gender in Attic authors (see Pape), 
 is in the N. T. only neuter, — in the four or five passages 
 where the Rec. had the masculine the neuter having now been 
 restored ; see the passages in Wahl. 
 
 nXoi/To?, elsewhere only masculine, is often used by Paul as 
 
 neuter, but only in the Nom. and Ace, e.g. 2 Cor. viii. 2 ; Eph. 
 
 1 Names of mountains, to judge from the Sept., have no established gender. 
 The neuter, however, is the most common. Thus we have rh 'Irafiipioi/ {Taior), 
 and, in the same combination as that given above with Sinai, rb Spos rh 'Eij>pa'f/i, 
 rh opos Th 57?e(p, rh 6pos rh *Apaplfj., rh iipos rh 'Aep/xtiv, etc. Lebanon 'is masculine, 
 d Al0avos, likewise Carmel, 6 KdpnniKos or 6 Xtp/jcA Isa. xxxii. 15 sq. ; Jer. xlvi. 
 (xxvi.), 18 ; but ri Spos rh KapiiiMov also occurs (2 Kings ii. 25), and once even ^ 
 Kipiiri\os (1 Kings xviii. 42), as also r) 'Aep/iiiv Josh. xi. 3 etc. But ij ©ofltijo in 
 1 Chron. vi. 77 is the city or region of Tabor. 
 
DEFECTIVE NOUNS. 23 
 
 i. 7, etc. ; in the Gen. always of the 2d Declension, Rom. xi. 33, 
 etc. ; (the Dative does not occur). 
 
 ZtjXo's is masculine as it is everywhere in Greek authors ; 
 but in 2 Cor. ix. 2 (codd. Vat. and Sin.), perhaps also in 
 Acts V. 17 (Vat.), the preference might be given to the neuter 
 form (as in the Clem. Bpp.). Only once, in the adverbial ex- 
 pression Kara ^Xo<i (Phil. iii. 6), has the neuter been adopted 
 by all the mss. [Sin. also]. 
 
 ^Hxo<i, altogether a later word (see Thom. Mag.), is mas- 
 culine ; but in Luke xxi. 25 the Genitive is ^%ows (if the 
 reading [so Sin. also] is correct). 
 
 Instead of ij vIkt}, which appears only once (1 John v. 4), the 
 collateral form to vIko?, common elsewhere also in later writers, 
 is usual ; as, Matt. xii. 20 ; 1 Cor. xv. 57, etc. ; so, too, in the 
 Sept. 
 
 B. §56, 6; H. §200; C. §226; D. §284; J. §85,0bs.2. 
 
 Of 6e<7/xo'? both plurals (-/ia and -/^ot) appear in the N. T. — 21 
 the first in Luke. That Paul takes the word as masculine 
 follows from Phil. i. 13 (in the other passages the gender is 
 not evident) and the usage of the Sept. (Jer. ii. 20 ; Job 
 xxxix. 5, etc.). 
 
 A metaplasm of the N. T. language, which however is in 
 plain analogy with other met^plasms (cf. ■n-poa-co'Trov, ovetpov, 
 B. § 58 ; H. § 199 and D ; C. § 225 f. ; D. § 284 ; J. § 117), 
 is found in to ad^^arov which regularly has aa/3l3dTov, -^, 
 Plur. TO, ad/S^ara (Acts xvii. 2 ; see the following paragraph) 
 a-ajS^drcov. Tlie Dative plural is almost uniformly ad^^aaiv — 
 from the Hebr. naaj , as if from a theme not in use. The reg- 
 ular form, Tot? o-a/3/SaT04?, Lchm. has adopted from the single 
 codex B in only two passages : Matt. xii. 1, 12 ; but between 
 then! (vs. 5), he gives ad^^cunv as everywhere else. 
 
 Deeeotive, Plukai., and Indeclinable Nouns. 
 B. § 57, 1; H. § 201 ; C. § 227 eq. ; D. § 284; J. §§ 114. 118. 
 
 Jewish Names of Festivals have the plural form, according 
 to Greek usage, as ra ijKaivia, ra a^v/j,a ; in like manner to, 
 ryevicria birth-day festival, and sometimes oi ydfiot when it is, 
 synonymous with convivium, epulae, Matt. xxii. 2 ; Luke xii. 
 86 ; xiv. 8. Also the plural t^ ad^^ara, both when it signifies 
 a festival and a week, freq'xently alternates with to adp- 
 ^arov ; see Wahl, and cf. e.g. I uke xviii, 12 with xxiv. 1, etc. 
 
24 LIST OP ANOMALOUS NOUNS. 
 
 The Plural r^ a-d^^ara appears even in the Sept., e.g. Lev. 
 xxiii. 32, etc. Respecting Names of Cities see above, p. 18. 
 
 Pm-ther, the following are sometimes used as Plurals in 
 the N. T. : ol koKitoi, in the phrase ev rot<i koXttoii; tov 'A^paa/M 
 elvat Luke xvi. 23 ; rh dpyvpia in the sense of money Matt, 
 xxviii. 12 (Y\x\g. pecuniam'), of. the common reading in Mark 
 xiv. 11, where, as in most other passages, the Sing, has been 
 adopted ; to, oijrwvia wages, synonymous with to o-^coviov (Luke 
 iii. 14, etc., cf. the Lat. stipendium) ; and, agreeably t'o a Jewish 
 mode of thought, oi alS)ve<; the world (ciiaiis Ps. cxlv. 13) Heb. 
 i. 2, and ol ovpavoi (w^-q^'n) Matt. iii. 16, etc. Also ' the holy 
 place ' in the temple and ' the holiest of all ' are called in Heb. 
 ix. 2, 3 JO, wyta and a'^ui cuyLwv after Bzek. xli., xlii. etc. Also 
 the newly-formed word fj.eyKj:7ave'i (equivalent to fieja Svvd- 
 fievoi, see Phi'yn. and Thorn. Mag. sub voce) seems (like pro- 
 ceres') to have been ordinarily used only in the Plural. 
 
 In the case of al Ovpai (^fores') and ra ifiaTia (^clothing') the 
 Plural form is suflSciently accounted for by the meaning. 
 
 The foreign word to crUepa intoxicating drink, like to Trd<7')(a, 
 is indeclinable ; in the N. T. it occurs only in the Ace. (Luke 
 i. 15), but in the Sept. also in the oblique cases (Num. vi. 3 ; 
 Deut. xiv. 26). 
 
 22 List of Anomalous Nouns. 
 
 B. §58; H. §202; C. §223 6q.; D. §284; J. §112. 
 
 Instead of o aX? salt (Mark ix. 49, 50) in the N. T- the later 
 neuter form is more common: to aXa'^ (Gen. aXaTo<;), Dat. 
 aXuTt Col. iv. 6, [in Mark' ix. 50 Tdf. twice reads Nom. to oka, 
 with N*, etc.]. 
 
 The Ace. of dpTefimv (Gen. -ovo's') is according to mss. [Sin. 
 also] dpTefitova in Acts xxvii. 40 ; so the Scholiast on Eurip. 
 Med. 273. 
 
 In the N. T. epi,<!, after the analogy of opvK, has the two 
 Plur. forms e/atSe?, 1 Cor. i. 11, and epei,<i — at present only in 
 Tit. iii. 9. In the other passages the editors have given the 
 preference to the Sing. e,3i? (2 Cor. xii. 20 ; Gal. v. 20 ; 1 Tim. 
 vi. 4); yet in Cor. and Tim. Tdf. ed. 7 restores epet? again, [fee 
 Treg. in Cor. ; m only epw, which Tdf. now adopts uniformly.] 
 
 Of /cXet?, likewise, both forms are found in Sing, and Plur. : 
 KKelv Rev. iii. 7, KKel^a Luke xi. 52, Tat Kkeli Rev. i. 18, K\elha<! 
 Matt. xvi. 19. 
 
ADJECT] VES. 25 
 
 SijyyevijS) properly an Adjective, ike all words in ?js of the 3d 
 Declension, regularly follows the analogy of rpt^pijs. Only once is 
 the Dat. Plur. (rvyyevevai found as an important variant Mark vi. 4 
 (also 1 Mace. x. 89). Whether this erroneous form, which arose 
 probably from the resemblance between the inflection and that of 
 nouns in cus (cf. Mwuo-^s), is to be attributed in the above passage to 
 the s( ribes or to the author, may be doubtful ; and on this account the 
 reading has not been adopted [yet so in Mark, Tdf. eds. 7 and 8, and 
 Treg.]. But it makes in favor of the 'latter supposition that in another 
 passage (Luke ii. 44) [many of] the very same mss. (with the excep- 
 tion of cod. Vat. which here also exhibits avyyevivai) do not repeat 
 the termination -evai but give the regular form uvyyevea-i, which also 
 harmonizes perfectly with the general accuracy of form characteristic 
 of Luke, as on the other hand the form (Tvyycviva-i is congruous with 
 Mark. Further, that the form acknowledged to be erroneous should 
 be -early altered by other scribes into the regular one, is quite natural ; 
 and finally, it appears from the grammarian Herodian, in Cram. An. 
 IIL p. 246, that this corrupt form must have actually been in frequent 
 use (tt oWii)V o'c^aXA.o/u.e't'wv Kara kXictlv Sotik^i? TrrwueiDS Koi Xpydrrwi' 
 (Tvyyevivai kt\.). Otherwise he would have hardly found it necessary 
 to demonstrate in detail, as he does, its erroneousness. 
 
 Karijywp, a solecistic by-form of xoT^yopos, occurs only in Rev. xii. 
 10 ; (it is wanting in the lexicons).. 
 
 Adjectives. 
 
 B. §60; H. §209sq.i C. §229sq.; D. §196; J. §127. 
 
 In the distinction of Genders of Adjectives in o? certain 
 irregularities and departures from the common usage occur in 
 the N. T. The following deserve especial notice : 
 
 /3e/3ato?, in Attic authors generally of the common gender, 
 always in the N. T. takes the form /3e/3ata in the Fem. ; see 
 Wahl. 6/3 7? jU. 9, on the other hand, which in Attic writers 
 has three endings, has invariably the Fem. 6/377/^0? Gal. iv. 27, 
 etc., and Wahl is to be corrected accordingly. 
 
 erot/tio? fluctuates between three terminations and two, 
 cf. Matt. XXV. 10 ; 2 Cor. ix. 5 ; 1 Pot. i. 5. 
 
 apyn Fem. of apy6<; (1 Tim. v. 13 ; Jas. ii. 20) is altogether 23 
 a later form ; see Pape, and cf. Tit. i. 1 2. 
 
 Not only i-n-ovpavio^, which as a composite adj. must be 
 of the common gender (Heb. iii. 1, etc.), but also the simple 
 ovpdvi,o<;, which is regularly of three endings (see Pape), 
 has two terminations in the N. T. : aTpanh ovpdv(,o<; Luke ii. 
 13 ; (nrraaCa ovpdvi,o<; Acts xxvi. 19. 
 4 
 
26 ANOMALOUS ADJECTIVES. 
 
 ofioio<; is always of three endings, only in Rev. iv. 3 we 
 find Ipii ofioio'! (according to cod. A). 
 
 ocrLovi, too, in 1 Tim. ii. 8, as its very position indicates, 
 is to be joined to xetpa?, as is done by most of tiie commentators 
 and the ancients. The Pern, does not occur elsewhere. 
 
 alcovio'i, ordinarily even in the N. T. of the common gender, 
 has the Pem. almvia only in two passages : 2 Thess. ii. 16 ; 
 Heb. ix. 12, (of. the common reading in 1 John ii. 25 ; Acts 
 xiii. 48). 
 
 B. §60,6; H. §208; C. §23; J. §121,2. 
 
 Xpv<reo<; contracts its feminine xpvcrf) Heb. ix. 4; on the 
 other hand, the Ace. 'xpva-av is given by Lchm. [Tdf. Treg. ; so 
 cod. Sin.J in Rev. i. 13 (analogous to the Plural 'xpvaa'j neut. 
 ■Xpva-a). Contraction is neglected in the Gen. Plur. '^pvaiiav 
 in Rev. ii. 1 Lchm.[Trg.,Tdf. 7]. In Rev. also occur according 
 to cod. Sin. 'xpvcrea, 'X^dXKea, — forms which (according to 
 Phryn. p. 207) must have been generally in use among writers 
 of the KOivr]. 
 
 B. §62; H. §212; C. §23; J. §122,1. 
 
 The Genitive /Sa^ew?, which now on MS. authority [Sin. 
 also] is substituted in Luke xxiv. 1 for the regular ^adeo<;, 
 rests on later usage ; see B. § 51 N. 2 ; H. § 186 ; D. § 101 ; J. 
 I.e. ; Tdf. ed. 7, p. liv. Perhaps, too, in 1 Pet. iii. 4 •npaiw'i 
 [Tdf. Treg.] should be read instead of ■irpaeo';. 
 
 Respecting ^fila-ov<;, etc., see p. 14. 
 
 B. §63,1; H. §217; J. §130,1. 
 
 The plural vrjaTeis from vfj<TTi<}, Matt. xv. 32 ; Mark viii. 3 
 [here Tdf. now reads vqajii; ; so too in Matt. I.e. edd. manual. 
 et stereot.J, is a collateral form of the Plur., instead of vrjaTiet 
 or vrjcmBef, which occurs also elsewhere, but is censured by the 
 Atticists ; see Lob. ad Phryn. p. 326 ; Fritzsche ad Marc. Exc. 
 IIL p. 796. 
 
 Anomalous Adjectives. 
 B. §64,2; H. §219b.; C.§236o.; D. § 216 ; J. § 125, Obs. 2. 
 
 The form Trpao? seems to be wholly unknown to the language 
 of the N. T. ; for not (inly in Matt. xi. 29 — the single passage 
 where it still stood — has it been made by the editors to give 
 •way to the other form vpav<;, agreeably to all the other passages 
 (see Wahl), but the abstract substantive tt/doott;? also has 
 been, at least by Tdf., everywhere altered into 7rpavTr]<!. And 
 
COMPAEISON OF ADJECTIVES. 27 
 
 this procedure is the more defensible because in the two pas- 
 sages still remaining (Gal. vi. 1 ; Eph. iv. 2) in which Lchm. 
 has left the form Trpaorij? (which he writes 'without iota sub- 24 
 script)., important MS. authorities [Sin. also] offer the other 
 form ; see the other passages in Wahl, to which Col. iii. 12 
 is to be added. 
 
 An example of the use of the indeclinable word eTrdvayKev 
 as an adjective by means of the article, after the manner of 
 adverbs (see § 125, 10 p. 95), is Acts xv. 28 irXf/v roincov twv 
 eTrdvar/Ke'}. Elsewhere the word does not occur in the N. T, 
 
 COMPAKISON OF ADJECTIVES IN -OS. 
 B. §65,N. 5; H. §221; C.§257i J. § 135. 
 
 The comparative of SiTrXoS?, — which in its ethical sense 
 antithetic to aTrXou? (see Pape) is capable of comparison, — 
 is in Matt, xxiii. 15 StTrXorepo?, a form which can be shown 
 elsewhere also in later authors (Appian, Praef. 10) and is con- 
 structed as if from SiTrXot, of which the Neut. plural SnrXd can 
 be authenticated, at least in later poets ; see Steph. Thesaur. 
 and Lob. ad Phryn. p. 234. 
 
 Othek Fobms op Compaeison. 
 B. §67; U. §222; C. §261; D. §277; J. §136. 
 
 The form of the comparative of Ta^v? peculiar to later Greek : 
 rax^t^v, rdxtov, is the only form in use in the N. T. as 
 well as in the Old. In the New Testament, however, it occurs 
 only as an adverb in the neuter : John xx. 4, etc. The com- 
 mon form Oda-aov has so completely passed out of use that it 
 has not been preserved even as a variant. 
 
 Anomalous Compabison. 
 B. §68; H. §223; C. §262; A §280; J. §137. 
 
 The common comparison of dya66<i is KpeUrawv, /cpdna-TO'; 
 — the latter employed in addressing, persons of rank and au- 
 thority : Acts xxiii. 26 ; xxiv. 3 ; xxvi. 25 (cf. Luke i. 3 ; the 
 Vulg. always uses optimus). Of the other forms of comparison 
 only ^eKnov occurs once (a/i an adverb), 2 Tim. i. 18. 
 
 The ordinary comparative of kuko^ is %el,p(ov — as well in 
 the signification deterior as pejor, Matt, xxvii. 64, etc. The 
 superlative does not occur. 
 
28 DEFECTIVE COMPARISON. 
 
 Defective Comparison. 
 B. §69, 2; H. §224; C. §262; D. §282; J. § 140. 
 
 The positive ^joe/nos (formed from ripeiM), which is very 
 rare and not yet satisfactorily established from other writers, 
 occurs in 1 Tim. ii. 2. Cf. Lobeck, Path. Proll. p. 158. 
 
 The adjectival forms of the comparative ava)Tepo<;, etc., 
 (questioned in B. § 69, 2 note) cannot be denied, at least in 
 25 later writers. Accordingly in the N. T. we have them not 
 only used adverbially in the Neuter, avanepov Lukexiv. 10 etc., 
 but even as adjectives: ttjv ea-anepav (pvXaK'^v (Acts xvi. 24, cf. 
 Heb. vi. 19), to. Karcorepa fji,epr] Eph. iv. 9. 
 
 B. §69, H. 3; C. §262(0); D. §283; J. §140. 
 
 Two examples of double comparison occur in the N. T. : 
 3 John 4 /ietfoTcpo?, and Eph. iii. 8 iXaxto-TOTepoi;. In 
 general it is to be noticed, that in all such formations, which are 
 not altogether rare either in poets or in prose writers, the two 
 different kinds of comparison (by -repoy, etc. and -lav, etc.) are 
 always found united. The Latin language also presents anal- 
 ogous phenomena, which in general belonged probably more 
 to the popular language and to the class of arbitrary formations. 
 
 KuMEBALS. 
 B. §70.1; H. §255; C. §24sq.; D. §249 sq.; J. §166. 
 
 Respecting et<; Ka6' e?? and similar expressions, see p. 30. 
 
 The later spelling ov9eh, //.rfdeh is found in the N. T. 
 (see Tdf. 7, 8 on 1 Cor. xiii. 2) alternating with the common 
 one ; indeed the two are found close beside each other, as in 
 1 Cor. xiii. 2, 3 (cf. ' lepoaoXvfia, Mapia above, pp. 17,18). The 
 same holds true of the derivative i^ovOeveco, only that here the 
 other form with 8 is incomparably more rare ; Lchm. gives it 
 only in Mark ix. 12 and 2 Cor. x. 10 ; [so Treg. in Mark]. 
 
 Eemaek. The Form iiovSevow, which is given in the lexicons 
 on account of Mark ix. 12, has been altered into the common form in 
 -£(i> after preponderant MS. authority. On the other hand, the form 
 in -o'o) is very common in the Sept., and has now been adopted again 
 by Tdf. in Mark ix. 12 (after Sin.) The mss. fluctuate between 
 i^ovSivew, -ou), i^cwOevioi, -6io ; cf. Steph. Thesaur. sub voce. 
 
 The form Svolv from Bvo no longer occurs, but instead of it 
 in the Genitive the indeclinable form Bvo, e.g. Matt, xviii. 16, 
 and in the Dative Svai, Matt. vi. 24, etc. 
 
 The spelling rea-crepe^, TeacrepaKovra is probably hardly 
 
NUMERALS. 29 
 
 to be called an lonism, but rests merely on an erroneous usage 
 of the Alexandrian period. For we never find the inflections 
 reaaepmv, -epcri, as these cases run in Ionic, but invariably 
 (even in cod. Alex.) retrcrdpcov, Ticraapa-i,.e.g. Acts x. 11 ; Rev. 
 xxi. 17 (reaffepaKovra reaadpoiv). Since, however, the forms 
 with 6 have been transmitted principally by the above codex, 
 whence they have often found their way into the 0. T. (see 
 Sturz, Dial, Alex. p. 118), Lachmann, following the au- 
 thority of cod. Vat., has adopted them but sparingly, e.g. Acts 
 i. 3 ; 2 Cor. xi. 24, and almost always in the Apocalypse. 
 Tischendorf [cf. ed. 7, p. il] has them more frequently, — 
 in particular Tea-a-epuKovTa throughout [so Treg>] and the neuter 
 riaaepa, — but otherwise Teercrape';, -a?, Tea-aapecxKaiheKaTO';. 
 To maintain consistency throughout is not advisable, since it 
 is certain that both modes of spelling were in use, but it is 26 
 best everywhere to follow the mss. Compare besides the form 
 (received by Lchm.) KeKa6epi,eTfj,evo<; for KeKadap. in Heb. 
 X. 2, and iKadepiadrj in Tdf 's. last ed. Matt. viii. 3 ; Mark i. 42, 
 sKaOepiffev Acts x. 15 Tdf. [ed. 7 ; Treg.] , ;iti6|o6? for p,iap6^ Barn. 
 Act.l9, p. 71 ed.Tdf. [In Rev. xxi. 17 Treg. prints rea-a-apaKovTa] . 
 The rule of certain ancient grammarians relative to the 
 accent of the compounds of eVo? (Etym. Magn. rpierTj^ fiev 
 Xpovo^, rpteTT]^ Se irah, cf. Winer p. 50 (49)) has been observed 
 in the N. T. by Lchm. ; hence Tea-a-epaKovTaeTr]<; y^^povo'; Acts 
 vii. 23 ; xiii. 18, but eKaT0VTaeTri<i sc. avrjp Rom. iv. 19 (-er?;? 
 Tdf.). In the Rec. the rule was reversed; [Treg. accents 
 the last syllable in every instance]. On the disagreement 
 among the old grammarians see Schol. ad II. i/r. 266, and cf. 
 Lehrs, quaest. epp. pp. 136, 147. 
 
 Ordinal, and other Derivative Numbers. 
 B. §71,1; U. §256; C. §240; D. §253, Obs. Id. ; J. § 165, 3. 
 
 As a later form for TecrcrapcucaiSeKaTO';, and one peculiar to 
 the N. T., Te(Ta-ape<iKaiBeKaTO<; is to be noticed: Acts xxvii. 
 27, 33. Cf. the Ionic cardinal number B. § 70. 
 
 The cardinal eh takes the place in one case of the ordinal 
 •7rp5)To^ (cf. B. p. 92 note f), namely, in the common phrase 
 ri /Mia Tu>v aa^^drmv i.e. the first day of the week (see p. 23) ; 
 as, Mark xvi. 2 (on the other hand, in vs. 9 irpwrr) a-.} Acts 
 XX. 7, etc. Matt, xxviii. 1 also, where the article is wanting, 
 is nevertheless to be understood like the other passages ; cf. 
 
30 ORDINAL, AND OTHER DERIVATIVE NUMBERS. 
 
 Eev. ix. 11 17 oval f) fiia with xi. 14. This use is borrowed 
 from the Hebrew (see Wahl under el?, or Gesen. under "in!«), 
 hence it is to be found frequently in the Sept. also, e.g. ev 
 ■fjixepa iMua tov /xtji/o? Exod. xl. 2 ; Ezra x. 16, etc. Corres- 
 ponding to Tt9 for TTorepo? (B. § 78, 2) is the use of eh or o e« 
 in the sense of alter, 6 eVe/jo? ; see Wahl. 
 
 In 2 Pet. ii. 5 the ordinal number is used peculiarly, (having 
 the force of the German se?5-) ; thus ojBoov N&e Noah with 
 seven others. Cf. airo? Tre/xTrro? (B. § 127, N. 2 ; H. § 669 ; 
 C. §641g. ; D. p. 462; J§656f.). 
 
 In compound numeral adverbs it is sufficient if the adverbial 
 form occurs but once ; as, Matt, xviii. 22 e^ho(irjKovTdici,<; kirrd. 
 
 Distributive numerals are destitute of a special adjective- 
 form in Greek. In the N. T. accordingly they are sometimes, 
 as in other Greek authors, expressed by adverbial con- 
 structions, as ava Bvo Luke ix. 3 (see § 147 under dvd, 
 p. 381), ol Ka& eva, Kard Svo, singuli, bini Eph. v. 83 ; 1 Cor. 
 xiv. 27 (see § 147 under Kara, p. 835}. In this case the 
 combination (unknown to classic Greek) deserves notice, by 
 virtue of which eh is treated like an indeclinable numeral, _or 
 27 the preposition as a species of adverb, particularly in the for- 
 mula e?9 Ka9' el<; Mark xiv. 19 [Tdf, Kard^; John viii. 9 (Rev. 
 iv. 8 ^z^ Ka6' ev), and cf. Eom. sii. 5 to he Kaff" eh for eh eKaa-rov, 
 Rev. xxi. 21 dvd eh eKaa-To<s. Sometimes distributives are 
 expressed by repeating the cardinal numeral, as is done 
 in Hebrew (see Gesen. Lehrg. p. 703 ;' Gr. § 118, 5), e.g. Bvo 
 Svo Mark vi. 7 with which the analogous expressions in 39,. 40 
 avfiTToa-ia a-vjjmoaia, m-pacnai wpaaiai may be compared (Gesen. 
 Lehrg. p. 669 ; Gr. § 106, 4), 
 
 B. §71,3; H. §258; C. §240, 6; D. §256; J. §161,6. 
 
 The Multiplicative numerals are formed : in the parable 
 ■of the Sower (Luke viii. 8) by means of -TrXacrtW, — a termina- 
 tion which in later writers came into frequent use (see Lob. 
 Phryn. p. 411 note), Kapvov eKaTovTafrXaaiova (like TToWa-TrXa- 
 o-tW Luke xviii. 30 ; see Pape, and cf. Xen. Oec. ii. 3 eKarovTo- 
 ■KXacriova) ; in Mark iv. 8 by circumlocution with a preposition, 
 after the manner of distributives, as eh rpidKovra, eh eKarov'^; 
 finally in Matt. xiii. 8, 28 by the simple cardinal. 
 
 1 This, at least, is that one of the ancient readings which Tischendorf [so Trcg.l 
 has followed. As respects the other (Lehm. Grsb. etc.) see Syntax 5 126, 3 p. 1 IS. 
 
PRONOUNS. 31 
 
 Pronouns. 
 B. §72; H. §230; C. §243sq.; D. §232; J. §149,1. 
 
 The reflexive forms of the 3d Pers. Sing, and Plur. (o5, etc.) 
 have pa.ssed quite out of use in the language of the N. T. On 
 iavTod, (avrov), airov, etc. see below, Syntax § 127, 14 p. 111. 
 
 B. §72, N. 8j H. §232; C. §788e.; D.§ 55(c); J. §64, So. 
 
 The inclination of the accent in tt/jo? /le has been adhered 
 to by the editors of the N. T., as in Matt. iii. 14, etc. And 
 Lchm. accents also the 2d Pers. in the same way when no 
 especial emphasis rests on the Pronoun, as tt/jo? ere Matt. xiv. 28 ; 
 XXV. 39 ; Mark ix. 17, etc. On the other hand, in John xxi. 22 
 riirpo'i ere; Matt. xxvi. 18 Trpo? ere ttoiw to •iTda-')(a. With other 
 prepositions the pronoun is always orthotonc ; as, eV e'/xot, ev aol, 
 eVt ere, etc. ; see Ihe rule of the old grammarians in Herm. de 
 emend, rat. p. 75. ; The accentuation w/ao? /j^ often employed 
 by Tdf. is uniformly to be rejected. 
 
 avT<is ; THE Reflexive Pronoun ; the Reciprocal. 
 B. § 74; H. § 234 eq. ; C. § 244; D. § 234 sq. ; J. § 150 sq. 
 
 Respecting the N. T. use of airos as well as of the reflexive 
 pronoun ifiavrov, etc., see the Syntax § 127, p. 107 sqq. 
 
 Though the use of the reciprocal pronoun dW'^Xeov is quite 
 current in the N. T., yet the circumlocution by means of the 
 numeral eh is also found, but only in isolated cases : 1 Thess. 28 
 V. 11 obKoSofielre eh rov'eva (interchanged with dXXT^Xou?) ; of. 
 1 Cor. iv. 6 "va fir) eh virep rov evb<; <pvatovc76e Kara tov erepov. 
 This use is not a Hebraism, see Winer, p. 173 (163), and cL 
 § 126, 3 p. 102. 
 
 tCs, tIs. 
 
 B. §77; H. §244; C. §253; D. §240; J. §156. 
 
 The secondary forms of rk and rh are quite unknown to 
 the N. T. ; the Gen otov of the compound oVrt? occurs, indeed, 
 but only in the conjunctional phrase ews orov Matt. v. 25, etc. 
 The un-Attic (and poetic) jm^tk for fj/r)Seh occurs 1 Cor. xvi. 11. 
 
 Correlatives. 
 B. §78, 2; H. §247; C. §53; J. §874, Obs. 4. 
 
 The distinction between rt? and troTepo^, which was some- 
 times neglected even by the Greeks (like the use of qiois and 
 uter by the Romans), soems to be wholly disregarded by the 
 writers of the N. T. ; for the form irojepos occurs but once and 
 
32 SYLLABIC AUGMENT. 
 
 in the double conjunction woTepov . . . rj (John vii. 17), while 
 everywhere else rt? is used, even where there is the plainest 
 reference to two, as Matt. xxi. 31 rt? eK twv 8uo iirol'ija-ev. 
 See Wahl under t/?, and cf. B. § 71, 1. An analogy to this is 
 offered by the obliteration of the difference between irporepot 
 and 7rpS)To<}, -ov (although the Latins in translating still observe 
 it in numerous instances), and likewise between aWo'i and 
 eTepo<;. For example, Heb. viii. 7 el yap rj Trpcorr} iKelvrj (Vulg. 
 illud prius sc. testamentum) ^v a/ie/XTTTo?, ouk &v Sevripa^ e^rj- 
 relro roiroii, John xx. 4 eTpe')(pv ol Suo 6/mov' 6 Se aXKo<! jjLadrjrrjii 
 rjkOev 7rpa)T0^ (prior a, b, c, d,) ei? to /jLvrjfietov. Hence nrpwrots 
 is even connected with the Gen. compar. (John i. 16, 30), 
 respecting which see Syntax § 123, 14 p. 84. 
 
 THE VERB. 
 
 Syllabic Augment. 
 
 B. §83, 2; H. §43; C. §277sq.; D. §305; J. § 171, and Oba. 6. 
 
 The doubling of p after the augment, which, as is well known, 
 was omitted only by the poets on account of the verse (B. § 
 21, N. 2) has sometimes been neglected also in the N. T. 
 Although double letters are often written singly in the MSS. 
 yet the doubling of p in most verbs is never, or only in ex- 
 tremely rare instances, omitted ; accordingly we find eppi-ifra, 
 epprj^a, etc. Hesitation, therefore, has justly been felt at 
 making arbitrary alterations in those verbs in which the best 
 codices sustain almost unanimously the single p. They are 
 29 Matt. xxvi. 67 ipdmaav, Acts xvi. 22 ■wepiptj^avTe'i (codd. Vat. 
 and Sin.), 2 Cor. xi. 25 ipa/BSia-Orjv, Heb. ix. 19 kpavncre (cf. 
 below, p. 33), 2 Tim. iii. 11 ; iv. 17 ipvaaro, epvadr], — (oh the 
 other hand, ippva-aro 2 Cor. i. 10 ; Col. i. 18 ; 2 Pet. ii. 7). 
 According to the analogy of these examples the cod. Alex. 
 [Sin. also] (and Tdf. [so Treg.]) writes in John xix. 23 apa<po9 
 instead of appac})o<; ; and so frequently in composition after 
 prepositions, as 8iap'^<ra-a>v Luke viii. 29, iiriplylravre^ xix. 35 ; 
 1 Pet. V, 7 ; cf. Mark ii. 21 ; Luke v. 6 ; Acts xvi. 22, etc. 
 
 B. §83,N. 1; H. §819b.; C. §280b.; D. p.l95! J. § 175, Olbs. 1. 
 
 The forn^r reading /t£/x.v>yo-T€t)/*cn; Luke i. 27 ; ii. 5 is now set 
 aside on the authority of mss. ; yet it is often found in the N. T. 
 Apocrypha, and elsewhere also, e.g. in Diodor. (18. 23); see Lob, 
 Parall. p. 10 sq. 
 
TEMPORAL AUGMENT. 33 
 
 B.§83, N.4; H.§S19; C.§159e.; D. § 306 b)Obs.; J.§176,1, 
 
 The Homeric pepv-n-wfiiva finds now two parallels in the text 
 of the N.T., viz. pepi,fj,/j,ivov Matt.ix. 36 (Lchm. after cod. D, 
 ipt/Mfj,. Tdf. [Treg.]) and p6pa.vricrfj.ivoi, Heb. x. 22 (accord- 
 ing to codd. [n] a C). Similar instances in later authors are 
 adduced by Lobeck, Parall. p. 13. As respects the aspiration 
 of the first p, Lchm. has in both cases [so Treg. in Heb.] given 
 tlie smooth breathing, see Ausf. Sprachl. § 6 Anm. 3 Note, and 
 Lobeck as above, who besides puts a breathing over the second 
 p, as pepi/x/j.ai. But as the opinions of the old grammarians do 
 not quite favor the adoption of this, Gottling (on Theodos. p. 
 213 and Ace. p. 205) advocates the retention of the rough 
 breathing on the first p, except in words of Aeolic origin ; and 
 this is done by most editors. Cf. Steph. Byz. p. 543 Mein. 
 
 B. §83, N. 5; H. §308a.; C. §279; D. §305(1); J. § 171, Obs. 1. ; Tdf. ed. 7, p. Ivi. 
 
 With /j-eXXco and Bvvafiai in the N. T. both kinds of aug- 
 ment are used promiscuously ; as, TjfieXXev John iv. 47, efieXXev 
 vi. 71, Tj^vvaTo Matt. xxvi. 9, iBvvavTo Mark iv. S3. But witli 
 povXofiai the text of Lchm. [Treg. Tdf. apparently] always 
 gives the simple augment : Impf. i^ovX6/j.r)v Acts xv. 37 ; 
 xxviii. 18 ; Philem. 13 ; Aor. i^ovXijd'^v 2 John 12 ; on the 
 other hand, the Aorist of 8vva/j.ai is always rjhvvrjdrjv \_-da67jv 
 Tdf. in Mark vii. 24 after N B], as in Matt. xvii. 16, 19 ; 1 Cor. 
 iii. 1, etc. Cf. besides, the anomalous iOiXco. 
 
 B.§83,N.7; H.§811; C.284o.; D.§311; J. §171, Obs. 4; Tdf. i.e. 
 
 The omission of the syllabic augment of the Pluperfect takes 
 place, though not invariably (e.g. Luke xvi. 20 ; John ix. 22), 
 yet in the majority of cases ; hence ireiroirficeuTav, eic^e^rjKei,, 
 ryeySvei Mark xv. 7, 10 ; Luke vi. 48. etc. See other examples 
 in Winer § 12, 9 p. 72 (70). 
 
 Temporal Augment. 
 B. § 84, 2; H. § 312; C. § 278; D. § 305, Obs. 2; J. § 173, 7; Tdf. I.e. 
 
 With epjd^ofj,ai the augment et is the common one in the 
 N. T. also ; yet the other augment (17) has been received into 
 the text on preponderant authority in Acts xviii. 3 ; Luke xix. 
 16 [Treg. et-]. In the other passages it is commonly found as 
 a noteworthy variant (particularly in codd. Cant, and Clarom.) 30 
 [and adopted by Tdf.], as in Matt. xxv. 16 [Sin. also] ; xxvi. 
 10 [Sin. also] ; Rom. vii. 8 ; 2 Cor. xfi. 12. 
 
34 TEMPORAL AUGMENT. 
 
 The reading of the Rec. in Rev. vi. 14 elXia-aofievoi is now 
 set aside. 
 
 On the other hand, the number of the verbs that take the 
 augment « is increased in the N. T. by one, viz. eKKoco, Perf. 
 Pass. Part. ei'KKcojjbevo'; Luke xA. 20. 
 
 B. §84, 5; H. §310; C. §278d.; D. §305(2); J. §173,2; Tdf.1.0. 
 
 Verbs beginning with ev have now e v , now t] v ; and in fact, 
 both kinds of augment alternately : evKaipea Mark vi. 31 ; 
 Acts xvii. 21, eiiXoyio) Luke ii. 34 ; Heb. xi. 20, 21, ev<f)paiva> 
 Acts ii. 26 ; vii. 41, evxapto'Teco Acts xxvii. 35 ; Rom. i. 21, 
 evpia-Kco in the Imperf. Acts vii. 11 ; Luke xix. 48 ; Heb. xi. 5. 
 
 On the other hand, ev alone "is used in the other tenses of 
 evpLcTKo)., as evpov, evprjKa, evpeOrjv, also in evBoKeco (yet not 
 without variants, see Col. i. 19), and in the following verbs, 
 which occur but once in augmented forms: evdvSpofiico Acts 
 xvi. 11, evvov')(l^co Matt. xix. 12 ; eviropico Acts xi. 29. 
 
 But ev-xpp-ai has everywhere only iju-, as rjvypp/rjv Rom. ix. 3 ; 
 i;i;;(;oz'To Acts xxvii. 29 [eu-Tdf. Treg.] ; Trpo'^rjv'xeTo, Trpo<;r)v^avTO 
 viii. 15 ; Luke xviii. 11 ; Jas. v. 17, 18, and in the case of 
 eii^opito, Luke xii. 16, the MSS. are divided (Lchm. 7]v(p6prja-ev, 
 [ev- N Tdf. Treg.]). Of. further below, p. 35. 
 
 B. §84, N. 3; H. §309D.; C. §284b.; D. p.201; J. § 174, 3. 
 
 Neglect of the temporal augment, after the manner of the 
 lonians, occurs in the N. T. but very rarely. Thus the MSS. 
 sustain eTraicr'xyi'O'rj [eVi;- n] 2 Tim. i. 16 (on the other hand, 
 it is regular in 2 Cor. vii. 14), Biep/j.ijvevev Luke xxiv. 27; 
 there is preponderant authority also for avopOwBrj [n avoop-^ 
 Luke xiii. 13 ; further, for •n-poopmp.rjv Acts ii. 25, and 6p,oiMdr)fiev 
 [ft)- N Tdf. Treg.] Rom. ix. 29, — both in quotations from the 
 0. T. (the latter, indeed, not taken into the text by Lchm., but 
 placed on an equality with the reading adopted) ; also for 
 olKoS6/j,7jaev Acts vii. 47 Tdf. [ed. 2 ; Treg.] cf. Luke vii. 5 var. 
 [in John ii. 20 Tdf. now reads oUoBofiTjdr]], irroiKoBo/j/rjaev 
 1 Cor. iii. 14 Tdf. [Treg.] (on the forms of the Aug. of this 
 verb see Tdf.'s crit. com. on Acts vii. 47), ofioXoyrjaev Acts vii. 
 17 (Sin.), BteyeipeTO John vi. 18 (Vat. [Treg.]). See more 
 examples of the kind from the Sept. in SturZ, Dial. Alex. p. 124, 
 
 The reading Trepita-Tpatl/ev Acts ix. 3 Lchm., as if formed from 
 ■n-epLcrTpoLTTTU), may be noticed as an anomaly quite isolated. It is an 
 
THE AUGMENT IN COMPOSITION. 35 
 
 instance of carelessness, which, in such a writer as Luke is probably to 
 be charged only to the transcribers, since in another passage (xxii. 6) 
 of the same author the Inf. Aor. runs irepiatTTp&pa.i. Tdf. accordingly 
 has not adopted it; see the various readings, and Steph^ Thes. sub 
 
 voce OrpOL-lTTO). • 
 
 The Augment in Composition. 
 B. § 86, 3; H. §816; C. §282; D. §310; J. §180, 2. 
 
 Of the verbs belonging under this head evayyeXl^co (also 
 Trpoevayy. Gal. iii. 8) always has the augment in the middle, 
 also in 1 Cor. xv. 2, see Wahl. On the other hand, the Perf. 
 Inf. of evapeario) is now read after cod. A without augment, 
 evapea-TfjKevai, in Heb. xi. 5 [n evrj-^ . 
 
 B. § 86, N. 3; H. § 315; D. § 308, Obs. 2; J. § 181, 6. 
 
 Agreeably to the general rule, ij-po^TjTevo} in the N. T. has 
 its augment at the beginning:, eirpo^Tevov, -aav, etc. (see 
 Wahl) ; yet everywhere with the variant -Kpoe^riTevov, etc. 31 
 (especially in the Vat. cod., which the Kec. followed). Only 
 once„Jude 14, has the text of Lchm. (not Tdf. [Treg.]) the 
 augment in the middle. [Of. Grimm's Lex. sub voce.] 
 
 B. §86, N. 4; H. §314; C. §279b.; D. p. 200; J. §181. 
 
 The number of examples of a twofold augment can be 
 increased from the N. T. Thus throughout we find aireica- 
 Tecrrddrj Matt, xii.13 etc. [so a-TreKaTeaTrj Mark viii. 25 Tdf.Treg. J , 
 and rjveay)(6r]aav, see the anom. ot'y(o p. 63. On the other hand, 
 ave')(oiJ,ai and hiaKovea have the simple augment : avei')(ea9e 
 ■ 2 Cor. xi. 1 (and 4 Tdf. [Treg.]) avea-^6fit]i> Acts xviii. 14 Lchm. 
 [Tdf. Treg.], Bitjkovovv -^aa frequently. On tiie double aug- 
 ment see Poppo on Thuc. 4, 130 ; and on this (common) 
 ht,r)it6vovv cf. An. Bekk. p. 1285 ; Moeris sub voce. Respecting 
 dvopdoQ) see p. 84. (Cf. besides Ps. xlviii. 13, 21 cod. Alex.) 
 
 Future Suejunctite. 
 B. §88, 1; H. §262; C. §269b. 
 
 From the N. T. a number of examples of the S u bj u n c t i v e 
 form of the Future are adduced. In very late Greek, like 
 that of tiie Byzantine writers and Scholiasts and N. T. Apoc- 
 rypha (which swarm with similar anomalies), forms of this 
 sort (eauivTai, iXevcraivTat) are not to be denied ; but, according 
 to Lobeck's judgment (Phryn. p. 721), in the earlier authors 
 down to the Koivolthej are to be charged wholly to the copyists, 
 
86 rUTURE SUBJtnsrCTI-VE. 
 
 whose ear had already become accustomed to such hall- 
 barbaroiis forms (ib. 720). How far back, however, the 
 beginnings of this usage are to be carried, would be hard to 
 decide. A basis for it is offered by fiefuadcaacovrai in the 
 Tabul. Heracl. (cf. Ahrens, Dial. Dor. p. 334). Respecting 
 the usage of the N. T. authors, Lobeck, indeed, does not 
 generally express himself; yet on the whole he seems to be 
 opposed to the admigsion of such subjunctives even in the N.T. 
 (p. 722). In point of fact, too, recent criticism has done 
 away with most of the instances (cited by Winer p. 75 (72)) : 
 e.g. 1 Pet. iii. 1 KepBtjdijcrovTai, Rev. xviii. 14 evpijaovaiv (^evpy<; 
 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] , eujoj^o-j;? Rec). Also the first of the examples 
 adduced there (1 Cor. xiii. 8 Kavdriawfiai) has been set aside by 
 Tdf. yet is still admitted by Lchm. [Treg.] ; but the reading is 
 altogether uncertain (the three leading mss. have Kavyrjamiiai). 
 Cf. Lob. p. 722. The reading of the received text in Luke 
 xiii. 35 fi^y for ^fet Lchm. Tdf. can likewise be referred to 
 this head. Jcio-j?, which in John Tvii. 2, owing to its strong 
 support, can hardly be got rid of (although even in the Rev. 
 it has yielded to the forms Swo-e* aud hitxriv. viii. 3 ; xiii. 16), 
 may, if established, still be looked upon as an (erroneous) 
 .Aorist Subjunctive form, which in later times became more 
 and more prevalent in the mouth of the people ; (some of the 
 modern Greeks still say etaxra). See the numerous forms 
 of the kind from SiBwfit and ti,07j/j,i in Lobeck as above, also in 
 Cobet's Nov. Lect. 266 ; Var. Lect. 96. Ihe same hoHs good 
 of the clearly transmitted Subj. o'^rtaQe in Luke xiii. 28 '"Td*'. 
 32 Treg. read oy^eaOe, with codd. B D etc.j, formed from the e'sp 
 where unused theme ottto) and the Aorist rly\j^d<i7)v whicl» 
 actually occurs here and there. See in particular Plat. legg. 
 p. 947 c, and cf. Ausf. Sprachl. under opdco. 
 
 Characteristic. 
 B. § 92, N. 3; H. § 328 b. ; C. § 349. 
 
 STripl^o) has commonly, in accordance with the rule, a-rTjpl^co, 
 iaTijpMTM, (TTTjpt^dfjuai ; but the Aor. Imperat. is always o-tjj- 
 piaov Luke xxii. 82; Rev. iii. 2 (likewise Ezek. vi. 2), and 
 besides, in cod. Vat. the same inflection is found also in Luke 
 ix. 51 earripMe [so Tdf. Treg.j, 2 Thess. iii. 3 ar^jpia-ei (not 
 in Lchm. [Treg.]). Hence the Perf. ia-iripoKa (not ^cnripiyja 
 Jer. xxi. 10) and Put. aTrjpiSi in the Sept 
 
THE PUTURE. v 37 
 
 Moreover o-dKiri^^as, though a-dXTrir/^ (var. aaXin^') -770? Rev. ' 
 i. 10 etc. comes from it, invariably lias the forms aaX-Trlaei, 
 iaaXinaev Matt. vi. 2 ; 1 Cor. xv. 52 (and often in Rev., see 
 Wahl), and likewise the subst. aaX-n-ia-Ti]'} instead of aaXiri/yKT'^'s 
 Rev. xviii. 22. 
 
 The Future. 
 
 B. §95, H. §372sqq.; C. § 305; D. §302; J. §203. 
 
 In the N. T. (as generally in later Greek, see Ausf. Sprachl. 
 II. 315") (jiopioi Q^opeaoi) itpopecra 1 Cor. xv. 49 (Sir. xi. 6) 
 belongs also to those verbs in eoi which in inflection do not 
 lengthen the e. 
 
 Respecting cTraiveo-co see p. 53. 
 
 Contrary to rule, Treivda has uniformly Fut. Treivdaco, Aor. 
 iiretvacra : Matt. xii. 1, 3, etc. See Lob. Phryn. p. 204. 
 
 The so-called Attic Future of verbs in i^w is quite usual in 
 the N. T. Yet not from all these verbs ; but, so far as can be 
 gathered from existing evidence, a portion of them have ex- 
 clusively the Attic Future, others the ordinary Future, still 
 others both. By far the greater number, however, do not 
 occur in the Future, and it is not always safe to draw an 
 inference from the usage of the Sept, or of later authors re- 
 specting that of the N. T. The Attic Future forms in the N. T. 
 (in part quotations from the 0. T.) are the following : d^opiel, 
 -lovaiv Matt. xiii. 49 ; xxv. 32, eXiriovaiv Matt. xii. 21 ; Rom. 
 XV. 12, irapopyieo Rom. x. 19, KadapCel Matt. iii. 12 ; Heb. ix. 
 14 etc., iSacpwva-iv Luke xix. 44, /xaKapiovaov i. 48, /MeroiKia) 
 Acts vii. 43, iyytel Jas. iv, 8, xpovtel Heb. x. 37, and in the 
 0. T. there are many more of them. The following, on the 
 other hand, have the Future in croj : <yva)pit,a), invariably, John 
 xvii. 26, etc., also Col. iv. 9 (where Tdf. [Treg.] and the Rec. 
 read r^vapbovaiv after [n] A C), ^e/Ji^cB 1 Cor. ix. 11; Gal. vi. 
 7 etc., iiMpavl^Q) John xiv. 21, ipi^co Matt. xii. 19, Kadi^co Matt, 
 xix. 28 ; xxv. 31, KaTapri^M 1 Pet. v. 10, fieTau-^^T^fjuaTi^m Phil, 
 iii. 21, o"%/f(u Luke v. 36, x'^pi^ofj.ai, Rom. viii. 32, ')(^pr]naTlljco 33 
 vii. 3, xtu/stic^viii- 35, and pairl^m Matt. v. 39 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7]. 
 But i^vTrviaco John xi. 11, aKavSaXiam 1 Cor. viii. 13, are Aor. 
 Subjunctives. Kofit^o/JLM has both forms : 1 Pet. v. 4 ; 2 Pet. 
 ii. 13 Q-ioufMai), Eph. vi. 8 ; Col. iii. 25 (^-iao/iai) ; this may 
 have occurred often, as well as in the 0. T., e.g. ■jtotiS) Num, 
 v. 24, 26 ; Sir. xxiv. 31, Tronaco Sir. xv. 3. 
 
38 THE FUTURE. 
 
 ■ Kespecting a-T'npi^eo and aaKirli^a see above, p. 36 sq. 
 
 B. § 95, N. 13. 
 
 As proof of the statement that the N. T. writers give the Attic form 
 of the Future even to such verbs as lengthen the vowel, several 
 passages are cited with more or less reason (see Fisch. ad Well. II. 
 p. 359). After the rejection of those passages in which formerly a 
 Future was erroneously supposed to be discovered (rt -kom, etc.), the 
 following have perhaps the greatest probability of such a use in thei/ 
 favor: Matt. xxvi. 18 irom, Luke xiii. 32 TeXetoC/iai, Luke xii. 20 
 d7raiToi)o-tj';in particular, Matt. xii. 25 Iptfjiovrai and John xiv. 19 ; xvi. 
 16, 17 Oiiopii, OewpelTe, since indubitable Futures (crra6-^<reTcu, ofearde, 
 etc.) correspond to them both before and afterwards. The supposition 
 is opposed by (1) Its complete irregularity ; (2) The entire silence of 
 the ancient grammarians, since, had the usage actually found place in 
 the language, it is hardly credible that they should not on any occasion 
 have taken notice of it ; (3) The extraordinary circumstance that, if 
 this form of the Future was possible, the examples of it are so uncom- 
 monly rare, although the opportunity of employing it was so frequent, 
 while yet the use of the Attic Future of those verbs that can form it 
 regularly occurred so very extensively ; finally (4) The fact that the 
 Vulgate in translating the form employs almost always the Present ; 
 which, on the other supposition, would hardly have been done where 
 the temptation to use the Future lay so close at hand as e.g. in Matt, 
 xxvi. 18. Only iprjfinvraL does it translate by desolabitur and 6eu>pelTi 
 by videhitis, probably on account of the other Future forms which 
 follow.^ Hence the admission of this anomalous Attic Future is un- 
 warranted even in the language of the N. T., and such Futures are to 
 be explained syntactically as Presents in which the future signification 
 is included (§ 137, 10 p. 203). By this, however, it is not meant at 
 all \o deny, that the N. T. writers, affected by their frequent use of 
 the Attic Future, were the more easily led to employ in pure verbs 
 the Present instead of the Future, inasmuch as the feeling which 
 demands the Future was in some measure satisfied by the circumflexed 
 
 34 form. Cf. Ti TTowvfiev (quid faciemus) John xi. 47. 
 
 On •ycvvSrat Matt. ii. 4 see Fritzsche on the passage, and below 
 
 • § 137, 9 p. 208. 
 
 1 The other (Ital.) versions have some of them the Future in tl* other passages 
 also. But that this warrants an inference respecting tlie sense only, in no wise 
 respecting the form, is satisfactorily shown by the circumstance that they translate 
 other indubitable Presents also (leaving out of sight ^pxofi-M, IpxifJ-evos, see p. ,58), 
 such as yipda-ieTai, hvafiidvu, SivaTat (Luke vi. 44 ; John vii. 8 ; Matt. xix. 25) 
 hy the Future. Cf. Lachmann's preface (Ph. Bttm.'s coroU.) p. 50. 
 
ALEXANDRIAN AORIST. 39 
 
 Alexandkian Aoeist. 
 B. § 96, N. 1 ; C. § 327 ; J. § 192, 8 ; Tdf. ed. 7, p. I7I ; Scrivener's N. T. Crit. p. 416 
 
 Numerous examples from the 0. T. of the Alexandrian 
 Aorist in a with the characteristic of the 2d Aor. are given in 
 yturz, Dial. Alex. p. 60 sq., and from the N. T. in Winer § 13, 
 1, a. p. 73 (71). Moreover, it is to be particularly noticed 
 that both Aorist forms are constantly found in use by the same 
 writer, often in close proximity (e.g. Matt. xxii. 22 sq. aTrfj\6ap 
 . . . TTjOo^ijX^oi', Acts xxviii. 13 sqq. r/Kdofiev . . . r)X6afx,ev . . . rfKdov, 
 xii. 10, etc.). This phenomenon is no more surprising than 
 the simultaneous use by the Attics of the two Aorists elirov 
 and eiTra, fjve<yKov and rjveyKa, formed after the same analogy. 
 Accordingly, it is a very uncritical procedure (of which the 
 Rec. has sometimes been guilty) to undertake by correction 
 to carry through consistently the one form or the other in any 
 writer ; but here if anywhere the authority of the greater num- 
 ber of good MSS. alone should decide in every particular case. 
 To be sure, the editors often arrive in this matter at different 
 results, according as they give this class of MSS. or that the 
 preference, (the cod. Alex., particularly, has the Alexandrian 
 form in such cases). Yet in general it will be found that in 
 the instances belonging here the Alexandrian forms occur 
 most frequently in the 1st Pers. Sing., the Plural throughout, 
 and the inflected forms of the Imperative ; but never in the 
 Infin. and Partic. Active (seldom in the Middle). Cf. with 
 this the somewhat variable use of the two Aorists in the anom- 
 alous (f)epco and el-irelv. For an example from the Sept. of the 
 2d Pers. Sing, see 2 Sam. iii. 34 eVeo-as. 
 
 Thus in the N. T. we find used promiscuously the forms 
 ?fK6ov -ofiev -ere, eXdirQ), and ^\6av etc. (the 1st Pers. y\6a is 
 found only in Rev. x. 9), 6t8oi' and el8av (John i. 40 ; Acts xii. 
 16 etc., eiSafiev in* Acts iv. 20), but elBov always in the 1st 
 Pors. almost without a single variant ; ^ eireaov [^aav Tdf. 
 
 1 It is surprising that in the Apocalypse, amid the uncommonly numerous 
 instances of the 1st Pers. Sing. e?8ov, nevertheless in one passage tISa is twice 
 given (xvii. 3, 6) ; so that we are probably justified in attributing the form rather 
 to the scribe of cod. A, which here is almost the sole authority [so T.,Tr., N in vs. 6]. 
 It may be further noticed that Tdf. [ed. 7 ; cf. Prol. p. Iii] in the Apocalypse has 
 everywhere [' plerumque '] adopted the forms ifSov, and IfSo, which often occur in the 
 Sept. [cf. Tdf.'s cd Prol. § 28, p. Ixxii; ed. 4]. In other books they seldom occur 
 in the MSS., see e.g. Mark xvi. .5 var. ; Luke ii. 20 [Tdf.]. 
 
40 THIRD PUTUUE. 
 
 Treg.J Mark vi. 40 etc., and eirea-av^ Acts xii. 7 etc., also 1st 
 35 Pers. e-zreaa Acts xxii. 7 ; Eev. i. 17, etc. and in the Sept. ; 
 Treaere Luke xxiii. 30 [-are Tdf. Treg.] and iriaare Rev. vi. 16, 
 e^eirecraTe Gal. v. 4 ; evpov -ojiev and eijpav Luke ii. 16 Tdf. 
 [Treg.J, evpdfiepo<} Heb. ix. 12. In the Middle alpelcrdai the 
 Aor. elxdp/qv, e'CXaro has (except in the Partic. and lufin. Heb. 
 xi. 25 ; Acts vii. 34) wholly supplanted the other : Acts vii. 
 10, 21; xii. 11; xxiii. 27; 2 Thess. ii. 13, (in the Active 
 dveiXare Acts ii. 23, dveVkav x. 39). 
 
 Other forms, like e(j)vyav, eXa^av, iXd^aiMev, e^akav, icjjdjor 
 fiev, ecl>avav, belong for the most part only to the 0. T., yet are 
 found also in the MSS. of the N. T. and here and there in 
 modern texts, e.g. Luke v. 5 (A) ; Acts xxi. 27 (A [n, Tdf. 
 Treg.]); Mark xii. 8 (B); Acts xvi. 87 ; Eev. xviii. 19 Lchm. 
 Tdf. [ed. 7] . But the Imperfect form elxav Mark viii. 7 (Rev. 
 ix. 8), Trapel^av Acts xxviii. 2, is wholly without analogy, 
 although the editors have adopted it into the text because sus- 
 tained by the testimony of the leading codices A and B (and n 
 also). In the N. T. Apocrypha forms of the sort become more 
 and more numerous. 
 
 B. § 96, N. 2. 
 
 In the Active voice Kpinnw has commonly the 1st Aor., in 
 the Passive the 2d ; yet once it has also the 2d Aor. Active 
 eiepv^ov Luke i. 24 — [according to Sophocles, Gram, an Im- 
 perfect ; cf. 2 Kings xi. 3 ; Soph. Lex. sub Kpv^co ; Lob. Phryn. 
 p. 317]. See B. § 92, Note 2, foot-note p. 122. 
 
 Third Future. 
 B. §99; H. §394; C. §319. 
 
 The Third Fut. (Passive), seldom used even by the Greeks 
 in its peculiar force as a Paulopost Future and Future Perfect, 
 belongs to the more delicate and artificial products of the 
 Greek tongue. In the N. T., therefore, it no longer appears. 
 On KeKpd^ofiai see the anomalous Kpd^eo p. 61. 
 
 1 In Matt. vii. 25 also the MSS. [N also] give Trposeveffav, out of which Lchm., 
 on account of the Latin translation and taking into consideration the frequent 
 interchange of f and ai (see e.g. ava!re<T!u for avaweae Luke xiv. 10; xvii. 7 [Tdf. 
 ed. 7, p. Ivi], (payetre ib. 8, fvvfKcus 1 Cor. xiv. 34, and the Still more uncouth 
 aio-flfiETai for iaOiere I Cor. x. 25 cod. G), thought he must make TrposeTraurav. 
 Yet considering the rarity of the word irposxaia (it occurs nowhere else in the 
 N. T., and in the O.T. also, as well as in other authors, its existence is almost 
 doubtful, see Stcphanus sub voce ; the usual word is TrposTTTala) Tdf. [so Treg.] 
 has with reason given the preference to the M8. reading. Cf. besides the anom- 
 alous TiiiTTu, p. 67. 
 
VERBS IN X H » p. 41 
 
 Vekes is X |i, V p. 
 B. §101; H. §345; C. §152; J. §222. 
 
 Examples from the N. T. of the later formation in a from 
 verbs in -aivat, -alpm are, arjfiavai Acts xi. 28 ; xxv. 27 ; Rev. 
 i. 1, iroifj,dpaT6 1 Pet. v. 2, eKicaddpri 2 Tim. ii. 21, i^da-Kuvev 
 Gal. iii. 1 and even eTn(f)avai Luke i. 79 ; thence the Subjunc. 
 (jidvy (Rec. (paivy or (/)az'.v [Tr.])Rev. viii.l2;xviii.23. Cf. the 
 extended discussion in Lob. ad Phryn. p. 25. The spelling 
 arj/MuvM, Kadapai in earlier authors (e.g. Xen. Hell. 1, 1, 2 ; 
 Oec. 18, 8, etc.) probably arose only through later copyists. 
 See Poppo and Dind. on Cyr. 4, 5, 36. 
 
 ^A-TTOKTeiva) uniformly retains the v in the 1st Aor. Passive ; 
 thus, direicTdvdrjv Mark viii. 31, etc., see Winer § 15, p. 83 (79). 
 With Kpivco and kKIvos, however, this is never the case. This 36 
 usage holds good in the N. T. Of retVo) and ifKvvas no Aor. 
 Pass, forms occur. 
 
 B. §101, N. 7 and 8; C. §50. 
 
 The Perfect Passive of /tttatVta, which in earlier authors 
 (Plato, Thucyd.) is formed according to common analogy 
 fiefiiaafjbat, is /jue/Mia/Mfiat in later writers (e.g. Die C. p. 655, 
 and cf. An. Cram. IV. p. 197) ; and this is the form given by 
 all the manuscripts in Titus i. 15. The form fiefiiavrai which 
 occurs in the same passage may be taken (according to B. § 101, 
 N. 7) as 8d Pers. Plural ; commonly it is explained as 3d Pers. 
 Singular, like i^-^pavrai Mark xi. 21.^ This last-mentioned 
 verb also has in the N. T. i^pa/j,ficu in the 1st Pers. Sing., 
 cf. Mark iii. 1 ; xi. 20. 
 
 Verbals in t<5s. 
 B. §102; H. §398; C;§269d.; D. p.l90; J. §318. 
 
 Verbals in ro'i take the accent on the last syllable, as ypaTrr6<s, 
 
 ryvo}(7T6<;, opaTO'i, dyaTrrjTO'i, (fidaproi, etc. When compounded, 
 
 1 The Vulgate translates it inquinatae sunt. .When we add to this the express 
 testimony of the scholiast on Arist. Plut. 635 (ex*' ^e rb \e\dfnrpvi'Tcu Tpirov 
 ■jTpSsunoy Twv eyiKuu &^6^tavov t^J rpiTtp tcSc ivKtiQwriKUVj Sts rh i^'fjpayrai Kai 
 KaTTjcrxwTai Koi 'iaa toioCto) and the other passages cited in the Ausf. Sprachl. 
 I. 442, we can hardly regard the existence of the 3d Pers. Plural as so improbable 
 as Schafer on Dion. H. de comp. verb. p. 355 asserts it to be ; especially as to a 
 
 ■ Greek the ending -vtcu would naturally produce the impression of a plural. . As 
 further evidence towards establishing that form p.efiiavTai as plural, the quotation 
 
 ■ from an unknown poet in Sujdas under rf/cujiap'} may serve: "Ea-rairaii, ovSh K6p,as 
 r^a(l>ap7i fie/itavTO Kovlri, where /ifpi.. is manifestly plural, whether we read Kd/ias 
 or with Valckenaer kiJ/ioi. Hermann also (on Aesch. Pers. 569) takes the form 
 Ippai/Toi. as 3d Pers. Plur. of the Perfect. 
 
 6 
 
42 REMARKS ON THE REGULAR VERB. 
 
 however, they always draw back the ;iccent if the composition 
 first takes place in the Verbal; as, deowevcn-o^, ^va^da-TaicToiy 
 evderoi, euTT/DoySe/cTo?, ex))(pr)aro<;, and all those compounded 
 with a privative, the number of which is very great in the N. T., 
 as ai'tTTTos, d(f>Oap'ro<;, a'jrp6<;no<s, dSidKpiTo<;, etc. On the other 
 hand, if derived indubitably from verbs already compounded, 
 they retain the accent on the last, as dveKToi from dvexo/J-ai, 
 ev\oyr]r6<; from eiiXoyeo), e/cXcKTo? from eKXiyofjLai, also <TweKke- 
 kt6<;, avvero^ from avviijfu, etc. Those that do not do this 
 must be regarded as first compoiinded in the Verbal, as aTroSe- 
 «T09 (simple Se/cros Luke iv. 19, etc.), avfjLcpvTO'i, 6fi(j)VTo<;, 
 €K6eTo<;, etc. 
 
 Verbals in to'; derived from intransitive verbs have also an 
 87 Active (intransitive) sense, as OvrjTO'i, ■n-aOT^ro's (Acts xxvi. 
 23) , dwraca-Toi (Jude 24), dpeo-To?, etc. See further respecting 
 Verbals below, § 134, 8, p. 190. On 7rpo9^XvTo? see p. 74. 
 
 Ebmakks on the Regttlae Vebb. 
 B.p.l62; H.§349; 0.§293; D.p.l79; J.§194. 
 
 Respecting the double form of the 1st Aor. Opt. Act. given 
 in the paradigm, it may be remarked that in the 3d Pers. Sing, 
 the form in at is the only one in use (hence probably in the 
 3d Pers. Plur. more correctly -n-onja-aiev Luke vi. 11 Lchm. 
 [Treg. Tdf.], ■^^'Ka<^crai,ev Acts xvii. 27 var.), and in the 3d 
 Pers. Plur. of the Imperative of all tenses the forms in -Tcoaav 
 and -a-dtoa-av. Examples of both verbal forms abound in all 
 parts of the N. T., e.g. 1 Thess. iii. 11, 12 ; Heb. xiii. 21 ; Jas. 
 v. 14 ; Rom. xv. 11 ; Luke xxi. 21, etc. 
 
 B. p.l62i H. §363; C. §331; J. §196. 
 
 Instances of the form in aai in the 2d Pers. Sing, of contract 
 verbs — a form which indubitably occurs in the N. T., and is 
 elsewhere also in use here and there, and is accordingly cen- 
 sured by the Atticists and even the anti-Atticists (An. Bekk. 
 II. 77, 98) — are the following : ohwdaai Luke xvi. 25, Kav)(aaai, 
 KaTaKauxpia-ai Rom. ii. 17, 23 ; xi. 18 ; 1 Cor. iv. 7. Elsewhere 
 it appears only in the two Future forms iriea-M and ^dr/ea-ai ; 
 see the anomalous irlvco p. 66, and ia6ico p. 58. 
 
 B. p. 162 ; H. § 863 a. ; C. § 297 f. ; J. § 196, Obs. i. 
 
 The 21 Pers. ^ovXei has been retained in the N. T. (Luke 
 xxii. 42), but the reading of the Rec. <y<^ei is not found to be 
 
REMARKS ON THE REGULAR VERB. 43 
 
 eptablished by the codd. ; hence recent editions have -y, as 
 generally in the 2d Pers., also of the Future, thus 01//77, /J-alvy, 
 TTape^, airapyrjari, etc. ; see Win. § 13. 2, p. 75 sq. (73). The 
 2d Pers. of oiofiai does not occur. In the N. T. Apocrypha 
 always ^ovXtj, o-fu (Nicod. B. 6, 9; Ep. Clem. 1, 39, etc.). 
 
 B.p.163; H.§856sq.j C.§330; D.p.253i J. §192. 
 
 The (Alexandrian, see An. Bekk. p. 91) termination, com- 
 mon in the Sept., oi-oaav for -ov especially in the 2d Aor. (see 
 examples in Sturz, Dial. Alex. p. 59 ; Mullach,Vulg. Spr. p. 16), 
 does not occur very often in the N. T. The reading of cod. 
 A [n alsd] in 2 Thess. iii. 6, irapeXd^oaav, has not been adopted 
 by Lchm. [yet so Tdf. eds. 7, 8] jeSoXtoCo-af in Rom. iii. 13 is in 
 a quotation from the 0. T. (Ps. v. 9); and eSiBocrav, which 
 Winer p. 77 (74) adds to these, cannot be taken into account. 
 In the 3d Pers. of 2d Aorists the eiiding -av was more common 
 (rjKOav, elhav), as observed above, p. 39. Accordingly we 
 have only eixoaav (John xv. 22, 24) left, — an Imperfect form, 
 therefore, which is as isolated here as el-xav was above ; see 
 respecting it my article in the Stud. u. Krit. for 1858, Heft 3, 
 p. 485 sqq. It is remarkable that this very form has the au- 
 thority of cod. Alex, against it. 
 
 B.p.164; C.§830; D. p.263; J. §191. 
 
 The ending -av for -arri, in the Perfect is now established in 
 many passages of the N. T., as John xvii. 7 ; Rev. xviii. 3 38 
 Lchm. [Tdf. Treg.J ; Jas. v. 4 ; Acts xvi. 36 etc., see Winer 
 § 13, p. 76 (73) ; yet not in all, see e.g. Luke ix. 36 [-av Tdf. 
 Treg.j ; Rev. viii. 2 ; 1 John ii. 18 Qyeyovaaiv, but in Rom. 
 xvi. 7 ; Rev. xxi. 6 Qtc. yiyovav'), etc. 
 
 Quite without parallel is the 2d Pers. Sing, of the same tense wiih 
 the ending -es for -as : Rev. ii. 3 KeKOTriaxcs. See Lchm. pref. p. 42 
 note, and of. Exod. v. 22 Alex. This form of the Perf., however, 
 was by no means uncommon in the Alexandrian dialect, as is apparent 
 from ApoUon. Synt. p. 57, 9 ; 71, 12, and is found both in cod. Vat. 
 and cod. Sin. in many other passages also. 
 
 The 3d Pers. Plur. of the Pluperf. Act. is uniformly -eicrav, 
 as ireiToirjKeKTav Mark xv. 7, etc., even when in Attic the form 
 in -ecrav is the only one in use see olSa, p. 51. (But air-, 
 i^iaav Acts xvii. 15, etc.) 
 
44 CONTRACT VERBS. 
 
 Contract Verbs. 
 B. § 105j H. § 370 sq. ; C. § 309 sq. ; D. § 332 sq. ; J. § 238 Sq. 
 
 The uncontracted Imperative awSxee (B. p. 174, note) has a 
 parallel in the form (Rev. xvi. 1) ixxeere (Rec. eKxearey. Of. 
 Lchm. pref. p. 42 note. 
 
 B.p.l67,note; H.§371; C. §309c.; D.p.256; J.§239. 
 
 In the more recent editions the t subscript is omitted in the 
 Infin. termination -civ. Yet in consideration of the Infin. ter- 
 mination -olv for -ovv in verbs in oa, vrhich is here and there 
 given and even accepted (Matt. xiii. 32, cf. Mark iv. 32 ;* Heb. 
 vii. 6 where Tdf. [so too Treg.j after cod. B reads a7roS««;aToZz'), 
 the other mode of writing is perhaps to be preferred in the N. T. 
 
 B. § 105, N. 5; H. § 371; C. § 120; D. p. 262; J. § 239. 
 
 Of the four verbs here mentioned, hv^^dm and ireivdo) do not 
 follow the rule, as they everywhere revert to the main rule and 
 contract into a, e.g. Rom. xii. 20. That ireivam (not hii^do)) 
 retains the a in the other tenses also see p. 37. 
 
 B. §105,N. 8; C. §322; H. §370D.; D. p. 263Bq.; J. § 240. 
 
 As in the case of the forms rea-aepa etc., see above p. 29, so when 
 contractions of verbs in aco which have 17 in the Future occur oc- 
 casionally as if from -eto (but only into -ov), we are hardly warranted in 
 regarding them as lonisms, but only as irregularities (perhaps of the 
 scribes) occasioned by analogous forms. Thus we find ■^pwrow Matt. 
 XV. 23 [Mark iv. 10 Tdf.], vikovvtl Eev. ii. 7, 17 Lchm. [so T. Tr. vs. 
 17] ; but viKuivra's again in xv. 2 (-ovvra^ C); \_ifi,Ppifi.ovji,tvo<i John xi. 38 
 Tdf. ; iveftpifj-ovvTo Mark xiv. 5 Tdf.]. Numerous examples of the con- 
 traction in ov may be quoted, moreover, from the Apocrypha of the 
 N. T., the Apost. Fathers, etc. ; cf. also Cram. Anecd. IV. p. 412. 
 
 Respecting the opposite change of ew into aco see eXeiui and ^peut in 
 the list of anomalous verbs, pp. 57, 63. 
 
 Verbs in )ii. 
 B. § 107; H. §400; C. §45; D.§319; J. § 274. 
 
 The remark that the contracted forms of the 3d Pers. 
 Plur. were those used in common Greek, does not hold at least 
 in the N. T., for there only the ordinary Attic forms are in 
 use, as Tideaai, hihocun Matt. v. 15 ; Rev. xvii. 13, etc. 
 
 Side by side with the common forms of the Pres. ta-TTjfii, 
 
 the later Present form la-Tavo) occurs, especially in the Indie. 
 
 39 and Partic, as a-vvta-Tavto Gal. ii. 18, cTvpccrTdvo/xev 2 Oor. v. 
 
 12, e^- a-vv- KoBiaTdvcov Acts i. 6 ; viii. 9 ; xvii. 1.5 ; 2 Oor. x 
 
CONTRACT VERBS. 45 
 
 12, 18, etc. Besides this, the Rec. often had by-forms of the 
 Pres. from the theme in da, see Winer 78 (75). These, how- 
 ever, in the Indie, and Partic. have all now been changed : 
 some into the common form (as in 2 Cor. iv. 2 ; vi. 4), and some 
 into that in vco (see above). The Infinitive in Lachmann's 
 edition [and Treg.'s] is given, as commonly, Icndvai (1 Cor. 
 xiii. 2), and once as from the collateral form in dot, viz. IcrTciv 
 (2 Cor. iii. 1). But as important Mss. give in both passages 
 [NTdf.8in2Cor.l.c.J the form in -ami/,Tdf. [eds. 2,7] in con- 
 sideration of the above examples has given it the preference. 
 
 The contracted forms of the Imperfect (B. p. 183), 
 iridovv, iridei,, kBlBovv, -ov are by far the most common forms 
 in the N. T. as also in common prose, e.g. Matt. xxvi. 26 ; 
 Mark iv. 8 ; vi. 7, 56 ; Luke xxiv. 30 ; Acts ii. 47 ; iii. 2; iv. 35 ; 
 2 Cor. iii. 13, etc. Instances like iSiSoaav John xix. 8 ; Acts 
 xvi. 4, eTrerLOea-av Acts viii. 17, are exceptional, (and have 
 for the most part important variants against them). In the 
 Present of both verbs only the common forms (riOrj/j,!,, -ai, 
 etc.) are in use, and the neuter Partic. aTroBiBovv Rev. xxii. 2 
 is quite isolated. In Rev. iii. 9 we find StSw, which Lchm. 
 [Tdf. eds.7,8] followingthe two leading mss. [but not Sin.J has 
 adopted, manifestly for the Indie, (not Subjunc), which here 
 agreeably to the style of the Rev. stands for the Future (Vulg. 
 daho), the common form of which, haxra, occurs ii. 17, etc. 
 
 The fotirth formation in vfii occurs, indeed, in the N.T., 
 yet perpetually alternating with the inflection in vo> (which is 
 more common in later au^thors). For example, from BeiKvvvai 
 we have Seiicwfii 1 Cor. xii. 31, Set/cwet? John ii. 18, heUvvaw 
 Matt. iv. 8 ; John v. 20, ZeiKvvew Matt. xvi. 21, eTnSetKvii^, 
 dTToBeiKvvvra Acts xviii. 28 ; 2 Thess. ii. 4, SeiKPvov7o<; Rev. 
 xxii. 8, i'TTi.BeiKvvfJLevau Acts ix. 39; from oXXvvai : diroWve 
 Rom. xiv. 15, '/47roXA.;/6)z/ Rev. ix. 11 (cf. Sir. xx. 22'), aTroXkvTai, 
 1 Cor. viii. 11, -vfxe0a Matt. viii. 25, -vfievou 2 Cor. iv. 9, etc. 
 In other verbs the form in vm has almost completely superseded 
 the other ; for instance, from ofjLvvfii we have ofjivvei,, ofivveTe, 
 ofivvovai ; bfivvew in Matt. xxvi. 74 (but in the parallel passage 
 Mark xiv. 71 o/ivvvai, ; where, however, cod. A [so Sin.] also 
 has -vei.v) ; further, iaTpciovvvov, i^covvve^, etc. 
 
 In the Subjunctive of the Pres. and 2d Aor. Act. the 
 oi'dinary contracted forms (rt^w, 6&, etc.) are everywhere found. 
 
46 CONTRACT VERBS. 
 
 40 Yet of BiBtofii three forms of the 3d Pers. Sing, have been 
 preserved, viz. 
 
 1) The regular (StScS) SS Matt. v. 25 ; John xv. 16 Lchm. 
 [Treg. Tdf.], and often. 
 
 2) BiBol, Soi. These forms are not Optative [of. e.g. Tdf. 
 cd. 7, p. Ivii] but Subjunctive, and have arisen by regular con- 
 traction from a theme in 6« (cf. fiicrdorj, /mutOoT) : 1 Cor. jsv. 24 ; 
 Mark iv. 29 ; [viii. 37 T. Tr.J ; xiv. 10, 11 ;. John xiii. 2, (and as 
 important variants in John xiii. 29 ; Eph. iv. 29 ; IThess. v. 15 ; 
 Luke xxii. 4). And in like manner from the syncopated Aor. 
 eyvcov comes the 3d Pers. Subjunc. yvoi Mark v. 43 ; ix. 30 ; 
 Luke xix. 15 (John xi. 67 var.). In 1 Mace. xi. 40 we find 
 ■TrapaSoL ; in Hermas, Mand. iv., yvoi (Sin.). On the Subjunc- 
 tive cf. § 139, 37, p. 233. 
 
 3) Stoj? (not San) or Saw?) as if from a lengthened form Scorn. 
 This form is the rarest and is quite without analogies in later 
 Greek in its favor. It occurs in Eph. i. 17 Lchm. [Sowy Tdf. 
 eds. 2, 7, 8 ; Treg.] (B 8m), 2 Tim. ii. 25 Lchm. [Sayrj Tdf. eds. 
 2, 7, 8 ; Treg.J and John xv. 16 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7 ; ed. 8, Lchm. 
 Treg. 8c5]. 
 
 The 2d Pers. Sing, appears always in the form Sal?, 7i;o3s : 
 Mark vi. 26 ; Luke i. 4 ; Eev. iii. 3 [Tdf. Treg. yz/wctj;] , etc. 
 
 The (Pres. and) Aor. Optative of BiSconi, which in ac- 
 cordance with the syntax of the N. T. occurs but rarely, lias 
 the later form (Si,Smjv) Smriv ; see Lob. Phryn. p. 346. Of the 
 passages cited by Winer p. 78 sq. (76) only Rom. xv. 5 ; 2 Tim. 
 i. 16, 18 (according to Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] also Eph. i. 17 [ed. 8 ; so 
 Tr.]; iii. 16 ; 2 Tim. ii. 25 [ed. 8 ; so Tr.J; iv. 14) belong under 
 this head, as the others have been changed in modern editions, 
 some into the Subjunctive(Sc5, 8a)27)some into theFuture(Scod-6t). 
 
 B. §107, N. I. 8; H. §402; O.§306c.; D. p. 183; J. §277. 
 
 The Aorist in ku of the three verbs rldrffu, SiSco/j,i, 'tqfu is 
 'uniformly in use in the N. T., not only in the Sing, and 3d 
 Pers. Plur. but also in the 1st and 2d Pers. Plur., so that in 
 the Indicative it has almost completely supplanted the 2d 
 •Aorist ; as, iScoxa/j^v, -re, Matt. xxv. 35 ; Mark vii. 18 ; Gal. ' 
 iv. 15 ; 1 Thess. iv. 2 ; d(f>TJKaiu,ev, avv^Kare, etc. Matt. xiii. 51 ; 
 xix. 27 ; xxiii. 23; Mark x. 28, etc. ; (only once irapeSoaav Luke 
 i. 2). 
 
 The M o d s , on the other hand, are formed from the 2d Aor. 
 throughout. 
 
CONTRACT VERBS. 47 
 
 Respecting the very anomalous Subjunctive Ba)<rr), see p. 36 
 above. 
 
 B. §107, N. 1. 14; H. §401; C. § 297; J. §274. 
 
 The 2d Aor. Imperative of icrTrjfu occurs in both forms: 
 avdara Acts xii. 7 etc., and avdarriOi, eiriaTrjdi. Acts ix. 6, 34; 
 2 Tim. iv. 2. Cf. the anomalous ^aivw, p. 54. 
 
 The Present Imperative Pass, of la-rrj/Mi has only the full 
 form io-Ttto-o : 2 Tim. ii. 16 ; Tit. iii. 9. 
 
 The 3d Pers. Sing, of the Imperf. and 2d Aor. Middle of 
 SiSoi/xi, ought, according to common usage, to run eSlSoro, eBoro, 
 as Lchm. [so Treg.J reads in Matt. xxi. 33 ; Mark xii. 1 ; Luke tl 
 XX. 9. But in other passages according to pretty trustworthy 
 authority (and in the [last two of the] above three also accord- 
 ing to cod. A [and in all three according to codd. n B]) it is 
 preserved for us with the ending -ero, as if from the theme SiSco. 
 Thus SteSi'SsTO Acts iv. 35, aTreSero Heb. xii. 16, irapehihero 
 1 Cor. xi. 23, and often in the Sept. e.g. Ex. ii. 21 ; v. 13 Alex. 
 That this erroneous inflection is not unexampled in later Greek 
 may be seen from Stephanus, Thes. under BiSco/j,!,; cf., too, the 
 theme tco under irjfii, p. 48, The more recent collations have 
 shown that both, cod. Vat. and cod. Sin. rather favor than oppose 
 this form. Both codd. exhibit ^Wwia manu almost always -ero. 
 Hence it is not to be discarded from the N.T. ; on the contrary, 
 the form in -oto is rather a later (Grecizing) correction. 
 
 The Future form eKZoererat (Matt. xxi. 41) has been set 
 aside. 
 
 B. § 107, m. 21; H. § 416; C. § 50; J. § 319. 
 
 The Aorist and Future Pass. e<rrd9r]v, aradrjaofiai occur very 
 frequently in a purely neuter force, irtterchangeably with 
 earrjv, a-Ttjaofiai. Examples abound in all parts of the N. T., 
 as Matt. xii. 25 ; Luke xviii. 10 ; xxi. 36 ; Rev. vi. 17 ; Rom. 
 xiv. 4, etc. Both forms <jTa6rjvai and crT'i^vaL are united in 
 Mark iii. 24 sq. Tdf. [Treg.}. Winer's statement p. 252 (237) 
 that the 1st Aor. Act. earrjo-a also occurs in an intransitive 
 sense is without foundation ; for in the isolated instance. Acts 
 xxvii. 28, an object (as vavv or eavrov^^ is to be supplied, ac- 
 cording to the well-known rule (§ 130, 4 p. 144), which is to 
 be applied also to the N. T. 
 
 Of the syncopated forms of the Perfect, we find most 
 frequently in use — but always alternating with the full forms — 
 
48 CONTRACT VERBS. 
 
 the Infill, eardvai (Acts xii. 14 ; 1 Cor. x. 12) and the very 
 common Partic. eo-rco?, IcrTwcra. The Neuter in the abbreviated 
 form is eo-ro? Matt. xxiv. 15; Eev. xiv. 1 (Tdf. [ed. 2] iaraxs 
 [7, 8, Tr. ecTTO'i']'). On the other hand, the full form ea-TTjKO'} is 
 found Mark xiii. 14 [-otto T. Tr.]; Rev. v. 6 [-/ooi? T. Tr.J. 
 
 Of the collateral form of the Present we find a-r^Kei, John i. 
 26 etc., (TTijKeTe (Indie, and Imperat.), and the Subjunc. 
 <yrriK7]Te 1 Thess. iii. 8, (see B. p. 187, Note *) ; and one ex- 
 ample of the Perfect earaKa in a transitive sense, Acts viii. 11 
 (cf. 9 and 13). 
 
 B.§108,109; H.§403; C.p.78; D.p.295; J.§283sq. 
 
 It is by far the most difficult task to lay down the N. T. use 
 of the verb 177/44 ; for nowhere do the Mss. (and consequently 
 the editions also) vary so noticeably as in the case of this verb. 
 Since its use is frequent, we will distribute the forms which 
 occur under the various themes. 
 
 1) Present IrjfjLi : Under this head we comprise the common 
 use, which is in the main that of the N. T. also, as is attested 
 
 42 by the forms a^irja-i,, d(f)ieTe, crvvMcn (2 Cor. x. 12 Lchm. 
 [T. Tr.]), aipUrco, crvviSxriv (Mark, Luke), avpiel^ ; Aorist 
 avvfjKa (see p. 46), irapeivai (Luke xi. 42), crvva, dvco (Heb. 
 xiii. 5), a(f>e<i, avvere (Mark vii. 14), avek ; Passive dcpierai, 
 d^ievjai, KaOie/j.evo';, '7rapeifiivo<;. The Aor. Pass, is only found 
 unaugmented : dviOrj Acts xvi. 26, d^eOTjcyav Rom. iv. 7. 
 
 2) Theme 'lEfl. Here belongs (besides the regular Pres. 
 Subjunc. given above) the Indie. 3d Pers. Plur. if accented as 
 perispome (crvviovauv, djuovatv), as is done by Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] 
 Matt. xiii. 13 [ed. 8 also] ; Rev. xi. 9 ; 2 Cor. x. 12. But the form 
 has few analogies. Still, they are now offered us by Hermas ; 
 who, indeed, in the Infin. uniformly has awievai, but elsewhere 
 always a-vvio), crwtew. Yet since (according to cod. Simon.) 
 Hermas gives the Imperat. avvi.e, perhaps we ought also to read 
 everywhere avviai, avviec^ ; but in Mand. 6, 2 crvvieK is a Future. 
 Lchm. [soTreg.] has accordingly sometimes(with cod. B)chauged 
 it into the regular form, and sometimes accented it as proparoxy: 
 tone [cf. T. on Rev. 1. c] — in this way bringing it under the 
 
 3) Theme '1/2. Here belong, besides this 3d Pers. Plur. 
 iovacv, the 1st Pers. d^iofjuev Luke xi. 4 (and moreover, as an 
 important variant in Matt. vi. 12, etc.), the Partic. a-wlmv Rom. 
 
CONTRACT VERBS. 49 
 
 Hi. 11 (Tdf. again from 'IEI2 : avvt&v, see above ; but quite 
 erroneously in tlie Eec. ctvvimv Matt. xiii. 23), Epli. v. 17 var., 
 a<f>iovTai, in cod. D (Matt. ix. 2, 5 [cod. Sin. also], etc.), and 
 especially, the thoroughly established Imperfect form rjcfiiev 
 Mark i. 34 ; xi. 16, (on which cf. B. p. 194, 5 ; J. § 284, and 
 Lchm. praef. p. 43). Finally 
 
 4) Theme 'E/2 — to which belongs the isolated d^et? Rev. 
 ii. 20. 
 
 5) Besides, there is still the Perf. Pass. 3d Pers. Plur. 
 aj>ewvrai, already mentioned in B. p. 191, Note *. This seems 
 to be a Dorism not peculiar to the N. T. but, on the contrary, 
 rather widely extended, and even received by Attic writers ; 
 see Ahrens, Dial. Dor. p. 344 ; Bredow, Dial. Herod, p. 395. 
 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] adopted it throughout, Lchm. [Tdf. ed. 8,Treg.] 
 only in Luke and John (also in 1 John ii. 12), but in Matt. 
 and Mark d<f>ievTai instead. See the passages in Wahl, and 
 Winer § 14, p. 80 (77). 
 
 The 2d Pers. Sing, /ea^jyandlmperat. wd^ov, noticed (inB. 
 p. 192) as later forms, are both found in th6 N. T. — the former 
 in Acts xxiii. 3, the latter in a quotation from the 0. T. (Ps. ex.) 
 in several passages (Matt. xxii. 44, Acts, Heb., etc.), and else- 
 where also : Jas. ii. 3. 
 
 Instead of afi^ievvvfu (Matt. vi. 30, etc.) the.N. T. has a 
 by-form dfj,(f)ie^a} Luke xii. 28 Tdf. [Treg.] which has been 
 formed, it is supposed, from the ordinary Put. dfi<j)i,ea-(o. Lchm. 43 
 (after cod. B) substitutes for it the still more anomalous form 
 df/,<j>id^€i, not found elsewhere in the N. T., with which we 
 have to compare only the (unreceived) reading of cod. D 
 ■^fj,<l)ia<T/j.ivo<; in Matt. xi. 8. The form dfj.(pid^eiv, however, is 
 found in the 0. T. (e.g. Job xxix. 14 ; xl. 5) and sometimes 
 elsewhere also in later writers ; see Steph. sub voce. On the 
 derivation of this form (held by the ancient grammarians to 
 be a Dorism) cf. Lobeck, Rhemat. p. 223. 
 
 The later by-form of the Imperat. 3d Pers. Sing. (B. p. 193, 
 Note t ; 0. p. 74c. ; D. p. 229 ; J. § 286, 2), ^rco, is found in 
 1 Cor. xvi. 22 ; Jas. v. 12, (on the other hand, la-Oi in Matt. 
 7 
 
50 CONTRACT VERBS. 
 
 ii. 13 ; 1 Tim. iv. 15 ; ecrTto in 1 Pet. iii. 3 ; ecrrojaav, etc.). 
 Further, the Imperf. 2d Pers. Sing. ^9 (questioned by "Winer 
 80 (76)) is found without variant, and has accordingly been 
 received, in Matt. xxv. 21, 23 ; John xi. 21, 32 ; xxi. 18 ; Rev. 
 iii. 15. On the- other hand ^crOa as usual in Matt. xxvi. 69; 
 Mark xiv. 67. 
 
 The 2d Pers. Plur. of the Imperf. is only ^re, Rom. vi. 20, 
 etc. As to Luke ii. 33 (j^v . . . davfid^ovre^') see § 129, 3 p. 127. 
 
 In the 1st Pers. Sing, the Imperf. has uniformly the Mid. , 
 
 form 7]fj.r]v (so that ^v in the N. T. is only 3d Pers. Sing.), as 
 
 Matt. XXV. 35, etc. (see Wahl) ; rarely in the 1st Pers. Plur. 
 
 TjfieOa, Matt, xxiii. 30; Acts xxvii. 37. On the other hand, 
 
 ■ ^fj.ev as usual in Rom. vii. 5 ; Eph. ii. 3[Tdf. Treg. r/fieda], etc 
 
 With regard to the inclination of et/it the remarks made, 
 p. 6 above, hold true. 
 
 As an example of the peculiar style of the Apocalypse, often 
 setting at defiance the laws of. Grammar, may be here set down 
 the frequently recurring formula 6 mv kuI 6 ^v; for here 
 the Imperf. 3d Pers. Sing, ■^v, in the want of a Partic. Pret. of 
 ehat, is not only used as such a Partic, but also the entire 
 expression itself (by the use of the Art.) is treated like an 
 indeclinable noun: i. 4, 8; iv. 8 ; xi. 17. 
 
 This verb, so common with the Greeks, does not occur as a 
 simple verb in the whole N. T. (also not in the 0. T., with 
 the exception, perhaps, of Wi Prov. vi. 6) ; but instead of it 
 other and more expressive verbs are everywhere used, as 
 ep-xpfJ-ai, /SatW, inTarfd), etc. Even in John vii. 34^ 36, where 
 some would read et/it, the only correct reading is 6t//.t. 
 
 In composition it appears, but almost exclusively in the 
 Acts (which approximates most closely to the Greek diction), 
 as e^-, dirrjecrav, ekievai, (ehuOi, in cod. B Acts ix. 6), ei^ei, 
 44 i^iovTcov, rj ETTiovaa sc. rj/^ipa ; see the (passages in Wahl. Else- 
 where isolated compound forms occur ; but still only in Luke 
 (viii. 4) avviovro^, and the Ep. to the Heb. (ix. 6) el^laaiv. 
 
 This verb is plainly used as Perf. Pass, ofrldiffii (B. p. 198, 4) 
 in Acts xxviii. 20 ravrrjv ttjv aXvcnv irepLKeijxai,. Of. § 134, 
 7 p. 189. 
 
DEPONENTS PASSIVE. 51 
 
 otSa. 
 
 Of olSa the regular (unsyncopated) forms of the Indicative 
 are the only forms in use ; thus 2d Pers. oZSa? (Matt. xv. 12, 
 etc.), Plur. oiSafj,ev, otBare (xxii. 16; xx. 25, etc.), also 3d 
 Pers. oiSaaiv (Jude 10 ; Luke xi. 44, etc.). Only in the Acts 
 again do we find once (xxvi. 4) the Attic 3d Pers. Plur. 
 iaaaiv, and in James i. 19 the best MSS. give tare (Vulg. also 
 scitis) instead of the reading of the Rec. &cTTe, although the 
 author elsewhere (iv. 4) writes otSare. 
 
 The forms of the Moods correspond to the Attic, even in the 
 Imperat. of which the syncopated form lare occurs Eph. v. 5 ; 
 Heb. xii. 17.i 
 
 The Imperfect has only ^'Set? in the 2d Pers. Sing., Luke xix. 
 22 etc., and in the 3d Pers. Plur. always rjSeiaav, according 
 to what was said on p. 43 ; as, Mark xiv. 40 ; Luke iv. 41 ; 
 John ii. 9 ; Acts xvi. 3, etc. 
 
 Deponents Passive. 
 B. § 113, 4; H. § 413; C. § 266; D. §§ 337. 433; J. § 320. 
 
 The custom of Deponent Verbs — or of such as in the Middle 
 form receive a peculiar meaning, whether transitive or intrans- 
 itive — to form their Aorist out of the Passive steadily increased 
 in later times, as may be gathered, for example, from the list 
 of those verbs which may have both Aorists, since then the Pas- 
 sive Aor. belongs for the most part to the later period. Thus 
 aireKpidr), is far more common in the N. T. than aireKpivaro 
 (this occurs e.g. Matt, xxvii. 12 ; Acts iii. 12, etc.) ; avwyojjbai, 
 aitXi^of^ai, have only avij'xdrjv, etc. Yet there are also cases of 
 the opposite kind, as dpveofiai, oTrki^ofiai,, and. others still are 
 used quite promiscuously, as dyaXkidofiat ^ (John v. 35 ; viii. 45 
 
 i At any rate the Vulg. has scitote in both passages. Still, in both passages it 
 suits the contents better to take this form as 2d Pers. Plur. Indicative, — especially 
 in the Ep. to the Heb-, which, moreover, in many respects approximates to the 
 classic Greek more nearly than do the other Epp. 
 
 2 This verb (peculiar to the N. T. and Sept. and also to the ecclesiastical au- 
 thors, but to profane writers almost unknown) is in all probability not a Greek 
 word but of oriental origin, coined out of the Hebr. S"'5 ('"'S^j '''?'*) abstr. f^f "'?) 
 to Tf/uicc, which is often, especially in the prophetic writings, rendered by 1270^- 
 MacrSai. Accordingly, with the word irjaWoiiai it has originally nothing to do. 
 Probably, however, it may have found support in this well-known word (as is the 
 case with all languages in the ad;ption of foreign words, Grimm, deutsch. Worterb. 
 Vorr. p. xxvi) to which in significatibn also it has a distant resemblance. The 
 Hebr. consonant '' on the reception of the word took its place after the liquids, — 
 a position better suited to the Greek utterance. 
 
52 DEPONENTS PASSIVE. 
 
 56, etc.), Ifi^pifiAoiJMi (Matt. ix. 30 ; Mark i. 43). However, 
 a complete exhibition of the use of all deponent and middle 
 verbs would carry us too far, and the subject must consequently 
 be left (as being of a lexical rather than a grammatical 
 nature) to the special dictionaries, or to a more extended 
 discussion. 
 
 But that in the language of the N. T. the Passive formation 
 was employed in general, far more than was tlie case earlier, 
 to denote the reflexive or intransitive sense answering 
 to the Active, may for example's sake be illustrated in a few 
 instances. Thus we have already seen (on p. 47) that the Aor. 
 Pass. iaTddfjv often stands precisely in the sense of ecTTrjv, and is 
 interchanged with it. So e.g. in Matthew Kptdfjvai means in v. 
 40 merely litigate (but vii. 1 fir; Kpidrjre purely Pass, be judged'), 
 hLaKpidrjvai xxi. 21 doubt, ^rjpavdrjvai xxi. 19 etc. dry up, 
 (pifiiodTjvai, xxii. 12 ^grow dumb, aKavBdkicrdTjVM, -Oijcreadai xi. 
 6 etc. take offence, (nfKay^vtcTdrjvai, ix. 36 etc. fed compassion, 
 apdr)Tt, Koi ^ijdTjTi xxi. 21 raise yourself and cast yourself (cf. 
 Luke xvii. 6), riyipdrj xxvii. 64 surrexit (Ynlg.'),eyepd'r]Te xvii. 
 7, ive^pifirjOr] ix. 30 comminatus est, avvTjx^V^^^ ^^ii- 34 ; xxv. 
 32 convenerunt ; and connected with a new object (according 
 to § 135, 3 p. 191) : ivrpairijcrovTai tov viov fiov xxi. 37 vere- 
 huntur Jilium meum. 'Eyevijdrjv, yevr]6^T(o (vi. 10 ; ix. 29) 
 alternates with the ordinary Aor. Mid. yevea-Sai ; and a^Orj, so 
 common (xvii. 3, etc.), means not was seen but appeared, and 
 46 hence is connected with the Dative avTOK (not vtt avrSiv; 
 with which cf. the familiar use § 134, 2 p. 187). Or to take 
 examples from James : fjLapav0-qaeTai i. 11 will wither away, 
 vTTordyTjTe iv. 7 a pure reflexive submit yourselves, so too 
 fieTacTTpatpijTa) iv. 9, TairewwOrjTe iv. 10, etc. 
 
 E. §113, N. 6; H. §415; C. §588; J. §368. 
 
 That certain tenses of deponent verbs, especially the Perf. 
 Aor. and Put. Pass., are used in a passive sense, abundant 
 examples may be brought from the N. T. to show ; for in fact 
 the usage was somewhat current among the Greeks. Thus are 
 used OeaOfjvao Matt. vi. 1 ; xxiii. i, dcr^a\ia6rivai from da-^a- 
 \L(Taa6ai xxvii. 64, 65, tarai, Mark v. 29, laOija-erai Matt. viii. 8, 
 Xaptadiivai, Xoyiirdrjvai, /j^vrjadfjvat (Acts x. 31), einXeK7]a fxevov 
 kcTTiv (Luke xii. 6), etc. Very rarely (as also among Greek 
 
ANOMALOUS VERBS. 53 
 
 authors) does this take place in the Present, e.g. Xoyl^erai 
 Rom. iv. 4, 5, and probably also ^id^eTat Matt. xi. 12, see the 
 commentaries and of. Luke xvi. 16, and relative to the similar 
 use of ^id^eadat by the Greeks see Pape. 
 
 B. §113, N.T; H. §412; C. §684; D. §344; J. §321. 
 
 Exactness in the employment of the Put. Mid. of many 
 verbs as an ordinary Put. lias undergone a marked dimi- 
 nution in the N. T. and among the koivol in general. To be 
 sure, dKovaojjMi still occurs often enough, especially in the 
 Acts (the Mid. form almost exclusively in the 1st and 3d Pers. 
 Plur., John v. 25, 28 ; Acts xxi. 22 ; xxviii. 28 ; xvii. 32 ; Rom. 
 X. 14 var. ; Active, John x. 16. Of. KXaico p. 60 sq.), but likewise 
 often aKovcrco, -crere Matt. xii^. 14 etc. ; further airavTija-co Mark 
 xiv. 13, yekdcra Luke vi. 21, Swb^o) John xv. 20 etc., eiraiveam 
 
 1 Cor. xi. 22 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7, 8 ; Tr.J, imopKija-o) Matt. v. 33, 
 KKe-^to Rom. xiii. 9 etc., (rwovhaaa 2 Pet. i. 15. The Future 
 form in Luke xii. 9 cod. Sin. aTrapvijaerai (although in itself 
 considered genuine Greek, see B. § 113, 6) rests probably on a 
 mistake of the copyist (for -i/ij^jja-erat). 
 
 B. §113, N. 9; C.§576. 
 
 The remark that the alleged Passive sense of the Aor. Mid. 
 is extremely rare, holds good also in reference to the N. T., 
 inasmuch as the examples referred by some to this head (Gal. 
 V. 12 ; 1 Cor. x. 2 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7 ; Treg.J ; 2 Cor. v. 4) are all 
 to be taken in a Middle or Neuter (not Passive) sense. Acts 
 sv. 22 even the Vulgate translates correctly, eligere vivos 
 ex eis et mittere. 
 
 Anomalous Verbs. 
 B. §114; H. §451; C.§50; D. §353; J. §250sqq. 
 
 dyvvfjLi,. The retention of the augment in tenses other- 
 wise without it occurs Matt. xii. 20 (^Kared^ei), John xix. 31 
 (^KareariSiffiv}. Cf. dvoir^a) under o'lrfo), p. 62. 
 
 d^(o. For an example of the 1st Aor. in composition see 41 
 
 2 Pet. ii. 5 cTra^a?. On the other hand, kut-, eTraryar/elv Acts 
 V. 28, etc. 
 
 alpeco. Respecting the Alexandrian Aor. 3d Pers. Plur. 
 dXav (Acts X, 39), Mid. eiXdfirjv, etc., see p. 39. Examples 
 of the Fut. eX&j in composition see in Luke xii. 18 QKuOeKcb'), 
 Rev. xxii. 19 (a^eXet) ,• cf. Josh. li. 13 i^eXelaOe. 
 
54 ANOMALOUS VERBS. 
 
 aWofiai. The Aorist has the form rjXaro Acts xiv. 10; 
 but Partic. i^aXofievoi Acts xix. 16 Lchm. [Tdf. Treg.j (al. 
 
 dfiapTtivto. ' Future afiapTrjato Matt, xviii. 21. The Aorist 
 always has in the Indie, the form ■^fiaprov ; in the Subjunc. 
 alternate the 2d Aor. ap-dpry, dfw.pTr]Te (1 John ii. 1, etc.) and 
 the 1st Aor. dfuipTi]crri Matt, xviii. 16, dfiapr-^awf/jcv Rom. vi. 15 
 (Rec. -a-ofiev'), even in close proximity, as Luke xvii. 3, 4. 
 The Partic. is* always dfi.apT'^cra'i : Rom. v. 14, 16 ; 2 Pet. ii. 4 ; 
 Heb. iii. 17. Hermas invariably uses ■^fj.dpTrjo-a, d/uMpTija-w;, etc. 
 
 aTretXeci) threaten, elsewhere only Active (1 Pet. ii. 23), is 
 used by Luke as Mid. in the same sense. Acts iv. 17, 21. 
 
 dpTrd^Q} has the first formation throughout: Put. a/JTraa-w 
 Matt. xii. 29 ; Mark iii. 27 ; John x. 28, Aor. rjpiraaa Acts viii. 
 39 etc., (Perf.) Pluperf. a-wrjpirdKei, Luke viii. 29, 1st Aor. 
 Pass. rjpirdcrdTjv Acts xxvii. 15 ; Rev. xii. 5. On the other 
 hand, from tlie second formation it has only tenses with a pure 
 characteristic : 2d Aor. Pass. rjpTrdyrjv 2 Cor. xii. 2, 4, Put. 
 dpwar/rjcroiULi, 1 Thess. iv. 17. 
 
 av^dvas has not only the causative sense, make grow, 
 1 Cor. iii. 6, Put. av^rjam 2 Cor. ix. 10 etc., but also the 
 immediative, grow, (Matt. vi. 28, etc.), for which also the 
 Mid. or Pass, form av^dvofiai is used, 2 Cor. x. 15 ; Col. i. 10. 
 The Aorist in this sense is both rfv^rjaa Acts vii. 17 and r)v^67)v 
 Matt. xiii. 32; 1 Pet. ii. 2. The simple Pres. form avftu only 
 in the latter sense Bph. ii. 21, — also in Col. ii. 19 av^eu ttjv 
 av^rjaw according to § 131, 5 p. 148. 
 
 ^alvQ). The syncopated Imperat. Aor. has in composition 
 both forms, as in the case of icnrifii, (see p. 47) ; thus Kurd-, 
 nerd^TjOi, John iv. 49 ; vii. 3 etc., jierd^a Matt. xvii. 20, dvdj3a 
 Rev. iv. 1 Tdf [also Treg.]. The further inflection appears Matt. 
 KaTa^drco xxiv. 17 Lchm. [Tdf. Treg.j, Mark xiii. 15; Luke 
 xvii. 31, dvd^are Rev., xi. 12. 
 
 ^apvveo. This theme does not occur at all in the N. T. 
 (also no longer in Luke xxi. 34), but instead the un-Attic 
 (except in the Perf., see Thom. Mag. sub voce) theme ^c^pea : 
 ^apeiaQa, ^e^ap'qfjbkvo's, ^apr)doi(7i,v, iiri^aprjaao, etc., [yet Karw- 
 ^apvv6fj,evoi Mark xiv. 40 Lchm. Tdf. Treg.j. 
 
 /3k3im has been almost completely supplanted (in the Put. 
 48 and Aor. also) by the verb ^jiv, as we find only ^iwaai, 1 Pet, 
 iv. 2. See ^yv, p. 68. 
 
ANOMALOUS VERBS. 55 
 
 ^Xaa-rdvco has in the Aorist only the later form of the 1st 
 Aor. epKaarrjcra Matt. xiii. 26 ; Heb. ix. 4 ; also in an Active 
 sense Jas. v. 18, on which cf. § 131, 4 p. 147. The Subjunc. 
 Pres. is /SXaa-ra in Mark iv. 27 (Rec. ^Xaaravr]) from a col- 
 lateral form ^Xaa-Tdw, hardly to be found elsewhere (see Schol. 
 Find. Pyth. 4. US ddXXei xai ^Xaara). 
 
 7 a/A 6 £0. The Aor. runs indiscriminately now 6777/ia Luke 
 xiv. 20 etc., now iydfiija-a Mark vi. 17 etc., both side by side 
 1 Cor. vii. 28. As respects signification, it is us'^d in the Active 
 as well of the man as of the woman, as in the above passage 
 from Cor., where the difference in form does not indicate a 
 difference in sense, but is purely accidental ; for subsequently 
 (vs. 34) 'yafj.Tjaat is used also of the woman. In the Mid. 
 (Pass.) it is always used of the woman, but in the Aor. it has 
 only the Passive form ryafirjOfjvai, mstea.d of the Attic yjfiaaOai, 
 vs. 39 etc. On the collateral form jafii^a, eKjafjii^co, see the 
 lexicons. 
 
 <yLvofjbai. The Aorist has far more frequently the Attic 
 form of the 2d Aor. Mid., especially in the Subjunc. and Optat. 
 (/li^ yiifoiTo'), than the un- Attic 1st Aor. Pass. ijev^dT/v 1 Tliess. 
 ii. 5 etc., of which the Imperat. yevrjd')]Tco often occurs in the 
 Synoptics, the Partic. in Heb. iv. 3. Partic. yeyovdiii in sense 
 like natus, old, in 1 Tim. v. 9. 
 
 yivwa-Kco. Respecting yvol (Aor. Subjunctive) see under 
 StSco/Mi, p. 46. 
 
 That the Pass, of ya/u>crK<a should sometimes (1 Cor. viii. 3 ; xiii. 12 ; 
 Gal. iv. 9) be taken as Pass, of the causative signification {cause to know, 
 bring to the hnowledge of) like the Heb. Hophal, so that iyvwo-6r]v v-tto 
 Oeov would mean ' I was brought to knowledge by God,' is an error 
 which modern interpretation has already left behind it. See the com- 
 mentaries on the above passages, and Winer 263 (247). 
 
 Seofiat. The uncontracted form iBiero [Tdf., also cod. 
 Sin.] in Luke viii. 38, Lchm. has altered after several mss. into 
 the still more anomalous form iSeelro (cf. Job xix. 16 Alex.), 
 thus formed as it were from the same theme from which comes 
 the common Aor. e.herjd'qv Matt. ix. 38, etc. Cf. the form 
 Beovfieda in the anti-Atticist, Anecd. Bekk. I. p. 90. 
 
 Biiva/iai. By the side of the common 2d Pers. Sing. 
 Bvvaaai is found sometimes the form (censured as Indie.) Bvinj, 
 Mark ix. 22 ; Rev. ii. 2. On the other hand, Bwijarj is now 
 
56 ANOMALOUS VERBS. 
 
 read [yet Treg. Tdf. ed. 8, Svi^ ; so n also] in Luke xvi. 2. 
 Eespecting the augment see p. 33. 
 49 Bvco has in the Present, as often in later writers and the 
 Sept., the intransitive sense: (of the sun) iTriBvirQ) Eph. iv. 
 26. The neuter by-form Bvua, Luke iv. 40, ought to form the 
 Aorist eSvv, as also was formerly read in, Mark i. 32. But 
 recent editors, after preponderant MS. authority [yet see be- 
 low], give even here the 1st Aor. eSvaav (in Luke iv. 40, 
 also, cod. D has BvaavTo<;') used by Greeks only transitively ; 
 and the compound -n-apeKeBvaav, Jude 4, also has this intransi- 
 tive sense. Elsewhere the 1st Aor. Act. in composition (e/c-, 
 ivBvco') regularly has the transitive signification ; in the in- 
 transitive or reflexive (^clothe one's sel/^ the form of the 1st 
 Aor. Mid. makes its appearance. The syncopated Aor.lSwhas 
 consequently passed quite out of use in the N.T. ; cf. (f>va} p. 68. 
 Yet the reading eBv (Mark i. 32 Tdf.) gains now a new support 
 in cod. Sin. Instead of ■7rapei<;iBvcrav cod. Vat. gives -Bvijaav, 
 formed quite after the analogy of i^vr)v. Cf. Lobeck's note in 
 Buttm.'s Au'sf. Sprachl. II. p. 821, under <pvco. 
 
 The Present by-form (BiBvaKoi) ivBiBva-Kco, Mark xv. 17; 
 Luke viii. 27 ; xvi. 19, analogously formed but unknown to 
 earlier writers, has a transitive sense. 
 
 iyeipco. The Present Active has sometimes, but as it 
 seems only in the Imperative (Matt. ix. 5, 6 ; Mark x. 49 ; Acts 
 iii. 6 ; Eph. v. 14), the intransitive signification (similar to 
 ays'). In the Rec. it was formerly, in opposition to settled au- 
 thority, altered into the Mid. form eyeipai, ; this form was the 
 less admissible as the Aorist in a neater sense always in the 
 N. T. has the Passive form rf/epdiriv, see p. 52 above. Cobet 
 has everywhere restored eyeipai again. But Suidas (sub voce) 
 censures expressly the erroneous (and hence actually occur- 
 ring) use of eyeipe. 
 
 (e^ofiai) Ka6e^ofj,ai. The Imperf. kKa6et,6p.7]v has every- 
 where plainly the Imperf. signification sat, was sitting, Matt, 
 xxvi. 55 ; John iv. 6 ; xi. 20, synonymous therefore with the 
 Imperf. eKadtjfirjv John vi. 3 ; Mark iii. 32, or with the very 
 common periphrasis ^v Kadijfj,evo<i Acts ii. 2, etc. In the Present 
 Ka6i^ofj,ai, is not in use except in the Participle (Luke ii. 46 ; 
 Acts vi. 15). See the N.T. use of the forms which belong here 
 under I'fo), p. 60. 
 
ANOMALOUS VERBS. 57 
 
 iOeXo). Although in the Present only the shorter form OiXco 
 occurs, yet tlie augmented forms always.take r] : fjdekov, ri6e\i]aa. 
 The Perf. does not occur. (On jeOeXr^Ka Ps. xli. 12 see Phryn. 
 sub yoce and Sturz, Dial. Alex. p. 64.) 
 
 ei-irelv. Respecting etTrov and etTra seep. 39. Besides the forms 
 of eiTra usual in Attic writers (elTra?, eiiraTe, etc.) we find 1st Pers. 
 eiTraHeb. iii.lO [Tdf.Tr. retain elirov] in quotation, Acts xxvi.l5, 
 irpoeiTrafjiev 1 Thess. iv. 6, 3d Plur. elTrav frequently interchanged 
 with eiTTov (e.g. Matt, xxvii. 4, 6), Partic. etVa? Acts vii. 87 
 etc. and elTrau vs. 60 etc. The Imperative with the ending 50 
 -ov is accented by the recent editors elvov (Acts xxviii. 26 ; 
 Mark xiii. 4, cf. Luke x. 40 var.). This accentuation, if the 
 form is taken as 1st Aor. Imperat., conflicts with the rules of 
 the old grammarians (Arcad. p. 169 Sia-vX\a^a irapo^vvovTav 
 rj irpoirepLairSiVTai • velfiov, ehrov avrl rov eiire «.t.X.) , and elTrov 
 accordingly is the only correct Attic accentuation, see Ph. 
 Buttm. Exc. I. ad Plat. Men. and Xen. Mem. 8, 6, 3. But as 
 respects the Scriptures, the testimony of the old grammarian 
 Jo. Charax (see Etym. Mag. sub voce ; Varini Eel. p. 172 Dind.) 
 is too clear and definite to allow us to adhere to the same 
 accentuation in the N. T. (Xijet 6 Xdpa^, oto to Trapa ry 6ela 
 ypa^fj TrpoifTaKTiKov 6^vtovco<; Xeyofievov, olov enrov avrl rod elire, 
 Sevrepov aopia-TOV earl Kara rrjv SvpuKova-icov yX&aaav Xeyofievov 
 . . . dlov Xd^e XdjSov, Kal ro aveXe dveXov. et, ovv etTre o^vr6va)<;, 
 BfjXov on Kal elirov /c.r.X.) ; on the other hand, the same gram- 
 marian expressly .lays down the accentuation eiTrov for Me- 
 nander. Mid. a-TrenrdfjLTiv 2 Cor. iv. 2. The less Attic mode 
 of writing the 1st Aor. Pass. ippi07}v instead of ipprjOriv 
 (Matt. V. 21, etc. [yet Tdf. reads -e6r]v even here]) is now 
 everywhere established in Paul (Rom. ix. 12, 26 ; Gal. iii. 16) 
 and in the Apocalypse (vi. 11 ; ix. 4), so also commonly in 
 the Sept. (Gen. xv. 13 ; 2 Sam. v. 6, etc.). The Partic. is 
 always prjOek, even in the Sept. (Gen. xlv. 27). 
 
 iXeeco. The collateral Pres. form eXeatu is not only estab- 
 lished by the mss., Rom. ix. 16 [so a], (18 [not n]) ; Jude 
 28 [so n] , but is also sufiiciently attested by the testimony of 
 the old grammarians (see Etym. Mag. and Steph. Thes. sub 
 voce) as well as by other analogous examples (as ^vpia, ^vpda)~). 
 In such verbs, however, the forms that arise by flexion always 
 take 1] : eXe'^am, iXeija-ov, ^vp-^a-avrat, e^prjfi.ivo';, etc. See 
 
58 ANOMALOUS VERBS. 
 
 Etym. Mag, p. 129, 49 and cf. eKXoyaro Rom. v. 13 (i , [-arat 
 N"]), iXkoja Philem. 18. 
 
 IXkom. Respecting the augment see p. 34. 
 
 ipavvdw, the Alexandrian spelling (see Sturz, Dial. Alex. p. 117) 
 for ipivvdui, hence often found in cod. Alex., as Rom. xi. 33 ; 1 Pet. 
 i. 10 ; 1 Cor. ii. 10, has been received only once by Lchm., in Rev. 
 ii. 23 ; on the other hand by [Treg. and] Tdf. everywhere (even in 
 Rom. viii. 27 with cod. Sin.). 
 
 ep^oytiat. Respecting the Alexandrian Aor. see p. 39. 
 Since el/xt is not iised in the N. T. (except in composition, see 
 p. 50), the Pres. in its mood-forms (e/3%ou koL t'Se), the Im- 
 perf. ripx6fjir]v, and the Fut. eXeiKTo/iai make their appearance 
 again ; in connection with which it is to be noticed, that (like 
 the Pros. elfiL in Attic authors) epxofiai here, agreeably to its 
 51 signification, often has a future force, John ix. 4 ; xiv. 3 (ttoKiv 
 ep')(piiai Kol irapdXrjiM'y^ofiab) otc, (cf. the Germ, ich komme). 
 See the passages in Winer 265 (249), and cf. p. 38 above ; 
 also § 137, 10 p. 203. 
 
 etrOLo). The by-form eaGco, otherwise only poetic (Zon. 
 Lex. sub voce ecrdetv o-Trai^ico? xal, eitrep apa, oi TToirjrai), has 
 sometimes, although not very strongly attested, been adopted 
 into the text : Luke xxii. 30 eadrire, Mark i. 6 Tdf. [Treg.J 
 ecrdcov. Yet the form is found also in the 0. T. : Lev. xvii. 10, 
 13 ; Sir. xx. 16, etc. [cf. Tdf.N. T. ed. 7 Proleg. p. il]. 
 
 Instead of the Attic Fut. eBo/x,ai, the N. T. employs the anal- 
 ogous form (pcuyofiai, as Jas. v. 3 (eaTai koI (f)dyeTai,^ , Rev. 
 Xvii. 16 (in the midst of Futures), Luke xiv. 15 (^fiaKdpio<! 6? 
 (fxyyeTM, Vulg. manducabii), and with a new anomaly in the 
 2d Pers. Sing, ^dyecrai,, Luke xvii. 8 (Micah vi. 14, etc.). 
 See p. 42. 
 
 evplcTKO). On the Alexandrian Aorist see p. 40, on the 
 augment p. 34, and on the formerly received readings evprjayi, 
 -acofiev p. 36. 
 
 €x<u. On £t;^av see p. 40, eixoo-av p. 43. On the augment of avei^o/iai 
 see p. 35. 
 
 ^dco. This verb, common in the N. T., has both forms of 
 the Future : fijcrw John v. 25 ; 2 Cor. xiii. 4 etc. and ^^ao/iai 
 Matt. iv. 4 etc., see the lexicons. The Future and the Aorist 
 e^Tjaa have also the signification ot dva ^fjv come to life (again) 
 in Matt. ix. 18 ; Rom. xiv. 9 ; Rev. xx. 4, 5 ; and in Luke xv. 
 
ANOMALOUS VERBS. 59 
 
 24, 32 cod. B [and in vs. 32 n also, which Tdf. and Treg agree 
 ■with] lias e^Tja-ev instead of the received ave^rjcxev. 
 
 Instead of the Imperf. 1st Pers. Sing, e^cov, Eom. vii. 9, cod. 
 B exhibits 6^771' — a form analogous in structure to el^r), ^rjdi, 
 ^vat ; hence it early became current and has been often pre- 
 served in the manuscripts of Attic authors even. B,especting 
 its doubtful Attic currency and the contradictory statements 
 of the Atticists, see Ellendt, Lex. Soph, under ^dco, and Buttm. 
 Ausf. Spraclil. § 114. 
 
 ■qr^icuai. The Perf. ijy'^fi.ai in Phil. iii. 7, taken by some as 
 a Pres., stands plainly in antithesis to the following ■^yovfi.ai. 
 Of. however Acts xxvi. 2 and Bhdy. Synt. p. 379. 
 
 ^ a: w . The Perf. 3d Pers. Plur. ^Kaaiv, very anomalous not 
 only as respects form but signification also (for the Present 
 has already the sense of the Perfect), Lchm. [so Tdf. Treg.] has 
 adopted in Mark viii. 3, sustained by the codd. AD [n also] 
 and the translation (venerunf). As the form does not occur 
 again in the N.T., the readings rjKovcriv (Rec.) and elcriv (Tdf. 
 [eds. 2 and 7] after cod. B) seem plainly to be mere correc- 
 tions. This Perfect is one of those isolated irregularities of 
 the language, occasioned by the signification and perpetuated 52 
 by the thoroughly analogous appearance of the form (cf. 
 Bunre<pv\dKaa-t Xen. Cyr. 8, 6, 3), of which examples are to 
 be met with not only in deteriorating Greek but in all' ages, 
 especially in dialects less cultivated than the Attic. Moreover, 
 the form fJKa as Perfect has Alexandrian precedent QSJKafiev, 
 •re, -a-iv Gen. xlii. 7 ; xlv. 16 ; xlvii. 4 ; Job xvi. 22 ; Sus. 
 52, etc.), and is found elsewhere also in writers of the koivij; 
 see Steph. Thesaur. ; Lob. ad Phryn. ; Ep. Clem. 1, 12, etc. 
 
 Respecting the Subjunc. ■»?^»; see p. 36. 
 
 ■^TTttOjaai. The Ionic form of the 1st Aor. Pass, (but with the 
 augment) rja-ffwOriTe for ijTTri6r)ri (A) has been received by Lchm. 
 [Treg.] after a few mss. [n also] in 2 Cor. xii. 13. 
 
 OdXXai. The 2d Aor. dveddXe-re, very rare elsewhere or 
 even doubtful (Lob. Paral. p. 557), is used by Paul, Phil. iv. 
 10, as also sometimes in the 0. T., Ps. xxviii. 7 ; Sap. iv. 4 ;- 
 Sir. xlvi. 12. 
 
 Oav/id^w. The Passive which elsewhere means only to he won- 
 dered at (2 Thess. i. 10) is used in the Apocalypse quite like a depo- 
 nent Pass. : Aor. i6avfji.d(T6-q wondered, Fut. Qavfi-oxrOricrovTai, xiii. 3 
 [Tdf. reads iGaviMunv 0X1) etc.] ; xvii. 8 [Tdf. Treg. read ^au^atrovToi]. 
 
60 ANOMALOUS VERBS. 
 
 Ovqaicus. The syncopated form reOvdvai, is given Acts xiv. 
 19 by Tdf. [ed. 2 ; but in eds. 7 and 8 Te6vr]Kevai, with Lchm. 
 Treg.J. 
 
 6vw. On iOvdrjv see p. 7. 
 
 (t^tu) Kadl^co. Respecting the Future see p. 37. 
 This verb is used by the N. T. writers in both senses (se<, 
 and seat one's self). The Middle occurs only twice in the 
 Future, and that too in the 2d Pers. Plur. KaOicreaOe, Luke 
 xxii. 30 ; Matt. xix. 28. 
 
 Further, since the ideas to sit and to seat one's se^/'pass over 
 into each other variously, the common N. T. uses of all these 
 related verbs may be grouped as follows : 
 /caOi^co set, KaOiao), KaOiS), etc. 
 
 Ka6c^co seat one's self, Fut. KuOlcra, -iS> (2d Pers. Plur. 
 KaSlcreaOe), Aor. eKadicra. The Perf. tceKaduKa (Heb. xii. 
 2) synonymous with 
 
 KdOrjfiai sit (Imperat. kuOov see p. 49, Inlin. Kadrjadai, 
 Partic. KaOtjfievo'i and Kade^o/j.evo'i'), Imperf. eKadrjfj/rjv and 
 iKa6e^6fir]v. The Future in this sense is supplied by the 
 Fut. oi KaOi^w. ■ 
 iKvkojjbai appears only once, in the 3d Pers. Sing, of the 2d 
 Aor. d<pUeTo Rom. xvi. 19. 
 53 Kaio). The 2d Aor. Pass, is KaTeKariv, Rev. viii. 7; hence 
 Fut. Pass. KaraKarjaofjiai 1 Cor. iii. 15 ; 2 Pet. iii. 10, but 
 also Kavdrjaofiat Rev. xviii. 8. Respecting Kavdijaa)fj,ai (1 Cor. 
 xiii. 3) see p. 36. The Fut. Act. is regularly Kavaa, Rev. xvii. 
 16. But the Partic. Kavaovfieva, 2 Pet. iii. 10, 12, belongs to 
 Kavaoa, see the lexicons. 
 
 Kafji.lj.viiy see fjivij} p. 62. 
 
 Ke pdvvvfjLi,. The Perf. Pass. KeKepaa/iat occurs Rev. xiv. 
 10 ; Heb. iv. 2 Lchm. [Treg. Tdf., son] (where Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] 
 reads KeKpafievos:). 
 
 KepBaiva. The formation (/cepS^jo-o/iat) Aor. eKepSTjaa is 
 almost the only one in use in the N. T. : Matt, xviii. 15, etc. 
 Accordingly the Aor. Subjunc. Kephdvco 1 Cor. ix. 21, although 
 the other form (KepBijcrw') is used four times in the same con- 
 nection either just before or afterwards, is surprising, but 
 established by the MSS. [n also]. 
 
 icXaico. Fut. 2d Pers. Plur. Kkavaere Liike vi. 25; John 
 
ANOMALOUS VERBS. 61 
 
 xvi. 20, 3d Pers. Plur. KKaiaovTai Rev. xviii. 9, as in the case 
 oiaKovo}, see p. 63 ; (cf. Origen on Luke vi. 25 irevdria-ovai koX 
 icKavaovT at). 
 
 Kpd^co with long a (Herodian tt. fiov. p. 23), hence Kpa^op 
 Gal. iv. 6 (cf. Lob. Parall. p. 408), and 2d Perf. KeKpaya iv 
 sense of Pres. (John i. 15 fxapTvpel koX KeKpayev), never has 
 [(except dv-eKpayov Luke xxiii. 18 Tdf.Treg.)] the 2d Aor., but 
 always, as in later writers, the 1st eicpa^a Matt. viii. 29 etc. The 
 Future occurs only once : Luke xix. 40. But since the author- 
 ities there are divided between KeKpd^ovrai, A, Kpd^ovcnv B [jt] , 
 Kpd^ovTai D, and further, in favor of the first the usage of the 
 Sept. (Ps. Ixv. 14 etc.) [where Kpd^ovai is nowhere found ; see 
 Tdf. crit. com. in Luc. I.e. J and the perhaps mutilated reading 
 of cod. D may be adduced, while the authority of the [two] 
 oldest Ms[s.] and the usage of later authors (Lob.'s note in 
 Buttm. Ausf. Sprachl. II. 223) weigh in favor of the second, a 
 decision cannot be given with confidence in a case which stands 
 so by itself. Among modern editors Lchm. has given the pref- 
 erence to the common form KeKpd^ovrai, Tdf. [Treg.] to the 
 reading Kpd^ovaiv. With Kpa^ov may be compared •jrpo'i-TfKa^ov 
 II. fi, 285,^ — as according to the intimations of Lobeck (in the 
 Ausf. Sprachl. II. 268) it is perhaps more correctly written. 
 
 tcpefidvyvfjii. From the Middle Kpefiafiai we have in Luke 
 xix. 48 the regular efe/Epe/xaro. The oldest MS [s.], however, 
 read instead i^eicpifj,eTo, probably not a clerical error, and cer- 
 tainly no more anomalous than e'feSero, SteStSero (see SiScop,!, 
 p. 47). But on account of the little support which other 
 codices give it, this rare form, which occurs besides only here 
 and there in Mss., has not been adopted by the editors [except 
 Tdf.]. 
 
 KpvTTToi. See p. 40. 54 
 
 KTelva . Besides this form there exist two other by-forms 
 of the Pres. : the most common diroKTevvo) with a doubling of 
 the liquid, after the Aeolic fashion (see Ahrens, Dial. Aeol. 
 p. 52 sq.). Matt. x. 28 ; Luke xii. 4 ; Rev. vi. 11, and dm-oKTaivo), 
 which is said to have been the Doric spelling (id. Dial. Dor. 
 p. 186), 2 Cor. iii. 6 ; Rev. xiii. 10. Yet this last form, which 
 is but weakly attested by the mss., has with reason not been 
 adopted by Tdf. [or Treg.], and seems, if it was really the 
 original reading, to be less a (doubtful) Dorism, than to rest 
 
62 ANOMALOUS VERBS. 
 
 upon an erroneous spelling of the word, occasioned by the 
 common Aorist aireK'rdvdtjv (see p. 41) and the familiar poetic 
 forms eKTav, KTavea, etc. 
 
 (/cuo)) diroKVQi or dvoKveo) (forms between which no dif' 
 ference can be found in Greek authors as respects signification, 
 see Lob. ad Aj. p. 103) has, where it occurs, the transitive 
 meaning, bear, bring forth, and forms the Aor. direKwijaa Jas. 
 i. 15, 18. Recent editors accentuate dvoicuei. 
 
 XajjL^dva). In spelling this verb the recent editors have 
 everywhere introduced the Alexandrian mode with jm (Sturz, 
 p. 130) ; thus, Fut. Xrjfi^lrofiai Acts i. 8 etc., Aor. Pass. i\'^fj,^6i]v 
 Mark xvi. 19 etc. In the same way in derivatives \fjfj,y{n<i, 
 dvor dvTL- fiera^ •jrpo'iXrjfiyjrt';, 7rpo?a)7roXi7yu.7rT6CB, etc. 
 
 The 2d Aor. Imperat. Xa/Se, according to the uniform direc- 
 tion of the old grammarians (e.g. Jo. Alex. p. 21 to Xa/Se koI ISi 
 6^vv6ft,€va drTOKa ecm • to, yap Koivd tovtoiv /Sapwerot), must, 
 like tSe, be accented as paroxytone in the N. T. : Rev. x. 8, 9 ; 
 John i. 47, etc. 
 
 A.ao-KO). The 1st Aor. eXaKijo-ei/ occurs once, Acts i. 18. 
 
 Xeiirw has as usual the 2d Aor., and only once the 1st Aor. 
 KaTaXei-^avTe'i Acts vi. 2. The collateral form" Xi/ATraj^w occurs 
 1 Pet. ii. 21. 
 
 IJLeOvco and fjieOvaKOfjbai are both united without any 
 important difference of meaning : 1 Thess. v. 7 ol fie6v(7K6fj,evoi 
 vvKTo<; fiedvovaw. Aor. Pass. i/ieOva-driv Rev. xvii. 2. 
 
 (//.eXo)) fx.eTafj,eXofj,at,, 'Fnt. fj^eTafjbeXTjOricrofjbai Heb. vii. 21' (in 
 quotation), Aor. iJ.erefieXtjOrjv. On the other hand, from iirtfjA- 
 Xofuu we have .the Fut. eTrifieX^aofiai 1 Tim. iii. 5. 
 
 fiiaivw. Respecting the Perf. Pass, see p. 41. 
 :55 (fivco). The abbreviated (after the Epic fashion, B. § 117 
 N. 2 ; H. § 73 D ; C. § 136 ; D. § 140 ; J. § 19.) compound 
 tcafifiiKo for Kurajjivas, which is severely censured by Phrynichus 
 (sub voce ), appears, according to the words of the same gram- 
 marian, to have passed over into somewhat general use in prose 
 from the time of the comic poet Alexis. At any rate the 
 Alexandrians employ it frequently (Isa. xxix. 10 ; xxxiii. 15 ; 
 vi. 10) ,1 and from this last passage it passed over into the N. T. 
 (Matt. xiii. 15 ; Acts xxviii. 27). 
 
 1 Whether in Lam. iii. 43 we should accent tcaiiiwaai after the poetic fashion, or 
 Kaimixrai as conanorily, may Tje doubtful. Yet in the case of a word manifestly 
 
ANOMALOUS VEEBS. 63 
 
 vi^m. Only the other Present vItttw is in use in the 
 N. T. (Matt. XV. 2 etc.) as in the Sept. (Ex. xxx. 18 ; 2 Ohron. 
 iv. 6). ' , - 
 
 (vi)(x<Tco) Karavvcra-o} forms, quite according to analogy, 
 a 2d Aor. Pass. KaTevvyrjv Acts ii. 37, which is not in use by 
 the earlier writers, but frequent in the 0. T. : Gen. xxxiv. 7, 
 etc. This Aorist has everywhere the ethical sense ; Hesych. : 
 KaT€vir/r]aav, eKvirrjdrja-av ; Suidas sub voce. 
 
 fupeti). On the by-form fvpao 1 Cor. xi. 6, see Etym. Magn. sub 
 voce ; Lob. on the Ajax p. 181 ; and under eXee'o) p. 57. 
 
 (o'i'^ay) dvoiym. The variations in the form of this very 
 common verb are very great, both in the Mss. and in the dif- 
 ferent editions. In order to get a summary view of the forms 
 we will bring them together as given in Lchm.'s text which 
 here departs in many respects from the Rec. : Putuee regularly 
 dvoi^(o Matt. xiii. 35 ; 1st Aobjst fjvot^a — John ix. 17, 21, 
 26, 30, 32 ; Acts v. 19 ; ix. 40 ; xii. 14 ; xiv. 27 ; Rev. through- 
 out, (Subjunc. dvoL^w Luke xii. 36 etc., Imperat. avot^ov xiii. 25, 
 Infin. dvol^ai Acts xxvi. 18 etc., Partic. dvoi^a^ Matt. v. 2, etc.) 
 — and uvea^a John ix. 14 (and frequently as a variant, as 
 ix. 30 etc.) ; 2d Perfect in an intransitive sense dve^ya 
 1 Cor. xvi. 9 ; 2 Cor. vi. 11 (Partic. dvewyora John i. 52). 
 Passive : 1st Age. '^voix^V^ Rev. xx. 12, dvemx^vv Luke 
 i., 64, and with double (threefold) augment rjvetpx^rjv Matt, 
 iii. 16 ; ix. 30 ; John ix. 10; Acts xvi. 26 (Infin. ave6ij;j(;0?7i'ai 
 Luke iii. 21 with retention of the Augment, as in dywfu, which 
 see) ; 1st Put. ai/o t% 09? o-o /tat Luke xi. 10; 2d Age. rjvoijujv 
 (was opened, or opened itself) Acts xii. 10 ; Rev. xv. 5 ; xi. 
 19 (Subjunc. dvoip/Sicnv Matt. xx. 33) ; 2d Put. dvoiyricro(ji.ai 
 Matt. vii. 7; Luke xi. 9; Peef. Paetic. dve^yfievo<; Rev. 
 iv. 1 ; Acts x. 11 etc. ; 2 Cor. ii. 12, ^veqiyfievo^ Acts ix. 8 ; 56 
 Rev. X. 2, 8 ; xix. 11, and BiT]voiy/Mevo<s Acts vii. 56 (also in 
 ix. 8 rjvoiyiievo<i according to A [n ; adopted by Tdf]). More- 
 over, we find several times in two of the oldest mss. (A B) the 
 1st Aor. Act. with the double augment fjvitp^e John ix. 17, 
 21, 32 [but not so cod. Sin.], which has at least as much inter- 
 nal probability as rjveurxOtjv etc. above. Of course, where the 
 MSS. vary, different editors have decided in many passages now in ' 
 
 borrowed from the language of poetry the former accentuation is probably to be 
 preferred. 
 
64 ANOMALOUS VEKBS. 
 
 favor of one reading and now in favor of another. As, however J 
 the number of forms in use, which is all we are here concerned 
 with, is the same (Tdf agrees in the main with Lchm.), we 
 will leave disagreements respecting particular instances to the 
 reader's own observation. 
 
 olKTeipa: Fut. olKTeuprjaco Rom. ix. 15 (as in the Sept. 
 where we find also Aor. Imperat. olKTelprjaov Ps. iv. 2). 
 
 (oXXv/it) a-TToKKvtu. For the collateral form of the Pres. 
 ih va> see p. 45. The Future Active is commonly aTroXiaa) 
 Matt. xxi. 41 etc. ; on the other hand, only once aivoXSy 1 Gor. 
 i. 19, in a quotation from the 0. T. In the Middle the Fut. is 
 always airoXovfuii Matt. xxvi. 52 ; Rom. ii. 12 ; Matt. ix. 17 
 Tdf [eds. 2, 7]. 
 
 6 /A £ t p o ft a t is a by-form of l/jLeipo/jLai, given only in 1 Thess. ii. 8 
 (and a few times in the versions o£ the 0. T.), but established by the 
 Mss., and also attested by Hesychius and Photius sub voce. See' 
 Steph. Thesaurus, and Fritzsche on Mark, excurs. tert. p. 792. 
 
 ofiLvvfji,L. Respecting the form in v<i> see p. 45. 
 
 op da). The J^. T. agrees in the main with the Attic use 
 of this verb, excepting the forms of the Alexandrian Aor. (see 
 p. 39) and the accentuation I'Se (see under Xa/j.^dvoa p. 62). 
 On isolated cases like irpoopcofiijv see p. 34 ; on the Subjunc. 
 oyfrrjaOe see p. 36. The mode of spelling the Perf (employed 
 in Attic poetry, B. p. 251 Note f ; H. § 450, 4 ; 0. § 60) 
 kopaKa is often exhibited by the mss., hut has not been received 
 by the editors before Tdf, who in his 7th ed. introduced it 
 several times, e.g. Luke ix. 36 ; John ix. 37, [but in ed. 8 ap- 
 pears to have returned to the usual form, — yet not in Col. ii. 
 18]. The Passive co^Oriv, oipdija-ofiao commonly means to 
 
 appear (apparere) cf. p. 52. Respecting Ihov see p. 70. 
 
 m-ai^w. The Fut. Mid. frai^oiuu is the common form in 
 the Alexandrian dialect (Ezek. xxii. 5 ; Hab. i. 10), as with 
 later writers in general (Luc. Dial. Deor. 4, 3 ; ApoU. Lex. 
 Horn, under ficofiija-ovrat') ; the Future occurs but once in the 
 N.T., and. then (according to B. § 113, N. 7) in the Active form 
 kfiTral^ovaiv Mark x. 34, which is not unknown to the Sept. 
 also (Isa xxxiii. 4). The other tenses also occur in the gut- 
 57 tural formation : eVatfa, eTratT^^'j;^, etc., Matt, xxvii. 31 ; ii. 16 ; 
 Luke xviii. 32, etc. 
 
 •n-ava. The 2d Fut. Pass, of this verb is found once (Rev. 
 
ANOMALOUS VERBS. 65 
 
 xiv. 13) formed after the analogy of Kaia) (^Kaua-tD, eKar^v) 
 avairarjcrovTaL. (Yet according to codd. Vat. and Sin. we 
 must so read also in Luke x. 6 [Tdf.] ; the Aor. Trarjvai, occurs 
 twice in Herinas : (Vis. 1, 3 ; 3, 9 Sin.).) That this form, 
 unparalleled in earlier authors, was actually current in the 
 common speech (eV t^ awrjOeia) is attested by Choerob. in 
 Anecd. Bekk. p._ 1324, where it is used as an example by the 
 side of eKat^v and i-xapijv. Other examples in very late Greek 
 may be seen in Steph. Thesaur. under vravw. But in Rev. vi. 
 11 we have again the regular avairaiKrovjat [so Lchm. in ed. 
 min., Tdf. eds. 2, 7 ; but now Lchm. Tdf. Treg. -acovrai- ; so n] . 
 
 The verbal adjective (Traucrro?, icara'jrav(n6<;') with a priv. 
 a/iaTaTravcTTo^ is read by most editions in 2 Pet. ii. 14. 
 Lchm., however, has adopted instead the reading of codd. 
 A B : afcaTaTrda-Tovi. To explain the word in this form as a 
 verbal from TraiKo would conflict with all analogy, and the 
 sense forbids iis to derive it from irda-cra) (conspergd) . Hence 
 Tdf. [so Treg.J has adopted dKaTwrraixTTovi, with codd. [n] C 
 and the Rec.^ 
 
 ireTOfiai occurs only in the Apocalypse, and in the forms 
 •jrerafievot; (Rec. irerco/Mevo^') and veTTjTai,, xiv. 6 [n here 
 •jreTafMevov], etc. 
 
 1 Since, however, the existence of the o in the penult in two of the oldest mss. 
 weighs heavily against this, it may be that the error is to be found elsewhere. 
 Perhaps it is not the second o, but the first, that is written by mistake, and arose 
 from the preceding ko!, so that the word was originally KaTairdffTous, a verbal 
 which occurs elsewhere also (see Stephanus, Thesaur.), formed regularly from koto- 
 viaaai (frequent in the Sept.), and here has the meaning spotted, soiled, which then 
 corresponds very well with the preceding ^/.tarois {6ifi9a\fiovs eyovTci f/tearovs 
 fioixa^t^os KaX Kmairiiinovs k^apy'ias). Suidassub voce and the Scholiaston Arist. 
 Eq. 502 expressly render Ka.Tikiraaros by KaTifxeffTos, irA.^p7)s, imroiKiKiiiyos, and in 
 the same way KaTaTr6^w by KaraTroiKikSi, irKrip^crcii. Hesychius, who has so many 
 biblical terms, has neither aKariiTrauffTos nor aKaTdircuTTOs, but he has the gloss 
 KaTdiraffTos ircnoimXiiihos. The unintelligible aKwrat dcnovs, having once arisen by 
 a clerical blunder, was easily corrected into OKOToiroiio-Tous, and naturally passed 
 over in this form into most of the later mss. Finally, as respects the derivation 
 of the word aKardiraiTTos from the ancient nAOMAI (whence the poetic vdtratTOat 
 to taste, eat), the resulting meaning would be appropriate (insatiable), but the deri- 
 vation is opposed by the following considerations : (1) that the word in this form 
 does not occur again in all Greek literature ; (2) that even the underlying verb 
 was as good as obsolete, and at the most was only sought out by imitative poets 
 as an archaic term ; (3) that it was used at no time by any author in composi- 
 , tion with uard ; (4) that a N. T. writer should coin so poetic a word, and that 
 the ancient grammarians, lexicographers, commentators should pass over in 
 complete silence a term so unusual and so much needing explanation. 
 9 
 
66 ANOMALOUS VERBS. 
 
 TTtfiTrXiy/At occurs but once in the Participle of the un- 
 Attic form in da> : e/i7«7rXwi/ Acts xiv. 17. Cf. iarrjfj,i, p. 44 sq, 
 
 TTtefo). Of this form we find only the Perf. Pass. Partic. 
 TreTTtecr/xeiio?, Luke vi. 38 ; iii all other instances it has been 
 supplanted by the Doric form with d for e (which in the Doric 
 dialect has the palatal characteristic : Tnd^w etc., see Ahrens, 
 Dial. Dor. p. 116), but with the ordinary inflection Put. Trtao-w, 
 Aor. iiriacra, iTidaai, Pass. eindaO'qv., John vii. 30 etc. 
 
 irivtii never has the later Future irtovfiai,, but the Attic 
 irlofiai, Matt. xx. 28 ; Mark x. 39 ; Rev. xiv. 10, 2d Pers. irieaai 
 Luke xvii. 8, see eV^tw p. 58. The Aor. Imperat. again is ac- 
 cording to rule me Luke xii. 19, Infin. as usual Trietj/. But 
 besides, this Infin. is several times preserved in the foi'm 
 •kIv or irelv : least questionably in John iv. 9, probably also in 
 iv. 7,10 Tdf. [Treg.],Rev. xvi.6Lchm. [Tdf.eds.7,8], andnot 
 unfrequently as a variant in the oldest MSS., as in Matt, xxvii. 
 34; Mark xv. 23 ; x. 38 ; 1 Cor. ix. 4 ; x. 7. These forms 
 (jrlv and irelv) have now been established in many passages by 
 the most recent collations of B, as well as by cod. Sin. That 
 this anomalous Lifin. actually existed, at Jeast in the popxilar 
 speech, is established by other testimony also, besides those MS. 
 authorities. Thus the Grammarian Herodian (in Herm. de 
 Emend, rat. p. 317) expressly rejects the form it€w as corrupt 
 (oLfxapTdvovcrbv oi Xiyovrei; 'ireiv l3ovXo/iai,' fiovoavWd^w^, heov 
 Xiyeiv nrieiv Sio'vWd^a'i. /ioi/tu? jdp outo)? kol trapa roi? dp- 
 ')(aioi<; Trdauv €lpr]Tai), and an epigram on the grammarians in 
 Anthol. Pal. xi. 140 employs, apparently with design, this 
 form which they censured (ol? ov a-K&fifia Xiyetv, ov irelv cjiiX.ov'). 
 Now as respects the form itself, it has been explained — ac- 
 cording as the preference is given to -jreiv or -ttIv — either as 
 syncopated from Troeiv, or as apocopated from -jrlvai, (like (jivv 
 from ^vvai, see Ph. Buttm. in the Mus. Antiq. p. 248). The 
 first explanation has little internal probability,^ although, 
 since it has appearances in its favor, it became current 
 among the grammarians, and may even have occasioned the 
 spelling Trelv (so the cod. Cantabr. always). Philologically 
 69 the other explanation has a better foundation, although no 
 
 1 We can hardly compare with this the extremely rare dialectic absorption of 
 the 1 before a in isolated poetic passages (^iaiaie ApoEon., aav&w Pind.) ; see 
 Ausf. Sprachl. under ^da, II. 130. 
 
ANOMALOUS VERBS. 67 
 
 Infin. Trlvai existed, or at least can be proved. But that the 
 Aorist eiriov had an inclination to form syncopated Aorists is 
 shown by the Imperat. irWi, ; and the abbreviation of the Inlin., 
 used as it must have been very frequently (80? not irlv, irlv jBov- 
 \o/j,at), would arise thus in the mouth of the people most natu- 
 rally. Modern editors of the N. T. have accordingly retained 
 this spelling, and Jacobs also in his Delectus Epigr. (6. 78) has 
 returned to the form ttIv. [Tdf. ed. 8 everywhere reads Treiv.] 
 
 TrtTTTco. Respecting the Alexandrian Aorist seep. 39 sq. 
 But the former reading avdireaov (Rec.) or avaTreaai, (Grsb.) 
 is now changed into the common Imperative form avdireae 
 Luke xiv. 10 ; xvii. 7. 
 
 peas has in the Future pevaco John vii. 38 ; in the Aorist, as 
 in Attic (^ippvrjv'), Subjunc. irapapvcofiev Heb. ii. 1. Of. p. 32. 
 
 o"aA.7rt^(D, see p. 37. 
 
 (j7 KeTTTo fMai) eiriaKeTTTOfiai, the writers of the Old Test, and 
 the New are fond of using in the Pres. and Imperf. ; see the 
 lexicons. 
 
 cTTijpi'^u), see p. 36. 
 
 (^(TTopevvvfii,') in the N. T. forms only from the other form, 
 a-Tpdivvvfii, the Aor. ecTTpcocra, Perf. Pass, earpcofiai, Aor. Pass. 
 ea-Tpcodrjv, On arpavvvas see p. 45. 
 
 Tvj')(^dvco . The Perf. in later writers is commonly re- 
 revx^a instead of TeTir^riKa (Lob. ad Phryn. p. 395; Sturz, 
 Dial. Alex. p. 198) and accordingly in the Sept. also : Job vii. 
 2, etc. This was formerly the reading also in Heb. viii. 6, 
 but now instead a tliird form has been adopted jrom MSS. [Sin. 
 also] into the text: rervx^i'. As this form was apparently 
 altogether unknown to the grammarians, Lobeck, as above, 
 and Dind., in the Thesaurus of Steph., regard it as a mistake 
 of the scribes, and it has been on this account expunged by 
 the editors in classic authors, often it must be confessed 
 against all MS. authority (e.g. Diod. 12, 17), and commonly 
 changed into rerevxo'- In the language of the N. T. the un- 
 usual and even erroneous (B. § 97, 4 p. 134) form of the 
 Perfect must always be allowed to stand. 
 
 (fsaivco. {Respecting e<pava see p. 41. 
 
 cfsava-KQ), a word formed from the stem 0a (to shine) after 
 the manner of iteratives, and used only in compounds (Job 
 XXV. 5 etc.), to which, quite according to analogy, the form 60 
 
68 
 
 ANOMALOUS VERBS. 
 
 ((/)auo-w) eTnj>avaei Eph. v. 14 is referred. In the 0. T. we 
 find frequently the Aor. Bi,e(pavc7e, hia<^avari (e.g. ew? Btacpavcry 
 ^fiipa 1 Sam. xiv. 36 etc.). This rare word, which however 
 is found even in Herodotus (9, 45), was wholly unknown to 
 Attic authors. 
 
 In a few passages (Matt, xxviii. 1 ; Luke xxiii. 54) it has 
 the form eVtc/xao-Kw, — in both instances of day-break. Of. the 
 Lat. illucesco. 
 
 (pi pa. On i]veyKov and ijvejKa see p. 39. Besides the forms 
 of the 1st Aor. usual also in Attic, we find most frequently 
 the Partic. iveyKa<; (Luke xv. 23 etc.), which in the N. T. has 
 completely supplanted the other in cov, as on the other hand 
 the Infin. iveyKelv (Jude 9 etc.) has superseded that in ai, 
 which is still read only in 1 Pet. ii. 5. The 1st Pers. ijveyKa 
 is found Acts xxvi. 10 etc., Imperat. ■7rpo<i€V6jKov Matt. viii. 4 
 (-Ke Rec). 
 
 (pddva. The Aorist e^idrju is not in use, but only 1st Aor. 
 e^daa-a : Matt. xii. 28 etc. 
 
 (/) u &) . As the Aor. e<f>w has been wholly superseded in the 
 language of the N. T. by the later 2d Aor. Pass, i^vrjp (hence 
 <f)vev, crviJ.<j)velaM Luke viii. 6, 7, 8), the Subjunc. must be 
 circumflexed eK(j)vp Matt. xxiv. 32 ; Mark xiii. 28 (eic(piiri Rec. 
 [Tdf.]). Cf. SuQ)'p. 56. 
 
 ■X^aipco. The Fut. is always ')(aprjcrofiai Luke i. 14 etc., as 
 in the Sept., which, however, in composition always employs 
 the regularly formed yet elsewhere unheard of form in ovfjbat, 
 as Kara-, i-jri'xa.povfiai. 
 
 %kfi>. Respecting the Imperative e/cp^^ere see p. 44. The 
 Future, after the manner of tlie so-called Attic Futures or of 
 the Fut. of liquid verbs (cf. Aor. e%6a), is circumflexed : e/c;)^eM 
 Acts ii. 17, 18 in an O.T. citation (Joel iii. Isq.). We are pre- 
 vented from accenting it eK^eoo, as in Attic, on the one hand 
 by the testimony of the ancient grammarians (Choerob. in An. 
 Bekk. p. 1290 ; Cram. IV. p. 194 ; Etym. Magn. sub ^eco) who 
 adduce it as an example of a second Future (to eV^j^edJ Semepov 
 fjieKKovTo<; olov /cal to KaraKkKK irap EvTrokhhi /c.t.\.) ; on the 
 other hand, especially by the further inflection of %ew : %ee«, 
 ;y;eet, %eetT6, ^(eovaiv, — forms which it so happens, indeed, 
 cannot be brought forward from the N. T., but are very frequent 
 in the Sept., as Ex. iv. 9 ; xxx. 19 ; Lev. iv. 12 ; Num. xix. 17 ; 
 
ADVERBS. 69 
 
 Deut. xii. 16 ; 2 Kings xxiv. 4, 'etc. 'EKxeirat in Matt. ix. 17 
 is Pres. ; probably also in Mark ii. 22 [yet dropped here by 
 ,Tdf. Treg.]. 
 
 The Aor. Pass. i'^eO'rjv, sp common in later writers (Lob. 
 Parerg. p. 732), has not yet been found either in the 0. T. or 
 the New, but always i'x^vdi^v, 'xvdi^a-oiJbai, as in the Perf. 
 Ke)(yTcu. On account of this last form we often find ^ijm given 61 
 in the lexicons as a form of the Present ; but it never occurs, 
 at least in tliB N. T., but instead (%wa)) a-vvexwev Acts ix. 22, 
 or, after the Aeolic mode of writing sometimes, yyvvm, (on this 
 form used in codd. Vat. and Sin. see Tdf. N. T. Vat. pref. p. 
 XXX Note 1; [N. T. ed. 7, Prol. p. xlviii]) lKyyvvinLevo<; Matt, 
 xxiii. . 35 ; xxvi. 28 and the parallel passages, av^yyweTab 
 Acts xxi. 31 Lchm. [Tdf. Treg.] ; xxii. 20. Of. Krevvo) under 
 icTclvco, p. 61. 
 
 tlrv'x^a). 2d Put. Pass. yfrvjija-oiJiai, Matt. xxiv. 12. 
 
 0)06(0 in the historic tenses loses again the syllabic augment, 
 i^&crev, airataaro Acts vii. 27, 39, 45 ; Rom. xi. 1, 2, and so 
 also in the Sept. airaxjdrjv Ps. Ixxxvii. (Ixxxviil.) 6, aTrSxTfiai 
 Jonah ii. 5 etc. This occurs sometimes also in earlier writers, 
 see Poppo on Thuc. 2, 84. 
 
 wveo jMai does the same : mvrjaaTo Acts vii. 16. 
 
 Adtekbs. f 
 
 B.§115,N.3; H.§225sq.; C.§380sq.; D. §260sq.; J. §324. 
 
 Lachmaun writes all adverbs, if they arose from the Dative 
 of even an obsolete noun, — as \dOpa Matt. i. 19, elicfj Col. ii. 
 18, TrdvTrj Acts xxiv. 3, Kpv<f>r] Eph. v. 12, — again with the i 
 subscript, [so Treg. in the case of iravrrj'] ; cf. B. § 116, Note 
 8 p. 272 ; 0. § 109. In the mss. both modes were used. See 
 Bast, ad Greg. Cor. p. 719, and Cobet,N. T. pref. p. 12, [Tdf. 
 ed. 7, Prol, p. Ixii], 
 
 B. §115,5; H. §228; C. §263; D. §282; J. § 141. 
 
 Adverbs in co? derived from the usual forms of comparison, 
 accordingly in repo)? (Tariu?) arw? (which, moreover, in ear- 
 lier authors also are not uncommon, see the list in Matthia's 
 Greek Gram. § 262), occur also in the N. T. Thus always 
 •jreptcraoTepQx; in Paul (Gal. i. 14 etc.), also in Heb. ii. 1, 
 cr'7rovSaioT6pco<; Phil. ii. 28, the phrase eo-T^jaxQ)? s'x^eiv Mark v. 23, 
 Examples of the common adverbial form of the comparative 
 
70 PARTICLES OF PLACE. 
 
 in repoii are, irepiaGorepov Heb. vi. 17 ; vii. 15 ; Mark vii. 36, 
 eKjevearepov Luke xxii. 44, kc iiylroTepov John iv. 52, Troppdrepov 
 Q-repw Rec. [Tdf.]) Luke xx.\t. 28, uKpi^earepov Acts xxiv. 22, 
 dvwTepov Heb. x. 8, etc. ; (but the present reading in Acts xxiv. 
 10 is eii6vfjb(0'i instead of eiidvfiOTepov, and BnrXorepov in Matt, 
 xxiii. 15 is an adjective ; of. p. 27). 
 
 Tlie other form of comparison in cov, ia-To<i always forms its 
 adverbs in the usual way : ^ttov, eXarrov, KaWiov, ^iKriov, 
 aaaov, Ta')(iov (see p. 27), Ta)(l,<TTa, etc. 
 
 B. §115, N. 7. 
 
 Instead of ihov ecce the N. T. writers, especially John, fre- 
 quently use I'Se ; both side by side in Mark xiii. 21 Lchm. Cf. 
 also § 129 a. 2 p. 139. Examples of t'Se with the Plural Matt, 
 xxvi. 65 ; of 076 as an Literjection Jas, iv. 13 ; v. 1. Cf with 
 liBe attended by tlie Plur. the similar a</>e9 'iBcofiev (Matt, xxvii. 
 49), on which see § 139, 4 p. 139. The ordinary distinction 
 between Sevpo and Bevre, according to which the latter is used 
 in addressing more than one (yet cf. Bttm. Lexil. II. No. 101), 
 is observed in the N. T. ; see Wahl. 
 
 62 Particles op Place. 
 
 B. § 116; H. §§ 203. 879; C. §§ 192. 70i; D. § 262; J. § 839. 
 
 The local ending -^ei/ has sometimes lost its original reference 
 to the question whence. Thus eaadev, e^mdev, hardly differ 
 any longer from the adverbs ecrto, e^co ; e.g. Matt. vii. 15 ; Rev. 
 iv. 8 ; V. 1 ; and with the Article, to ecrcodev vfiuv Luke xi. 39, 
 40 (cf. 2 Cor. iv. 16), Kvickodev in circuitu Rev. iv. 8. This, 
 as is well known, often occurred in the earlier language and 
 the poets with the termination -dev, -de ; as, oiriaOev, dvevOe, 
 efhirpoaOev, irpoirdpooOe^ etc. From the fact that the suffix -dev 
 came to take the place thus of a mere adverbial ending we can 
 explain a pleonastic combination which is frequent in the N.T., 
 viz. that to such an adverb, when the reference to" the question 
 whence is manifest, the prepositions anro and Ik are still pre- 
 fixed ; e.g. aiTo /juaKpodev, am-'' avmOev, e« iraiBiodev Matt. xxvi. 
 58 ; xxvii. 61 ; Mark ix. 21, etc., — combinations, however, 
 which came into use very early, especially with poets, (aTr' 
 ovpavoOev Horn.). 
 
 A strict observance of grammatica accuracy in the employ- 
 ment of the local particles is not to je expected of the N. T, 
 
PARTICLES OF PLACE. 71 
 
 writers. A portion of tliese irregularities may be removed, to 
 be sure, in some syntactical way, as e.g. the expression a^cov 
 Toi><; ixela-e ovrat (Acts xxii. 5) by the attractive power of 
 a^(ov (B. § 151, 1. 8); but in general it does not accord with the 
 language of the N. T. to explain all the passages of the sort in 
 such artificial ways. On the contrary, the assumption of a 
 certain inaccuracy in the employment of such particles seems 
 to be the more admissible, as even the earlier prose writers by 
 no means always adhered rigorously to the rule. And in 
 particular, particles of rest as e«et, irov, ov, oirov, iuddSe are 
 constantly connected with verbs of motion in answer to 
 the question whither, because the particles ttol, ottoj, etc. seem 
 to have passed wholly out of use, (a fact which explains the 
 frequent corruption of these particles in the texts of Attic 
 writers, and the instructions of Phrynichus ed. Lob. p. 43); as, 
 irov, oirov virdryet, eKel airrfKdev, ekOe ei'^aS6,(with which the usage 
 of earlier authors as given in B. § 116, 3 Note f and 7 Note 
 may be compared). It is likewise undeniable that wSe, orig- 
 inally a particle having reference to manner, has in the N. T. 
 already assumed completely a local signification : and that, too, 
 not merely of rest, here, but, like all those previously mentioned, 
 of direction also, hither, — a usage of which the beginnings can 
 be traced very early (see B. § 149, 1 p. 429). It is indeed 
 quite proper to be extremely abstemious in employing this 
 method of explaining classic authors, but to insist on observing 63 
 the same restraint in reference to all passages of the N. T. 
 would be to increase the difficulties of interpretation unneces- 
 sarily, and without any considerable gain either philological or 
 logical. Examples of this local use of &he (expressly censured 
 by the old grammarians) occur, especially in the gospels, very 
 frequently, as e.g. in Matt. xvi. 28 ; xvii. 4 ; viii. 29 ; xxii. 12 ; 
 xiv. 8, 18, etc. ; and often in Hermas the expressions whe KaKel, 
 wSe KaKelae are met with (Simil, 6. 1 ; Mand. 6. 2, etc.). 
 
 Finally, compare with the general tenor of these remarks the 
 N. T. use of the two prepositions which correspond most nat- 
 urally to the two ideas of rest and motion (whither), viz. eV 
 and et's, as given in the Syntax § 147, pp. 328, 332 sq. 
 
72 CHANGES OF FOEM IN PARTICLES. ANASTEOPHE. 
 
 Changes op Foem in Particles. Anasteophe. 
 B. § 117, 2. 
 
 Of the three forms idv, i]v, dv, the first is used almost ex- 
 clusively ; — dv is very rare indeed, or doubtful, John xiii. 20 ; 
 xvi. 23 ; XX. 23 Tdf. [Treg.J, ^v not found at all. 
 
 Although only the un-Attic form of the adverb ecreo (for 
 6(.'o-(u) is in use, yet the preposition is written only ek never e'?. 
 Instead of %^€? modern editors have everywhere substituted 
 the (Hellenistic) form e^^e'?, John iv. 52 etc. 
 
 Respecting eW/cev before consonants see p. 10. 
 
 B. §117, N.l; H. §872; C. §619; J. §423. 
 
 Instead of dv the form idv is frequently found. Yet this 
 interchange is not exactly arbitrary, since on comparing the 
 passages it will be found that it occurs only in relative clauses 
 with the Subjunctive : in clauses, tlierefore, of a general nature 
 which (according to B. § 139, 3) include within themselves 
 the supposition expressed by idv, and allow themselves. without 
 violence to be transformed into such conditional clauses. This 
 idv, however, continually alternates with dv, and in printed 
 editions there is no agreement in this particular. Since ex- 
 amples of this manner of writing the word abound in all parts 
 of the N. T., it may suffice here to illustrate what has "been 
 said by one or two cases : as Matt. xvi. 19 o dv Bija7i<: eirl t% 
 jrj';, 'iarai SeBe/ievov iv to4? ovpavoi<;, km o idv Xvarj^ eirl t^? 
 7^?, earau XeXvjjikvov iv r. o. ; likewise vs. 25 ; John xv. 7 o ay 
 GeXrjre Lchm. idv Tdf. [Treg.J, etc. In the Mss. of other 
 Greek writers, too, this idv is found only in similar clauses, 
 see Jacobs ad Achil. Tat. p. 130, 7 ; and the frequent occur- 
 64 rence of this interchange warrants us in inferring the existence 
 of this always erroneous (yet not altogether unfounded) mode 
 of writing the word, at least in later authors. 
 
 B. §117, 3, 2); H. §615; C. §785; J. §63, Obs. 3. 
 
 This second case of anastrophe (i.e. when the primitive 
 dissyllabic prepositions stand alone instead of a compound of 
 elvai} also occurs in the N. T. in the use of evi for evea-Ti,: 
 1 Cor. vi. 5 ; Gal. iii. 28 ; Col. iii. 11 ; Jas. i. 17. 
 
 The words oval, ovd, ea occur in the N. T. as Interjections. 
 
rCEMATION or WORDS. 73 
 
 Formation of Words. 
 B. § 119; H. § 452 sqq. ; C. § 359 sqq. ; D. § 854 sqq. ; J. § 329 sqq. 
 
 B. § 119, m. 19. Since in verbal Substantives in fxa the 
 long vowel belongs t: the earlier writers, the short vowel to 
 the later (of. Cobet's N. T. pref. p; 50), we ought in the N. T. 
 to write uniformly Kpi/xa (not Kplfia) ; so cod. Vat., though 
 very often writing /cpeivco, constantly writes KptfjLa. The form 
 aLTUofjiafa (Sin. also) for alTidfiara, Acts xxv. 7, is erroneously 
 formed, but unquestionable. 
 
 On <f>dyo<; and ^ay6<; see Pritzsche on Mark, p. 790. On Tret^o? 
 in 1 Cor. ii. 4 (very likely a corrupted passage) cf. 7^776? in 
 Homer. Yet probably iv Treidoi should be read, [eV ivecdol'i 
 a-o^la<; XoyoK is adhered to by Lchm. Tdf. Treg.] ; see the 
 interpreters. 
 
 B. § 119, m. 32. As respects substantives compounded with 
 dp')(6<; ruler, or derived from ap'^as, the ending 17?, according 
 to the 1st Declension, is the most common, and passed over also 
 into the Latin language. Thus iraTpidp'^T]';, Terpdp'^rj^ (.P'^ 
 triarcha, tetrarcha), iOvdp'^rji;, iro\i,Tdp')(ji]<;, daidp')(7j<i, and many 
 others besides in the S^pt. ; see the list in Winer 61 (60) and 
 the lexicons. Only in the case of ')(tXiapxo<i is the form in o? the 
 exclusive form ; and kKaTovTdpj(7j<s alternates with eKaT6vrap')(o<;, 
 even in close proximity, as in Acts xxii. 25, 26 ; Matt. viii. 8, 13. 
 Doubtful is a-TpajoTreSdp'XTj';, Acts xxviii. 16, since it is wanting 
 in codd. [n] A B. 
 
 Examples from the N. T. (besides lepcoa-vvi) given in B. § 
 119 m. 38) of words in ctvvt] with m preceding are: dryaOoj- 
 (jvvTj, dryiaavvT}, fjL.eydX.aavvr}, all with a short vowel preceding 
 the antepenult. Instead of /SatrtXeta the N. T. has everywhere 
 the later form (see Sturz, Dial. Alex. p. 151) ^aaiXoaaa. 
 
 B. § 119, m. 83. The adverbial ending i occurs only 
 in the word iravoiKi Acts xvi. 34, — for so the word should be 
 written, although several MSS. [Sin. also] give TravoiKel. See 
 Theodos. Gramm. p. 74 ed. Gttl., and among the moderns 
 especially Bllendt, Lex. Soph, under dvarei and dvoifiaKTi. 
 According to liis view, adverbs derived from words of the 2d 
 Declension have the ending t, at least by preference. 
 
 To the new formrrtions of later Greek belong also the two 
 adjectives iiriovaio'i and irepu)Vcno<;, respecting whose doubtful 
 10 
 
74 FORMATION OF WORDS. 
 
 derivation and meaning (( irigen de Orat. 16 : iTnovcno<; eoiice 
 ireTrkda-Qai, inro tS)v evar/<ye\i<TrS3v) see the lexicons. 
 
 B. §121, 8; C. §386 0.; D. p.335; J. §345, 2. 
 
 Among the words which in composition change the initial 
 6 into 7] may be reclfoned the new word irpo'iip^vToi}, so frequent 
 in the later language, of which the Prep, tt/so? and the stem 
 of fjXdov, f)kv6ov Put. iXevcrofiai, manifestly form the basis; 
 hence the abstract irpo<iri\v(Ti,<; (Just. Mart.) for 7r/30?6Xei'o-{? 
 (JohnChrys.). See the lexicons, and compare the words eVij- 
 Xu?, eVjjXuTO?, iiTrjKv<Ti<s, etc. 
 
 The practice of separating compound Names of Cities ex- 
 tends, as is evident from inscriptions, down to the latest times. 
 Hence in Acts xvi. 11 we should read, with all the [most] an- 
 cient Mss., Niav TToXiv ; and so, consistently, in Col. iv. 13 eV 
 'lepa TToXet (for 'lepairoXei'). Thus it was the uniform practice 
 to say MeyaXrj •jroXi';, KmvaTavTivov iroki's, 'ASpiavov ttoKoi, 
 but in derivatives MeyaXoiroXlTrj^, NeaTroKiTrji, KcovaravTivo- 
 ■n-oXiTrj<; ; cf. on this Herodian de Adverb, p. 587 ; Cobet's N. T. 
 pref. p. 12. 
 
SYNTAX. 65 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 1. The language of the N. T. departs from the cidinary 
 language in all that relates to the structure of clauses and 
 style of expression far more than in the forms of words ; — and 
 that not merely from the Attic, but also from the later common 
 Greek. The causes of this are : First, the want of classic- 
 Greek training and erudition (Acts xxii. 3 ; 2 Cor. xi. 22 ; Gal. 
 i. 14, etc.) which may be fairly assumed in the case of most 
 of the N. T. writers ; Secondly, their dependence upon the 
 language of the 0. T. (in particular that of the Septuagint), 
 as well as upon Jewish modes of thought in general (the so- 
 called Hebraisms pertain, strictly speaking, all of them to the 
 syntactical part of grammar) ; Thirdly, their new Christian 
 ideas. As was remarked, however, on p. 1 sq. respecting the 
 Forms, so again in this particular the difference between the 
 several writings composing the N. T. is not inconsiderable ; and 
 it is the Book of Acts again which distinguishes itself creditably 
 from all the rest by its Greek mode of expression and com- 
 bination of clauses. Among the Epistolary writings the Epistle 
 to the Hebrews lias most of the Greek complexion.^ And the 
 Apocalypse is farthest removed from the Greek diction, in con- 
 sequence of its peculiar and free style of composition (of which 
 we have already given an example p. 50), which often conflicts 
 with all the laws of Greek syntax. 
 
 2. Strictly speaking, in a special Grammar only those phe- 
 nomena should find place which are peculiar to the department 
 treated of, — in the present case, to the N. T. And this prin- 66 
 ciple has been in general adhered to in this Grammar. In this 
 
 1 Cf. Origen in Euseb. H. E. 6, 25 : 3t( iarXv ri IttuttoK^ avviean TJjs Ki^eas 
 iWriviKttirepa (i. e. than the Epp. of Paul) iras d iiriariin^vos Kpivtiv (ppiatav 
 Suupopits 6ixoKoyi)(Tai t,v, 
 
 T5 
 
76 THE SUBSTANTIVE. [§ 123. 
 
 instange, however, as in all things where practical requirements 
 also come into consideration, rigid consistency in carrying out 
 a principle would be injurious to the whole. Frequently it 
 has been desirable to bring into prominence the agreement 
 between the N. T. language and ordinary Greek usage, par- 
 ticularly in those cases where such agreement appears rather 
 as exceptional, and a departure from the usage of the N. T. 
 elsewhere. Moreover, the usage of the classic authors them- 
 selves varies so much, according to time, place, subject, etc., 
 tliat it could not fail often to seem appropriate to indicate 
 the coincidence between the N. T. usage and this or that de- 
 partment of classic Greek. And finally, it has been necessary 
 occasionally, where the more thorough treatment of the peculi- 
 arities of a department relatively restricted required a more 
 extended presentation of a topic,, to give a more detailed 
 delineation even of the ordinary usage than could be given in 
 a general Greek Grammar for the use of schools. This has 
 been particularly the case where the usage of later writers or 
 of the Seventy, to -which of course little or no regard is wont 
 to be paid in school Grammars, has had unmistakable influence 
 upon the language of the N. T. 
 
 SUBSTANTIVES AND ADJECTIVES. 
 
 The Scestantive. 
 
 B. §123. 
 
 ■When a substantive, whether concrete or abstract, in any 
 Case, refers to another substantive (subject) in the Plural 
 in such a way that it pertains equally to every individual of 
 the plurality, accurate usage requires that it . also should 
 stand in the Plural. 
 
 67 The ancient languages, as is well known, are more consistent in this 
 respect than, for instance, the German, which says unhesitatingly, 
 and perhaps more frequently than not, sie zogen sick das Kleid an, 
 schlugen das Gesicht nieder, Jielen auf das Knie, etc. etc. But 
 irregularities occur also in ancient authors, even (though seldom) in 
 good Greek prose ; ^ lience no special N. T. usage can be established 
 on such passages as Acts xviii. 6 to alfia v/imv im ttj'v K€<^aA.^v 
 vfiMV, Luke xxiv. 4 kTritnrjcjav iu ia-drjn atTTpaTTTovar], vs. 5 Lchm. 
 (K\ti/oucrai) TO Trpocrunrov 6is rrjv y^v, 1 Thess. iii. 10 i/iSv to TrpocrtoTTOV, 
 
 1 The subject requires, according to Bhdy. Synt. p. 60 note ", a more careful ex 
 amination than has yet been given it. See the works there referred to. 
 
§ 123.] APPOSITION. 77 
 
 1 Cor. vi. 19 TO crSjUO vfiMv, Rev. vi. 11 iS69rj airots aroXij XeuKi^, xi. 
 8, 9 TO TTTuj/ia avTuiv. On the other hand, the Plural occurs Acts i. 10 
 (ev ia-6i^(Ticn XevKais), Rev. xi. 9 (ra ^Tiojuara avruiv) ; and in several 
 of the above passages important authorities (followed sometimes by 
 Tdf. [Treg.]) have the Plural. This fluctuation in the mss. proves 
 the currency of both modes of expression ; and again^ the frequent 
 correction of the Sing, into the Plur. shows that oflfence was taken at 
 the Sing, as the inferior form. 
 
 Respecting the Hebraistic circumlocutions Slo. x"pos, Ik xeipos, Sta 
 OTO/u-aTos airujv, see § 133, 20 p. 182. 
 
 Most of the passages adduced by Winer 175 (165) where, on the 
 contrary, the Plural seems to stand instead of the Singular, rest 
 upon no fixed usage, and accordingly the explanation of the Plural 
 must be left to the interpretation of the individual passages ; e.g. Matt. 
 ii. 20 (oi ^TjTovvTi's), xxi. 7 (lirdveo avTwv), xxvii. 44 (ol XijcrTat), 1 Cor. 
 xvi. 3 (St eiricrToXmi/), Heb. ix. 23 {KpfiTToiTiv ^wCTiats), etc. The same 
 liolds true of passages in which the interpreters recognize a Hebraistic 
 pluralis excellentiae (John ix. 3 ra epya tov 6eov, Heb. vii. 6 ras 
 iirayy£\ia<;, etc.) ; in these the Plural, without any such assumption, 
 has a natural foundation in the ordinary usage. On the other hand, 
 ■ the following belong to an idiomatic usage : 
 
 1) Those substantives which are Plural only. These, so 
 far as they are peculiar to the N. T., have already found their 
 place above on p. 23 sq. 
 
 2) The custom, belonging to ancient languages in general, 
 of expressing abstract ideas by the. Plural, inasmuch as 
 in this way not the idea of the abstract, as such, is to be indi- 
 cated, but rather its external manifestation, — its applicability 
 to a certain plurality of persons or objects. Thus in the N. T. 
 occur frequently oIktip/mol, TrpoacoTrdX.Tjfj.'sfriai, inroicpia-ei';, iptOeiai, 
 Oufioi, tpdovoi, fioi^elai, KXcnrai, irXeove^iai, iromjplai, Karor 
 XaXiai, TrpasTOKkia-LM, etc. In enumerations, the Plural and 
 the Singular are wont to be interchanged ; as, Mark vii. 22 ; 
 Gal. V. 19 sq. 
 
 Apposition. 
 B. § 123, 2; H. § 500; C. § 393; D. § 407; J. § 467. 
 
 Appositive limitations which are separated from the sub- 
 stantive to which they belong by a relative clause referring to 
 the same substantive, may also take the Case of the Relative, 
 being attracted by it as the nearer word. 
 
 The clearest instance is Phil. iii. 18 iroWot TepnraTov<nv, oSs iroXXaKu 
 
 68 
 
. 78 APPOSITION. [§ 123 
 
 fXcyov l/uv . . . , Toil's ixdpov^ rov cTTavpov tov Xp. 1 John ii. 25 rj 
 iwayyeXia, rjv auTOS hrrff/ilXaTO ■rj/Juv, rrjv ^uiriv rrjv aldiviov, Philem. 10 
 ToC T€KVOV, ov lyiwqcTo. iv rots Sctr/iois, Ovrj(7Lfji,ov, tov ttotc etc. Cf. 
 Eev. xvii. 8 (Sv . . . jSXettovtodv) ; and respecting 2 Cor. x. 13 (o5 . . . 
 fisTpov) see § 143, 9 p. 286. 
 I The assertion that appositive limitations are also expressed by the 
 Genitive, rests upon an erroneous conception of such combinations 
 as TToXis T^s Sttftapctas Acts viii. 5, ttoXeis SoSo/ia)!/ koL To/j.oppa's 2 Pet. 
 ii. 6 (Lat. urbs Eomae, fluvius Euphratis), and it is only out of con- 
 descension to modern usage that an appositive relation is here assumed. 
 Just as erroneous is it to bring under apposition such phrases as tov 
 appafiUva tov Trvev/iaros, ri/v airapy^rjv tov irvcu/iCiTos, O"rifi.eiov TrtptTO/i^s, 
 etc., since such combinations are either to be taken literally, or at 
 most as circumlocutions of simple abstract ideas. Such periphrases 
 are quite current in the ancient languages generally, and in the N. T. 
 preeminently with the apostle Paul. 
 
 5 In certain portions of the N. T., however, a noticeable de- 
 parture from the grammatical usage of other writers is per- 
 ceptible. That is to say, appositives whether expressed by a 
 substantive, an adjective, or a participle, since they may be' 
 regarded as an abbreviation of a relative clause (cf. § 125, 3 
 p. 92 sq.), frequently appear, not in the oblique case demanded 
 by the context, but in the Nominative, — still lingering, as 
 it were, after the rejection of the relative construction, in the 
 extraneous case, viz. the Nominative. 
 
 The most conspicuous examples of this incorrect grammatical usage 
 are found in the Apocalypse : i. 5 airo 'Irja-ov Xp. 6 /Aaprvs 6 ttio-tos, vii. 4 
 TOV api6fu>v Twv l(Ti^payuT)iiv<ov, exaTOV . . . ;)(tXta8« io-ippayi(TfJi,evoi, XX. 2 
 iKpoLTrjo-ev tov BpaKovra, 6 o(f>is b dp^aios ; particularly when the Partic. 
 with the Art. is used : ii. 20 ttjv 'le^a/JcX, 17 Xiyova-a iavTrjv Trpo<t>rJTa', 
 lli. 12 TTJi Katv^s lepovcraXrjiJ,, rj KaTa/Saivovaa, xiv. 12 tZv ay'iu>v, oi 
 TrjpovvTCi, viii. 9 to TpiTov tS>v KTto-/x.aTO)v, Ta €;^ovTa ij/vxai, ix. 14 tS 
 Iktcj) ayyiXia, 6 €;((ui' Trjv adXTnyya; and even many limiting participles 
 i69 without the article' maybe conveniently viewed as instances of 
 this construction, as xiv. 14 (eiSov) ofxoiov vIm avOpumov, e-xw etc. 
 whether we refer i^tov to ofjLoiov (tivo.) or to vlw, cf. xix. 12 ; and with 
 especial harshness in vii. 9 Lchm. elSov o^Xov ttoXw (Tdf [soTreg.] xal 
 ISov o^Xoi TToXus) . . . «o-TaiT£s . . . Tr€pil3e^Xr]fjbivov<s. (See respecting 
 
 1 That we are justified in assuming that the writer often, instead of the Participle, 
 bad in mind a relative clause in very form, may be seen from such passages as 
 vi. 1 iJKovira his . . . Kfyovros as ipaiyii fipovr^s (Rec. by correction <I><i>vt}s), Cf, 
 on the other hand, Eom. i. 4 etc. 
 
§ 123.] APPOSITION. 79 
 
 tlie very frequent loose annexation of participial olauEes in the Nom. 
 and their use instead of other cases § 129 a. 6 p. 141, § 144, 3-7 and 
 especially 13 p. 298, and cf the examples given in § 151, 12 p. 386 
 of loose connection of clauses in other constructions also). In the 
 other writers this use appears on the whole less frequently, although 
 there is reason for supposing that the number of passages of the sort 
 has been greatly diminished by later corrections (the Rec. in fact had 
 displaced it almost everywhere). A plain instance occurs in Mark xii. 
 39 sq. The recent editors, indeed, [Lchm. Tdf. Treg.] place one of 
 the larger punctuation marks before ol KarecrOiovTe^ [icaTe'cr^o^Tcs Treg.] 
 and let the Partic. be resumed by the following ovtol, according to 
 § 144, 21 p. 306, so that vs. 40 forms an independent clause by itself. 
 But the asyndeton before oi Koreo-^iovres is not satisfactory, and still 
 less the assumption that the forcible close (ovtoi Xrifi^ovriu etc.) is to 
 be referred merely to vs. 40, and not at the same time to vss. 38, 39. 
 On the contrary, by referring oi KaTetr^iovTcs immediately to tu>v ypafi- 
 fiareiov not only does the passage gain in natural flow, but the con- 
 struction assumed receives external confirmation also on comparing it 
 with the parallel passage in Luke (xx. 47 Tdf. [Treg.] oi KartcrGiova-iv). 
 An instance without the article is Mark vii. 19 (ttSv) «s t6v dc^cSptovo 
 inttopeierai, KoOapi^iav Travra to. jSpii/jLara (Rec. KaOapl^ov). Respecting 
 Luke xxiv. 47 Tdf. [Treg.J (apidp.€voi) see § 150, 7 p. 374. 
 
 In Phil. iii. 19, therefore, it is not necessary to refer back the 
 loosely appended clause ol to. Imyeia ifipovovvTes to the remote leading 
 subject of the sentence, and in Luke xx. 27 (rtves tS>v %aSS., ol avriXe- 
 yoiTEs) the description ol avriXiyovre^ applies not merely to the part 
 (rives), but to the whole. But Jas. iii. 8 (t^i/ Se yXwa-crav . . . ■ aKwrd- 
 (TTarov KaKov, p-ca-ni iov Oavarrjfjiopov) , 2 Cor. xi. 28 (rj efft'cTTao-ts p,oi rj 
 Kaff rifiepav etc.) and similar passages are rather to be taken as in- 
 dependent clauses left incomplete and approximating to exclamation.^ 
 
 1 An extraordinary example of grammatical inaccuracy is given by the mss. 
 [N also] in Acts vi. 5 Lchm. e^eKe^afro 'Zriipavov, AvSpa irKiipTjs wto-Teojy. In 
 such a writer as Luke (particularly in the Acts) such a combination may be held 
 to be impossible {iiviip wK'tipris might have been tolerated) ; hence, in spite of the 
 emphatic testimony, Tdf. [so Treg.] has refused to accept the reading in this form. 
 Another example is Acts x. 37 olBoTe rh yei'Sfievov ^rj/m Koff Satjj tjjs 'IouSoioj, 
 ap^tifi€v OS oTri T7]s ra\i\aias /xeT^ rh ^dTTTttTfia {hy the bj : read K-^puy/Aa accord- 
 ing to cod. Vat., Roman ed. 1868), sustained almost unanimously by the entirn 
 collection of uncials (including Vat. and Sin.), and, what is strangest of all, not 
 called in question even by the correctors of the mss., as may be gathered from the 
 collation of a yet larger number of mss. The change into ap\ip.epov is easily made, 
 and forces itself upon every one. But since not even the ancient correctors ven- 
 tured to make it, we are the less warranted in doing so, but must put up with the 
 grammatical anomaly, and assume that the formula ap^d/xevos AttiJ to the mind oi 
 the writer had become petrified almost into an indeclinable adverbial adjunct. 
 
80 CONSTRUCTIO AD SYNESIN. f§ 123 
 
 Respecting the Accusative in appositional specifications see § 131, 
 
 13 p. 153. 
 
 YO Remark. Tlie question whether adjuncts in the correct gram- 
 
 6 matical case (as 1 Pet. iii. 21 ; Rom. viii. 23, etc.) are to be taken as 
 
 appositive or not, pertains wholly to the exegesis of the several 
 
 AGEEEMENT OF ADJECTIVAL ADJUNCTS WITH THBIE SUBSTANTIVE. 
 
 CONSTKUCTIO AD SyNESIN. 
 
 B. 5 123, 3 and N. 3; H. § 611, 23; C. 5§ 492-98; D. p. 862; J. § 378. 
 
 The offences against grammatical accuracy in respect to 
 Gender and Number in which the language of tlie N. T. 
 allows itself, are far less frequent than as respects Case, (see 
 the preceding chapter). Most instances of the sort, also, may 
 be comprised under the grammatical categories of Attraction 
 and Constructio ad Synesin; and accordingly reference 
 may be made to the sections relative to these topics : §§ 127, 7 
 p. 105, 129, 8 p. 129, and 143, 4 p. 281. Hence only those 
 passages will be spoken of here in which similar irregularities 
 occur with attributive (i.e. adjectival) adjuncts of the 
 substantive. 
 
 The strongest cases are furnished, again, by the Apocalypse. Yet 
 they are hardly founded in the author's ignorance of the laws of the 
 language, as there is reason enough for supposing that such roughnesses 
 of expression were positively designed by him ; cf deWette on Rev. 
 i. 4; Winer 534 sq. (497 sq.) : for instance, xii. 5 Lchm. [Tdf.Treg.] 
 ereKiv vlov apcrev (Tdf. [ed. 2] dppeva), os /jLtWei etc., since the idea of 
 T€Kvov (which word actually follows just afterwards) is suggested by 
 the verb cVekei/ (Germ, sie gehar einen Sohn, ein Mdnnliches, der etc.). 
 On the altogether analogous combinations Oripiov os, 6v6p.aTa ol, and the 
 like, see § 143, 4 p. 282. Still more surprising is the reading of Lchm. 
 in xvii. 3 Ka6r)ii,ivqv km Oripiov kokklvov, yefj,ovT a ovo/iara j8Xa(r<;6)y|U.tas 
 c'xov Ketj>aXa.<;, — a harshness which [Treg., not now Tdf] avoids by 
 separating the word into yi/jLov to.. But harsh expressions of this sort 
 are quite common in the Rev., as witness immediately afterwards the 
 
 Still more surprising, and grammatically viewed almost inexplicable, are two ex- 
 ■imples from the Apocalypse, yet whose genuineness we are not warranted on this 
 account in questioning: xix. 20 Lchm. i^Kifdriaav eis T^tv Kinvriv -rov vvphs, ttis 
 KaiofievTis eV fleim (Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] tV k.) and i. 15 Lchm. ol ir6Ses oiitoC Ei^oiai 
 XoXitoKi^ivif, d)s if KajUiVu Trewvpufieviis (Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] -mi). From the last 
 passage it at least follows that the word is x^^Ko^^ff"""'! "ot -vov (it is wanting 
 in the Sept.), and is of the Feminine gender, as the simplo \l0ams is so often 
 (Eurip. Nicand., see Steph. sub voce), and accordingly has pretty nearly the sense 
 of brazen incense (amber ?). The gloss in Suidas under xa\oK\lPttyiii> is not genuine ; 
 see Bernhardy in ioc. [In i. 15 Tdf. ed. 8 reads -yif. Treg. in both agrees with 
 Lchm.l 
 
§ 123.] OmSSION OF THE SUBSTANTIVE WITH ADJECTIVES. 81 
 
 simultaneous dependence of the Ace. and the Gen. upon yi^ov, see 
 § 132, 12 p. 164. The language in the following passages is in com- 
 plete antagonism to a sense of grammatical propriety, but sustained 
 by the mss. jjSin. alsoj : xi. 4 ovtoI tlcnv ... at Svo kv)(yiaL ai iviimiov 
 Kvpiov T^s y^s lo-TU)T€s, where no author would have written any 
 thing else than co-Two-at (the correction of Eec), and nevertheless 
 £<TTaJT€s must be referred to the ovtoi at the beginning, xxi. 9 Lchm. 
 EK £K Twv dyyeXuv tS>v ep(0VTa)v ras eTrra 0taXas, rmv ye[ji,6vTwv (Tdf. 71 
 [^eds. 2, 7] •ye/u.ovcras) tG>v TrXrjySiv etc., where ye/xovTiov as respects sense 
 can have reference only to (^i(iA.as, and yet has been attracted by tSjv 
 dyyeXuv, SO that the ayyeXoi seem to be, as it were, identified with the 
 (^taXai, xiy. 19 ets rrjv Xrjvov tov 6viji,ov tov 6eov tov fj-iyav (Rec. |[cod. 
 Sin. also] t^i/ iJ.eyaK-qv), which cannot be grammatically defended by 
 the fact that X-qvo^ has two genders ; see the lexicons, and cf. xiv. 20 ; 
 Deut. xvi. 13 ; Gen. xxx. 38, 41, etc. To the examples already given 
 may be added v. 12 Tdf. and xxi. 14 (Tdf. [Treg. ; »* om., K" ex""-])- 
 
 In the other writings of the N. T. such anomalies are seldom met 
 with, even in the mss. ; for such a combination as Xi^itov fxiyav . . . ■^rts 
 in Acts (xi. 28), the reading given by several mss., is very improbable ; 
 see above p. 12. On the other hand, in Phil. ii. 1 et ri's a-TrXdyxva kol 
 o'lKTipfjiol Lchm. [Tdf eds. 7, 8, Treg.] is not only the reading almost 
 unanimously [Sin. also] attested, but, however offensive the combina- 
 tion may sound even to our ears, is to be preferred with Grsb. Lchm. 
 [Tdf. 7, 8, Treg.] to the manifest corrections nva or n, which also are 
 by no means satisfactory. We have nothing left us here except to con- 
 nect Tts, by virtue of the constr. ad syn. and in view of what precedes, 
 immediately with the abstract idea (compassion) which follows, although 
 such a connection is to be justified only by the license of epistplary 
 style. In Mark xiii. 14 Tdf. (even before the discovery of Sin.) had 
 adopted the reading orav iSijre to ySSeXuy/x.a rrj's iprjfj.da-tiD's ia-rrjKOTa [so 
 Treg.], the writer having had in mind a dimly conceived Masc. subst., 
 either a heathen statue or a Eoman army or something else of the 
 sort; cf Fritzsche on Matt, xxi v. 15. 
 
 Acts iii. 11 ttSs 6 Xaos . . . tKOajxpoL is quite according to usage; the 
 passage falls under the head of Participles constructed ad synesin, 
 respecting which see especially § 129, 8 p. 129 sq. 
 
 Omission of the Substantive with Adjectives. 
 B. § 123, 5 and N. 5; H. § 509; C. § 506; D. §399; J. § 436. 
 
 Examples of the omission of easily supplied substantives g 
 with adjectives are not uncommon in the N. T. Tlius by the 
 omission of ■^fiepa we have rf} i'xpfiivr], iiriova-r), Tpirr}, rj 
 il3S6/ir} (Heb. iv. 4), cf. the similar instances § 125, 10 p. 95 ; 
 11 
 
82 ADJECTIVES USED INSTEAD OF ADVERBS. [§ 123 
 
 of 0809 Luke xix. 4 iiceivr}^ ijfieWev Si€pxecr0at, v. 19 Trotas' 
 el<;eveyKW(nv aiirov ; oi x^^P' V apiarepd, rj Be^id, Be^ia^; StSomt 
 etc. ; of 7^: 1? |7?pa, V 7reptxa)/3o?, ejtc. ; of ttiiXtj John v. 2 
 eVt Ty -irpo^aTiKfi; of dvBpe'i (more specifically Sta/coj/ot) 
 Acts xxi. 8 eK TMv kind (cf. vi. 5) ; of dyaXfia Acts xix. 35 
 TO SiOTrere? (cf. Eurip. I. T. 950 ; Herodian 1. 11). 
 
 What omitted word is to be supplied is not always so evident as in 
 the above examples, and accordingly it has been proposed to regard 
 the force of the subst. as inhering in the adjective, and (as in § 128, 
 
 1 p. 122) not to supply any definite word. With Masculines and 
 F e m i n i n e s, however, this will hardly do, and accordingly we must, 
 as in all languages, supply a more or less definite idea, although it 
 may be but dimly conceived. Thus the idea of Time, conformably to 
 6 xpo'i'os or ■^ &pa, rjfjLepa ; hence both d<^' ^s 2 Pet. iii. 4 ; Luke vii. 
 45 etc. (cf Col. i. 6, 9), and a<f>' ov, i^ ov, axpts ov, etc., further i^ aiiTjs 
 or i$avTrj^ Acts X. 33 ; xi. 11 etc., en T€Tpa/Ai7Vo's ia-riv John iv. 35 ; 
 Space, Locality, as it were after 17 x^P") ^ ^f ei/avrtas Mark xv. 39, 
 
 72 EK TTj^ VTTO TOV OVpOVOV 61S T^V VTT OVpOVOV Xd/iW£t Lukc XVll. 24, furthef 
 
 ev Se^ia, plur. ek Se^tiuv, e^ f.vwvvfx.ii>v, and the like ; Breeze, after 17 avpa : 
 Acts xxvii. 40 T17 Trvtova-g ; Water, agreeably to to vSuip : Matt. x. 42 
 TroTrjpiov ^l/vxpov, Jas. iii. 11^ Triq-yr] . . . fipvu to yhjKV /cat to iriKpov ; 
 more specifically Rain : Jas. v. 7 (yetupybs jxaKpodvjxiav) eus Xaji-Q 
 Trpmfiov Koi oij/ifjiov ; Raiment : John xx. 12 Bvo dyyeXovs iv Aeu/cois sc. 
 ijiioTiois (a word which by subsequent correction was added Matt. xi. 
 8 Rec), Rev. xviii. 12, 16 TrepipepXrjfJiivrj ^va-a-bvov, iroptj^upovv, etc.; 
 Opinion, in accordance with 17 yvw/xr], in the phrase aTro /xtas Luke 
 xiv. 18. 
 
 An example also of the omission of a substantive implied in the 
 idea of the verb (tovtov oXtya? Iiraio-e sc. TrXijyds B. § 123, N. 5) 
 occurs in Luke xii. 47 Sapi^a-erai TroA.A.ds . . . oXiyas (with the Passive 
 according to the usage treated of in § 134, 6 p. 189) ; and similarly 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 24 TeacrepaKovTa Trapa p. Lav tXa^ov. 
 
 Respecting adverbial expressions, like kot ZStW, Br/p-oa-Ca, etc., see 
 B. § 115, 4 p. 266. 
 
 Remark. The opposite case (B. § 123, N. 6), viz. the addition 
 of dvijp to substantives, as though it were an adjective, occurs only 
 with Luke (xxi v. 19 avrjp 7rpo(^^Ti;s, Acts iii. 14 avSpa ^ovea, etc.) ; 
 in respectful addresses (avSpes d8eX<^oi, TahXaloi, etc.) only in the Acts. 
 
 Adjectives used instead oe (English) Adverbs. 
 B. §123,6; H. §4S8; C. § 609; D. p.458sq.; J. §714. 
 
 9 This use is quite current with the N. T. writers, so that it 
 is not worth while to give the separate instances, since they 
 
§ 123.] COMPARATIVE AND StTPERLATIVE. 83 
 
 agree in the main with the specifications given in the Grammars ; 
 as, eieaiv Trpdaaco, Sevrepaloi i]\dofiev, ttiiKt] avTO/xaTr} r/voi'^^dr], 
 6o-TWT(x? apyovii (Matt. xx. 3), etc. In like manner these 
 authors discriminate accurately between 7rp53To<i and Trpcorov, 
 e.g. John XX. 4 ; i. 42 Tdf. ; xviii. 13, etc. ; fiovcK and fiovov, 
 e.g. Rom. xvi. '4 ; Matt. v. 47, etc. 
 
 Comparative and Supeklative. 
 B. §123,7; H. §662; C. §514; D. §415; J. § 784. 
 
 When the idea or the object with which the comparison is 
 made is apparent at once from the connection, the Comparative 
 not infrequently stands alonej and so gets the look of a Positive, 
 as Acts xvii. 21 tI Kaivorepov. Especially is this the case with 
 the Comparative of adverbs, as Tdj(i,ov, koXKlov, p,a,XKov, aaaov, 
 7r6/3tcro-oTepa)9, etc. ; cf. p. 69 sq. Moreover, this usage is by no 
 means peculiar to the N. T. ; see the literature in Winer 242 sq. 
 (227 sq.). 
 
 B. § 123, N. 8; H. § 665; 0. § 510; D. p. 392; J. § 784, 2. 
 
 Examples of the (pleonastic) strengthening of the Comparative by 11 
 fiaXXov are Mark vii. 86 fiaXKov TrepuraoTtpov eKjypvo-o-ov ; still 
 stronger Phil. i. 23 ttoXXu /jLaXkov Kpela-a-ov. The strengthening by 
 means of voXv, en, etc. needs no explanation. 
 
 Eespecting the Comparative force of the Positive see § 149 under 73 
 71 p. 360. 
 
 B. §123, N. 9; H. §664sq.; C. §553; D.p. 396; J. § 870, Obs. 4. 
 
 The intensifications of the Superlative (by ttoXv, //.dXia-Ta, etc., the 12 
 particles cos, y, etc., the pron. oTos, etc.) usual in Greek authors do not 
 occur in the N. T. On the other hand, certain constructions are 
 brought forward by the interpreters as (in part intensive) circum- 
 locutions for the Superlative. That sometimes the Positive may 
 in a sense take the place of a Superlative is apparent in Matt, xxii, 36 
 irota ivToXrj ^eyaX-q kv t(3 vd/io) ; cf. VS. 38. To this may be added Matt. 
 V. 19 (/A€yas KXrjOi^aeTai), Luke x. 42 (t'^v a,ya6r]V fieplSa cfcXcfaro) 
 and the Hebraistic (Gesen. Lehrgeb. p. 692 [Gr. § 117]) phrase, Luke 
 i. (28) 42 €iXoyrin.evri crii ev ywai^iv. But in all these passages our 
 Positive is fully adequate as a translation (and has been used for the 
 most part), so that a peculiar (Hebraistic) usus loquendi cannot be 
 founded upon them. Such a pecuharity might sooner be found in the 
 circumlocution for the Superlative formed according to Hebrew pre- 
 cedent (o'^ia^lsn V'ip, see Gesen. as above), if it had been perpetuated 
 in any other expi •'ssion than to ayta ayimv, already touched upon 
 
84 COMPARATIVE AND SOTERLATIVTi;. [§ 123 
 
 p. 24 ; for, substantive phrases, such as Paa Xeiis ^acriXiuxv, Kuptos KvpLiav, 
 can hardly be included under this head, as Winer 246 (231) correctly 
 remarks. 
 
 Concerning fjuKpbv ocrov oa-ov see § 150 p. 373. 
 
 Interchange op Compahative and Supeklative. 
 
 13 Luther in his translation of the Bible [so A. V.] has availed 
 himself, in a number of passages, of the (German) Superlative 
 instead of the Greek Comparative, (an example, however, 
 which de Wette has not followed) ; and consequently tlie 
 opinion has been pretty general, that such an interchange of 
 the degrees of comparison is a characteristic of the N. T. 
 language. That this is not the case modern commentators 
 have shown abundantly, and careful consideration of the sense 
 will teach every attentive reader for himself 
 
 Since, however, it is not to be denied that the modern languages in 
 the majority of these cases would have employed the Superlative or 
 other modes of expression, we will here designate the passages in 
 question ; but for the extended exposition of them, in particular of 
 1 Cor. xiii. 13, reference must be made to the commentaries. Besides 
 this instance, we have Matt, xviii. 1 and the parallel passages (Mark 
 ix. 34 ; Luke ix. 46), Matt. xi. 11 ; Luke vii. 28 ; xxii. 24. We must 
 not number among them the passages in which the nature of the Com- 
 parative is preserved by the addition ttcivtcov, and at the most we are to 
 assume a very common circumlocution for the Superlative ; hence 
 Luther [so A. V. generally] translates such passages also (but with 
 greater reason) by the Superlative : Matt. xiii. 32 ; Mark iv. 82 ; 
 1 Cor. XV. 19. Similar is John x. 29. 
 
 14 Lastly, it is said that on the other hand the Superlative can stand 
 for the Comparative. This opinion rests upon the connection — 
 
 74 occurring here and there in native Greek writers — of the Superlative 
 with the Genitive (e.g. Hom. Od. X, 482) or with -ij ; respecting which 
 see Herm. ad Vig. p. 718 and ad Eur. Med. p. 343 (V. 67). In the 
 N. T. only -John's connection of Trpcuros with the Genitive can here 
 come into account ; this, however, receives its natural explanation by 
 the (later) usage spoken of p. 32, according to which Trpwro^ often 
 stands for Trpdrepos (e.g. Matt. xxi. 28, 36, etc.). The passages are 
 John i. 15, 30; i. 42 Tdf. ; xv. 18 (Vulg. prior). 
 
 That the wish of certain interpreters to refer Luke ii. 2 also to this 
 head is thoroughly contrary to philology, has of late been sufficiently 
 demonstrated ; see the cotpmentaries of deWette, Meyer, and especiallj 
 Winer, E..W.B. under Quirinius, and Gram. 244 sq. (229). 
 
§ 124.] THE ARTICLE. 85 
 
 The Aktiole. 
 B. § 12i, 2 ; C. § 548 a. ; D. p. 348 ; J. § 659 ; W. § 117 (Ul). 
 
 Instead of the indefinite article, eh without a partitive 1 
 Gen. following is not infrequently used, as elsewhere also in 
 later writers (Achil. Tat. 4, 22), — accordingly for rh. Thus, 
 for instance, but in connection with a participle. Matt. xix. 16 
 and the parallel passage el? irpo'^eXOcbv el-jrev (cf. Mark xv. 36) ; 
 with a substantive, Matt. xxvi. 69 fj-ia -TraiBicrKrj, xxi. 19 a-vKijv 
 fjbiav, Mark xii. 42 fiia %»7/3a, etc. Among the variants we 
 often find for eh the reading rh, and in the versions unus and 
 quidam. 
 
 With this may be compared the Hebrew use of nnx (Sept. eis) in 
 isolated passages, as 1 Kings xx. (xxi.) 13 ; Dan. viii. 3, etc., but it is 
 unnecessary to assume that it served as the precedent for the N. T. 
 usage. It is incorrect to refer to this head those passages in which 
 the idea of unity, in contrast with a (mentioned or uunientioned) 
 plurality, must have distinctly hovered before the mind of the writer, 
 as in the Rev. ets ayyeKo? xviii. 21 ; xix 17, ev6s aerov viii. 13, etc. 
 
 The pleonastic combination eh tk (hit always with a partitive Gen. 
 following) is found in Luke xxii. 50 ; John xi. 49 (Vulg. unus), Mark 
 xiv. 47 Tdf., without a Gen. following Mark xiv. 51 Tdf. but with 
 important variants.' 
 
 The Definite Article. 
 B. § 124, 1. 3 sq. ; H. § 526 sqq. ; C. § 520 sqq. ; D. § 394 ; J. § 446. 
 
 In reference to the definite article the rules and regulations 2 
 given in the grammars hold good, — so far as in a subject so 
 delicate as this we can talk of rules. For in the endeavor to 75 
 lay down fixed laws respecting the use of the article, many 
 a learned and laborious inquiry has already come to naught ; 
 and the intention ought at length to be abandoned of forcing 
 the use or the omission of the article under precise regulations, 
 which find the proof of their nullity and uselessness in the 
 throng of exceptions which it is necessary to subjoin straight- 
 way to almost every rule laid down. For, a writer's sovereign 
 pleasure does not allow itself to be curtailed, whenever it 
 seems good to him (or perspicuity, that supreme law of every 
 
 ^ It is not allowable to compare with this the classic use of eh tis, since in the 
 earlier writers this combination is never used except where it was necessary to 
 express at the same fine unity and indefiniteness united, as is evident 
 from Soph. Oed. Tyr. .8 ; Antig. 262, and the other passages, (seeSteph. under els 
 p. 289). V , ' 
 
gg THE DEFINITE AETICLE. [§ 124. 
 
 intelligent writer or speaker, requires him) to depart even 
 from a well-founded grammatical law. Nevertheless, it is the 
 grammarian's task to settle the nature of the article in 
 its main features, and to elucidate the same by a number of 
 examples, and then to trace back the exceptional uses to their 
 respective principles. It is that of the exegete, to show in 
 every particular passage by what thought the .writer was led in 
 one case to use the article, in another and perhaps precisely 
 identical case, to omit it. Accordingly, we shall content our- 
 selves here with selecting from the mass of pertinent matei'ial 
 such special cases only as at least approximate to a general 
 use, or rest upon a grammatical basis clearly recognizable. 
 
 3 Since the use of the article with Names of Persons is 
 wholly variable in the N. T. also (let the use of the names 
 Jesus, Peter, Pilate, in this respect be traced in the Gospels, 
 and that oi Paul in the Acts), the matter must be left where 
 the general Grammar places it : viz. by using the article the 
 writer means to designate the person as one known or already 
 mentioned; without the article he wishes simply to give liis 
 name. Accordingly, when rather unimportant persons are 
 mentioned for the first time, the article is everywhere omitted 
 unless other reasons render its addition desirable. 
 
 Such a reason is the desire to be perspicuous. It will be found, 
 for instance, that indeclinable names often have the article, 
 manifestly only to make the case apparent, especially when the name 
 stands iu an oblique case ; as, Mark xv. 45 cSuipijo-aTo to TrTWfj.a. tQ 
 'lu)a-jcj>, Rom. xi. 25 Trupioo-ts a.TTo /xepovs t<3 'IcrparjX. yiyovev. When the 
 case is plain from the connection, the art. is commonly wanting; as 
 after a Prep., e.g. Ik Siwv, aTro 'laK<l>j3; with a Gen. after a subst., as 
 Acts xiii. 21 tSuKcv airots tov SaoiiX, viov Kcts, ai/Spa Ik <j>vXrji B£vta/j,€tv 
 IQ etc. That all such rules, however, are only approximately correct, 
 attentive reading will soon teach. 
 
 4 It has further been observed, that names of countries 
 have the art. far more frequently than names of cities. This 
 observation is philologically well founded. For the great 
 majority of names of countries are originally adjectives, as f, 
 'Axata, 7) FaXaTia, which consequently must be first rendered 
 substantives by the addition of the article; with names of 
 cities, this as a rule is not the case. Again, however, ex- 
 amples of the opposite occur in both cases; and accordingly 
 here, too, the general remarks made in 2 above apply. 
 
§ 124.] THE DEFINITE ARTICLE. 87 
 
 On the otlier hand, it is to be noticed as a constant exception to the 
 above rule, that the common word Aiyum-os never has the art. (for in 
 Acts vii. 1 1 Lchm. [Tdf. Treg.] the art. has another cause) ; yet 
 probably for no other reason than because the word originally is not 
 an adjective like the rest. And with what has been already said in 
 3 above, agrees perfectly the fact that liames of cities after a prep, {iv, 
 eU, sk) are connected with the art. very much less frequently than 
 where they stand without a prep., especially in the Nominative. 
 
 The names of rivers approximate so much to the nature 
 of appellatives that tlie addition of the article seems to le 
 almost necessary. In the N. T. the art. is never wanting ; 
 see the names ^Iophavq<i, EvcppdrT)^, XCKmafju in the lexicons. 
 
 B. § 124, N. 2; C. § SSlj J. § 453 j8. 
 
 Examples of the use and the omission of the art. with toiovto's 5 
 and Too-ovTos are found in the N. T. in sufficient number (cf. e.g. 
 Eom. i. 32 ; Mark ix. 37 ; Rev. xviii. 16 with 1 Cor. xi. 16 ; 2 Cor. 
 iii. 12, etc.) to show that the distinction given in B. 1. c. is perfectly 
 observed, (i.e. the prons. are used with and without the art. according 
 as it is either the object so qualified, or the quality as such, that is 
 to be made prominent ; and according as reference is made to a de- 
 scription already g i v e n, or to one still to be given). 
 
 B. § 124, N. 4; H. § 538 c. ; C. § 524; D. p. 352; J. § 452. 
 
 The use of the art. with possessive prons. is observed by the 6 
 language of the N.T. so strictly, that no single instance can be adduced 
 of its omission where according to the rule it ought to stand. In the 
 Sept. it is wanting more frequently, but only in certain portions often 
 (e.o'. in Prov. ayp/ x"P"j ""O" °^5, e/a^ (To<f>ia., etc.), in others never. 
 Where it is wanting in the N. T. the expression is p r e d i c a t i v e, as 
 then (cf. § 129, 1) the art. must be omitted (e.g. John iv. 34 ; xiii. 
 35 ; xvii. 9 ; xv. 8, etc. ; cf. Luke x. 29, 36 ; 2 Cor. viii. 23, where, 
 however, the omission of the art. with the following dSeX^oi ruitav 
 is erroneous, see § 127, 27 p. 119), or the art. is brought in after- 
 wards in an attributive limitation that follows ; as, Phil. iii. 9 jiij txi^v 
 ifjir]v SiKCUoa-vvrjv Trjv Ik v6fi.ov. Sse below § 125, 3 p. 92 sq. 
 
 B. § 124, N. 6; D. § 396; J. § 446; W. p. 115 (109). 
 
 The definite art. cannot stand for the indefinite — neither 7 
 in the N. T. nor in any writer who thinks and writes in Greek ; 
 although there are passages enough where we, certainly, em- 77 
 ploy the indefinite art. rather than the definite, or at least might 
 do so. On the contrary, the use of the article has everywnere 
 
88 OMISSION OF THE ARTICLE WITH iiPPELLATIVES. [§124. 
 
 its positive reason, inasmuch as the writer conceives the object 
 thus designated, as one sufficiently limited, either from its 
 nature, or by the immediate context. In all cases where the 
 definite article appears to stand for the indefinite, the writer 
 has ill mind a more closely defining participle or a relative 
 clause, which if added would have been heavy or superfluous. 
 Often by this addition of the article a certain rhetorical 
 emphasis is laid upon the word (cf. § 129, 1, Remark p. 
 124). In the translation of all such passages we shall do well 
 if, in order to reproduce the intention of the writer, we avail 
 ourselves likewise as far as possible of the definite article, even 
 against our sense of propriety. 
 
 Compare in particular with this section the detailed exposition given 
 § 129, 1 p. 123. To elucidate what has here been said, we will select 
 but a few examples : Matt. xiii. 2 Tdf. [ed. 7] oSa-TC eh to ttXoIov e/i^avra 
 Ka6rja-6aL he went into the ship (which was there, stood ready, etc.), on 
 the other hand, Lchm. [Treg. Tdf.], with equal grammatical accuracy, 
 eh TrXoLov into a ship, John vi. 8 avrjXOev eh to opos (Luther [so A. V.] 
 inaccurately a mountain), 1 Cor. iv. 5 6 ciratvos yev-qa-eTai eKocxTta a.TTO 
 Tov 6eov, deWette the praise (deserved) ; cf. Rom. iv. 4; 1 Cor. ix. 18 ; 
 2 Cor. i. 17 /iijTt apa ttj ekat^pla, i)(prjcrdij,7iv ; (where the art. is hard 
 to reproduce in the translation) ; further, in the standing phrase Matt. 
 viii. 12, etc., eKel eo-rai 6 KXavd/jiO's kol 6 jSpvy/jios tS>v oSoi'tojv, emphatic " 
 the well-known, the terrible, pains of hell ; so, too, always in the 
 Doxologies e.g. 1 Pet. iv. 1 1 (j) Icttiv tj Sofa /cai to /c/Daros etc., Rev. 
 V. 13, etc., see § 129, 22 p. 137. Respecting 2 Thess. iii. 14 see 
 § 125, 2 p. 92. 
 
 Omission op the Article with Appellatives. 
 B. §124, N. 7; H. §530; C. §633; D. p. 347; J. §447, 2. 
 
 Since in the N. T. the omission of the article is very 
 common in cases where we employ it, and where in strictness 
 it ought to stand in Greek also, Winer gives to this subject in 
 § 19 a thorough examination, distinguished for the clearness 
 and accuracy of its statements. The result he reaches is this : 
 That the usage of the N. T. in this respect follows closely the 
 four points specified in B. under tliis head [viz. Hiat the 
 Art. is omitted, 1) with general (especially) abstract terms 
 in apothegmatic sentences, 2) in general adverbial ad- 
 juncts, 3) with words individualized by the context, 4) with 
 quasi-proper names]; and that likewise the remark there sub- 
 
§ 124.] OMISSION OF THE AETICLE WITH APPELLATIVE .5. 89 
 
 joined, Tiz. " that none of these precepts are settled, and con- 
 sequently in most cases the art. may still be. employed," 
 is completely applicable to the N. T. We will therefore con- 78 
 tent ourselves here, with confirming somewhat more in detail, 
 and completing, the substance of those four rules, by means of 
 a few examples from the N. T. The article is often wanting, 
 accordingly, 
 
 a) With abstract terms, as SiKaioo-uvrj, ayaTTi], ■/tlo-tk, KaKia, rrXe- 
 ovefta, af^apTia, awr-qpia, also when compound : tfar) aitai/ios, Sofa Oiov, 
 Aoyo5 t")!;?, etc. ; as, 1 Thess. v. 8 ny^to/xei/ evSucra;u,ei'oi OuipaKa marews 
 Kai dyaTDjs Kai ■mpiKet^oKaia.v eXmSa o-WTTjptas, ■ Gal. V. 5 ij/ieis TrvEU/xaTt 
 Ik TTwrTcco'; iKTriSa SiKaioo-ui/rys (XTreKSe^^o/AcSa. 
 
 b) With such appellatives as approximate to proper names. Thus 
 with 6e6i,^ Kvpio^, ^uTTOi, ■Trvev/ji.a ayiov, ^Xtos, yrj (but not y^dpa), 
 OaXadcra, Kocrfios (so e.g. always in the phrase diro Kara/JoX^s koctixov, 
 hence also in the synonymous aTr' dpxrjs KTto-ews), further Std/3oXos and 
 o-aTttvas, the last, however, but extremely seldom, and strictly speaking 
 only in Luke xxii. 3 ; Acts xiii. 10 ; for in 1 Pet. v. 8 ; Rev. xx. 2, 
 etc., the omission is regular. Lastly, avrLxpco-Toi in 1 John ii. 18 with 
 Lchm. Tdf. [Treg.J according to the oldest mss. [s* also]. 
 
 c) With such words as commonly seem to be individualized suf- 
 ficiently by the connection, as -irar-rjp, [n^rrjp (Matt. x. 37 ; Luke i. 15, 
 etc.), yoveii (Rom. i. 30, etc.), tjios, avijp and yvvi^ in the sense of 
 husband and wife (Acts xviii. 2 etc.), :rd\is, etc. Here belongs also 
 vo/xo'; to denote the Mosaic law, especially in the Pauline Epp., but 
 not in the Gospels (cf. d), and Oavaroi, e.g. dfios Oavdrov, iJi,rj iSuv 
 Bdvarov, etc. The combination TratSes koX yuvaiKes also, so common in 
 the claissics, occurs Acts xxi. 5 [crw yuvai^X Koi tekvois]. 
 
 d) In general adverbial phrases and standing formulas, especially 
 when dependent upon prepositions, as Kara iJi,ea-rjfji.j3piav, Sltt dj/aroA^?, 
 aTr' dyopds, oltt ay pov, iv dypS, iv vxj/ia-TOK (although an adj., cf. the 
 note below) , Tcmre.iv ern Trpocroiirou, kwt 6cj)6a\p.ov?, ews and jixe^pt davdrov, 
 £7rt Oipais, iv juecra), diro rpCrrj'S wpas, SfLTTVov yevofnevov, 6ij/i (ray8)8dT(uv, 
 Trpo Katpov, dir' dp}(^9, iyeipeiv and dvacTTrjvai fK vcKpwv,^ and many 
 similar expressions. But in one respect the N. T. usage departs 
 
 1 Even fSifiurTos, which when it stands for God, though as an adj. it ought to have 
 the art., is yet used without it in Luke i. 32, 35, 76 ; vi. 35. Still more extraor- 
 dinary is Rev. xi. 16 Lchm. ff/toirt Tiaaapes Tpev^iTepoi for ol irp. (Rec. [T. Tr.]). 
 
 '^ Often also avia-r-aais veKpuv, but also on the other hand ix, airii t&v vfKpSiv. 
 The remark of Wilier 123 (117) that the Greeks regularly omit the art. before 
 iliKpoi needs considerable limitation. For example, in Thucyd. the use of the art. 
 is far more frequent than its omission ; and the latter, moreover, occurs for the 
 most part only in connection with rk vavdyta : 1. 54 ; 8. 106 ; 4. 14. 
 12 
 
90 ART. WITH MORE CLOSELY DEFINED SUBSTANTIVES. [§ 125. 
 
 manifestly from the classic, viz. eve:,, when such adverbial phrases are 
 restricted by a following Genitive to particular cases, and so lose their 
 general character, the art. is frequently wanting ; so especially in the 
 Sept. This omission takes place regularly in the Hebraistic circum- 
 locutions for simple prepositions by means of the terms vpoa-oyirov, 
 Xelp, o-Toixa, as Trpd or airo trpoo-iiirov tov Kvpiov, Sia, p^etpos av6fj.ii>v, etc. 
 (see § 133, 20 p. 182; § 146, 1 p. 319) ; further airo o06»aX/*<SV a-ov, 
 iv o^^aX/tois ■^p.w' (Matt. xxi. 42 quotn.), hrcaov iirl wpocrtaiTov airojv, l^ 
 79 e<^'>7yiiepias 'AySta, iv ■fjfx.epai's HpioSov, N(3e, eJs fijxipav aTroXvTpuxrems, iv 
 rjfiipa opyrj^, ets oIkov avTov, iv Se^L^ avTOv or tov Bpovov, an aKpov yrji 
 eujs axpov ovpavov, iv l3ij3X(o ^mrjs, and many others. Such omissions as 
 belong at the same time to one of the preceding classes (a. b. c), like 
 the already mentioned irpd Kara/SoXijs or aTrd KTiVecos koct/hou, the 
 Pauline phrase ii ipyosv vo/xov, eis eiayyiXigv 6'eov, im irapopyuTfiia 
 VfjLtov, Kor iinova tov KTicravTos avTOV, el<s eTraivov So^rjs avrov, iv vd/ixio 
 Kvpiov (Luke ii. 23, 24), further iv yy Ma8ta/x, Xavadv, eh irdXtv AavdS, 
 €K yrj's AlyvTTTov, etc., may be justified well enough by the ordinary 
 usage. Cf. on this section § 127, 27, 1) p. 119 
 
 TJsE OF THE Article with more closely Defined Substantives. 
 B. § 125, 1 to N. 5 ; H. § 531 sqq. ; C. § 523 ; D. §§ 400. 407 ; J. § 468 sq. 
 
 1 As has been already remarked in speaking of the Possess. 
 Prons. § 124, 6 p. 87, the language of the N. T. remained faith- 
 ful throughout to the general rules of grammar in reference 
 to the position of the article with a substantive having an 
 attributive adjective: That is to say, it either places 
 the adj. between the subst. and art. (^rb ar/iov irvev/j.d) ; or 
 after the subst., repeating the art. (to irvevfjia to ayiov} ; even 
 repeating it twice, as Matt. xxv. 41 rb irvp to alwvbov to rf 
 Toi/j-aff/ievov, Rev. viii. 3 ; ix. 13 ; xvii. 1. Hence in John, 
 notwithstanding the frequency with which the phrase fw^ 
 aiMvuxi occurs without the art. (agreeably to § 124, 8 a) p. 89), 
 as soon as the art. precedes it the expression is reversed : r) 
 alcovio9 ^0)7] (xvii. 3), or if the order is retained the art. is 
 doubled (1 John i. 2 ; ii. 25). 
 
 It would hardly be possible to adduce examples on the other side, 
 inasmuch as all the instances in which the adj. stands without the 
 art. after a subst. with the art. are either not genuine or find their 
 grammatical explanation in other ways. Since "Winer 133 (12G) 
 appears to acknowledge the existence of such exceptional cases, we 
 will mention them here. In 1 John v. 20 the reading of the Rec. ij 
 4co^ aiunos is now set aside on ms. authority and likewise in Luke xll. 
 
§ 125.] ART. WITH MORE CLOSELY DEFINED SUBSTANTI-V ES. 91 
 
 12 TO yap 7ri/€l)/ia ayiov. On Mark v. 36 (t6v \6yov XaXov/xtvoi/) see 
 § 144, 16 p. 802. In John v. 36 Tdf. (fx<« ttjv jiapTvpLav /xei'lo) rov 
 'luiavvov) tlie word fiei^w is predicative, and consequently the example 
 belongs to those given below (5 p. 94). 1 Pet. i. 18 ck rijs jtiaTata? 
 v/iSv dvaoTjOoi^^s TraTpoTrapaSorov is quite regular, since the classic 
 Greek authors also are accustomed, after a subst. which already has one 
 attributive, to put a second without the art., as Xen. Ages. 1, 10 ; Thuc. 
 6, 31, 5; see other examples of the sort in Bhdy. Syntax p. 323. 
 Accordingly, the common reading also in 1 Cor. x. 3 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] 
 TO ain-o ^pCiifia 7rveup.aTi.Kov ftjiayov may be defended ; but the oldest 
 MSS. give [n simply Trveup.. jSpoJ/u,.] to avro iTvevp,a.TiKov Ppu>p.a ttjjayov 
 [Treg. Tdf.] or t^yov PpS>p.a (Lchm.); likewise Gal. i. 4 Tdf.[eds. 2, 7] 80 
 €K TOv iveffTCiToq alwvo'S irovrjpov, where these MSS. [so ft*] read Ik tov 
 aiuivoi TOV ei/eo-rSTOs Trovijpov (Lchm. [Treg. Tdf.]). Matt. xxiv. 45 tw 
 apa icrnv 6 7r«rTos SoCXos Koi <f>p6vi.p.o'; a native Greek, to be sure, would 
 perhaps not have written ; but it finds its apology in the predicative 
 position of the whole expression. In John xii. 9, 12 the reading 6 
 oxA-os TToXvs (B C L [so Tdf. {» vs. 9, but in vs 12 he omits the art. 
 with n]) is the only correct one, since oxXos iroXvs was regarded as 
 but a single word (vulgus, the great mass), and 6 ttoXus 'o^Xos would 
 sound strange, and very likely give another meaning. 
 
 The case is different with adverbial additions to a i 
 substantive with the article. According to rule, they also 
 ought always to stand between the art. and the subst., or to 
 be placed after with a repeated art. as is often the case in the 
 N. T. : Rom. vii. 10 jj ivTciKr) ^ eli ^(orjv. Acts xv. 23 rol<i kut^ 
 Trjv 'Avno-^eiav koX Svpiav a8eX<^ot? tok e^ idv&v ; see a mul- 
 titude of similar passages in Winer 133 (126). But the 
 language of the N. T. has liberated itself somewhat from the 
 traditionary usage (although the beginnings of such a change 
 can be traced even in good classic authors), in that it also 
 subjoins such adverbial adjuncts without the article. 
 
 From the examples belonging under this head, however, wc miist 
 first except (as analogous to some given in 1 above) all those cases in 
 which the subst. is already furnished with a genitival, adjectival, or 
 adverbial attributive (whether inserted or subjoined) ; as, Epii. i. 15 
 Tijv KaO' v/tas tticttlv iv to! KVpuo, iii. 4 Tijv avvefflv fJ,ov iv t(3 p.vcTT'qpiia, 
 iii. 13 rats OXiif/itrw p.orv virtp vp.Siv, vi. 21 o ayair-qTOi d8eX<^bs koX ttio-tos 
 StaKOVOs €V KVpuo, Phil. i. 26 T^s e/'^s ■jrapovcria.'s ttoKiv Trpos v/xas, iii. 14 
 T^s ai'u) KXiytreius tov Oeov iv ILpurTw Irjcrov, Gill. i. 13 tyjv €p.r]V a.vacrTpo(f>i^v 
 TTOTi h> T<3 'lov8ai(Tfj.<^, Rom. ix. 3 twv trvyyevcuv p.ov Kara (rapKa, 1 and 2 
 Thess. i. 1 r^ iKKXrjo-ia ®ea-(ra\oviKf<DV iv ©eu, 2 Cor. vii. 7 ; Col. i. 4, 8, 
 
92 ART. WITH MORE CLOSELY DEFINED SUBSTANTIVES. [§ 125. 
 
 etc. Accordingly, in 2 Thess. iii. 14 the phrase 8ta t^5 Imo-ToX^s belongs 
 to the preceding ™ Xo'yu. vfiSv, and cannot — as the position and the 
 article indicate plainly enough — be referred to <rr!iJ.eLova-6e following, 
 for thus it would receive an inappropriate emphasis. More surprising, 
 yet absolutely required by the sense (see the recent commentaries and 
 Winer 220 (206)), is the construction of the phrase iv Soyuaa-iv in 
 Eph. ii. 15 with the preceding rbv vofnov rwv ivroXiov, and still more 
 harsh is the Dative rois Soyfrnaiv, which belongs to to Ka6' ^/iuJi; 
 ^eipo'ypat^ov, in the parallel passage Col. ii. 14. 
 
 But, setting these aside, cases enough are left in which the adverbial 
 adjunct is placed after a subst. limited only by the art., — cases in 
 which exegesis, to be sure, has made manifold attempts to draw the 
 adverbial phrase away from the subst. to other parts of the clause, 
 but in which both position and sense require it to be connected with 
 the subst. Least of all are we compelled to resort to such an apparent 
 grammatical make-shift in cases where the governing subst. is an 
 abstract term whose radical verb is capable of the 
 same adverbial connection; for parallel instances are found 
 even in the earlier prose writers from Herod, and Thucyd. down (see, 
 81 among others, Poppo on Thucyd. 2, 52 ; Kriiger on Dionys. liistoriogr. 
 p. 153), and still more frequently in later authors. From the N. T. 
 e.g. Rom. vi. 4 to /3a7rTio-/ia eis tov Ooi/ixtov (cf. vs. 3 ex<s tov Odvarov 
 avTov i/SaTTTLo-drjixev), 2 Cor. ix. 13 rj Kotvoivia eh airov's (agreeably to 
 KoivoiveLv £« in § 132, 8 p. 160 ; and cf. the examples below,llp.95sq.). 
 But such adjuncts also occur in the N. T. often enough where at least 
 the more accurate style requires the repetition of the art. ; as, 1 Thess. 
 iv, 16 01 veKpol iv li.pLcrT(o, 1 Cor. X. 18 /BXeirere tov 'lo'pa'^X Kara crdpKa, 
 Eph. vi. 5 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7 ; ed. 8, Treg. cod. Sin. tois k. a-. Kvptois] tois 
 KvpLOK Kara crdpKa' (at the parallel passage Col. iii. 22), Eph. iv. 1 iyui 
 6 8e(r/xio5 iv KvpLw, ii. 11 Ta 'idvr] iv a-apKi. But to give a complete list 
 of all such passages, and in particular to determine when such adver- 
 bial adjuncts belong not to the subst. but to the verb or some other 
 part of the proposition, lies quite beyond the limits of grammar, and 
 must be left to the exegesis of the individual passages, since everywhere 
 the context alone can decide. A portion of these doubtful passages 
 are treated by Winer 137 (130). Cf. 11 p. 95. 
 
 3 The usage (cf. B. § 125, 3 sub fin.) that, 1) when attributives 
 are placed after with the art., the art. before the subst. is 
 dropped ; or, 2) to substantives which (according to § 124, 8 
 p. 88 sq.) commonly stand without the art., the adjunct, when 
 subjoined, is given with the art., — is quite current in the 
 language of the N. T. 
 
§ 125.] ART. WITH MORE CLOSELY DEFINED SUBSTANTIVES. 93 
 
 Examples of 1) are Luke xxiii. 49 ywatices al crvvaKoXov&ova-aL, Acts 
 i. 12 a/iro opotis tov KiXovfjiivov iX.aiSvo'i, vii. 35 ayyiXov Tov o^Bivro's 
 (cf. VS. 30), 1 Pet. i. 7 -^pvcriov rov aTroXXu/tevou, Phil. iii. 9 ijjJqv ScKai- 
 ocrvvrjv ttjv Ik v6fji.ov (cf. vs. 6), i. 11 Kopirbv SiKaiocrvvrj^ tov Sia 'I. Xp. 
 Rom. ix. 30 KareXa/iev SiKaioo-WTji/, SiKaLocr6vr]v St tyjv €k Trla-rews, John 
 xiv. 27 dprjvriv atftirjixi vfjuv, elprjxrqv rrp/ ifiir/v 8lSw[U vfuv, Acts x. 1, 41 ; 
 XXV. 23 ; Heb. ix. 2, 3, etc. Examples of 2) are very numerous : 
 Rom. viii. 33 0eo? 6 SiKaiuiv, Gal. i. 1 6eov irarpos tov iyeipavros avTov, 
 ii. '^0 ev TTtcTTei ^(3 rg tov vlov, Luke v. 36 Lchm. i-!ril3Xrjfi.a to dn-o tov 
 Kaifov, Mark viii. 27 Katcrap«as ttjs $tXiWou ; cf. Acts xxvi. 22 ; 
 1 Tim. i. 4 ; iii. 13 ; 'w.'S; 2 Tim. i. 13, 14; ii. 10, etc. etc. 
 
 Remark. Winer's observation 139 sq. (132, cf. ed. 5 p. 159) that 
 in such cases the substantive is strictly speaking always conceived 
 indefinitely, and that the limitation following is equal to an 
 abbreviated relative clause, is at least not to be extended 
 to the above passages ; probably, however, there are passages to wjiich 
 it applies. That is. to say, since (as we have already seen § 123, 5 
 p. 78, and as will be shown at length § 144, 9 p. 294) the parr 
 tiCiple with the art. often takes the place of a relative clause, 
 sr.ch a participle may stand not only after indefinite pronominal ex- 
 pressions, like Tis, Irepos, aAAos, TroXv? (§ 144, 9f) p. 295), but in general 
 also after indefinite and consequently anarthrous substantives, as well 
 as after such as are predicative und on this account (according to 
 § (29, 1 p. 123) also dispense with the article; e.g. Jude 4 waptts- 
 ehvcrav rive? avOpinTroi, o l iraXai Trpoyiypajj.p.ivoi eh tovto to Kpl/xa 
 dc c/Sets ; cf. Luke xviii. 9 ; Gal. i. 7 ; Col. ii. 8 ; Luke vii. 32 o/Aotoi 
 vmSlois rot? iv ayopa KaOrj/xivon, John V. 2 [Lchm. Treg.J ccttii' iv rots 
 'lepocroX. KoXvii^rjOpa, i] iTnXeyo/ieiri] Biy^ccrSd, Acts XX. 19 /j-fTO. SaKpvwv 8a 
 Ko^ Treipacrp.itiv t<dv (ruiJ.pdvTiov jjloi, Rom. ii. 14 Wvr] to. p.7] vo/xov ej^ovTa, 
 ix. ."iO ; Gal. iii. 21 tt iSoOr) vop.o's 6 Sivva.iJi.evos ^woiroL^<rai, ovtok av rjv 
 etc Jas. iv. 14 dr/Ais (pred.) ecrrc, rj wpos oXiyov (fiaivofjievrj, Acts xix. 11 
 Swa/neis re ov ras Tvxova-as hroUi etc. ; and with the omitted participle 
 of exvai ; Phil. ii. 9 eyapiaaTO avrio ovo/xa to vwep Trav ovop.a sc. ov. Cf. 
 besides, the examples given in § 144, 9 f ) p. 295. 
 
 B. § 125, N. 2; H. § 669 d. j C. § 523 c. ; S., p. xxxiii. eq. 
 
 That the partitive genitive (which, however, frequently ap- 4 
 pears in a resolved form, see § 132, 6 p. 158) is not inserted between 
 the subst. and art. is plain from many examples, as Ty irpwTri roJi/ 
 d^VjOtoiv, T^ /Ala 7(1)1' craj8/8ciTO)V, 01 irpwroi tov XaoC, to ttX^Oos t<3v ixadtyrmi, 
 Tr)<; TToXeus, etc. Yet discrimination by means of position between the 
 partitive and the ordinary Gen. is almost wholly at an end in ,the 
 N. T., since in the Gospels and in the Rev. there hardly exists an 
 
94 ARTICLE IN LIEU 01 A SUBSTANTIVE. [§ L25 
 
 instance of insertion (of the ordinary Gen.), and in the Acts and the 
 Epp. also the modern position grows more and more frequent, as ^ 
 t.K7r\-qpo}(TK T(ov rjixepiov tov ctyvtcr/toD (Acts xxi. 26), 6 vofi,oi ToS ttvev- 
 /AOTos T^s fw^s ev XpitTTfp (Rom. viii. 2), etc. 
 
 B. §125, X. 4; H. §585; C. §523b.; D. p.360; J. §458, Obs. 2. 
 
 An adjective without the art., standing either before or 
 after a substantive with the art. ,is predicative. 
 
 Examples (besides John v. 36 adduced under 1 p. 91) are Mark 
 viii. 17 TrcTToipwf/iivrjv 6;^eT€ rrjv KapSiav v/xuJv, Heb. vii. 24 dirapapaTOV 
 ix^i rr]v UptiMTVVTjv, 1 Pet. ii. 12 T^i/ avacrTpo(j>Tjv vfiSiv e^^ovres KaAijv, iv. 
 8; Heb. v. 14; 1 Cor. xi. 5 aKaraKokoTTTio rrj KecfiaXfj, Acts xxvi. 24 
 p-eydXr) rrj (jyun/fj (prjaiv, xiv. 10 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] ; Eph. i. 18 Tretjxa- 
 Turp.h'ov's Tovis 6(j>6aXp,ov's, on which passage compare also § 145, 6 
 p. 317. 
 
 B. §125, N. 6; H. §686sq.; C. § 523; D. §444; J. §459. 
 
 Examples of the predicative position in the case of oXos are 
 countless, see the lexicons ; but in the case of the other adjs. mentioned 
 (axpos, /tc'o-os, iaxo-To^) none occur, because the later language is wont 
 to employ them no longer as adjectives bjit as substantives, and hence 
 to frame its expressions by means of the Neuter of the adj. with a 
 Genitive following ; as, to aKpov tov SaKrvXov or t^s pd/38ov, iv p,((T<o 
 TTJI aiXfjis (not Iv pta-rj rrj oiXij) or avTUiv or twv Trpeaj3vT€pwv, €(os 
 ia-xoLTOV TTJ's yrji, Heb. i. 1 iir kcrxa-Tov t(ov r/ixepuiv (Rec. ecrp^aTtov) . On 
 the other hand, with the last-mentioned word (17/xepa) the common 
 adjectival position is often found, but in the other sense : iv t^ eo-p^arg 
 rip-ipq. not at the end of the day, but on the last day ; so tov ecrxo-Tov 
 KoSpdvTr]v, r) ia-)(aTf) irkdvrj, etc. 
 
 Akticle in LiEn or a Substantive, oe with a Substantive to be 
 
 SUPPLIED. 
 
 B, §125,5; H. §563; C. §527; D. p. 356; J. §436. 
 
 In the N. T., besides the common omission of son and 
 daughter when the art. is followed by a Genitive (cf. § 123, 
 8 p. 81 sq.), that of /ir^Ti^/s is also to be noticed, Mark xvi. 1 ; 
 Luke xxiv. 10 Mapla rj tov 'laKco/Sov, Mark xv. 47 Mapia ■^ 
 'IcoarJTo<; (complete in Matt, xxvii. 66 ; Mark xv. 40) ; of 
 yvvij, Matt. i. 6 e'k t'/)? tov Ovplov ; probably also of aheX<^6ii, 
 Luke vi. 16 ; Acts i. 13 'louSa? 'laKw^ov (cf. Jnde 1 ; Winer, 
 K.W.B. under Judas, I. p. 632 ; Credner, Einl. p. 613 ; on the 
 ■other hand, Meyer in 11. cc), and of 'jraTrjp in the passage 
 Acts vii. 16 Tdf [eds. 2, 7] (cf. Gen. xxxiii. 19 ; xxxiv. 6, etc.). 
 
§125.] ARTICLE IN LIEU OF A SUBSTANTIVE. 95 
 
 The designation, so frequent especially in the later profane literature, 83 
 of a person in a broad sense by the phrase oi ire pi nva, strictly 8 
 speaking does not occur in the N. T. For in Acts xiii. 13 01 irept 
 IlavKov plainly means, Paul and his compatiions (Vulg. Paulus et 
 qui cum eo) ; in xxi. 8 the expression has been discarded ; and John 
 xi. 1 9 is doubtful : Tdf. ttjoos ras inpl MdpOav koI Mapia/A (Lchm. [Treg., 
 cod. Sin.] TTjobs t^i/ M. k. M.). In Mark iv. 10 ; Luke xxii. 49 ot vepl 
 avTov is to be understood quite literally, they that were about him. 
 
 On the other hand, the art. 01 with a following Genitive 
 is often found in the sense of ' the. people, adherents, etc., of a person,' 
 as Rom. xvi. 10, 11 ot 'Apuj-To/3ovXov, 01 NapKiWov, 1 Cor. i. 11 ot XA.o'?ys, 
 Acts xvi. 33 avTOS (6 Sccr/xo^vXaf) icat ot avrov, for which in vs. 32 we 
 have 01 iv ry oiKLo. avrov ; and transferred to the followers of Christ, 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 23 ; Gal. v. 24 ot rov Xpurrov. But in Luke v. 33 pLoB-qTaL 
 is to be supplied from what precedes, and in Mark ii. 18 ot ^apia-alot. 
 is the better reading [so Tdf. Treg., after M etc.]. 
 
 Remark. Respecting the (doubtful) combinations eis aSov, iv 
 AiyvTTTov, see § 132, 27 p. 171. 
 
 B. § 125, N. 6; H. § 563; C. § 528; D. p. 357; J. p. Ill sq. 
 
 In general, the designation of persons and things by the 9 
 simple article Qoi, to, to) with a Genitive or an adverbial 
 limitation following, is by no means uncommon ; and the ex- 
 amples from the classics may be matched in abundance from 
 the N. T. Thus witli a Gen. following : tA Kaiaapo^, ra rijs 
 aapKO'i, TO, Tov 7rvev/Maro<;, to, tov Trarpo^ fiov, to. t^? aijpiov, to 
 rfj<; cyvicfi^, to irj'; aXrjdov^ irapoip,la';, to, eavT&v ^rjTova-tv, etc. ; 
 with an adverbial adjunct following : ot iv rfj 'lovBaia, onro 
 KiXiKia'i, diro 'IraXta?, e'/c t?js Kao(rapo<; olKia<;, iv Ty oIklo,- oi 
 6K ■jrepno/j.rj';, iic Trto-Tew? • ra Trepl ifie, Trpo? ttjv ')(peiav, Kara 
 TOV JJavXav, Si^ tov ffco/iaTO? • to e« fiipovi (1 Cor. xiii. 10 [A.V. 
 tJiat which is in part], Luth. Stuckwerlc) , to e'f vnStv (cf. § 128, 
 
 2 p. 123), Ta -TTpof T-qv Qvpav (Mark ii. 2 the entrance-hall^, etc. 
 
 B. §125, 6 and 7; H. §492; C. § 526; D. §400; J. §456. 
 
 The same holds true in reference to the use of adverbs with tO 
 the art. in lieu of adjectives, as iv tS vvv KaopS, 6 Tore Koa-fio^, 
 6 earn avOpoiiro'i, rfj 1^? VJJ'^pa, V ava>6ev crocpta, etc , and with 
 the omission of the substantive : 6 ■jrK'qa-lov, ol e'f&), ^k to irepav, 
 TO, oTTt'o-ft), T^ a-rjfiepov, iiravpiov, e^rj^, etc. 
 
 Remark. Far more rarely will adverbs or adverbial phrases be l\ 
 found joined to a subst that is not provided with the article or 
 
96 ARTICLE BEFORE ENTIRE SENTENCES. [§ 125 
 
 another attributive, in particular a participle. Such combinations the 
 language sought to avoid in order to preclude possible misunder- 
 standings, to which in the other case, by the insertion of the adverbial 
 qualification between the art. and the subst., the author was not ex- 
 posed. Yet such combinations have been occasionally permitted, 
 where the context is of such a nature as to exclude in advance every 
 ambiguity ; as, for example, in 2 Cor. xi. 23 sq., where klvSvvoi e/c yevovs, 
 iv ipri/xla, iv daXaa^crg, iv vrjCTeiaiq iroXXctKis, iv kottois Trepto-o-OTe'pms, 
 84 stand in the relation spoken of. But elsewhere, also, especially in the 
 Epistles, the interpreter has often found himself compelled to refer 
 adverbial limitations of this sort away from the predicate, and to con- 
 nect them immediately with preceding or following substantives 
 destitute of both art. aid attributive, — substantives which for the 
 most part are either abstract terms (that according to § 1 24, 8 p. 89 
 often stand without the art.), or verbals whose stem-verb is capable 
 of a similar construction (cf. 2 p. 92). This, procedure must be 
 regarded as the more permissible in the N. T., as we have seen above 
 (2 p. 91) there are so many combinations likewise grammatically 
 loose in which the adverbial adjunct is subjoined to the subst. without 
 the repetition of the article. Thus Mark (i. 23) says briefly avOpiairos 
 iv TTvevfxan aKaddpna a man (afflicted) with an unclean spirit, in 1 Cor. 
 xii. 31 Ka6' vTrep/JoXiji' oSov is explained by an excellent v)ay, Eph. vi. 23 
 aydirrj [xera Trwrrews, Gal. V. 5 Trveufi-wn (k ttiWcms, 1 Tim. ii. 7 SiSacTKaXos 
 iOvuiv iv TrlcTTU koX aXr]6da. (cf. § 131, 6 p. 149), Rom. xiv. 17 x^poi «" 
 7rv£ijMxri. ayuo (according to § 133, 23 p. 185), etc. 
 
 B. §125, N. 8; H. §652 a,; C. §629; D. p.502; J. §466. 
 
 12 Besides the adverbial expression to XoitoV (Matt. xxvi. 45, etc.), 
 Xotiroi/, also, without the art. is often used adverbially; see § 128, 2 
 p. 123. The following also stand adverbially : to kuO' ■^/j.epav Luke 
 xix. 47; Acts xvii. 11 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7],, to irXfurrov 1 Cor. xiv. 27, to 
 i^ vix.u)v Rom. xii. 18, to, iroSXa. XV. 22. 
 
 The Article before Entire Sentences. 
 B. §125,N.9; C. §491; D. §400; J. § 457. 
 
 j3 The practice of introducing entire clauses by the neuter 
 article to is not uncommon in the N. T. It occurs, 1) before 
 passages quoted in full or in part, which in this way are made 
 parts of the sentence ; and, 2) before indirect interrogative 
 clauses, especially in Luke. 
 
 Examples of 1) are Matt. xix. 18 to Ou (j>ovevcreK, ov //.oix^vcreK etc., 
 Gal. V. 14 6 vo/Aos iv Ivl Xdyo) ireirX^pcoTat, iv tm 'AyaTrrjcreL's etc., Rom. 
 xiii. 9; Eph. iv. 9 (to Avijit)), Heb. xii. 27 (to h-i a?ra^), Luke xxii. 
 
§ 125.] ART. WITH SUBSTS. CONNECTED BY CONJUNCTIONS. 97 
 
 37 Tdf. [Treg., cod. Sin.] ; of 2) Luke i. 62 ivivtvov tu Trarpl to ti 
 av Ofkoi KaXiia-Oai avTO, ix. 46 ; xix. 48 ; xxii. 2 i^rJTOw to irais aveXoj- 
 iriv avTov, xxii. 23, 24; Acts iv. 21 ; v. 24 (to tl yevono, according to 
 Sin.), xxii. 30. Cf. also Eom. viii. 26 ; 1 Thess. iv. 1. See the com- 
 mentaries respecting the extremely difficult passage Mark ix. 23, which, 
 according to Lchm. (praef. I. p. 44 ; II. p. 7) needs emendation, and is , 
 left dubious by the MSS. 
 
 The Aetiole with Several Stibstantives Connected by Conjunctions. 
 B. § 125, 10; C. § 634; J. 369, 9; of. S. p. xv. 
 
 It will probably never be possible, either in reference to .4 
 profane literature or to the N. T., to bring down to rigid rules 
 which have no exception, the inquiry when with several sub- 
 stantives connected by conjunctions the article is repeated, 
 and when it is not. Nevertheless, it is the business of the 
 grammarian to set forth certain established linguistic principles 35 
 as the foundation of grammatical usage, and to trace back 
 deviations even, as far as possible, to their analogies. 
 
 From this fact alone it follows, that in view of the subjective and 
 arbitrary treatment of the art. on the part of individual writers (cf. 
 § 124, 2 p. 85), it is very hazardous in particular cases to draw im- 
 portant inferences, affecting the sense or even of a doctrinal nature, 
 from the single circum.stance of the use or the omission of the article ;. 
 see e.g. Tit. ii. 13; Jude 4; 2 Pet. i. 1 and the expositors of these 
 passages, and cf. 17 c) below, p. 100. Such inferences are the more 
 precarious, as, moreover, amid the conflict of variations, the reading 
 often can hardly be settled as yet ; and the recent editors, therefore, 
 differ very much on this point. 
 
 1) If the connected substantives are of the same gender and 15 
 number and 'without attributives, it holds as a general 
 rule that, a) when the substantives may be regarded as parts of 
 one whole, as terms belonging together and related or comple- 
 mentary, it is enough to use the article but once ; but, b) if 
 they denote contrasted, or at least independent, objects or 
 notions, to be conceived of as separate, the article is repeated. 
 Nevertheless, the language is by no means bound by this rule, 
 well founded though it is in the nature of things. The ex- 
 planation of this, however, lies- not in the negligent style of the 
 writers, but in the impossibility, as a matter of fact, of drawing 
 a sharp boundary between the two cases. In particular, (a) 
 in the first case we often find the article repeated, because the 
 
 13 
 
98 ART. WITH SUBSTS. CONNECTED BY CONJUNCTIONS. [§ 125. 
 
 writer, even when the identity is almost complete, may, if he 
 will, mention the members as members, consequently each by 
 itself, without incurring the danger of being ambiguous. In 
 point of fact, at least half of the examples adduced by Winer 
 p. 128 (122) consist of such cases, where similar ideas are con- 
 nected and yet each has the article. On the other hand, (b) 
 in the second case, i.e. with members which are necessarily to 
 be thought of as separate, we but very rarely find only a single 
 article used, since in such circumstances the mind demands 
 the repetition of the article, and its omission can only take 
 place where the following term, viewed by itself, may also 
 for some reason be used without the art. 
 
 The remarks which have been made will be elucidated by 
 the following examples : 
 gg on a). That with terms of kindred nature the art. is now omitted, 
 now repeated, even by one and the same writer, is seen in the nu- 
 merous combinations of the words apxiepet's, ypa/j.fjbaTel';, -Trpecr/Surepoi, 
 ^apiacuoi, in the- Gospels. Thus they occur, for instance, in Matt; 
 (according to the text of Lchm.) with but a single art. in ii. 4 ; xvi. 21 ; 
 XX. 18; xxvi. 47; xxvii. 3, 41, with a repetition of the art. in xxi. 
 15, 23, 45; xxvi. 3; xxvii. 1, 12, 20, 62; and so, too, in the other 
 Gospeils. Further, in Luke xv. 6 we read a-vyKaXel roiis ^iXous koI 
 Toil's yetrovos, but directly afterwards in vs. 9 rets <^iXas koI yiiTova.% 
 (where Rec. adds a second ras) ; likewise also with associated proper 
 names, Acts xv. 22 (tvv tm IlavAcd koX Bapva^q,, but in xiii. 43 etc. tu 
 n. Kol Tu B. Other instances of the repetition of the art. with 
 words which are manifestly related or belong together are Mark vi. 21 ; 
 xiii. 17 ; Luke i. 53 ; xi. 39, 42 ; xii. 11 ; xx. 20 ; John ii. 14 (of. Luke 
 xix. 45 Lchm.) ; Acts xv. 4, 6 (cf. xv. 2) ; Rom. vi. 19 ; Col. ii. 3 Tdf. 
 ([buted.8] Lchm. [Treg. n] om, second T'^s) ; Rev. vi. 15 ; vii. 12, etc. 
 
 on b). On the other hand, that in the second case the art. is almost 
 indispensable, we see plainly from Acts xxvi. 30 dveW?/ 6 jSaa-iXev^ koI 
 6 riyefiuiv, where if the second art. were omitted we should think of 
 but a single person. Or if we look at 1 Cor. iii. 8 6 <t>vT€vaiv Kal 6 
 iTOTiljiiv tv tluLv, or compare Mark xi. 9 oi irpoayovrcs Kal ol d/coXou6o£ivT€s 
 with 2 John 9 6 wpoayw/ koI p.-q niviav iv T'rj StSa;;^^, we recognize the 
 difference between the two forms of expression instantly. See more 
 instances of the legitimate repetition of the art. in this case in Winer 
 128 (122), many of which, however, belong to 1 p. 90. 
 Id Remark. Where several terms are predicated of one and 
 the same object, the article of necessity can only be used once, 
 because otherwise uncertainty trould arise resnecting the meaning. 
 
§ 125.] ART. WITH SUBSTS. CONNECTED BY CONJUNCTIONS. 99 
 
 This appears further from the phrases, 6 ^eos Kal Trarrip Col. iii. 17 ; 
 Eph. i. 3 ; Phil. iv. 20 ; 2 Cor. i. 3 ; 1 Pet. i. 3 ; Jas. iii. 9, etc. ; tov 
 Kvpiov Kol crcorijpos 2 Pet. ii. 20 Tdf. [Treg.] ; iii. 2, etc., Mark vi. 3 
 6 VLO'S Mapi'as KOL dSeX^os 'laKciijSoi), , Acts iii. 1 4 tov ayiov koI SUaiov 
 rjpvT^a-acrOe, Tit. i. 15, etc. Likewise with participles used substan- 
 tively, John xxi. 24 o jxaprvprnv Trcpl tovtihv koI ypdij/a's ravra, Gal. i. 7 
 01 TapdEcrcrovTes Ujuas Kal ^eAovres etc., Phil. iii. 3 ot . . . karpivovTfs Kal 
 Kavx'itp'ii'OL, 1 Tim. iv. 3 ; Luke vi. 49 ; 2 John 9 ; see other examples 
 belonging to this head under 17 and 18 below. This is the case, also, 
 even with contracted predicates (with aWa) 2 Thess. ii. 12. On the 
 other hand. Acts xvii. 18 ; 2 Thess. iii. 2 ; 1 Tim. iv. 7, etc., may be 
 regarded simply as the insertion of two adjectives. 
 
 2) If the connected members are of the same gender and lif 
 liumber, and a) one of them, no matter which, is provided with 
 an attributive limitation which is to be referred to the 
 two (or more) members, as a rule the article is not repeated ; 
 or b) if the attributive is connected with one of the members 
 and not to be referred to the other, the art. is used with each 
 member ; or c) if each member is provided with its own attrib- 
 utive, the case is essentially the same as that above in 15, and 
 the art. is either repeated or dropped, under the same circum- 87 
 stances as there. Since, however, examples to the contrary are 
 not wanting under a) and b) also, it is plain that all rales of 
 this sort, though grammatically well-founded, are not altogether 
 unyielding ; but that, over and above them, the law of pers- 
 picuity, or the writer's desire in a particular case to render 
 more perceptible either the independence of the members or 
 their similarity and connection, has great influence over the 
 use and the omission of the article. 
 
 What has been said will be rendered clear by the following 
 examples : 
 
 on a) With'out the repetition of the art.: Eom. i 20 ^ re diSios 
 avTov Svvap.Li kol OeLOTT)^, 2 Cor. i. 6; Heb. iii. 1 ; Phil. i. 19, 20 Kara 
 TTjV awoKapaSoKLav kol iXmSa p.ov, 1 Thess. ii. 12 ; iii. 7 evrt Trdcny rg 
 avdyKr) koI dXl,\p€L r)jji,S>v 81a. rrji vif,u)V TrtcrTeios, 1 Pet. ii. 25 ; 2 Pet. i. 10, 
 11 ; ii. 20 Lchm. [Tdf.], Eph. iii. 5 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7], etc. Exceptions : 
 Eph. iii. 10 Tttis apxal'; kol rat? iiovatcws iv tow iirovpavioK, iii. 12 ; 
 1 Cor. xi. 27 TOV o-iiifxaTOi koI tov at)iaTos tov Kvpiov, Acts xxv. 15 ; 
 Rev. xiii. 10. In the account of the expulsion of the traders irom 
 the temple we read in Matt. (xxi. 12), according to the rule, toii; 
 TTiaXowras kcu dyopd^ovras iv t(3 tepu ; on the other hand, in Mark xi. 
 
100 ART. WITH SUBSTS. CONNECTED BY CONJUNCTIONS. [§ 125 
 
 15 TOiis TTcoXowTas KOI Tovs d.yopd^ovTa's iv t<3 Jepu ; in Luke xix. 45 
 Lchm. again, according to the rule, tow TrcoXowTas iv avrio kol dyopci- 
 ^ovTas ; but in John ii. 14 tovi iruiXovvra^ /3oas koa. irpoftaTa /cai iripumpas 
 Kai Tous Kipix-anaTCK Ka.6y)ft,ivau^, where Kadrj/xivcyvs manifestly belongs 
 to both classes, but perspicuity required the repetition of the article. 
 
 on b) With the repetition of the art. : when the attributive limi- 
 tation is used with the first member; Mark vi. 21 toZs iJ.iyuTTa.a-iv 
 avTov KOL Tots x'Xittpxo's, 1 Cor. i. 28 ; v. 10 (where with four members 
 the art. quite regularly is repeated only once, since the limiting genitive 
 Tov k6<tp.ov Toirrov belongs by position only to to^ iropvoi's, although 
 according to the sense it may be referred to the following members 
 also, which again, as expressing kindred ideas, have the art. in common), 
 Acts vi. 13. When the attributive limitation stands with the second 
 member ; Luke i. 58 ol TrepioiKoi koL ol crvyyevei'; aur^s, viii. 24 ; Acts 
 vi. 4 ; xiii. 43 ; 1 Tim. iv. 6 r^s ttiotcios koL t^s KaXrjq ^iSauKaXia^, 
 2 Cor. xiii. 2 toi? Trporj/j.apTrjKocnv Koi toL'S \oi7rots iracnv. Exceptions 
 (respecting which cf. the Remark, 16 above) : Col. ii. 8 rijs ^tXdo-o<^ias 
 Kat KEvij'! o.Trd.Trj<;, 2 John 9. Respecting Acts xv. 23 Lchm. [Tdf. 
 Treg.], see Meyer. It is apparent, moreover, that ambiguity is in 
 every instance avoided by the position of the attributive limitation 
 (either before or after the subst.). 
 
 on c) (With all which the examples in 15 are to be compared) — 
 with the repetition of the art.: Mark xi. 15 ras rpaTrc'^a? t&v koXXu- 
 PicrTu)v Kai ras Ka^cSpas Tciii' wuiXovvTuyv, 1 Thess. iii. 11 ; 1 John iv. 6 
 TO irvevp-a ttj's dXiySttas Kai to TrvevfjM Trji -irXdv-q^, Rev. xi. 4; without 
 the repetition of the art. : 2 Thess. i. 12 tov Oeov ij/aiIv koI Kvpiov 'I. Xp. 
 cf. 2 Pet. i. 1, etc. ; Tit. ii. 13 (see 14 p. 97), Phil. i. 19 (because 
 i/nSv is to be referred to both members), iii. 10 Lchm. [Treg. J (where 
 the addition of ttjv is not at all necessary, at least grammatically), 
 Jude 4 (see 14 p. 97), 2 Cor. i. 3 o irar^p twv oiKTipp-fii/ Kat Oib^ Tracnjg 
 TrapaKXijcrews (according to 16 p. 98 sq.), 1 Tim. vi. 16 (cf. 16 p. 98 sq.). 
 
 88 3) If the connected nouns differ in gender, the article 
 18 is as a rule repeated, since in such a case for two (or more) 
 nouns, whether kindred or dissimilar, one article is no longer ■ 
 sufficient ; thus, Eph. vi. 2 rifia rou Trarepa aov km rrjii nrjrepa, 
 Luke X. 21 Kvpoe tov ovpavov koI tj}? yy';, xiv. 26 ; Rom. viii. 2 
 v6fio<; Tfji ajjiapTLat; Kai tov davaTov, xvi. 17 ; Col. iv. 1 ; Tit. i. 
 15, etc., and there ought properly to be no deviation from this 
 usage. 
 
 Only in very rare cases does the language take the liberty to deviate, 
 viz. where it makes a decided gain in perspicuity by omitting the 
 article, as with substantivss so closely united as to make almost a unity 
 
§ 126.J THE ARTICLE AS A DEMONSTRATIVE. IQl 
 
 (o iJLiv iTia^povuiv KoX (ru><j)povov(ra Plato), or when according to 2) a. an 
 attributive limitation is to be referred to both nouns, or further, where 
 the addition of the art. would have occasioned inconvenience in some 
 way, as Luke xiv. 23 ets ras oSois- koi <^pay;u,ovs, Mark xii. 33 iravriov 
 Till' 6XoKauTu)/jaT<ov Koi Ova-Lwv (where the addition of rSiv after the Rec. 
 is positively wrong, on account of Trai/ruv which is manifestly to be 
 referred to both), Luke i. 6 ; Col. ii. 22 Kara ra ivTok/jiaTa koa, SiSauKa- 
 Xi'as Toil/ av6pu>Tr<jiv, Rev. V. 12 ttju Swafiiv Koi ttKovtov koI crocfilav koI 
 i(r)(6v etc., Acts xxi. 25 to re el8io\66vTov xal al/xa (cat ttvlktov Kat Tropveiav 
 ' (cf., on the other hand, xv. 20 Tdf.). 
 
 4) If the connected nouns differ also in number, the 
 genius of the language renders the repetition of the article 
 still more necessary (Col. ii. 1-3 eV TOi<; irapairraifjiaacv koX ttj 
 uKpo^varia tj)? crapico^ iijiiiSi', Eph. ii. 3, etc.), and no examples 
 to the contrary are found in the N. T. That 1 Cor. iv. 9 
 establishes no exception, Winer 127 (121), deWette, and others 
 have already observed. ^ 
 
 The Akticle (Prepositive and Postpositive) as a Demonstrative. 
 B. §126,2and3; H. §525; 0. §518; D.p.345; J. § 444. 
 
 The use of the prepositive article standing alone as a de- 
 monstrative, wliich was always rather poetic, and accordingly 
 restricted in ordinary prose to single phrases, is still more rare 
 in the N. T., and, strictly speaking, appears there only in the 
 combinations 6 /j-ev and d Se, (for the poetic quotation in Acts 
 xvii. 28 cannot be taken into account). But even these com- 
 binations, also, have been retained only where they take the 
 place of the subject, and moreover are in the Masc. or Pern. 
 
 1 On this whole subject cf. Jatho, Brief an d. Phil. Exc. IV., who, however, has 
 arranged all the examples under the single classification of union and sepai-ation 
 of ideas. Important and influential as this distribution in itself considered is, it 
 is nevertheless always an erroneous and one-sided procedure to group the phe- 
 nomena of speech only according to such abstract classifications, — a procedure 
 which is the more detrimental to grammar as, owing to their elasticity, it is easy to 
 succeed in bringing under them the great majority of phenomena. Form and 
 substance have always, with the N. T. authors as well as with profane writers, 
 at least an equal share in the structure of discourse; and to deny the effect of 
 all the more external influences upon the choice of expressions would be to deprive 
 authors of the instincts of speech. But to lay down the above classification as the 
 only one leads to a disregard of the formal principle; a disregard which betrays 
 itself, among other ways, in the above-mentioned essay in this : that the autKor 
 (on p. 79) unhesitatingly lays dowii the principle that in applying this rule it does 
 not make the least difference whether the nouns to be connected are of the same 
 or different gender, (why not, then, number also ?). 
 
102 THE ARTICLE AS A DEMONSTRATITE. [§ i2ft 
 
 6, 57, ol, al ; SO that all the cases beginning with t (to and ra 
 included) must be left out of view. In the oblique cases, as 
 well as in the Nom. neuter, the form of the postpositive, more 
 usual in later prose, everywhere makes its appearance ; so that 
 now all these combinations begin with the rough breathing : 
 6 Be, ol ixkv (Heb. xii. 10), a //eV (Matt. xiii. 4), o fA^ev . ..ohi 
 (ib. 8), ov, w, ov<; fj,ev, etc. 
 
 The only exception, and that, too, more apparent than real, is Eph. 
 iv. 11 (tSuKEv Toiis /x£i' otTToo-ToXow, Tovs SI TTpo^Tfa^ ctc.) ; foF lu Mark 
 xii. 5 the reading tows fi.iv is now set aside by MS. authority [Sin. also]. 
 In the Nom. Masc. the form of the postpositive sometimes appears 
 instead of that of the prepositive, e.g. 01 fi.lv . . . os 8e Matt. xxii. 5 ; 
 Eom. xiv. 5, 2 ; 1 Cor. xi. 21, or the mss. vary, as in 1 Cor. vii. 7 ; 
 John V. 11 Lchm. [Treg.J. 
 
 B. §126,4; H. §5257.;,C.§518e.; D. §390; J. §444. 
 
 2 Examples of this use (of 6 8e alone as a connective in narration in 
 reference to an object already named) can be brought forward in great 
 number, yet only from the historical writings of the N. T. Let it be 
 noticed, too, that in this case only the forms of the prepositive (6, 17, 
 ot, al) are chosen, hence the exception (John v. 11 Lchm. [Treg.] os 
 Se aT€KpC9T]) appears suspicious ; even here cod. Sin. has Se as usual ; 
 on the other hand, in one other passage (Mark xv. 23 [Tdf. Treg.]) both 
 the oldest MSS. give os Sc, but in opposition to [nearly] all other MS. 
 authorities. The combination kol os, koL ot (B. § 126, 5) does not occur. 
 
 U. §126, N. 4; H. §525a.; 0. §518; D. p.676; J. § 764. 
 
 3 Of the variations usual in classic Greek instead of 6 fj,iv . . . o Se, the 
 following are found in the N. T. : Matt. xvi. 14 Lchm. 01 /xiv ... ol 
 Si (Tdf. [Treg.J aXkoi Si) . . . hepoi Si, John vii. 12 Lchm. [Treg.] 01 
 IJiiv . . . 3X\oi Si (Tdf. 6XX.01, see § 149, 13 b) p. 366) cf. 1 Cor. xii. 8 ; 
 Acts xvii. 18 Tive's . . . ot Si, Mark iv. 4 /teV . . . kui aX\o, Luke viii. 5 
 o ij.iv . . . Kol hepov. On 1 Cor. xii. 28 see § 149, 12 b) p. 365. 
 
 Further, under this head belong the various and rather Hebraistic 
 90 constructions with cts (ins . . . nnx Exod. xvii. 12 ; 1 Sam. x. 3), of 
 which the following approximate most nearly to Greek usage : 6 ets 
 . . . 6 8£ erepos Luke vii. 41 cf. Acts xxiii. 6 ; less so : 6 els . . . /cai o eVepos 
 Matt. vi. 24 ; Luke xvi. 13 ; xvii. 35 Lchm., etc. ; without the art. 
 eh ... Koi 6 cTcpos Matt. vi. 24 ; Luke xvi. 13 ; xvii. 34 Tdf. [Treg.^ 
 etc., fjLia [17 fiia Tdf., cod. Sin.] . . . ■^ Sk Iripa xvii. 35 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] ; 
 also 6 CIS ... o oXXos (but in reference to the last two of seven) Rev. 
 xvii. 10 ; cf. § 127, 33 p. 122. Those constructions seem to come 
 nearest to the Hebrew usage in which ets is repeated. As, however, 
 
§127.] PBONOUNS. 103 
 
 according to recent editors the article in this case is always 
 dropped, and the expression is employed in reference to more than 
 two members, its origin may quite as well be found in that mode of 
 speech, natural to common people, which arises from a simple enumer- 
 ation of the several members (just as in German) ; as, eh ... kol ets 
 Matt. XX. 21; xxiv. 40; Mark xv. 27; John xx. 12; Gal. iv. 22; 
 compare with this the circumlocution for dXX^Xojv p. 31. Luke uses 
 this combination only in the single passage ix. 33 (as in the parallel 
 passages Matt. xvii. 4 ; Mark ix. 5), in an enumeration of more than 
 two members. After what has been said, the reading of Grsb. Lchm. 
 etc. in that passage of critical difficulty Mark iv. 8, 20 — according to 
 which in both verses the word ev (without the art.) is thrice repeated — 
 gains much in intrinsic probability, [Tdf. Treg. cod. Sin. give ek thrice 
 in vs. 8, iv in vs. 20] ; see p. 30. Lastly, in Gal. iv. 24 the enumer- 
 ation, begun with fila fiev, is continued in vs. 26 by another and similar 
 construction which connects closely with what precedes. 
 
 PEONOUNS. 
 
 O^TOS AND 8Se, CKClVOSa 
 
 B. § 127, 1 b. ; H. § 679; C. § 544; D. p. 379; J. § 657 sq. 
 
 The difference spoken of between outo? and oSe (that o5to? ' 
 refers ordinarily to wh&t precedes, oSe to wha.t/oUows'), although 
 individual cases in support of it might be adduced from the 
 N. T. (Rev. ii. 1, 8, 12, etc.), has lost tliere its general validity, 
 inasmuch as the use of oSe (rowahe, rocroa-Se) is quite isolated, 
 in fact doubtful (Luke xvi. 25 Grsb. ; Acts xv. 23 Grsb. ; 2 Cor. 
 xii. 19 Grsb.). The N. T. language employs in all cases 
 almost exclusively the other demonstrative forms oh-o'i, toiovtoi, 
 etc. 
 
 In James iv. 13 cn^iJt.epov koX avpiov Tropeva-Oji-iBa eh T-fjvZe rrjv 2 
 iroXiv, according to the interpreters tiJvSe has the force of an indefinite : 
 this or that. As proof of this use, a passage is cited from Plut. Symp. 
 1, 6, 1 where TtjvSe rrp/ rj/jiepav is thought to have this signification. 
 Such, however, is not the case ; on the contrary, in Plutarch, as 
 everywhere in Greek authors, the pronoun has its full 
 demonstrative force. Accordingly we are not warranted in this single 
 biblical passage in taking, the pronoun in any other than the demon- 
 strative sense. The apostle intended, to be sure, any city at option, 
 yet in thought he could point it out definitely ; very much as we, too, 91 
 say in a similar case : into this city here (Germ, in diese Stadt da). 
 
 The familiar Latin usage, according to which, when two 3 
 objects are spoken of, whatever be the position of the words, 
 
104 PRONOUNS. , [§127 
 
 hie refers to that which at the moment is nearest the tliought 
 of the writer and ille to the more distant substantive, is quite 
 applicable in Greek prose to the two demonstratives ouro? and 
 e/celvoi. In the N. T., however, there are but few passages 
 where both demonstrative pronouns make reference in one 
 and the same proposition to two different ideas previously- 
 mentioned (see Luke xviii. 14 ; John v. 38, and cf. Jas. iv. 15). 
 In these passages, as well as in others where ovto<; and eKelva 
 occur alone, it can be plainly seen that o5to? always refers 
 to the leading subject directly under discussion, and e'«ewo? to 
 another, ordinarily more distant. Yet the writer in using 
 oSto? does not allow himself to be disturbed by the accidental 
 proximity of another substantive, especially when the con- 
 nection manifestly excludes every false reference ; and on the 
 other hand, he can for the same reason safely make reference 
 by means of cKetw? to an object which as respects the thought 
 is subordinate, though as respects position it is nearer. Cf. 
 my Article on e'/cewo? in the Stud. u. Krit. for 1860 pp. 505 sqq., 
 and the supplement in Hilgenfeld's Zeitschr. Bd. V. pp. 204 sqq. 
 
 In Acts vii. 19 ; 2 John 7, oStos does not occasion the slightest 
 doubt or ambiguity. In 1 John v. 20, also, an impartial interpreter 
 can refer oi)tos only to ^eos, and avrq in Acts viii. 26 only to y] 68os 
 (for this is the subject of discourse, not T6I,a which is used merely to 
 designate the way more precisely). Just as plainly does tKeii/os in 
 Acts iii. 13 refer to Pilate, and in Matt. xvii. 27 to <xTarqp. Acts iv. 
 10 sq. may serve to prove how little is to be conceded to the external 
 position, and how, when the connection is plain of itself, the author 
 confides in the reader's good sense. Here there was occasion enough 
 for perspicuity's sake to use the two demonstratives alternately ; yet 
 ovTo^ stands three times in succession : first {iv tovtio) referring to 
 ovofiari 'Ir/a-ov (although 6 6e6i just precedes), then (ovtos) to the 
 lame man, and the third time (outos) again to 'Iijo-oB?. 
 
 There is an analogy to the familiar Latin use of hie also in speci- 
 fications of time (ante hos quinque annos) in Acts i. 5 oi /xeTa TroAAas 
 TovTa? fijji.ipa.<s after not many days from this ; where, moreover, the 
 position of the words (instead of it,iT oi TroAAas) is to be noticed. 
 Similar instances are found in the (later) Greek writers, see Winer 
 161 (152). 
 
 B. §127, Id.; H. §810i C. §551f.; J §817,4. 
 
 The omission of the demonstrative bef ire the relative is so 
 common in the N.T., that it is hardly worth while to adduce examples 
 
§ 127.] CONSTE. AD STN. WITH DEMONSTRATIVES. 105 
 
 of this general custom. That in this respect the writers have made 
 the classic usage quite their own may be seen from the following 
 passages (the examples where attraction occurs besides, will be found 
 ■ § 143, 10 p. 286) : John xviii. 26 cruyytv^s <ov o5 amcKoij/ev IltTpos to )2 
 diTiov, Mark XV. 12 Tdf. ri OeXere Troi^trw ov Xeyert tov jSacriXc'a t£v 
 'lovSaiwv (respecting the Ace. after iroiciv see § 131, 6 p. 149) ; and 
 when the Cases differ : Luke vii. 47 w Sc oXlyov dc^ierat, oXi-yov ayava, 
 John xi. 3 tSe ov <^iAets aaOevii, Rom. iv. 7 jxaKapioi Siv a.<f>e6rja-av ai 
 ayojiiai; or are dependent, variously, upon prepositions: 2 Cor. xi. 12 
 ii/a Iv <{) Kavy(S>vTai ivpeOSiorLV KaOibs koc ■^fieii (for iv tovtiu iv (S, see § 133, 
 23 p. 185),' Rom. x. 14 ttSs i-iriKaXia-tavTaL eh ov ovk iiria-T€va-av (for 
 TovTov ets 01/), John vi. 29 Iva wto-TeuorijTe eis ov airiaTuXev (for cis tovtov 
 ov), Heb. vii. 13 i<f> ov XeycTat ravra, ^vkrjs erepas fLeritr^Kev (for 
 ovTos £0' '6v) etc. On Rom. vi. 21 cf. § 143, 4 b) p. 282. In this way 
 many Relative conjunctional phrases have arisen, as 6.v6' &v because (of 
 this) that, ii ov since (the time that), a<f>' ov, iv w, etc., see § 147 under 
 the several prepositions. 
 
 Before Relative adverbs, also, the demonstratives are fre- 
 quently dropped : and that, too, not only when they express similar 
 relations (there . . . where, etc.) e.g. John xx. 19 twv dvpSiv KiKku(Tft,ivo>v, 
 oirov rjaav oi jxaOrfral, 1 Cor. xvi. 6 Iva /«.£ ' TrpoTrifxipTfri ov iav iropivwfjiaL 
 (for ov here answers to the question whither, see p. 71), but also dis- 
 similar (thither . . . where) — a case which with the N. T. authors was 
 very common, in consequence of the want of precision just mentioned 
 in the use of adverbs of place (cf. besides § 151, 2 p. 377) ; as, John 
 xi. 32 rjXOev oirov rjv, vi. 62 avajSaCvovTa oirov rjv, Mark v. 40 vxTTTOpeieTat 
 oirov r)v i.e. inuo^e. (or Ikei) ottov. 
 
 Respecting attraction in such cases see § 143, 12 p. 287. 
 
 B. §127, le.; J. 657,2. 
 
 OStos is often used redundantly, or rather in reference to what 6 
 follows, before propositions introduced by on; as, John iii. 19 avrij 
 icTTiv rj Kpia-L's, on to <f>G>i iX.i^X.v6ev etc. Rom. ii. 3 \oyit,-Q Se tovto . . . 
 oTi iK<j)eviri to Kpljia ; 2 Cor. i. 12, etc. Likewise before iva, — re- 
 specting which in its connection § 139, 45 p. 240. On the introductory 
 TOVTO before infinitive clauses see § 140, 7 and 9 pp. 262 sq. 
 
 CoNSTEUCTio Ar Stnesin with the Demonstratives, Especially with 
 
 air 6s, 
 
 The constr uctio ad synesin as respects gender and number / 
 takes placOj as with the relative (see § 143, 4 p. 281), so, too, 
 of course with the demonstrative. As this usage harmonizes 
 completely with the gei^us of the Greetc language (B. § 143, 5 ; 
 
 14 
 
106 CONSTR. AD SYN. WITH DEMONSTRATIVES. [§i27. 
 
 H. § 523 ; C. § 498 sq. ; D. p. 362 ; J. § 378 sqq.), it is sufficient 
 here to refer to examples : Matt. i. 21 (Xahv . . . airStv'), xiv. 
 14 and Mark vi. 46 (o'xXoi/ . . . avTol-i'), Matt, xxviii. 19 (edvT) 
 . . . avToi'i'), Rom. ii. 14 (eOvr) . . . ovtoi), Mark v. 41 (waiSiov 
 . . . aitT^}, 2 Cor. V. 19 (Koafiov . . . avToh'), Col. ii. 15 (ra? 
 apXaf Kol ra? e^ovaLa<} . . . avTOV'i), 3 Jol/n 9. (iicKk'rja-ia . . . 
 avTOiv'), Rev. xvii. 16 (ja Kepaja Kol to Orfpiov . . . o5toi) ; 
 1 John V. 21 (jeicvla . . . eauToy? Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] eavrd Lchm. 
 [Tdf. Treg.]) is doubtful. Respecting John xvii. 2 (irav . . . 
 avToh') see § 128, 1 p. 122. 
 8 Remark. It is an extension of the above usage (an extension which 
 occurs likewise with the relative), to employ the most general of the 
 93 demonstratives {o.vr6%) in reference io a substantive not expressly 
 mentioned but only so far as the sense is concerned con- 
 tained in what precedes. Thus John viii. 44 i/feuo-riys eo-riv koX 6 -iraTrjp 
 avTOV sc. Tov i/fevSous,^ Rom. ii. 26 rj dicpo/Suo-Tta . . . avrov SC. Tov iv axp. 
 6vT0<;, Eph. V. 12 ra yivoiieva vtt avrSiv SC. the children of darkness, to 
 be supplied from ctkotos and re/cva <^(otos preceding, John xv. 6 where 
 we find (Tvvayovcnv aura, owing to the neut. xX^jiia and the plurality 
 suggested in rk, Gal. iii. 12 6 ?rot^o-as aira sc ra tov vd/u,ou. Not 
 
 less customary is it to employ the Plural avroi in referring to the 
 inhabitants of a place or country already mentioned, e.g. 2 Cor. ii. 12 sq. 
 (Tpu)dSa . . . auTOis), Matt. iv. 23 (TaXiXaiq. . . . avTuiv), ix. 35 ; Acts 
 viii. 5 (Sa/napeias . . . avTois), XX. 2 ; 1 Thess. i. 9 ; so that at length 
 the plur. avToi comes to denote in an indefinite way the general idea 
 of people, and the reader is left to judge for himself according to the 
 connection what persons or classes of men stand in necessary relation 
 to the substance of the statement So e.g. in 1 Pet. iii. 14 tov tj>6fiov 
 avTwv ji.ij <jiol3Tj6rJTe, where avTwv means the many suggested in tis o 
 KaKilicruiv ii/aSs ; cf. Heb. iv. 8 ; viii. 8 ; xi. 28 ; Acts iv. 5 tovs ap)(ovTa's 
 airSiv viz. of the Jews, Matt. xii. 9 t^v <jwayoyyr]v avTSiv viz. of the 
 Galileans (see deWette on iv. 23), Acts x. 10 TrapaarKeva^ovTwv avrSai 
 viz. the inmates of the house. Matt. xix. 2 o)(\.oi. voXXol., Koi iOepa,7reva-ev 
 avTov^ viz. Toiiq appwcrTovs avTwv according to xiv. 14 ; cf. xii. 15 ; Luke 
 V. 17. According to this usage, too, the indefinite interpretation of 
 avTuv in Matt. xi. 1, and of auTois in viii. 4 ; Mark i. 44 ; Luke v. 14, 
 seems to be perfectly justified. On the other hand, in Acts xii. 21 
 
 1 This is the current interpretation according to the well-established reading. 
 Yet even ancient expositors took exception to it, and Lachmann, following them, 
 proposes (Vol. II. p. vii of Preface) to read ts &!> for Srati. Then the meaning 
 would be somewhat altered as follows : vihoeuer speoketh a lie (cf. Ignat. Ep. iiiterp. 
 p. 283 ed. Dressel idv tis Xpiarhv iepvrirai vtbv fhai @eov) spedketk his own pecultat 
 language, because his father also {6 StdfiaXos) is a liar. 
 
§ 127.] THE USE OF THE PRONOUN airds. 107 
 
 iStjfuyjyopn Trpov avrovi means definitely to the Tyriana and Sidonians 
 (vs. 20). 
 
 The Use op the Pronoun otiTiJs. 
 B. §127, Zand N.l; H. §668; C. §6401.; D. p. 375; J. § 656. 
 
 No pronoun appears more frequently in the' Scriptures of 9 
 the Old and New Testaments than avToi ; indeed, this pronoun 
 is employed to such excess (cf. 26 below p. 118, and § 129, 12 
 p. 131, § 130, 2 p. 142, § 145, 1 p. 314), that it contributes 
 essentially to the peculiar character which distinguishes biblical 
 from classical Greek. 
 
 As respects the pronoun's agnification, the ordinary rules 
 (B. p. 307 ; H. § 669 ; C. § 540 sq. ; D. p. 462 ; J. § 656) hold 
 good in the main ; but in tlie Nomi native there is a notice- 
 able departure from classic usage. Winer 150 (141 sq.), 
 Pritzsche (ad Matt. p. 47), and others assert, indeed, that (as 
 in' the classics) aiT6<; in the Nominative never stands for the 
 nnemphatic he, inasmuch as then it is used, either 1) for Jesus 
 in contrast with his disciples, or 2) with a certain emphasis, 
 or 3) only in definite antithesis to other objects. Although it 
 is true that the majority of passages allow themselves to be 
 distributed among these three classes, yet we have not, by 
 doing this, demonstrated the agreement of the biblical use ^i 
 with the classical ; and besides, there are passages enough 
 where there is absolutely no hint of emphasis or of antithesis 
 and common classic prose would in no case have employed 
 avT6<;, — an assertion which can be made also even of most of 
 the passages where aiiro'} represents Christ. 
 
 We will endeavor to make what we have said plain by a number 
 of examples from the Gospels, especially from Luke, with whom the 
 Nom. is most frequent. The language of Luke i. 22 respecting Zach- 
 arias : koI airos rjv Siavcvwv airols, in the classics could only mean he 
 also or he himself. It is, however, the simple continuation of the 
 narrative. And should any one wish to assume an antithesis because 
 other persons were previously spoken of, the antithesis is only such a 
 one as the Greek language ordinarily conveyed by 6 Si; otherwise we 
 should be compelled to maintain t'.iat there is such an antithesis every- 
 where, in every narrative, provided only several persons are spoken 
 of. Further in ii. 28, where it is said of Simeon xal avros iSe^aro avro 
 etc., KoX airds might be omitted altogether. In xvi. 24, whe"e it is 
 said of the rich man Kai airos ^(ovijcras cTttev etc., either o Si or sin ply 
 Kai might have been used ; for just before, too, he was the subject, 
 
1Q8 THE USE OF THE PROKOUN avro's. [§ 127. 
 
 and the mention of Lazarus involves no antithesis. ■ Luke xiz. 2 
 Lchm. [Treg.j Koi l8ov avrjp KoXovjuevos ZaKxouos, kol airos yjv apxireXd)- 
 vrjs, Kttt auTos Tjv ttXowios, /cat £^^t£i etc., where otherwise we should 
 have had either twice a simple apposition, or at most the participle u>v 
 with apx- and ttXovo: The peculiarity 'of the language consists pre- 
 cisely in its being thus dissected into many individual propositions, in 
 which auTos is a simple unemphatic repetition of the antecedent subject. 
 Compare, now, with such sentences, those in which airds or kal 
 auTos really is emphatic, as vi. 42 iruis Swao-ut Xiyav • ASeXc^e, a<^€s 
 CKySaAu) . . . , airos t^v Sokov ov fSXiiruyv etc., v. 87 pij^ei 6 o'vos Toi/s 
 dcrKou5, /cat auros €K)Cjdrj<Terai /cat ot do-Kot ciTroXoCvTat ; vi. 3 b eTTOf/jtrcv 
 Aav€i8, 0T€ cTTCtVacrev avros /cat ot ju,£t auTOV, XV. 14; xvii. 16; xix. 9, — 
 although in such passages even it does not seem to be always necessary 
 to employ the pronoun, e.g. iii. 15 ; vi. 35. 
 
 Further, if we look at the passages in which airds stands for Christ 
 (some thirty times, more or less, in Luke), we shall find that, in by 
 far the greater number, the mode of expression or the connection of 
 clauses is at variance with ordinary usage; as, iii. 16, 23; iv. 15; 
 V. 1, 14, 16, 17; vi. 8, 20; viii. 1, 22, 37, 54; ix. 51 ; x. 38; xi. 17, 
 28; xvii. 11; xxii. 41 ; xxiii. 9; xxiv. 25,28, in all which cases 
 either no pronoun would have been used, or oBtos or 6 Se. Oh the 
 other hand, it is used with emphasis apparently only in iv. 30 ; x. 1 ; 
 xviii. 39 ; xxiv. 39, in which passages it accords with Greek usage. 
 The weakened force of ourds is clearly perceptible in those passages 
 where it is several times repeated ; as, xxiv. 36 raCra 8e airSiv XaXow- 
 Tu>v avTos etTTV iv fnicria avrSnv /cat Xiyu avroi'S, Xxiv. 31 airSiv Si Sirjvoi- 
 p^Siycrav ot ocjjOaXfjiol /cat eTriyvwdav avrov • /cat awTos d<^avTOs iyevero air 
 avTuiv. Cf. John ii. 24; Mark iii. 31 sq. ; Acts xxiii. 9, etc. 
 
 Similar observations may be applied to the other books, especially 
 the historical, e.g. Matt. iii. 11 ; v. 4; xiv. 2; xvi. 20, etc. In ref- 
 95 erence also to a preceding or following Relative, avTo's is used in the 
 sense of he, the one, instead of ovtos or c'/cetvos which alone is customarjr 
 in such cases in Greek prose, (where avrds before a relative always 
 has its proper meaning, self) ; as, Mark xiv. 44 ov av ^ikrjcria, avro's 
 i(TTiv, Matt. xii. 50 otrrts av Trotg to $iX-qpi,a . . . , avTOi /jlov dScXt^ds etc. 
 Matt. xxvi. 48, etc. ; so, too, when a participle stands instead of the 
 relative clause, according to § 125, 3 p. 93, as Luke xxiv. 21 ^Xtti- 
 ^ofiev OTi airds eortv 6 fiiXXuiv XvrpoCcr^at etc. 
 
 10 What has now been taught in reference to the Nom. Masc. 
 avr6<;, must of course be applied consistently to all other forms 
 of the Nominative, both Sing, and Plur. 
 
 Thiersch (de Pentat. vers. Alex. p. 98) asserts that in the Sept." 
 avTos is used for he, but for the Feminine the demonstrative avrr) is 
 
§127.] THE USE OF THE PRONOUJy o4t6s. luy 
 
 regularly employed. This seems to be the case also in the N. T. ; at 
 any rate, the numerous examples of avros cannot be matched with a 
 single indubitable instance of avr^, still less of aurai. Nevertheless, 
 the state of the matter may have been different, since in the case of 
 avTT] and avrai it depended only on the accent to make the one form 
 or the other ; and in point of fact, the readings often fluctuate (Mark 
 xii. 31 ; Luke ii. 2 ; vii. 12 ; Rom. vii. 10 ; xvi. 2). Further, if we 
 look at the several passages where at present avrrj stands, we find 
 many which are quite like those with awos given above ; to take ex- 
 amples again from Luke : ii. 36 Lchm. [Tdf. Treg.J ('Awa) avTij 
 
 f^tracra ixera dvSpos • ■ . , Koi avTTj (Tdf. ^Treg.] air^) XVP'^ etc., vii. 1 2 
 Lchm. [Treg.J ttJ fxyfrpl airov, kox avTTj rjv XOP"- (Tdf. om. r/v [in eds. 
 2 and 7, not in ed. 8]), viii. 42 ; 1 Cor. vii. 12, etc. But since in all 
 these and similar passages the Vulgate has haec,^ while ovros it always 
 reproduces (and on account of all absence of doubt respecting the 
 form cannot do otherwise) by ipse, and avrr) also where it is indubitably 
 the Fem. of o-uto's by ipsa (e.g. Luke i. 36 ; Ex)m. viii. 21 ; xvi. 2 ; 
 1 Cor. xi. 14; Rev. xviii. 6), recent editors in the above instances 
 have for the most part acquiesced in the form avrr). 
 
 Respecting the Neuter air 6, Thiersch (as above) likewise de- H 
 clares that in the Sept. it does not, after the manner of oStos, stand 
 for it, but that tovto is always used instead. Certainly where it (as 
 the Subject) refers to purely abstract ideas, the form tovto may 
 alone have been in use ; but that in the more concrete instances 
 (which, however, from the nature of the case cannot occur frequently) 
 the form avro straightway makes its appearance again, is shown once 
 more by a passage from Luke (xi. 14) : rjv iK/SaXXiov taifi,6vLov, /cat 
 avTO rjV KUiffiov. 
 
 Of the M a s c. P 1 u r., again, a number of indubitable passages may 
 be adduced, as for example the airoi common in the Sermon on the 
 Mount (Matt. v. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, cf. 3, 10), further Mark ii. 8 Tdf. 
 [eds. 2, 7] (where Tdf. [7th ed.] remarks correctly, vox ista avrot 
 delenda videri .poterat, non item addenda), Luke ii. 50 ; ix. 36 ; xiii. 4, 
 etc. This use becomes more frequent in later authors, presumably 
 through Roman influence. 
 
 B. § 127, 2, iii. ; H. § 602 b. ; C. § 540 d. i J. § 656. 
 
 Of the combination airo tovto id ipsum a considerable number of 12 
 instances may be brought forward, all of theiji, too, from the Epistles, 
 viz. Rom. ix. 17 ; xiii. 6 ; 2 Cor. v. .5 ; vii. 11 ; Gal. ii. 10 ; Eph. vi. 96 
 22 ; Phil. i. 6 ; Col. iv. 8 ; doubtful is 2 Pet. i. 5 ; once also tovto avTo 
 
 ' Yet the versions do not always agree in this particular ; see e.g. Tdf.'s note 
 on Lnke ii. .S6. 
 
110 THE REFLEXIVE PRONOUN. [§ 125 
 
 occurs, 2 Cor. ii. 3 ([cod. Sin. also], see the variants). The Masc. airol 
 ovToi occurs in Acts xxiv. 15, 20. 
 
 Remark. Respecting the quiescing auTo's in relative clauses 
 (oi> ... avTov) after the example of the Hebrew, see § 143, 1 p. 280. 
 
 The Reflexive Pkonoitn. 
 B. § 127, 3 and N. 3; H. § 670 sq. ; C. § 637 sq. ; J. § 653 sq. 
 
 In the use of the reflexive pronoun the language of the 
 N. T. has departed essentially from Attic correctness. It re- 
 tained, indeed, a knowledge of the difference between the 
 reflexives and the simple personal pronoun, for it never uses the 
 reflexive where according to the rule it ought not to stand, e.g. 
 John viii. 18 eyco elfu 6 fiapTvpS>v irepl ifiavrov, koL fiaprvpel 
 irepl ifiov 6 7re/ii|fa? fie irarrip^ci. v. 31, 32 ; Rom. xvi. 2 avrr) 
 irpoaTd,Ti<; troWaiv iyev^dr] koX ifiov avTov, but it very fre- 
 quently neglects it, and contents itself with the simple 
 personal pronoun instead of the usual reflexives. 
 
 To make this plain first in reference to pronouns of the First and 
 Second Pers. (Sing, and Plur.) : the simple personals take the place 
 of the reflexives not only, a) in those cases which rest upon the analogy 
 of ordinary Greek usage, that is to say in which the reference to the 
 leading subject is rendered difficult by the intervention of subordinate 
 clauses with a different subject, especially participial and infinitive 
 clauses, e.g. Luke Viii. 46 eyvoiv Srvva/juv i^e\9ov<jav a.7r c/aoC, Acts xxii. 7 
 r/Kovaa <j><Dv^i Xeyovcnrj's p-oi, xxvi. 13; Rom. vii. 23; Col. i. 29; Rev. 
 X. 9 aTTrjkda, Xeyoiv auT(3 Sovvai /iot to ^l^X., Matt. xiv. 28 (cf. also the 
 subject-acc. with the Infin. expressed by /te, ere, etc., instead of c/iaurov, 
 ■etc., § 141, 4 p. 274) ; or, b) in those which find a natural apology in 
 the fact that other personal pronouns are coupled with them, as Matt. 
 xvii. 27 Xa^oiv 80s auT0t9 avTi ifnov kol crov, Rom. i. 12 (v/tcov te koi 
 ■iixov), Matt, xviii. 15 ; or, c) where the reference to some other term 
 in the clause, even though it may be merely the article, was more con- 
 venient than reference to the subject, as in Gal. i. 17 diniXOov Trpos 
 'Toil's Trpo i/Mov airoerTo^ov;, Phil. ii. 23 (os av d^i'So) to. Trepl ifxe, — hence 
 uniformly crov, ijlov, instead of a-eavrov, etc., when the personal pronouns 
 are used in place of the possessives (see 19 below, p. 115) ; but 
 also, d) where the reflexive force of the pronoun goes back directly to 
 the subject, — yet particularly, only where the oblique case is preceded 
 by a preposition, as ^aXe am crov, p.rj croXiricrrj'i t/xTrpocrdlv crov, 
 irapaXa^e ftera crov, aparc i(j> v/nas, etc. (Matt. v. 29, 30 ; xviii. 8, 9 ; 
 vi. 2 ; xviii. 16 ; xi. 29, etc.) ; but the regular construction also occurs 
 especially in John : IXkuctoi irpbs Ifiavrov, Trepl (rtavrov fiaprvpa';, ay« 
 
§ 127.] THE EErLEXIVE PRONC UN. HI 
 
 fiera a-eavrov, etc. But where the case is governed immediately b j 
 the verb, the reflexive forms in the Singular are constantly *7 
 used, as /SaXc, a-uicrov, Setfoi' treaurdv, e7re;^€ areavrS, dyia^u) ifxavTOV, tKpiva 
 ifuxvTia TovTO, — even eSo^o ifiavra mihi videhar (Actsxxvi. 9), although 
 among the Greeks themselves the expressions 8okS /xoi and /xot SokG 
 were common enough (see Steph. sub voce) ; in the Plural, on the 
 other hand, the forms of the reflexive of the 3d Pers. cauTois, ea-urovs, 
 etc. (respecting which see 15 below, p. 113) are almost always used 
 in this case, and such instances as Matt. vi. 19, 20 (/tij 6rjcra.vpl^eTe 
 vfuv Orjaavpov^), Eph. iv. 22 (see § 141, 4 p. 274) are extremely rare. 
 
 As respects the reflexive pronoun of the Third Person, n 
 it is to be noticed first of all, that according to the more recent 
 collations it exists only in the fuller form eavrov, -?5?, etc. (not 
 avTov, etc.). It has, accordingly, been assumed that in all 
 cases where the forms avrov, avrco, avrov, etc. (not eavTov) 
 appear, they must be marked with the smootli breathing, and 
 consequently the reflexive is not used. This procedure was 
 occasioned by observing the usage of the Sept., and has been 
 confirmed, 1) by observing that of the 2d Pers., also, only the 
 fuller form ffeavrov, etc., has been preserved ; and, 2) that the 
 reflexive forms of the 1st and 2d Pers. began to be iised with, 
 considerably less frequency (see the preceding section) ; 3) 
 by the usage of ordinary prose, in which (B. § 127, N. 3) a 
 marked vacillation began likewise to show itself in the em- 
 ployment of the forms avrov and avrov, etc. ; 4) by the 
 difference in position commonly observed in connection with 
 the two forms (awTou and eavrov} in a possessive relation (see 
 on this point 20 below, p. 116) ; 5) by noticing that before 
 the forms avrov, etc., when decidedly reflexive in sense, the 
 prepositions iirl, Kara, etc., are never aspirated after elision, see 
 Tdf. praef. ad Vet. Test. p. xxxiii [ed. 3] ; ad N. T. xxvi. [ed. 
 2 ; lyiiisq. ed. 7] ; Winer 152 (143). 
 
 If, now, we compare together the cases in which the forms avrov, 
 etc., and those in which eavrov, etc., are given, we shall find what was 
 just now said in reference to the first two persons to be in the main 
 substantiated in reference to the third also, inasmuch as avrov, etc., 
 are.used almost exclusively in a possessive relation (therefore for suus), 
 and in general in all the cases given above (13 p. 110) where im- 
 mediate reflex reference to the verb is in any way obstructed. If, 
 however, especial emphasis made the reflexire form necessary, — that 
 is to say, 1) if in specifications of possession not merely the notion his 
 
112 THE REFLEXIVE PRONOUN. [§ 12? 
 
 (sMws), but his own (suum ipsius, etc.), was to be expressed ; 2) in 
 case ot the emphatic repetition of the subject after verba dicendi in 
 the construction of Ace. with Infin. (see § 141, 4 p. 274) ; and 3) if 
 the case of the reflexive was governed immediately by the verb 
 (often also after a preposition), — the fuller forms lavrov, etc., (so far 
 as we can be sure about the mss. in this matter) made their appearance. 
 98 Examples. 1) Of airov, etc. : in a possessive relation, Matt. x. 8& 
 6 evpuiv, 6 dn-oXeo-as ttjv <l/vxqv avTOV, Luke ii. 7 heKev toi/ vlov avr^s, 
 and so on times without number ; in immediate dependence on a 
 participle, Mark x. 32 ^piaro Xeyeii' toi /ieXKovra avrw crvfu^aCveiv, Acts 
 ix. 4 TjKovarev <j)u>vr}v Xeyovcrav aurm, Heb. xii. 2, etc., or on an infinitive, 
 Eph. i. 4 i^iXi^aro rifna'S . . . eivai ^/aSs ayious KaTivii)7nov avTOv ; as 
 subject of the Infin. after verba dicendi — a case which can occur but 
 seldom, since according to rule in Greek the reflexive subject is 
 separately expressed only for the sake of emphasis, and then iavrou 
 must be, used. Acts xxv. 21 toC HauXov eTriKaXecra/xcvoi; rriprjd^vai airov 
 (where there is no emphasis, and yet the repetition of the subject was 
 necessary, cf. § 141, 4 p. 274) ; after prepositions, John ix. 21 auros 
 irept avTOv XaXrjcrei, Acts XV. 22 €K\f^aj«,£vous avSpas ef avrSiv, xvi. 3 tovtov 
 ■tjOiXriaev crw avTcS cfeX^cti/, Heb. xiii. 21 ; Mark ix. 16 rt aw^yjTeiTt 
 Trpos avTovs (cf. i. 27) ; — with unaspirated consonants preceding, Matt. 
 iii. 16 f.p-)(6p.fvov hr avTov, Luke vi. 3, 4; Eev. ix. 11 (where Grsb. 
 and Rec. give ei^' avrSiv, a correction ; [cod. Sin. caurcov]). 
 
 2) Oi lavTOv, etc., for his own : Luke xiii. 34 opvi.<; to. eavr^s voo-o-ta, 
 xi. 21 rr)v kavTOV avX-qv, Matt. viii. 22 tovs kavrSiv viKpov^, etc., cf. 20 
 below, p. 116 ; as subject after verba dicendi, see for examples § 141, 
 4 p. 274 ; in immediate dependence on the leading predicate, with 
 and without a preposition, aTrapvrjcra.<rdu> iavrov (Matt. xvi. 24 ; Mark 
 viii. 84), iroulv iavTov /SacriXca (John xix. 12), raTravovv (Matt, xviii. 
 4, etc.) iij/ovv (Matt, xxiii. 12, etc.) aTroXia-ai (Luke ix. 25) e.vvov)^it,av 
 (Matt. xix. 12) iavTOv, ayairav rov irXrja-iov ws eavrov (Mark xii. 33), 
 tva ayopdcrwcriv iavTois (Matt. xiv. 15), ^acriXeia fiepurOaua Ka6' mvrqs 
 (Matt. xii. 25), avearTt] icj) iavrov (Mark iii. 26), etc. ; to this last class 
 there are but few exceptions.^ 
 
 1 These seem to be John ii. 24 iria-Tevev av-r6v (Grsb. favrSv), xix. 17 ^(urri^av 
 aiT$ rbc ffravphv i^ri\0ev {yet with both the other forms as variants ; [Tdf. N Iout^], 
 Grsb. Thv.irTavphv avrov), Acts xir. 17 Lchm. [Tdf. Treg. ii\ ouk hjiAprvpov avrhv 
 aipriKev (Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] kavT6v), Rev. viii. 6 Lchm. [T.Tr.ts] ^Toifioo-oK aiiTous(Tdf. 
 [eds. 2, 7] louTous, cf. xix. 7), xviii. 7 ^Sffjaffey atniiv (Grsb. tainitv)- Since in this 
 single class of cases the reflexive is used almost without exception with the first 
 and second Persons also (13 p. Ill), consistency seems to require that in these 
 passages too, the reflexive, i.e. the aspirated form, be retained, unless we choose tu 
 restore the fuller form eawrdc, etc., which is that presented, as a rule, by mss. 
 (Matt. XV. 30 does not belong here. ) 
 
§ 127.] THE EEFLEXIVE PEONOUN. 113 
 
 B. §127, N.6! H. §672; C. §639; J. §654, 2b. 
 
 It is now universally acknowledged, that in authors of every 15 
 age, prose writers as well as poets, the reflexive of the 3d 
 Person often takes the place of the reflexive of the 1st or 2d 
 Person. In the N. T. this occurs especially with the Plural 
 reflexives. The following seems to be the account of the 
 matter: Since the pronoun avr6<i as a reflexive had lost its 
 proper sense of self and all emphasis, i/iavrov, aeavrov, etc., 
 only signifying me, thee, etc. (like the English myself, thyself), 
 it became necessary in the Sing., if the precisq idea my etc. 
 self was to be expressed, to write the, words separately ifie, 99 
 ae avTov or avrbv ae, etc. This was not the case in the Plural, 
 where the two senses us (reflex.) and ourselves, etc., could 
 not be distinguished so well as in the Singular-; on the contrary, 
 the separation of the two pronouns would naturally suggest to 
 the mind the meaning us etc. ourselves. Accordingly the 
 usage gradually grew up, after the unquestionable precedent 
 of the earlier writers (see, for instance, in prose, Thuc. 1, 82 
 ra avT&v eKiropi^co/Meda, Demosth. Phil. p. 52 ^wrejo /j^r] eavruv 
 direryvcoicaTe, de Cor. p. 252, 14 ; 282, 2 ; Chers. p. 95, 5 ; Plat. 
 Phaed. p. 78 Set ■^fid<; avepeadai eauTov?), in case the reflexive 
 of the 1st or 2d Pers. Plar. was to mean simply us, you, without 
 emphasis, to employ the form of the reflexive of the 3d Pers. 
 Plur. consisting likewise of a single word, especially as by 
 doing so no ambiguity could arise in any way. In the N. T. 
 this usage has already become so thoroughly established that 
 the disjoined forms (^/aS? auroi;?, etc.) are no longer used as 
 mere reflexives, but when they occur have manifestly the force 
 of us ourselves, etc. 
 
 Instances of the Plural are very numerous and completely established 
 by the mss. ; that is to say, 
 
 Of the 2d Pers., Matt. iii. 9 /x^ S6ir]T£ \cyeiv iv lavrois, xvi. 8 ; xxiii. 
 31 fiaprvpeiTe eauTots, xxv. 9 ayopdaaTe eavrais, xxvi. 11 ex^re /aO' eav- 
 Tu>v, Mark ix. 50 ; xiii. 9 pXiwiTi v/ji-w iavrov's, xiv. 7 ; Luke xii. 1, 33, 
 57 ; xvi. 9 etc. ; John v. 42 ; vi. 53 etc. ; Acts v. 35 ; xiii. 46 etc. ; 
 Rom. vi. 11, 13, 16 etc.; 1 Cor. vi. 7, 19 etc. On the other hand, 
 Acts XX. 30 e^ vfjiuiv avToiv auacTT'qaovTai avSpei (not reflexive) ; 1 Cor. 
 vii. 35 Trpos TO vfifov avT&v iTvij.(^opov for yowr own profit; xi. 13 ew 
 vfuv avToh Kpivare judge by yourselves. 
 
 Of the 1st Pers., Acts xxiii. 14 aveOe^aTicrafjiev iavrov^, Rom. viii. 23 
 avTol iv iavTOCi o-T£vd^OjU,£V, XV. 1 oijaiKoixiv , . . /jlt] iavroi's apeaKCiv, 
 15 
 
114 THE PRONOUNS tIs, t£s, 8<ms. [§ 127 
 
 1 Cor. xi. 31 ; 2 Cor. i. 9 (twice), iii. 1, 5j etc. On the other hand, 
 
 2 Thess. i. 4 (Sore ^/xSs avrovs iv v/jiiv ivKovxaa-OaL so that we ourselves 
 boast. 
 
 Remake. Of the Singular, it is true, hardly an unquestionahla 
 and satisfactory instance can be adduced from the N. T. In Gal. v. 
 14 Tdf. [ed. 2] reads again with the Eec. dyajr^o-eis . . . ws icLvrov, but 
 by far the greater number of the ancient mss. [it also] and authorities 
 give (xeavTov (Lchm. Grsb. [Tdf.eds.7,8,Treg.]). In John xviii. 34, 
 again, the most important MSS. ([n] B G L) have otto creavTov Xeyas 
 (Lchm. [Treg.]), instead of d^' iavrov (Grsb. Tdf.). On the other 
 hand, examples are common in the apocr. writings, e.g. Protev. 9, 1 ; 
 Thom. 7, 2 ; Nicod. 3, 2 ; Ep. Ignat. ad Trail. 3, etc. It is noticeable 
 that in the classics, also, when the Sing, forms, eavrov etc., appear to be 
 so used, there is almost always considerable variation in the readings, 
 but not in the case of the Plural ; see e.g. the variants on Xen. Mem. 
 1, 4, 9 (where almost all the oldest and more important mss. give 
 o-eavTov); 2, 1, 7. 30; 2, 6, 35 ; Anab. 6, 6, 15 ; 7, 5, 5 ; Cyr. 1, 6, 35. 
 44 ; 5, 1, 20 ; Plat. Phaed. p. 91 C. ; Protag. p. 312 A. ; Amat. p. 136D.; 
 100 Alcib. II. p. 143 C. etc. Since it is often the inferior and later mss. 
 which offer the 3d Pers., we may assume thus much at least as certain : 
 that the usage was in later times pretty generally (in the Plural almost 
 exclusively) prevalent, and that it must have been very familiar to 
 the coypists ; hence Apollon. Synt. 3, 2 (p. 1 95 B) expressly instructs 
 us ov yap (j)afji,tv iavrov v/Spiva rj « a u t o v vfipKra's, eauroii? 8e vfipi' 
 ■ 'crafii,ev. Consequently, the common assumption (see e.g. Kiihner on 
 Mem. 1, 4, 9 ; Meyer on Gal. 6, 14) that the copyists out oi ignorance 
 changed the 3d Person into the 1st or 2d, may be given up as erroneous, 
 if not in all, at least in many, passages of ancient authors, and certainly 
 in the two from the N. T. given above. See besides, Bhdy. Synt. 
 p. 272, and the copious references on the subject in Matth. p. 1088 ; 
 EUendt, Lex. Soph. I p. 272. 
 
 The Peonouns tIs, tCs, 8<ms. 
 B. § 127, 4; H. § 683; C. § 548; D. § 412; J. § 659. 
 
 16 The Indef. Pron. rt?, rl in the pregnant sense of a man of 
 importance, something great, or merely of the emphatic 
 somdhhig in opposition to nothing (see Herm. ad Vig. nott. 112, 
 113), is not unknown in the N. T. 
 
 E.g. Acts V. 36 ®eu8as Xiywv ilvai rtva kavTov (viii. 9 in full; cTvai 
 Tii/a kavTOV fniyav) ; Gal. vi. 3 ci Soxet ft; cTi/ai rt ft/rihtv mr (juft as in 
 Plat. Apol. p. 41 E.), ii. 6 ; vi. 15, etc. Cf. on this head § 129, 5 p. 127 
 
§127.j PERffHRASIS FOR THE POSSESSIVES. 115 
 
 B. 5 -27, S; H. § 682; C. § 666; D. p. S82j J. § 872. 
 
 Instances of the combination of two questions into one 17 
 (indirect) interrogative clause, are rare. Such appear to be 
 .Mark xv. 24 /SaXXovre? KKrjpov rt? ti dprj, Luke xix. 15 'iva yvol 
 Tif Tt SieTrpar/fiaTevaaTO. 
 
 Remakk. For the use of tis, ti sometimes instead of the simple 
 relative (or of the indirect interrogative clause instead of the relative 
 clause), see § 139, 58 p. 251. It likewise tabes the place of TroTtpos 
 (e.g. Matt. xxi. 31) in reference fo two, like 6 th for 6 Irtpos cJ. p. 30, 
 
 B. §127, N. 10; H. §681b.; C. §550; J. §816. 
 
 The looser use of the relative pron. ocrrts, in so far as it refers to 15 
 precisely-defined objects, is constantly gaining ground in the later 
 language (see Steph. Paris ed. sub voce p. 2309) and also in the N. T., 
 as numerous examples show : Luke ii. 4 els ttoKiv AavelS, tJti's Kakurat 
 ^Brq6\iili, Rom. xvi. 6, 12 IcnracracrOi Mapia/i, tJtls ttoXXo. EKOTriacrei' cis ^ 
 i/Atts, Luke xxiii. I&tov Bapa/8/3ar, ooris r/v . . . (i€J3X.rjij,ivoi ets <j>vX.aK-ijv, 
 Gal. iv. 26 19 avw 'lepoucraX^/x . . . rjTis icrrlv /J^'^'rip rj/JiiJiiv. See besides, 
 Matt. xxi. 33 ; Acts xvii. 10 ; Rom. xi. i; Eph. i. 23 ; iii. 13 ; 2 Tim. 
 ii. 18 ; Rev. xii. 13, etc. That besides, and indeed in by far the 
 majority of cases, oo-tis has its legitimate general force, it is not neces- 
 sary to state. 
 
 PeKIPHEASIS FOK the P08SE8SIVES BT MEANS OP THE PeHSONAL PkONOUNS, 
 
 THE Reflexives, and ISios. 
 B. § 127, 7, 1) ; H. § 675 ; D. p. 362 sq. ; J. § 652, 3. ! 
 
 The substitution of the genitives /aou and aov for the pos- 19 
 sessives of the 1st and 2d Pers. Sing, predominates in the New 
 Testament as in tiie Old — (the adjectives e/io? and 0-09 are 101 
 employed ofteuest by John) ; and the ear had already become 
 so accustomed to this mode of expressing mine and thine, that 
 (according to 13 p. 110 above) it was everywhere ^ resorted to, 
 even when classic Greek would have been obliged to employ 
 the rellexive pronouns efiavTov and a-avTov. Their position is 
 uniformly according to the rule : that is, tliey eitlier precede 
 the article or follow the noun. 
 
 Examples : 6 a.8e\<}>6s <tov, /aov tous Xoyovs, a-ov tijv Kkivr^v, /xov i-iro ttjv 
 a-Tiyrjv (Matt. viii. 8, according to § 147, 31 p. 343) ; for reflexives : 
 John viii. 49 n/j-C) tov ■Traripa fj-ov, Rom. i. 8 ev)(apLcrToi> tw ^e<3 /jlov, Matt. 
 V. 24 a^£s TO SSipov (TOV . . . SiaWdyrjOi rm oBeKipm aov . . . xai 7rp6scj>fpe 
 TO Su>p6v (70V, vii. 4, 5, etc. 
 
 1 The onlj contrary example, 1 Cor. x. 33 rh efiavTOv (rifi^opov, finds iw explana- 
 tion from § 135, 23 p. 169 as iin objective, not possessive, genitive, and from the 
 antithesis to tuv tcoKKuv, 
 
116 PERIPHRASIS FOR THE POSSESSIVES. [§ 127 
 
 B. § 127, 7, 2); H. § 538; C. § 523 sq. ; D. p. 353; J. § 452. 
 
 20 On distinguishing between the forms avTov and eavTov, etc , 
 in the place of the Poss. Pron. of the 3d Pers. see 14, p. Ill 
 above. As to their position, with substantives which have 
 the article it is, in the main, the regular one, see e.g. Mark 
 viii. 35 (Vat. Sin.) ; yet here and there (as in classic authors 
 also, see B. § 127, N. 12) instances to the contrary are found : 
 
 1) Of avTov, -ijs, etc. Those instances have a foundation in usage 
 where avrov, etc., get an intermediateiposition because there are already 
 other attributive limitations between the art. and the subst., as Matt. 
 xxvii. 60 iv TO Kaivu airou /tvij/xeio), Acts iii. 21 twv^ dytW dir' ataJvos 
 avTOV irpo(l>r]TS>v, 1 Pet. i. 3 Kara to ttoXv avTov tXcos, ii. 9 ; V. 10 ; 2 Pet. 
 i. 9 Twv TTciXat avTov a^apriMV. The intermediate position of avrov is 
 also justifiable when it has a reflexive sense, as Tit. iii. 5 Kara to 
 avTov IXeos, Heb. ii. 4 Kara ttjv avrov dQvr]ULV, Rom. iii. 25. Yet 
 instances where it is not reflexive are Bom. xi. 11 tu avrutv -irapavrui- 
 fjMTt, iii. 24; Jas. i. 18 ; 1 Thess. ii. 19 ; Heb. vii. 18 8id to aur^s 
 aa-OevU. In the Gospels there are no examples of the sort. 
 
 2) Of the irregular position of eavrov, -rj^, etc. : Matt, xviii. 31 tu 
 Kvpiif iavrSiv, XXV. 1, 4, 7 ; Luke xii. 36 ; xv. 6 ; xvi. 5 ; xxii. 66 ; Gal. 
 vi. 4, 8 (elsewhere, however, Paul always has the regular position : 
 Eph. V. 28, etc.) ; Matt. xxi. 8 eovroiV to, Ifidria, Luke xxiii. 48 Lchm. 
 iavTu>v TO (TT-qdr/, Acts xxi. 11. 
 
 B. §127, 7, 3); H. §675 8q.; 0. §538; J. §652. 
 
 21 To express the possessives of the 1st and 2d Persons 
 Plural, again, the periphrasis with •^fj.&v and vfi&v is incom- 
 parably more frequent than the adjective pronouns. Thus, for 
 instance, our in the Gospels is rendered only by rjfi&v, your in 
 
 102 Matt, and Luke in like manner only by vfiav ; in Luke vjj.irepo'} 
 occurs only twice (vi. 20 ; xvi. 12), but not in connection with 
 a subst. ; in John against two passages with vjj^eTepo^ there are 
 some thirty with v/jmv, and so on. 
 
 As respects position, r/fiZv and ijuSv, just as is the case with 
 avTov, never in the historical books occupy the intermediate place, (but 
 always stand either before the art. or after the subst.) ; in the other 
 books this position is also comparatively rare, and indeed there is (as 
 in 20 above) no deviation from Greek usage when in addition another 
 , adjective or adverbial limitation stands between the art. and subst. ; 
 e.g. Rom. vi. 6 6 iraXatos 7jix,u>v avOpunro's, 2 Cor. iv. 16 6 e^o) rifi.u>v 
 avBpunroi, V. i ; Rom. vi. 12 ; 1 Pet. i. 18 ; v. 9 rfj iv Koa-fiui vfiSiv 
 a&ek<l>6T7jTL. 2 Pet. i. 10 Lchm. ; iii. 15 ; ,Jude 3 Lchnu fTdf. Treg.], 
 
§ 127.] THE USE OF tSios. H7 
 
 20 ; but ouly such examples depart from usage as Rom. xvi. 19 ^7 
 v/Aw vTraKo-^, 1 Cor. ix. 12 r^s vfiSiv cfouo-t'as. Yet this intermediate 
 position is peculiar only to the style of the Apostle Paul ; see besides, 
 2 Cor. i. 6 ; vii. 7 (three times) ; viii. 13, 14; xi. 8 ; xii. 19 ; xiii. 9 ; 
 Phil. i. 19, 25 ; ii. 30 ; Col. i. 8 ; 1 Thess. iii. 7, — (aU with i/^wv). 
 
 B. § 127, N. 12; D. p. 353; J. § 652, 2. 
 
 The non-euclitic form of the 1st Person e/Ao5 is never used in 22 
 dependence on substantives except when it stands in connection 
 with other genitives (in which case a-ov also must retain the 
 accent) ; as, Rom. i. 12 irttrTEcos v/^Sc re koX e/iov, xvi. 13 rijv ix-qripa 
 avTov K(u c/ioC. Hence in Matt. xvi. 23 we are not to read o-KavSaXov 
 et e/Aou (Lchm. [Tdf. Treg. {<*]), but, according to good authorities, 
 either ixov (Tdf. [eds. 2, 7]) or the Dative £/*ot (cod. D). The accent 
 is also retained of course when the pronoun is strengthened by ainov, 
 -^s: Luke ii. 35 xat crou Sc air^s rrjv ij/v)(qv, Rom. xvi. 2. 
 
 B. §127,N.13; C.§538; D.p.353,372; J.§656,4. 
 
 The peculiar classic usage of strengthening the possessive 2J 
 adjective pron. by the Genitive of the substantive pron. 
 avTov, -Siv, etc. (Lat. suum ipsius, etc.) to express the idea of 
 own, no longer appears in the language of the N. T.i As a 
 substitute for it, the language in expressing this idea avails 
 itself very commonly of the simple adjective I'Sto?; which 
 thus, when it has no special emphasis, frequently takes the 
 place of the reflexive used possessively, particularly of the 3d 
 Person .2 
 
 Accordingly iSios stands in the reflexive-possessive sense of the 103 
 First Pers. (my etc. own) 1 Cor. iv. 12, of the Second Pers. 
 (thy etc. own) Luke vi. 41 ; Eph. v. 22 ; 1 Thess. ii. 14 ; 2 Pet. iii. 17, 
 of the Third Pers. (for iavrov, etc.) very frequently in all parts of 
 the N. T. (never in the Rev.) ; see among other passages Matt. xxii. 
 5 ; Luke vi. 44 ; John i. 42 ; Acts i. 25 ; Rom. x. 3 ; 1 Cor. iii. 8 etc. ; 
 1 Tim. iii. 4, 5; Heb. iv. 10; Jas. i- 14: 1 Pet. iii. 1, 5 ; Jude 6, etc. 
 
 1 As analogous may be noted Paul's rp eVp X"P^ nai\ov, at the end of several 
 Epistles. 
 
 '' That ISios is in fact used quite in the sense and stead of eauroS etc. is manifest 
 not only from the variants and parallel passages, as in Luke ii. 3 els tV eavrou 
 w6\iv Lchm. [Tdf. Treg.], ritu iSlav Tr6\iv Tdf. (eds.2,7J (cf. vi. 41 ; Mark xv. 20, 
 etc.), but also from the fact that the expressions are exchanged one for the other 
 without any sensible difference, as in 1 Cor. vii. 2 ; Eph. v. 22, 28, and in 2 Pet. 
 ii. 22 the proverb (Prov. xxvi. 11 Kiav . . . ivX rbv eavrov (/ierov) is reproduced 
 Kiaiv iiruTTpt\l/as iirl t!» tSiav i^ipa/ia. The Latin versions also frequently translate 
 it simply by suus. 
 
118 PLEONASTIC USE OF POSSLSSIVES. [§ 127, 
 
 It is noticeable that in the following passages the Genitive avT&v is 
 added to this iSios to strengthen it, just as in Greek it is added to the 
 Possessives : Acts i. 1 9 T17 iSia StaXe/cTo) airw. Tit. i. 1 2 rts I'Stos avrtov 
 •irpocf>rjrij's, 2 Pet.' iii. 3, 16 Kara ras iSuxs 057(01/ hnOvfiiw;, irpos rifv 
 lOLav oAjriov aTrwXetav. 
 
 8j Hence iStos with the article used substantively (01 tStot, to tSto) 
 takes the place of the constructions current in ordinary classic usage : 
 01 kavTov, TCI kavTov, etc. ; as, John i. 1 1 ; viii. 44, etc. ; Acts xxi. 6 ; 
 1 Thess. iv. 11 ; 1 Tim. v. 8, and with the addition of avTov (cf. 23 
 above) Acts xxiv. 23. It stands likewise for to rjfiwf avTw/ : Luke 
 xviii. 28 ^/ii6ts di^cvTes to. tSia. 
 
 E5 'IStos appears to be used more in its strict sense (^proprius) in such 
 passages as John vii. 18 ^tjrei rrir Sd^av rrp/ ISiav, x. 3, 4 ; Acts iii. 12; 
 xxviii. 30 ; Gal. vi. 9 ; Eom. viii. 32 ; Heb. ix. 12, etc. Thus Caper- 
 naum as the city in which Jesus dwelt and taught (Matt. iv. 13; 
 Mark ii. 1, etc.) is called in reference to him ij ISCa ttoXis Matt. ix. 1. 
 
 B.§127,8; H.§527d.; C.§630e.; D.p.363. 
 
 26 It is to be noticed as a prominent peculiarity of N. T. 
 usage, that where classic Greek, even in later (post-Christian) 
 authors, manifestly avoids adding possessive limitations, as 
 superfluous, indeed offensive, they are nevertheless subjoined 
 in by far the majority of cases. This usa^e was oc- 
 casioned, without doubt, by the language of the Septuagint ; 
 which, in consequence of the literal translation of the Hebrew 
 original, contains manifold constructions of the sort, as a com- 
 parison of the Sept. with the Hebrew text shows on almost 
 every page. 
 
 The following examples may serve to illustrate this very frequent 
 (pleonastic) use : Matt, xxiii. 5 ■n-dvra to, epya avriav iroiovcnv 7rpo9 
 TO OeaO^vai, xiii. 44 aTrb t^s X"-P"-^ avrov inrdya /cat ttwXeZ iravra, John 
 ii. 23 OewpovvTK avTov TO. o-ij/icia a iiroUi, Matt. ii. 15 (quotn.) exaXeo-a 
 Tov vlov fi.ov, ix. 18 eTriOes T'^v X^P"^ °'™! Luke iv. 11 (quotn.) ; x. 27 
 (quotn.) ; xi. 46 ivl t<Sv SaKTvXwv ip-wv oi wpocrij/aveTe rots tftopTibLs, Matt. 
 xvii. 8 ;' xviii. 8, etc. If in anything syntactical, it is in precisely 
 this uncommonly frequent employment of the possessives /xov, a-ov, 
 aiiTov, etc. in which, throughout the Greek of the Bible, the Hebrew 
 104 tinge becomes apparent. Yet instances are not wanting of genuine 
 Greek constructions, as e.g. Matt, xxvii. 24 Xa/3a>v vSwp aitcvLxpaTo ras 
 X«p<xs, Mark viii. 1 Tdf. [Treg.] Trpo^KaXecra/tfi/os rov'i fiaOTjrds (cf. 
 
 1 With the author of this Ep. the predilection for the expression with ISioi 
 seems, to judge from the little that is left us, tc have completely suppressed the 
 other mode 0'' ".xpression by means of lauroS, et» 
 
\ 
 
 §127.] THE USE OF PRONOUNS WITH THE ARTICLE. 119 
 
 Matt. XY. 32),- etc. ; and in this particular undoubtedly much may be 
 set down to the account of scribes accustomed to this form of speech, 
 when we consider that the co^. Vat. especially is devoid of an innu- 
 merable multitude of these superfluous adjuncts. Cf. with this idiom 
 the excessive use of the pron. avrds 9 above, p. 107, and the Hebraism 
 ov . . . avToi in § 143, 1 p. 280. 
 
 Filially, as respects the article, the language of the N. T. 2. 
 is not so consistent in the case of possessive limitations con- 
 sisting of the Gen. of the subst. pron., as in those that are 
 adjectival (§ 124, 6 p. 87) ; inasmuch as it omits the article 
 not only, 1) where the omission is allowable according to the 
 rules given § 124, 8 p. 88, but also, though far less frequently, 
 2) where according to general rules the art. is demanded. 
 
 Examples of 1), as well when the possessive limitation is a sub- 
 stantive pron. as when it is an actual subst., are comprised among 
 those already given in § 124, 8 p. 88 ; 
 
 Of 2) Matt. xix. 28 iirt. Opovov So^s airov, xxv. 31 ; Luke i. 72 
 
 fjLvrjcrOrjvaL StaS^KTjs ayiai airov, ii. 32 So^av Xaov crov 'Icrpa.'qk, Jas. i. 26 
 Tdf. [Treg. cod. Sin.J jxij -xakivayuiywv yXwo-o-av avTOV dAAa aTraruiv 
 KapSiav avTOv (Lchm. iavrov), V. 20 ex irXdvijs oSov airov. (Passages 
 like liuke xiii. 19 eis xtj-ttov iavrov, xv. 29 oiSiirore ivroXi^v troi) TraprjXdov, 
 1 Cor. iv. 14 (US TiKva fiov can at all events, according to the princi- 
 ples laid down B. § 124, N. 4, be so interpreted that the substantives 
 dispense with the article because not limited.) This omission takes 
 place sometimes also where the possessive limitation is a substan- 
 tive, as 1 Cor. X. 21 ov BvvacrOe rpaire^ijs Kvpiov fitTexj^w koX T/ooTre^iys 
 Sai/xovioiv, 1 Tim. v. 10 et dylwv Tro'Sas fvi>j/tv, 1 Pet. iii. 12 6<ji6akp,oL 
 Kvpiov . . . Kal mra airov . . . Trpoionrov Se, Kvpiov, Rev. ii. 1, 8, 18 Lchm. 
 
 In a manner quite analogous the article sometimes falls away also, Jg 
 where according to ordinary Greek usage it is apparently necessary, 
 in the possessive limitation expressed by tStos (23 p. 117) ; e.g. 2 Pet. 
 ii. 16 eXcyftv i(T\iv tSi'as Trapavofiias, i. 3, 20 ; 1 Cor. vii. 7; Tit. ii. 9 
 SovXovi Seo-TTorats iScoi's vTroTd<T<jccrOai. In other passages the omission 
 of the article is according to rule, as in the adverbial limitations 
 (§ 124, 8 d) p. 89) Kara. iSiav TrpoOecriv, 'Kaipio iSio), Kaipoii iSiots, Kar 
 IhLav; or in sentences like John v. 18 iraTepa iSlov tXtyEv tov Oeov 
 (where it is a predicate). In 1 Cor. xv. 38 the mss. fluctuate between 
 tSiov tr(3/xa (Lchm. [Treg. Tdf. «*]) and to i8. o-. (Tdf. [eds. 2, 7]). 
 
 Position of outos, skcivos, was, etc., with the Article. 
 B. § 127, 9 ; H. § 637 sq. ; C. § 624 ; D. § 398 ; J. § 463 sq. ; S. pp. XTiii. sq. 
 
 The usage in this matter had become so established, that 29 
 offences against it do not occur in the N. T. Hence we find 
 
120 THE USE OF PRONOUNS WITH THE AKTICLE. [§127 
 
 105 invariably either avrrj ij ttoXj?, afKpoTepa ra irXota, ttS? o o;j^A.o?, 
 or ^ yfj iKeivT], to, pruJMTa ravTa, etc. TliougH Tra? does appear 
 frequently without an article (jraaa crdp^, irav SivSpov, /lerci 
 •n-darrj'i Trpodvp.ia^, •jrdvre<; avOpatiroi, 'Adrivalot Be Trai/re?, etc.), 
 yet this is quite according to analogy, because the statements 
 are general and unqualified, or they fall under the class of 
 cases treated of in § 124, 8 p. 88. Whenever the number is 
 presented as limited, the article is never missing ; hence TravTei 
 ol fiadfjTal, iravTa^ roil'; irpo^Ta';, at dvpat Traaai, etc. 
 
 The insertion of was, too, between the article and substantive 
 rests upon classic precedent: Acts xix. 7 ^a-av Se ol iravres avSpe? wcrel 
 SaJSe/ca i.e. the whole number of the men was twelve (cf. xxvii. 37), 
 XX. 18 p-eS" u/iuf Tou Travra )(p6vov (.yf.v6p.-qv throughout the whole time 
 (more emphatic than Trai/ra tov ■)(p6vov), Gal. v. 14 o ttom vo/j.oi iv ivl 
 \6y<o 7r£7rX^po)Tat the law in its entire compass' and contents, 1 Tim. i. 
 1 6 rriv awaa-av fxaKpodvpiav the entire fulness of his longsuffering. 
 30 Remark;. Although eKaarros, which is commonly used substan- 
 tively, always appears without the art. in the few passages in which 
 it is conjoined to a subst. as an adjective, yet no exception from 
 ordinary usage can be established on this fact, since all the passages 
 may be brought under the same rules which applied above to iras 
 without the art. : Luke vi. 44 eKaa-rov SivSpov, John xix. 23 CKao-rai 
 a-Tpa-TiMTr) (the number of the soldiers has not been previously men- 
 tioned), Heb. iii. 13 Ka6' iKacrrTiv rjixepav, Rev. xxii. 2 Kara pjqvav 'lKa<TT0V. 
 So we find in Thucyd. Kara tov oirXiTrjv tKacTTOV, koB' kKacnrjv r-qv rj/xipav 
 used interchangeably with Ka6 kKmrrqv ^apaxa, Kwra. eroi tKacrTov ; in 
 Herod, eir ijizipws iica.a'Trj'; and tov Siy/xapp^oi/ tKao'Tov, etc. 
 
 The common phrase cIs cKao-Tos is likewise found in the classics 
 also : Thuc. 1. 77 ; 2. 60, etc. Respecting dra ets eKao-Tos see p. 30. 
 
 B. §127, N. 15; H. §688; C. §B24c.; D. p.S52; 'j. §453, Obs. 1. 
 
 Jl Further, the article is regularly wanting, wl],en the 
 demonstrative takes the place of the predicate, or the sub- 
 stantive following must be taken as a predicate and separated 
 from the demonstrative. 
 
 Of this rule there are many good examples in the N. T. : Rom. ix. 8 
 ravra rexva tov Oeov sc. ia-Tiv, Gal. iii. 7 ovtoi vIol eto-iv 'Afipaap, iv. 24 ; 
 1 Thess. iv. 3 tovto ydp (sC. aTri)(€cr6ai an-o t^s iropv€ias) io'Ttv Oik-qpa 
 rm 6im, Luke i. 36 ; xxi. 22. As an objective clause : John iv. 54 
 ToijTo TtaXiv SevTcpov o'rjfA.eiov iTToir/crev this was the second sign which 
 etc., ii. 11 TavTTjv iiroirjcrev a.p)(riv tcov arjpeiwv. With cKcti/os: John 
 viii. 44 eKeivoi avdpunroKTovoi rjv, x. 1 ; and in an objective clause, x. 35 
 
§ 127.] PERIPHRASTIC FORMS OF THE NEGATIVES. 121 
 
 el cKEivovs eLTrev Oeovi. Here belongs also the much debated passage 
 Luke ii. 2 Lchm. [Treg.J avrri aitoypa^rj Trpm-ij iyevcTO tj-yeixovivovros r^s 
 Svptas Kvpivov [Tdf. St* lyiviTo Trpcurij] ; and therefore the addition 
 of the article is by no means necessary (Winer, R.W.B. under 
 Quirinius). 
 
 Peeiphrabtic Forms op the Negatives. 100 
 
 Instead of the negatives ovheL<; and /irjSeli!, weakened as they 32 
 were by daily use, the N. T. language employs several more 
 emphatic modes of expression, effected by resolving these neg- 
 atives into their component parts, viz. 
 
 1) The phrase, current among the Greeks also, ovBe cis (B. § 70), 
 as Matt, xxvii. 14 Trpds ovSe ev pfiit.a, John i. 3 ;^<i)pts avrov iyivero ovSe 
 tv o yiyovev, Acta iv. 32 ; Horn. iii. 10 ovk cotiv SiKaios ovSi «is (still 
 stronger vs. 12 ovk icmv ems Ivos, after Ps. xiv. 1,3). 
 
 2) The simple separation of the two parts of ouSei? (i.e. ov and eis, 
 see B. § 70, 1), but reversing their order, thus : els (juta) . . . ov; as, 
 Matt. V. 18 i<0Ta ev ^ /Ata Kepaia ov fi-rj trapeXOy, x. 29 ev e^ avriov ov 
 Trea-eirat, Luke xi. 46 ; xii. 6, etc. 
 
 3) The expression, imitated from the Hebrew or borrowed from 
 the Septuagint, ov (p-rj) ... iras, but always written separately, so 
 that the negative comes immediately before the predicate (just as in 
 the Heb. bb ... sib e.g. Exod. xx. 10 ; Judg. xiii. 4 ; 2 Sam. xii. 3, etc.) : 
 Matt. xxiv. 22 ovk av ea-a)6-q iraa-a a-dp^, Luke i. 37 ; Acts x. 14 ovSe- 
 TTore e<j>ayov ttoLv koivov, 1 Cor. i. 29 ottcds /t^ Kav^'^crryrai Tracra crdpi, Gal. 
 ii. 16; Rev. xxi. 27. The Greeks would have preferred to express 
 themselves by means of a double negation, or to use tl instead of ttuv, 
 — both which expressions also are common enough in the N. T. e.g. 
 Matt. xxii. 16 ; Mark xiv. 60, etc. ; viii. 26 ; Rom. ix. 11 ; Rev. vii. 1 
 /iijre em ti (Rec. [Tdf. 8*3 irSv) hevSpov. 
 
 Similar in meaning, but probably of a different origin, is the opposite 
 arrangement of the two words, iras ... ov (p-rj), in the following 
 passages : Rev. xviii. 22 ttSs rexyCTrji ov p-q evpeOy ev a-ol en, xxii. 3 ; 
 2 Pet. i. 20 ; Eph. v. 5 ■n-S? irdpvos . . . ovk e^ei KXrjpovopCav, iv. 29 iras 
 Xdyos <rairp6s ex tov aropaTos vpwv prj eKiropeviarOta. This mode of 
 expression had its origin, we may suppose, in the circumstance that 
 when the writer began his sentence an affirmative predicate was 
 hovering before his mind, as is plain in passages where an affirmative 
 predicate follows the negative one immediately:^ John iii. 16 Iva ttSs 
 
 1 Whether the celebrated passage 1 Cor. xr. 51 Tdf. [Treg. Alf.] — (on the 
 
 origin of Lclim.'s reading see Riickert in loc. This greatly interpolated passage 
 
 ran, as we may suppose, originally thus : irdms . . . Koiiiri6ri<r6iieBa, [ft-^"] oS, ndvres 
 
 Si &X\o7J)<r(ff46flo ; cf. cod. Sin.) — is to be explained in the same way is doubtful, 
 
 16 
 
122 NEUTER ADJECTIVES. [§ 128. 
 
 6 TTio-TOxov fJLrj aTToXrjTai a\\' I^S ^o'^v alwviov (cf. vs. 15), vi. 39 iva ttSi' 
 
 . .. HTj aTToXecro) ii avTov, dWo, avatrrqa-io airo etc. (on the order see 
 
 1.07 § 151, 4 p. 379), which affirmal. ve predicate, too, in other passages must 
 
 be supplied from the negative, as in John xii. 46 ; 1 John ii. 21 ; iii. 15. 
 
 Somewhat anomalous, but referable to the above rule, are Rev. vii. 
 16; ix. 4 (ouSe vav Kav/ia, etc.), where the preceding predicates {ov 
 fx-i] ireaii, jjurj dSiK'^crouo-tv) must for substance be supplied after the neg- 
 ative ov&k ; on ix. 4 cf. besides § 148, 8 p. 352. 
 
 The difference in meaning provided that the negative comes im- 
 mediately before ttSs and belongs to it is made plain by such passages 
 as Matt. vii. 21 ; xix. 11 ; John xiii. 10, 11, 18; Acts x. 41, etc. 
 Compare besides the adverbial expressions ov irdvTun and 7TdvT(a<; ov in 
 § 151, 19 p. 389. 
 
 B. § 127, 10; H. § 638 e. ; D. p. 463; J. § 464, 8. 
 
 33 That aWoi with the article is exchanged, without difference 
 of meaning, with 6 eTepo<; (the other of two), we have already 
 seen in noticing the expressions substituted for 6 fiev . . . 6 Si, 
 § 126, 3 above, p. 102. Other instances, also, not connected 
 with this combination are pretty frequent, as Matt. v. 39 oo-rt? 
 as paiTL^et, el<! rrjv Se^iav aiar/ova a-ov, arpe^jrov aiir^ koI rrjv 
 aXKifv, xii. 13 ; John xix. 32 ; xx. 3, 4, 8, etc. 
 
 Neutee Adjectives. 
 B. § 128, 3; H. § 496; C. §607; D. p. 388; J. § 436, 2. 
 
 1 In accordance with the familiar metonymy by virtue of 
 which abstracts are used in a concrete sense (thus in the N.T. 
 frequently e.g. 17 irepiTo/jLrj, 17 uKpo^vaTia Rom. ii. 26 ; iii. 30 ; 
 Gal. ii. 7 etc., al'x^iuiKadla Eph. iv. 8), the neuter Singular of 
 adjectives and participles also is employed to set forth a 
 plurality of concrete objects in their union. 
 
 Examples : John xvii. 2 Iva ttov o 'ScSwKas outm, Sucttj ovtois fw^v 
 aluiviov (respecting the arrangement see § 151, 4 p. 379), vi. 37 ; 
 1 John V. 4 ; Heb. vii. 7 to eXoTTov viro rov Kpavrovo's cvXoycu-at (where 
 vTTo with the Gen. makes reference to an author, § 147 p. 340). 
 
 and has been disputed particularly by Meyer among recent writers, — whom 
 Winer 555 (517) agrees with. Yet the earlier interpretation (Olsh., deWette, 
 Eiickert, etc. ) ought not to be held to be " a make-shift opposed by the context 
 and without warrant or example " in view of the similarity of the above two pas- 
 sages from John, even notwithstanding the repetition of viivTes. At least the 
 diiBculty does not lie in the grammatical construction (respecting the omission of 
 lih cf. the two passages from John and § 149, 11 p. 364, and especially § 148, 14 
 p. 355), but in the obscure contents of the (repeated) irivres. In Interpreting tha 
 passage, 1 Thess. iv '5-17 is to be specially compared. 
 
§ 123.] PREDICATE WITH THE ARTICLE. 123 
 
 Similar is 2 Thess. ii. 6 koa. vvv to Karixov oiSare, for which subsequently 
 vs. 7 the Masc. o Karixiov is used ; see deWette's excursus on the pas- 
 sage p. 132. For examples of the Neuter Plural in a concrete 
 personal sense see 1 Cor. i. 27, 28 ; Gal. iii. 22. The (good classic) 
 nse of the Neuter Participle instead of the simple Substantive 
 (kindred in sense or in derivation) is found especially in Luke ; as, 
 TO eiaiOos or eWuTfiivov for t$oi (iv. 16 ; ii. 27), to ■yevvoJ/Aevov i. 35, etc. 
 See Credner, Einl. p. 135. 
 
 B. §128, N. 4;, H. §552a.; C. §509; D.p.388sq.; J.§436,2. 
 
 That the Neuter Sing, and Plur. with the article is often used 2 
 mlverbially has already been remarked § 125, 12 p. 96. The remark 
 holds true also of the Neuter Sing, and Plur. w i th o u t the art., e.g. 
 XoLTTov henceforth, for the future, and (in the Epistles) as a conjunction '. C8 
 consequently, furthermore, ergo ceterum : Mark xiv. 41 ; Acts xxvii. 
 20; 2 Cor. xiii. 11 ; 2 Tim. iv. 8; fi-icrov in the midst, Phil. ii. 15 
 (Grsb. ev iA.£&(o) ; iroXAa multum (i.e. both seepe and vehementer) Matt. 
 ix. 14 [Treg.] ; Mark v. 23, etc. (see Wahl, under ttoXv's). On the 
 phrase etvai ta-a OeS see § 129, 11 p. 131. 
 
 Remake. An isolated Hebraism is- the use of the Fern. Sing, in 3 ' 
 a quotation from the O. T. for the Neuter : Matt. xxi. 42 ; Mark xii. 
 11 (^Trapa. KvpCov iyiytro avTt) /cat ecttiv Oavp-aa-T-^ etc.) — taken 
 from Ps. cxviii. 23 and originating in the literal translation of the 
 Fern, (as Neut.) nsjt. See Gesen. Lehrgeb. p. 661 [Gr. § 105, 3]. 
 On irputr-q jravToii' h/roXri see § 150, 6 p. 374. 
 
 THE NOUN IN CONSTRUCTION. 
 Subject and Pebdicate. 
 B. §129, '2; H. §536; C. §534; D. §394; J. § 460. 
 
 The Predicate, if it is a noun, naturally dispenses with the 1 
 article so far forth as it is to be affirmed of the subject naerely 
 as an idea, i.e. when taken as a general and unlimited con- 
 ception ; as, John iv. 24 Trvev /A,a 6 0e6<;, Rom. x. 4 xe'Xo? yap 
 vofiov XjOtCTTo?, Acts xix. 26 ovic elcrlv 0eol ol Bia '^eipwv yivo- 
 fievoi where, therefore, ol yivofievoc sc. 0eoi is the subject. Yet 
 the article is admissible as soon as the predicative idea is 
 limited, i.e. restricted to something conceived as within definite 
 limits, or assumed as known, or as previously mentioned or 
 designated. In the N. T. its use is frequent, especially in 
 John (Winer adduces in § 17 [5th ed. ; of. 7th ed. § 18, p. 114 
 (109)] alone more thai: eighty instances of the sort, and the 
 number could be easily increased) ; and on comparing them, 
 the admissibility, indeed necessity, of the article is everywhere 
 
1 24 PREDICATE WITH THE ARTICLE. [§ 129. 
 
 perceptible, for they can be conveniently distributed into the 
 three following classes : 
 
 a) The predicate, a substantive, contains an idea (generally known 
 or previously mentioned) definitely limited. To make the distinc- 
 tion clear, compare the above passage from John (iv. 24) with 
 
 2 Cor. iii. 17 6 8e Kvpios to Trvevfjui icrrLv, viz. the Spirit of which 
 we are speaking, which emanated from Christ and is operative in his 
 church; or Rom. vii. 7 6 vofjio's afiapria {ia-Tiv ;) with 1 John iii. 4 
 Tras o TTOiuiv t^v afjiapriav (cat Tr/v avoixiav Troiel, koX tj a/tapTia itrriv rj 
 avajxia; or compare Matt. xii. 23 fi-qri ovt6<s ia-nv 6 vloi AavtiS; is 
 this the son of David / and xiv. 33 dXi?6<3s Oeov vibs el thou art truly 
 God's Son (cf. John i. 34, 50 ; 1 John iv. 15) ; or Acts ii. 7 oix ovtol 
 ilcTLv ol XaXowT€s TaXiXoioL and Mark vi. 3 oix 0^'''°^ itrnv 6 Tixriav, 6 
 vio% TTjs Maptas, etc. Hence everywhere av ii- iyw d/jn- owds icmv- 6 
 
 109 Xpio-Tos, 6 ■irpo<jrrirqi;, i.e. spoken of in the Scriptures, etc., e.g. Matt, 
 xvi. 16 ; Mark viii. 29 ; Luke iv. 41 etc. ; John i. 20, 21, 25 etc. ; Acts 
 ix. 22 ; 1 John v. 1 etc. See further John i. 1 h apxg r)v 6 A-oyos . . . 
 Koi 6eos ^v 6 Xdyos (where, accordingly, the predicate has the art. 
 although the subject dispenses with it ; yet the passage is also differently 
 interpreted, see the Comm.), i. 4, 8 ; viii. 12; ix. 19, 20 ; x. 7, 14; 
 xi. 25 ; xiv. 6 ; xv. 1, 5 ; xviii. 33 ; Matt. v. 13 ; Mark xv. 2 ; Acts 
 iii. 25 ; 1 Cor. x. 4; 2 Cor. iii. 2 ; Phil, iii/ 3, 19 (where o 6e6? is the 
 Pred.), Eev. xviii. 23 ; xix. 10 etc. In many of these passages the 
 predicate is already more closely defined by an adjective (as in John 
 XV. 1 ) or a Genitive (hence John viii. 44 i/feiJo-Tijs eo-tIi/ koi 6 Trarrjp 
 avTov), in others it allows itself to be more closely limited by a relative 
 or equivalent participial clause (§ 125, 3 p. 92 sq.) which is understood, 
 and indeed such a clause very often actually follows ; e.g. Matt. iii. 17; 
 Mark ix. 7 ; 2 Pet. i. 17 ; 1 John ii. 22, etc. 
 
 b) The predicate is an adjective or participle rendered substantive 
 by means of the art., i.e. raised to a definitely limited, objective, idea ; 
 as, John vi. 69 ctu et o ayios rov 6eov not a holy one of God but the holy 
 one of God, " the one whom God has consecrated (x. 36) and on 
 whom he has set the seal (vi. 27) of sanctity," see deWette in loc. 
 Accordingly in 1 Cor. xii. 6 5e6s ivepylov icrnv to. TravTO iv rj/juv would 
 only declare simply God works in us ; but 6 ivepySiv signifies it is God 
 (alone) who (in point of fact) works, etc. — substantially, indeed, the 
 same idea, but differing in conception, in energy of expression. See 
 besides Matt. x. 20 ; John i. 33 ; v. 39 ; vi. 33, 63 ; viii. 18 ; ix.8 ; 
 xiv. 21 ; Acts ix. 21 ; 1 John v. 6, 7 ; Eev. i. 17 ; ii. 23 ; iii. 17. 
 
 Remaek. That with substantive predicates also the passage 
 often gains in force by the addition of the article, may be seen from 
 I Cor. xi. 3 6iX.<o ijaas ttSevoi on irai'Tos di'Spos ^ KC<f>a\ri Xpiords 
 
§ 129.] AGREEMENT OF SUBJECT AND PREDICATE. 125 
 
 eoTiv, Ke(f>a\r] Se yvvaiKo<; o av^p, Ke<f>a\rj Se Tov XptcrToC o ^cos, where 
 tae omission of the art. would not, to be sure, have altered the mean- 
 ing, but would have weakened its expression ; Eph. ii. 14 avTos ia-riv 
 ■l) eip'^vT) ripLuiv he is our (only, true) peace ; without the art. the prop- 
 psition would assert of Christ merely in a naked way that he is our 
 peace ; John xv. 1 eyu> ei/^t -q ajuTreXos 17 d\ij6iv^, etc. Cf. § 124, 7 
 p. 87 sq. 
 
 c) The proposition is one in which subject and predicate stand in 
 such a relation to each other that one expression is meant to be merely 
 explained, elucidated, amplified by the other, as 1 Cor. xv. 56 irov arov, 
 6a,vaT€, TO Kevrpov; to Sk Kevrpov tov Oavdrov fj afiapria, etc. So reg- 
 ularly in explaining the parables : e.g. Matt. xiii. 37 sq. a-irdpiav to 
 Ka\ov <7irepju.a eo'Tii' 6 uios tou a.v9p<!>Trov, 6 8e aypos io^Tiv 6 KocrfJi-Oi etc., 
 vi. 22 o X.vxi/oi TOV o-w/uttTos ItTTiv 6 ocfydaXp.o's. Cf. the example from 
 1 John iii. 4 in a) above, and deWette in loc. This holds true in 
 particular of many passages in which a pronoun, as iya>, oStos, 
 cKeii/os, OS, etc., takes the place of the subject; as, Matt. xxvi. 26 tovto 
 fo'Tiv TO (Tw/jid fiov, 28 tovto icTTiv TO al/jid, fiov, and in the exposition 
 of the parables : Matt. xiii. 19, 20, 22 etc. See, besides, .John i. 19 ; 
 V. 35 ; vi. 14, 50, 51, 58 ; Acts iv. 11 ; vii. 32 ; viii. 10 ; xxi. 28, 38; 
 Eph. i. 23 ; iv. 15 (cf. v. 23) ; Rev. iv. 5 ; v. 6, 8 ; xx. 14, etc. It is 
 further to be noticed, that in these instances also the predicative sub- 
 stantive is, as a rule, more closely defined by an adjective, a genitive, 
 a relative or participial clause. 
 
 Agkbement of Subject and Predicate in Number and Gender. 110 
 
 B. §129, 3; H. §515; C. §569; D. p.399i J. §384sq. 
 
 Although the Mss. vary very much, it is nevertheless certain 2 
 that the N. T. writers proceed rather arbitrarily in reference 
 to the use of the Singular and Plural where the Subject is 
 a Neuter Plural. For not only is the Singular verb 
 found where animate and even human beings are the subject, 
 e.g. Luke xiii. 19 ; Mark iv. 4 (Treretm, on the otlier hand in 
 Matt. vi. 26 the Plural), Luke iv. 41 (Zaiiiovia), 1 John iv. 1 
 QirvevfiaTa) , iii. 10 (re/cz/a, moreover in a contrast of two), 
 Rom. ix. 8 ; 1 Cor. vii. 14,^ or where the plurality is made 
 prominent, as Matt. xii. 45 ; Luke viii. 2 (cTrra irv&jjiwra, 
 haufwvia). Matt, xviii. 12 (eicaTov irpo^aTa), Luke viii. 30 
 (paifiovia -woKKa); — but also the Plural where inanimate 
 objects are the subject, as Matt. vi. 28 (^Kpiva), John vi. 13 
 
 ' Hence in 1 Tim. ii. 1.5 it is quite inconsiderate to supply Tixva, from the 
 preceding Teievo-foi/las, for iielvaaiv. 
 
126 AGREEMENT OF SUBJECT AND PREDICATE. [§ 129 
 
 (^KXdafjMTo) , xix. 31 (o-KeXi?) ; and abstracts, as Luke xxiv. 11 
 QijfiaTo), 1 Tim. r. 25 {epya) ; and even the Neut. Plur. of 
 a pronoun (very rarely), John xvii. 7 (codd. Vat. Sin.), Rev. 
 i. 19; 1 Cor. x. 11 Lchm. ;i and, indeed, both numbers 
 stand side by side in the same connection : John x. 27 (to, 
 Tpo^aTa . . . cLKovei . . . Koi aKoXovOouaiv iMii), Rev. i. 19 ; 
 (1 Cor. X. 11). In general, however, it is not to be overlooked, 
 that the majority of instances of the use of the Plural occur 
 with animate objects; the majority of instances of the Singular, 
 with inanimate, abstract, and almost always with pronominal, 
 expressions. 
 
 Remark. As an anomaly is to be noticed Rev. ix. 12 Tdf. [so 
 Lchm. Treg. nJ : iSoi kpx^rai €Ti Svo ovai, for oval is Feminine 
 (ij ovai fj jxia). The precedence of the predicate (cf. the following 
 paragraph) may have led to the introduction of the Singular. 
 
 B. §129,4and5; H. §511; C. §570; D.p.400; J. § 392. 
 
 3 Where there are several subjects united by copulative 
 conjunctions, the Predicate usually stands in the Plural 
 when it follows, and the first Pers. is preferred in such cases 
 to the 2d and the 3d : Luke ii. 48 6 TraT-^p aov Kaym i^rjTovfiev 
 ae, 1 Cor. ix. 6. On the other hand, when the Predicate pre- 
 cedes, either a) the Plural is lised, Mark x. 35 ; Luke viii. 
 
 Ill 19; Acts iv. 27 etc., or b) the Singular, the predicate being 
 in form restricted to a single object; and this occurs, too, 
 not only with abstract and impersonal objects, as in Matt. v. 
 18 eaj9 av •KapekOrj 6 ovpavo'i Ka\ r/ yrj, 1 Tim. vi. 4, but even 
 with Persons : John xii. 22 epxerai 'AvBpea<; km, ^i,\i,itwo<} 
 Kal Xeyova-iv tS 'Ii^aov ; cf. i. 35 ; ii. 2, 12 ; xviii. 15 ; xx. 3 ; 
 Matt. xii. 3 ; Luke vi. 3 ; xxii. 14 ; Mark iii. 33 Lchm. [Treg. 
 Tdf.]; Acts xi. 14 ; xxvi. 30 ; Philem. 23. Sometimes the Pre- 
 dicate stands between the subjects, and then it conforms to 
 that which precedes: Luke viii. 22 aiiro^ ive/3r] ek ttXoiov Kal 
 oifjudtfToX ainov, Matt. xxii. 40; John iv. 12; Rev. xxi. 22. 
 
 1 In this passage the harshness of the Plural is essentially abated by the adop- 
 tion (with Tdf. [eds. 2, 7]) of the reading Timoi (standing as it does between 
 TaDra and the verb tTwefiaivov) instead of tviriKm, The adoption of the reading 
 TimiKwn requires the restoration of the Singular [so Treg. Tdf. ed. 8] the more, 
 inasmn«-.h as it is precisely the same Mss. [so N] whieh exhibit both this word and 
 the Sing, (as, on the contrary, others exhibit the Plural and riiTroi), and the Sin- 
 gular follows again immediately afterwards. 
 
5129.] AGREEMENT OF SUBJECT AND PREDICATE. 127 
 
 Remark. Analogous is Acts v. 29 dTroKpt^cls Se Ilerpos koI ol am- 
 oToXoi ilirav, where, notwithstanding the Plur, imav, the Participle is 
 referred to Peter alone as the spokesman in the words that follow, 
 and consequently stands in the Sing. More surprising and harsh, 
 however, are Luke ii. 33 rjv 6 Trarijp airov koX ij /UTyrr/p dav/xd^ovre's and 
 Matt. xvii. 3 S><^6-q avrovs Mwvotjs /cat 'HXt'as avWaXovvTe; /xct' avrov 
 (Eec. wt^Orjo-av), on account of the Participles which immediately follow 
 in the Plural ; of. Mark iii. 31 ([Tdf.] N G D). With these instances 
 may be compared the similar constructions in Greek authors, e.g. 
 Herod. 5, 12 ; Thuc. 4, 37 ; App. B. Civ. 1, 32. 
 
 With disjunctive conjunctions the Singular is used 
 by far the most frequently, as well when the predicate precedes 
 as when it follows ; since the assertion, although it may hold 
 good of the two (or more) members, always applies to the 
 several objects separately, not to both simultaneously or in 
 union : e.g. Gal. i. 8 iav r/fiel'; rj a/yje\.o<; eva/yyeXi^rjTat v/mv, 
 1 Cor. vii. 15 ov SeSovXanai 6 a8eX(j>b^ rj f) c£eK<^rj, Matt. v. 18 ; 
 xii. 25 ; Mark iii. 33 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] ; Luke xiv. 5 ; Bph. v. 5, 
 etc. In Acts xxiii. 9 and similar passages nothing but the 
 Sing, is to be thought of. 
 
 A rare instance of the Plural is Jas. ii. 15 lav Se dScX^os ^ dSeXc^^, 
 yvfjLvol v7rd.p)(iii(Tiv Koi XeiTro/tcvot r^s rpoffirjs, where the Sing, would have 
 caused ambiguity, on account of the difference of sex. 
 
 6. §129, 8; H. §622; C.§502; D. p. 898; J. §381. 
 
 Examples of the usage here spoken of (the Neuter Sing. 4 
 of the predicate adj. when the subject is to be conceived of as 
 tiling, XPVI^^ ^^ ''"') ^^^ found, though rarely, in the N. T. also: 
 Matt. vi. 34 apKerov Ty rjiiepq, r^ Kaxia avTri(;, 2 Cor. ii. 6 Ikuvov 
 . . . 7j inrLTifiia avrrj. 
 
 B. § 129, N. 8 ; H. § 683 c. ; C. § 507 e, : J.i 881, Oba.-3. 
 
 Far more frequently are the Neuters ovSev, jui/Sev used in ref- 5 
 erence to Masc. and Fem. subjects, if they blend with the copula 
 elvac into a single idea : nothing i.e. of no worth, in contrast with 
 Ti eimi (see § 127, 16 p. 114) ; as, 1 Cor. vii. 19 ^ irepirojM,^ ovSiv ia-riv 
 Koi ^ aKpoPva-Tia ovSev icrnv, xiii. 2 ; 2 Cor. xii. 1 1 oiStV ei/At, John viii. 
 54 ; Gal. vi. 3 d yap SoKel tis eivai tl firiSkv u)v. (But Matt, xxiii. 16, 18 
 belongs under § 143, 14 p. 288.) Analogous to this usage is 1 Cor 
 xi. 5 (yjvyf) ev yap icmv kol to air 6 tq e^pr)p,ev7j, and that of 112' 
 TrXeiov, IXttTTov when (quite as in the classics) treated almost like 
 indeclinable word? : Matt. vi. 25 ; Luke xii. 23 7 >j/vxri •wXeidi' iariv 
 
128 AGEEEMENT OF SUBJECT AND PREDICATE. [§ 129 
 
 Trjs rpotji^'s, ix. 13 ovk cictiv ^/aiv irXeiov ^ Trivre aproi, (on the Other 
 hand, the Plural is used Acts xxiii. 13, 21 ; xxv. 6) ; with this compare 
 1 Tim. v. 9 eA.aTTOl' Iriov liiqKOVTa yeyovvia. 
 
 B. § 129, 9; H. § 613; J. §381, Obs. 1. 
 
 Pronouns, when, at the beginning of a clause, they are not 
 only subjects, but refer at the same time to the fol- 
 lowing predicate, are in the ancient languages, as is well 
 known, put in the same gender with the predicate. Of this 
 usage there are a great many examples in the N. T. also: 
 Mark iv. 15 ovroi elcriv ol Trapa tyjv oSoi', Matt. xxii. 38 avrrj 
 icnlv r) /j,eyd\r} ivToXij, Mark xii. 28 ; Luke ii. 2 ; Eom. xi. 15 
 rk rj ■7rp6<;\r]fi-\ln^, el fjirj etc. Eph. i. 18 ; vi. 2 ; Phil. i. 28 tjtks 
 iarlv avroh evBei^c; dTr(oXela<;, 1 Cor. iii. 17 (6 vaosi) o'lTivei 
 eVre vfieK, etc. 
 
 Yet passages are not wanting which appear to approximate to our 
 (German) usage of employing the Neuter in such a case, as 1 Pet. 
 ii. 19 TovTo yap x^^P'^ 6tc., where, however, tovto rather prepares the 
 way for the following clause with el as containing the proper subject 
 for the predicate x°-f"'^ > ^^' ''^^' ^^ where toBto refers back to what 
 precedes. Nevertheless, in both cases the Vulgate translates, in ac- 
 cordance with ancient usage, heec est gratia. Here belong, in par- 
 ticular, a number of passages where a preceding, and generally a 
 foreign, word is interpreted, or even directly translated, 
 by a relative clause beginning with the Neuter o. If the word to be 
 explained is itself a Neuter, as in Col. i. 24 o-<3fta airov, o icrnv r) 
 iKKXrjo-La, the Neuter form of the relative was required by that ; ' and 
 if the predicate of the relative clause is a Neuter, as in Mark xv. 16 
 T^s awXiJs, o icTTiv ■TrpaLTutpiov, Eph. vi. 17 tt/v [.id^aLpav tov jrvEv/ittTOS, 
 o ia-Tiv prjfxa 6eov, such cases may be regarded as instances of the rule 
 laid down § 143, 3 p. 281. But there are passages in which neither 
 of these suppositions is the case and yet the Neuter o is used, — 
 passages, therefore, in which (according to B. § 125, 8, 2) the word 
 to be explained is to be taken merely as such, i.e. as a term desti- 
 tute of gender. We distinguish three cases : a) most frequently the 
 word to be explained is a foreign word and precedes the relative 
 clause, as Matt, xxvii. 33 tottov Xeyo/jLevov Vo\yo6a, 6 Icttlv Kpaviov totto? 
 Xeyofievoi (a harsh combination, for which Mark xv. 22 more 
 classically o co-riv fmOipfi-qvaio iji,iv ov etc.), Mark iii. 17 Boavjjpyes, 
 o eoTtv Dioi Ppovrri's, John i. 42 (Metro-ias), 43 (Kij<^as), ix. 7 (StA.u)dju., 
 
 'On TOV /ivarriplov, '6 iffriv XpurT6s which follows (i. 27 Lchm. [Treg.]) see 
 § 143, 3 p. 281, and on ii. 17 see c) below. 
 
§ 129.] CONSTRUCTIO AD SYNESIN IN THE PREDICATE. 129 
 
 Bee No. 18 p. 21), Acts h 36 (BapvajSas), Heb. vii. 2 (5aA.^) ; b) the 
 case is similar when the foreign word fills the place of the predicate 
 in the relative clause, as Mark sii. 42 Xeirra Svo, o io~nv KoSpavrr/s, 
 John xix. 17 Kpaviov roirov, o (Grsb. and Rec. os) Xeyerai "E/3paio-Ti 
 TokyoOa; c) the term to be explained is a common Greek word 
 (Masc. or Fern.), as Col. iii. 14 ayainq, o iartv cruvSeo-ftos Trjs reXetdnyTos 113 
 (Grsb. Rec. ^w in opposition to the mss. [Sin. 09J), Rev. xxi. 8 
 Xl/jlvti, o io-Tiv 6 OdvaTOi 6 SeuTcpos.^ 
 
 Remark. All that has been said does not apply, of course, to clauses 
 in which the pronouns do not refer directly to the predicate, but, as 
 substitutes for objects previously mentioned, simply constitute the , 
 subject respecting which something is predicated, — and consequently 
 there can be no thought of a change of gender ; as. Acts viii. 10 ovtoi 
 (sc. ^l/juav) IdTOi f) hvva/jiK Tov Oeov, Eph. iv. 15 eis avroVjO? iiTTiv 17 
 Kc^aA.17, XptcTTos, i. 23 etc. ; see other examples 1, a) and c) above, p. 124. 
 
 B. §129, 10; H. §511; C. § 490 sq.; J. §391. 
 
 When there are several subjects, if the predicate is in the 
 Plural the Masc. is preferred to the Pem., as in Luke ii. 33 
 (o •jraTrjp ical jj jJ-rjTqp ^au/ia^oi/re?), 48 (^oSvvcofievoi) , Jas. ii. 
 15 etc. The other case, in which, namely, the adjective etc. 
 refers as respects gender in form to only one of the subjects, 
 occurs especially with attributives: Luke x. 1 eh iracrav 
 TToXtv KM TOTTov, 1 Thcss. V. 23 ; Heb. iii. 6 Lchm. [Treg. Tdf., 
 Sin.] Trjv irappTjcyiav Koi to Kav^ixa . . . ^e^aiav, ix. 9 S&pd re 
 Kol Ovcriai, fir) Bvvdfievai etc. 
 
 CONSTKUOTIO AD SyNESIN IN THE PkEDICATB. 
 B. §129; 11; H. §523; C. §499; D. p. 398sq.; J. § 378. 
 
 The construction known by this name, characteristic as it 8 
 is more or less of all languages, establishes itself especially in 
 
 I Harsher than any of the above instances is the reading Eph. v. 5 Lchm. [T. Tr.] 
 irKeoyeKTTjSj S itrriv iiSw\o\dTp7]Sj and not analogous to them, because no kpfitiveia 
 of the word iT\€oviKTris occurs here. Moreover, since the origin of this reading, 
 which in its complete form only B [now N also] exhibits, may be satisfactorily 
 traced (see Tdf.'s crit. note), the older reading '6s has been restored by Tdf. [eds. 
 2, 7] with reason. Incomparably better accredited is Col. ii. 10 8 ianv ri Ki(paKii, 
 and preferred by Lchm., as being the more difficult reading, to the equally attested 
 8s iariv [N also] ; but exegesis opposes the reference (in that case necessary) of 8 
 to 7r\l5pa)/ia, and the putting of the words ko! eVre iv aiirif ir(TT\ripan4voi in a 
 ]iar3nthesis. On the other hand, in Col. ii. 17 the well-attested reading 3 ea-Tiv, as 
 the more difficult, may be well sustained against the other S ea-rtv [H also], inas- 
 much as all that has been previously mentioned, grouped together under the 
 unifying term 8, is designated as ax lit riiv jneAAdyTav in contrast with the 
 trw/ia XpurroS, [yet Tdf. Treg. prefer Sj. 
 17 
 
130 CONSTEUCTIO AD SYNESIN IN THE PREDICATE. [§ 129. 
 
 the unconstrained popular language, which is averse to gram- 
 matical punctiliousness ; hence examples of it begin with 
 114 Homer, and come down to the latest Greek, the N. T. included. 
 As the subject is rendered familiar enough by the general 
 grammars, examples are subjoined at once; these cannot be 
 omitted here, since (in connection with those catalogued in 
 §§ 123, 7 p. 80 ; 127, 7 p. 105 ; 143, 4 p. 281) they constitute 
 an essential element of the N. T. language. And in order not 
 to distract the attention by too many classes of passages, those 
 in which the construction appears in participial clauses, 
 whether predicative or attributive, are included. 
 
 a) The predicate stands in the Plural, instead of the Singular, 
 with collectives : most frequently with the terms o;)(Xos and TrXfjOo's, 
 e.g. John vii. 49 6 o;(\os ovtos . . . iirdpaTOL i'unv, xii. 12 ; Matt. xxi. 8 ; 
 Mark ix. 15 ; Luke vi. 19 Tdf. [Treg. n], ix. 12 ; xix. 37 ; xxiii. 1 ; 
 Acts V. 16; xxi. 36; Eev. vii. 9; also with a-rpaTid Luke ii. 13 
 (TrkrjOoi (TTpaTias ... aivovvTtjiv), with oiKia (family) 1 Cor. xvi. 15; 
 Eev. xix. 1, and the collective limitations to rpiTov t&v m/dpumuiv, twv 
 ttXoluiv Eev. ix. 18 ; viii. 9. Both Sing, and Plur. united : John vi. 2 
 ■riKoX.ov6ii o;(A.o9 . . . on iOeiopovv, xii. 9, 18 ; Luke i. 21 ^i/ 6 Xaos Trpoa- 
 SoKoJi/ . . . Ktti eOavp.a^ov, Acts xv. 12, and in the Genitive Abs. (cf. tov 
 a-ToXov . . . 7r\e6vTu>v in Demosth. Mid. § 45) Mark viii. 1 ttoXXov oxXov 
 
 OCTOS Kol p,yj i)(6vTlliV. 
 
 b) The predicate follows the natural gender of the subject. 
 Of this • the examples are most numerous in the Apocalypse, in ac- 
 cordance with the style of the author (see § 123, 7 p. 80). Thus iv. 
 1 ; ix. 13 ; xi. 15 (Jjidvyj . . . Ae'ywv, (fxjival . . . Xeyovres as the author 
 thought at once, instead of the voice, of the angel uttering it, vii. 4 
 ;;(i\idS€s ia-(j>payi<Tp.ivoi (§ 123 p. 78), V. 12 x'^"^8'S • • • Xeyovres (cf. 
 § 144, 13 a) p. 298), iv. 8 Tdf. [2, 7, 8, Treg.; cf. Sin.] C^a, tv Koff ev 
 iXuiv ... X ey 1/ T € s (cf. GrjpLov § 1 23 p. 80) , xix. 1 4 crTpaTeu/iara . . . ivSe- 
 Su/xtVoi, xvii. 3 Lchm. [Tdf, Sin.] (see § 123 p. 80). Examples from 
 other authors are, Mark xiii. 14 (respecting which see p. 81 above), 
 Luke X. 13 Tvpio koI SiSroj/t . . . irdXai av . . . KaO-qjJiivoi, (Grsb. and Eec. 
 -vai) ixerevo-qcrav, Acts xxviii. 26 (Aeyojv) Tdf. [Treg. so Cod. Sin.], 
 Gal. i. 23 (see 14 below, p. 133), Eph. iv. 17, 18 ra iOvr] . . . Io-kotw- 
 IxivoL. (But in 1 Cor. xii. 2 dTrayo/xcvoi does not depend immediately 
 upon idvrj, and in Mark ix. 20 tScui/ does not refer to to wev/m, see 
 § 144, 13 c) p. 299.) 
 
 In almost all the passages cited under a) and b) it will be found 
 that the employment of the natural gender and number imparts to 
 the expression a much more unconstrained character than would have 
 resulted from strict grammatical correctness. 
 
§ 129.] ADVERBS IN LIEU OF THE PREDICATE. 131 
 
 B. §129, N. 12; H. §514 b.; C. §B01; D. p. 399; J. §478. 
 
 Instances of the Plural with eKa'a-ro's and the like are Acts ii. 6 
 ^Kovov eis 2(cacrTos, xi. 29, etc. The first hand reading of cod. Vat. in 
 Acts iv. 32 oiiSi eh eXcyov (Sin. and others eKeyev) is probably not a 
 clerical error. ■ Similarly 1 Cor. iv. 6 iva fjirj eh iirep rov evb's cj>vo-iova-&e 
 Kara rov erepov. 
 
 B. §129, N. 14; H. § 518 d. ; C. § 499 b. ; D. p. 399; J. §390d. 
 
 The employment of the so-called Pluralis Majestaticus is everywhere 10 
 common in the Epistles, agreeably to the general character of their 
 contents, as Rom. i. 5 ; 2 Cor. i. 8 sqq. ; Heb. xiii. 18, etc. "Whether 
 the 1st Pers. Plur. occurring here and there in the Qospels in the 
 discourses of Jesus is to be understood in the same way, is disputed ; 
 see the interpreters on Matt. iii. 15; John iii. 11. On the plural in 
 such passages as Mark iv. 30 (nVi ofnoKoa-ayfiev etc.) see § 139, 4 p. 209. 
 
 Adverbs in Lieu op the Pkedicate. 115 
 
 B. §129, 13; C. §706; D. p.454; J. §375, 3. 
 
 The power of adverbs to be employed as pi'edicative limita- U 
 tions is far greater in the Greek language than, for example, 
 in the Latin, owing to the readiness with which adverbs in 
 Greek, without further change of form, can be turned into 
 adjectives and substantives (§ 125, 10 p. 95). 
 
 In the N. T. the following adverbs among others are found so used: 
 iyyv9, e.g. 6 Ktttpos //.ov, to Trdcr)(a., to prj/Jia eyyvs ecrriv Matt. xxvi. 
 18; Rom. X. 8 (a quotn.), eyyvTepov xiii. 11; irX-qo-Lov, e.g. 
 Luke X. 29, 36 Tts eo-Tiv iJ,ov TrXrjcriov who is my neighbor^ (without 
 the Art. according to § 124, 6 p. 87) ; Troppto, Luke xiv. 32 avrov 
 iroppio ovTos ; o i! T (1) s , Matt. i. 1 8 ij -yeveo-ts oirtDs rjv, xxiv. 27, 37 ; xix. 
 10 el ovToii earlv rj ama (if the case is so), Rom. iv. 18 (a quotn.) 
 ovTws ecTTai to crTrep/ia crov (viz. as the stars of heaven), 1 Pet. ii. 15, 
 etc. In this way is to be explained also the phrase to elvai to- a 6eio 
 Phil. ii. 6 ; on the adverbial use of lo-a see Pape. 
 
 B. §129,14; H. §667; C. §586; D. §409; J. §652. 
 
 The addition of the personal pronouns iyo), etc., to the verb 12 
 takes place, as usual, wherever emphasis, and in particular 
 sensible antithesis to other subjects, renders tliem necessary ; 
 see, for example, 1 Cor. xv. 36 aii o aTreipei<;, ov ^cooTroieiTat etc. 
 (cf. § 151, 17 p. 388), but subsequently on repetition (vs. 37) 
 merely o o-Tretpet?, John vii. 34, 36 ; i. 19, 22, etc. 
 
 Yet it is not to be overlooked that, — agreeably to what has been 
 elsewhere brought forward respecting the immoderate use of the pro- 
 
132 UNEXPRESSED SUBJECT. [§12a 
 
 nouns, and in particular relative to avros as subject (see § 127, 9 p. 107, 
 26 p. 118, § 180, 2 p. 142), — the personal pronouns were frequently 
 employed where no reason of importance is obvious, and a 
 native Greek, at least, would certainly have contented himself siroply 
 with the form of the verb. We mistake the character of the N. T. 
 language, and should misapprehend many passages, should we attempt 
 in this matter to apply the classic standard and assume in all 
 cases a rhetorical reason for the use of the pronoun, — a procedure 
 which would do injustice to the homely and simple narrative style, 
 especially of the Gospels. Compare on this point such passages as 
 Matt. xiv. 16 ; x. 16 ; Mark vi. 37 ; xiv. 30 ; Rom. ii. 3 ; Gal. ii. 19 ; 
 2 Cor. xi. 29, etc., or look up the numerous passages in which John 
 avails himself of the personal pronoun as the subject of a finite verb. 
 Accordingly we encounter here also, as we did above for instance in 
 the case of the Possessives (airov etc. § 127, 26 p. 118), a continual 
 variation in the documents ; as some of the scribes, accustomed to the 
 usage of the N. T., often added the pronouns, while others proceeded 
 more according to classic principles and omitted the pronouns where 
 they seemed to them superfluous. See, for example, simply in ref- 
 erence to iyiii the various readings on Mark i. 2 ; Lukrf vii. 27 ; John 
 V. 36 ; vi. 40 ; xii. 50 ; xvi. 17 ; xvii. 19 ; xviii. 37, etc. 
 
 116 B. § 129, N. 15; H. § 506; C. § 394; D. p. 372; J. § 167, 3. 
 
 13 An instance of apposition to the omitted pronoun implied in the 
 verbal ending, is 1 Pet. v. 1 TrapaKaXS 6 (ru/ATrpecr/SvTepos Koi fiAprw. 
 This occurs most commonly with appositives in the fc'm of a participle 
 (taking the place of a relative clause), examples of rtriiich are given 
 § 144, 9 c) p. 295. 
 
 Unexpressed Subject (Germ. man,i'ta.). 
 B. §129,15; J. §§373.893. 
 
 14 Although the language of the N. T. is lar more liberal in 
 its use of pronouns than the ordinary literary language (see 
 12 above), yet frequently, when there is an abrupt change 
 of the subject in a minor clause (co-ordinate or subordinate), 
 there is found, as in the classics, no corresponding pronoun, 
 ■where the connection is evident ; e.g. Mark i. 27 rot? irvevixacriv 
 iirndcraeb, kol vTraKovovatv avrS sc. to, irvevfiara, 1 Cor. vii. 36 
 ovx afiaprdvei, <ya/j,eLT(ocrav (var. ja^ieLToi), where any more 
 precise specification would have been heavy, in lact intolerable. 
 
 Thus Luke, relying on the inevitable suggdstions or the context, 
 felt no hesitation in writing, xv. 15 eKoXX-qbr/ eA tZv TrokiTutv, koj. 
 tTreix-ipev (sc. 6 TroXinjs) airov eis Toiis aypov',,, JL.CM< vi. 6 oSs i(rTrj(Tav 
 
§129.1 UNEXPRESSED SUBJECT. 133 
 
 cvunriov twv aTrotrroXuv, koX . . . eTTiOrjKav (sc. ol air6(TToXoi) avTots tois 
 X«pa9. Luke iv. 39 ; xvii. 2 are still more simple and obvious ; but 
 Acts xvii. 2 Kara TO eiw^os rm IlaijXo) flirrjXOev sc. 6 IlaDXos is harsh, and 
 hardly Greek, on account of the subject of the leading clause being 
 supplied from a subordinate adjunct ; and Acts viii. 7 ttoXXHv tZv 
 i)(6vTiiiv Trvevfj.aTa axaOapra, ySouivxa (sC. to. Trve.vfi.a.ra) (jxovfj /ieyaXj; 
 ktqpxovTo, where the subject of the leading clause is identical with the 
 object of the preceding participial clause (on the other reading, Lchm. 
 [Tdf. Treg. cods Sin.], see p. 380), is anacoluthic, or to be explained by 
 the blending of two constructions (§ 151, 10 p. 383). Examples from 
 Paul's Epistles, are, Gal. i. 23 ^/ajjv ayi/ooujuo'os Ttus eKKXijcriais . . . , 
 juoVov Se ciKovovTcs yjo-av viz. the members of the Jewish churches (see 
 b) under 8 p. 130 above) ; 1 Cor. vii. 17 ei /a-^, kKauria ws i/jiipia-iv 6 
 Kvpioi .... ouTOJs 7r€pt7raT€tT<i) sc l/caoTos (on the hyperbaton see § 151, 
 18 p. 889). See, besides, other similar examples §' 151, 10 p. 388.' 
 
 B. § 129, N. 16 ; J. §§ .378. 893. 117 
 
 Sometimes the unexpressed subject of a clause is also not to 15 
 be fouud in what precedes, although a definite subject was 
 in the writer's mind. In such cases, as a rule it (a) may 
 either be gathered from the necessary connection, or (b) is 
 assumed to be suf3Bciently known to the readers, e.g. in quota- 
 tions, which in fact are so often given by hint and in a frag- 
 mentary form. 
 
 Examples of (a) are Heb. xi. 12 8io koI a4> era? eyevv-^Oricrav viz. 
 the posterity of Abraham, Bom. ix. 11 /iijTru yevvriOivTuiv /j-rjSi irpa^dv- 
 
 1 1 John V. 16 4dv tis iSrj ([so &{] ; Lchm. e*5^) Thif &b€\<l>hj/ avTou afiaprdvojfTa . . . , 
 oiT'^o-ei, Kcit Sci(ret ain^ fm^^' etc. is a case hard to decide. Winer (p. 427 5th ed. 
 [cf. 7th ed. p. 523 (487) J) holds the interpretation of deWette and others (who, com- 
 paring Jas. V. 14sqq., would retain the same subject) to be harsh, which is by no 
 means the case, since it has'the grammatical sequence in its favor. It is opposed, 
 however, by the use of the word StS6vai in the sense of acquire, procure, a circum- 
 stance which early induced ancient expositors to assume a new subject, viz. God. 
 And the parallel passage from James, notwithstanding its similarity, is not quite 
 in point : in the first place, because there the predicate is aiaa, and secondly, 
 because the causal relation between the two terms iiriaTpe\jiai and aSicrai is different 
 from that between oiTJ)<rai and Sovpai. For the iracrai is included in the ^irHTTpe'ifai 
 and the iimrTpetfias is thereby at the same time a iriiaas. The other explanation 
 of the passage in John (that of Winer, Liicke, etc.) is manifestly the harsher, not 
 so much on account of the rapid change of subject, as because the subject under- 
 stood (S ee6s) is also previously to be supplied as the object of aiT^o-ei. Neverthe- 
 less, taking into consideration the usage given above, and in particular vs. 14 
 {iin Ti alTii/iida . ■ ■ aKovet rifiSiy), it seems to be the more probable; and the identity 
 of the verbal forms {ah-ijffsi . .. Sdoret Mey. [i e. Huther]) is no obstacle in the 
 way of this construction ; cf. Acts vi. 6 etc. above. 
 
 On the double Dative (aur^i, aimpTdvovai) see § 133, 13 p. 179. 
 
134 UNEXPRESSED SUBJECT. [§i29. 
 
 To)v Ti viz. Esau and Jacob (vs. 13), Luke xvi. 4 tva Siiiovrai fi,i cis 
 Tovis oiKovs ai™v viz. the debtors subsequently mentioned, Joha 
 xii. 5 Sto. Tt TO jjuvpov ovK iirpoB-q ... (cat eSd^?; TrTa>xot<; viz. the( proceeds, 
 Eom. iv. 3, 22 ; Gal. iii. 6 ; Jas. ii. 23 (a quotation) eTrt'o-Tevo-ci' 'A^paafi. 
 T<3 6eia, Koi IXoyiaQr) avTU €is 8tKato(riJV7;v SC. to Trio-TtiJetv. Hence it 
 harmonizes perfectly with the genius of the N. T. language to supply 
 in John vii. 51 as subject of cIkouotj, not i/d/ios itself, but 'he who is 
 administering the law,' and in Heb. x. 38 the general term man educed 
 from StKaios (according to § 151, 23 d) p. 392). This latter passage 
 Bleek takes otherwise ; cf. also Hab. ii. 4, where the order of the 
 clauses is reversed. 
 
 Examples of (b) : John vi. 31 (a quotation) apTov ek rcni ovpavov 
 tScDKEi/ avTol% <f>ay€'iv, 2 Cor. ix. 9 (a quotation) ia-KopTrura', tSiaKev tois 
 ■irivrj(Tiv " etc. 
 
 B. §129, 16; H. §604c.; C. §571; D. §881b.; J. §373, 2. 3. 
 
 16 The case is different with apparently impersonal predicates, 
 such as aaXirl^ei, etc., with which it is usual to supply a verbal 
 concrete, as aaX7ri<yKT7]<;, etc. : 1 Cor. xv. 52 a-oKirlaei y,ap, xal 
 oi veicpoi avaaTTjo^ovTai. 
 
 Quite in accordance with this usage, the predicates Xe'yei or (^ijcrii/ 
 are often found in the N. T. in quotations, 6 ^eds or even merely r) 
 ypa4>V being always to be supplied as subject ; as, 1 Cor. vi. 16 ; 2 Cor. 
 vi. 2; Gal. iii. 16; Eph. iv. 8 ; v. 14 ; Heb. viii. 5; iv, 3 (uprjKev). 
 Those subjects are also expressed, as in Gal. iv. 30 ; 1 Tim. v. 18, or 
 to be supplied from the preceding context, as in Heb. i. 6 sqq. Sim- 
 ilarly with eiSoKijcrev in Col. i. 19 6 Oeo's is to be supplied, which is 
 expressed in 1 Cor. i. 21 ; Gal. i. 15 (doubtful). Respecting dpfa- 
 
 ixivov (Luke xxiv. 47) see § 150, 7 p. 874. 
 
 ff 
 
 B. §129, 17; H. §504; C. §5n(d); D. §881b.; J. §373. 
 
 17 Among the examples of this section respecting an unexpressed and 
 118 indefinite subject (where in English we use it e.g. Trpoarnxawa, iaeiae, 
 
 IhqKuiai) may be reckoned Acts ii. 3 &tpdr)a-av avToii Sia/icpt^d/ievai 
 yXSxTcrai wo'ci Trvpb's, koI iKaO laev icf) eva 'iKatnov airSiv, where the 
 subject of eKaOiaev (Trvp or ykw^o-a or TrvcCjito) has been designedly 
 left obscure, on account of the mysterious and wonderful nature of the 
 occurrence. More difficult grammatically is Luke xxiv. 21 TptTTjv 
 TttiJTijv rip,ipav ayei cn^jji,epov, a(ji ov ravra cyeVeTO. The insertion of 
 a definite personal subject viz. 'Irja-ovs (Meyer) cannot be justified by 
 later usage ; for in this, Siyeiv when connected with an object), as 
 rjfjiipav, CTos etc., either has the special signification to celebrate,^ solem- 
 nize, a day (Dion. Hal. de comp. verb, in.), or is an imitation of the 
 Latin use of agere annum (i.q. natum esse, to he old, Galen) ; see 
 
§129.] UNEXPRESSED SUBJECT. 135 
 
 Stephanus sub voce. Moreover, the assumption of a personal subject 
 would only be allowable in case the following relative clause (a.<f> o5, 
 etc.) also contained the same subject, or at least continued the nar- 
 ration of occurrences relating to the same subject. Still more strange 
 does it seem to supply 'Icrpa'^\ as subject from the preceding tov 'la-pa-qX. 
 (Bornem.). The majority of interpreters (deWette, etc.) ha^re ac- 
 cordingly taken the expression ayei t^v yjfjLipav as impersonal (pretty 
 nearly equivalent to ■^ -q/jt-epa aycrai), which not only gives the simplest 
 and most natural meaning, but agrees best with the following relative 
 clause, which is likewise without a personal subject. Although this 
 supposition seems no less than the other to have the ordinary 
 usage against it, so that we must regard the expression in this sense 
 as a avai prjOiv, yet it finds its analogue in the use (likewise of isolated 
 occurrence) of airixei (Mark xiv. 41) it is enough, more closely it 
 is completed, all is over} All these terms {ayu, aniyf^i, iKaOurev) are, 
 however, to be carefully distinguished from the strict impersonals of 
 the following section, since they stand out of all connection with verbal 
 constructions. The meaning of ayei in the passage before us is given 
 unequivocally in the , ancient versions : tertius dies est, agitur. Cf. 
 farther on this subject § 130, 4 p. 144. 
 
 B. §129, 18; H. §494; C. §5716.; D. §381o.; J. § 373, Oba. 1. 
 
 To the ordinary impersonal verbs (Sci, Trperra, etc.) a few must be 18 
 added which are manifestly imitations of the Hebrew idiom or bor- 
 rowed from the language of the Septuagint. Foremost among these 
 are the common koI lyivero or tyivero 8e' (''rt^^),on the varied construc- 
 tion of which see § 141, 6 p. 276, and the phrase dj/ejSr/ ettI KupSlav 
 (ab }>S rbs see Gesenius) 1 Cor. ii. 9 (cf. Luke xxiv. 38), which is 
 used quit< after the manner of impersonal verbs in Acts vii. 23 ave^rj 
 im Tr}V KapBlav airov iincrKiipa(TOai etc. 
 
 B. § 129, 19 ; H. § 504 c. ; 0. § 571 c. ; J. § 373, 7. 
 
 The common modes of expressing the indefinite personal 19 
 subject (English one, Germ, man') are by means of the 3d 
 Pei's. Plur. Act. or Mid. (even Luke xii. 20 is to be taken thus) 
 and the 3d Pers. Sing. Pass., without any sensible difference ; 
 hence botli modes of expression are united in a single sentence 
 in Luke xiL 48 iroXii ^rjTrjdijaeTai -Trap' avrov . . . xal Trepia- lljj 
 croTepov aiTijaovcnv ainov. 
 
 That the 3d Pers. Sing, of the Active was thus used, the in- 
 
 1 See on this passage my detailed exposition in the Stud. u. Krit. for 1858 3d 
 Heft, and cf. the similar use of irepie'xet (equir. to jrepie'xeToi) in 1 Pet. ii. 6 
 Tdf. [Treg. cod. Sin.]; see p. 144 note. 
 
l^Q OMISSION OF THE COPULA. [§ 129. 
 
 definite tI; being omitted (of. B. § 129, N. 17), can reasonably be held 
 only of 2 Cor. x. 10, in case we read c^Tjo-tv with Eec, Grsb., Tdf 
 [Treg., n] etc. : ai jncv eiruTToXal, ^rjalv, /Japetai etc. ((jfcacrtv certainly 
 looks like a correction, and the translation of the Vulgate inquiunt 
 like an interpretation, — suggested as it was by common usage). 
 That with both these verbs, however, this usage, in parenthesis, is by 
 no means unknown to Greek and Latin authors is seen e.g. in Demosth. 
 c. Aristocr. p. 150 ; Plut. Mor. p. 119 F. ; Liv. 6. 40 ; Gic. de fin". 1. 2 ; 
 4. 24, etc. 
 
 Other passages, which are referred to this head, see under 15 a) 
 p. 133 sq. 
 
 Omission op the Copula. 
 B. §129, 20 and N. 18; H. § 508a.; C. §572; D. § 419; J. § 376. 
 
 20 The omission of the copula in the 3d Pers. Sing, of the 
 Indicative is very common in all parts of the N. T., in fact it 
 may be said, particularly in the Pauline Epistles, to be pre- 
 ferred often throughout entire paragraphs. See a great mul- 
 titude of such passages in Winer 584 (544). 
 
 This omission takes place 1) in aphorisms, sententious propositions, 
 and proverbial phrases, as tticttos o 6eds, oi -iravTw/ rj Trt'o-rts, tv a-Zfia 
 KoX €V TTve.viJ.a, €19 Kvpio^, TrdvTa KaOapa tols KadapoL's, tois Se aTrto-Tois 
 oiSci' KaOapov ; 2) in questions, and exclamations in an interrogative 
 form, as rt <toi ovoixa; tl's rj o><f>i\eia t-^s irepiTOfjiyjs ; ttov ovv rj Kav^crK; 
 rp (TKOTOS Trocroj/ (Matt. vi. 23), cos ave^epevvrjra to. Kpifiwra avTov, etc. 
 
 3) in the customary formula m {cm) ovop-a or ovo/jLa avrw (avrov), as 
 Mark xiv. 32 ^uipCov ov to ovo/ia (Lchm. m oVo/ua) Te6crrjp.avei, Luke i. 
 6 "ywiy, Kol TO 6vop,a avTrjs EXio-a/JeT, 26, 27 ; ii. 25 ; viii. 41 ; xxiv. 
 13, 18, etc., also when unconnected or parenthetic, as John i. 6 av- 
 Opuyiro's, ovo/xa avrio 'Iwawq's, iii. 1 avBpunro'i, NiKoS-iyjuos ovop,a avria ; 
 
 4) especially with certain predicates (as indeed in Greek authors, see 
 B. § 129, N. 18; D. § 419 (b) ; J. § 376 c.), — for instance, with the 
 notions necessary, possible, impossible with an Infinitive following, or 
 to be supplied : Rom. xiii. 5 5io avayKt] vTrorda-o-ea-Bai, Heb. ix. 16, 23 ; 
 vi. 4, 18 iu ots aSvvaTov ipivcraxrOai Oiov, X. 4; xi. 6, 19 Tdf. [cod. Sin.; 
 Treg.], Gal. iv. 15 €i Svi/ardv sc. rjv, with hard: Acts xxvi. 14 uKkrjpov 
 (TO'. Tpb's Ktvrpa XaxTt^eiv; with righteous: 2 Thess. i. 6 e'lTrep hiKaiov 
 avTairoSovvai, etc. 5) before the Relative when the demonstrative 
 correlate is also dropped, as fiaKapios avrjp, ov ov p-ri XoyicnqTaL Kuptos 
 afjMpTiav Rom. iv. 8 ; Jas. i. 12, etc. ; on this cf. § 151, 24 c) p. 395. 
 
 That no such rules as these, however, are invariable is obvious. 
 Respecting other phrases, in part established formulas, such as &fjX.ov 
 OTL, tva Ti, Tt oTt, fJLLKpbv oo-Qv ocTov, Ke(fjd\aLov Si, etc., see the references 
 in the Index, and § 151, IV. Ellipsis, pp. 390 sqq. 
 
§ 129.1 OMISSION OF THE COPULA. 137 
 
 Of the other Persons, that most frequently omitted is the 21 
 3d Pers. Plural ela-lv, as in 1 Cor. xvi. 9; Rom. iv. 7, etc., 120 
 particularly in the course of such statements and deductions 
 as (according to the preceding paragraph) are generally de- 
 livered with the omission of the copula ; as, Rom. iv. 14 ; xi. 
 16 ; 1 Cor. i. 26 ; xiii. 8 ; Heb. ii. 11, etc. 
 
 Iij the first and second Persons the omission more rarely 
 occurs, — as a rule, only when the person is expressly designated by 
 means of the personal pronoun, as in John xiv. 11 Trio-Tevere on e-yu ev 
 T<3 irarpl /cat 6 ■jra.Trjp ev ifioi, Mark xii. 26 eyo) 6 ^eos 'Afipad/x, 2 Cor. x. 
 7 Kaduis avros Xpio-ToC, ouTcos Koi ^/xets, John xvii. 23 iyi) iv avTois icai 
 (TV iv e/Aoi ; sometimes also where the person is readily suggested by 
 the context, and in other respects no ambiguity arises, as 2 Cor. xi. 6 
 ei 8e KoX iSitoTTj? tw Xdyu) (sc. £tjU.t) dW* ov rg yvwcrei, Rev. XV. 4 Tts oi 
 fxri (ftoPtjOr), Kvpie • . . . on iJ,6vo% ocrtos sc. ci. ; 
 
 Also when the construction requires the Subjunctive, or 22 
 the Optative (in wishes), or the Imperative, we find the 
 copula omitted ; yet here again but rarely. 
 
 The Subjunctive: 2 Cor. viii. 13 oi yap Iva aWois avco-ts, vp2v 
 8£ 6Xltj/is sc. ■^ or yivrjTai which is subsequently used vs. 14; viii. 11 
 OTCos, KaOtxTrep fj irpo6vp,ia tov OfXtw, ovtoxs to eTTiTeXecrat €k tov ex*'"* 
 The Optative is omitted, particularly in certain very current 
 phrases which have become standing formulas for expressing a wish, 
 as tA.€(JS (Tot sc. Oeos Matt. xvi. 22, elp-qvy) v/uv, rj ^aP'S fxeO v/xtov, 6 6eos 
 r^s ilpT^vi]^ /iera TrdvTtov v/jmv, etc. The Imperative, particularly 
 in connection with preceding imperatives or demands, so that the form 
 to be supplied is necessarily suggested, as Col. iv. 6 (TreptTraTetre . . .), 
 6 Xoyos vp-mv TravTore iv ^dpiTi, Heb. xiii. 4, 5 ; Luke i. 28 ; Rom. xii. 
 9 sqq. Respecting p.ijSei' a-oi etc., see 23 below. 
 
 Remark. Whether in the doxologies (Rom. xi. 36; xvi. 25 sq.; 
 Gal. i. 5 ; Jude 25 ; Rev. i. 6, etc.) and in the opening formulas, as 
 tvXoyjjTos o ^£os KOI iraTrjp 2 Cor. i. 3 ; Eph. i. 3 ; 1 Pet. i. 3 (of the 
 song of praise in Matt. xxi. 9), we are to supply etiy or Icttw, or the 
 Indicative eo-TiV, may be doubtful. Yet in view of Rom. i. 25 ; 2 Cor. 
 xi. 31 and particularly 1 Pet. iv. 11 (cf. the various readings on Matt. 
 vi. 13) the Indicative ia-rCv decidedly deserves the preference. 
 
 Strictly speaking, every case of the omission and insertion 23 
 of a verbal idea ought to be treated in the chapter concerning 
 Ellipsis. Since, however, a sharp discrimination in terms the 
 supply of which is left solely to our own judgment is quite 
 impossible, it seems to be expedient to treat in this place also 
 
 18 
 
138 NOMINATIVE AKD VOCATIVE. [§129 a, 
 
 of the case where the verb to be supplied is a general term, 
 closely allied to the copula, as trapeivai,, <yevia-6ai, iXOelv, ai d 
 the like. In every instance it will be found that the siipply 
 of the absent verbal idea (expressed as it is by us in various 
 ways) is facilitated by other parts of the sentence, in particular 
 121 by a Dative (as the verb's regimen) or a relation indicated 
 by Prepositions. 
 
 Here belongs primarily the Hebraistic formula (2 Chron. xxxv. 21 ; 
 2 Sam. xvi. 10 ; xix. 22), which, however, is not unknown to the 
 Greeks (Arr. Epict. 1,1,16, etc.), that occurs in the Gospels : ti e/u.oi km 
 a-ol, Matt. viii. 29 ; Mark i. 24 ; v. 7 ; Luke iv. 34 ; viii. 28 ; John ii. 4 
 [A.V. what have I to do with thee] so Luther, (cf. Sch weigh, on Herod. 
 6. 33), — even when the connection requires an Imperative, as Matt. 
 xxvii. 19 firjSlv crol Kai t(3 SiKam iKSLvia. Also the phrase (quite classic) 
 Ti Trpos (re ; tI vpo's rjjj.a.'s ; Lat. quid hoc ad me [A.V. what is that to 
 thee] Luther was gehts dich an (Herm. de ellip. p. Ill), Matt, xxvii. 4 ; 
 John xxi. 22, 23; similarly 1 Cor. v. 12 rt yap jjlol toiis eio> Kpivav ; 
 Other phrases with the Dative are 1 Cor. vi. 13 m ppuifj.a.Ta ry 
 KoiAi'a Koi rj KoikCa tois Ppwjxjxa-iv (exist for etc.), Rom. xi. 11 .t(3 avrSsv 
 TrapaTTTiifiMTi rj (rwrtjpia rots tdvta-iv (has come), iv. 13 ou yap Sia vo/jlov 
 ■^ iTvayyiXLa tw AjSpadfX. 
 
 In connection with Prepositions: Heb. vi. 8 ijs to reXos e« 
 Kavo'LV, 1 Cor. XV. 21 Si av^puiTrov OdvaTO? Kal Si' dvdpunrov avdaracn'S 
 ViKpSiv, Acts X. 15 tjiumj irpo's avrov sc. cyivtro (cf. vs. 13), 1 Cor. iv. 20 
 ovK iv koyta ^ /3a(nX.€ia tov &€ov dXA." Iv Swdfiei, 2 Cor. iv. 1 5 ra Trdvra 
 Si ifjLas, Rom. iv. 9 6 /AaKapicr/x.6s oStos iin t^i/ TreptTO/A^i/ etc. (refer toy. 
 Matt, xxvii. 25 to at/ia auToB li^ ■^fi.S.i, Acta xviii. 6 iirl ttjv ke^oX^i' 
 vju.5v sc. yevea-0(o or eXdoi (cf. Matt, xxiii. 35). And with an Adverb 
 instead: Heb. X. 18 ottou atftecrL^ tovtiov, ovkIti Trpoa'<j>opa Trepl af{,apTLas- 
 "Without any adjunct : 1 Cor. xv. 40 koi a-wfrnra iirovpdvia Kal crw/iaTa 
 cTTtycia (i.e. there are, after the analogy of i. 26, etc.). 
 
 The numerous passages in which the predicate is only to be 
 supplied from the preceding context, are not noticed further here. 
 
 With this whole section compare § 151, IV. pp. 390 sq. 
 
 the cases. 
 
 Nominative and Vocative. 
 
 B. § 129 a. ; H. §§ 541-43 ; C. § 401 ; J. §§ 476 sqq. 
 
 [ The instances in which the Nominative stands instead of 
 other Cases are chiefly occasioned by Anacoluthon (Noms. 
 Absol.) or by loose construction, and will accordingly be 
 treated of elsewhere. 
 
 [1 Cf. p. 394.] 
 
§ 129 a.] NOMINATIVE AND VOCATIVE. I39 
 
 Respecting the Nom. in appoaitional adjuncts see § 123, 5 p. 78 ; — 
 for the Ace. in instances of two Ace, § 131,8 p. 151 ; — in participial 
 clauses and instances of Nom. Absol. in general, § 144, 4sqq. p. 291, 
 13 p. 298 ; § 151, 4sqq. p. 379, and numerous examples in § 151, 
 10 p. 388. 
 
 The interjection ISov and (especially in John) even 'iSe, like 2 
 the Latin ecce and en, are followed by a Nominative. (The 
 frequent occurrence of these interjections, both in narration 
 and in argument, is probably derivable not merely from the 
 0. T. alone, but from the popular language in general ; hence 
 they appear more and more frequently in the later period, 122 
 after Christ.) See numerous examples of ISov particularly in 
 Matt., Luke, and the Apocalypse ; of i'Se with a Nom. following, 
 in Mark iii. 34 Tdf. [Treg. cod. Sin. J, xvi. 6 ; John i. 29, 36, 
 48; xix. 5 [ISov Tdf. Treg. cod. Sin.], 14, 26, 27, — in these 
 passages, therefore, it is an interjection ; on the other hand, 
 when connected with the Ace. it is the ordinary Imperative of 
 elSov, as in John xx. 27. 
 
 Peculiar to the Apocalypse is the frequent combination elSov xal 
 ISov likewise followed by a Nom., as in iv. 1 ; vi. 2, 5, etc. Yet the 
 author sometimes allows himself the syntactic liberty of letting both 
 cases (Nom. and Ace.) follow interchangeably, so that eJSov again 
 governs the Ace. although the Nom. has preceded; as, xiv. 14 elSov 
 Kol iSoii ve^eXij XevK'q . . . koi Ka£rjix.ivov etc. Cf. iv. 1-4, and vii. 9 
 which is spoken of in § 123, 5 p. 78 above. 
 
 The Nominative stands quite absolutely and as an incom- 5 
 plete parenthesis, where it is employed as a closer limita- 
 tion of the predicate, — hence adverbially. 
 
 It is so used in temporal limitations, in Luke ix. 28 lyiviro fiira 
 Tovs \6yav<s toutods, (Iktci ■^/j.fpai oktw, koI ■jrapaXa^oiv etc.. Matt. xv. 32 
 cTrXayp^t^o/tai . . . , on 57817 ij/xe/Mii rpets ■n-poa'/jiivovcriv ; in modal lim- 
 itations, Mark vi. 40 avinea-ov Trpacriai irpacriat (see p. 30) ; iti vs. 39 
 the construction of Ace. with Infin. requires us to take crv[A,Tr6cna crujiwro'- 
 crta as Accusative (cf. Luke ix. 14). "With this use of the Nom. we 
 may connect the (Johannean) parenthesis ovofia aurcS spoken of § 129, 
 20, 3) p. 136, for which other writers employ either the Accusative 
 adjunct rovvop-a (§ 131, 12 p. 153), or most commonly the Dative 
 ovofiaTL followed by that case of the proper name which the construc- 
 tion requires, as Acts x. 1 av^p rts ovo/ian Kopv^Xtos, Matt, xxvii. 32 
 €vpov avOpunrov 6v6p,wn 2t/Utovo, Acts XXvii. 1 tKarovTap^fg ovo/j/arl 
 lot'Xifa), etc. 
 
140 NOMINATIVE AND VOCATIVE. [§129 a. 
 
 Respecting a, second Nom. and the periphrasis with ets for the 
 predicate-Nom. see in connection with § 131, 7 p. 150. 
 ' The remark (B. § 129 a. 1) that the Vocative in classic 
 Greek commonly takes the interjection & before it, does not 
 hold in the N. T. On the contrary, not only is this sign of 
 the Voc. in itself rare (used only sixteen times in all), but in 
 most of these instances it is more than a mere sign of the 
 Voc, inasmuch as the expression generally has an emphatic 
 character, and so contains rather an exclamation than a 
 simple address. 
 
 For example, Matt. xvii. 17 (and parall. pass. Mark ix. 19; Luke 
 ix. 41) S ycvco, ama-Tos, Rom. xi. 33 S /Sa^os ttXovtov, Luke xxiv. 25; 
 Gal. iii. 1 w avorjTOL, Acts xiii. 10 iS n-X^pTjs iravro? SdXou. As a simple 
 address in classic style it occurs, strictly speaking, only in the Acts 
 (i. 1; xviii. 14; xxvii. 21), for even 1 Tim. vi. 20; Matt. xv. 28; 
 Rom. ii. 1, 3 ; Jas. ii. 20 are not without a certain emphatic accent. 
 
 5 Even when the Vocative has its own fofm, that of the Nom- 
 inative is not unfrequently chosen (as in the classics). The 
 
 123 Voc. of the 2d declension in e is still found most frequently, 
 as Keve avdpanre, SovKe irovrjpi, vie, Kvpie (this last word always 
 in this form if it has not the article, see below), even dee fiov 
 (cf. p. 12). In the 3d declension, with the exception perhaps 
 of those nouns which are often used in the Vocative, as Trdrep, 
 ^acriXev, the Nominative is ordinarily used ; in Luke xii. 20, 
 also, and 1 Cor. xv. 36, most of the MSS. [Sin. also] give aippwv 
 instead oi acppov (Grsb.). 
 
 The language of the N. T., like that of the Old, differs, however, 
 essentially from the ordinary literary language in this: that the 
 Vocative, besides taking the form of the Nom., very often takes the 
 Article besides (6, ot, etc.);' cf. 6 p. 141. Examples abound: 
 Matt. xi. 26 vai, 6 irar^p, Mark v. 41 to Kopdcnov, tyeipe (although the 
 preceding Aramaic word, raXifla, has no article), Luke xviii. 11, 13 o 
 6cos, iXacr6y]Ti p,oi, John xx. 28 6 Kupios p,ov koI 6 6eos p.ov, Rom. viii. 15 
 d/3;Sa, iraTrjp, Col. iii. 19 ot avSpes, ayanS/Ti, Jas. V. 1 otye vvv, oi 
 trXovarioi, KXavcrare, Rev. xv. 3 SiKaiai ai oSoi (tov, 6 /SacrtXeiis twv idvtov. 
 Also in quotations : Acts xiii. 41 ; Heb. i. 8, 9 ; x. 7, etc. 
 
 1 That this use is not a mere Hebraism (cf. Gesen. Lehrgeb. p. 654; Gr. § 107, 
 Rem. 2) but rooted in the popular and colloquial language of the Greeks 
 is expressly recognized by Bernhardy (Syntax p. 67), who cites in support of it 
 many examples from Aristophanes and the Dialogues of Plato (Ar. Pac. 466 ' 
 Plat. Symp. p. 218 B). 
 
§ 130.J THE OBLIQUE CASES IN GENERAL. 141 
 
 B. §129a. 2; H. §533; C. §401, 3; D. §407; J. §§ 467. 476. 
 
 A number of the passages in which the Nom. with the article seems 6 
 to be used as Voc. may also be suitably taken as those in which 
 adjuncts in apposition with the Voc, and even additions sub- 
 joined with Kai, take the form of the Nom. with the article, 
 according to well-known laws of the Greek language. This is the 
 case when particular persons are expressly designated : Luke xi. 39 
 v/tcis oi ^apuTOLoi, Rom. xiv. 4 oru tis el, 6 Kpivoiv ; ii. 1 etc. ; even if 
 the preceding pronoun stands in a different case — an irregularity 
 sufficiently explained by § 123, 5 p. 78: Luke vi. 25 oval v/jiiv, oi 
 e/iTTtTrXijcr/ieVot. In the case of adjuncts -with Kai: Acts xiii. 16 
 ai/Spes la-parjXlrai Kai ol ^oySov/iiei/ot etc., 26 ; Rev. xviii. 20 ovpave koI 
 ot ayioi. In particular we may refer to this head (in accordance 
 with § 144, 9 d) p. 295) participial adjuncts with the Impera- 
 tive, which frequently occur in the N. T., as Matt. vii. 23 airoxiapuTt 
 01 £pya^o/A€voi, xxvii. 40 ; Mark xv. 29 ; Gal. iv. 21, 27 (a quotn.), 
 Eph. V. 14; Jas. iv. 13; Rev. xii. 12; xvi. 5. 
 
 The Oblique Cases in General. 
 B. §130, 1-4; C. §§397sq.; D. §§148. 469; J. §§ 471 sq. 
 
 The settlement of the fundamental signification of the 1 
 oblique cases forms a leading subject of general Greek gram- 
 mar, and in particular of philosophic researches in syntax. 
 But to institute such investigations in a special grammar like 
 the present would not only be a departure from its aim, but 124 
 would lead to but meagre or even incorrect results, since the 
 language of the N. T. is already far removed from the primary 
 and formative period of the Greek tongue. In this particular 
 the process of development in the language must be regarded 
 as completed, and the results attained in the general grammar 
 as respects prose usage must accordingly be assumed as already 
 established, and valid in the main also as respects the N. T. 
 language. Since, however, with the decline of a nation a 
 decline is wont as a rule to appear in its language also, we 
 shall naturally find, in the writings of the N. T. as well as of 
 the later writers generally, the syntactic combinations, and 
 consequently the cases also, no longer employed with such 
 precision and clearness of reference as prevailed in the earlier 
 language. Hence we shall see many verbs construed with dif- 
 ferent cases from those used in the earlier language ; and 
 in particular, the more analytic and decomposed language of 
 
142 THE OBLIQUE CASES IN GENERAL. [§ 130. 
 
 later writers will often use prepositions with their cases, 
 where the earlier language was satisfied with the simple cases. 
 Instances of this sort, as matters belonging strictly to the 
 province of N." T. grammar, we shall naturally have to treat 
 with special prominence in the course of the following para- 
 graph's ; yet completeness of specification, as respects the cases 
 and other constructions, in reference to every individual 
 verb, it does not fall (as has been already intimated in the 
 preface) within the limits of N. T. grammar to give. 
 
 B. § 130, 5 and N. 1; H. § 605; J. §§ 893. 894. 
 
 2 Such an essential departure, as has been alluded to, from 
 the ordinary usage, we encounter at once in the application 
 of the general principle that the ancient languages often neg- 
 lect to designate the object (immediate or remote), where it 
 is already sufficiently clear from the connection ; and in par- 
 ticular, are wont to express it but once if two verbs in any 
 way connected have an object in common, — thereby 
 avoiding a multitude of those pronouns that often so encum- 
 ber modern languages. 
 
 The language of the N. T., however, especially that of Luke and 
 of the Ep. to the Heb., is not so far removed from the ordinary Greek 
 as not to avail itself of this advantage ; as may be seen from a 
 considerable number of examples : Matt. xiii. 44 Orjcravp^, ov evpuiv 
 avdpioTTOs fKpvij/fv, xxvii. 65 acr<t>aiXicracr6£ sc. tov Td<jiOV, Mark vi. 5 
 tl25 appwaroK iTrideis rots ;)(etpas iOepaTreva-ev, Luke xiv. 4 cTriXa/Sofitvos 
 idaaro avrov Kat direXvcFiv, John X. 29 6 Trarrip, os Si8u)Kev /noi SC. avrd, 
 Acts xiii. 3 iviBivTei ras )(elpas avrois dTreKvcrav, Eph. V. 11 /i^ crvyKoi- 
 vwviLTe Tois Ipyots Toi? aKapTTOK, fj,aWov Se kol eXey^cTe, Heb. xi. 19 ex 
 vfKpuiv iyeipeiv Suvaros 6 6eos, 1 Cor. X. 9 ; 1 Tim. vi. 2, etc. 
 
 But far more frequently than is the case even in still later Greek 
 prose writers, we find (in accordance with the great preference for 
 .pronominal constructions often mentioned already) the object expressed 
 by a pronoun, especially airos ; so ^that here, too, the influence of 
 Oriental usage is unmistakable, (cf. § 127, 9 sqq. p. 107 sq., 26 p. 118, 
 § 129, 12 p. 131 sq.) ; as, Mark x. 16 erayKaXio-d/xcvos avrd, rt^ek ras 
 ^etpas ei"' avra KarevXayei avrd [Tdf. Treg. ivayi<. avr. KareuXoyet Tt6«? 
 Tas x^P^s «"■' <''^™ after codd. Sin. Vat.; cf. § 127, 26 p. 119], Luke 
 xvi. 2 i^oiv^o-as aiiTOV eiTrev avTW, Matt, xviii. 2 jrpouKaXccra/iti/os wai&LOV 
 ka-Tijaev avro ev jnc'cro). (But in John XV. 2 there are other reasons for 
 the repetition by means of the pron. avro, see § 151, 4 p. 380.) Col. 
 ii. 13 i'/aSs vocpovs ovras . . . crwe^ioovoirjcrev vfias. 
 
§ 130.] REPETITION OF THE OBJECT. I43 
 
 To the same origin is to be attributed the repetition of the same 
 object in several clauses connected by conjunctions (cf. e.g. Josh, xxiii. 
 2 ; xxiv. 20 ; Neh. ix. 34 ; 1 Mace. i. 6, etc.), as Luke xxiv. 60 c^^yaytr 
 avTovi . . . KOI evAd-yrjo-ev avTov<;, cf. Matt. Sxii. 37 (and its parallel 
 Mark xii. 30), Rev. ix. 21, etc. ; also the un-Greek constructions 
 in which to the Participle, with and without the art., the pronoun 
 aird? (not oSros or cKeti/os, on which see § 144, 21 p. 306) is Subjoined 
 in the same case quite without emphasis,' — as Matt. v. 40 tw 
 6i\ovTi croi KpiOrjvai . . . ai^es airu Koi ri Lfjiariov, iv. 16; Rev. vi. 4 ; 
 Jas. iv. 17 elSoTL KaXbv iroitii' Koi /jltj TroLovvn, a/tapi-ia avrS ecTTtv, — yes, 
 even when it has already been used with the Participle, is repeated 
 again (cf. Col. ii. 13 above), as Matt. xxvi. 71 i^eXdovra airbv w tov 
 ■jniXSiva, ctSev avTOV aXKr], viii. 23 i/i^avTi aircS €ts to irXoiov, rjKoXovdri(rav 
 a-uTU), and ajso frequently elsewhere in Tdf.'s text [eds. 2, 7] cf. Matt. 
 viii. 1,5, 28 ; xxi. 23 ; Mark ix. 28, etc. ; ^ and lastly, the practice 
 (also anomalous), in constructions with the Gen. absol. and sometimes 
 also with the Ace. and Infin., of expressing the subject by means of a 
 pronoun, although it has already been given in the leading clause ; see 
 on this in its place § 141, 4 p. 274, and § 145, 1 sqq. p. 314 sq. 
 
 Remark. In Matt. xxi. 41 KaKovs Kawfis diroAeo-et avTovi the pronoun 3 
 auTov's was formerly held to be a superfluous addition. Modern ex- 120 
 egesis, however, has acknowledged ovtous to be the true object, so 
 that KaKovs is the word which ought to be held to be the rhetorical 
 addition, made out of fondness for paronomasia, just as was often 
 the case in Greek authors ; as, Lucian, Pise. Ka/coiis kokuIs airorplxf/oixev. 
 That the Latin versions and church fathers seem to take no notice of 
 avTovs is solely owing to the impossibility of reproducing both words 
 in their foreign idiom (as in our own also) ; and to take avTov<s par- 
 titively quite contradicts the sense of the passage. 
 
 1 Isolated instances of this use adduced from Greek authors do not suffice to 
 stamp it as an ordinary Greek construction. Where we find something similar 
 occasionally even in later Greek writers, other causes (generally rhetorical) as 
 perspicuity, emphasis, the separation by parentheses of words belonging together, 
 etc., have occasioned the repetition of the pronoun; whereas the frequent 
 occurrence of this construction in the N. T., considering its small extent, warrants 
 us in inferring a formal usage. 
 
 2 We see from this that the assumption that all such cases as these last named 
 are examples of the so-called Dative absolute (\ 145, 5 p. 316) is quite 
 erroneous. On the contrary, the dative is everywhere governed by the verb of the 
 leading clause. The abnormal addition of ainif etc. in the leading clause led to 
 this false assumption, and probably also often in ancient times to the alteration 
 (of the Mss.) into the G«n. absol., which in fact is itself not according to rule. Cf. 
 besides § 145, 2 p. 315. [Tdf. ed. 8 adopts the Gen. Abs. (with Treg. Lcfhra.) in 
 all except the first.] 
 
144 OMISSION OF THE OBJECT. [§ 130. 
 
 B. §130, N. 2; H. §684; C. §577; D. §430; J. §369. 
 
 The remark that verbs originally transitive, by the frequent 
 omission of an easily supplied object qr of a reflexive pronoun, 
 -assume in the Active voice a neuter signification, is so well 
 established and applies so commonly to all languages, that it 
 seems to be quite suflicient simply to give a list here of a 
 number of verbs so used in the N. T. ; the usage is so wide- 
 spread that we must desist from attempting to give a com- 
 plete collection of the passages where it occurs, as well as 
 from referring to analogous instances of the use of the same 
 verbs by other writers. We find the following used thus 
 intransitively : 
 
 ayeiv, particularly in the summons aye, aytafiev (on ayei in Luke 
 xxiv. 21 see § 129, 17 p. 134), — together with the compounds 
 {/■n-dyeiv (very frequent, especially in the Gospels, where it seems to 
 take the place of the wanting Uvai, see § 137, 10a) p. 204), Trapdyeiv 
 to pass hy, pass on, i-ravayeLv to return or merely to put o^(Matt. 
 xxi. 18; Luke v. 3, 4), hidynv to pass, ■n-epidyeiv to go about (Acts 
 xiii. 11), in this sense it then (according to the analogy of those Middle 
 verbs that, having' acquired a new, transitive, sense, take an object 
 of their own, cf. B. § 135, 5) takes after it a new object, viz. of the 
 place, as KoJ/nas, oXrjv t^i/ raXiXaiW (Mark vi. 6 etc.), irpodyeiv to 
 go before (Mark xi. 9), likewise with a new object when used in this 
 sense — a use of this verb peculiar to the N. T., and particularly to 
 Matt, and Mark, as Trpo^ycv avTovi went before them Matt. ii. 9 etc. 
 (so TTpoipx^o-daj, with the Ace. of a person Mark vi. 33 ; Luke xxii. 
 47, perhaps after the Latin) ; 
 
 c^eiv, for example KaXois, ecrxarcos, (as in colloquial Latin bene habet); 
 thus exetv Kara tivo's means to have something against any one, be angry 
 with him, Eev. ii. 4, 20 ; cf. Hermse pastor, Mandatum 2 (Sin.), — 
 together with the compounds airiy^nv to be at a distance (on diri^u 
 sufficit see § 129, 17 p. 135), iTrixt.iv to stay, both literally (Acts xix. 
 22) and in a tropical sense, sc. vow, to direct the mind to someihirig 
 (Acts iii. 5 ; 1 Tim. iv. 16), in which sense Trpoa-ex^iv especially is 
 current, v tt e p e'x e i v proeesse, valere, and with a new object sitperare, 
 prcBStare, evex*"' *" watch, be on the watch for any one, insidiari, 
 Tr€pte'x€i it runs, stands written 1 Pet. ii. 6 Tdf. [Treg.],' Iv yaa-rpl 
 cxeii' to be with child; 
 
 ^ TlepUxei must be taken intransitively in this passage whether we read with 
 Rec. and others [cod. Sin. also' eV (t^) ypa<l>f], or with Lchm. ^ ypatfifi (sc. oUtms 
 or tSiiSi rhv Tp6roy, cf. 2 Mace ix. 18 ; xi. 16 ; 1 Mace. xv. 2 ; Joseph. Antt. 12, 
 4, 10, etc.). To which of these two readings we ought to give the preference it is 
 
§ 130.] OMISSION OF THE OBJECT. IJ.5 
 
 PaWiiv to storm against, rush upon, of the wind (Acts xxvii. 14), 127 
 and the compounds ImPoXKav of the waves (Mark iv. 37), in the 
 signification to fall to Luke xv. 12,' Trpo^dWeiv to sprout (Luke 
 xxi. 30), o-u/i.j8aA.A.eiv in various seases (see the lexicons) ; 
 
 KkCveiv to incline, together with the compound eKKXivav; 
 
 (TTpc^eii/ to turn (away) one's self (Acts vii. 42) together with 
 the compounds dvaa-rpeipeLv, Ittio-t pit^nv; 
 
 aTToppLTTTtiv to tkrow one's self off ; 
 
 irapahovvai to offer, to present itself^ (Mark iv. 29) ; 
 
 cvio-xvetv transitive and intransitive in Luke (see Wahl) ; 
 
 dvaXijetv to go away, depart, also to return i.e break up, rise 
 from, a meal (Luke xii. 36) in order to go home (oikoSe ijura. Scra-vov 
 dvaXvav Plut. Tib. Gracch. 14) ; Kaxakvuv to put up as at an inn 
 (common in later writers in this sense) ; — not to mention many- 
 others, whose intransitive signification has always been in use side by 
 side with the transitive, as av^dvav (p. 54), crireviav, TrpoKowrew, Siarpi- 
 ^eiv, reXeuTav, etc., or whose object was almost uniformly omitted be- 
 cause involved in the signification of the verb, as dvolyuv, di/aKdjuTTTctv, 
 yajxeLV, etc. ^ 
 
 In other cases the omission of the object is not a result of the usage i 
 by virtue of which the verb comprises the objective relation in itself, 
 
 hard to decide, since the balance of authority is in favor of the latter, but other 
 and internal considerations favor the former. See my Essay in the Stud. u. Krit. 
 for 1858 p. 509. 
 
 ^ In Mark xiv. 72 ko! iirt0a\iiv iKXaiev, the verb iiri^aWeiv has received the 
 most diverse interpretations ; see the commentaries. The interpretation common 
 formerly (Luther, he began to weep [Tyndale, Cranmer, A.V. margin]) is supported, 
 indeed, by the ancient versions, the variant ^pfaro K\alfiv, and the gloss of Suidas 
 4Tr4$aKe jjp^aro ; but is both too weak for the tenor of the passage, and also phil- 
 ologically inaccurate, since eVe'^SaAe, as even the addition {dirsx^ipTia-ev) in Suidas 
 shows, may mean conatus est, but not coepit. It would harmonize best with the 
 connection, considering the parallel narratives {iKKavtriv iriKpas Matt. xxvi. 75 ; 
 Luke xxii. 62), to take diri^ahdv adverbially in the sense of vTrfpBa\)i.6vTus (cf. 
 the Hebrew 5''\l?r' in 1 Sam. xx. 41 ; see Gesen. under S'l?) ; but such a use 
 cannot be proved. The most satisfactory interpretation philologically is that 
 eirijSoA.iii' (sc."t!i>' vovv) is equivalent to tmoiiaas considering i.e. taking to heart, in 
 case it is designed to intensify the preceding avc/iniia-eri. See a number of very 
 appropriate precedents for this signification in Wetstein in loc. 
 
 2 The 2d Aor. wapaSovvai, in analogy with other (syncopated) 2d Aor. forms, is 
 found in the Sept. also with this purely intransitive meaning, e.g. Isa. xlvii. 3. 
 , Hence in 1 Pet. ii. 23 {■jrdffx<^i^ ovk iyirelXei, TrapfSiSov Se tijJ KpivovTt SiKatus), it 
 appears to be not only more in accordance with the sense but with philology also 
 to supply with the Imperfect (irapeSlSov) an object like rh eaurov (or Kpiaiv) 
 from the context (with Luther et al.), not iavrSv (deWette). The passage cited 
 by deWotte, Josh. xi. 19 (not ii. 19), runs quite differenfy in the Vat. ms. On 
 irapaSMiiat in the sense of permitto, also with the objec (a thing) omitted, see 
 Btephanus (Paris ed.) sub vpce p. 247. 
 19 
 
146 THE ACCUSATIVE. [§ 181. 
 
 but the objects are easily supplied from the context: as e.g. 
 aipeiv sc. avKvpav Acts xxvii. 13, (t k awT €Lv sc. yijv Luke xiii. 8, 
 a^avi'^eiv, kXctttciv SC. ^pij/xara Matt. vi. 19, Siopvcra eiv SC 
 Tci^^os Matt. vi. 19, pfi^ov (sc. <ftiDvrjv see Wetst.) koX fiorjo-ov Gal. iv. 
 27, (XT pSicrov acaiiTw sc. kXiVjjv Acts ix. 34, Kara Ke<jia\^'s 
 128 'X*"" ^''' KaXu/iyiia or simply ti 1 Cor. xi. 4, Iroi/ia^ctv sc. KaTdkvp,a 
 Luke ix. 52, crvXXapftdveiv and cruAX. ti/ yacrTpi sc. diw Luke 
 i. 24, 31 ; or the objects to be supplied are altogether general 
 terms, as d-n- oor c'XXe tv, Tre/iTretv SC. Ttms, (Ik ou eras sc, TavTO, 
 crap^ Kai alp,a ovK aTreKdXvijjiv crot viz. that of which I am speaking 
 Matt. xvi. 17 ; or are intentionally left in the dark by the writer 
 on account of the variety of notions it is possible to supply, and the 
 choice among them is referred to the reader, as Jas. iv. 2, 3 ; Col. ii. 21. 
 Respecting the omission of the object (or of the whole) with parti- 
 tive statements, see § 132, 6 p. 158. 
 
 The AccnSATivE. 
 B. §131,2; H. §644a.: C. §472f.; D. §464; J. § 544. 
 
 1 Among the verbs which by governing the Ace. depart as a 
 rule from English and German usage, the following in the 
 N. T. deserve special mention : 
 
 Those signifying to speak well or ill (defame) : KaXfis, KaKu>% 
 Xeyeiv, as usually with the Ace, but only used by Luke in vi. 26; Acts 
 xxiii. 5 (quotn.). The common verb for defame is /J X a o- ^i; /a eiv, like- 
 wise used with the Ace, as well of the person Matt, xxvii. 39 (or instead 
 ovop.a Jas. ii. 7 ; 8d^a? Jude 8) as of the thing Mark iii. 28, sometimes 
 also with ek Mark iii. 29 ; Luke xii. 10, with iv 2 Pet. ii. 12 iv ots 
 ayvoovcTiv jSXao-c^ij/ioCi/Tcs (see § 143, 10 p. 287), which, however, des- 
 ignates rather the sphere within which the evil speaking occurs. 
 Respecting ovetSi^etv, Karapaadai, see § 133, 9 p. 177.; to do well: 
 
 iv and KaXS)'; wouiv with the Dat. : Luke vi. 27 ; Mark xiv. 7 Lchm. 
 [Treg.J (yet cf. Tdf. ed. 7 in loc), Matt. v. 44 Grsb. The use of 
 TTotetv with the Ace. of a word expressing time, as ypovov, rpeU pr/vas, 
 iviavTov etc. for our spend (commorari) is peculiar, e.g. Acts xv. 33 ; 
 xviii. 23; XX. 3; 2 Cor. xi. 25; Jas. iv. 13, (elsewhere also in later 
 writers); to flee: (j>evy€iv in its strict sense (to run away) is 
 construed only with am (in Rev. xx. 11 hebraistically (xtto Trpoo-tojrou), 
 particularly with persons, air airov, a.cf>' vpSiv, and with abstracts 
 instead, as aTro Kpiuiw'i, opyfji, etSwXoXaTpeias, Luke iii. 7 ; Matt, xxiii. 
 33 ; 1 Cor. X. 14 (purely local, Mark xvi. 8) ; in the signification to 
 avoid, abstain from, with the Ace. (of the thing) e.g. ravra, rrjv wop- 
 veiav, etc. Heb. xi. 34 (c^uyov a-Topara /iap^atpijs) is an exceptidn. The 
 compound cV^cuyctv takes only the Ace. or is used absolutely, see 
 
§ 131.] THE ACCUSATIVE. 147 
 
 Wahl, (cK purely local in Acts xix. 16) ; on airo(j)€vyeLv see § 132, 5 p. 
 158; to swear: o/jivvfiv, with tl^e Ace. only in- Jas. v. 12; else- 
 
 where with a preposition, and after the example of the Hebrew (of. 
 Gesen. under sac) most frequently by far with iv, sometimes with Kara 
 and the Gen. Heb. vi. 13, 16, with cts (after a preceding eV, cf. § 147 
 under eh and iv) Matt. v. 34 sq. 'OpKi^av and ivopKi^uv (1 Thess. v. 
 27) to adjure, always with two Aces., see Wahl; on the other hand, 
 f^opKL^iiv with Kara Matt. xxvi. 63. Cf. § 151, 24 b) p. 394. 
 
 Remark. With vmav the objective limitation is connected once 
 by EK — quite unique, yet not so surprising in the language of the 
 Apoc. abounding as it does in solecisms — (as it were, fo win the 
 victory/ over, Lat. victoriam ferre ex) : Eev. xv. 2 rois viKtui/ras Ik tov 
 Otjpiov, Vulg. qui vicerunt hestiam. 
 
 B. §131, N.'S; H. §544c.; C. §472b.; J. § 489, Obs. 2. 
 
 On the construction of verbs expressing an emotion of the mind 2 
 see § 133, 23 p. 185. Only those are connected with the Ace. of the 129 
 person, which, like IKeelv, olKTeipew; are pure transitives. On tvSoKelv 
 with the Ace. see as above. 
 
 B. §131N. 4; H. §764b.; C. §598 a.; J. § 669, 1. 
 
 The Impersonal Sei (and Beov IutCv Acts xix. 36) is followed only 3 
 by the Ace. and Infin. or, in general sayings, by the Infin. alone. Cf. 
 § 132, 12 p. 164. Xp'^ occurs but once, likewise with the Infin.: 
 Jas. iii. 10. 
 
 B. §131, 3; H. §544; C. §577; D. §430; J. §359. 
 
 To the verbs whose signification is originally or predom- 4 
 inantly intransitive, but which are rendered transitive by the 
 addition of an object, belong, among others from the N.T., 
 the following : /ladrjTeveLv to be a disciple (verbs in evco formed 
 from nouns and expressing the state or action of their 
 primitives,!?. § 119, 3 a.), rtvd Matt, xxviii. 19 etc., dpian^eveiv 
 to hold a triumph, rivd (Plutarch) Col. ii. 15 ; 2 Cor. ii. 14 ; 
 also i/j.Tropeveadai riva 2 Pet. ii. 3, ireivav, Siyfrav SiaaioavvTjv 
 Matt. v. 6, 6\iylrei,<i fie iievovcriv (me manenf) Acts xx. 23 — 
 according to a later and rather poetic use of the word. 
 
 On the other hand, /cXatetv and TrevOeiv are found but once 
 with the Ace. of the object (Matt. ii. 18; 2 Cor. xii. 21), elsewhere 
 always with im and the Ace. or the Dat. see § 1 47 p. 336 sq. ; irpocr- 
 Kvvilv is joined to the Dative uniformly by Paul, and predominantly 
 by the other writers (or to Iviimiov Tivog § 133, 3 p. 172) ; in the 
 Apocalypse it is construed with both the Dat. and the Ace. (as 
 iu the Septuagint) without the slightest difference. Its synonym 
 
148 THE ACCUSATIVE. [§ 131 
 
 yovvTreTe2v is always followed by the Ace. (or e/iirpociOiv) ; euay- 
 yeXi^ecrOai is connected indiscriminately now with the Dat., now with 
 the Ace, of the person (see more below, nos. 5, 6) ; hence in the 
 Passive wtuixoI iva.yyeXit,ovTaL Matt. xi. 5; Luke xti. 16; Heb. iv. 
 2, 6, etc., (the Act. cvayyeXi^etv occurs only in the Apocalypse). 
 
 B. § 131, 4; H. §547; C. §477; D. § 466; J. § 548, 2. 
 
 5 The construction by which an intransitive verb takes the 
 Ace. of its kindred abstract noun (/xa^iji' /j,dxea6at, v^pi^etv 
 vl3piv, etc.) rendered more definite by an adjunct, is not only 
 current in the N.T., but, — fostered as it was by the analogous 
 Hebrew usage (see Gesen. Lehrg. p. 809 sq. [Gr. §135, Rem. 
 1.]) and consequently by the Sept. also, — was taken up eagerly 
 and even extended. 
 
 Th'js we find the following constructions used, and with the re- 
 quisite closer limitation : a-ufetv av$r]cnv, ajxapTdvuv ajxapTiav, Bavfi.a.tfiiv 
 BavjjM, ojj,o\oyuv o/xoXoyiW, Kpicriv Kpiveiv, cTTpaTevetrdai arrpaTuav, ojyuivL- 
 ^eo-^ai dymi/a, ^aipuv )(a.pdv, <^d/3ov (also tttoijo-iv 1 Pet. iii. 6) <j>o^ei<T6ai ; 
 and in tlie Passive /SaTrncr/xa /3airTia-6^vai Markx. 38 etc., ivBeSviii- 
 vo's ivBvfia yd/jiov Matt. xxii. 11, Kavfian^ea-dai, KavpLa fxeya Rev. xvi. 9, — 
 where /SaTrTto-jita, a/8vfjia, Kav/xa are the Accusatives of the object 
 retained in the change of the verb to the Pass. (Mid.) ; see B. § 134, 
 N. 2. 
 
 Different from the above are those expressions in which the Ac- 
 cusative takes the place of a simple object, and therefore the closer 
 limitation is either wanting, or at least unnecessary, grammatically 
 considered, (as in the Homeric Krepea Knpu^uv, etc.) ; thus StSovai 
 Sofiara, ai)(p.aX.<jiTeviiv aixixaXuxriav ducere captivos (after Ps. Ixvii. 19), 
 fiapTvpiiv p.apTVpiav, StSaCTKCtv SiSao-KaXtas, tvayyiXiov fvayyeXuTacrBai, 
 130 iScii' opa/jLa, Stari^eo-^at BiaBiqKrjv, rj^vXdcrcreiv <J3vXaKd<;, cnreipuv (nropov 
 (see still other examples in 6 below, and respecting Seii' S^a-jjid's see 
 7 p. 150). The difference between these constructions and the pre- 
 ceding is plain from this, that when the verb is changed into the 
 Passive, the Accusative, as the natural object, passes into the subject 
 Nominative, as Acts xvi. 9 opafia t^ liavXai 3)<f>6r), Mark xv. 26 ^ 
 iinypai^ri rjv iTnyeypap.fiivrj, Gal. i. 1 1 to evayyiXLov to ciayyeXicrOkv vir' 
 ip.ov ; and in this way is to be explained 2 Cor. i. 1 1 iva to iii ^/xSs 
 )(dpLcrp.a . . . tvxapio'Trjdfj, 
 
 A further extension of this general usage is afforded not only by 
 the phrases (current elsewhere also) IXBtlv. rip.ipai oSov, Sepeiv TroXXas 
 8C. TrXriyd<; (§ 134, 6 p. 189) and moreover in several of the examples 
 of the double Accusative which follow in 6 below, but also in such 
 Relative constructions as John xvii. 26; Eph. ii. 4 dyd-irrp/ rn 
 
§ 131.] THE ACCUSATIVE. 149 
 
 ^yainjo-as /xe (cf. 6 sub fin.), Jude 15 irepl tSv ipyu)v ao-cjScias S>v yjcrl- 
 ^Tjaav (see § 143, 11 p. 287), Rom. vi. 10 o yu^ iire-Oaviv, Ty-a/Mapriif 
 Sjridavev o SI ^rj, t,fj ™ 6eS (i.e. mortem, vitam suam), Gal. ii. 20 o 8e 
 (i.q. T'^v ^la^v ^v) vvv ^S> Iv crapKt etc. 
 
 B. §131,5; H. §563; C. § 480; D. §465; J. §582sq. 
 
 Deviations from the construction of the double Accusa- ( 
 tive (with the verbs given in the grammars, cf. J. § 583) are 
 either rare or are founded in the analogy of common usage. 
 
 Thus StSdo-KEtv is always joined with two Aces, (on Heb. v. 12 
 see § 14.0, 13 p. 268) except in Rev. ii. 14 eStSao-Kev tu BaXax ftaXav 
 etc. (ci'. Ev. Nicod. 16, 2; Thom. 4, 2) ; this exception either follows 
 Hebrew precedent (cf. Job vi. 24, etc., and GeSen. under "pa), or, as is 
 more probable, is due to the circumstance that SiBdo-Kew here has 
 more the signification of a-v/jLJBcwX.evea', irapaiveiv (see deWette). The 
 adjunct iv ■n-dcry a-o<}>Ca, Col. i. 28; iii. 16 does not denote the object 
 but the mode of teaching, cf. i. 9 ; Kpv-n-reiv a.ud aTroKpvirTciv 
 are used with the Ace. of the nearer and am with the G.en. of the 
 more remote object, Matt. xi. 26 c/cpui/'ag ravra dn-o croi^aiv, Luke x. 
 21, etc., hebraistically otto npoa-utwov tivos Rev. vi. 16, drr o(^&aA./AG» 
 crov Luke xix. 42 (cf § 146, 1 p. 820) ; d^aipetv and a<t>ai- 
 peio-Oal TL a-iro tivos (according to § 182, 5 p. 157) Luke x. 42; 
 xvi. 3, etc. ; likewise aiTtiv and d tt a t t e i v ti dTro rtvos Matt. xx. 
 20; Luke vi. 30; xii. 20. But constructions like aireii/ tl Trap a 
 6eov, di^aipcti/ tivC ti, iTrepiOTrjaai nva Trepl tov pij/iaTos are perfectly 
 regular; Troteiv is found with two Aces, according to the rule 
 only in Matt, xxvii. 22 rt ovv Trotijcro) 'Irjo-ovv, Mark xv. 12 Lchm. Treg. 
 Tt OiXere iroLrja-o) tov fiacriKia rmv lovSatW (also according to the other 
 reading [ffOHjcroj ov Aeyere etc. Tdf. cod. Sin.], see § 127, 5 p. 105), else- 
 where always with the Dative of the person — Matt. xxi. 40 ; Luke 
 XX. 15 ; Acts ix. 13, etc. (in many passages the Dative would have 
 been used, too, in ordinary prose, e.g. Mark vii. 12; x. 36, 51, etc.), 
 or a Preposition instead, as Matt. xvii. 12 i-iroirjo-av iv airw o<Ta 
 ^diXtjcrav (cf Mark ix. 13), John xv. 21 ravra Travra Trotijo-outrtv «is 
 vjLias (Grsb. vp-iv). Cf further the double Accusative in 10 p. 152. 
 The following are more or less peculiar to the N. T.: TrepifiaXXetv 
 Tivd Tl (in the classics commonly construed otherwise, see Dind. in 
 Steph. Thes. sub voce), as John xix. 2 t/taTioi/ irop^vpovv TrepUjSaXov 
 aiiTov, cf. Luke xxiii. 11 var. (but rivt Tt in xix. 43 [where Tdf. 
 (with n) now reads irape/j.^aXovcnv']) ; and in combination with the 
 construction mentioned in 5 p. 148: TroTt^eiv tlvo. ydXa, TroT-qpiov 
 Mark ix. 41; 1 Cor. iii. 2, <j>opTL^ttv to/o. ^opTia Luke xi. 46, 
 j^pieii/ Tivu eA.atoi' dyoXXtacreus Heb. i. 9 (quotn.) and tyxP'^"' tovis 131 
 
150 THE ACCUSATIVE. [§ 131. 
 
 I 
 
 o<^SaA./xoi)s KoXkovpiov Rev. iii. 18, aywrrav a.ya.-7rqv two. (see 5 p. 148 sq.), 
 EvayyiXi^^a-OaL also is found once with two Aces, according to 
 later usage (see Pape's Lex.) in Acts xiii. 32 — (a passage which is not 
 to be explained by § 151, 1 p. 376), but elsewhere always, if attended 
 by two nouns or pronouns as objects, with the Dat. of the Pers. and 
 the Ace. of the thing announced ; as, Luke i. 1 9 ; Acts viii. S5 ; 
 2 Cor. xi. 7, etc. Respecting opKi^eiv see above, 1 p. 147.' 
 On the constiaction with the Passive see § 134, 5 p. 188. 
 
 B.§131,6; H.§556; C.§480; D. §465; J. §§375,6; 625. 
 
 With verbs denoting to make or hold/or anything, and those 
 of kindred signification, we find, besides the common con- 
 struction of two Accusatives, the combination tip a et? ti 
 after the example of the Hebrew (Gesen. Lebrg. p. 814) or 
 the Scptuagint. Uouelv, and also KaOiardvai,, Tidevai, have, 
 indeed, in the N. T. regularly two Aces., but in the 0. T. 
 commonly eh : Gen. xii. 2 ironjcra ere et? edvo's fiiya, Ezek. iv. 
 9 ; 2 Chron. xi. 22 KareaTTjaev et? dp^ovra ^A^od, Deut. xxviii. 
 13, etc. In analogy with these examples are the following : 
 Acts xiii. 22 rp/etpev top /iavelB aiiTOK et? ^aaiXea, vii. 21 
 dve9pe>\raT0 avTov eavry eh vlov, xiii. 47 reOeiKo, ae eh (pw 
 edv&v (after Isa. xlix. 6 Alex.), Matt. xxi. 46 eh ■7rpo(p'^Tr]v 
 avTov d-)(pv (cf. vs. 26). In Matt. xiii. 30 the Mss. yary between 
 BiqaaTe avTo, et? Secr/xii? Lchm. [Tdf. cod. Sin.] and Beafj,d<i 
 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7]. [Treg. gives eh in brackets.] 
 
 This Hebr-aistic mode of expression occurs more frequently still 
 where the construction requires the doubleNominative, especially 
 with elvai and yevia-dai ; for example in the repeated quotations tcrovrai 
 £is (rap/ca fx-iav (after Gen. ii. 24), iyevT^Orj eh Ke<f>a\rjV ywvia's (after Ps. 
 cxvii. 22). Cf. Luke iii. 5 (quotn.), xiii. 19 iyevero ek SivSpov fieya, 
 John xvi. 20 rj Xv-kt] £ts x°-P°-^ yev-qcmaL, Rom. xi. 9 (quotn.), 1 Cor. 
 XV. 45 (quotn.), 2 Cor. vi. 18 ea-oixai ifuv eis waripa koI u/acis tcncrOi p-oi 
 £is viov^ (as in 2 Sam. vii. 14 etc.), Heb. i. 5 ; viii. 10 ; 1 John v. 8 ; 
 Rev. viii. 11. Yet not all the passages of the sort are to be forcibly 
 brought under this class, since there are many which can be satisfac- 
 torily explained by Greek usage (for yivea-dai els tl is a Greek phrase 
 also), and where the application of the above Hebraism would be 
 erroneous and disturbing to the sense ; as, 2 Cor. viii. 14; Col. ii. 22 ; 
 
 1 Ponnerly iretSeLD also was numbered among the verbs that take two Aces, 
 on account of Acts xix. 8 ; xxviii. 23 ; recent editors, however, have expunged 
 t4 in both passages, [restored in xix. 8 by Tdf. with cod. Sin.]. The Ace. with 
 the Passive (Heb. vi. 9, etc.) is explainable by no. 10 below, p. 152. 
 
§131.] THE ACCUSATI\rE 151 
 
 Jas. V. 3 (eis (jiOopdv, CIS ft-apripiov corat tend, redound to destruction, 
 •prove a witness), Rev. xvi. 19, etc. Similarly Xafji^dveiv (tI eis ti): 
 Heb. xi. 8 tottov ov l/ieXXcv \.a[j,pa.v€iv eis Kky){)ovoft.ia.v, and probably 
 Acts vii. 53 also. 
 
 Remark. Likewise borrowed from the language of the Septuagint 
 and a departure from classic usage (for Xen. Cyr. 3, 1, 33 and 
 the like are not parallel) is the current combination Xo-yi^o/xai 
 CIS T t in the signification to he reckoned or set to the account of, as 
 etc., for example, in the oft-repeated quotation iXoyia-dr] aimS' cJs 
 SiKaioarvTTfjv (after the Sept. of Gen. xv. 6. That the .Hebr. aun is 132 
 capable of the same construction, see 1 Sam. i. 13 and Gesen. sub 
 voce), and further in the phrases ets oiScv Xoyiad^vai, ij dicpo/Suo-Tta cts 
 ■!rfpi,TOiJ.rjv XoyurOrjcmai, to. reKva Xoyl^erai eh (TiTepfii,a Acts xix. 27 ; 
 Rom. iu 26 ; ix. 8. But the phrases with ws, Rom. viii. 36 eXoyCa6rifji,ev 
 (is irpo^aTa (after the Sept. of Ps. xliii. 23, Hebr. 3), or with fierd 
 and the Gen. Luke xxii. 37 (for which the Sept. in Isa. liii. 12 use 
 €v Tots avofiOK), have a different ■ meaning and are not opposed to 
 Greek usage. 
 
 According to a construction not unknown to the Greeks also 8 
 (see Bhdy. Synt. p. 66 ; Matth. § 308 ; Lob. ad Pliryn. p. 517 ; 
 Schaef. in SchoL Apoll. Rhod. p. 209) the predicative term 
 with verbs of naming sometimes stands in the Nominative 
 instead of any other case : John xiii. 13 (fxoveiTe fie 6 SoSda-KaXa 
 Koi 6 Kvpio<; (of. 1 Sam. ix. 9), Rev. ix. 11 ovofui e^^et ^AttoWvcov. 
 On TO opo<; TO KaXovfievov 'EXaicov see p. 22. 
 
 From the Hebrew usage (iBO-nij X'nip Gen. iv. 25, 26 ; v. 2, 3, etc.) 
 or from the Sept. are , borrowed the (pleonastic) expressions KaXiaeis 
 TO 6vo p,a avTov Irjcrovv, Iwdvvrjv, — also in the Pass. eKX-qO-q to 
 ovofw, avTov 'Irjo-ovs Matt. i. 21 ; Luke i. 31 ; ii. 21 ; Rev. xix. 13, etc. ; 
 for the classic use of KaXelv ovofjM (B. § 131, N. 11 ; J. § 588, 1) is 
 manifestly of a different nature.^ 
 
 1 Quite isolated is the reading of cod. Vat. in Matt. x. 2.5 ei t$ olKoSe(nr6Tri 
 Be6Afe/3oii;8 fBeefejSotX ed. Tdf. ; so Sin.] iiTeKd\ecrav,Tr6<r<ii ii.a\\ov ro7s oifciaKoij 
 avTov, which has been adopted by Lchm. It belongs to those which without ms. 
 support from other quarters will hardly succeed in gaining the general approval of 
 critics against the entire mass of remaining authorities [cod.. Sin. also]. Yet it is 
 very improbable that it should be the emendation of a grammarian who took 4irt- 
 KaXe^v here in the sense of reproach with (Meyer). '^irucaKelv here, at least in an- 
 cient times, was taken iu no other signification than to name, or more accurately to 
 give the surname, cognamentum daemonis addiderwnt (as Hilary expressly translates 
 the passage). Too little attention, however, to the composition with iirl naturally 
 ted to the result that the Latin versions rendered in accordance with their idiom, 
 patrem. vocaverunt ; and this, again, in the Greek Mss. not only led to the easy alter- 
 ation of the Dative into the Ace., but also — what is very significant — to the 
 
152 THE ACCUSATIVE. [§ 131. 
 
 133 B. §131, 7; H. §649; C. §481; J. §579. 
 
 9 The Ace. of limitation witli adjectives aud other pred- 
 icative terms, known under the name of the Greek Ace, has 
 passed in the N. T. pretty much out of use. Single instances 
 are Heb. ii. 17 Trtcrxo? apxi'Spew to, tt/so? tov 6e6v, Rom. xii. 18 
 etc. of. § 125, 12 p. 96. For the most part the Dative, or, a 
 Prep, like Kard, is substituted for it ; as, Luke xxiv. 25 ^paBek 
 TTJ icapSia, Mark vii. 26 ; Acts iv. 36 Kvwpi,o<; t& yeveL, xviii. 3 
 aKTjvoiroiol rfj rexvy ([so cod. Sjn.J, Grsb. rrjv t.), and the 
 expressions dwwv rw crtofiaTi,, irapoiv t5> 'rrvevixari, ao<^oi . . . 
 avj'yevel<; .*. . KvpioL Kara adpKa, Taireivb'i Kara •yrpocrcoTrov, etc. 
 On the other hand, with the Passive (Middle) the Ace. is 
 much in use, see §§ 134 and 135. 
 
 B. § 181, 8 and S. 12; C. § 478 a. ; J. § 579, 6. 
 
 ID Instances of the pronominal Accusative neuter with 
 verbs which otherwise govern a different case, are : Luke ix. 45 
 aiffOmwai avro, Matt. xix. 20 ri wrepm (§ 132, 22 p. 169), 
 2 Cor. xii. 13 o '^TTTjdrjTe (i^o-o-w^T/Te), Acts xxv. 8 ti rjfiapjov, 
 liepifivav TO, rov Kvpiov 1 Cor. vii. 32 etc., even ovBev %pe«M' 
 6%(u Rev. iii. 17 (cf. § 129, 5 p. 127). Examples of cases in 
 wliich the verb is connected with two Accusatives in conse- 
 quence of tliis usage only are : Luke iv. 35 fj/rjBev ^kdf^av amov, 
 Matt, xxvii. 44 to avro oaveLBitpv avrov, Acts xxv. 10 ; Gal. iv. 
 12 ovBev iJ,e rjBiKrjcraTe, Mark viii. 36 ; Gal. v. 2 etc. u/ia? ovBh 
 m^eX'^a-ei. With the Passive: ireldeadai ovBev, to, KpetTTOva 
 Acts xxvi. 26 ; Heb. vi. 9. 
 
 Respecting Acts xiii. 2 see § 147, 30 p. 342. 
 
 B. § 131, 9; H. § 560; C. § 482; D. p. 498; J. § 548g., of. § 906, Obs. 2, 7. 
 
 11 The use of the Accusative in giving the duration of time 
 and the measure of distance agrees with the ordinary use. 
 It is seldom employed in the more definite specifications of 
 
 change of hiiitaheiv into the simple KoXeiii (see the various readings). To this it 
 must be added : that another leading authority, the cod. Alex., is wanting here, aud 
 the saying is one of those preserved by the evangelist Matt, alone ; and in particu- 
 lar, the circumstance that the construction of ^iriKaKfTv with the Dat. in consequence 
 of the M in composition (B. § 147, N. 9) can not only be established grammatically, 
 but the employment of the Dative in this connection is so natural that it would be 
 most likely to suggest itself to an author of little practice, writing in the language ot 
 the people. Moreover, compare the altogether analogous exampleof ^TroKO/iiifen 
 with the Dat. in Greek authors in Steph. sub voce, Heind. on Plato's Phaedr. 30 
 and 0*' "aKe^p inona Twi in B. 5 131, N. 11 ; Eein i. on Plato's Crat. 6. 
 
§131.] THE ACCUSATIVE/ 153 
 
 time, — as John iv. 52 for which in vs. 53 eV with the Diit. is 
 used, yet with a slight difference. 
 
 Further, mention deserves to be made of the peculiar position 
 (which originated perhaps through the influence of the Latin usage, 
 and frequently occurs also in writers of the Koivq, as Plutarch, Lucian, 
 Appian, Josephus) of the prepositions aTro and Trpd in specifications 
 of place and time ; as, John xi. 18 ^v BrjOavia eyyiis tSv lepocroXvixuiv 
 (US airo <rroStW ScKairei/Te some fifteen stadia distant from Jerusalem, 
 xxi. 8 ; Rev. xiv. 20 ; John xii. 1 Trpo If , ^/tepSv tov ■n-do'xa ^kOtv six 
 days before the Passover (cf. Amos i. 1 ; iv. 7, and the corresponding 134 
 (Latinizing) use in Plutarch e.g. Philop. 4; 0th. 11, and in Appian 
 e.g. 1. 15; 2. 115, etc.). Together with these constructions the com- 
 mon one is in use, Luke xxiv. 13, etc. Cf. Zumpt, Gr. § 396. 
 
 B. § 131, 10; H. § 552; C. § 483; D. p. 502; J. § 579. 
 
 The Ace. as an adverbial adjunct of the mode, etc., 12 
 as Tr}v apyfjv, tov api,9fi6v as respects number, tovpo/ui by name 
 (Matt, xxvii. 57), (laKpdv sc. ohov, has its foundation in ordi- 
 nary usage. But aKfiriv in the sense of adhuc (Matt. xv. 16) 
 is un- Attic (see Pape). On the Hebraism aSov 9aXdacr7}<; 
 (pi'n 'r^'i'n) Matt. iv. 15 see Meyer in loc. 
 
 B, § 131, NN. 13, 14 ; H. § 647 d. ; 0. § 481 b. ; D. § 467; J. § 680. 
 
 , Analogous to the use of the Ace. in classic Greek as if in 13 
 apposition to a clause, and before proverbs, quotations, etc., is 
 its varied employment also in the N. T. in certain abbrevi- 
 ated and parenthetic adjuncts, — appositive limitations, 
 as it were, of the preceding or following thought (not of single 
 words, — a case in which the Nominative sometimes appeared 
 contrary to the rule, § 123, 5 p. 78). When such adjui\cts 
 are in the Neuter, it is hardly possible to say positively whether 
 they are to be taken as Nominatives or as Accusatives. 
 
 Examples : a) referring to what precedes, Eom. xii. 1 !rapaKa\5 
 vuSs ■jrapaaTTJa-aL to. crw/iiaTa v/a(uv Ovcriav ^uxrav . . . , t rj v XoyiK-qv 
 XarpeCav vixuiv — an adjunct which can neither be regarded as in 
 apposition to ^ucrtav alone, nor as an object dependent immediately on 
 TrapaKoXSi. 2 Thess. i. 5^lvh € ly fi.a t^s SiKotas KpCcnaii and Rev. xxi. 17 
 aerpov avdpdnrov may alsO/be taken as Accusatives. Further, Acts 
 X. 36 Tdf. [cod. Sin. Treg.] tov X6yov,ov aTricrTuXtv tois viol's IcrpaijA 
 etc., for with i/^ets oiSare (vs. 37) begins a new paragraph, so that tov 
 \6yov does not belong to that as object (Meyer). The omission of 
 ov (Lchm.) has probably been occasioned by the unusual character 
 
 20 I 
 
154 - THE GENITIVE. [§ 132. 
 
 of the construction. In Rev. i. 20 to (iva-ryipiov may be construed 
 simply as the object of the preceding ypdifiov ; b) referring to what 
 follows, Rom. viii. 3 to •yap aSvvarov etc., Heb. viii. 1 KecjxiXaiov 8e 
 etc. ; yet these two Neuter adjuncts may be taken unhesitatingly aa 
 Nominatives also, according to § 151, 6 p. 381. 
 
 B, § 131, N. 16; H. § 545; C. § 476; J. § 579, 8. 
 
 14 An Ace. of exclamation might be found in Rev. xii. 12 which 
 according to Lchm.'stext[soTd£Treg. ; Sin. gives oial eis etc.] runs 
 ovaX Trjv yrjv Kol rrjv OaXaa-a-av, Vulg. vae terrae et mari. But since 
 ovat (differing from the exclamation of astonishment ova Mark xv. 29) 
 neither in the Apocalypse nor anywhere else is otherwise construed 
 than either with the Dative or with the Vocative instead (in which 
 case the Dative can be omitted, Rev. xviii. 10, 16, 19), and the woe 
 is aimed at the inhabitants of the earth as is plain from the following 
 ijuSs and the context, it is necessary to educe the idea Tots KaTot/coiio-ii' 
 (which the Rec. has adopted) out of the preceding o-kijvowtcs and to 
 let the Ace. depend on that. Compare under this head the examples 
 in § 151, 23 d) p. 892 sq. 
 
 135 The Genitive. 
 
 B. §132, 1; H. §558; C. §444g.; D. p.482; J. §464. 
 
 \ Assuming the distinction between the subjective Genitive 
 and the objective to have been made plain by the general 
 grammar, we remark here : 
 
 1) That the union of substantives, especially abstract terms, 
 by the Genitive relation is employed with fondness by some 
 of the N. T. writers, particularly by Paul in his doctrinal 
 argumentations and by the author of the Apocalypse, so that 
 two, three, yes four, Genitives stand in immediate dependence 
 one upon another. Such an accumulation of Genitives is 
 manifestly avoided by the native Greeks, because it easily 
 begets ambiguity (see e.g. 1 Thess. i. 3 ; Rom. xi. 83, etc.). 
 
 2) That exegetes, especially where dogmatic interests come 
 in, differ very much in interpreting a Genitive, whether as 
 subjective or objective; and yet the settlement of the 
 matter is properly left to them, because grammar, from its 
 point of view, must concede in most cases the possibility of 
 both opinions ; cf. Winer 186 (175). As the subject, however, 
 is one of weighty importance for the understanding of Scripture, 
 and the decision in all disputed cases necessarily presumes 
 thorough investigation of the usage of individual writers, ex- 
 
§ 132.] THE GENITIVE. 155 
 
 position of the internal coni, ection in every passage, comparison 
 of parallel expressions, and the like, it well deserves a separate 
 and systematic treatment of its own. 
 
 The mode of expression mentioned under 1) 'we will illustrate 
 in a number of instances. The ambiguity easily occasioned 
 by accumiilating Genitives it was sought to avoid as follows : 
 
 a) If the Genitives depend one on another, they stand, as 
 far as possible, in the order in which they depend on one 
 another ; 
 
 b) If, however, two Genitives depend on one and the 
 same substantive, this fact is also, at least as a rule, indicated 
 by the position (before and after the governing substantive). 
 
 Examples under a) Of two Genitives: Col. ii. 2 to ttXoCtos 
 r^s TfXripOKJiopLa^ rrjq crui/ecreeus, ii. 11 rj arreKSvcrK tov (riofiaTO? rijs crapKos, 
 Horn. xi. 33 <o fSddo's ttXoutov koL o-o<^tas koi yviiio-etos Oeov (where, gram- 
 matically viewed, it may be doubtful whether cro<^tas and yvdjo-eus 
 depend together with irXovrov upon pa.6o<;, or both together upon 
 ■kKovtov ; the context favors the former opinion, see Mey. in loo.) etc. 
 Of three Genitives, — then as a rule the last is a personal (possessive) li(6 
 term which easily unites with its predecessor into one whole : 2 Cor. 
 iv. 4 TOV fl>ioTia-iA.6v ToB^evayycXiov rrj's Sdfijs tov XpLo-Tov, Col. i. 13 t^v 
 |8acrtX«'av tov vlov tiJs dyixTnjs avTov, 1 Thess. i. 3 (ixvrnxovevovTe'S v/JiSiv . . .) 
 T-^s iTTo/iov^s r^s eXtti'Sos tov Kvpiov Tjii,uiv 'IfjcTmi XpuTTov — where the 
 five Genitives are to be so arranged that tov Kvpwv rnxdv 'Iria-ov Xptaroi) 
 is taken as a whole and governed by eXttiSos, which together with 
 vfi-wv (according to b) below) is governed by wo/novijs, and this by the 
 verb fji,vr]iJiovevovTes, Eph. i. 1 9 Kara t^v ivipyuav tov KpaTOvi t^s l(T)(yo<s 
 avTov, iv. 13 (twice); i. 6; Heb. v. 12, etc. Of four Genitives: 
 Rev. xix. 15 iraTO, ttjv \rjv6v tov oivov rov $vfji,ov t^s opyij? tov $(ov tov 
 TravTOKpd.Tbpo's, cf. xvi. ID ; xiv. 8. The 0. T. also offers examples of 
 the sort. 
 
 Examples under b) : Rev. vii. 17 im ^wijs mj-yas vSaTciv (cf. § 147, 
 31 p. 843), Acts V. 32 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7 ; not 8] ia-filv airov fA.dprvpe's tSiv 
 prj/JLaTutv TovTOiV, 2 Cor. v. 1 ■^ eTri-ycios rjfiitjiv o'lKia tov (tki^vov;, Phil. ii. 30 
 to vijmv vcTTeprj/ua t^s \.tiTovpyia^, 1 Thess. i. 3, see under a). . Further, 
 position requires us in Rev. iii. 10 (tov Xoyov t^s vrrofjiovrji fiov) to 
 make /jlov depend on vTrop.ovri<;, in Heb. vi. 1 tov Xpurrov on t^s "PX'J'i 
 not on Xoyov ; and in 2 Pet. iii. 2 tov Kvpldv is hardly to be carried 
 over ivToXTJi and connected with olttoo-toXoiv, which according to the 
 Mss. [Sin. also] has already the Gen. w/aujj/ (not ■fjp.Zv Rec. Grsb. and 
 the translation). The passages where, besides, the Genitive is sep- 
 arated from its substantive, as 1 Thess. ii. 13; 2 Cor. iii. 6; 1 Pet. 
 
156 PERIPHRASIS OF THE GENITIVE. [§ 132. 
 
 iii. 21, etc., are of a different sort, and hardly admit of a doubt as re- 
 spects the meaning; see respecting them in connection with §151, 13, 
 14 p. 387. The reference of crcyv, however, in Rev. xviii. 14 is doubtful 
 (even according to the MSS. [n puts it before t^s £7rt6.]). 
 2 Eemaek. Exegetical works on the N. T., particularly the older, 
 often speak of a periphrasis of the Genitive (subjective and 
 objective) by means of prepositions, especially Kara with the Ace. 
 Winer 193 (182), Fritzsche, Meyer, and others, have declared them- 
 selves as decidedly opposed to this expression ; and in truth, as 
 respects the origin and philosophy of the matter, with entire correct- 
 ness, since we cannot speak of the two modes of expression as gram- 
 matically identical, and in general, caution must be exercised in the 
 application of such terms. The simplicity and intelligibleness of 
 grammatical exposition would suffer, however, should we insist in 
 practice upon carrying this caution too far ; for the rigorous application 
 of this principle would affect also many other phenomena which in 
 grammatical discpurse we are wont to meet with under the title 
 " Periphrasis." We do not take offence when grammars speak of a 
 periphrasis of the partitive genitive by means of prepositions, as ii, Iv, 
 in Latin ex, de, inter ; just as little should we in the present case. The 
 only important point is that we connect the right views with gram- 
 matical terminology. (Cf. in § 161 the chapter on -Ellipsis pp. 390 sqq.) 
 That is to say, since it was at all times easy (in comparison, for 
 example, with the Latin) for the Greek language by virtue of its 
 arrangement of words, which was in this particular rigidly prescribed 
 (cf. § 125), to make prepositional phrases dependent immediately 
 upon substantives, it is in perfect analogy with the development 
 of language to assume, that the later language (of prose), agreeably 
 to its analytic nature, carried the application of this usage further and 
 further, and employed prepositional expressions even where the earlier 
 137 language still preferred the simple case. S5 that, strictly speaking, 
 the case was not periphrased, but the prepositional phrase displaced 
 the simple case, or, as Bernhardy (Synt. p. 241) aptly describes it, was 
 employed inthe sense of the Genitive. Just as we, instead of 
 'your faith,' might also say 'the faith among you' i.e. the faith ex- 
 isting among you, so too, we find in the N. T. instead of the usual 
 fj TTio-Tis i/j-wv the phrase rj KaO v/nas Tri'trTis (Eph. i. 15), and in other 
 writers oi Kaff ipas p^ropes (Longin. 15. 8) instead of the ordinary 
 01 pryropK vfuav (cf. Acts xvii. 28). Now if such an instance as this 
 occurs often, and shapes itself into a species of usage, as was un- 
 deniably the case in the later language with Kara, and the Ace. (e.g. 
 7) Kara Ti]v apx^v awoOecTK, r) Kara to o-fi/ua p(o/*r; Diod. Sic, rj Kwr avTOV 
 aperrj Ael., al Kwr 'Avvi^av Trpd^tK, rj Kara tov ijXiov dvaToXij, . . . wopeia. 
 
§J32.] PERIPHRASIS OF THE GKNITIVE. 157 
 
 TO Kara ras irXareias Siao-T-^/iaTa Polyb., etc.), the grammarian is per- 
 fectly authorized to call this, for brevity's sake, as is done in so 
 many other cases, a periphrasis for the Genitive in the sense above 
 defined. 
 
 Lastly, it is in no wise agreeable to the nature of these expressions 
 to supply everywhere in explaining them (as is so frequently done) 
 an omitted verbal idea (as wv, yevoixevos, etc.) ; just as we do not 
 deem it necessary also to supply such an ellipsis with the periphrasis 
 for the partitive Genitive. On the contrary, the verbal idea is either 
 already included in the governing substantive, as (to take an example 
 from the N. T ) in Phil. i. 5 rj Koivwvia ifiMV eis to iiayyekiov (see 8 
 p. 160), or is naturally suggested by the context, or by the force of 
 the preposition, as Mark v. 26 Ta irap am^s iravra (otherwise ra eavrrj^), 
 2 Cor. viii. 7 r/ i$ vjxSni dyaTrij, Acts xxiii. 21 ^ airo (Tov iirayyiXia (thy 
 promise, consent). That in this sense also we can call the super- 
 scriptions (which without doubt are very ancient) tvayyiXiov Kara 
 MaOOalov, etc., (precisely, gospel according to the understanding, 
 apprehension, of Matthew) circumlocutions instead of tte Genitive, is 
 plain. In a manner quite similar, as we shall see below, 10 p. 161, 
 attributes (with substantives) which we regularly reproduce by 
 adjectives are expressed both by the Gen. of a subst. and also by 
 Kara with the Ace. 
 
 B. §132, N. 1; H. §677; C. §638d.; D. p.482; J. § 652, Oba. 6. 
 
 Examples of the use of the Possessive pronoun instead of the 3 
 objective Genitive of a personal pronoun are Luke xxii. 19; 
 1 Cor. xi. 24 TOVTO troiure eis Ty^v i/jirjv avaixvrfcnv, Rom. xi. 31 Toi 
 I'/ieTepco eXeei, 1 Cor. xvi. 17 to vfiirepov vo'TtprjfJi.a, XV. 31 Tdf. [so 
 Lchm. Treg. cod. Sin., etc.J vt] rrjv viLeripav Kowpfijo-iv. In John xv. 9 
 the idea of mutual love seems to predominate. 
 
 B. §132,2; H. §659 b.; C. §418a.; D. p.482 sq.; J. §542, vi. b. 
 
 The Genitive of the country in the mention of cities is 4 
 found in Matt. xxi. 11 ; Mark i. 9 Na^aper ttjs FaXiXaia^, John 
 ii. 1 etc. Kavd . . . Brtdaalha rr^? TaX. ; moreover Tdpao^ Trj<; 
 KiXiKW, Uepyr] Trj<; najjL(f}v\ia<;, etc. 
 
 B. §132, 3. 4 and N. 2; H. §5798q.; C. §405; D.§451; J. §§529, 530. 
 
 That the genitive as the whence-case, in particular the 5 
 Genitive of separation with the corresponding predicates, 
 is very frequently elucidated or periphrased by the addition 
 of the prepositions aTro' and e'/e (e« %etj009 § 133, 20 p. 182) 
 does not need to be detailed ; see the lexicons under a'ipeiv, 133 
 
158 THE PARTITIVE GEKlTIVE. l§ 132. 
 
 d^aipeiv and a(paipeiadai,^ iKevOepovv, Kodapi^etv, Xoveiv (to 
 bathe, cleanse from) , Xveiv, XVTpovv, pveaOai, aw^^eiv, ycapi^ew^ 
 the adjectives da-7nXo<; (Jas. i. 27), Ka6ap6<; (Acts xx. 26), 
 deSo'; (Matt, xxvii. 24), etc. Cf. §147 under e'/c pp. 326 sq., 
 and diro pp. 322 sqq. 
 
 With other words this insertion of the preposition occurs less fre- 
 quently; e.g. Trav€LV 1 Pet. iii. 10, avcnravecrdai Ik tSv kcSttoji' 
 Rev. xiv. 13 rest from (^fter) their labors, vcTrepelv Heb. xii. 15, 
 KwXveiv Luke vi. 29., In general, the Hebrew use of ya with these 
 and similar terms (see e.g. 2 Sam. iii. 28, also the Sept. aOwog airo) 
 may not have been without influence. 
 
 Other verbs are, perhaps accidentally, connected only with the 
 Genitive ; see the lexicons under Sta<^epetv, an-oa-Tepeia-Oai (respecting 
 Jas. V. 4 see § 147, 6 p. 326), iravea-Bai. 'ATro<fiivyuv, as a transitive 
 construed commonly with the Ace. (2 Pet. ii. 20), also takes by virtue 
 of its composition the Genitive (2 Pet. i. 4). On KpwTctv and its 
 compounds seg § 131, 6 p. 149, and on apaprdvav see § 133, 3 Bem. 
 p. 173. 
 
 B. §132, 5; H. §569; C. §415sq.; J. §533, cf. §893e. 
 
 Agreeably to what was said above (2 p. 156), instead of 
 the partitive Genitive we far more frequently find a periphrasis 
 by means of prepositions. Thus particularly (as in Latin) 
 eh, Bvo, Tive'i, ttoXXoI i^ avT&v, or with ej/ (corresponding to the 
 Latin inter') as Jas. v. 13, 14, 19 idv rt? iv vpZv TrXavrjdfi, etc., 
 and with elvai, Matt. ii. 6 ; Rom. i. 6, etc. The language of 
 the N. T. goes further, too, in that it not infrequently omits 
 the indefinite part (rwh), so that there then remains 
 merely the whole in the Genitive, with or without e/c ; and this 
 Genitive then takes in the sentence the place of the subject, 
 or of the object. (On this point compare the earlier Greek 
 usage in B. p. 484 note, 21st Germ. ed. ; p. 497 note, 22d 
 ditto.) 
 
 Examples: Acts xxi. 16 (nwrikBov Kal tZv padryr&v avv ripa), John 
 xvi. 17 iiTTov ovv Ik Tutv iJ,a$r)TSiv avrov Trpo? a.Wr]Kov<s, Rev. xi. 9 pXi- 
 TTovcnv EK Twv XaSv (sc. TToXXoi) . . . TO iTToi/Aa avT&v, Matt, xxiii. 34 
 
 ^ KoflcXEiv, also, in the signification to take down is used with airii (Acts 
 xiii. 29), but in the sigtiification to destroy, always with the Ace. of the object. 
 Hence in Acts xix. 27 (the text of which is very uncertain) the Accusative 
 tV f-fya\ei6TiiTa (Tdf. [eds. 2, 7]) is more simply taken as Subject-Acc. of 
 KoSaipucBai (without aliTTis it might according to § 134, 7 p. 189 be taken as the 
 Object-Acc). On the other reading (which is the more difficult, and is supported 
 by the most important mss. [N also]) Tjjj n€yaKfi6Tij-Tos airrjs (Lchm. Tdf. Treg.) 
 the Genitive must be explained according to what is said below, 7 p. 159. 
 
§ 1^2.] THE PARTITIVE GENITIVE. 159 
 
 €^ auTcov arroKTeveiTe , . . Kou i^ airuiv fnaxirtyijuTeri, Luke xxi. 16 ; Rev. 
 ii. 10; Matt. xiii. 47 Ik iravTos yeVovs (sc. ti) cruvotyeii'. Hence, too, 
 the participial limitations that follow can be subjoined in the 
 Nominative or the Accusative: John vii. 40 Ik tov oyXov ovv, 
 oLKova-avTes twv koyiav, St-eyov (Grsb. adds iroWoi), Acts xxi. 16; 
 2 John 4 evprjKa €k tSv reKviav aov TrcpiTraroCvTa? Iv aXrjOeia. 
 Similar to these examples is Acts xv. 7 iv vfiiv i^eXiiaro 6 6ebs etc. 
 Isolated instances of the sort occur even in classic authors; as, 139 
 Xen. An. 3, 5, 16 ; Ages. 1. 22, etc. Cf. the following paragraph. 
 
 Remark. Examples of the use of the whole with 6 /juiv ... 6 Sc in 
 the same case with the part, do not occur. But similar to Anab. 
 5, 5, 11 is Eph. V. 33 r/icis oi Ka6 tva tKaoTo^ . . . ayaTrdru) etc. 
 
 B. §132, 5c); H. §672a.; C. §421sq.; D. p. 473 8q.; J. §533. 
 
 The beginnings of the usage treated of above (in 6) appear 7 
 in the connection (so frequent in the classics) of the partitive 
 Genitive immediately with verbs, principally with ehai 
 (with which it is usual to supply tk, tI for explanation) ; as, 
 Acts xxiii. 6 to ev fiepo<i eaTiv SaSSovKaiav, to St erepov ^api- 
 aaimv, 1 Tim. i. 20 mv eariv 'Tfi.kvaio<i (on the Gen. with elvou, 
 see in its place, 11 below, p. 162 sq.) — and when the Gen. is 
 resolved by Ik: John xviii. 17 km, a-ii m tSjv fiadTjTuv el, Luke 
 xxii. 68, etc. But the whole without any specification of part 
 is commonly enough found also in connection with words of 
 complete predication, as SiSovai, 'Ka^jL^dvet/v, eadieiv, etc. ; yet 
 here again there is this difference, that the whole does not as 
 in the earlier Greek writers stand in the simple Genitive (with 
 the exception of Rev. ii. 17), but depends on an intervening 
 preposition (e'f, otto). 
 
 Examples: Luke xx. 10 dTro tov Kapirov tov a.ii,7r(\u>vos Stoaovcriv 
 avrS, 1 John iv. 13 ek tov irveu/xaTos avTov SiBiaKev Tjfiiv, Matt. xxv. 8 ; 
 Mark xii. 2 Iva X-dPy am tS>v Kafnruiv, Rev. xviii. 4; John xxi. 10 
 iviyKaTe Sltto twv oij/apioxf, Acts ii. 17 £K;(eS am tov irvevfuaTo^ /xov; and 
 particularly often with the words ^ayilv and -miiv. Matt. xv. 27 rci 
 KViupui laOiu am tui/ ypi^iiav, 1 Cor. xi. 28 e/c tov apTov icr&teru}, Luke 
 xxii. 18 ov fj.^ TTiio dm TOV yevVTJfji.aTO'; r^s d/nreXov, John iv. 14 ck tov 
 v8aT05, vi. 50 ; 1 Cor. ix. 7, etc. By this construction are also to be 
 explained Acts v. 2 ei'oo-c^to-aTo arro t^s Ti/irj^ i.e. a part of the price, 
 Rev. V. 9 rjyopaa-a^ £K Trd(rrjg <l>vXrjs sc. ttoXXovs (for rj/xS.^ [so cod. Sin.] 
 is a later addition). 
 
 Remark. (B. § 132 5 b. ; H. § 589; C. § 420; J. § 527). Examples 
 of partitive specifications of time with adverbs are Matt, xxviii. 
 1 6fi a-aP^aTtov, Luke xfiii, 12 -Sis tou ^m^^aTov. Cf. -Coi. ii. 16. 
 
160 THE PARTITIVE GENITIVE. [§ 132. 
 
 B. §132, 5d); H. §574; C. §§124,427; D. p. 472sq.; J. §635. 
 
 8 Among the verbs of partaking, etc., we may notice, 
 KXijpovofjielv only with the Ace. ; /jLeraSiSovat with the 
 Dat. of the person and Ace. of the tiling; 'Ka'^'x^dveiv with 
 the Ace. (see Wahl), respecting the Gen. see § 140, 16a) 
 p. 269: fjLCTS'x^eiv once also with e'/c (for the simple Gen.) 
 
 1 Cor. X. 17, /ie/30? exei'V fJ-erd t«/o? (of the person) John xiii. 
 8, and ev tivl (of the thing) Rev. xx. 6; KOivcDvelv only once 
 with the Gen. (Heb. ii. 14), elsewhere always with the Dative, 
 as well of the thing (Rom. xii. 13, etc.) as also of the person, 
 
 140 in which case the Dat. of the thing (in which) is expressed by 
 a circumlocution with ei^ Gal. vi. 6 (see Mey.), or even with 
 eh Phil. iv. 15 ovSe/iia (loi eKKXija-ia eicoivatvqa-ev et? Xcr/ov Boa-ews 
 etc. let me take part in the account etc. 
 
 The Substantive Kowuivia is often construed with ek (cf. 2 above) 
 
 2 Cor. ix. 13 ; Phil. i. 5, also with Trpds 2 Cor. vi. 14 ; Koiv(oviav e^eiv 
 with jnera 1 John i. 3, 6, 7. The Adjective Kotvoi/ds is commonly 
 construed with the Gen. (of the person and the thing) ; the person is 
 also put in the Dat. (Luke v. 10), and the thing construed with iv 
 (Matt, xxiii. 30). 
 
 B. §132,5 e) and N. 10; H. §B74b.: C. §426; D. p. 483sq.; J. § 536. 
 
 9 Verbs signifying to lay hold of, to touch, are sometimes 
 construed with the Genitive, and sometimes also, inasmuch as 
 from their nature they easily assume a purely transitive sig- 
 nification, with an object-A ccusative. 
 
 Among the compounds of Xafj-Pavca-dai the verb eTTLXafi^dvea-Oaif 
 which governs as well the Gen. of the person as of the thing, is con- 
 nected with both Genitives at the same time by Luke in xx. 
 20, 26. But that it is said in the Middle to govern also an Accusative 
 of the person, arises from a misapprehension of the construction. 
 Nowhere (not in Greek authors even) does such an Ace, where it 
 seems to occur, depend on the verb ein\a/i/3av£cr^at alone, but it in. all 
 cases stands connected with another transitive verb, so that the Ace. 
 is dependent on both predicates together (by the cr^fia am kolvov ; 
 cf. § 133, 11 noteip. 178). The examples of this use (quite classic in 
 cast) are, moreover, all from Luke's writings : Acts ix. 27 iiriXajSofievo'; 
 airbv ^yayei/, xvi. 19 tTriXa/Sd/xci/ot tov HavXov iiXKva-av, xviii. 17 £7nA.a- 
 Pofnevoi %<ocT6ivqv ervTTTov — passages which are to be construed like 
 Luke xiv. 4 67riAaj8d|U,£vos Ida-aTO avrov. F urther, avTiXaix/SdvecrSai 
 always has the Genitive. On the other hand, tt p o or Xa'u. ^dve a- 6 ai 
 agreeably to its composition and signification (take to one's self, take 
 
§132.] THE GENITIVE FOR AN ADJECTIVE. 161 
 
 up, take aside) is uniformly joined to the Accusative (of the person) : 
 Matt. xvi. 22 ; Acts xvii. 5 ; Philem. 17, etc. The Gen. of the thing 
 (rpofj)^'; Acts xxvii. 36) may be explained either by 7 p. 159, or 19 
 p. 167; (but in vs. 34 Trpqa-Xa^elv is a false reading instead of 
 ficraXaPelv). 
 
 To €x£o"^a t (Heb. vi. 9) we may add the compounds avrexea-OaL 
 and di'£';^Ecr^ai which always have the Genitive ; (in 2 Thess. i. 4 
 the Dative is to be explained by attraction, but cod. B has the very 
 important variant iv sxea-Oe). 
 
 K pare IV which in the N. T. has become for the most part a perfect 
 transitive to lay hold of, hold fast (^Kpan^aas rbv Iwdvvrjv, Kpareiv Trjv 
 irapaSocriv, ttjv SiSa^^iji', Kpani o ex^'S, ol 6<j>da\/ji,0L e/cpaToBi/ro Luke xxiv. 
 16, etc.), in a figurative sense is connected sometimes also with the 
 Genitive, Acts xxvii. 13 (i-^s Trpo^e'creo)?), Heb. iv. 14; vi. 18 (o/xoXoyia?, 
 eXirtSos), and likewise in the proper signification to lay hold of to touch 
 viz. T-^s x^'pos with Gen. of person following and dependent on this, 
 Matt. ix. 25 ; Luke viii. 54 (Mark ix. 27 Lchm. [Tdf. Treg.]). But 
 the combination current in later writers Ttra r^s x^'po's occurs only in 
 Mark ix. 27 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7 ; Grsb.], cf. i. 31 ; analogous to this is 
 TT id^€LV, Acts iii. 7 indaras avrbv t^s Sef las )(eip6's, 
 
 B. §13ii,N. 12; H. §568; C. §437d.; D. p.482; J. §4S5o. 
 
 The use of a substantive in the Genitive as a peri- jj 
 plirasis for an Adjective, which is mentioned as a poetic 
 peculiarity among the Greeks, is found not infrequently in 141 
 the N. T. ; at any rate, there are numerous genitives that can 
 hardly be reproduced by us otherwise than by means of their 
 corresponding adjectives. In this peculiarity the influence of 
 the genius of the Oriental tongues is unmistakable, for they 
 were especially addicted to this more poetic mode of expression. 
 See respecting the Hebrew, Gesen. Lehrg. p. 644 [Gr. § 104]. 
 
 The following may serve as examples : Luke xvi. 8 o ot/covo/xos t^s 
 dSiKt'as the unjust steward, xviii. 6 o Kpirijs t^s aSiKias the unjust judge, 
 iv. 22 Xoyoi Tijs xdpLTO^ gracious words, Rom. i. 26 irddrj d.Ti/ji,ias dis- 
 honoring passions, xii. 20 dvOpaKes irvpo's, Heb. xii. 15 pit,a Trticpias 
 (after the Alex, reading of Deut. xxix. 18), Matt. xxiv. 31 jneTct 
 <raA.5riyyos K^wj/iys ju,£yd\i;s with a loud-sounding trumpet (not, toith the 
 loud sound of a trumpet, see § 147, 31 p. 343 ; cf. rpia fjivcrTiQpLa Kpavy^s 
 the three loudly-proclaimed mysteries, Ign. ad Eph. 19). 
 
 Under this head belong in particular the numerous phrases formed . 
 by means of the substantive vioC or reKva followed by the Gen. of 
 an abstract (cf. the Heb. "^a and n^a"8J''«, and the like ; see Gesen. 
 
 21 
 
162 THE GENITIVE WITH stvai (vCvotOoi). [§ 132. 
 
 Lex. under ^a) e.g. rcxva (juaros, Karapas, ijraKo^s, viol aireiBciai, (^a)T09, 
 fjfiipa^, vDKTos, o-KOTovs, o vios T^s dTTioXcias, etc., 1 Thess. V. 5 ; 2 Pet. 
 ii. 14; 1 Pet. i. 14, etc. 
 
 Yet on the whole this use of the Genitive is by no means so general 
 as to warrant the laying down of a special rule — (the Hebrew 
 Genitive of material, for example, is even in the Sept. regularly 
 rendered by adjectives, as xputroBs, ^vAivos, oa-TpaKivo^, Xt'^ivos, etc., 
 sometimes by Ik as in Rev. xviii. 12 but with an adj. subjoined), and 
 many of the cases otherwise referred to this head, in particular those 
 in which the Gen. is more closely defined by an attributive (e.g. a 
 pronoun) and the expression thus loses its general character, are in 
 translation more suitably reproduced literally. Hence, in Col. i. 13 
 i^tos Tiji ayixTrrji avTov deWette translates Son of his love (Luther [so 
 A. v.] his beloved Son), Heb. i. 3 prj/xa rrj? Swafxeui? avrov the word of 
 his power, Acts v. 20 to. p-^/iara rrji ^ojijs Tavrrji; the words of this life, 
 cf. xiii. 26 ; Rom. vii. 24, etc. On the other hand, those phrases 
 (especially Pauline) in which the governing substantive also is an 
 abstract idea are of a general rhetorical nature ; as, 2 Cor. iv. 7 
 VTrep/JoXij t^s Swa/Accus (equiv. to vTrip^aXKaucra Swa^uts), Rom. vi. 4 
 Kaii/oTijs ^(o^s, dSrjXoTTjs, ^ddos ttXcwtov, etc. 
 
 Remark. Quite in accordance with the exposition given in 2 p. 
 156, qualitative limitations are often expressed by Kara with the 
 Ace. instead of by the Gen., as 2 Cor. vii. 10 rj kutcI Oeov XvTrrj godly 
 sorrow, Rom. xi. 21 ol Kara. (f>v(nv kXciSoi the natural branches, vs.. 11 
 71 Kar fKXoyrjv irpoOecrK (see Mey.) ; also without the article, Kaff 
 vTreplioXr]v oSov (see § 125, 11 p. 96). But they are seldom expressed 
 by Kara with the Genitive (see § 147, 20 p. 334). 
 
 The Genitive with etvai (Yivso-flai). 
 B. §132, N. 13; H. §572; C. §§421sq. 437; D. p. 473 sq.; J. § 618. 
 
 11 Although the N. T. use of the Genitive with elvai arose 
 
 142 from common classic usage, and agrees in general with that 
 
 of Greek authors, yet the subject is so important that it seems 
 
 expedient to review that usage once more here in its special 
 
 application by the N. T. writers. 
 
 In an examination of it we must first of all set aside those passages 
 in which, viewed formally, a substantive found in the same sentence 
 is to be repeated, although as respects sense they may belong to one 
 of the classes given below ; as, Luke xx. 38 Oeos ovk Io-tiv (sc. Oebs) 
 veKpwv dXXa ^lavruiv, 1 Cor. xiv. 33 ovk ea-TW dKaracrTacrtas 6 ^cos, dXXot 
 iiprqvrj's, 2 Cor. ii. 3 tj i/j,}) )(a.pa wdvTMV vynSv (sc. xa,pa.) iariv, 1 Pet. iii. 3 
 S)V (sc. Koa-iiO'i) eoTco ov^ b i^mOfv ... Koo-fios, 1 Thess. V. 5, 8, etc. 
 
§ 132.] THE GENITIVE AFTER VERBS. 163 
 
 But in Jas. v. ] 2 v/iZv depends immediately on to vaC, and ^tu is the 
 copula. 
 
 I. If the limiting Genitive with eivai is personal, the phrase 
 signifies, a,) most commonly property, possession — as well external 
 or proper, Luke iv. 7 eo-rai a-ov Traxra, John xix. 24 \a.x<DfJ.ev irepl airov, 
 Tivos eurai, Luke xx. 14 tva rifiSiv ycvrjTai ■^ Kkr]povofx.l.a, Mark xii. 7 ; 
 Matt. V. 3 ; xxii. 28 ; Luke xx. S3 ; John x. 12 ; Acts xxi. 11 ; 1 Cor. 
 iii. 21 ; — as also tropically that of ideal connection and dependence, 
 as dtov elvai, XjOioToi) eivai Mark ix. 41 ; Acts xxvii. 23 ; Rom. viii. 9 ; 
 xiv. 8; 2 Cor. x. 7 ; 2 Tim, ii. 19 (ttp'sv/m.'^tos Luke ix. 55 Grsb.), 
 naijA,ou . . . AttoXXw 1 Cor. i. 12, ovk eore eain-ioi' vi. 19. Analogous 
 in structure to these examples is the elliptical phrase t^s oSoS clvai 
 sc. KvpLov or crojTiypias Acts ix. 2 ; ^ also b) duty or right, power. 
 Acts i. 7 ov\ v/jlSiv io-Tiv yuoyvaL ^ffiovaws (at. Matt. XX. 23), Rom. ix. 16 
 oi Tov OiX.ovTO'S ■ ■ • , aXA.a tov ikeSivros deov SC. icrriv, Heb. v. 14 reXfiuv 
 ea-Tiv rj a-Tepea ipo^rj ; and c) pure causality, 2 Cor. iv. 7 Iva rj 
 VTUip^oX-q T^s 8uva/x.ea)9 vj rov Oiov koX p.r] i^ vfMov. But 
 
 II. If the limiting Genitive is a t h i n g, it is to be taken in a qual- 
 itative sense ; and it may then denote, either a) a permanent 
 quality — a use which in ordinary Greek prose is as rare (see B. 
 p. 335) as the similar use spoken of in the preceding paragraph 
 (10 p. 161), as Heb. xii. 11 irStra iraiSela ov SoKei p(apas etvat dAXa 
 XijTTT^s, X. 39 OVK iap-iv vttocttoX.'^'; eis aTrciXetav, dAAo. Trtorccos, 2 Pet. i. 20 
 jrSo'a Trpotj>rjTiLa tSia; iTTiXvaemi ov ytVerai (is of such a nature that, etc.) ; 
 or b) one that is transient, as in Greek, rjv erSm SdSeKa Mark v. 42 ; 
 Acts iv. 22, ore iyevcTO irZv SoiSeKa Luke ii. 42. 
 
 Remark. Apparently this last idiom underlies the specifications of 
 size in Rev. xxi. 16.sq. ip.erpija'a/ to Tttj^os air^s cKaxoi/ Tio-a-epaKovra 
 rea-crapiov -irrjxfov, and still more anornalously ifj-erprjcrev rriv ttoXiv t(3 
 KaXdfuo iitl CTToStous SuJScKa ■)^ikidSwv SC. o'TaSiW ; as though they arose 
 from the simple statements to TeL)(0'S rjv eKarov rea-a: Ticrcr. inrjy^Siv, ij tto'Xis 
 
 B. §132, 10a); H.§675; C.§414; D.p.468; J.§5.39. 
 
 The extension of the causal Genitive with words of p 1 e n t y, 12 
 being full, by means of the prepositions Ik and airo is frequent in 
 the N. T. ; and that, too, not only with Pass, and Neut. verbs like 143 
 \opTaa-6rjvai, Tr\rjpui6r)va.i, yifjiuv (cf. §.147 under aTro p. 32-3, and iv 
 p. 827), as Matt, xxiii. 25 (cf. vs. 27) Tdf. [cod. Sin.], John xii. 3; 
 Luke xvi. 21 ; Rev. xix. 21, but also after the transitive ye/iiaai, 
 
 1 Quite similar is the use of Svo/ia absolutely, with the obvious ellipsis of xvpiou, 
 as Acts V. 41 ; in Jas y. 14 also cod. Vat. omits tov Kvptou (certainly not by 
 accident). 
 
164 THE GENITIVE ATTEE VEEBS. [§ 1 82 
 
 Luke XV. 16 i-reOvfiLei yefiiaai Ttjv KoiXlav diro T&v KeparCwV. More 
 
 in accordance with our usage, and yet not unknown to the Greeks 
 also, is the construction of these words with the (instrumental) Dative, 
 Rom. i. 29 ; 2 Cor. vii. 4, to which Dative according to N. T. usage 
 (§ 133, 17 p.-181) iv is frequently added, particularly with Trcpio-o-eutii/ ; 
 see Wahl. 
 
 The linpersonals Bti and xPV (§ 131, 3 p. 147) are no longer 
 construed with nouns. The place of these verbs in the sense of to 
 need is supplied by personal constructions, e.g. with )(p7j^eiv, )(piiav ex"" 
 (cf. § 140, 3 note p. 259), wpocrSeio-^ai with the Gen. ; see also vtmptiv 
 in 22 p. 169. Atlcrdai which only occurs in the sense of to ask for, 
 entreat, is likewise accompanied uniformly by the Gen. of the person, 
 but takes the thing in the Ace. (2 Cor. viii. 4; x. 2). 
 
 Remark. The Accusative (of a neuter word) with ye'/Actv, Rev 
 xvii. 3, and in close proximity to another word in the Genitive (vs. 4) 
 is most simply explained by the analogy of the Accusative after Pas- 
 sives, as TrXrjijova-Oav § 134, 7 p. 189. 
 
 B. §132,10 0); H. §578; C. §431; D, p.478sq.; J. §§ 519. 520. 
 
 The prepositions used to characterize more precisely the Genitive 
 with verbs of buying and selling are Ik Matt, xxvii. 7 (whose 
 force is apparent from the construction in i. 18) and dvri Heb. xii. 16. 
 Peculiar is the phrase ayopd^eiv Tt/irj^ in the pregnant signification 
 ' dearly bought ' 1 Cor. vi. 20 ; vii. 23, and the Gen. Srjvapim without 
 a verb Rev. vi. 6 ; also the expressions a-v p,<^u>v ^Iv 8r]vapCov and Ik 
 8rivaplov Matt. XX. 2, 13, as it were : make a contract j^r a denarius. 
 
 B. § 132, 10 d) ; H. § 576 ; C. § 432 b. and o. ; D. p. 484 sq. ; J. §§ 493. 515 Obs. 
 
 Heipa^iiv to try, put to the test, commonly in a bad sense, in 
 later writers and in the N. T. is wholly transitive; iretpSo-^ai does 
 not occur connected with a noun. M.vrip.ove.v(iv is construed as 
 well with the Gen. as with the Ace, without any sensible difference 
 of signification ; see Wahl. The Ace. with the Middle dva/At/yti/ijo-Keo-^at 
 (2 Cor. vii. 15) is explained by § 135, 5 p. 193. 
 
 B. § 132, 10 e); H. §§ 576. 577; C. § 432 d. ; J. § 496. 
 
 To verbs signifying to care for, be anxious, must be added from the 
 N. T. the newly formed word a-Tr\ay)(^vit,i(T6ai to Tiave compassion 
 from TO. aTrXo.y)(ya (i.q. Disri'i Prov. xii. 10) ; it is construed sometimes 
 absolutely, sometimes with the Gen. (Matt, xviii. 27) or Trepl with 
 the Gen. (ix. 36), but commonly with en-i and the Dat. or Ace. 
 MeXei /Aot occurs with the Gen. only in 1 Cor. ix. 9, elsewhere 
 always with Trept. On the construction of fjiepLfjLvav and other similar 
 verbs, as ixaKpoOvfj-elv, Oavp-d^tu/ (which is no longer ever construed 
 
§ 132.] THE GENITIVE AFTER VERBS. 165 
 
 with the Gen.) see under verbs of emotiDn § 133, 23 p. 185 and 
 25 p. 186. On the other hand, (fiiiBecOai. and (in accordance 
 with their composition) /caTayeXav and (caTai^povciv are con- 
 strued only with the simple Genitive whether of the person or of the 
 thing. In 1 Tim. iv. 12 neither the sense nor usage (cf 9 p. 160 and 
 17 note p. 167) prevents our making both Genitives depend 
 immediately on Karat^povetv. 
 
 Remark In Gal. v. 26, where with <j)Oov£iv both the Dative 
 and the Accusative (oAX^Xovs) have manuscript authority, in the 
 absence of other passages in support of the Ace. of the person the 
 reading oAA-^Aots [so Sin.J deserves the preference. 
 
 B. §132, lOgjandN. 16, 17; H. §677b.; C. §431c.d.; D.p.479; J.§S01. 144 
 
 To verbs of accusing and the like, belongs KaTUfiapTvpelv 16 
 followed by the Gen.: Matt. xxvi. 62, etc. Moreover Karrj- 
 lyopetv, with the Gen. of the person, has once also Kara 
 repeated from the verb (Luke xxiii. 14), and once contrary to 
 usage (and hence not without var.[Siu. too]) the person in the 
 Ace. Rev. xii. 10 ; the thing it takes, as commonly, in the Ace. 
 KaTahcKOL^eLv is used with the Ace. of the person Matt, 
 xii. 7; Jas. v. 6, Karaicpiveiv (like Kpivetv) also always' 
 with the Ace. of the person (by metonymy also rrjv a/jiapTiav 
 Rom. viii. 3) ; but the punishment to which the person is 
 condemned is put (by the Greeks commonly in the Ace, 
 sometimes in the Gen.) in the Dative, because (as is supposed) 
 this construction was the prevalent one with the verb ^7ifj,iovv, 
 as Oavdrm Matt. xx. 18 ; Mark x. 33 (in this way 2 Pet. ii. 6 
 is to be explained), or expressed ceriphrastically : ivo')(pv elvat 
 OavcLTov Mark xiv. 64. 
 
 The thing or the offence of which one is accused, etc., never 
 stands in the Genitive alone ; for whenever it seems to occur thus, it 
 is to be explained by the law of Attraction (§ 143, 8 sq. p. 285) as an 
 Accusative — as in Acts xxiv. 8 ; xxv. 1 1 ; Luke xxiii. 1 4 (on e-yxo- 
 Xeio-^ai o-Tacrecos see § 133, 9 p. 177), — or the common circumlocutions 
 with prepositions appear, especially Trept rtvos, and also lirC nvi. Cf. 
 Acts xxiii. 6 ; xxiv. 21 and xxvi. 6. On the phrase e/cSocEii/ tl tx 
 ni/os see § 133, 20 p. 182. 
 
 B. §132, lOh.j H. §576; C.§432; D. p. 469; J. §485. 
 
 Among the verbs of perception (physical and mental) i; 
 none is more common than aKoveiv, — the representative, so 
 to speak, of all other similar verbs. The constructions of this 
 
leg THE GENITIVE AFTER VERBS. [§132 
 
 verb in the N. T. ai'e exceedingly various ; yet they connect 
 themselves closely with those preserved in ordinary Greek. 
 
 In the first place, as respects its construction with nouns (on its 
 construction with verbs see § 144, 16 p. 301) the person, so far as 
 he is the author of the {immediately perceived) sound or speech, 
 uniformly stands only in the Genitive, never in the Accusative ; ' 
 the thing either in the Accusative, so far forth as the speech or 
 sound is the natural object of the hearing, or (but only with substan- 
 ]i,5 tives which denote a sound, etc.) in the Genitive, in so far a? by 
 metonymy (cf 16 above, p. 165) instead of the speaking etc. person, 
 the thing i.e. the speech, the sound itself, is introduced ; as, ctKovet tGv 
 Xoywv avTov equiv. to avrov Xiyovro'i. Examples are: Matt. ii. 9 
 dKovo-avT€s ToC fiacTiXiu><s (at the same time with the collateral idea of 
 obeying), Mark vi. 20 ^Sews avrov rqKovtv, Luke ix. 35, etc. ; xi. 31 t^v 
 (Tcxfytav 5oXojU.(i)vos, xxiii. 6 TaX.iX.aLav (i.e. the word Galilee ; aKovuv 
 raAiXaia? could only mean Galilee, i.e. to hear the Galileans speak). 
 Acts vii. 34 (quotn.) Tj/covcra tov a-Tivayfx.ov avrSiv i.e. avrwv (mvatpvTtav, 
 so in John x. 3 ti)s tjuDvrjs avrov, Luke XV. 25 crujxijiiDvia.^ koj. y^opSiv, etc. 
 It is hardly possible to express in translation the difference in signi- 
 fication between <j)u>v^v and <j)u>v^<; aKoveiv, Xoyaiv and Xoyovs d/c., since 
 both expressions are used side by side e.g. John v. 25, 28, 37 ; Acts 
 ix. 4, 7 ; Rev. xiv. 2, 13, etc., and as respects the sense, therefore, it 
 is a matter of indifference whether we read in Mark xiv. 64 -^kowotc 
 T7]v l3Xai7cj)r)fji.lav (Lchm.) or t^s pXa&<f>iq^i,ai (Tdf [Treg. cod. Sin.]), 
 in John vii. 40 dKoucravTcs toiv Xoywv (Lchm. Tdf. [Treg. cod. Sin.]) 
 or Tov Xo-yov (Grsb.), only the Genitive as a causal case is more 
 forcible than the Object-Acc. 
 
 Frequently both limitations — that of the person and that of the 
 thing — are found dependent alike upon the verb. Then a threefold 
 construction occurs : 1) the thing is put in the Ace, the person in 
 the Gen., as Acts i. 4 t^v eTrayyeXtW, yjv ^Kova-are /xov, and perhaps 
 also such sentences as Matt. vii. 24, 26 6 dKovwv /j-ov rov^ Xoyovs, see 
 p. 1 67 note ; 2) the thing in the Ace, the person in the Gen. 
 but with a preposition intervening, as ck, irapd and (contrary to 
 ordinary usage) sometimes airo, as Acts x. 22 aKova-ai pw/iara Trapa aov, 
 John viii. 40 aXridtiav ^v ■^Kovo-a Trapa tov 6eov, 2 Cor. xii. 6 Tdf. [eds. 
 2, 7 ; ed. 8, Treg. Lchm. cod. Sin. om. Ace] aKovei ti c£ kfiov, 1 John i. 5 
 
 1 When sometimes the person alone is found in the Ace. with aKoieiv, he is not 
 the author of the sound, but the object of the hearing, and strictly speaking to 
 be regarded always as the beginning of an Infinitive construction (with the Ace.) ; 
 as, Eph. iv. 21 itye abrhv ijKoiaare etc., not if ye have heard him (personally), but 
 if ye have heard him that he is Christ etc., hence briefly if ye have heard of him. See 
 similar examples in Greek authors in Ar. Pac. 603, Thesm. 164; Xen. Cyr. 1 
 1, 4 ; and cf. my Essay in the Easter programme, Fotsdam. 1855, p. 5. 
 
§ 132.] THE GENITIVE AFTER VERBS. 167 
 
 dyyeXta, ^v aKij/toa/xev air airov ; with this case may be reckoned also 
 those sentences where the object (a thing) is periphrastically expressed 
 by an entire clause or by Trcpt and the Gen. (Acts ix. 13, etc.) or must 
 be supplied e.g. John vi. 45 o otKoveras Trapa tov Trarpos koX /j-adiav (A 
 adds Trjv uXiQdeiav) tpxerai Trpo's /w,6, i. 41; 3) both the limiting 
 
 nouns are put in the Genitive ; as, John xii. 47 edv t« ijlov anovayj tSv 
 pT][mTU)v, xviii. 37 ; Luke vi. 47 ; Acts xxii. 1 aKovo-are juov t^s Trpo^ 
 u/xas aTToXoyia^} 
 
 With the other verbs of perception, such as TrvvOdvfcrOai, ix.avda.vav, 146 
 {Tvvievai,, the object of the perception always stands in the Accusative, 
 the person in the Genitive connected by means of a prep., especially 
 ■!ra^a,(jjLav6ff.v€Lv almost always with am see § 147, 5 p 324). "AirTeo-dat 
 to touch uniformly has the Gen., both of the person and of the thing. 
 
 Remakk. Acts ix. 1 SavXos eri ip.Trviu>v a.TTiiXrj's Koi <j)6vav is an 18 
 imitation of o^eti/, ttvsIv ft-vprnv (B. § 132, 10 h.), and has the stronger 
 signification of breathing, panting. 
 
 . B.§132,101); H.§576; C.§432a.; D.p.470; J. §537. 
 
 Among verbs signifying to taste, to enjoy, to have an advan- 19 
 tage, rfevecrOat has commonly the Genitive, yet is also joined as 
 transitive to the Accusative, John ii. 9; Heb. vi. 5 ; Kopevvvadat, 
 'X^ppTti^eiv (cf. 12 p. IQS^fOvivacrdai take the Genitive. On the 
 phrase irpoaeKd^ovTo Tpo<^<; (Acts xxvii. 36) see 9 p. 161. 
 
 B. §132, N. 20; H. §586; C. §611b.; D. p.391sq.; J. §781. 
 
 Of the familiar classic breviloquence by which in comparisons the 20 
 
 1 We may be in doubt whether in this last case we ought not rather to make 
 the Gen. of the. person depend immediately upon the Gen. of the thing, and in 
 this way to reduce the two limitations to a single one, as is indubitably the case in 
 such sentences as ijKovaa tov ffTevayfiov avrSiVj etc. The question, however, comes 
 to be a, mere dispute about words, since according to both constructions the re- 
 sultant sense is the same. Yet since 1) the construction with adouble Genitive 
 cannot be any more surprising than that with a double Ace. and a double Dat. 
 (§ 138, 27 p. 165), and is unquestionably found in Greek usage, e.g. with KaT-riyopitv 
 Aesch. Ctes. p. 61 tup TeTTapav KaipSiv KarriyopSj aov, ib. p. 84; Dem. Mid.' in., 
 With KOToycX?!' Plat. Soph. 239 E. cf. imAaiiPdveirBtti above 9 p. 160 and KaTa<t>pomv 
 15 p. 165 ; cf. also the double Gen. with Sf7<reat, xp^feiy, B. ^ 132 N. 14 ; C. § 414c; 
 J. 5 529 Obs. 1 ; and 2) the personal Genitive in this case so often precedes the 
 other substantive, or is even separated from it by a word (although position alone 
 would not decide the matter, cf. Luke xiv. 24, etc.), — the grammarian is fully 
 authorized to make both the limiting nouns in the above passages depend on 
 aKoifii'. Prom the circumstance, perhaps not accidental, that the personal lim- 
 itation always precedes the other substantive if ixoieiv also stands before it, and 
 on the other hand, if axoieiv follows it the personal adjunct also is placed after it 
 (John X. 16, 27; Heb. iii. 7, 15, etc.), we may infer at least a close connection 
 between the jiersonal Genitive and the verbal idea. 
 
168 THE GENITIVE OF COirPARISON. [§132. 
 
 whole of the object compared is substituted for a part, or a single 
 substantive takes the place of an entire clause (see the examples in 
 the grammars and cf. Herm. ad Vig. no. 55 and § 133, 10 p. 177 below), 
 the N. T. exhibits a few indubitable instances : Matt. v. 20 iav n.r) 
 irepuTcrevari rj BiKaiocrvvr] vfiuiv ttXuov t(3v •ypa/A//.aT€'a)v instead of njs 
 StKatoo-wTjs T<oi/ ypafi., John v. 36 Tdf. [cod. Sin.J ixui ttjv /xaprvpiav 
 /iet^u) Tov 'Ididvvov for t^s tov 'Iwavyov or ^ o 'loidwi^s cp^et. But 1 Cor. 
 i. 25 does not belong here (see Meyer). 
 
 B.§132,N.21; H.§660d.; C.§511o.; D.p.393; J. § 780, Obs. 1. 
 
 21 Examples of the omission of ij without change of case 
 (as in Latin) in connection with the idea more (jplm) are the 
 following: Matt. xxvi. 53 Trapacrr'^aei fioi irXeico ScoBeKa Xeyea)va<i 
 ay^eXcov (where rj is an explanatory addition) ; and in like 
 manner according to later usage in connection with kTrdvo), 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 6 ax^drj i-rrdvco iTevraicoaiot<; dSeX<f)OL<}. In Acts xxiii. 
 13, 21 ; xxiv. 11 ; xxv. 6 (iv. 22) the case is not evident ; 
 yet these passages, beyond all doubt, must be so construed, 
 and in Mark xiv. 5 the Genitive is required on other grounds 
 also. Rarely »; is expressed : Luke ix. 13. 
 
 Remark. That the Gen. of comparison can be used with Positives 
 also if they include the idea of a comparative (B. § 132, N. 24) is 
 illustrated in the N. T. by Trepio-o-os and the adverb virepeKTre- 
 picra-ov, as Matt. v. 37; Eph. iii. 20. Of. with this the similar 
 construction with irapd § 147, 27 p. 339. On the Gen. of com- 
 parison with the Superlative, see § 123, 14 p. 84. 
 
 B. §132,12; H. §581; O.§406sq.; D. p. 476; J. §604sq, 
 
 il Among the verbs which contain the idea of a comparison, 
 14T irXeoveKrelv, according to the usage of later writers (see 
 Pape's Lex.), is connected as a simple transitive only with the 
 Accusative, after the analogy of many other verbs ; see Wahl. 
 Hence the Passive ifKeoveKrelxxdai (2 Cor. ii. 11), as also in 
 the earlier writers (Xen., Dem.) according to B. § 134, 5. 
 Respecting St.a<f)ipeiv see above, 5 p. 158 ; respecting eXartovv, 
 -ovadai, see under Trapa § 147, 27 p. 339. 
 
 The Dative with riTTdo/j,ai, in 2 Pet. ii. 19 w tk ijnrjTai, 
 rovTcp KOI BeBovXwTai, is an instrumental Dat. ; but it may also 
 be regarded as the Dat. of the Person with a Passive (§ 134, 
 
 2 p. 187), since lyTTaco in later writers (Polyb., Diod.) has 
 become' a pure transitive, like BovX6a>. 
 
§ 132,] THE GENITIVE Or COMPARISOlir. 169 
 
 va-repeiv, -eia-Oai, commonly construed with the Genitive, occurs 
 once also with ciTro, see § 147, 2 p. 322. In the sense cf the Latin 
 desum alicui it is joined to the Dative in the Sept. (Neh. ix. 21 ; Eccl. 
 vi. 2), once also to the Ace. in the sense of the impersonal Stt (Ps. 
 xxii. 1 ovSeV fi,e voTTepi^crei), and this is the reading also of some of the 
 oldest Mss. [Sin. also] in Mark x. 21 (cv o-c vo-repei), which reading 
 Tdf. has adopted instead of the former o-oi ; on the Ace. of the thing 
 (ev, Ti) see § 131, 10 p. 152. £ir€p«';(£iv is construed with the 
 Gen. in Phil. ii. 3, with the Ace. in iv. 7. irepLcrcreveLv by its 
 chief signification, to have plenty, dbundare, (e.g. aprtov, iv iXnlSi) 
 belongs to no. 12 above p. 163. The derived signification to surpass, 
 superare, it acquires, strictly speaking, only by the addition of p-aXXov 
 (Phil. i. 9 ; 1 Thess. iv. 1, 10), yet it is uniformly used absolutely 
 i.e. without the Gen. of the object surpassed (respecting Matt. v. 20 
 see 20 above, p. 168), for which the periphrasis of wapd with the Ace. 
 is used in Eccl. iii. 19, virep in 1 Mace. iii. 30. Of the verbs of 
 ruling PacriXeveiv is joined most frequently to i-jri with the Ace, 
 Eom. V. 14, etc., more rarely to im with the Gen. Kev. v. 10 ; Matt. 
 ii. 22 Tdf. [edsi 2, 7 ; ed. 8 om. prep, with Lchm.]. On the other hand, 
 apx^i-v and rjyep.ovev.eiv always have the Genitive (as has cod. 
 B also [so Sin.] with /Sao-iXeuetv in Matt. ii. 22), and likewise 
 ■f] y el a- a I, but only with o ■fjyovp.a/o'; used substantively. Further, 
 from the N. T. belong here also Kvpuveiv, KaTaSwa<7Ttvuv, av6vTraTeveiv 
 (Acts xviii. 12 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7 ; but ed. 8 avOvTrdrov ovtoi, with Lchm. 
 Treg. cod. Sin. etc.], av6evT€Lv, — all with the Genitive. apxec^a' 
 in the sense of to begin is construed only with diro. 
 
 B. §132, N. 26; H. cf. §509; C. rf. §444; D. p. 388; J. §436 a. 
 
 Since every adjective, participle, verbal adjective, can be 
 rendered a substantive by its position in the sentence (not 
 merely by the article), it can in such circumstances also be 
 construed with the Genitive instead of the constructions, 
 casal (or adverbial), which otherwise properly belong to it. 
 
 Examples are frequent: o dyainjTos p-ov in the address dyamjrot p-ov 
 (1 Cor. X. 14 etc.), iv yewrjToh yuvaiKulv (Matt. xi. 11 ; Luke vii. 28), 
 01 ei'Xoyrip.evoi tov irarpos p.ov (Matt. xxv. 34), to ip,avTov . . .to vp.mv 
 a\jTu>v (Tvp.<^opov (1 Cor. vii. 35 etc.), a.vop,o? and twopos 6eov (1 Cor. 
 ix. 21), kXijtoi 'Irjcrov Xpurrov (Rom. i. 6), SiSaKTol Oeov (John vi. 45), 
 avpp.op(l>oi T^s EtKovos TOV vlov (Rom. viii. 29), and likewise also (Tvptjyvroi. 
 rijs dvoo-TacretDs Rom. vi. 5 (see deWette). Cf. with these the ex- 
 pression diov (not 6iw) vTTOTacra-optvoi in Ign. ad Eph. 5. Hence o 
 Sicrp.io's 'Itjctov XpuTTov (Eph. iii. 1 etc.) in brief for, ' a prisoner /o/" the 
 cause q/" Christ (cf. iv. 1). 
 
170 TIIE GENITIVE OF TIME AND PLACE. [§ 132, 
 
 B.§132,N.27j H. §687 e.§ 584 b.; C.§446b.i D.p.lTS; J.§B078q. 
 
 24 But even when the parts of speech just mentioned retain 
 148 their adjectival nature (in connection with substantives there- 
 fore) they can be construed with the Genitive so far forth as 
 it subjoins the necessary complement of the idea of quality 
 incompletely expressed in the adjective, etc. 
 
 1 Cor. ii. 13 ovk ev SiSaKTOt? avOpionLvrj's croi^ias Xoyots, dX\ ii> 
 SiSoKTOis TTveiJ/xaTos, 2 Pet. ii. 14 xapSta •yeyv/uvacr/iici/rj irXeovefias ([so 
 cod. Sin.j, Rec. -ai?), Jas. i. 13 ^6os direipacrTos Kaxuiv not inexperienced 
 (that would be aireipo's) in evil, but untempted hy evil, — agreeably to 
 the parallelism of the passage and the derivation, from the N. T. 
 TTctpd^eiv.^ Accordingly 'ivoxo<s is construed either (as commonly) 
 with the Dative, Matt. v. 21, 22,^ or with the Genitive, Matt. xxvi. 
 66, etc. (so also Herm. Mand. 2) ; in the same way we have eyyvs 
 Tivl. (for which also iwi with the Dat. is used) and tii/o's. But whether 
 o/tioios was also connected in this way with the Genitive (like similis 
 in Latin) is doubtful, and rests only on John viii. 55 [so cod. Sin.] 
 where Lchm. [so Treg.] has given the preference to vj/lv. In Heb. 
 iii. 12 KapSia. Trovrjpa ctTrio-Tias, the Gen. is rather to be regarded as 
 dependent on the whole expression KapSla Trovrjpd. 
 
 B. §132, N. 28; of. D. p.483sq.; J. § 540, Obs. 
 
 25 To the examples (given in B. note) of a free use of the Genitive with 
 verbs {Xovo-ai irora/noio, etc.) may be added from the N. T. : /Jdirretv to 
 aKjDov Tov SaKTvXov -uSttTos Luke xvi. 24, of. Arat. 650, 868, 961 (Lev. 
 xiv. 16), (Tvfj.4>(iivuv Srjvapiov (see above 13 p. 164). 
 
 B. §182, 14; H. §§590, 591; C. §433; D. §452; J. §§622, B23. 
 
 26 a) Examples of the Genitive in general statements of Time are 
 ;!^et/iu)i/os, i'vktos (especially in connection with fjixipa : wktos koI ■^fi.ipa's 
 and the reverse), /xea-ovvKTiov, aXeKTopoffxavCas (Mark xiii. 35), tov \onrov 
 
 1 Similar is the Genitive KapSias in Acts vii. 51 with StTeplTixriTot in cod. Vat. 
 after the analogy of other verbals compounded with a privative (Grams, as above). 
 But the adjunct Kai roh uaiv immediately following agrees badly with this Genitive. 
 The supposition is much more probable that the Vat. reading arose merely by n 
 clerical error from the Dat. Plur. xapSiais, and accordingly this very old and 
 well-attested [by cod. Sin. also] reading deserves decidedly the preference over the 
 other (t^ KupSlif Kec). On &irirt\os, iflijjos i,ir6 see above, 5 p. 158. 
 
 ' The construction with eis which also occurs in this passage {epoxos eis rriv 
 yiemap) hardly rests on a usage of the word imxos, nor is a verbal idea (^Krfirivat 
 after v. 29, 30 ; xviii. 9, etc.) to be supplied here outright. It is rather — agreeably 
 to the character of the Biblical Greek — a vivid, concrete, circumlocution for 
 the Dative (§ 133, 2. 3 p. 172), called out by the concrete term ■yUvva, in an- 
 tithesis to the preceding abstract term Kp'imi and the word amttpiif used in a 
 similar sense. 
 
§ 133.( THE DATIVE. 171 
 
 (Gal. vi. 17). But it is never used in definite specificatiois ; hence in 
 Matt. xxiv. 20 quite regularly /nij yiv-qTai fj fjtvyr] u/iSv p^et/iSvos /J-riSk 
 <ra/8y8aTu), and likewise idiomatically oij/e ... St; rov o-a/S/Sdrou (see 7 
 above. Rem. p. 159). (The Accusative to /liv a-a^^aTov Luke xxiii* 
 56 is used according to § 131, 11 p. 152.) In connection with adjec- 
 tives or participles the above described specifications of time pass 
 Over into the Gen. absol. ; as, /j.eoT;s wkto^, . . . rifiipa's Matt. xxv. 6 ; 
 Acts xxvi. 13 ; opOpov /3a6ia>'s Luke xxiv. 1 etc. 
 
 b) The Genitive in general specifications of Place is more 149 
 rare, — as in the classics. Here only two examples from Luke can 
 be adduced : v. 1 9 //.r] ivpovrs's tt o t a s (sc. 68oC) acreviyKuxriv avrov, and 
 xix. 4 €/c€iVi;s ■^/itAAev Siepp^eerflat. 
 
 In both the preceding cases (a. and b.) expressions with prepositions 
 most commonly appear, even as the received text adds Scd in both the 
 passages just quoted. 
 
 B. §132, N. 30; H. §509 3.; C. §438; D. §399 3-; J. §436,lb. 
 
 The word 981;? is found construed in Greek fashion (eis ^ov) but 27 
 once, Acts ii. 31 Lchm. [Treg.], although even here the important 
 authority of codd. Vat. and Sin. (followed by Tdf.) opposes this con- 
 struction. Elsewhere the word has directly the signification under- 
 world, hell, and is construed accordingly ; thus eis ah-qv Acts ii. 27 
 (quotn.), Iv TO) ^§27 Luke xvi. 23 ; TnJXai, kXu<; ^8ou, etc. Hence that 
 even in the phrase ecus oiSoi; (Matt. xi. 23 ; Luke x. 15) it is not to be^ 
 taken otherwise is plain. 
 
 Remark. Very extraordinary for the language of the N. T. would 
 be the ellipsis — after the analogy of the above ets ^8ou — of y^ in 
 Heb. xi. 26 Lchm. tuv ev KlyvTrTov 6r]cravpoiv, and probably hardly 
 to be regarded as anything more than a clerical error of cod. A, (cod. 
 Clarom. [Sin. also] omits iv, and the Vulg. translates Aegyptiorum.) 
 
 Thk Dative. 
 B. §133; H. §594; C. §448; D. §455,- J. §S86. 
 
 As in the general Grammar, we take as the basis of our 
 treatment of the Dative the two leading distinctions in the 
 same, viz. the Dative of the Person or of the Object af- 
 fected (the Dative proper), and the Dative of the Thing 
 (the Ablative). 
 
 A. Dative of the Pfeson or op the Object ArrECTED. 
 
 In this use it coincide? in general witlj the Dative of other 1 
 
 languages, and the grammarian, therefore, can conveniently 
 
 pass over all those instances which need no explanation, such 
 
 as BoDvai, TrapaSovvai, \eyeiv Ttvt, ireiOe&dcu Ty aKrjQela, ojcdkov- 
 
172 THE DATIVE. [§ 133. 
 
 6eiv rivt etc., and likewise those in which we, to be sure, 
 generally avail ourselves of prepositions, yet the identity of 
 which with the examples just given is at once obvious ; as, 
 uTToXcr/eladai tlvl to defend oneself be/ore any one Acts xix. 
 33 etc., TrpodvfJLLav, rjv inrep xjjjLOiv Kavxcbfuu MuKeSoaiv to the 
 Macedonians 2 Cor. ix. 2, ■^Ireva-curOai, dvdpd)Troi<;, t&J 6e& Acts 
 V. 4, TrpoaavaXSiaai tov ^lov larpol'i on physicians Luke viii. 43, 
 XaXelv TLvi to talk to [Germ, zw] one. 
 
 2 As everywhere, so especially in the N. T., for the Dative of 
 150 the Person various periphrases with prepositions are 
 
 substituted : the language bringing to view the manifold in- 
 ternal and ideal significations of the Case by the more concrete 
 terms of relationship, viz. the prepositions, (in English by 'to,' 
 ' for,' ' towards,' etc.). Inasmuch as here also the grammarian 
 inust proceed upon the views set forth § 130, 1 p. 141 and 
 § 132, 2 p. 156, he must restrict himself to exhibiting this 
 general usage in those examples which are peculiarly charac- 
 teristic of the N. T. 
 
 3 The most common circumlocutions which are used 
 instead of, or in the sense of, the Dative of the object 
 affected, are formed by means of the preposition's et? (of 
 which a few examples have been already given, § 131, 6 p. 149 
 and § 132, 24 p. 170 note), tt/jo? with the Ace. (as in Xiyeov 
 Twl and irpo's nva), fierd with the Gen. (as in XaXelv tlvi 
 and fMSTo. Twoi John iv. 26, 27) avv more rarely iv and iiri 
 with the Dat. — as will appear from the contents of this entire 
 section. 
 
 More peculiar are the periphrases by means of the prepositions 
 oirt'tru), e/xTrpoo-^ej', and the Hebraistic ivdnnov ("'jBI:). Thus we often 
 find oTricroi instead of the Dative (or the more classic /Acra Rev. vi. 8 ; 
 xiv. 13) with aKoXovOelv (see Wahl), with which compare Luke xix. 14 
 aTreCTTCiAav Trpec/Jctai' ottlctui airov, Acts XX. 30 OTrocnrav nva OTTurtn 
 avrZv {after them i.e. to attract to themselves) and 22 below, p. 184; 
 ifx-TT pocrOtv and ivuiiriov {KaTevwTriov) : Matt. v. 16 (to <^(3s) Xa/xipaTta 
 ifi-TrpocrOiv tuiv avOpiawuiv, xi. 26 ovtw; iyivtro eiSoKia ifjiTrpoaOiv (TOV, 
 xviii. 14 ovK fCTTLv BiX-qp-a ipjrpoQrBev tov narpo? p.ov, x. 32, 33 ; xi. 10 ; 
 xxiii. 14, etc., Trpoa-Kvveiv (§ 131, 4 p. 147) ivtoTriov tivos Luke iv. 7 ; 
 Rev. XV. 4 (and so the Sept. after the Hebrew : Ps. Ixxxv. 9 ; Isa. 
 Ixvi. 23) ; further Luke viii. 47 aT^yyciXav ivuiTriov Travros tov Xaov, 
 XV. 10 ylveTai x^-P^ evtoTTLov Ttav dyyeXoDv, xxiv. 11 ecfxivrjcTav ivtlitnov avTwv 
 (likewise <f)avep<o6rjvai and the adj. d</>ai'^s, 2 Cor. vii. 12 ; Heb. iv. 13), 
 
§133.] CONSTRUCTION OF mo-reieiv. 173 
 
 Acts vi. 5 fjpecrev 6 Xd-yos iviLmov tov irXvj^ovs — and in accordance 
 with this also the verbals dpecrTo's, empEo-ros, drrdScKTOs, ivdnriov Tiros 
 1 John iii. 22 ; Heb. xiii. 21 etc., ctjiuDjuos, aviyKXriTO's KareviaTTiov rtvos 
 Eph. i. 4; Col. i. 22 (cf. 14 below, p. 179, and § 134, 3 p. 188) 
 Corresponding to KavxacrOaL rivi above (1 p. 172) we have KavxacrOai 
 evcoTnov tov Oiov 1 Cor. i. 29, to 6upas ftoi dvEcpy/iO'r/s (2 Cor. ii. 12), 
 Ovpav ivuiiTLov crov dveu-y/x. Rev. iii. 8, to the common o/AoA.oyEiv tivC 
 the construction with IjHTrpoo-^Ev (7 p. 176) and with ivuimov Rev. iii. 
 5, etc. 
 
 In all the above passages the Dative might be used just as well, but 
 the adverbial periphrasis is more lively, pictorial, and suited to the 
 Oriental way of looking at things ; hence it is added as a sort of com- 
 plement even to a preceding Dative, as Luke i. 75 Xarpeveiv airu . . . 
 ivunriov avTov. 
 
 Remark, a/jutprdvav also, which in the N. T. retains only the 
 secondary signification to fail towards one (to sin), ought strictly to 
 have been joined to the Dative of the person, as indeed is frequently 
 the case in the Sept. (Judg. xi. 27 ; 2 Chron. xix. 10, etc.) ; yet 
 everywhere the periphrasis with eJs appears instead (as frequently 
 also even in classic writers, see Pape), Matt, xviii. 21 etc. So in the • 
 O. T. also, where too ivavrCov, h/avn are connected with dfjuxpTavav. 
 
 The constructions, in part very diversified, of the following 151 
 verbs, ir i,<neveiv, ire'Troidevat, iXvl^ecv, 6 fioXoyelv, 4 
 deserve a special and comprehensive exposition, since these 
 words as respects their signification also were used often in a 
 decidedly different sense after the introduction of the new- 
 religion from that which they anciently bore. 
 
 Ilto-TEvEiv. Passing over all those passages where it is used in 
 the ordinary sense (ffive credit to, put faith in) and construed as 
 usual, we notice its appearance 
 
 1) Absolutely, equivalent to tticttiv ex^iv (Mark ix. 42 Tdf. [cod. 
 Sin.]) i.e. trustfully (/i^ hunKpidivTo., cf. Matt. xxi. 21, 22 ; Jas. i. 6) to 
 cleave to the new dispensation of grace with faith in God the Redeemer : 
 Mark xvi. 16 ; Luke viii. 12, 50 ; John iv. 53, etc. ; also in the Passive, 
 Rom. X. 10. 
 
 2) With the Dative, and that a) of the Person, which is 
 indeed the common construction, but in the majority of cases is applied 
 also to this new idea; as, Muuo-Et John v. 46, 'Itodwy Matt. xxi. 26, 
 32 ; Mark xi. 31 etc., t(3 'Itjo-ov Matt, xxvii. 42 Lchm. ; John v. 46 ; 
 viii. 31 etc., tw irefiij/avTi /lie John v. 24, tu Kvpiio Acts v. 14 ; xviii. 8, 
 Toi OeS xvi. 34; Rom. iv. 3 (quotn.) ; I^t. iii. 8 etc. 'The gradual 
 transition into the above special N. T. signification is to be explained 
 
174 CONSTRUCTION OF m<rT€<i6iv. (§133. 
 
 by the common ellipsis of a clause, as on £i/aI, et, iariv XpttrTos etc. 
 b) Instead of the Dative of the Person who is believed, frequently 
 by metonymy an abstract in the Dative is substituted, as rg ypa^rj 
 Kal ™ Xo'yw John ii. 22, ypajxixua-iv, priiJi.acnv v. 47, rots yeypaix/j.ivoi's 
 Acts xxiv. 14, Tois epyoK {ft-ov) John x. 38, (xkojJ xii. 38 (quotn.), 
 &kr)6ua. 2 Thess. ii. 12, ovo/iaTi 'Iijcroi! 1 John iii. 23. 
 
 3) Exclusively pertaining to the new signification of the 
 word is its construction — very frequent, particularly in John — 
 with ets T IV a to believe on {in) any one, and here again a) with 
 the Ace. of the Person: Matt, xviii. 6 ; Mark ix. 42 Lchm. ; 
 John ii. 11 ; iii. 16, 18 etc. ; Acts x. 43 etc. ; Rom. x. 14 ; Gal. ii. 16 ; 
 Phil. i. 29 ; 1 Pet. i. 8 — everywhere in reference to God or the 
 person of Christ; and alternating with the Dative 1 John v. 10 ; 
 b) by metonymy with the Ace. of an abstract-^ again in John, 
 especially tis to ovofia 'Irjcrov i. 12; ii. 23 ; iii. 18 ; 1 John v. 13, also 
 £is TO i^S? John xii. 36, eis rrjv /jtaprvplav 1 John v. 10. That in this con- 
 struction the ellipsis of a clause is, logically considered, no longer 
 demanded, is obvious ; hence the word in its new sense, when connected 
 with nouns, gradually settled upon this construction. 
 
 4) Far more rare is the construction cTiit Tiva, instead of that 
 with els, and in the same sense. Thus im tov Kvpiov Acts ix. 42 ; xi. 
 17 ; xvi. 31, cf xxii. 19 ; Rom. iv. 5, 24. This use is uncertain in 
 the gospels : Matt, xxvii. 42 (cod. B [n Tdf. Treg.]), John iii. 15 Lchm. 
 
 5) The construction with eirt and the Dative of the Person 
 seems to belong more to the 0. T. ; hence in the quotation from 
 Isaiah (xxviii. 16 Alex.) in Rom. ix. 33 ; x. 11 ; 1 Pet. ii. 6, cf. 1 Tim. 
 i. 16. Matt, xxvii. 42 Tdf [ed. 7] is doubtful. The construction 
 with €7ri and the Dative of the Thing (Luke xxiv. 25 ; Rom. iv. 
 18) rests upon the Greek use of the preposition em with the Dat., 
 see § 147, 24 p. 336. 
 
 6) The rarest construction is with the preposition iv, — unques- 
 tionably supported only in Mark i. 15, and there with the Dat. of the 
 thing : iv tm eiayyeXim. Respecting its force (whether to believe in 
 . . . , trust in ... , believe through, by virtue of, the gospel) inter- 
 
 152 preters differ ; and it is the more difficult to arrive at anything certain 
 on this point, as in the other passage (John iii. 15) the mss. and 
 editors also disagree (Lchm. in avrov [N eis], Tdf. [Treg.] iv avrS). 
 The Seventy, in accordance with the Hebr. original (cf. Gesen. under 
 ■jttX Hiphil, and Fritzsche on Mark p. 26), employ the construction ev 
 Tivi frequently in the sense ' to trust in,' e.g. Jer. xii. 6 ; Ps. Ixxvii. 22 ; 
 1 Sam. xxvii. 12 Alex. 
 
 The (Pauline) formula rrto-Tos iv Kvpuo, iv XpurrS 'Irjaov (Eph. i. 1 ; 
 Col. i. 2, etc.) did not originate in the verbal construction, cf. 5 and 
 6 p. 175. 
 
§133.] CONSTRUCTION OF iretrcie^voi, IWC^evv. I75 
 
 7) The construction with the object-Accusative (of the thing) 
 in the sense ' to believe something' as tpyov Acts xiii. 41 ([so cod. 
 Sin.j ; Grsb. <o), Travra 1 Cor. xiii. 7, ayaTT-qv 1 John iv. 16 (hence in 
 the Passive: to fiafn-vptov rj/jiwv 2 Thess. i. 10, cf. 1 Tim. iii. 16). 
 Further, the Ace. of the object with TrurreveLv in the sense of to entrust, 
 confide, as avrov or iavrov tivi John ii. 24, and the allied construction 
 of the Ace. with the Passive (Tna-Tevo/jMi n, see § 134, 7 p. 189) find 
 their basis in the ordinary Greek usage. 
 
 ILeTToiOevai to trust admits in the main of the same constructions, 
 being joined 1) with the Dative, as in Greek writers, e.g. iavria, 
 Sco-jnois, i^ttKo^, 2 Cor. X. 7 ; Phil. i. 14 ; Philem. 21 ; 2) w i th e is, 
 but only once, €ts v/x.as Gal. v. 10 ; 3) with cirt and the Ace. of 
 the Person, Matt, xxvii. 43 Tdf. [Treg. cod. Sin.]; 2 Cor. ii. 3 ; 
 2 Thess. iii. 4; 4) with iiri and the Dative, — and that both of 
 the person, Luke xviii. 9 ; 2 Cor. i. 9 ; Heb. ii. 13 (quotn.), doubtfully 
 in Matt, xxvii. 43 (B), and also of the thing, Luke xi. 22 (TravoirkCa), 
 Mark x. 24 (xpi?/*ao-tv) . 
 
 In the phrase ireir. €v rtvt the expression with iv, if a personal 
 Dative follows, is more an abverbial adjunct designating the ground 
 of the trust ; hence it is commonly connected with one of the above 
 constructions or with a clause introduced by on, as Gal. v. 10 ; 
 2 Thess. iii. 4 ; Phil. ii. 24 (iv Kvp'uo), cf. 6 below and 23 p. 185. But 
 it is otherwise with the DatiVe of the thing, as irewoiOh/ai. iv a-apKi Phil, 
 iii. 3, 4 (a periphrasis for the Dative above : to trust in the flesh ; cf. 21 
 and 22 p. 183). 
 
 'EXTrt'^eii' to hope, in the earlier Greek prose uniformly prefers, 
 with the exception of the object- Accusative(dya0a Xen. ;8ouXj;crii/ Thuc, 
 also tI ■n-apd Ttvos Dem.), the verbal construction (with the Infin. etc.). 
 The connection with the Dative in Thuc. 3. 97 ry rvxg iX.iriaa's (but 
 in the following clause with on, where tvxt] is the subject) gives 
 EA.7rto-as the sense of Treirot^tus, trusting fortune, parallel to the pre- 
 ceding rovTOK ireuTOeK — a sense in which cXTrt'Sa ex€tv also is often 
 construed by the Greeks with iv and iirC with the Dat. On the othpr 
 hand, as early as in the Sept., where the Hebr. words bn^ , non , and 
 naa are generally all translated by iXirl^eiv, the construction with 
 nouns has become by far the predominant one, in fact almost the only 
 one in use, and from thence passed also into N. T. usage. The con- 
 struction most current in the Sept. (in consequsnce of the above 
 Hebrew verbs being joined with bx and bs) is wit i ctti — both with 
 persons and abstract terms — and likewise also ii the N. T. ; that is 
 to say, 1) with iirl and the Accusative, frequent in the 0. T., 
 in the N. T. indubita,bly only in 1 Tim. v. 5 ; 1 Pet. i. 13 (iii. 5) ; 
 but 2) most comiponly with iiri and the Dative, Eom. xv. 12 
 
176 CONSTRUCTION OF bfioKoySv. [§ 133. 
 
 163 (quotn.), 1 Tim. iv. 10 ; vL 17, cf. 1 John iii. 3 ; 3) with eis (rare 
 in the Sept. e.g. Isa. li. 5), as eis ov John v. 45 ; 2 Cor. i. 10, eis 6e6v 
 
 1 Pet. iii. 6, cf. i. 21 also Acts xxiv. 15 IXiriSa ex<ov eis Oeov (but with 
 Ace. and Infin. following) ; 4) wi th ev (likewise rare in the Sept., 
 Ps. xxxii. 21 ; 2 Kings xviii. 5, since there the Hebr. a also is com- 
 monly rendered by iiri, e.g. with fibri in Ps. v. 12 ; vii. 2 ; xxv. 20, 
 etc.), 1 Cor. XV. 19. Respecting Phil. ii. 19 (i\ir. iv Kvpita followed 
 by the Ace. and Infin.) cf. the similar use in 5 p. 175 and 23 p. 185. 
 
 Only in one passage (Matt. xii. 21) does it appear with the simple 
 Dative, and that, strange to say, a quotation from the O. T. (Isa. 
 xlii. 4), where the Sept., which Matt, seems to follow here, gives the 
 common construction Im. tw ovofxaTi. Fritzsche and others have 
 therefore taken offence at this Dative ; on account, however, of the 
 almost unanimous authority [Sin. also] in its favor, it is retained by 
 the editors, and must be explained by the analogy of the construction 
 ireTToiOivai rivi. Of the remaining constructions those with iv and iiri 
 with the Dative adhere most closely to classic usage, those with eis 
 and cTrl with the Accusative belong exclusively to the later (biblical) 
 Greek. 
 1 'O/ioXo'yctv is connected 1) in the signification to confess, as 
 commonly, with the Dative of the person and Accusative of the thing, 
 as Matt. vii. 23 ; Acts xxiv. 14, etc. 2) in the signification to praise 
 (equiv. to ij/dWeLv) o/ioXoyciv, commonly i^ofioXoyiLCTOai, is likewise 
 connected with the Dative of the person or of the per.sonified object 
 (ovofioTi) ; but the use is borrowed from the Sept.' where the Hiphil 
 iTiifi is regularly translated thus ; hence in the quotations from the 
 0. T. in Rom. xiv. 11 ; xv. 9, cf. Heb. xiii. 15 ; Matt. xi. 25 ; Luke 
 X. 21; 3) in connection with the Accusative of the person 
 Jesus (Rom. x. 9 ; 1 John ii. 23) it acquires the specific N. T. sig- 
 nification to cotifess Jesus (as Redeemer, etc.), and the expression is 
 then to be taken, in analogy with iria-Teveiv tlvi above, as an abbreviated 
 clause (with a participle), such as appears in full in 1 John iv. 2 
 ojaoXoyeiv Irjcrovv Xpicrrbv iv crapKt iXrjXvOora, 2 John 7. The change 
 into the Passive occurs Rom. x. 10. 4) The construction with 
 Iv Tivt in the same sense is peculiar to Matthew and Luke; as. 
 Matt. X. 32 £v ifioC (Vulg. me), iv avrS (Vulg. eum D avrov), Luke 
 xii. 8. But this is not a Hebraism, see Fritzsche ad Matt. p. 386. 
 5) The person before whom as witness, or in whose presence, the 
 confession is given, is expressed by means of the preposition tfiirpo- 
 o-Otv in the last two passages quoted, by ivwiriov in Rev. iii. 5. 
 Cf. above, 3 p. 173. 
 
 1 Hence the Apocalypse connects even aiveTv with the Dative (xix. 5) 
 according to a less common usage of the Sept. (Jer. xx. 13 ; 1 Chron. xvl. 36 
 
 2 Chron. xx. 19, etc.). 
 
§133.] THE DATIVE. 177 
 
 B. §133, a a and b; H. §602; C. §450; D.p. 489; J. §§692. 601. 
 
 With all verbs (both simple and compound) whose i: ignifica- 8 
 tion can be traced back to the idea of union or approach 
 in a friendly or a hostile sense, manifold periphrases by 
 means of prepositions make their appearance, as elsewhere, 
 instead of the Dative. 
 
 Thus for example we have /xaxccrOai, SiaKpivea-Bai, StaXeyco-^ai, ofJuXelv 154 
 Ttvi and -Trpos Tiva, fjLiyiriav /Aera tivos and iv t iv i, ttoXc/aeiv 
 fie TO, Tivos, KpivecrOaL (to contend) t ivi and /leTo. t6vos Matt. v. 40 ; 
 1 Cor. vi. 6 ; with other verbs there is no circumlocution, as iTriTiOe- 
 itOiu, Trpocrep^etv, KaraXkaTTUV, SiaXXa-TTecrOal tiv i, etc. Notice, in par- 
 ticular, with the Dative : SiaKaTeXeyxfo-Oai rtvi by controversy to convince 
 Acts xviii. 28 ; eTepo^vyovvm awiarous in a peculiar sense, see the 
 lexicons ; yafjLrj&rjvai (of the woman, p. 55) nvt after the Latin nubere, 
 1 Cor. vii. 39; Mark x. 12 Tdf. [ed. 7j. Respecting irpocrix^iv d™ 
 see § 147, 3 p. 323. 
 
 B. §133, 2c. d.; H. §605; C. §452; D. p. 489 0bs.; J. §589. 
 
 Among verbs (mostly compounded with a preposition) of exhort- 9 
 i n g and requesting the following deviate from the usual construc- 
 tion; Trapaiviiv with the Acc, Acts xxvii. 22; evxea-Bai rtn and 
 Trpos TLva (2 Cor. xiii. 7); KaTapacrdai with the Acc. Mark xi. 21 ; 
 [Luke vi. 28 Lchm. Treg. Tdf. cod. Sin.J ; Jas. iii. 9, with the Dative 
 Luke vi. 28 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7]. Among those of censuring and 
 reproaching oveiSi^eiv has uniformly the Acc, both of the per- 
 son and of the thing, Matt. v. 1 1 etc. ; hence in the Passive, 1 Pet. iv. 
 14; e-yicaXeiv tlvi and Kara Ttvos (Rom. viii. 33), — the thing 
 
 always with irept and the Gen. Acts xxiii. 29 ; xxvi. 2 (according to 
 § 147, 30 p. 341), xxvi. 7 ; in xix. 40 also o-Tacretos, as the following 
 article r^s shows, still depends on Trept (cf 18 below, p. 181) ; /*«/«■" 
 tj>e(T6ai with the Acc, Heb. viii. 8 (where, however, according to 
 Bleek the reading airois and the connection of the same with Xcyei are 
 to be preferred). Other verbs, as EfA|8piju.ao-^ai, hrnifji^, are unifornaly 
 construed only with the Dative. 
 
 B. §133, 2 f. and N. 4; H. §603; C. §451; D.p. 490; J.§694. 
 
 An example of the Dative with o avTos is found in 1 Cor. xi. 5. 10 
 Of the brachylogj already mentioned (§ 132, 20 p. 167 sq.) and 
 peculiar to the ancient languages — (comparison with the whole 
 instead of the part) — see several examples in the Apocalypse : ix. 10 
 eXOV(Tiv ovpa,'; opLOiai cTKopirt'ots, xiii. 11 Kepara Svo o/jioia apvlio. Sim- 
 ilar is Jude 7 and the construction with UT6nij,cK 2 Pet. i. 1. In a solitary 
 instance, in a quotation, As with the Nominative is loosely used with 
 onoiow instead of the Dative, Rom. ix. 29 (after the Sept., hot the Heb.). 
 23 
 
178 DATIVUS OOMMODI. [§138 
 
 The Dativus Commodi and Related Datives. 
 B. §133, 2g.; H. §697; C. §453; D. §458; J. §695sqq. 
 
 11 To the Dative known under the designation Dativus 
 commodi et in commodi, many and iu part very peculiar 
 constructions and phrases with the Dative may be referred. 
 
 Thus ii.apTvpe.lv Tivi means to give testimony in one's favor, as 
 Luke iv. 22, etc. ; by metonymy it is construed also with the Dative 
 of the thing, as rg dXiy^eto, John v. 33 of. Luke xi. 48 etc., for which 
 also the circumlocution with -n-epi. and the Gen. is often used. On the 
 other hand we find KaTaixaprvpiiv tlv6% according to § 132, 16 p. 165. 
 Notice further Matt. xiii. 14 dvairA-iypovTai avToi% rj Trpo<f>7p-eia tov 
 'Hcrdtov,^ 1 Cor. vii. 28 6Xiij/Lv rrj crap k I t^ovcriv, 2 Cor. ii. 13 ovk 
 155 IcryriKa avicnv t(3 rrviv jxaT i fidv (not equiv. to ev t^ crapKi, iv tu 
 TTve.vix.a.Ti), 2 Cor. ii. 1 txpLva iixavrif, etc. 
 
 12 In this way is to be explained the use of the Dative in 
 various connections which is especially characteristic of the 
 Apostle Paul, and rests on profound views of language. 
 
 Thus, after the analogy of the common phrase ^yv t<^ 6iw, Kvplt^ 
 (Rom. vi. 10, 11 ; xiv. 8 ; eavrio xiv. 7 ; 2 Cor. v. 15), the expression 
 aTTodavelv Tivtin the same passages is formed; and this verb is 
 used by metonymy with the Dat. of the abstract, rrj d/xaprtoi Rom. vi. 
 2, 10, 11, T(3 vofjLu) Gal. ii. 19 cf. Rom. vii. 4. In the same way in 
 the 1st of Peter (ii. 24) in contrast with ry SiKaLo<rvvy ^rj the word 
 oLTroyevea-Oai alsc, which according to its composition ought to 
 ' have the Genitive, is construed with the Dative rais d/iaprtats. Paul 
 connects the same view with other predicates in order to express 
 the ideal reference of an ordinary and every-day act to God or any 
 individual, or even to a (substituted) abstract term ; see the entire 
 argument in Rom. xiv. 4-8, where, besides the verbs above-named, 
 also tftpoveiv, ia-Oieiv, cniK itrOUiv, arqKav,^ ■klttthv stand in the same 
 construction. In Gal. v. 1 rg iKevOepia {■§) rjna^ Xpiorbs riXivdl 
 
 ^ By comparison with this passage the Dative in Luke xviii. 31 is explained 
 most satisfactorily, Te\e<r6'fjaeTat ircLvra Tct yeypafifieva 6ict ruv irpotpriTui/ t^ uiijJ 
 to" iii/eptlmov ; here the Dative depends on both predicates by virtue of the (rxvf'<i 
 &iri Koimv (as in § 132, 9 p. 160 the Accusative with iTriKa^eaSai), although ex- 
 ternally it belongs rather to the former (TeAeo-fl^o-fTai). The simple resolution of 
 the Dative into TrepX tov vlov is thoroughly unphilologlcal, and the Vulgate's 
 translation (rfe ^&) according to the above exposition is only to be defended 
 in a general way. The Dative if referred to yeypaiiiiha alone, must at least 
 have been preceded by ivl, as in John xii. 16. [Yet cf. 3 Mace. vi. 41.] 
 
 ^ In 2 Cor. i. 24 (t^ yhp Triarei IffT^/caTc) the assumption of this Dat. would 
 ; impart to the passage too high an oratorical coloring. It is more probable that 
 Tp iriiTTfi here is to be taken in the sense of the phrase o-T^/ceic iv Ty iriaTsi which 
 elsewhere occurs (1 Cor. xvi. 13), see Meyer and 19 below, p. 182. 
 
§133.] DATIVUS ETHICUS. 179 
 
 poKTcv etc., rfj ikevdepia is according to both readings equally to le 
 taken as a Dat. com. (see especially Meyer pp. 256, 259). The Dati'se 
 in Rom. vi. 20 iXeuOepoi rJTe rfj SiKaioa-vvy is peculiar and hard to 
 reproduce ; it is called out by the parallelism of SovXaj^eVres t<3 Oeia 
 in vs. 22 (and to be rendered perhaps towards, in relation to, but not 
 from). 
 
 B. §133,N.5; H. §599; C. §462e.; D.§459; J. § 600, 2. 
 
 The softer Dat. com., commonly designated by the gram- 13 
 marians the Dativus ethicus,is not a mere peculiarity of 
 the earlier language, but a genuine product of the language 
 of the people, whence it has found its way so frequently into 
 the poems of Homer, the writings of Herodotus, Plato, etc. 
 Accordingly the assumption of such a Dative in the N. T. is 
 quite in accordance with the genius of its language. Of. the 
 note on § 129 a, 5 p. 140. 
 
 Here belong : Rev. ii. 1 6 Ip^^o/iat crot ra)^ koI ttoXe/x^o-o) j«.eT avriov, 
 5 ep)(Ofi,a( cToi Koi Kiv-qaio ttjv Xv)(yCav ; ' probably also 1 John v. 1 6 if, 156 
 according to § 129, 14 note p. 133, we assume o ^cos as subject for 
 Soicrei and refer a i t (3 as Dat. eth. to the person atrrja-as ; and, according 
 to many interpreters, also the critically and hermeneutically difficult 
 passage Heb. iv. 2 (according to the more ancient reading [so n] — 
 received alsoby Tdf. [eds. 2, 7, 8] — fj-rj <rvyKfKpaij.ivo<; rrj irt'crTei tois olkov- 
 aofriv i.e. the word which in the hearers was not mixed with faith, see 
 Mey. [i.e. Lunemann] in loc. On the other hand, for Lchm.'s reading 
 [so Treg.J see Bleek II. p. 501 sqq.). Simpler and easily intelligible 
 is the Dat. in John vi. 13 a iTrepicrcrevaav rot? /3efipwK6(jLv. Finally, the 
 Dative in airoTaiacrOal. tlvi to dismiss any one, bid him farewell, 
 literally to withdraw one's self for one ; this phrase is quite un- Attic, 
 in fact solecistic (ck^uA.oi' ttoa/v Phryn.), and first made its appearance 
 in the Alexandrian age (Joseplus, Philo), but later became pretty 
 general : Mark vi. 46 ; Luke ix. 61, etc. 
 
 B. §133, N. 7; H. §601; C. §462; D. §459; J. §600, 1. 
 
 Also of the Dative of subjective judgment — closely re- If 
 lated to the preceding — there are several unquestionable examples : 
 in particular. Acts vii. 20 ^v do-rctos t<3 ^ecS (in the sight of God), 
 2 Cor. X. 4 OTrXa Swaro. t(3 Oiia (Luth. mdchtig vor Gott, [A.V. m irg. 
 to God^) ; 2 Pet. iii. 14 is doubtful (see § 134, 2 p. 187). From the 
 
 1 DeWette differently, — taking <roi. in the sense of to thee. But the appeal to 
 iJKeH' Tivi Pint. Aem. Paul. 16 is not in point, since there the Dative depends on 
 the expression ^ke /jinifiav. In Philustr. Vit. ApoII. 2. 14 fiKftv riyi has quite 
 another sense, and in Matt. xxi. 5 (Zech. ix. 9) <rot is a literal translation of the 
 Hebr. "ip- [This note, as respeets de Wette, seems to be founded in a mistake,] 
 
180 DATIVE AFTER SUBSTANTIVES. [§133. 
 
 0. T. cf. Jonah iii. 3 7roX(.s fieyaXr] ™ Oew. But it corresponds more 
 with N. T. usage (cf. 3 above p. 172) to periphrase this Dative by 
 means of a preposition, and none was better suited to this purpose 
 than ivdnriov (Hebr. ''33b, Eng. before i.e. in the sight of) e.g. 
 5iKaios, j3hi\vyiJ.a iviLiriov tov Oeov, /te'yas ivdnriov Kvpiov (Luke i. 6 Lchm. 
 15 ; xvi. 15 ; Acts iv. 19, etc.), woXurcXts ivu'nnov Oeov 1 Pet. iii. 4 (cf. 
 the analogous use of ivwTriov with the so-called Dativus Passivi § 134, 
 3 p. 188), as well as IvavTi, ivavriov, which is often interchanged 
 with ivunnov in the various readings, Acts viii. 21 ; Luke i. 6 Tdf. 
 [Treg.J, xxiv. 19, and the compound KarevunrLov see 3 p. 173. 
 
 B. § 133, 2 h. ; H. § 595 d. ; C. §§ 454,e. 464 c. ; J. § 588. 
 
 15 Some relics of the construction (formerly pretty extended, and 
 called by the old grammajians crp^^/ia KoXoc^iovtoi') of the Dative in 
 immediate dependence upon substantives, particularly those 
 whose stem-verb permits the same construction (as ^porol'; Sor^p Aesch.]' 
 have been preserved in 2 Cor. ix. 11,12 (where in both cases rJi ^eo! is 
 best made to depend on eixapia-Tia) , and in 2 Cor. xi. 28 Lchm. [Treg. 
 Tdf.] according to the reading eTtiaracrk /a o i. Respecting the signi- 
 fication of this expression interpreters differ. If the Dative is genuine 
 (which, according to the authorities [n* also] and the rendering of 
 cod. Claromont. in me, is hai dly to be doubted) tTrto-Tao-is cannot sig- 
 nify attention, because then the Dative would not stand in the relation 
 of verbal regimen to the substantive. The most probable assump- 
 tion is that as aTrdcrTacns (from a<f>icrTacr6aL tivos) signifies defection, 
 so eTTtoTacrts (from e^torao-^ai tlvl) signifies accession, uprising (Acts 
 xxiv. 12), and iirla-Tacris /j-ol denotes concourse, thronging, to me 
 (cTTio-Tatris occurs in the sense of thronging also in App. B.C. 4, 129), 
 more precisely my being encompassed, beleaguered, and the detention 
 caused thereby, with which the Dative is as necessary as the Gen. is 
 with d-jToo-T-acrts, di^io-Tao-^at. Cf. Etickert in loc. The Dative with 
 
 157 participles and adjectives used substantively is still more plainly an 
 effect of the verbal power of both these parts of speech, and needs no 
 further confirmation by means of examples. 
 
 B. § 133, 3 and N. 10 ; H. § 605 ; C. § 699 f. g. ; J. § 622, Obs. 1 ; § 623, Obs. 4 ; § 636, Obs. 
 
 16 That compound verbs, particularly those compounded with 
 iTvv, iv, ini, are joined to the Dative, see § 147, 33 p. 344. In John 
 ix 6 eTrexpLcrev avrov tov irrjKov iirl tovs 6cji6a\fji,ov<; the Genitive indeed 
 seems to depend on ivixP'-o'fv (according to B even on iwiOrjKev), 
 somewhat after the analogy, therefore, of verbs of touching. This 
 however is not the case; on the contrary, the Gen. airov (cf vs. 15) 
 is to be connected by Hyperbaton with o06aX|u,ovs, and the addition 
 
§133.] DATIVE OF THE THING. 181 
 
 Tov rv<l>Xov to be expunged, with Lchm. Tdf.^ [Treg.]. See more ex- 
 amples of the sort from the classics in B. § 133, N. 10 and from the 
 N. T. in the section on Hyperbaton § 151, 13 sqq. pp. 387 sqq. 
 
 B. Dative of the Thing (instrument, etc.). 
 B. §133, i; H. § 606sq.i C. § 465 sq.; D. §457; J. § 607 sq. 
 
 That the Dative of the Thing comprises most of tlie relations 17 
 of the Latin Ablative does not need to be shown at length. 
 But tlie language of the N.T. departs a little from the ordinary 
 usage in that the preposition ei; is prefixed to this Dative 
 with uncommon fi'equency.^ Although a similar use is here 
 and there to be found even in Greek writers also (see the 
 grammars under eV), yet this N. T. peculiarity is hardly an 
 extension of tliose isolated instances in the classics, but mani- 
 festly a result of the frequent occurrence of the preposition in 
 the Sept. (after the example of the Hebr. ^), as is apparent from 
 countless examples from the Old T. and New, see 19 p. 182. 
 And in general, through the influence of the Oriental manner 
 of expression, both the compass and contents of the signification 
 of this preposition became essentially modified, see § 147, 9 sq. 
 p. 328 sq. 
 
 B. §133, 4 a.; H. §607a.; C.§466b.; D. p. 491; J. § 691, Obs. 2. 
 
 With xpri(T6ai, elsewhere in the N. T. always construed with the 18 
 Dative, the Accusative is given to us by the oldest mss. [Sin. also] in 
 one passage, 1 Cor. vii. 31 ot p^pw/Aei/oi tov xocriJiov m? fii] KaTa)(pu)- 
 fievoi. The instance is so isolated that recent editors were the first to 
 venture to put it in the text. The construction is indeed an erroneous 
 one (the appeal to Xen. Ages. 11, 11 is inadmissible as the Ace. there 
 was set aside long ago, and still less ought we to argue back from the 
 usage of later Byzantines), but finds its apology in the use of the 
 compound KaraxprjirOaL with the Acc. by later writers, as Lucian, and 153 
 Plutarch (see Steph. Thes. sub voce), so that the Acc. in the above 
 passage is governed to a certain extent a,Tro kolvov (§ 132, 9 p. 160; 
 133, 11 note^ p. 178) by the KaTa)(pwii.a/oL also immediately following; 
 see another example of such retro-action in 9 above, p. 177 (Acts xix. 
 
 1 The phrase tov tui/)AoS, taken up again by Tdf. in his [7th] edition of 1859, 
 has, been expunged once more in his [8th] edition of 1869 (after cod. Sin.). 
 
 " Many, particularly of the earlier commentators, believed therefore that 4v was 
 a sort of sign of the Dative in the N. T., and was added even to a personal 
 Dative without altering the sense. The error of such a view TViner 217 (204) has 
 sufficiently shown by examples. 
 
182 PERIPHRASES FOR THE DATIVE OF THE THING. [§ 13:j. 
 
 40). Certainly native Greek writers would hardly have allowed 
 themselves to employ constructions of the sort. 
 
 Examples of the addition of iv to the instrumental Dative, 
 where the Greeks decidedly would have used the simple Dative only, 
 are the following : iv rm aXia-Oi^a-eTai (Matt. v. IS), iv w /jterpio fierpeiTe 
 (Matt. vii. 2), ayavav iv oXg rrj KapBiq. etc. (in Matt. xxii. 37 closely 
 after the Hebr., of. the parallel ■ passage Mark xii. 30), KaTaTraTeiv iv 
 Tots Trocriv (Matt. vii. 6), aTroKTCtVetv ev //.ap^aipij (Rev. xiii. 10), aTroXeV^at 
 iv fi.axa.ipri (Matt. xxvi. 52), Sia4>ipeiv iv 86irj (1 Cor. xv. 41), etc. 
 Further, examples where iv is alternately used and omitted, oftea 
 close together, are vyiaiveiv iv tjj jriWet (Tit. i. 13) and rij irlxTra 
 (ii. 2) of. 12 above, note^ p. 178, iv to o-Top-aTi. and o-TopiaTi 6/ioXoyeti', 
 iv Ty KapSia and rg KapHq, TncrTtveiv (Rom. X. 9 etc. where, however, 
 the change from the Act. to the Pass, construction has, perhaps, not 
 been without influence), jSaTrrt^eiv vSari (Luke iii. 16 etc.) and iv vSart 
 (not in water. Matt. iii. 11 etc.), yS. iv TTVf.vp.wn, p. iv irvpL (e.g. Acts i. 5 
 'Itaawrjs ifiaTmaev iuSaT6, vpeL<; Se iv mnvpaTi j3a.TrTicr6i^cr€cr6e), etc. 
 That iv can stand even with Persons so far forth as they serve as 
 the means of an action, see § 147, 10 p. 329.' 
 
 Remark. Otherwise, when Persons are the means, 8ta with the 
 Gen. is employed as usual. As a special- peculiarity, however, is to be 
 noticed the Hebraistic periphrasis for it (which really is not rare) by 
 means of the Substantive x''P' ^^^ ^^^^ both in the form St, a 
 X € t p o s ("I!!?) , even with a Gen. Plur. following, and also 8 1 a x^'-P'^v: 
 e.g. Mark vi. 2 Sura/teis at 8ta ^^P'"'' avrov yivopevai, Acts ii. 23 Sia 
 X^ipo'S a.v6p,oiV, xi. 30 8ta ^^tpos Bapvd/3a koI SauXov, xiv. 3 ; xix. 11 etc.; 
 rarely iv ^cp') Gal. iii. 19 — (this is frequent in the Sept., as Gen. 
 xxxviii. 20 etc.). 
 
 Many other periphrases expressive of simple relations are formed 
 with the word x^V after Hebrew precedent ; for example, of the 
 Dative with TrapaStSovai by means of cis x«'P"5 ("'!!!' ^?)j Matt. xxvi. 
 45 ; Mark ix. 31 etc. ; ek x^'P°s (I^h) is used with verbs ot separa- 
 tion, liberation, instead of the Gen. or the simple ix, John x. 39 
 i^^X.6fv £/c T'^s x*'P°s avTu>v, Acts xii. 11 ; Rev. xix. 2 e^eSiKijcrei/ to 
 alpa iK x^i-P°^ avT^s (like 2 Kings ix. 7 ; 1 Sam. xxiv. 16 etc.) for 
 which in Rev. vi. 10 we have merely cKScKeis ck tS>v KaToiKovvTOiv (cf. 
 xviii. 20; Luke xi. 50, 51), and a-iiv x^<-Ph as Acts vii. 35 ayyikov 
 
 1 By this addition of iv to the instrumental Dat. it is possible for the language 
 of the N. T. to make instrumental limitations depend, without u. participle, im- 
 mediately upon substantives. Several instances of the sort have already been 
 treated of § 125, 2 p. 92 and 11 p. 96, — instances some of which indeed have 
 their foundation in the analogy of ordinary Greek usage, but some are destituta 
 of such analogy, and belong tc the peculiar language of the N. T. 
 
§ 133.] DATIVE OF MAIWER. 183 
 
 hy the hand, under the protection, of an angel. All these phrases, like 
 the trope ;^eip Kvpiov (Acts xi. 21), plainly bear an Oriental stamp, and 
 are not to be identified with isolated, analogous (poetic), modes of 
 expression in Greek authors. Cf. in general Gesen. under 1\ 159 
 
 With the idea of speaking, instead of xdp the term a-rofia is sub- 
 stituted, hence 8ta oro'/iaTos Acts i. 16; iv. 25, etc.; also with a 
 Plural following, iii. 18, 21 (and likewise in the Sept., 2 Chron. xxxvi. 
 21, etc.). See more respecting these and similar periphrases under 
 prepositions § 146, 1 p. 319. 
 
 B. §133, 4b.; H. §608sq.; C, §467; D. p.487sq.; J. §603. 
 
 The Dative of the mode or manner (ablativus modi), as 21 
 well as the Dative of complement and closer limitation 
 (in which case it often takes the place of the similarly used 
 Accusative in Greek writers, see § 131, 9 p. 152), is only a 
 phase of the foregoing Dative ; as, Ta-n-eivo<; rfj KapBia, ^paSvf 
 Tj) Kaphia, aZvvwTO'i TOt? iroaiv, Trepire/Mvecrdat, tu> e0ei after the 
 custom (Acts XV. 1), irpojyrjTeveiv t&> aa ovoiian by virtue of 
 (by") thy name (Matt. vii. 22). In its stead we frequently find 
 of course, as in Greek authors, periphrases by means of such 
 prepositions as Kara, 8id, iv; and in particular, with iv 
 many adverbial expressions of mode and manner are formed — 
 likewise after Greek precedent ; as, iv aXrjdeia, iv Trapa^oXy, 
 iv irpavTTjTi, iv fiipet, iv Tou)(ei, etc. On all these, as well as 
 respecting the common construction iroielv n iv ovotiarl tivo^, 
 see § 147, 10 p. 329 ; and respecting ep)(eG6ai, iropeveadM iv in 
 particular, the following paragraph under b). 
 
 As an extension of this Dative, mention may here be made 22 
 of two genuine biblical uses of this case, which, since they are 
 manifestly indebted to Oriental phraseology for their origin, 
 must have appeared more or less alien to the Greek idiom : 
 
 a) The Hebrew usage of subjoining to a finite verb the form of the 
 Infin. absolute (nia;) ma , etc.) to strengthen the verbal idea in divers 
 aspects (see Gesen. Lehrg. p. 778 sq. [Gr. § 128, 3]) is commonly 
 translated in the Sept. by the Dative of the abstract derived 
 from the verb (or even by the Participle of the same verb, on 
 which see § 144, 30 p. 313) ; as, Sia/j-apTvpio. ij,eij.apTvprjTcu Gen. xliii. 2, 
 iTTiOvfuia iTri.6vfJ,-^creis xxxi. 30, 6ava.T<o diro&avuaOe ii. 17, <j>OopS, ijiOa- 
 pi^aerai Isa. xxiv. 3, K\avO/Ji^ eKkavaev xxx. 19, laa-tTai IdacL xix. 22, 
 aKoy aKovcrite vi. 9,. ■)(a,pr)Te X°'P?' l^^i- 10, d<^jj d^^-^crcTai Jer. xxxi. 
 (xlviii.) 9, fjivyy ttf>vyov xxvi. (xlvi.) 5, KaKia (caKOTrot^treTc 1 Sam. xii. 25, 
 
184 XO'P'J X"'P"'', iropevleo-eoi <j>(5p<s>, ETC. [§133. 
 
 aud many others. Analogous expressions, in part new formations, 
 are found in the N. T. : aKojj aKovuv Matt. xiii. 14-(quotn.), iTri6vfi.eiv 
 iTnOvfita Luke xxii. 15, x°^P9- X''''P'"' Jolin iii- 29 (but with a limiting 
 adjective added in Greek fashion ixa.pr]a-ai/ x'^po-v /xtyaXijv Matt. ii. 10), 
 aireiXri ctireiXetv Acts iv. 17 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7], irapayycXt'a iraprjY^tLXaii.e.v 
 V. 28, avadiixan ave6€p.aTia-aiJi€v xxiii. 14 (Deut. xiii. 15 ; xx. 17), 
 irpoa-evxyj irpocrrjviaTO Jas. V. 17. Similarly davaria TeX-iVTaru) Mark vii. 
 10 (quotn.), dTTOKTeimi iv Oavdrta Eev. ii. 23; vi. 8. That this usage, 
 notwithstanding the various similar phrases from earlier and ■ later 
 writers which Lobeck, Parall. p. 523 sqq., adduces (ya.fh<^ ycya/xTjKcos 
 160 Dem., (jivaei iritfiVKev Hippocr., TratStoi Trai^eLv Plut., also 4'vyrj i(J3Vyov 
 Plat., in Latin occidione occidere), is not an outgrowth of Greek 
 phraseology, but solely derived from the Hebrew (or Alexandrian) 
 idiom, this same scholar shows clearly and convincingly by a compari- 
 son of examples on both sides. 
 
 b) Not less peculiar is the Dative which is subjoined to verbs 
 of going (jropeveaOai, (ttoix^lv, irepiirarEtv) , when taken tropically 
 (of. our walk), to designate the way i.e. the manner of walk. So 
 in particular with 68(3, oSots (after the Hebr., see Gesen. under 'XM), 
 which is used indeed in the 0. T. m the proper sense (1 Sam. xv. 20), 
 but often enough also in the figurative (Ps. Ixxx. 14; Tob. iv. 5), in 
 the N. T. Acts xiv. 16 iiaa-ev vopevedOai tois oSois avTW/, Jude 11 t^ 
 o8(3 ToC KaiV iTTopevOrjo-av ; 68w iropevtcrOai is often found also in 
 Hermas. Analogous is cttoix^'lv i^^vco-tv in Rom. iv. 12. After the 
 same model many other constructions are formed, instead of 68os 
 some other abstract term being added in the Dative, e.g. TrepLTraruv 
 Tots Wmiv to walk in, after, the customs Acts xxi. 21, Trvcu/iari Gal. v. 
 16,. TToptvitrdai T(3 (f>6l3io ToB Kvpiov Acts ix. 31, ei ^oijuev wveijiaTi, irviv- 
 Ixa-Ti KoX (TToixSipi-ev Gal. v. 25, kovovi vi. 16, also merely tcj airZ sc. 
 Kovovi (see the various readings) Phil. iii. 16. 
 
 That in this case also, instead of the simple Dative periphrases 
 with prepositions appear, follows as a matter of course after all 
 that has been said above ; — particularly with ei/ and Kara, as Iv a-yimrj, 
 Iv dXrjOela., Kara aydrrriv, crdpKa, avOpunrov iropeveadai etc., see the Lex. 
 Ottictu also (see 3 above, p. 172) belongs here in the two parallel 
 passages 2 Pet. ii. 10; Jude 7 oTriaio crapicos iropevo/xevoi, dTrekdov(Tai, 
 literally to walk after the flesh (the lusts), Germ, dem FJeische nach- 
 gehen. The familiar Htebrew formula of adieu (1 Sam. i. 17 
 etc.) runs in Greek either itopeiov, viraye eh flpr/vrjv or iv elpiqvrj (Mark 
 V. 34; Luke vii. 50; Acts xvi. 36 etc.), — differing in conception but 
 not in sense. The phrase epxea-dcu iv ovo/iaTi Kvpiov (Matt. xxi. 9) 
 is also quoted from the O. T. 
 
§ 133.] CONSTRUCTION OF VERBS OF EMOTION. 185 
 
 B. §133, 4 c.; H. §611; C. §«6sil.; D. p.491j J. §607. 
 
 Among verbs expressing emotion, the verb ctyaWiao-^at (see 2J 
 p. 51) to rejoice, which did not come into use till the time of the 
 Sept., has acquired especial currency in the Bible : sometimes, as in 
 the Sept., with kv ; sometimes with liri and the Dat. Further, the 
 verb ciSoKciv to he well pleased, used also by later profane writers 
 • (Polyb. Diod.), is employed again most commonly with kv (rarely eis 
 2 Pet. i. 17) after Alexandrian precedent ; also with the simple Ace. 
 of the thing, Heb. x. 6, 8 oXoKavTw/xara . . . ovk -qv^oK-qaai (for which 
 in Ps. xxxix. 7 the Alex, text reads e^-^njtras). Whether it was also 
 joined to the Ace. of the person (Gen. xxxiii. 10) is doubtful; in 
 Matt. xii. 18 Tdf. in ed. 7 [so 8] has returned to the original and 
 better attested reading €is ov [n* B ov]. The verb /cauxacr^at to 
 boast is especially used by Paul, — most frequently again with iv 
 (Jer. ix. 23), also with eirt and the Dat. (Ps. v. 12) and with the Ace. 
 of the thing, see Wahl ; on the other hand, the Gen. with KaraKav- 
 yaxrOai (B,om. xi. 18) is to be explained by the altered signification 
 of the verb, after the analogy of the syntactical use of KaTa<f>poveiv, 
 KaTayAay (§ 132, 15 p. 165). EEVt^etrSat (Luther, sich befremden 
 lassen, [A.V. think strange^) is used with the simple Dative and with 
 hi, 1 Pet. iv. 4, 12. Among other more common verbs ^av/ia^€n 
 is no longer, as in the classics, joined to the Genitive, but most com- 
 monly, yet quite idiomatically, to lirL with the Dat. (not to kv, on Luk*. 
 i. 21 see below § 140, 9 p. 263), iripi with the Gen. Luke ii. 18, in It/l 
 a peculiar, pregnant, sense to oiriaw Eev. xiii. 3 ; moreover it ii. 
 several times used with the simple Accusative ■ — not only of the thing 
 (to yeyovos, to opa/i,a), but also once of the person Luke vii. [). 
 'Evaptcrrelv and -eia-dai (only in the Ep. to the Heb.) is used 
 with the simple Dative. Xaipeiv commonly with im and iLe 
 Dative, sometimes also with iu (Luke x. 20 ; Phil. i. 18 ; Col. i. '•14). 
 But in the Pauline phrase ^aipav iv Kvpiia the words ev Kvpiw (as 
 above in 5 p. 175) are an adverbial adjunct designating the mode or 
 nature of the joy; hence e.g. in Phil. iv. 10 the object of the joy is 
 added in a clause with on. So with the substantive, x"P" ^^ Trvevixan 
 ayuo Eom. xiv. 17 (cf. § 125, 11 p. 96). On the diversified construc- 
 tions of the other verbs of emotion, such as jiaKpodvp-ilv, cuc^patVeo-iJat, 
 opyi^ecrOai, XvTreLo-Oai, a-vWvTretcrOai, eKTrXi^mcrOai, /iept/irav, etc., see the 
 lexicons. 
 
 Ebmark. To set up a special class (as is often done) undc,- the 24 
 title Dative of the end (consilii) is unnecessary either in refe'-'ince 
 to general or to N. T. usage, since all the examples brought 'iider 
 this head may be referred to the idea of the preceding Dative (n3< tive, 
 occasion, propter not causa), — whether such a Dative stances vith 
 21 
 
186 DAVIVE OE TIME, ETC. [§ 133. 
 
 strict Passives (Rom. xi. 20 propter infidiam, Gal. vi. 12 propter 
 crucem), or sometimes elliptically with Active or Neuter verbs a 
 Passive idea being supplied (cf. the Lat. metu, odio, studio for propter 
 metum, etc., Zumpt § 454) ; as, Eom. iv. 20 ov 8i€Kpi6rj rrj aTrurria, 
 1 Cor. viii. 7 nvh 8e ry 0TJv«8);a-et . . . ia-6iovtnv, 2 Cor. i. 15 ravrrj ry 
 TreiroiOijo-ti kpov\6ii.y)v IXOiiv. 
 
 B. § 133, 4 0. note ; C. § 472 e. ; J. §§ 495. 607. 
 
 25 To the examples adduced from Greek authors of verbs whose idea 
 is capable of such varied reference that they can be construed with 
 all three cases, may be added from the N. T. the verb ju, ep t /x, v a r : 
 according to 11 p. 178 it is construed with the Dative (t^ i/txJJi tw 
 o-w/Ltari Matt. vi. 25 etc.), takes after it the object of the care as usual 
 in theneut. Ace. (ra rov tcvptov 1 Cor. vii. 32; ra trepl iij.Zv Phil. ii. 
 20), and finally in one passage according to recent editors [so cod. Sin. J 
 is connected with the Genitive (like other verbs of caring § 132, 
 15 p. 164), viz. Matt. vi. 34 /icpt/tv^o-et tavrij's. Moreover, it is used 
 with irepi, virep, see Wahl. 
 
 B. §133,4e.; H. §613; C.§469; D. p. 487; J.§606. 
 
 26 In reference to Time, the Dative is used to specify a) a 
 definite point of time; b) the space of time {within, for 
 which the Ace. is also used, see § 131, 11 p. 152) ; c) 
 periodically returning portions of time. 
 
 In cases a) and b) eV is often added to the Dative (as in 
 Lat. in, during^; in c) we find besides Kard with the Ace. also 
 (cf. p. 30). 
 
 Examples : of a) Tavrg rfi vvxri, ry rpirj rj/jLtpa, etc. ; of b) ikovu 
 )(p6v<a ; rroAAots, aioivtois )(p6voLi ; eTtpats •yeveats ; Tfo-trepaKovTa koI t^ 
 ereaiv, Acts viii. 11 ; Rom. xvi. 25 ; Eph. iii. 5 ; John ii. 20, etc. The 
 reading varies between the Dat. and the Ace. in John xiv. 9 ; Acts 
 xxviii. 12, also with the Nom. Matt. xv. 32 (on which see § 129 a. 3 
 p. 139), now with and now without iv John ii. 20; of c) tois crd/i- 
 /Sao-iv, TTj eoprfj, iv a-a^jSoLTio, Matt. xii. 2, 5 ; Luke ii. 41 etc., Kara, ioprrfv 
 Matt. XX vii. 15 etc. 
 
 B. § 133, 5 ; of. H. § 600 b. ; J. § 611, Obs. 1. 
 
 162 The possibility of the combin3,tion of two Datives in the N. T. 
 
 27 according to the crx^jua Kaff oXov koi f*«pos is as little to be denied as 
 the construction of two Aces. (§ 131, 6 p. 149) and of two Gens. 
 (§ 132, 17 note p. 167). Yet the compass of the N. T. books is so 
 limited that the opportunity for the construction was rare. 2 Cor. 
 xii. 7 i^oOr) ju,ot a-KoXoij/ rfj crapKi plainly belongs here. Elsewhere we 
 find two different Datives united in one construction, but not aftei 
 
§ 134.] THE PASSIVE. 187 
 
 the above schema: 1 John v. 16 and Heb. iv. 2 (on which see IS 
 above, p. 179). Rom. vii. 25 tS voi SovXevm vdjuo) 6eov grammatically 
 viewed presents no difficulty. 
 
 THE VEEB. 
 
 The Passive. 
 
 B. § 134, 1-3; H. § 693; C. § 686; D. § 431; J. H. p. 21. 
 
 The most common mode of designating the personal 1 
 author of a passive state is, in the N. T. as in the classics, 
 by means of vtto with the Gen. ; in certain cases also by means 
 of Trapd with the Gen., Sk and even cnro. Respecting all this 
 see the Prepositions. 
 
 The personal medium is likewise designated as usual by 8id. with 
 the Gen., as to prjOlv 8ia 'H'jaiou, lepe/xCov, to p7]6iv vtto tov Kvpiov S t a 
 Tov TrpoffyrfTov A.eyovTos etc., Or hebraistically by 6ta p^cipos, <7To//.aTos, 
 according to § 133, 20 p. 182. 
 
 B. §134, 4; H. §600; 0. §461; D. pp. 431,492; J. §611. 
 
 Instead of the prepositions, the Dative alone, according % 
 to an ancient usage, is employed to designate the personal 
 author (the Dat. rei coincides with the Dat. instrumenW), 
 especially with the Perfect and Aorist Pass., as Luke xxiii. 15 
 ovSev a^iov davdrov icrrlv •n'eirpayfievov aiirui. Yet this use in 
 Greek is by no means so general that we can assume that it 
 can be substituted indifferently in any and every case for viro 
 with the Gen. On the contrary, it is resti-icted, at least in 
 prose, to certain predicates and phrases, to which this Dative 
 imparts a somewhat modified signification corresponding 
 to the force of the Dative. Cf. with this the Latin phrase 
 alicui probare, and the like, in Lat. prose ; Zumpt § 419. 
 
 Thus the Dative in the common phrase 6<f>6rjvaL tivi (cf. Eur. Bacch. 
 912) imparts to o^Ofjvai the simple neuter force, to appear to one (cf. 
 p. 52), and the same holds true more or less of the phrases (likewise 
 often recurring) evpe^^i/at and yvuxrOrival rii/t ; as, Rom. x. 20 (quotn.) 
 evpiO'qv Tois €/*« /li) ^ijToiJcriv, ificjiavrj'S iyei'ofirjv tois- e/A^ p^rj iTrepioTuxnv, 
 Luke xxiv. 35 ; 2 Cor. xii. 20 ; Phil. iv. 5 yvmid-^m jrSo-iv dvdpioirois 
 (become known). In 2 Pet. iii. 14 avrqi, as the very position indicates, 
 is best referred uirb kolvov to both terms (d/iu/AijToi and ivpeOrjvai), 163 
 since it stands in equally close relation to both, (respecting the Dative 
 with a,/x(i)j«.-ip-os see § 133, 14 p. 179). 
 
 Formerly many other Datives also were taken in the same sense 
 (as Dats. of the author), but incorrectly (e.g. Matt. v. 21 ; Heb. iv. 2); 
 
188 THE OBJECT WITH THE PASSIVE. [§ 134. 
 
 for in general the assumption of such a Dative, particularly in the 
 N. T., seems only to be warranted where analogy and usage render 
 its presence manifest. 
 
 Remark. As a periphrasis for this Dative, i.e. to render it vivid or 
 to approximate it to the Oriental style of thought, the preposition 
 ivioTTLov is employed (agreeably to the closely related cases in § 133, 
 14 p. 180) ; as, Luke xii. 6 ev e^ avTwv ovk ea-nv i7n\eXriiTiJ.ivov ivwTnov 
 Tov 6eov by him, i.e. concretely, in his sight, before him ; Rom. iii. 20 
 ov BiKai<j)6^cr€Tai irScra crap$ ivwinov avTov, with which may be compared 
 Tmpa Tw 6eS Sikmovtol Gal. iii. 11, cf. Rom. ii. 13 ; 2 Thess. i. 6. 
 
 B. §134,5; H. §694; C. §686; D. p. 431sq.; J. II. p. 22. 
 
 Since even the earlier authors did not hesitate to construe 
 in the Passive, like pure transitives, verbal ideas which 
 take their limiting object in another case than the Accusative, 
 the N. T. authors also, particularly the better writers among 
 them, made this good classic usage their own, — recommended 
 as it was by facility of construction. 
 
 Thus we find Kar-qyopua-Bai in Matt, xxvii. 12; Acts xxv. 16, 
 KaTcyvuKT/xEi/os in Gal. ii. 11, iyKaXA&Oai. in Acts xix. 40 etc., //.aprupii- 
 a-Oai (testimony is given me, I get the witness) frequently in the Acts 
 and the Ep. to the Heb. (see Wahl), — a liberty which John (in his 
 third Ep. vs. 12 Aiyfir/rpio) jat/napTijpi/Tai in-o Trai/ruiv) did not avail 
 himself of, perhaps because it was unknown to him. Further, 
 evapea-Teicrdai Heb. xiii. 16, BLaKovrj6^vai Mark x. 45. Xpiy/tan'fetv Tivi 
 to give a response to one (Jos. Antt. 10, 1, 3 etc.) undergoes as a rule 
 the same change into the Passive : xP'J/^'iTt^o/iat it is revealed to- me, 
 divinitus edoceor (Matt. ii. 12 etc.; Acts x. 22; Heb. viii. 5 etc.); 
 only in Luke ii. 26 is the other (impersonal) construction found, ^i/ 
 avT<3 Ke)(p7jfiaTUTfii.evov (but D gives rjv K€)(prjfJi.a,Ti<TiJi.€vo^ as usual). See 
 still other examples in 7 below, p. 189. 
 
 With other verbs the personal mode of expression is quite universal 
 because they were in general by later writers connected rather with 
 the Accusative, i.e. regarded as transitives. Thus particularly ttXeo- 
 v€KTeLcr6aL according to § 132, 22 p. 168, evayyeXll^ecrdai in the Passive 
 § 131, 4 p. 148. . 
 
 B. § 134, 6; H. § 563 a. ; C. § B87; D. § 46B; J. § 545, 3; also p. 256, Obs. 8. 
 
 The retention of the Accusative of the thing as the 
 object of the Passive, with verbs which govern two Aces., 
 is found with BiBda-Ketv, 2 Thess. ii. 15 cf. Gal. i. 12 ; and. with 
 TTori^eLv according to the present reading in 1 Cor. xii. 13 (Iv 
 wvevfji.a iiT0Ti<T6t]fji,ev). 
 
5134.] THE PASSIVE. 189 
 
 The anomalous passive construction with such verbs as Kprnrea-Oai, 
 djTOKpiWeo-^ai, aKJiaipeurdai ano tivos (Col. i. 26 ; Luke xviii. 34 ; x. 42) 
 rests on tlie construction of these verbs with Sltto, — more usual even 
 in the Active, see § 131, 6 p. 149. Respecting the Gen. d.Trto-Tcpijju.ei'os 
 T^s dXij^euxs (1 Tim. vi. 5) see § 132, 5 p. 158. 
 
 B. §134,N.2; H.§555a.; D.§466; J. § 548, cf. p. 245. 
 
 That in the constructions treated of in § 131, 5 p. 148 (avieiv 164 
 av^a-Lv etc.) the Ace. of the abstract is in like manner retained when g 
 the verb is changed into the Passive, has already been illustrated by 
 examples under that head. Of the same origin is the elliptical phrase 
 (cf. § 123, 8 p. 82) in Luke xii. 47 Sap^trerai wo Was, oXtya's sc. 
 TtXriyds, and the construction (formed regularly after iTcuSevdrjvaj, 
 jratSeiav) iiraiSevOrj nacrav cro<j)iav in a (rejected) reading of cod. D 
 Acts vii. 22. 
 
 B. §134, 7; H. §595; C. §587; D. p.432; J. §584, 2. 
 
 But not only when the verb is capable of being construed 7 
 with two nouns in the Accusative is it followed by an Ace. in 
 the Passive; the Ace. of the thing (often expressed, ac- 
 cording to § 131, 10 p. 152, by a pron. or adj. of the neuter 
 gender) or of the abstract is also subjoined to the Passive 
 predicates of many other verbs. That this use stands in the , 
 closest relation to the so-called Greek Accusative treated of in 
 § 131, 9 p. 162, has already been remarked there. It is to 
 such a degree characteristic of the Greek tongue above all 
 others, and was so firmly rooted, too, in the phraseology of 
 the people, that it not only did not disappear from the later 
 language and in particular that of the N. T., but was employed 
 with decided preference by all the N. T. writers nearly to the 
 same extent. The Latins also borrowed it. as is well known, 
 from the Greek. 
 
 As the subject itself has been rendered sufficiently familiar by 
 general Greek grammar, we may adduce here briefly (in order to 
 exhibit the extension of the usage in the N. T.) the examples only, 
 among which are to be included the instances where the personal 
 Subject implied in the verb has arisen from the Dative or the 
 Genitive in the Active (4 p. 188): ^rjfiiovaOou ttjv i/"Jx^v Matt, 
 xvi. 26 ; Mark viii. 36, ScSe/Acvos rovi TroSas koI ras x^V"-'' John xi. 44, 
 Sie<j)6apiJievo<s tov vovv 1 Tim. vi. 5, ptpcanuTix.evo<i ras (fopStas, XcXou/aevos 
 "o (rSiiua, Heb. x. 22, irXyipova-Qai Kapirbv SiKaioavvri'S, rrjv tniyviMTiv Phil, 
 i. 11 ; Col. i. 9 (Eph. i. 23 must be taken as Middle i.e. actively), 
 n-EpiKci/xai (equiv. to TrepLTiOtifmi. according to B. § 109 p. 198) aXva-iv 
 
190 VERBAL ADJECTIVES. [§ 134. 
 
 Acts xxviii. 20, acr6iv(iav Heb. v. 2, KeKavT7]piacrfJi.ivo^ rrtv crwdSuja-iv 
 I Tim. iv. 2, KaT-qxavfitvo's tov Koyov Gal. vi. 6, particularly TnjrevecrOai 
 (to be entrusted with) e.g. to fvayyiXiov, to Kripvyixa, rrjv oLKovojj.iav, to. 
 Xo'yia, Tit. i. 3 ; 1 Cor. ix. 17 ; Rom. iii. 2 ; Gal. ii. 7, etc. (but 2 Thess. 
 i. 10; 1 Tim. iii. 16 belong to § 133, 4, 7) p. 175). The following 
 are very free and brachylogic, after Paul's style: 2 Cor. iii. 18 t^v 
 avrrjv eiKoVa /A£Ta/top<^ou/xt^a are changed to the same image, vi. 13 
 rr}v avTrjv AvTiiJ-urOiav TrXaTvvOiqTi kcu i/iiEis expand yourselves (your 
 hearts), as I do, after my example, for the recompense. See the 
 other (Pass.-Mid.) examples under the Middle § 135; and respecting 
 irdOitrBaL to. Kpeirrova, ovSiv see § 131, 6 note p. 150, and 10 p. 152. 
 
 Eemark. Luke (in Acts xxi. 3) peculiarly and without similar 
 precedent in other writers has written, instead of di/a^avei'oTjs rijs 
 Kvwpov . . . cTrXe'oju.ei', exchanging the subjects, ava<pav£VTK ttjv Kvirpov 
 appeared b efo r e Cyprus, as it were after we had allowed Cyprus to 
 appear to us i.e. had come in sight of it. Yet the reading of the Vat. 
 MS. a.va.<^d.va.vT€'s (confirmed now by cod. Sin.) deserves perhaps 
 the decided preference ; [so Tdf.j. 
 
 Verbal Adjectives. 
 B. § 134, 8-10 ; H. § 804 sq. : C. §§ 458. 682 ; D. p. 190 sq. ; J. §§ 613. 883 ; G. § 114. 
 165 Of tlie two verbal adjectives (in -reos and -to?) the form in -reos is 
 8 rare. The word pXrp-eov occurring in Luke v. 38 ; Mark ii. 22 
 Lchm. has the Active construction (tov oIvov). Adjectives in -to? 
 include the idea of possibility in an Active and Passive sense (cf p. 42), 
 corresponding to Germ, adjectives in -lieh and -bar [Eng. -ly and -ble'], 
 as opaTO's, SvvaTos, dvr/Tos, iraOryro';, di/eKXaXijTos, d/xapavTos, aVTattrTOS, 
 etc. ; often also without the collateral notion of power (as among the 
 Greeks, too), as dyaTrijTos, ycvvijTOS, •yvuxxros, t/c^eros, avrnToi, etc. 
 
 Adjectives in -tos are no longer capable of,the verbal construction ; 
 hence, for example, dyaTrrjTos is only connected with the Gen. 
 (ayamp-oi fiov, Oeov), never with the Dative. On the Dative with 
 a/juifurp-oi, (2 Pet. iii. 14), see no. 2 above, p., 187 ; and in like manner 
 the Dative with jviocttos, o.pe(rT6^,- Swvaros, aTroSeKros, etc., depends 
 not on the form but on the signification of the word. Most of 
 them, consequently, have become as respects their signification and 
 construction completely adjectives (or substantives, as 6 xp'^'''°^> 
 ot ayanrp-OL), just as the ending -tos in other cases also is a common 
 formative syllable of adjectives e.g. at;^dX(i)Tos, d^e/xiros, dypd/i/u.aTos, 
 TO. ipTTfTo,, etc. 
 
 Hence it is not improbable that, with the disappearance of the 
 verbal use of the verbal adjectives, the N. T. writers, to designate a 
 .participle corresponding to ,the Latin in -ndus, have followed Hebrew 
 
§135.] THE MIDDLE. 191 
 
 precedent (see Gesen. Lehrg. p. 791 ; [Gr. § 131, 1]) and frequently- 
 taken other participles in this sense. Yet we have a right to assert 
 this probably only of the Future Part. (Heb. iii. 5 €is jj-aprvpiov r5>v 
 \aLXri6rjaofx.evo)i/), or of the Present in which according to § 137, 11 
 p. 206 the notion of futurity or of conatus is already included, — most 
 plainly in Heb. xii. 18 irpoo-fXtjXvdaTe \pr)\a^u>ii,ivio {opet) koI 
 K€Kavfi.iv(o TTvpi; (see the other examples ibid.). Other participles, as 
 Kare-yvuJcr/Aei'os Gal. ii. 11, ij38eXvyfJLe.vo^ Rev. xxi. 8, iKpitfaOivTO. Jude 
 12, which are also so explained sometimes, are to be taken strictly 
 according to their form as Past Part., and to be translated accor4ingly. 
 
 The Middle. 
 B.§135,l-3; H. §§687 sq. 6940.; C.§578sq(i.; D.§432sq.; J.§362sq. 
 
 That Middle verbs, if translated by us reflexively or intrans- 1 
 itively, give the preference in the N. T., as in later writers 
 generally, to the Passive form of the Aorist rather than 
 the Middle, has already (p. 51 sq.) been taiight. The number 
 of these Passive Aorists (for the most part to be translated 
 intransitively) is very great ; and examples, therefore, are to 
 be found everywhere in multitudes. With many verbs, never- 
 theless, the Middle form of the Aorist had already come into 
 such universal use (e.g. with (pvXda-a-eaOai, Ko^ii^eaOai, alTetcrOai, 
 e'xeadab and all its compoui^ds), that even in the N. T. no 
 contrary examples of the Aorist formation are extant. 
 
 B. § 135, 4; H. § 6.33 a, ; D. p. 434; cf. J. § 583. 
 
 Instances of the Obj ect- Accusative with verbs which in the 166 
 Active admit the construction of two Accusatives, are found most 2 
 frequently with Iv- and eKhveaOai, — and that both in the proper 
 sense (x'Tfiva, ivSvp-a, rpii^as Kap,T^\ov) and in the tropical ( Irjo-ovv, tov 
 viov avOpunrov, a<J30a.pcTtav, tov GwpaKa t^s St/catoo-wijs), — cvStSwo-fce- 
 a-6ai lfx.a.TLw, iroptjivpav, . Trep i/SaWe tr^at (according to § 131, 6 
 p. 149) ifji,dT(.ov, o-ToXcts, etc. often in the Apocalypse, and according to 
 the same analogy Tnpi^tivvvcrOai as well with the Ace. of the 
 girding object (ZJtovijv) as of the girded (da<j>vv), and likewise viroSua-OaL 
 a-avSaXia and TrdSas. On all these see the lexicons. Exceptions are 
 rare ; only a.p^i(vwa6ai and trepi^aXXio-Oai permit (like our to wrap 
 one's self in, clothed with) the construction with ev: Matt. xi. 8; 
 Luke vii. 25 ; Rev. iii. 5 (without kv iv. 4 Lchm.). 
 
 B. §135, 6; H. §§544a. 687; C. §579; D. p. 436; J. §549Bq. 
 
 The number of verbs wlaich in the Middle acquire a new s 
 transitive sense, and accordingly govern also a new Object- 
 
192 THE MIDDLE. [§ 13S 
 
 Accusative, is likewise very considerable. The following 
 deserve notice in tins respect as peculiar : 
 
 ciraio-^vvecr^at nva to be ashamed of (shaiae one's seli hetoie) 
 any one Mark viii. 38, etc., analogous to which Ivrpiir ea-Oai also 
 in the same sense (which arose from the signification of the Active 
 to make ashamed, intimidate, abash, 1 Cor. iv. 14) as in later writers 
 (Polyb.) is regularly joined to the Ace. Matt. xxi. 37, etc. ; in earlier 
 writers the Middle is current in the sense to give heed to, and accord- 
 ingly in connection with the Genitive (see Pape) ; airoa-T pa<f>rjvai 
 nva to turn one's self away from one, shun him, 2 Tim. i. 15; tjivXacr- 
 o-ea-OaL (to be on one's guard against) is indeed as usual joined tO' 
 the Ace. in Acts xxi. 25 ; 2 Tim. iv. 15, but more in accordance with 
 N. T. usage, as with the Active <^v\a(rcr€ii/ in the sense of to preserve 
 from etc. (2 Thess. iii. 3 6e6? v/jlols <f>vXa^ei am tov vovrjpov) and other 
 verbs of similar meaning (see § 147, 3 p. 323), is the construction 
 with (XTrd, as Luke xii. 15 (jivkduaeo-Oe dn-6 7rdcrr]s TrXcove^ia?, for which 
 we have in 1 John v. 21 i^uXafaTC eauTovs dm twv tlhwXuiv. In the 
 signification to observe it is used in the Active, even in the N. T. 
 Matt. xix. 20 ; Mark x. 20 Lchm. ; Luke xviii. 21, in which passages 
 formerly the Mid. was read, as is done still by Tdf. [Treg.] in Mark 
 after the majority of mss. [cod. Sin. also]. ^o/Sela-Oai is almost 
 always connected with the Ace, but sometimes (after §147, 3 p. 823) 
 with dffo. Matt. X. 28 ; Luke xii. 4; ala-xvv^crOai dm in 1 John 
 ii. 28. 
 
 B. §135,6; H. §6898q.; C. §682; D.p.436sq.; J.§362,2. 
 
 4 The remark that the Greeks employ the Middle form to 
 designate an action that takes place in some connection with 
 the subject, is performed for his own advantage or disadvantage, 
 in general, stands in some close relation to him, — is in the 
 main applicable to the N. T. also. 
 
 Among the numerous examples of this -signification of the Middle 
 in its broader application we may mention — besides the verbs named 
 above (2 p. 191) denoting an action done to one's own body (to 
 which yet others are to be added, as vUreo-Oai Tas x^'P as ; dXeixj/aa-dai, 
 Keipaa-Oai t^v Ke(j>a\.-qv) — such as the following : o-Trda-aa-Oai fid)(aipav ; 
 irpoa- e'urKa\eL<T6ai, rtva ; eTrt/caXcicr^at 6e6v, K.aLaapa ; im- 7rpo<T- 
 \aft,pdve(T6ai ; wepnroiuaOai ; ivBeitcwaOai ; (rrjij.€iov(T6aL ; KO/JLi^ecrBai ; 
 167 'X^c^"' together with its compounds ; further, among those com- 
 pounded with dTTO and ck (B. p. 354), dTrio6cLa-6ai, diroTWea-dai, dm- 
 Xveo'dai, dirofiM(T<Te(TOai, aTroSiSotrfloi, dwihracrOai, iiayopd^ecrOai, eKrpi- 
 vexrOai, etc. 
 
5»"«5.] THE MIDDLE. 193 
 
 B. §135, N.8; C. § 585; D. p. 488 sq.j J. § 363, 8. 4. 6. 
 
 How exactly the N. T. language could still make the distinction 
 between the Active and the Middle forms of one and the same 
 verb, can be seen clearly in many cases. Let any one compare in 
 this respect in the lexicons the examples of vmreiv and vlimaOai, 
 Xoij€tv and diroXovccr^at, Kupav and KelpeaOai, <j>vk(iTT€LV and (jivXaTTtirOai 
 (see 3 above, p. 192), d7roKo\i57rT€tv and diroKaXvn-Tecr^ai, and of those 
 verbs whose Middle is used in a signification essentially altered : iTriTiOi- 
 vai and iTTiTCOeirOai, aTroSiSovai and aTroStSoo'^ai, Kpivfiv and KpLveuOai (Sux- 
 KpCvetrOai) , aipetv and atpeicr^at, Troteii' and ■KoixXcrdai — the last only in 
 a mental reference, as in the phrases p.vr]p/qv, Koyov, (nrovBijv ■n-oKicrdai,,^ 
 etc. Yet instances are not wanting in which the Active, as the 
 generic form, stands for the Middle and alternates with it without any 
 sensible difference (cf. B. § 135, 6 ; J. § 363, 3 and Obs. 2). Thus we 
 find in pafticular aireiv and a'lTekrOai, even in close proximity, as Jas. 
 iv. 3 oiTetre /cat oi Xa/xjSavere, BiOTi xaKws aiTettr^e, 1 John v. 15 (atTto/iefla 
 . . . ■gTT^Kaix.ev), Matt. XX. 20 and 22, Mark vi. 23 and 24; a-v/KaXelv 
 and o-uyKoXeto-^ai Luke xv. 6, 9 Lchm. [Treg.], Acts v. 21 and x. 24, 
 etc. ; Bi.aTo.<T<T€iv and Swn-dcrcrecrOai ; for crirdcracr^ai pA^aipav (Mark, 
 Acts) Matt, says, xxvi. 51, avio'Tracrev T-qv iJt.d)(aipav ; evpia- Keiv 
 occurs in the sense of ivpla-KecrOai, in Matt. x. 39 ("6 evpibv rijv ijwx^v 
 avTov) ; ivepyelv and ivepyficrOai, — although between these forms 
 this distinction has been observed by Paul (see Fr. on Eom. vii. 5 ; 
 Winer 258 (242)) : that with the Active the operating subject is 
 personal,^ with the Middle (in 1 Thess. ii. 13 also) non-personal ; see 
 the numerous passages in Wahl. But irotctv often stands in the 
 phrases before designated where, at least in the classic style, the Middle 
 alone was usual ; as, o-vfJL^ovXiov iron^cravrtis ; jrot^o-at eXeos, irpoOtcnv, etc. 
 
 But on the other hand the Middle is, strictly speaking, never used 
 without some sort of reference to the subject ; (in Acts ix. 39 this 
 reference is still intimated, but only very feebly it is true, in the /uer' 
 airrlov that follows). In single cases it involves at least a different 
 signification from the Active (a tropical or mental) ; particularly in 
 certain compounds, which, because they were used almost ex- 
 clusively in the Middle form, have almost become complete Deponents. 
 Thus Paul has written in 2 Cor. xi. 2 ^pju.ocrd/Aiji' uju.as Xpia-rw, instead 
 of the ordinary ^p/ioo-o, in order to express the idea of spiritual 
 espousal to Christ, iii. 18 ttjv S6$av KvpCov KaTOTrrpi^d/Aevoi (to view in 
 
 1 In Acts viii. 2, therefore, the reading of the oldest mss. [Sin. also] iTrolriirav 
 KoirerSv is to be preferred with Lchm. [Tdf. Treg.] to the Middle form. 
 
 2 That with cruvepytT also, in Rom. viii. 28, vdvra was not formerly taken as 
 Subject is proved by the important (although prolably only explanatory) additioa 
 i0e6s (A B Lchm.). 
 
194 THE TENSES. [§137 
 
 a mirror), Heb. xi. 40 toC 6eov TrpopXeil/a/jiivov, Col. ii. 15 oTrcKSuo-a- 
 /X6V05 Tcis a.pxa.<s kol tos efoucrtas (deWette, to disarm), and many of tho 
 168 most current compounds, as cTrayyeAAeo-^ai, oTroKpivicrdai, avTiXaix^dvea-Oai, 
 iTnTidea-Oai, etc.^ 
 
 B. §135, N. 4; H. §688a.; C. §583; D. p.435; J. §363, 2. 
 
 6 A deviation from ordinary usage consists, as has already been 
 intimated § 127, 26 p. 118, in the practice of often expressing again 
 separately the Possessive and Reflexive limitations strictly 
 speaking already comprised in the Middle form ; as, criryKa\ccra/iei/os 
 Tovs crvyyevw avTov (auT.); aTteOevTO to, IfjidTia avrSiv (Acts vii. 58), 
 Suj.\oylt,€<T6€ hi rais KapSiat? vjuSv (Mark ii. 8, etc.), ottms trSct'^w/Aai 
 riji/ 8wa;u,iV ju.ot) (Rom. ix. 17), etc. Where, however, especial 
 emphasis required the addition of tho reflexive pron. to the Middle, 
 N. T. usag« harmonizes with the ordinary usage ; as, Siefiepia-avTo 
 iavTols John xix. 24 (quotn.), av€6pe\j/aT0 airov iavry Acts vii. 21, 
 crtavTOV Trape^^o/nevos Tit. ii. 7. 
 
 (The Middle.) 
 B. §136,NN.3,4; H. §415; C. §§5T5sq, 588; D.§350; J. § 365, 3. 
 
 That the Perfect of middle and deponent verbs shares the middle 
 (Active) signification of the verb hardly needs mention, since the 
 usage is sufficiently established, see e.g. 2 John 8 [?]; Actsxiii. 47; also 
 in the periphrastic form with elvai (§ 144, 24 p. 308), Acts xx. 13 
 &aT€Tay/xeVos ^v. That single tenses, however, — especially the Aor. 
 and Perf. Pass. — of these verbs are also used in the Passive sense, 
 see on p. 52. 
 
 The Tenses. 
 B. §187; H. §§695sqq.; C. §§590sqq.; D. §§422sq.; J. §§894sq.; G.§§8sqq. 
 
 1 Among all known ancient languages none distinguishes the 
 manifold temporal (and modal) relations of the verb so ac- 
 curately as the Greek. It is conceivable that under the 
 prolonged dominion of the Greek language and culture, per- 
 meating as they did the concerns of all classes, the knowledge 
 of the signification of these forms of speech (so essential in 
 making one's self understood) was not only not lost by the 
 less cultivated portion even of the Greek people, but also 
 became the possession of those foreign populations and 
 
 1 Only iiiiivaro Acts vii. 24 seems to stand completely for the Active. But we 
 must consider that the Active form hjiivsiv is pre-eminently poetic and the Middle 
 came in later prose into such general use that it must be regarded as having be- 
 come a Deponent, — as vmW in the signification to repel from one's self, as to defend 
 (anither), to avenge (ulcisd). See Lucian,Dial. Mort. 13, 6 ; Jup. trag. .37. 
 
5 137.] THE TENSES. 195 
 
 individuals that made the Greek tongue their own. Had the 
 Jews and others become acquainted with this foreign tongue 169 
 only through the medium of the written language, not through 
 contact with people who spol^e Greek themselves, or had the 
 adoption of the language taken place suddenly and not before 
 the time when the N. T. books were composed, instead of 
 gradually and centuries earlier, there would be greater reason 
 than there is for the assertion that the N. T. writers in the 
 use of the Greek tenses labored under a degree of uncertainty, 
 fostered by the well-known poverty of the Hebrew tongue in 
 this respect ; or even if they had employed exclusively only 
 certain Greek temporal forms and avoided others, we might 
 assume at all events the possibility of such a supposition. We 
 see, however, that the N. T. writers, even those less practised 
 in tlie use of language, avail themselves with great assurance 
 of tlie whole treasure of the Greek temporal forms — Active, 
 Passive, and Middle. Obscurity and uncertainty of thought 
 occasions necessarily a diminished facility in the employment 
 of the corresponding forms of speech. That this is the case, 
 for example, with respect to the Moods, particularly the 
 Optative and the Tenses connected with dv, will appear from 
 the exposition given below. But in the use of the Tenses 
 the N. T. writers are by no means deficient in the requisite 
 skill. Consequently the so-called Enallage Temporum 
 or Interchange of Tenses, which was applied by some of the 
 older interpreters of Scripture often and indiscriminately, is 
 to be opposed on behalf of the N. T. language at the outset, 
 and discarded on principle. Still less does the observation 
 that other languages — particularly we ourselves in trans- 
 lating — frequently employ different temporal relations, give 
 us any right to assume that the writer in Greek connected 
 with a tense any other conception than that residing in the 
 tense. 
 
 Accordingly, whenever our mode of conception departs from the 
 tense employed, it is our busiiiess to transfer ourselves to the position 
 of the writer, and take pains in every case to apprehend the temporal 
 relation which corresponds to the tense he used, and, if possible, 
 to reproduce it. This, too, thanks to the more recent judicious 
 criticism and thorough philological study, has already been done by 
 most modern interpreters; and thus a multitude of absurdities have 
 
196 AORIST AND PERFECT. [§ 137. 
 
 been removed from the interpretation of the N. T. We can ac- 
 cordingly dispense here with an extended refutation of those gram- 
 ■ matical errors the more readily, as the scientific treatment of the 
 Greek language adopted at the present day universally in the schools 
 secures at the outset the inexperienced (and consequently still impartial) 
 reader of the N. T. from errors of the sort. Whoever, therefore, out 
 of professional interest wishes to obtain a closer acquaintance with 
 them, must be referred to the commentaries or to the ample 
 170 collection of them in Winer § 40. Yet no one will be disposed to 
 insist that consistency in the maintenance of this position be carried 
 so far as to forbid us to recognize the least inaccuracy in expression 
 or deviation from ordinary usage ; on the contrary, to exhibit such 
 anomalies is especially the object of this section ; only we shall see 
 in them, rather, a product of the unconstrained phraseology of 
 the p e o p 1 e or an illegitimate extension of a Greek form of thought, 
 and not an (immediate) influence of a foreign idiom. 
 
 B. §137, land2; C. §60Bd.; J. §399,2eq.; G. §17. 
 
 2 The distinction established in the general Grammars between ' 
 the Perfect, as a tense having a present reference, and the 
 Aorist, as a narrative tense, holds completely in the N. T., as 
 every attentive reader can convince himself by comparing the 
 verbal forms which occur on every page. It may suffice here, 
 therefore," to adduce a few passages in which both tenses have 
 clearly preserved their proper force when united in a single 
 sentence : Col. i. 16 kp avTW iKTicrdrj to, travTa . . . etre dpovot 
 elVe KvpiOTTjTe^ . . .• to, iravra Bi avTov koX eii aiirov eKTiarai, 
 Koi alr6<; icrriv irpo Travroiv etc., 1 John i. 2 i; fw^ e<^avepmdri, 
 Kol impaKa/jiev Kal fuipTvpovfj,€v, Mark xv. 44 UiXdro'i iOavfiacrev 
 el ijSr/ riOvrjKev, /cal . . . eTrrjpairrfaev Qvov Kevrvpimva) ei 
 irdXai diredavev, Acts xxi. 28 "EXKi)va<i ela-ijiyayev et? to 
 lepov Kal KEKoivcoKev tov ar/bov tottov tovtov, John viii. 40 (^Tjrelre 
 fie dwoKTelvai) 09 rrjv aXijdeiav v/uv XeXaXTjKa, rjv iJKovcra irapa 
 roil deov. See more examples of the sort in Winer 272 (255). 
 If, nevertheless. Perfects are sometimes used in a purely 
 Aoristic force, that is something which not only took place in 
 Greek authors (Bhdy. p. 379), but has its natural foundation 1) in 
 the well-known usage by virtue of which Presents so frequently 
 take the placeof the Aorist in narration (see B. § 137, N. 7; H. § 699 ; 
 C. § 609 ; D. p. 405 ; J. § 395, 2 ; G. p. 6, and as examples of this 
 Present from the N. T. John i. 44; xx. 4-6; Acts x. 11, etc.), 
 and 2) in the deterioration of the later language, in which (per- 
 
§ 137.1 PEKFECT AND AORIST. 197 
 
 haps in consequence of the influence of the Latin) the use of the 
 Perfect as an historic tense, even by poets, becomes more and more 
 frequent; see the list from Plutarch in Wytt. adnot. p. 412 sq., 
 from Nonnus in Lehrs quaest. epp. p. 274. The examples from the 
 N. T. which belong here are, however, almost all of such a nature 
 that the Perfects stand in connection with (preceding) Aorists, so 
 that a narrative character was thereby impressed upon the passage as 
 it were in advance : (cf. Dem. Hal. p. 84 ei/^Tjc^urai/ro Kal mfioXoy-qKaariv, 
 Ach. Tat. p. 100, 33 ed. Jacobs ; Luc. Deor. dial. 19. 1, etc.) Rev. v. 7 
 Kal ^\6ev KoX etA.ij(^ei' (to PipXiov) , viii. 4 sq. koI avi^Tj 6 KaTrvbs . . . 
 KoX eikrjtjitv . . . Kttl €ye/xi(7£v, 2 Cor. xi. 25 ; Heb. xi. 28 ; also with the 
 participle: Matt. xxv. 24 6 to ev raXavTov e'lXrjtfxDi, for which previously 
 (vs. 20) XajScov was used. 
 
 It is therefore more correct certainly, in many passages of the kind, 
 not to seek out laboriously any subtUe distinction in the temporal 
 reference of these two tenses, as in Jas. i. 24 where in SmeX'^XvOev 171 
 some have wanted to assume a protracted stay in contrast with xare- 
 v6r]crev and eTreXdOero (see further on this passage in 8 below, p. 202), 
 Luke iv. 18 where dTria-TaXKo/ in contrast with ^xP'^^ '^ ^'^^^ to sig- 
 nify continuance to the present time ; nor is it allowable in Heb. xi. 
 17 to find in the Perf. Trpoa-evT^vox^v (in contrast with the Aorists in 
 vss. 4, 5, 7, 11, etc.) the expression of an act not yet completed, 
 which would agree least of all with the Perfect ; see deWette. 
 
 B. §137, 3; H. §706; C. §605; D. p.419; J. §404; G. p. 25. 
 
 That on the other hand the Aorist may stand for the 3 
 Perfect, has been denied indeed by many" grammarians in 
 reference to ordinary Greek usage, and by Winer 276 (259) 
 in reference to the N. T. also ; yet with too little qualification. 
 As in so many other instances (cf. § 132, 2 p. 156) the question 
 depends simply upon our connecting the correct idea with the 
 grammatical terminology. That is to say, inasmuch as the 
 relation of time expressed by the Perfect is compounded, as it 
 were, of that of the Aorist and that of the Present — the action 
 having its beginning in the past (Aorist) but extending either 
 itself or in its effects down to the time being (Present), — in 
 cases where the Aorist is used in the sense of the Perfect we 
 must take this view of the matter : that the Aorist was not 
 intended to express both relations of the Perfect at once, but 
 tliat the writer for the moment withdraws from the present 
 and places himself in the past, consequently in the position of 
 a narrator. This p« sition is uniformly the most natural for the 
 
198 PERFECT AND AORIST. [§ 137. 
 
 act of composition ; and from it tliere results of itself, if not a 
 positive aversion to the Perfect, yet a greater preference for 
 the Aorist.- The continuance of the action, therefore, and its 
 working down to the present time, resides, not indeed in 
 the tense, but in the connection; and the necessary 
 insertion of this relation is left in every case to the hearer. 
 
 The following may serve as examples : Matt, xsiii. 2 iin t^s Mujvo-eus 
 KaOiSpa's iKaQurav ol ■ypa/i//,aT£ts Koi oi ^apicroLoi seated themselves (and 
 still sit), Heb. viii. 1 cxo/ncv apxi^pia os iKa.6i(T€v iv St^ta etc. (cf. 
 X. 12) ; the common O. T. quotation (Matt. iii. 17 etc.) oSrds ia-nv . . . 
 iv w evSoKiyo-a. In Mark iii. 21 i^iaTrj corresponds closely to the 
 Presents following (ex^'i eK^aWei), so that certainly we are not to think 
 of a merely transient tKcrracns ; Col. i. 21 vvvl 8k dTroKaTiJXXa^ev 
 (aTTOKaTrjXkdyrjTe Lchm.), deWette : hat etc. versohnet, [A.V. now hath 
 he reconciled3 In John xv. 8 ei' toi!™ iSo^dadrj 6 irar-qp fjiov, tva Kapnrov 
 KfteprjTe, even ancient interpreters explained Iho^ojid-rj by So^d^erat, see 
 Lucke; xiii. 31 vvv cSo^do-flij 6 uJos etc. (prophetic Aorist, for ho^aa-n. 
 follows, cf. 4 below). Another example is the common iypaij/a in 
 letters : not merely in reference to previous letters but also to the one 
 just written, at its close (1 Pet. v. 12, etc.) ; or, in reference to single 
 172 sections of it, at the end of that section (1 Cor. ix. 15, etc.). In fact 
 the Present ypa.(f>(o often stands in its stead (1 Cor. iv. 14, etc.), and 
 even the two forms alternate, 1 John ii. 12 sq., at the most 'with the 
 difference that ypdcfxa is employed rather in reference to the entire 
 letter, iypa\f/a. to that portion of it thus far written (deWette). But 
 even this distinction is perhaps too delicate, when we take into consid- 
 eration the ancient use of cn-e/ti/^a (Acts xxiii. 30 ; Phil. ii. 28 ; Philem. 
 11) and of the Latin mid, litteras dedi (Krijger § 451) ; so that the 
 change of tense in the 1st Ep. of John probably arose solely from the 
 need of variety in connection with the sixfold repetition of the verb. 
 Respecting Eph. v. 29 and other similar Aorists in aphorisms, etc., see 
 8 below, p. 201. 
 4 There is still another case in which the two preterite forms 
 are interchanged in a way which, as respects the sense at least, 
 is perfectly indiscriminate, viz. in an impassioned apodosis 
 after a conditional clause with edv or et — tlie proleptic 
 Perfect or Aorist. This case has caused certain expositors 
 even to assume an enallage of these tenses and the Future. 
 This use, however, is of such a general, rhetorical, nature that 
 it belongs not only to every age (see among others Joseph. B.J, 
 4, 3, 10 and more examples in Mtth. Gr. § 500), but also to 
 every language (see, for tlie Latin, Kriiger § 444 Rem. 1). 
 
§ 137.J THE AOEIST. 199 
 
 The natural tense in such clauses is the P e r f e c t ; as, 1 Cor. xiii. 1 
 tav Tttis -yAcoo-CTais tGv avOpunnav XaXto ... yiyova p^aXicos ijp^iuv etc., 
 Rom. IV. 14 fl yap oi Ik vo/xov KX.r]pov6ixoi, KeKei/iorat ■q ttlo-tu; (cai Karrjp- 
 yrjTai fj lirayyeXia, xiv. 23 6 Si.aKpiv6ixevo<s iav (jxHyri, KaTaKfKpLTai, 2 Pet. 
 ii. 20, and with a Participle taking the place of the conditional clause 
 Rom. xiii. 8. On the other hand, the Aorist is used in John xv. 6 
 iav firj Tts fi-ivrj iv e/iot, i^XrjOrj efo) <os to xX^/ia koI i^7]pa.vd-q, Koi 
 (Tvvayova-Lv avrd etc. (see further on this in 8 below, p. 202), Rev. x. 7 
 orav fieXKy uaXiri^av, koX ireXia-Or] to fiva-Trjpiov, 1 Cor. vii. 28 lav 
 ■ya/iijo-jys, ov^ ^fLapres. A difference between the two forms exists 
 only in so far as in the Perfect the continuous and in the Aorist the 
 momentary nature of the action comes into prominence. 
 
 Remark. With this obliteration of the difference between the two E 
 tenses, which later increased more and more, it does not excite sur- 
 prise that the iiss. in many passages fluctuate between the two forms. 
 With no verb is this more frequently the case than with SlSw/jli, owing 
 to the similarity of the two forms. Since, too, the context almost 
 everywhere permits both forms to seem admissible, according as the 
 momentary act of giving or the resultant continuous possession 
 is intended to receive prominence, a decision is often difficult, indeed 
 positively impossible ; and hence the recent editors, as a matter of 
 fact, often disagree. Thus, for example, in John v. 36; vi. 32; vii. 
 19 ; xvii. 6, 7, 22, 24, Lchm. has decided for ISwKa [so Treg. in vi. 32 ; 
 vii. 19 ; xvii. 6], Tdf. [with cod. Sin.] for Sc'SuKa [but in xvii. 6 Tdf. 
 has now adopted ffito/ca after cod. Sin. etc.] ; see besides, the various 
 readings on iv. 12 ; vii. 22 ; xii. 49 ; xiii. 3, 15 ; xvii. 4, 8, 9, 14 ; xviii. 
 9, 11 ; 1 John iii. 1 ; iv. 13; v. 20. Yet here it is to be noticed 
 particularly, that where the sense necessarily requires the pure 
 Aoristic time (e.g. John xviii. 22; xix. 9, etc.), no fluctuation of the 173 
 sort occurs in the mss. 
 
 B. §13r,N.l; H. §706; C. § 606rl>- of. p. 420 8q.; J. §404; G. p. 25. 
 
 The use oF the Aorist instead of the (Latin, German, g 
 English, etc.) Pluperfect in subordinate clauses, 
 especially tempo"al and relative, is so generally acknowledged, 
 that it is hardlj necessary to adduce passages in proof of it 
 from the N. T. ; see e.g. Luke vii. 1 ; John xi. 30, etc. 
 
 In leading clauses the case is different. Here, since the rela- 
 tion of time could not be regarded as adequately defined either by an 
 explanatory conjunction or by immediate connection with other parts 
 of the sentence (as is the case with subordinate clauses), the form of 
 the Pluperfect is incomparably more nscessary ; and, as matter of fact, 
 the use of the Aorist is found then ii: Greek authors far more rarely 
 
200 THE AOEIST. [§ 137. 
 
 (see the Grammars as above). Hence, in interpreting the N. T. — 
 the language of which had already become completely wonted to the 
 somewhat cumbrous form of the Pluperfect (as is evident from numer- 
 ous examples) — we shall proceed more safely if we assert such a use 
 of the Aor. at the most only where the temporal reference is obvious 
 from the immediate context. Yet here, too, it must hold as a rule, 
 after the analogy of the exposition given in 3 p. 197, that the author 
 where he reports in the Aorist facts that have previously occur- 
 red (see especially Matt. xiv. 3 sq.) has at once transferred himself 
 as a nart'ator to the time then being, leaving his hearer to supply the 
 temporal relation for himself; as is manifest, for example, in the 
 passage adduced, from the fact that the writer alternates between the 
 Aorist and the Imperfect (cf. 7 below). See besides John xviii. 24 
 (and Liicke in loc), vi. 22 sq. It is an uncritical procedure, how- 
 ever, when certain interpreters avail themselves of this circumstance 
 (very precarious as it is, and suggestive of arbitrary interpretation) 
 in order by its aid to remove all the discrepancies which occur 
 in different authors relative to the sequence of the events narrated. 
 For it is far more probable that the writers, in cases where the tem- 
 poral reference of the Pluperfect is absolutely necessary to 
 in tell igibili ty, would have made use of it, since the Pluperfect 
 form was thoroughly current with them. See in this respect partic- 
 ularly Matt, xxvii. 37 (and deWette on the passage;, John xviii. 12 ; 
 Mark iii. 16 (compared with the narratives of other Evangelists, 
 John i. 43 cf. Matt. xvi. 18), and still other examples in Winer 275 
 (259). 
 
 B.§137,4-6; H. §§ 696 b. 701. 716; C. §592; D.§§426.427; J. §§401, 3. 405; G.pp.7,8,24. 
 
 J The established grammatical distinction between the Aorist 
 as a purely narrative tense (expressing something momentary) 
 and the Imperfect as a descriptive tense (expressing some- 
 thing contemporaneous or continuous) holds in all its force in 
 the N. T., as is plain from many passages e.g. Matt. xxi. 8 sq. ; 
 Mark xi. 15sqq., etc. But since every writer must be left to 
 decide to which conception he in narrating the facts will give 
 the preference, it is quite profitless to adduce all the examples 
 where an Imperfect appears according to our conception to 
 be used instead of the Aorist, or, on the other hand, an Aorist 
 instead of the Imperfect (see e.g. Matt. xxvi. 26 exXaaev . . , 
 
 174 eSiSov . . . ehcoKev), And it would be still more futile, in 
 matters which the caprice of the writer alone decides, to try to 
 establish a general difference of usage. 
 
§ 137.] THE GNOMIC AORIST. 201 
 
 What has been said respecting the Indicative of the tenses mentioned, 
 holds, of course, also for their respective moods (to wit, those of the 
 Aorist and of the Present). The use of the Participles, how- 
 ever, is in so far more precise, that with the Present Part, to the idea 
 of continuance that of incompleteness or of contemporaneousness 
 (with other predicates) must necessarily be added, and with the Aorist 
 Part, that of the completed (real or imaginary) past has sovereign 
 control, whether the action be momentary or fill the duration of an 
 entire period. (For details see B. § 137, 6 ; W. § 45, 1.) 
 
 For an example of the Imperfect with the force of to be wont, 
 see Mark xv. 6 ; and of the Imperf. tKekevov, which the Attics prefer 
 to use in the sense of the Aorist, see Acts xvi. 22. Respecting the 
 Imperfect de conatu see below, 10 c) p. 205. 
 
 The Gnomic Aorist. 
 B. § 137, N. 6; H. § 707; C. § 606; D. p. 412; J. § 402; Gr. § 30. 
 
 Respecting this Aorist, commonly designated in the gram- 
 mars the Aorist of habitude^ with the sense of the 
 Present (in contrast with the Imperfect), it is necessary to. 
 make a few general preHminary remarks, as the brief notices 
 hitherto given in the grammars do not suffice to make it 
 understood., 
 
 According to MoUer's exposition (Philol. Bd. viii. 1) this Aorist, 
 used alike by poets and prose writers of every age, can indeed 
 express habitualness, but just as well and still more frequently the 
 necessity or universality of an action or state ; which does not, like 
 habitualness, permit of exceptions. Since now this Aorist was 
 employed for the most part in general propositions deduced from 
 experience, propositions whose contents are valid not only for the 
 past but also for the present and the future, the title "Gnomic Aorist" 
 designates more correctly its essential nature. Its use in Greek 
 occurs not only in similitudes, propositions involving comparisons (as 
 so often in Homer), and ideal pictures (Plato, Phaedr. p. 246 sq.), 
 but also in abstract, maxim-like declarations founded in practical 
 observation (see the examples from Thucyd. and Demosth. given by 
 Moller). The Present (strictly non-preterite) nature of this Aorist 
 appears not only from its frequent and immediate connection with 
 Presents (and Perfects), but also from the employment with it of the 
 Subjunctive with av in subordinate clauses (according to B.. § 139, 9), 
 especially temporal and relative clauses (e.g. frequently in the above 
 passage of Plato, moreover in Horn. II. ir. 690 ; Hesiod. Ipy. 738, etc.) 
 
 1 [In German, Aorist des Pflegens ; English, Iterative Acrrisi.] 
 
202 THE GNOMIC AOEIST. |§1S7. 
 
 When, then, "Winer 277 (260) asserts that the Aorist never in the 
 N. T. expresses what is habitual, the assertion is well founded so far 
 forth as the peculiarity of the Aorist in question is not adequately 
 
 175 described by the feature of habitualness ; but the occurrence of the 
 Gnomic Aorist, according to the above description of it, ought at the 
 same time not to be denied. For the objection that the whole idiom 
 presumes too nice an observance of the laws of classic Greek and 
 greater familiarity with them than can be supposed in the N. T. 
 authors, may perhaps be decisive for a portion of them, but not for 
 all. On the contrary, the employment of the Aorist, as the most 
 common historic tense, corresponds perfectly to the character of 
 popular expression, which so gladly endeavors to break away from 
 the form of abstract presentation and spontaneously falls into the tone 
 of narration (cf. 3 p. 197). Observe the form of the Homeric com- 
 parisons, or the description of the shield in the Iliad (where moreover 
 Imperfects and Aorists continually alternate in the narrative). 
 
 ' In the N. T. this is the view to be taken of the comparisons in Jas. i. 
 
 10 sq. Kav)(a.crd(ji o TrXoucrios iv rfj TaireH/iucret avrov, on cos avOoi y^oprov 
 Trape\ev(TfTai. avireiXev yctp 6 ^Xios (TW t(3 Kaijcrtui't Koi i^rjpavtv 
 Tov \6pTov, Koi TO a.v6o<s avTov i^iTTiu ev Kol 7] evTrpitriUx. tov vpoviaTTOv 
 aiiTov aTTuiXero • owtios koi 6 TrXovtrtos . . . fn-apavO'^aerai. Similar is 
 1 Pet. i. 24 TTcia-a o-ap^ As x°P'''°''> '''*' ""oicra 86^a awr^s u)S av^os x°P'^'^ ' 
 iirjpa.v6ri 6 )(°P'^o';, Kal to avOo^ avrov l^iirfatv. Further Jas. i. 23 
 • ioiKtv di/Spl KaTavoovvTi to irpdcrwiroi' . . . €v iaoTrrpw • KttTcvoijo'ei' yap 
 eavTov Kal aTTf\i^\v6tv (see 2 p. 197) Kal evOews iTreXaSeTO ottoios ^v. 
 From the same source, viz. the requirements of historic presentation, 
 proceed the Aorists in Paul's doctrinal analysis in Rom. viii. 29 oSs 
 Trpoiyvu), koI irpoiopicrev' ... oSs 8e trpowpLo'ev, tovtovs koI Iko,- 
 X e o- e V • Kal oSs eKiiXeo'ev, tovtou^ Kal iSiKai (ocrev • oSs Se iSLKaloMTCV, 
 TowTovs Kal iSoiaaev; hence it is not necessary to assume that the 
 last Aorist (cSo^acrev) differs in force from all the rest (cf. Eph. ii. 5 sq.). 
 Finally, the two Aorists in John xv. 6 quoted in 4 above, p. 199, may 
 also, in part at least, be included under the head of the Gnomic Aorist, 
 inasmuch as the thought contains an experimental truth set forth 
 figuratively, in which the two momentary acts (c/SX-^^ij, i$rjpdv6ri) 
 come into manifest antithesis to the continuous one denoted by the 
 Present (crwdyovcriv). In Eph. v. 29 ofiSa's irore rrjv lavrov <rdpKa 
 ffiia-ijo^ev, dXXa eKTpe<f>a Kal 6dX.Trei avrqv, the preterite force is retained 
 indeed by the particle irori, yet in such a way (as the Presents 
 following show) that the validity of the statement for the. time now 
 current is, at the same time, included (cf. 3 above p. 197). A like 
 reference in James ii. 6 (with ■^ifido-are) is at least not excluded. 
 In John X. 18 aipti n probably an early correction for the originaJ 
 
§ 137.] PRESENT WITH PTTTURE B ORCE. 203 
 
 ^pcv (the first-hand reading of the Vat. and the Sin. jiss.) and the 
 latter word, therefore, probably ought to have been adopted by 
 Tischendorf iq his 8th ed. 
 
 If, then, it is evident from the exposition given, that the N. T. 
 writers, so far forth as their writings philologically viewed are 
 products of Greek modes of thought,' must have been led by the 
 very nature of the popular language to use this Aorist as a matter of 
 course when occasion occurred — (and the cases would certainly be 176 
 more numerous if the compass of the books were greater, since with 
 the present compass they are already pretty numerous), it is also a 
 settled truth on the other side, that where the genius of the Greek 
 language had no opportunity to develop itself freely, the assumption 
 also that this Aorist is used seems to be, inadmissible. Hence the 
 Aorists in quotations from the 0. T., as Heb. i. 9 ; x. 5, 6, are not to 
 be brought under this head, since in the Sept. translation the foreign 
 idiom has exercised, particularly in the choice of the Greek Tense, 
 too considerable and unmistakable an influence. On the Aorist 
 evSoKHjo-a in quotations, see 3 p. 198. 
 
 B. §137, N. 8; H. §698; C. § 612 ; D. p. 405 sq. ; J. §396; G. p. B. 
 
 Of the Presents which include at the same time aPerTect 9 
 force (i.e. are translated by us commonly by the Perfect), rjKO) and 
 oLKovu) occur frequently (Luke ix. 9; xvi. 2; 1 Cor. xi. 18; John 
 ii. 4, etc.) ; dTrep^ecv in the signification to have received already 
 (Luther, dahin hahen Matt. vi. 2 etc., cf. Herm. Vis. 3, 13) is likewise 
 to be found even in Greek authors, see Pape. That in Matt. ii. 4, 
 however, yivvarai is not to be taken after the analogy of the 
 (poetic) use of riKTav, yewav (see B. I.e.) in the sense of the Perfect, 
 but as a pure Present, the context shows ; see Fritzsche in loc. 
 
 B. §13T, N. 10; H. §699a.; C. §609; D. p.405; J. §397; (i. p. 6. 
 
 Lastly, that the Present frequently stands where things still 10 
 future are spoken of — consequently that the Present comprises 
 within itself the Future force of the verb, is a phenomenon 
 so common in all ages and all languages, that in order to 
 describe it we least of all need the unp' lilosophic designation 
 enaUage temporum. 
 
 In order to set the cases in the N. T. vhich belong under 
 this head in the right light, we will distribute them into the 
 following classes : 
 
 1 That this, as rosiiects style, holds quite peculiarly also of the Epp. of James 
 and Peter, has often, and with reason, been emphasized by the interpreters. 
 
204 PRESENT WITH FUTURE FORCE. [§ 137 
 
 a) The idea of the verb is of such a nature that of itself it 
 includes the force of the Future. This holds (as in our lan- 
 guage) pre-eminently of two verbal ideas : that of coming, ipx^o-Oai, 
 together with its synonymes iirdyHv, iropevecrOai, etc., and that of 
 becoming, yivtcrdai. As in ■ijKia (see No. 9) there inheres a Perfect 
 force (I have come, am present), so in ip-)(0)w.i a Future (I come, shall 
 appear). For both ideas the language contents itself with the form 
 
 ' of the Present, as that which, participating alike in both temporal 
 relations, stands midway between both, including in itself the termina- 
 tion of the one and the beginning of the other. That the Present 
 ip)(pijja.i in all the Moods takes the place of et/^i (which by the Attics 
 was commonly employed in a Future sense, but in the N. T. as a 
 simple verb is not used) has already been mentioned (p. 50) and is 
 plain from innumerable examples ; as, John iv. 23 Ip^erat <5pa koX vvv 
 iOTiv, xiv. 3 iav iToiii,a,(Tia roirov v/xlv, Trii\iv fp^ofJiaL Kai irapaXjjjUi/'o/toi 
 v/jLas, i. 30 oTTicro) p,ov ep^erai avr/p etc., especially in the Part, o 
 ipxap-evoi of the Messiah Matt. iii. 1 1 etc., the formula in the Apoca- 
 lypse 6 ibv Koi 6 ■^v Ktti 6 ep^^o/AEvos of God, TCI lpy(6jx.iva (John xvi. 13)^ 
 6 aieov 6 ipx6p.€vos (Mark x. 30, etc.) of the future. By the Future 
 177 iXeva-ofJiai (Matt. ix. 15 iXeva-ovrai rjfiipai, etc., 1 Cor. iv. 19; xvi. 12, 
 etc.) the beginning of the future action is placed at a distance, by the 
 Present it is placed more in the present (to be sure, not always in 
 the immediate present of which the senses take cognizance as John 
 xxi. 3, but also proleptically in the imaginary present of prophetic 
 vision); see under b). 
 
 For ipxe-crOaj. in the sense of to go i.e. to go away, especially in the 
 Gospels and the Rev. (never in the Acts, by Paul, or in the Ep. to 
 the Heb. ; also not in the Sept.), the provincial (cf. the Egyptian 
 papyrus in Mullach's Vulgarspr. p. 20) vTraynv is a favorite word. 
 This word is often used in the future sense — in the Indicative most 
 frequently by John, also in connection with epx^arOai e.g. viii. 14 ttoOcv 
 ^KOov Koi TTOV vira-yw . . . TroOev epxa^aL koI vov vTrdyb), cf. Xxi. 3 ; xiv. 28. 
 Uopevea-dai also is found in the Present like ipx^crOaL and used in 
 company with it, e.g. John xiv. 2, 3, 12 ; xvi. 28'; Acts xx. 22 ; Rom. 
 XV. 25, etc.; likewise dva/Jalveiv Matt. xx. 18 etc.; John vii. 8; 
 XX. 17 ; irpodyeiv Matt. xxi. 31. 
 
 It is hardly worth while to adduce examples of yCvecrOai — a 
 word in which a future force still more evidently resides ; as, Luke 
 xii. 54 sq. Xeyere on oiJ,j3pos tpxerai, koI yiverai owus" ... Xeyere otI 
 Kavcruiv hrrai, Kai yCverai, cf. xi. 26 ; XV. 10 ; Mark xi. 23, etc. 
 Similarly iyeiperaL John vii. 52. 
 
 b) The Future force follows inevitably from the context. 
 In this case the Present as the more common and simple verbal form 
 
§ 137.] PBESENT WITH FUTURE FORCE. 205 
 
 perfectly takes the place of the Future in all languages, and a multi- 
 tude of instances can be adduced from the N. T. where not only the 
 Present alone has the future force, as 1 Cor. xv. 32 avptov yap a-TroOvi^- 
 o-Ko/i.ei','^ but also where (especially in John) Presents alternate with 
 Futures without a sensible difference, or where (in parallel passages) 
 one writer employs the Present, the other the Future ; as, John x. 
 4, 5, 12-16, 18; xvi. Ifi, 16, the discourses and similitudes of Jesus 
 in tlie 14th and 15th chapters ; Matt. vii. 8 Tdf.; Gal. ii. 16 (Si/caiovTat 
 . . . StKattu^^o-erat), Matt. xxiv. 40 compared with Luke xvii. 34. 
 L'urther, see those Presents (with the circumflex on the last syllable) 
 which have already been adduced (p. 38) in connection with the , 
 Attic formation of the Future, and still others below, § 139, 3 p. 209; 
 39 p. 235 ; 61 p. 255. If there is any difference between the two 
 forms, it is that — but only taken quitein the general — which 
 has been already given under a) viz. that the Present is rather used 
 if either the commencement of the future action falls in the present, 
 or (in general maxims, comparisons, etc.) the statement has equal 
 validity for the present as well as the future ; the Future, on the 
 other hand, is used with actions whose beginning is projected to a 
 (definite or indefinite) distance (e.g. John xvi. 13 sq.; 20 sq., etc.), 
 or whose occurrence is not definitely to be expected till after the 
 accomplishment of others (expressed perhaps by such general Presents ; 
 as, John xvi. 19). Yet this criterion is only an approximate one, 
 since the author certainly allowed himself in many cases to be guided 
 merely by feeling (cf. p. 38) ; and, for example, even in reference to 
 actions purely future seems designedly to have chosen the Present, in 178 
 order to portray the more impressively their closely impending 
 occurrence, as in Matt. xxvi. 2. 
 
 c) Finally, under this head belongs the familiar antique usage (see 
 B. 1. c. ; H. § 702 ; C. § 594; D. p. 409 ; J. § 398, 2 ; G. pp. 5, 7 ; 
 and, for the Latin, Kriiger § 446 Anm. 2) by which the Present, 
 and consequently in narration the Imperfect, designates the will, 
 the mere intention, to perform an act ; or, according to grammatical 
 terminology, is used de conatu . so the Pres. in John x. 32 (Sta tC) 
 \i0a.t,iTi /Ae; xili. 6 a~v fj.ov vHrrets Tois TroSas; the Imperf. in Luke 
 i. 59 iKoXovv avTO Zaxapio-v (cf. 60), Acts vii. 26 (Tvi/-q\ka.&aev avTOV'S 
 fcf. 27). In Matt. iii. 14, however, in SieKwXvev the idea of the verb 
 £|,ctually passed into execution, and consequently the Imperf. is used 
 in the ordinary sense. That the same holds true of other passages 
 also (as Gal. i. 13 ; Heb. xi. 17), Winer 269 (253) has already noticed. 
 
 As the Participles uniformly reproduce the temporal 11. 
 
 1 After Isa. xxii. 13, where, although the Heb. text has the Future, the Sept. 
 (like the German) gives the Present. 
 
206 THE TENSES. t§ l^^- 
 
 reference of their respective Indicatives (see above, 7 p. 201), 
 so the Present Part, also participates in the nature of the 
 Present that has just been unfolded, inasmucli as, including 
 vrithin itself a future force, it often stands for the Future Part. ; 
 and thus the number of actual Future Parts, in the N. T. has 
 been greatly diminished. 
 
 If then a Present Part, stands in connection with an actual Future, 
 from the idea of contemporaneousness resident in the Pres. 
 Part, the notion of futurity results of itself; as, 2 Pet. iii. 10 oTot;^«ta 
 SI Kava-ovfi-iva Xvd-^crovTai, Luke i. 35 to ■yevvojju.evoi' e/c (tov ayiov 
 KkrjO-qa-erai vtos ^eoB, etc. But Present Participles are frequently 
 used in a future sense also When not thus connected, particularly if 
 the future action they designate takes its beginning in the real or 
 imaginary, the absolute or the relative, present, — if the statement, 
 therefore, has a validity quite universal. In this sense food is called 
 in John vi. 27 unqualifiedly f) aTroXXv/jiivr] ; gold, in 1 Pet. i. 7, to 
 airoXXvfxevov (perishable) ; the hardened and believers are called by 
 Paul so often ol avoXXxifievoi, ol a-iotpjj.o'oi, 2 Cor. ii. 15 etc. ; mortal 
 men ot aTvoQvriaKovTf<;, Heb. vii. 8 cf. 2 Cor. vi. 9. The blood of Christ 
 is spoken of as to Trepi ttoWSv lK-)(yw6ii.€vov, Matt. xxvi. 28 (Mark xiv. 
 24 ; Luke xxii. 20) ; all things (raCra TravTo) in the above passage 
 'from 2 Pet. (iii. 11), directly after the Put. XvO-qa-ovTai, are straight- 
 way declared to be A,vo/xei/a. To the general proposition in 1 Cor. 
 XV. 32 {avfjiov a.iro6vrj<TK6ij.ev) corresponds precisely Matt. vi. 30 tov 
 ■)(6pTov ... av piov €ts K\i(3avov j3aXX6iJi.€vov. To these may be added 
 also the Present Participles (so far forth as used de conatu) spoken 
 of in § 144, 11 p. 297. In other cases still, the future force resides 
 in the signification of the verb, as in the above 6 cp^ouci/os, to 
 ipXO/Jia'a, to. eTtipypfieva (10 a) p. 204), Luke ii. 45 vTria-rpiipav dva^ij- 
 TOVVTi'S, 1 Cor. ii. 1 riXOov KarayyeXkiov, Acts xxi. 2 €i!pov ttXoiov StairfpSv 
 {on the passage) ik ^oiviK-qv, 1 Cor. iv. 14 ovk ivrpeTruyv i/iSs ypdi/xi) 
 .TttijTa. Cf. with the entire contents of this section the sparsely 
 occurring examples of the actual Future Participle in § 144, 10 p. 296. 
 
 B. §137, NN.12, 13; C. §§599. 643 h.; J. II. p. 64; G. p.21. 
 
 12 Instances of the Perfect Subjunctive, and still more of tho Perfect 
 and Future Optative (rather rare, moreover, in Greek authors), no 
 longer occur in the N. T. 
 
 Of the Imperatives Passive, besides the Present, that of the 
 Perfect is in use in the 2d Person (tppwuo, eppiacrOe, /iie/xnjo-^e, 
 179 ■mtjyiji.iixTo), but commonly that of the Aorist in all Persons (apdrfri, 
 Pk-fjOrfTi, ayiacrBrfTU), yvtocrO'^Tto, ^o;3ij5jp-t, etc.). 
 
§139.] THE MOODS. 207 
 
 The Moods. 
 B.§139; H.§§719Bqq.! C.§§6138qq.i D.§§5098jq.; J.§§410sqq.; G. Chap. 1. 
 
 While as respects the Tenses the language of the N. T. does 1 
 not, in the main, depart from the general usage of the Greeks, 
 but, on the contrary, a few minor irregularities excepted, has 
 known how to conform to it perfectly, it falls manifestly far 
 behind that usage in the employment of the relations of Mood. 
 It would be very hasty, however, to draw a conclusion from 
 the inferior facility in the use of the Moods respecting the 
 N. T. use of the Tenses also. For, exact discrimination in 
 the use of tenses is, as has been already remarked, not only 
 quite indispensable to mutual intelligibility, but it is far easier 
 for the mind of a common man, that is to say, one little trained 
 and taught in literature and language; to become familiar 
 with' a system of temporal forms ready to his hand, even though 
 diversified, than to master the Modal forms, regulating and 
 presupposing, as the latter do, a more delicate and cultivated 
 linguistic sense. The wealth and charm of the Modal expres- 
 sions, as they appear especially at the flourishing period of 
 Attic prose in the writings of Thucydides, Plato, Xenophon, 
 exhibits the complete impress of the literary and refined 
 genius of the Athenian people. The finer shades of Modal 
 relation disappear more and more the further the language 
 departs in time and space from this focus of Greek culture. 
 Only the zealous study of the language of Hellenic culture, 
 the aspiration after intellectual development in the Hellenic 
 sense, could render it possible for later authors, such as Lucian, 
 Plutarch, Arrian, etc., to acquire a beauty and finish of diction 
 approximating, although never attaining, to that of the 
 flourishing period. Since the N. T. authors were far from 
 indulging in any such endeavor, but on the contrary, as the 
 repositories of a new intellectual movement found themselves 
 almost in direct antagonism to it, they were little con- 
 cerned with the acquisition (toilsome at the best) of Greek 
 phraseology in its more refined development ; — all the less as 
 they were primarily interested only in rendering themselves jgo 
 plain and intelligible to their own countrymen, who, as a 
 whole, were certainly far removed at that time from such 
 culture. Foreign influences, — partly the general influence 
 of the Latin language upon the Greek, partly that of the 
 
208 THE SUBJUNCTIVE AND OPTATIVE. [§ 139. 
 
 Hebrew, and in particular of the translation of the Bible 
 (which is extremely restricted in its use of the Moods) into 
 the language of the N. T. writers, — certainly contributed 
 here also to the far greater imperfection of expression which 
 characterizes the N. T. ; for, as respects the Moods, it presents 
 no inconsiderable contrast to the language of contemporary — 
 in fact, much later — profane writers, and even of ecclesiastical 
 writers also. Again, however, Luke's language, particularly 
 in the Acts, is that which employs the Modal relations with 
 moi'e certainty and precision. 
 
 The Subjunctive and Optative in Simple Sentences. 
 B. §139,m.2; H. §720o.; C. §647; D. §516; J. §417; G. §88. 
 
 The Conjunctivus dubjtativus or deliberativus. 
 This Subjunctive is found sometimes standing quite alone in 
 all three Persons ; sometimes, as occurs so often in Greek and 
 Latin, in immediate connection (i.e. without the intervention 
 of conjunctions) with the Indicatives jSovXei,, 6eXei<;. 
 
 Examples of the 1st Person are, Rom. vi. 1 eTn/xivwuev rrj afiapria; 
 15 aiJ.apT-q<Tto/ji.iv ; 1 Cor. iv. 21 iv pdpSio IkOta ; vi. 15 Troirj<Tu>; xi. 22 
 ri citrui vixiv ; eiraivicrui v/iSs iv tovtio ; ovk ejraivS, John xviii. 11 ov ftii) 
 TTto) avTo; of the 2d Person : Matt, xxiii. 33 iris (f)vyr]Te otto tiJs 
 Kpicrews ; of the 3d Person : Luke xxiii. 31 iv tuJ f>;p<3 '"' yivajrai ; 
 Matt. xxvi. 54 wais ovv irXrjpwOSxTiv at ypacjiai; Rom. x. 14 Lchm. 
 [Treg. ; Tdf. «* bis]- In connection with jSowXet etc. it is frequent : 
 ^cXeis £t7r(i);u,€v (Luke ix. 64), 6e\us o-vAAc^w/Aev (Matt. xiii. 28), n 
 GiXcTt TTotijcru) vfuv (Matt. XX. 32 etc.), riva OtXtre airoXvcroi v/uv (Matt, 
 xxvii. 17, 21 etc.), ySoijXccr^e a/iroKvcriii vfuv rbv jiacriXia twv 'lovSaimv , 
 (John xviii. 39), etc. (Cf. the similar construction with d<^etvai in 
 4 p. 21C,) 
 
 That instead of this Subjunctive the Future should be substituted 
 (hence frequently found also as a variant, Rom. vi. 15 ; Matt. xiii. 28 ; 
 xxvi. 17 ; Mark xiv. 12 ; Luke xxii. 9 ; xi. 5, etc.) is, considering the 
 internal and external affinity of the two forms, perfectly grammatical ; 
 as, John v. 47 irSs ■Trumva-eTe ; Acts i v. 16 Lchm. ti Trotijcro/xei/ ; Rom. 
 X. 1 4 Tdf. N* TTuis aKovcrovTai ; Cf. besides, with interrogative clauses, 
 61 p. 254, and Lob. Phryn. 734. Respecting the addition of iva 
 after ^eXeis etc. see 41 p. 236. 
 
 Remark. Since the Subjunctive in this sense was quite current in 
 N. T. Greek, it may be doul)ted whether in the N. T. the form of the 
 Indicative Present instead of the Subjunctive is admissible, or 
 the Indic&tive if thoroughly established critically can be taken in this 
 
§ 139.] THE SUBJUNCTIVE. 209 
 
 • 
 
 way. Here belongs the consideration of John s. 47 n iroiovfjuv, 6Vt 
 ouTos o avOpuiiros JroAAa iroiel (rrjiji,ua; This sentence is in form and 
 substance almost identical with those above, so that it seems rather 
 too artificial to assume with Winer 284 (267) a difference in signifi- 181 
 cation between this ti ttoioC/ixcv and the ordinary n iroirjcroix.ev or 
 ?rot^o-<i);u,ev (Acts iv. 16) ; on the contrary, the simplest interpretation 
 (which corresponds also to the popular usage, was thun wir equiv. 
 to was sollen wir thun, [what do we equiv. to what are we to rfo]) is 
 not only adequate, but may be justified by usage also. For we must 
 consider here 1) that the first stages of this use in free conversational 
 style are found even in the earlier writers (see Bhdy. p. 396) ; 
 
 2) that in later writers, or those who had no positive need of accuracy 
 of expression, the usage doubtless extended itself still more : ' and 
 
 3) that the form ttoiov^icv belongs to those circum flexed Presents 
 (treated of above, p. 38) which are represented in the vers. Ital, by 
 the Future (faciemus, in the Vulg. on the other hand facimus, cf. 
 trom in Matt. xxvi. 18 var.). Therefore iroiovfi,ev here is nothing more 
 or less than a Present, which, according to § 137, 10 b) p. 204 sq., in- 
 cludes the force of the Future ; and as a trustworthy witness of the 
 mode of expression current among the people ought not to be called in 
 question. 
 
 Quite in the same way was the word irapa^ijXoS/^cvin 1 Cor. x. 
 22 taken by a portion of the ancient translations (temulemur not 
 cemulabimur), — an interpretation which appears to be in no wise 
 unsuited to the sense of the passage, although the more recent ex- 
 positors (though not Ruckert) reject it. Cf further the Indie. Pres. 
 with rai/, oTov, Iva below, 23 p. 222, 39 p. 234. 
 
 B. § 139, m. 3; H. § 720 a. ; C. § 628; D. § 516; J. § 416; G. § 85. 
 
 Conjunctivus adhortativus. This Subjunctive also 4 
 is very common, especially in the 1st Pers. Plural, as aycofj-ev, 
 ^drycDfiev Kal Trlojfiev, yprjyopw/jLev Kal vrj^wfiev, em Trjv reXeio- 
 TTjra <l>epa)fjieda etc. ; rare in the 1st Pers. Singular, Acts vii. 34 
 (after Exod. iii. 10) vvv 8evpo aTroareiXei) ae. The relationship 
 between this Subjunctive and a declaration expressed by the 
 Fut. Indie, is obvious ; hence both verbal forms are united 
 with almost the same force in Rev. xix. 7. And in many 
 passages where the sense admits of both acceptations the MSS. 
 
 ^ Cf. the completely analogous ri irowviiei/ in Pseudo-Luc. Asin. 25, (as several 
 MSS. give in Luc. Pise. 10 also) ; ri SpSi/iev; (jxiyofuv i) fiem/jiey : Alciphr. 1, 11 
 Mein. ; Arr. Exped. 7, 11, 2 {where Kriiger rashly emends irpdrTainv and \eya<rtu); 
 Lucian 38, 16 ; 44, 53 ; 47, 4. 14 ; Acta Petr. et Paul. 45, and the quite common 
 use (noticed also below § 148, 10 p. 353) of the Indicative with iu^ttotc. 
 27 
 
210 THE SUBJUNCTIVE. [§ 139. 
 
 » 
 
 (and editions) -wcyer between the two forms, — as particularly 
 in the above passage from Acts, where formerly aTroo-TeXw was 
 read ; and, on the other hand, the Subjunctive was read where 
 now we have Futures : Jas. iv. 13 ; Heb. vi. 3. 
 
 Also in the much-debated passage (see Winer 286 (268 sq.)) Jas. 
 iv. 15, the text of which is very uncertain, the Future seems in both 
 cases to deserve the preference (^Tjo-o/io' . . . iroi-qa-ofjLEv [so Tdf Treg. 
 cod. Sin.]) ; but there are other difficulties besides, see § 149, 8 d) 
 p. 362. 
 
 Peculiar to this Subjunctive is the almost pleonastic prefixing 
 
 of the Imperative a</>e? let (analogous to the Latin /ac, cave 
 
 182 before Subjunctives, and similar to the use of diXei,^, ^ovXei in 2 
 
 p. 208), supposed to be a provincialism current in the colloquial 
 
 language of those regions. 
 
 Its use is, therefore, especially characteristic of the Synoptists (cf. 
 iWa-yio in § 137, 10 a) p. 204), and is found as well with the 1st Pers. 
 Singular of the Subjunct. following,, a^cg eKySdXu) let me pull out 
 Matt. vii. 4; Luke vi. 42, as with the 1st Pers. Plural a<^£s iSco/tei' 
 Matt, xxvii. 49, for whicSh in Mark xv. 36 we find the Impera. also in 
 the Plur. ax^ere. 'iSoifiev. Cf. aye etc. p. 70. On the force of the 
 verb dt^civat for cao-ai (the two verbs are interchanged in the mss. in 
 Acts V. 38) and the common construction with the Infin., see the 
 lexicons and § 140, 1 p. 258. v 
 
 5 Remark. That for this Subjunctive also the Indicative 
 Present could be substituted, even in the more negligent popular 
 language, is hardly conceivable: because 1) the proposition would 
 , then be destitute of any intimation how the Indicative is to be taken 
 , (which with the deliberative Subjunc. was still given by the inter- 
 rogative form) ; and because 2) here the middle term, as it were, is 
 wanting, viz. the Fut. Indie, for which in such cases the Pres. Indie. 
 is first wont to appear, see 3 p. 209, 23 p. 222, 39 p. 234. For even 
 the Future cannot directly take the place of this Subjunct., since it 
 imparts to the sentence at once instead of the Imperative force the 
 character of a direct assertion. Hence Lchm. in Gal. vi. 10 in his 
 larger edition instead of ipya^on^Oa has restored the Subjunct. 
 [Treg. Tdf.] ; yet the Indic.^ also, in the proper force of the Pres. 
 Indie, gives a sense not to be rejected, see Mey. p. 306. The Pres. 
 ipx6ij,e0a, however, in John xxi. 3 rests on the principle in § 137, 10 a) 
 p. 204 ; so too €px6/ji,e6a, iropivofjieOa, often in the Apocrypha. 
 
 ^ To the JpyaC^neBa in codd. Vat. and Sin. (so frequently are o and oi inter- 
 changed) the less importar.2e is to be attached, as both mss. just before give ?x"i^" 
 instead of ^xo^f which i9 alone correct. 
 
§139-] THK SUBJUNCTIVE. 211 
 
 B. §139, m.4; H. §720 b.; C.§628; D.p.ilS; J. « 120,3; G. §Se. 
 
 Tlie limitations in reference to the negative Imperative 6 
 and theAorist Subjunctive as its substitute (viz. that 
 the former expresses a continued or repeated, the latter a single 
 or momentary, prohibition, etc.) are observed i;i the N. T. very 
 rigidly and without exception ; see e.g. the Sermon on the 
 Mount throughout. Consequently in the Present only the 
 Imperative is used : /i^ ypa^e, fiij Kplvere, f^rj (j>o^ov, fj,r) 
 <j)ol3eia-de ; in the Aorist in the Second Pers. only the 
 Subjunctive : fj,r) vo/j,iarj^, fir) vo/Miarp-e, jjuq airocnpa^fi^Sj /j,r] 
 KpiOrjTe, fir) (j)o/3TjdrJTe (not 4>o^V^7)Te, cf. Matt. x. 26 and 28) 
 etc. ; but in the Third Pers. the Imperative in both instances : 
 fjLTj ■^copt^eTio, /J,r] ia-dterco, fir) 'yvmra, fir) KaTa/Sdro}, p.r) eVtcTxpe- 
 yjrdT(o. 
 
 B. §139, mm. 5,6; 'h.§ 845; C. §627; D. § 544; J. §748; G.§89. 
 
 Owing to the great external similarity between the form of 1 
 the (Aorist) Subjunctive and that of the Future, and the affinity 
 of the two modes of expression, there occurred, as is well 
 known, very early (see th§ examples from Homer in B. I.e.) an 
 interchange or intermingling of the two forms. In tlie classic 
 period that followed, indeed, the use of these forms was settled ; 
 but in later writers considerable vacillation in the employment 
 of them is again discernible. Hence the frequent combination 183 
 of the Subjunctive and the Future to form a single proposition 
 or thought in the 0. T. as well as the New ; ^ hence the fluc- 
 tuation, recurring every where (and already remarked in 2 
 and 4 above), between the two forms as preserved by the mss., 
 especially where only the change of a letter is involved (o and 
 &), e and 17, see 8 below) ; hence the reproduction and explana- 
 tion of a Future form by the Subjunctive in the ancient 
 exegetical writings, glossographies, etc. (see Lob. Phryn. p. 723). 
 
 Thus, then, the two forms alternate without the slightest 
 difference in signification (cf. 2 p. 208) after the combined par- 
 ticles ov fir), a combination which is very common in all parts 
 of the N. T. (occurring close upon one hundred times). Yet, 
 on the whole, here the Subjunctive is the prevalent form ; 
 
 ' E.g. Lev. X. 6 ; Deut. xxix. 13 ; Isa. vi. 10 ; Matt. vii. 6 ; xiii. 15 quotn., Luke 
 i. 15; viii. 17; xi. 5, 7 Tdf.; xii. 58; xxii. 17sqq. ; xxii. 30; John vi. 37; x. 28 ; 
 xii. 40 quotn. ; Phil. ii. 1 1 Tdf. ; Rev. iii. 9 ; ix. 5, 6 ; xv. 4 ; xix. 7 ; xxii. 14, — a 
 portion of these, hovrever, allow themselves to be c{ nstrued and explained according 
 to the analogy of the usage treated of 5 151, 9 p. 582. 
 
212 THE SUBJUNCTIVE. [§ 139 
 
 and, moreover, in those cases where the (Aor.) Subjunctive 
 differs essentially in form from the Future {e\6r), irio), 
 <7vvfjTe, evpedfi, KXeadwatv, etc.), is handed down for the most 
 part without any variation; far less frequently (and 
 often only as an isolated variant) the Future. 
 
 As the Future is often used in the exegetical writings of the Church 
 Fathers instead of the Subjunctive preserved in the N. T. text, all 
 the doubtfully transmitted Future forms awakeo the suspicion 
 that they originally served (either as marginal glosses or elsewhere) 
 only to explain the Subjunctives, and then subsequently passed over 
 into a portion of the mss. Such passages are Mark x. 15 eicreX^j; (D 
 flcre\ev(TfTai), xiii. 2 KaraXvO^ (var. KaraXvBi^creTai [so Sin. without 
 ju.^]), Luke xxii. 16 <^ayu (D <j>dyofji.aL), 1 Thess. v. 3 eKtfyvyaxnv (var. 
 iKtjievioi'TaL) . The Future form is firmly established only in Matt. 
 xvi. 22 ov ijui] lo-Tiit without var. ; has preponderant authority in Luke 
 xxi. 33 TrapiXeva-ovTai. [so Sin.] ; while the authorities are equally 
 divided between the two forms [Sin. gives Fut.] in Mark xiii. 31 ; 
 Heb. X. 17 (cf. Jer. xxxviii. 34), Rev. ix. 6 ; xviii. 14.' Cf. besides 
 the examples in the following paragraph. 
 
 The identity in signification of the Subjunctive and 
 the Future after ov fjirj is establislied unquestionably : not only 
 by quotations from the 0. T. like Matt. xiii. 14 aKovaeTe koX 
 ov firj awrjre, ^etjreTe koX ov fir] iBrjTe (where after the example 
 184 of the Sept. the Hebr. Future is rendered by the Subjunctive), 
 but also by such passages as Matt. xxiv. 21 ota ov yeyqvev, 
 oils' ov /jlt] ryevTjTai, John x. 28 ov fit) airoXxcViai . . . Kai ov^ 
 dpTrdcrei tk, xi. 26 ov fjirj diroddvy et? tw aia>va, Matt. xxiv. 35 
 (irapeXevcreTai ... ov /u.rj irapekdajaiv) cf. witli Luke xxi. 33 ; 
 Heb. X. 17 Lehm. [Treg. Tdf. cod. Sin.J cf. witli viii. 12 ; 
 Luke i. 16 ; xxi. 18 ; John vi. 37 (viii. 12) ; Rev. xv. 4. Hence 
 the ancient versions give the Future almost uniformly — 
 for which, indeed, the (synonymous) Pres. Indicative often 
 appears as a variant, and the Subjunctive without var. only 
 in the passages designated in 18 below, p. 218. 
 
 That the N. T. writers employed this construction with ov }x.rj also 
 to designate that form of statement which classic Greek expressed 
 rather by means of ov and the Optative with av — see 18 p. 218. 
 
 • In other passages still the Future is sufficiently attested, but not the 
 particles. Thus in Matt. xxiv. 2 ov KaraKvBiiaeTat [so Sin.] has been restored 
 instead of oi ^^ KoTa\. ; and so rught we to read likewise in John x. 28 (oux ap- 
 v<i(Tei [Sin. oil /iii cipwdari]), and ■» th Tdf. [Treg.] also in Luke xxii. 34 (oi ipoiviicf. 
 [so Sin.J). 
 
§139.] THE SUBJUNCTIVE. . 213 
 
 Lastly, it is to be noticed particularly, that in the N. T. only 
 the Aorist Subjunc. (and the Second Aor. as well as the 
 First, see 8) is used after oi fj/i], and not a single instance of 
 the Subjunc. Present is found. For in Heb. xiii. 5 the 
 variant iyKaraXelirco [Tdf. cod. Sin.J cannot establish itself 
 against the received reading (-XtVo) [Treg. also]). 
 
 B. § 364, m. 6 and p. 376 Note; C. § 627 a. ; J. § 748, Obs. 3; G. p. 79 sq. 
 
 The much contested canon of Dawes, which, however, Bern- i 
 hardy (Syntax p. 402) among recent writers adheres to, 
 with certain limitations, and defends, — (according to which 
 only the Subjunc. of the Second Aor. can stand after ov /mjj 
 and oTTtB? in the Active and Middle, otherwise always the 
 Future) — can hardly be carried through as respects ordinary 
 Greek usage, least of all, however, in the N. T. 
 
 Bernhardy maintains the admissibility of the First Aor. Subjunc. 
 only in cases where it differs essentially from the Future as respects 
 form (see 7), consequently in liquid verbs, or where the Future has 
 the Middle form (dKoucro/iat etc.), or the circumflexed form (ko/aio) etc.) : 
 consequently, everywhere except when the two forms differ externally 
 only in the vowel of the Mood. But these are the very cases 
 where in all mss., as well those of profane literature as of the Old and 
 New Testaments, the greatest uncertainty occurs in the readings ; so 
 that by the way of criticism, and owing to the great internal aud ex- 
 ternal affinity of the two forms, absolutely no sure result can be 
 attained either in favor of the one or of the other. Hence in- 
 dubitable and well-attested Subjunctives of the 1st Aorist, 
 such as dTToXeo-j;, awayyuXri^, a.<fiOp/ji.i(rrj, iKirXivarj's, SettrTjs, d?roXaTJcra)/xei/, 
 ought to be allowed to pass as proof of the admissibility of this Sub- 
 junctive. In the N. T. also, in almost all cases where the 1st Aor. 
 Subjunc. and the Future differ only in the Mood-vowel, there occurs 
 so great a degree of variation in the readings, that there was no other 
 course left here to the editors, except to follow the auphorities, and 
 put now one form in the text and now the other. Accordingly at 185 
 present we read after ov ixtj 
 
 1) The Future: Matt. xv. 5 rtfi-qo-u; xxvi. 35, Mark xiv. 31 
 dirapvijcro^at [in Mk. Tdf. -wfrnL, so cod. Sin.] ; Mark ix. 41 aTroXecrei 
 [Tdf. -(717, so Sin.J ; Luke x. 19 dStiojcra; John iv. 14 SujJrjcrei ; x. 5 
 OKoXovO'qcrovcnv [-(utriv COd. Sin.]; 
 
 2) The 1st Aorist Subjunctive: Matt. x. 23, Gal. v. 16 
 TeXe'o-ijTe ; Matt. x. 42 awokio-g ; xvi. 28 (Mark ix. 1 ; Luke ix. 27) 
 yev(Tu)VTai ; Matt. xxv. 9 apxecrg [Tdf. /ai^ttpte ovk apx., so cod. Sin.] ; 
 
214 THE OPTATIVE. [§ 139. 
 
 Mark xvi. 18 pXaip-g; Luke xviii. 7 Trot^a-ij ; Luke xxii. 67, Acts 
 xiii. 41 7rL(7T€va-rp-€ ; John viii. 12 ircpin-aT-^cnj ; John viii. 51 Oaapricrri 
 [-0-61 cod. Sin.], 52 ■ycwjjrat; xiii. 8 vixiqj's, 38 iptovi^cn] ; Rom. iv. 8 
 XoywnjTat ; 1 Thess. iv. 15 (ftdaa-oi/xev ; Heb. viii. 11 8i£a$wcnv; 2 Pet. 
 i. 10 TTTatcnjTc; Rev. xviii. 23 (/mxv;;. In almost all these passages, 
 indeed, the other spelling (as Future) is also found, but for the most 
 part far more feebly attested, frequently by single or insignificant 
 MSS. ; several times, however, (e.g. in 1 Thess. iv. 15; 2 Pet. i. 10; 
 Acts xiii. 41, etc.) no trace even of a Future form is found among the 
 variants. Hence in all these cases both Lchm. and Tdf. [so Treg.] 
 have adopted the Subjunctive form. 
 
 3) The passages in which — the authorities being pretty equally 
 divided — the editors disagree, seem to be the following : John vi. 35 
 (ireti/acret Lchm. -ar] Tdf. [Treg. cod. Sin.], ^iif/rja-a Lchm. [Tdf. Treg. 
 cod. Sin.J -crri Tdf. [ed. 2]), Gal. iv. 30 (KXripovoiJ.iQ(Tii Lchm. [Treg. 
 Tdf. cod. Sin.], -ay Tdf. [eds. 2, 7]). Cf. besides Luke xxii. 34, 68 ; 
 John X. 28, and the Lat. verss. on Rev. ix. 6 ; xviii. 14. 
 
 Remark. If then, according to the evidence above given (7 and 8), 
 the Future with oi /m; as a rarer form must be recognized along with 
 the Subjunctive, yet after oirws the Subjunctive has decidedly 
 supplanted the Future ; inasmuch as, in all the passages (some fifty) 
 with the exception of one (Matt. xxvi. 59), the Subjunctive is given 
 by the authorities almost without the least variation. The Future is 
 found in the mss. as an isolated reading in Mark v. 23 ; Acts ix. 12 ; 
 Rom. iii. 4; ix. 17; 1 Cor. i. 29; and in the above passage Matt. 
 xxvi. 59 also there are still authorities enough [cod. Sin. among them] 
 for the Subjunctive (the reading of cod. Vat. morjeover is uncertain 
 [Tdf. gives it as -o-iucrir]), so that even here its restoration seems to 
 be required. 
 
 Cf. in general respecting the fluctuation of the mss. in reference to 
 both forms, besides Nos. 2 and 4 above, Nos. 22, 23, 31, 38, 61. 
 
 B. §139, m. 7; H. §721,lj C. §638; D. p.548; J. §fl8,6.; G. §82. 
 
 The Optative, which is somewhat rare in the N. T. (see 
 11), is still used most frequently, agreeably to its name, in ex- 
 pressing a wish, desire; as, Heb. xiii. 21 ; 1 Thess. v. 23; 
 2 Thess. ii. 17, etc. 
 
 Instead of the Optative the Future is once found, yet with 
 the particle of wishing o^eKov, Gal. v. 12. 
 
 B. §139, m. 8; H. §721b.! C. §638; D. §517; J. §4180bs. 1; G. §88. 
 
 There are also a few examples of the Indicative of a 
 Preterite with a particle of wishing (oc^eXoi/) to express a wish 
 
§ 139.J THE MOODS. 215 
 
 whicb has now become impossible, or, under the existirg circumstances, 
 is seen in advance to be incapable of fulfilment: 1 Cor. It. 8 otpeXov 
 ye iPacTiXeva-are had ye but attained to lordship (by which the 
 ironical character of what precedes is brought out), Eev. iii. 15 o(jie\ov 
 ifivxpo? ^s ^ ^eiTTos (previously, ovre tjrvxpo^ et ovre ^etrros), 2 Cor. xi. 1 
 o(f>i\ov avuxea-Bi /jlov . . . a.<f>po(rvvr)<s Vulg. utinam sustineretis (not 
 sustineatis), hence the following aXXa Kai ave^ea-Oi (jlov is to be taken 
 correctively (see Meyer); cf. o^cAov ifu/xovvTo Ign. ad Smyrn. 12. 
 
 Peculiar is the periphrasis by means of a clause with 6eX<o d 
 followed by the Aor. Indie, Luke xii. 49 ; see below, 52 p. 246. But 
 that clauses with el without an apodosis following (such as Luke xix. 186 
 42 etc.) are not clauses of wishing, see § 151, 26 p. 396. 
 
 B. §139,111.9; H. §728aq.j C. §617; D. §513sqq.; J. §797; G. §31sq. 
 
 The most considerable departure from ordinary usage as u 
 respects the Moods, consists in the fact that the N. T. hardly 
 puts the Optative in use any longer as a Mood of dependence 
 in indirect discourse, particularly after an historic tense. It 
 sometimes employs instead the Indicative in independent 
 discourse, and that, too, far more extensively than was the 
 case among the Greeks ; sometimes it includes the dependent 
 form of statement which the classic language had assigned to 
 the Optative under the form of the Subjunctive. The 
 first of these substitutes was essentially favored by the cir- 
 cumstance, that in accordance with the character of popular 
 language discourses are almost always quoted directly (as in 
 Heb. and the Sept.), and a protracted recital in oblique dis- 
 course hardly occurs (§ 141, 1 p. 272). The second, viz. the 
 greater prominence given to the Subjunctive at the expense 
 of the Optative (gradually quite disappearij g), may have been 
 a consequence of the general influence of Latin on the later 
 Greek. Tl'ie proofs of these statements will not only be 
 found in great number below, where we treat of the several 
 forms of dependent clauses, but by the reader who notices tlie 
 point will be met with everywhere, particularly in the historic 
 writings. 
 
 The Optative as a dependent Mood appears most fre- 
 quently in the writings of Luke ; its use even here, however, 
 is unmistakably on the decrease. In the apocryphal writings 
 of the N. T. it has almost completely disappeared. Cf. 63 
 p. 256. 
 
216 THE PARTICLE 4v. r§ 139. 
 
 The Particle &v. 
 B. §139,m.l0sqq. H. §873; C.§618; D.§601; J. §42i; G.|86. 
 
 12 The use of the Particle av (so important in expressing 
 modal relations) had already become so thoroughly established 
 in the literary language, that all that is taught in the general 
 grammar respecting its force holds completely in reference 
 to the N. T., although in its employment the N. T. is 
 more sparing, and several of the more delicate constructions 
 (like the av with the Participle and the Infin. 20 p. 219) are 
 no longer met with. The following points may be noticed 
 respecting the use of this particle in the N. T. : 
 
 B. §139, m. 12a); H. §704; C. §616b.; D. §515; J. 11.93; G. §30.2. 
 
 13 Examples of av with an Indicative Preterite to denote repetition, 
 though not numerous, are completely established : Mark vi. 56 ottod 
 
 187 O.V [euv Tdf. cod. Sin.] theirop€veTO . . . hLOtcrav tous cto-^evoBi'Tas • koj, 
 ocroi av rprrovTO \_rj\^avTO Lchm. Tdf. Treg. Cod- Sin.] avTov iawtpvTO, 
 Acts ii. 45 ; iv. 35 koOoti av tk xpeta" i^X^v. This principle appears to 
 explain also 1 Cor. xii. 2 (is ai' ^yecr^e), see more at length in § 151, 
 10 p. 383. 
 
 B. § 189, m. 12 b) ; H. §§ 746, 752 ; C. § 636 ; D. p. 539 sq. ; J. II. 93 ; G. § 37, 8. 
 
 14 The ordinary force of a Preterite Indicative with av, 
 so far forth as it denotes the non-existence or impossibility of 
 fulfilment of the declaration contained therein, occurs as a 
 rule (just as in Greek authors) in the apodosis of the fourth 
 case of hypothesis (cf. below, 25 p. 224). 
 
 Yet there are also several examples of this Mood without the 
 customary protasis, which in such case is either reserved in 
 the mind or finds expression in a different form : Luke xix. 23 Kayu) , 
 iXBibv avv TOKO) av avrb cTTpa^a, where the protasis is contained in the 
 preceding interrogative clause Sia ri ovk eScdkos etc. ; similar is Matt. 
 XXV. 27, see the following paragraph ; Heb. x. 2 eTrci ovk S.v iiravo-avro 
 (cf. ix. 26 in No. 15) where the unfulfilled condition to be supplied in 
 thought lies in the iir€t {for otherwise, sc. el eSvvaro, see § 149, 5 p. 359). 
 
 B. §139, m. 13; H. §§703, 745a.; C. §632; D. pp. 541, 411 ; J. §§ 398, 3; 858,3; G. p.97sqq. 
 
 15 The case here mentioned of the (apparent) omission of 
 av with predicates such as eSei, avfJKev, iBwaro, etc., is by no 
 means rare in the later language (nurtured perhaps by the 
 analogous ise of the. Latin, debebam, potercmi, etc.), or in the 
 N. T. also. But it Is very erroneous grammatically, and a 
 
§ 139.] THE MOODS. 217 
 
 s 
 
 supposition prompted solely by our modern ideas of idiom, to 
 think that the particle in such cases is only omitted. On 
 the contrary, we are to conceive of the matter thus : that there 
 is no addition whatever of av to the form of statement, since 
 not the necessity or possibility of the fact is denied (that would 
 be expressed by eSet av etc.) , but the fact itself. 
 
 Very instructive examples from the N. T. may be added to those 
 given in the grammar; as, Matt. xxv. 27 tSei o-e jSaXelv to apyvpiAv 
 jxov Toi's TpaTre^LTaK, koX iXOwv iyiii av iKoixurafirfV to i/juiv aiiv to/co) 
 where the addition of av was as necessary in the second clause, g,s the 
 simple Imperfect in the first, Acts xxiv. 19 oSs tSei eirl o-ov Trapilvai, ci 
 Tt t)(oifv Trpos ejne (therefore, as the Optative shows, not the fourth 
 form of hypothesis). See besides, 18 e i in Matt, xviii. 33 ; xxiii. 23 ; 
 Acts xxvii. 21 ; 2 Cor. ii. 3 ; Heb.ix. 26; avrjKev in Eph. v. 4 Lchm. 
 [Tdf. Treg. cod. Sin.] ; Col. iii. 18 ; KaOrjKiv Acts xxii. 22 ; ixjaiXov 
 1 Cor. V. 10 ; 2 Cor. xii. 11 ; y]hvvaTo Acts xxvi. 32 ; John ix. 33, — 
 on which last two passages and scgne others 27 c) p. 226 below is also 
 to be compared. 
 
 A similar difference between our mode of expression and the Greek 
 idiom occurs in connection with the ideas to wish, be willing, like ; as, 
 i^ovXo fjirjv (our I should like), Acts xxv. 22 i^ovk6fji,rjv tov avdpunrov 
 aKovaai, Philem. 13 ; iqv^o ii.i)v, Gom. ix. 3 ■qbf^op.rp' avaOtfia ttvoL . . . 
 imep tS>v a.Se\<f>S)v p-au etc., (in these passages the addition of av weakens 
 the sense, since then the existence, the possibility, of the wish 
 itself is put in question); — and with the predicates KaXov ^v, "[^8 
 KpeiTTov rjv (cf. the Latin melius, aequum fuit, Kriiger § 463): 
 Matt. xxvi. 24; Mark xiv. 21 (see 27 c) p. 226), 2 Pet. ii. 21 KpeXrrov 
 riv avToi's p-r] £7r£yva»Kei/ot ^ etc. See Hertn. de Part, av p. 60. Paul, 
 according to his custom (§ 129, 20 p. 136), omits in these cases the 
 copula altogether, as 1 Cor. ix. 15 koXov yap p,oi jxaXKov airoOavelv ^ etc. 
 
 B. §139, m.l4; H. §7S7; C. §619; D. p. 544; J. §428; G. §36, 2. 
 
 The Particle av (after Relatives idv also, see p. 72) is used 16 
 in the N. T. by far most frequently with the Subjunctive. 
 On the character of this form of statement — (the particle 
 belonging rather to the pronoun etc. than to the verb), see 
 the general grammars ; and on its employment, see below, 
 under dependent clauses. 
 
 B. §139, m. 15; H. §722; C. § 636; D. §504; J. §425; G. §39. 
 
 On the other hand, the Optative with av (the Mood 17 
 formerly employed so frequently to express subjective opinion 
 
 28 
 
218 THE PARTICLE &v. [§ 139. 
 
 or softened assertion, which Attic urbanity so readily substitutes 
 in place of the most positive affirmations), has passed almost 
 entirely out of use. 
 
 In general, this Mood bears so decidedly the peculiar impress of 
 Greek diction that most of the N. T. writers seem hardly any longer 
 to be acquainted with it Jeven John does not, for in xiii. 24 the 
 Optative is no longer read), and it is still found only in the writings 
 of Luke, who approximates nearest to the classic Greek style : — in 
 the Gospel (according to the older editions) five times, and eight 
 times in the Acts, which small number recent criticism has again 
 diminished (see for example Luke xv. 26; xviii. 36; Acts ii. 12 
 Lchm. [Tdf. Treg.J, xvii. 20 Lchm. [Tdf. Treg.J, xxi. 33 Lchm.). 
 This Mood is described in the grammar as a modification of the 
 independent form of statement ; hence even in Luke it never 
 stands after conjunctions or relatives. It commonly appears in 
 (direct and indirect) interrogative clauses, in which it was especially 
 favorite with the Greeks also (see H. below p. 254) ; in a non-inter- 
 rogative direct clause it is found but once. Acts xxvi. 29. 
 
 18 Remark. As a substitute for this characteristic Greek Mood the 
 Future is introduced in positive sentences, e.g. in a sup- 
 posed case (Lat. dicat, dixerit aliquis) 1 Cor. xv. 35 ; Jas. ii. 18 kpA 
 Tis, Rom. ix. 19 ; xi. 19 epcts ovv, v. 7 //.o'Xis yap vnip SiKaiov tis d?ro- 
 Bavarai ; further, very commonly in direct and indirect questions, 
 1 Cor. XV. 29 cirei tl Troirjcrovcnv ; Rom. iii. 6 tmi TrStq Kpwei 6 ^eds ; (sc. 
 tl aStKos €Lrj, see § 149, 5 p. 359), vi. 1 n ovv epovfi.ev ; Mark iv. 13 ovk 
 oiSare . . . 7r<us ira(ras ra? Tropa/SoXas yvt!>(Te(76e ; etc. In many such 
 and similar passages the Greeks would probably have used the 
 Optative with av ; although, it cannot be denied also that the mode of 
 expression with the Future has foundation in usage, and strictly noth- 
 ing more can be inferred from the above examples than a certain aver- 
 sion (or ignorance) on the part of the N. T. language as respects this 
 form of statement, where the possibility of employing it lay so close 
 at hand. 
 
 In negative clauses the substituted mode of expression has taken 
 on a more recognizable form, inasmuch as for ovk av with the Optative 
 following (according to 7 p. 212) the Subjunctive (or the Future) 
 with ov fA.'q appears, — a construction which, as is well known (cf. B. 
 
 189 § 139, 6), was interchanged with the other even by the Greeks. As 
 examples of this, may be set down especially those passages where the 
 ancient versions either unanimously or in part employ the Lat. Sub- 
 junctive : Mark xiii. 2 ov fjiij afjieOy \Wos IttI XWw, os ov (jlt) KaraXvOy 
 (Vulg. destruatur), Matt. xxv. 9 jU,^TroT« ov fii] apKicrrj rjfuv Koi vp.lv 
 (Vulg. sufficiat), Luke xviii. 29 ov ^.r] A.a;8g (Vulg. recipiai), John xi. 
 56 ov ur] tkdrj (Vulg. veniaU veniet). 
 
1 139.] THE MOO]>S. 219 
 
 B. §1S9, m. 16; H. §760; C. §617d.j J. §§40B, 2j 829; G. J 20, N. 1 sq. 
 
 The rule, carefully observed in good prose, that in relative W 
 and other subordinate clauses, whenever the leading thought 
 falls in the future, the action which precedes and is completed 
 before it is expressed by the Aorist Subjunc. with dv (and 
 likewise in Latin by the Fut. exactum, or Pluperf. Subjunc. 
 in its stead), is but seldom disregarded in the N> T. also. 
 
 Examples of the regular construction, especially after relatives 
 (o5 av, oa-a civ, ottov av) as well as after conjunctions compounded with 
 ai' (e<DS av, idv, oTav), are found abundantly in all parts of the N. T. 
 Tiiat the freer usage also, that is to say the simple Future aud even 
 theP resent Indie, is found in such clauses is to be expected, since 
 ■instances of it can be pointed out even in Greek and Latin writers; 
 e.g. after ocms Matt. v. 39 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] ootis ae paTri'crct ... 
 arpifov avT<3 etc. (Lchm. [Tdf Treg. cod. Sin.] pairHu), 41 ; vii. 24 
 7ra9 ocTTts d/couet jHoii Tov<i Xo'yovs koI iroiet aurous o/jLoidxru) avrov etc., 
 X. 32 ocTTis ofjioXoyi^creL . . . ojiqXoyiQcru) Kayo) etc. 
 
 A different liberty, viz. the dropping of av with the Subjunctive, is 
 spoken of below: 31 p. 228, 33 p. 230. 
 
 B. §139, m.lTsq.; H. §§783, 803; C. §658 a.; D.p.M3; J. §429; G. § 41, cf. § 42, 3 NN. 1, 2. 
 
 The more delicate use of the particle dv, by which when 20 
 joined fo the Infinitive and Participle it imparts to 
 these verbal forms the modal force of an Optative or Indicative 
 witli dv, is altogether unknown to the N. T. 
 
 It is likewise not found with the Infin. after the verbs So/cetv, cXtiXe'v, 
 etc. (see § 140, 2 p. 259), and hardly can the solitary instance of the 
 sort which actually occurs (2 Cor. x. 9) be regarded as a remnant of 
 the ancient construction after Sokciv. Rather, in tlie words /jltj So'^oj 
 iLs av iKtjto^elv v/jlo.'s the expression ws av (which two words were so 
 often heard, and by later writers used more and more frequently, in 
 immediate connection ; see the examples from Lucian in Du Mesnil, 
 Stolper Progr. 1867, p. 24) has become for the apostle, as it were, a 
 single word with the signification g'Masi, just as in Greek wa-Trepavei, 
 later wa-avei (B. § 151, IV. 3), U used in the same sense. In further 
 confirmation of this interpretatio a, compare 1 Cor. vii. 5 fir] diroo-repeiTt 
 dXXrjXous, €t fi.'^Ti av €k a-vfjitjxLvov irpo's Kaipov, where av also stands 
 without anyverb. To supply here the Optative, such as yevoiTo, 
 in order to connect av with it (as similar phenomena in a few passages 
 of the Greek poets are to be explained, see Hartung II. p. 330) 
 militates with the apostle's usage (see 17 p. 217). Hence we must 
 supply, either the Indicative after the analogy of 2 Cor. xiii. 5 el n-qri 
 
220 A. CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. [§ 139. 
 
 dSd/ci/iot ia-Ti), or the Subjuuctive according to Luke ix. 13 (ei /Arjrt . .. 
 190 dyopao-cu/ifi'), and combine av, again in the sense of somehow, perchance, 
 with the restrictive particle d i^-^ti so as to form one whole.' 
 
 A repetition ofdv in lengthened sentences, or after the inser- 
 tion of parenthetic thoughts, nowhere occurs. 
 
 A. Conditional Senteijoes. 
 Since the various forms of conditional sentences rest upon 
 the general basis given above and in the grammars, it may 
 suffice here to assume that the four chief forms of these sen- 
 tences are familiar, and to point out the deviations from the 
 same which occur in the writings of the N. T. 
 
 B. § 139, m. 22-24; H.§745sqq.; C.§63l8q.; D. §502; J.§861; G. §47 sq. 
 
 21 The first two forms. of hypothesis (et with the Indicative, 
 idv with the Subjunctive) are by far the most frequent, and 
 the distinction given in the grammars is in general applicable 
 to them in the N. T. But the majority of the writers were so 
 much accustomed to these two modes of stating an hypothesis, 
 that they (in harmony with the general observation made in 
 11 p. 215) manifestly avoided the third case, el with the 
 Optative, preferring to substitute for it one of the first two (cf. 
 
 22 below.) 
 
 See the more extended treatment of this point, and the few instances 
 of et with the Optative still extant, in 24 below, p. 223. Examples of 
 the first two species, however, are found everywhere. The difference 
 between them (described in the grammars) is plainly to be recognized 
 in sentences where both are used in close proximity ; as. Gal. i. 8, 9, 
 where the hypothesis expressed in the 8th verse by idv with the Sub- 
 juuctive is resumed or repeated in the 9th with greater energy and 
 definiteness by « with the Indicative. So in Acts v. 38, 39. 
 
 B. § 139, m, 25 ; H. § 747 b. ; D. of. § 513 ; J. § 864, Obs. 1 ; G. § 50, 1 NN. 2 and 8. 
 
 a Since the later common Greek writers are pretty negligent 
 in discriminating between the two particles ei and idv and we 
 
 ^ Possible, however, and not at variance with the character of the N. T. ellipses, 
 or of Paul's style in particular, is the assumption that &v here is to be taken in 
 the sense of iin and (according to § 151, 23 b. p. 392, 24 b. p. 394, and § 129, 
 
 23 p. 137) its predicate to be supplied in an altered form froiti what precedes 
 (accordingly here ATroo-Tcp^re, or the more general yei/rirat) . The only objection 
 to this is the extremely rare use of &v for 4ii> (see p. 72). As respects the 
 meaning of the passage, however, it remains a matter of indifference whether we 
 choose to explain the origin of the ellipsis (which certainly exists he'-c) gram 
 matically in the one way or the other. 
 
§139.J THE MOODS. 221 
 
 often find in them el with the Subjunctive and idv with the 191 
 'Indicative (see the references in Winer 295 (277)), we might 
 expect beforehand that the N. T. writers also would not keep 
 tliemselves free from such inaccuracies." Of the first case, the 
 use of el with the Subjunctive, we find, to be sure, accidentally 
 (for cf. 31 p. 228 and 33 p. 230) no example which is quite 
 certain ; for in some of them the readings vary, some are set 
 aside by the MSS. (as Rev. xi. 5 [but cod. Sin. OeXijar} the 
 second time]), some are capable of a special interpretation. 
 
 The most probable is 1 Cor. ix. 11 el . . . ea-welpafiev, fiiya et ^/ncis 
 i/xuiv TO. crapKiKo. depia-ijiixev. So Tdf. reads (^eds. 2, 7] with the 
 majority of the mss. instead of the former Future [Tdf. Treg. cod. 
 Sin. also] which is frund so often as a variant of the Aor. Subjunct. 
 (see 8 p. 213). Since strictly considered the Greek Optative would 
 be in place here, in point of fact the Subjunctive as its substitute 
 (21 p. 220) seems to deserve the preference even on grammatical 
 grounds. Further, Luke ix. 13 ovk da-lv . . . d /a^ti TropevOevre'; •^/Aets 
 ayopda-o>ij.ev ^pw/jLara. The Subjunct. here is not only thoroughly 
 established by the mss. [cod. Sin. also], but as a conjunct, duhitativus 
 (described above, 2 p. 208) is not at variance with the sense {unless 
 perhaps we are to buy). In classic Greek, however, the Fut. Indie, 
 would have been used here in preference (see B. § 139 m. 23, and the 
 example from Xen. An. 4, 7, 3). In 1 Thess. v. 10 {ovk eBero etc.) Iva, 
 tiTi yprjyopwfuev ciVe Ka^cuSco/tiev, a/Aa criif avrio t,i^(Tw/iev the Subjunct. 
 stands rather by the attraction of the Subjunct. of the final clause, to 
 which it is parenthetic (cf. the quite similar examples in 24 p. 224) ; 
 and the frequent use of the double conjunction eire . . . etVe, especially 
 by Paul (see the Lexx.), caused it, like an unchangeable particle (cor- 
 responding to the Latin sive ... sive), to appear even where out of 
 regard to the Subjunct. following idvre ought to have stood.' The 
 same holds true of the formula iKTo^ ei p.-/), which in like manner 
 became so established in the signification except, unless (1 Tim. v. 1 9 ; 
 1 Cor. XV. 2, see on these § 148, 13 p. 855) that it remained unaltered 
 even with the Subjunctive : 1 Cor. xiv. 5 £kto9 d p.rj Siepfji.r]vevy. Lastly, 
 in Phil, iii. 12 (et . . . (caTaXa/Joj) d means whether, and belongs under 
 ,62 p. 255, 
 
 1 The use of edi/re . . . Hvre in Rom. xiv. 8 might seem to contradict this. But 
 how little we are warranted in expecting from the N. T. authors accuracy, or 
 even uniformity, in the employment of the conjunctions as well as of the adverbs 
 and prepositions, is a point on which probably there is hardly a doubt any longer 
 among N. T. critics. Compare, for instance, the following paragraph, and also 
 the detailed statements made above on p. 70 sq., and the chapter below on Particles, 
 Prepositioas,etc. 
 
222 A. CONBITIOUAL ^ENTEKCES. [§139. 
 
 23 On the other hand, the se'cond case, idv with the 
 Indicative, is given so frequently, that it is to be eliminated 
 as little from the writings of the N. T. as of the Old. ^ee Tdf. 
 N. T. Praef. p. xxvi [ed. 7 p. Ivii]. 
 192 It is, indeed, not to be denied that the instances in question almost 
 disappear amid the multitude of those that are grammatically regular, 
 and suspicion may also be' raised by the circumstance that hardly a 
 single passage with the Indicative is completely beyond question 
 critically. Yet when we consider that in countless passages with 
 the Subjunctive not the smallest variation is found (which would not 
 be the case if the Indicative were chargeable solely to the copyists), 
 it is far more probable that, where a diversity of readings occurs in 
 such a number of instances, this fact results from the circumstance 
 that the copyists, commentators, etc., early altered the Indicative 
 which gave them offence. When we add to this, that in pretty nearly 
 as many passages orav with the Indicative occurs, and more- 
 over the circumstance that the Latin versions, which render the Aor. 
 Subjunc. very consistently by the fut. exactum, have the first Future 
 in many of these questionable passages, and that the ancient gram- 
 marians expressly admit the existence of the usage by their censure 
 of it (see Bekk. An. p. 144 ; Thom. Mag. p. 132 ed. Eitschl), it is 
 no longer to be disputed that that lax use of the particles edv, orav 
 etc., had at least begun to be practised at the time when the apostles 
 "wrote. How far we are authorized to set down merely to the account 
 of the copyists offenses of the kind in the writings of authors who, in 
 earlier or later times, were educated by Greek literature and wrote 
 with Greek models before their eyes, is considered by Klotz ad Devar. 
 II. 468 sqq. and 690. 
 
 The decision when the Indicative is to be received into the 
 iext, depends, of course, less upon internal grounds, than upoi. 
 the weight which is attached in every instance to the au- 
 thorities ; and hence the more recent editors differ much in 
 this respect. 
 
 To avoid repetition elsewhere we will include here at the 
 «ame time the passages with orav and the Indicative: 
 
 The probability of the Indicative is the greatest in the case of the 
 Future, which according to 8 p. 213 is so often interchanged with 
 the Aor. Subjunct. The most certain instances are Luke xix. 40 eav 
 criunrrjcrovdw [so Sin.J, E.e"v. iv. 9 orav ^umxovctlv [Sin. -oxnv] ; less 
 certain are Luke xi. 12 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] lav ahricru [but ed. 8 drops 
 eav, so Treg. -cod. Sin.] (Vulg. petierit), Acts viii. 31 Tdf. [Treg.j 
 oSjjyijtra (after codd. Vat. and Sin.), 1 Tim. v. 11 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] 
 
§139.] THE MOODS. 223 
 
 orav KaTaa-TprivLda-ovcnv ^-(To)aiv T(lf. Tl'eg. Cod. Sin.] ("Vulg. luxuriatae 
 fuerint)\ cf. also Matt. vii. 9, 10 Tdf. ed. 7 [ed. 8 drops idv with Lchm. 
 Treg. cod. Sin.]. The Future is well attested besides, though not 
 received, i;i Matt. x. 19 orav TrapaSuo-ovo-iv [-Cxriv Sin.] (tradent). Cf. 
 Ilerm. Vis. 1, 4 (fji.eTavoricrovcnv) ; 2, 2 etc. 
 
 If the examples with the Future, owing to the internal affinity 
 between this tense and the Subjunctive, still maintain a certain analogy 
 to Greek usa'ge (cf. the examples from the classics quoted by Klotz 
 as above), the same no longer holds true of the Present, the em- 
 ployment of which (or rather of the particle in connection with it), 
 in the N. T. at least, must be accounted for solely by the indifference 
 beginning to prevail in reference to grammatical precision of expres- 
 sion. Thus, firmly established are 1 John v. 15 av (i.e. iav) otSa/jnv 
 [thwfiev Sin.], Mark. xi. 25 orav o-TijKere [o-Trjre Sin.] ; strongly attested 
 are Luke xi. 2 Tdf [ed. 7] oTav Trpocrevxeo-Oe [-xr/tr^e ed. 8, so Treg. 
 cod. Sin.], Rom. xiv. 8 Lchm. iavre a.-Ko6vy]<TKOfi.iv, Luke vi. 34 Tdf. 
 ' [eds. 2, 7 ; Treg.] Jav Sai/ci'^CTf [SavicrijTe Tdf. ed. 8, so cod. Sin.] 
 (Lchm. 8avetcrrjTe) ; less so Mark xiii. 7 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] orav dKovcTC 
 [' ex errore de B', yet so Treg. ; Tdf. ed. 8 d/covcnyTe, so cod. Sin. Lchm.], 
 Rom. ii. 14 var. orav ttoioBo-iv. 
 
 Lastly the Preterite. Indubitable instances of this are found only 19S 
 with oral' owing to its prevalent temporal force, so that it stands then 
 completely for ore (cum), as idv stands for et; from this it follows 
 that in such fixed compounds the original force of the particle av 
 begins gradually _to disappear in the N. T. (cf. 20 p. 219). Thus, 
 firmly established are Mark iii. 11 orav iOtwpow, Rev. viii. 1 orav 
 r)voi^€v [ore cod. Sin.] ; and hardly to be doubted is Mark xi. 19 Tdf. 
 [Treg. cod. Sin.] orav iyivero, (Lchm. ort). 
 
 The Indicative is found besides in isolated instances with both 
 particles, especially in codd. D and E ; as, Matt. v. 11 ; x. 23 ; Mark 
 xiii. 4; Luke xi. 21 ; xiii. 28; John viii. 36; Acts viii. 31 (Vulg. 
 ostenderit). Examples from the Sept. are Ex. viii. 21 ; Lev. i. 14; 
 1 Sam. xvii. 34 ; Job xxii. 3 ; Ps. xlvii. 4 (Alex.) ; cxix. 7 ; cxviii. 32, 
 and there are innumerable instances in the Apocrypha in which the 
 particle av has lost all force. 
 
 B. §139, m. 26; H. §748; C. §631d.; D. p. 639; J. § 865; G. §60, 2. 
 
 That the use of the third form of hypothesis, el with the 2i 
 Optative, is but very limited has already been remarked, 21 
 p. 220. Of the case iii its fully developed form (in the protasis 
 el with the Opt., in the apodosis the Opt. with av), not even a 
 single instance is found ; on the contrary, in tlie only passage 
 where the Opt. with av stands in the leading clause, and con- 
 
224 A. CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. [§ 13a. 
 
 sequeiitly there was opportunity for tlie full construction, this 
 form of hypothesis was nevertheless not employed. 
 
 The instance (otherwise quite regular grammatically, see B. § 139, 
 30 a) is Acts viii. 31 ttids yap av Suvaiju.iyi', tau jjltq tis bSrjyi^cnfjiie. Even 
 when dependent on historic tenses, the Second form of hypothesis 
 almost always makes its appearance (pursuant to the general remarks 
 lip. 215 and 63 p. 256) ; as, John ix. 22 o-uvcts^oi/to, iva idv tk 
 avTov bfi.okoyijO~g Xpurrov, airocrvvdyitiyoi yivrjTai, xi. 57 ocoioKewrav, :va 
 lav Tis ■ yvii etc., Acts ix. 2 rjVijo-aTO, o?rujs, ia-v Tivas ^vpy, a-yd-y-Q etc. 
 Cf. 1 Thess. V. 10 above, 22 p. 221. When the Optative occurs, it 
 appears rather in short, fragmentary, parenthetic clauses, as et Tvxpi 
 1 Cor. xiv. 10 ; xv. 37, d « expuv Acts xxiv. 19, et hvvaivTo xxvii. 39 
 Lchm. [Tdf. Treg. cod. Sin.J, d Swarw d-q (Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] ^v) xx. 
 1 6 Lchm. [Tdf. Treg. cod. Sin.J, d 6i\oi to OeXrjjxa toB Otov 1 Pet. iii. 
 17. Both forms of hypothesis, viz. the 2d and the 3d, occur close 
 together, but grammatically, in 1 Pet. iii. 13, 14. In all other passages 
 ei with the Optative has the meaning whether, if perhaps, and belongs 
 then under H. below p. 255 sq. In many of the books (in all four 
 Gospels, for example) the case is no longer extant. 
 
 B. §139, m. 28; H. §746; C. §631b.; D. p. 639sq.; J. §866; G. §49, 2. 
 
 25 On the other hand, the fourth form of hypothesis, regularly 
 framed (el with the Pret. Indie, and in the apodosis a Pret. 
 with dv), comes into use pretty frequently, — as well with the 
 Imperf. Luke vii. 39, etc., as Aorist Matt, xi-21, 23 etc., and 
 Pluperf. John xiv. 7 etc. ; and with different tenses in the two 
 clauses, John xviii. 30 ; Gal. iii. 21 ; Heb. iv. 8 ; 1 John ii. 19. 
 Examples of the Imperfect (to express duration, B. N. 4) in 
 the protasis, in place of the Pluperf., are John xi. 21, 32, cf. 
 Matt, xxiii. 30. 
 
 r §139, m. 30b.; H. §746a.b.; C. § 631f.s cf. §615; D. p. 540 8q.; J. §8B6; G. §49, cf, 64. 
 
 26 The form of the fourth case of hypothesis is so sharply 
 194 defined, that the N. T. writers have in thfe main adhered 
 
 strictly to the grammatical model ; for, an alteration of it would 
 have caused ambiguity, and have disturbed at once the char- 
 acter of the hypothetical statement. Nevertlieless, deviations 
 are found here and there : — and that as well 1) in the Protasis, 
 as 2) in the Apodosis. 
 
 1; In the Protasis. Oi ce, when the apodosis is formed regularly, 
 £1 with the Present is the construction given in the protasis : John 
 viii. 39 Lchm. ei riKva tov Aj3paa.fi ecrrc, ra epya tov 'A^paa/j. tTroieirt 
 
§139.] THE MOODS. 225 
 
 av [Tdf. Treg. omit av; so cod. Sin.J. Most of the interpreters and 
 editors, indeed, have takea offence at this reading, and have adopted 
 into the text instead the very weakly-attested ^re (and thus re- 
 stored the construction to the ordinary form), explaining to them- 
 selves the origin of eo-re in various ways (see Lijcke). But io-re is 
 not only the correct reading, and perfectly suited to the character of 
 this particular passage, but is founded also in actual usage. This usage, 
 however, has sometimes not been duly noticed ; and sometimes, owing 
 to the rarity of its occurrence, it was probably obliterated by correction 
 very early by the copyists and commentators. In the N. T. there 
 are, in particular, three other passages where the Present is given by 
 the most important mss. viz. John xiv. 28 ; Luke xvii. 6 [so cod. 
 Sin. Tdf. Treg.] ; Heb. xi. 15 [so cod. Sin. Tdf. Treg.J. In all these, 
 indeed, the Imperfect (which is likewise found) has been generally 
 received into the text ; and yet they, particularly the first two, have 
 (in comparison with the other regularly constructed passages) an un- 
 mistakable similarity in character to the above passage from John.^ 
 
 2) In the Apodosis, — inasmuch as the particle dv is JJ 
 omitted with the preterite. Winer, 305 (286), is inclined to 
 the opinion, that this omission occurs merely in consequence 
 of negligence peculiar to the later writers. This is the case, 
 indeed, elsewhere (see e.g. 31 p. 228), but not in the fourth 
 class of conditional sentences. On the contrary, such an 
 omission is allo.wable only in fixed cases, which are observed 
 also in the N. T., and may be reduced to the four classes that 
 follow. 
 
 That is to say, the omission of dv occurs 
 
 a) When av has already been expressed previously in the same 
 connection with another predicate. This instance, which often occurs 
 in the classics and is founded in the nature of the case, is accidentally 
 not to be met with in the text of the N. T. ; but it occurs once only 
 as a various reading of cod. A in Luke xvii. 6 (v-n-^Kovcrev). 
 
 b) When the predicate (or the copula) to which it belongs is also 
 dropped, as 1 Cor. xii. 1 9 ei Se tjv to. iravra ev jUcXos, ttov to crZfjLa ; — 
 agreeably to which vs. 17 also is to be completed ; and as an important 195 
 variant in Gal. iii. 21. 
 
 c) Where the apodosis contains such a predicative term as iSei, 
 KoXov rjv, TjSvvaTo etc. The omission here (as was explained above, 
 
 J To show all this requires a more extended examination than can be given 
 here. Such an examination, therefore, I have endeavored to give in another place 
 (theol. Stud. u. Krit. for 1858, 3d No., pp. 474 sqc.) ; to this, accordingly, I refer 
 the reader. 
 
 29 
 
226 A. CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. l§ 139 
 
 15 p. 216) is so necessary according to Greek habits of thought, 
 that it is only by way of concession to our usage that we can speak 
 of supplying av. That even the copyists of the N. T. books felt no 
 need here of supplying the particle, is plainly to be seen from the fact 
 that av is no longer found even as a variant. Examples are (cf. 15 
 p. 217) Matt. xxvi. 24; Mark xiv. 21 KaXbv rjv avriD, el ovk lyevv-qdri o 
 av9p(i>vos eKeiTO?,' John ix. 33 ei fiT] ■rjv ovto's irapa. Oeov, ovk TjSvvaTO 
 TToiiiv ovSiv, Acts xxvi. 32 aTroX.iX.v<TOai rjSvvaro o S.vdpmiro'S ovtos, €i p-rj 
 iiriKiKXrjTo Katcrapa. 
 
 d) Lastly, av is dropped for rhetorical reasons: where, though 
 the fact itself is impossible or improbable, the orator in the vivacity 
 of his thought desires to represent it as actually having occurred, or 
 at least, as almost taken place. This case (which, as is familiar, is 
 not unknown to the Latin writers also, cf. Zumpt § 519, b.) belongs 
 rather to the more delicate Greek usage (see the examples from the 
 classics in Hermann, de part, av p. 70 sq.), yet it is discoverable alsr 
 in a few indubitable instances in'the N. T. ; most plainly in Gal. iv. 15 
 p-apTvput i/juv, QTi, ei Svvarov (sc. ■^v), Toiis 6(fi6a\jjt,ov's vumv i^opviavTC'S 
 iSuiKwri pLoi, Rom. vii. 7 ttjv lin6vfx.iav ovk tjSeiv, A p.y] 6 v6p,os iX.€yev etc., 
 perhaps also in Gal. iii. 21 (see the var.). 2 Cor. xi. 4; Acts xi. 17 
 do not belong here ; in both these passages nothing more than the 
 first form of a conditional sentence is to be sought for.^ Moreover, av 
 is wanting here and there in the mss. ; as, John viii. 19 ; ix. 41 ; Acts 
 xviii. 14; Heb. iv. 8; xi. 15. 
 
 Remark. As an appendix to this Section respecting Conditional 
 Sentences, mention may be made here of another and peculiar mode 
 of expressing the hypothetical relation of two clauses : viz. without 
 conjunctions, by the asyndetic juxtaposition of the clauses. 
 The clause containing the hypothesis stands then in the Indicative, 
 and by Lchm. [Tdf. Treg.] is commonly (though unnecessarily, see 
 Herm. de Ellip. p. 180) distinguished by a mark of interrogation ; as, 
 1 Cor. vii. 1 8 TreptTeT/x.ij/iei'os ti9 ekXij^ij ■ /a^ erruntacrOio, 2 1 SoCXos ckAij^ijs ■ 
 jj.-q troi p-eXeriD, 27 SeSea-ai ywaiKt • /jlt] t,rjTU Xvcnv, Jas. v. 13 KaK0Tra6a 
 TK £v v/Mv ■ irpocTivxio-Odi K.T.X. Ou thc othcr hand, in Rom. xiii. 3 the 
 first clause really contains a question. 
 
 1 The relationship of the statement — put forth as it is herewith perfect pos- 
 iliveness (hence ovk, according to § 148, 3 d) p. 347) — to the firs t form of con- 
 dili.mal sentences is so close, that this last in fact appears in plain shape Mark ix. 
 42 KaK6v e IT Tit/ aiiT^ ^aKKov, ei TreplKelTaL etc. 
 
 '' Commonly two passages more, from the Gospel of John (xv. 22, 24 and xix. 
 11 ), are reckoned among the examples of the omission of &v. See respecting them 
 both, and also respecting the omission of Sr in John viii. 39 (26 above, p. 224 sq.), 
 as well as on the entire subject, my exposition in th& Stud, und Krit. as above, 
 pp. 485 sqq. 
 
§139 .J THE MOODS. 227 
 
 To be compared with this construction is the prefixing of the 
 hypothesis in the form of an Imperative, in wliich case the con- 196 
 elusion is always subjoined by means of kcu; as, John ii. 19 Xvo-arc 
 Tov vaov TOVTov, KoX iv Tf)i(Tlv fjf).ipai% eyepSi avTOV, Jas. iv. 7 avTt'cmyTe to) 
 Sia/Jo'Xu, Kol tftevierai d<^' v/mv, Eph. v. 14. That all such cases belong 
 to the popular language (which likes to resolve periodic structures 
 into single independent members), and consequently find their analogies 
 in all languages, is obvious. Cf the periphrasis or resolution by 
 which Participles become leading clauses, §144, 2 p. 290. 
 
 B. Relative Sentences. 
 B. §139, m. 32; H. §§755sq.; C. §§e40sq.; J. §§826sq.; G. §§68sq.' 
 
 On the general statements respecting the Moods in Relative '9 
 sentences — [viz. a clause with the Indie, either refers back to a 
 demonstr. or is of a general nature ; in a clause with the Sub- 
 junct. av associates itself with the relative, and the clause is 
 always general; a clause with the Optative without dv cor- 
 responds to a conditional sentence of the third class, and con- 
 tains a subjective complement to the leading thought ; av is 
 added to the Optat. if the relation of thought spoken of in 17 
 p. 217 is, to be expressed ; the historical tenses in the ludic. 
 with dv are used where they ■%ould be used in simple clauses], 
 — we need only remark, that the addition of dv (or idv, see p. 
 72) in clauses with the Subjunctive is at least the rule even 
 in the N. T., as is apparent from numerous examples. Rela- 
 tive clauses with the Optative as a mood of dependent state- 
 ment are no lohger to be met with ; but we find instead, in 
 interiofiediate clauses in the oratio obliqua or after historic 
 tenses, either (as so frequently in Greek) the Indicative (Mark 
 vi. 45 etc.), or the Subjunctive with dv (according to 11 p. 215 
 above). 
 
 If this last case after historic tenses is rare, the reason is solely to 
 be found in the fact that the occasion for using it seldom occurred in 
 the N. T. writings, in consequence of the choice almost everywhere 
 rf the direct mode of introducing discourse in the historical books, 
 and of the predominantly concrete^ contents of the Epistles. Exam- 
 ples of the Subjunctive with av thus used are. Matt. xiv. 7 i/u-oAo'-yijoev 
 avTTJ Sovvac, o av alrirjcrrjTai (instead of the regular o alr-qa-aiTo or ain^- 
 a-eiev'), 1 Thess. ii. 7 sq. ws iav Tpo<t>o'S OaXTrg to, eavrijs rcKva, ovtcos . . . 
 £v8oKov/x£v etc. (for iv^oKovfLtv is — as the context teaches, the Vulg. 
 translates, and cod. Vat. by the augment ijv8. intimates — only to be 
 taken as the Imperfect) ; cf. the similar cases in 24 p. 224, and Rev. 
 xiii. 15. 
 
228 B. RELATIVE SENTENCES. [§ 139. 
 
 Less surprising, and in accordance with the usage given 37 p. 233 
 and 33, 3) p. 230, is the simple Subjunctive in relative clauses which 
 contain also the purpose after historical tenses, as Acts xxi. 1 6 
 (TWTJXOov . . . ayovTes Trap' w ^evurOS>iJi,ev Mvao-covi, see below, 32 p. 229. 
 
 30 Eemaek. The Indicative Present is given us once with 
 o-vov av, and has been adopted by Lchm. [Tdf. 7, Tr.J : Rev. xiv. 4 
 ovToi 01 dicoXov^owTcs T<3 dpviui, oirav av mraya. Although this con- 
 struction conflicts with the usage of the N. T. elsewhere, it is yet 
 conceivably correct, especially in the Apocalypse, and finds analogies 
 in the examples (quoted in 23 p. 222 sq.) of the Indicative after eav 
 and orav. The employment also (so frequent in Greek authors as 
 well as in Latin) of the Indicative in general relative clauses 
 (B. § 139 m. 32 ; J. §§ 826, 4; 827 c. ; G. § 62 N. 1) may have been 
 not without influence. Cf. further 22 p. 221 above, with the note. 
 The Indicative, moreover, is often found as a variant, e.g. Mark iv. 25 ; 
 xi. 24 (Grsb.), Luke x. 22 ; John ii. 5 ; 1 Cor. xvi. 2 ; 2 Cor. viii. 12; 
 Col. iii. 23. 
 
 197 B. §139,m. 33; H. §759; C. §619d.; J. §828, 2; G. §63, 1. 
 
 31 Corresponding to the lax construction of the Subjunctive 
 with ei (spoken of in 22 p. 220 above), is the employment (far 
 more frequent) of -the simple Subjunctive without av in 
 general relative clauses, — a construction not uncom- 
 mon also in the earlier poets (see reff. above). As, however, 
 it was not allowable in ordinary prose, and at the most appears 
 as a rare exception to a usage otherwise fixed (see Poppo on 
 Xen. Cyr. 2, 2, 25), we should err, certainly, in wishing to 
 identify it with that poetic construction ; especially since it 
 stands in so obvious analogy with other cases in the N. T. (cf. 
 33 p. 230), and contains, moreover, in itself its adequate gram- 
 matical justification. That is to say, since av falls away only 
 after the compound relative octtk, just as after oaoi;, tto.? 6'?, etc., 
 and not after the simple o? (which first acquires a general force 
 by means of dv'), we discover plainly that the N. T. authors 
 omitted av whenever universality was already sufficiently indi- 
 cated by the pronoun, and consequently the addition of av 
 
 ' might seem to them to be superfluous. 
 
 Here again we find, however, as in all similar cases, considerable 
 fluctuation in the readings — (av besides occurring almost everywhere 
 as a variant, and still more frequently the interchange, already ofi,en 
 alluded to, of the Subjunctive with the Future taking place, even 
 where av has been left standing) ; so that the critical editions often 
 disagree, and we shall probably never succeed altogether in reaching 
 
§ 139.] THE MOODS. 229 
 
 certainty on this point. As examples we may take Jas. ii. 10 oorts 
 n/jprjor], Matt. X. 33 Lchm. [Treg.] ocrrts dpv^cnjTai (Tdf. [so cod. Sin.] 
 inserts av), John xvi. 13 Lchm. oa-a aKovayj (Tdf. [ed. 2] av, [ed. 7 oaa 
 aKova-a without av, so Treg. ; ed. 8 Sara d.Kovei, so cod. Sin.J), Matt. 
 xii. 36 ttSv o Xa\)jcru)o-tv (Tdf. '[Treg. cod. Sin.J -crova-iv) ; and as 
 examples of various readings, Matt. v. 41 ; x. 32 ; xviii. 4 ; John v. 19, 
 etc. An example of the Subjunct. and the Fut. together is Luke viii. 
 17 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] ; of the Fut. with av, Acts vii. 7 Tdf. [Treg.J (Rev. 
 xi. 6 var.). The Future often occurs as a variant where the Subjunct. 
 is received: Matt. v. 19 ; xvi. 25 ; xviii. 19 ; Mark viii. 3.5 ; ix. 41 ; 
 X. 11, 35 ; Luke xii. 8, etc. Now, though here and there the reading 
 which oflfends against general usage is perhaps to be set down to the 
 account of the copyists, yet this much is certain : that the great 
 fluctuation in the mss. would not exist if there had been no mistakes 
 in this respect on the part of the authors themselves. For it is par- 
 ticularly to be noticed, that there are cases in abundance where it is 
 the anomalous modes of expression which are found in the earlier 
 MSS., and the regular that occur in the later ; consequently the suspicion 
 arises that the latter are later corrections. 
 
 Respecting the very common Subjunctive after €uk otov and similar 
 conjunction-like phrases, as &xpi,^ ov, axpt ^s fjixipa's, see 33 p. 230. 
 
 B. § 139, m. .34; H. § 756; C. § 642; J. § 836, 4; G. § eS. 
 
 Instances of relative sentences (whether with the Future 32 
 or with the Subjunctive) which at the same time contain an 
 intimation of purpose are rare in the N. T., since it employs 
 for this end the express statement by means of the final par- 198 
 tide Xva almost invariably. 
 
 John ix. 36 rts icmv, iva Ttumvo'ia eJs avrov, v. 7 avBpunrov ovk Iyo), 
 tva ^dXy //.e cis ttjv KoXvp-^ridpav, 2 Cor. xii. 7 i^oOt] /jloi. tr/coAoi/r ... 'iva 
 ju.e Kokaffii^Tj, Iva firj etc. Rev. xix. 15 eKTropeverai po[ji.<j>aia, 'iva h avrrj 
 iraToti] TO. (Bvq ; especially after dTroo-TeAXo) and the like, as Gal. iv. 5 
 i^aTriimiXev tov vibv avrov, iva roi? im vop-ov i^ayopatrQ, Iva etc. 
 Yet we may with confidence (guided even by the position) take as 
 relative clauses including the expression of a purpose, the example in 
 29 p. 228 ayovra Trap u ^eviaOwfiev Mv. (see § 143, 7 p. 284), and also 
 Luke vii. 4 a$i6? ia-riv w ^rapi^ tovto (cf. the construction with iva 
 after oftos in 46 below, p. 240), Matt. xxi. 41 yewpyoi's, omi/es djroSu- 
 crovcriv etc. 
 
 It is to be noticed further, that instead of the regular relative 
 clause after such predicates as ovk e)(ta (non habeo quod followed by 
 the Subjunct.) e.g. Luke xi. 6 ovk Ip^cu o irapa&Tjcra) aura!, the form of 
 
230 C. TEMPORAL SENTENCES. [§ 139 
 
 an Indirect Question is commonly substituted, see 58 below, 
 p. 251. On Acts xix. 40 see § 151, 29 note p. 400. 
 
 C. Temporal Sentences. 
 B. §139,m.37i H. cf. §758; C. §641d.; D. p..678 sqq. ; J. §§840sqq.; G. §§58 8q(l. 
 
 33 As the constructions in temporal sentences agree in their 
 general principles with those in relative sentences, because the 
 temporal conjunctions themselves were mostly relatives origi- 
 nally (ft)9, ore, «B9, i^ oil, etc.), all the deviations from classic 
 usage touched on above in connection with relative sentences 
 will repeat themselves here. 
 
 1) The Optative as a dependent Mood no longer occurs except 
 in a single instance, either the Indicative or the Subjunctive (with and 
 without av, see 3 below) being substituted for it, as above. The in- 
 stance of the Optative used in classic fashion is again from Acts (xxv. 
 16) a.TreKpL$T]v, on ovk eariv i6o<; . . . irpiv rj t^oL etc. 
 
 2) Corresponding to the use of oirov av and iav with the Indicative, 
 oral/ also is sometimes joined to the Indicative ; see more on this 
 point, together with examples, in 23 above, p. 222. Respecting tws av 
 with the Fut. see the following paragraph (3). 
 
 3) Temporal particles which express a limit or goal (our 
 till, until), 6(u?^ /^XP''i "W"! together with all their extensions, 
 as eco? oil, «u? otov, etc., if they are joined to the Subjunctive, 
 take (as being originally relatives) according to rule the par- 
 ticle av : Matt, xxiii. 39 ; xxiv. 34, etc. Still more commonly, 
 however, they are construed, agreeably to their signification, 
 after the analogy of the final particles 'Iva and ovrto? 
 below: that is to say, with the simple Subjunctive with- 
 out dv, even after historical tenses. 
 
 Examples are very numerous, and are in the main also thoroughly 
 establishfed critically, while in ordinary Greek prose the construction 
 with the simple Subjunctive can be regarded only as an isolated and 
 199 doubtful exception. In order to get a view of the great extent to 
 which this usage is carried in the N. T., we give here a list of the 
 passages. Thus we find with the Subjunctive, Iw9 in Matt, xviii. 30 ; 
 34 Lchm. ; Mark xiv. 32 ; Luke xv. 4 ; xvii. 8 ; xxii. 34 ; 2 Thess. ii. 
 7; Heb. x. 13 (after a Pret., but with reference to the Present, see 
 § 137, 3 p. 197) ; Jas. v. 7 Tdf. [Treg.J ; Rev. vi. 11 ; Iw? oZ in Matt. 
 xiv. 22 ; xviii. 34 Tdf. [Treg.] ; xvii. 9 ; xxvi. 36 Tdf. [Treg.J ; Luke 
 xii. 59 [Tdf. Treg. cod. Sin. om. o5] ; xxiv. 49 ; John xiii. 38 ; Acts 
 xxiii. 12 (after an historical tense), 14, 21 ; xxv. 21 (after an historical 
 tense) ; 2 Pet. i. 19 ; lias otov Luke xii. 50 ; xiii. 8 ; xv. 8 [ov Treg. 
 
§ 139.] THE MOODS. 231 
 
 cod. Sin,]; xxii.l 6,18 [oSTreg. cod. Sin.]; /^c'^^pt Eph.iv.13 ; /texP'^ 
 ov Mark xiii. 30 ; a;^pt Rev. vii. 3 ; xv. 8 (after an historical tense) ; 
 XX. 3, 5 (after an historical tense) ; a^^pts ov Luke xxi. 24; Rom. 
 xi. 25 ; 1 Cor. xi. 26 ; xv. 25, [Tdf. in Lk. Cor. -pi o5 with cod. Sin.] ; 
 Gal. iii. 19; iv. 19 [p.£;)(p(,so5Treg.Tdf.cod. Sin.]; a^pi rji-^ /xipa^Jjuke 
 i. 20 ; and finally, also after Trplv ij Luke ii. 26 [tt. ^ av Tdf., w. av 
 Treg., £u)s a.v cod. Sin.], (and in xxii. 34 as a variant for eo€). It is 
 noticeable that here the Subjunctive does not, as in so many similar 
 cases, alternate with the Future; but the Future, with the exception 
 perhaps of the passage Rev. xvii. 17 (itself uncertain) and a few 
 various readings, is well nigh excluded. That this usage stands in 
 closest connection with the N. T. structure of final clauses, appears 
 on comparing the respective paragraphs (37 and 38 p. 233 sq.). And 
 since also the omission of av with the Subjunctive in all clauses 
 which .contain the expression of a purpose has its foundation in classic 
 usage (see B. § 139, m. 45 and m. 47), mucl^ less here can we think 
 of the retention of av with the Future (of. 23 p. 222 andSl p. 228), 
 — an instance of which, in point of fact, hardly occurs even as a 
 variant, with the exception of a very doubtful case in Luke xiii. 85 
 Lchm. (see fine print under 4) ; cf. £u)s av with the Future in Act. 
 Petr. et Paul. 63, 
 
 On the other hand, the connection of all these particles with the 
 Indicative Present is not in the least anomalous^ since as 
 temporal conjunctions, particularly in the signification as long as, until 
 (cf. the Lat. dum, donee, etc.), the,y can be construed also as such, 
 consequently with the Indicative ; as. Matt. v. 25 La6i evvouiv . . . eeos 
 orov et jj-iT avTOV iv rfj oSJi, Heb. iii. 13 TrapaKaXetre cauToiis, oxpi? ov 
 TO (Trj)i.epov KaXelrai, John ix. 4 lius ij/icpo io~rlv, xxi. 22, 23 ; 1 Tim. iv. 
 13 iuis lp)(ofi.ai, Mark vi. 45 £<us dTroAvcij Acts xxi. 26, — these last two 
 passages are at the same time examples of the Indie, instead of the 
 Optat. in an intermediate clause to express an indirect statement 
 (11 above, p. 215). 
 
 4) With all other particles of time which contain no speci- 
 fication of a limit, if the construction witli the Subjunctive 
 occurs, the particle av (Jedv') is added regularly and 
 almost without exception. Hence, always tjuIku av, 6adKi<s idv, 
 d(p' ov av, with the Subjunctive following ; and oVe, eVet in 
 such cases become as usual orav, eirdv, as Matt. ii. 8 ; Luke 
 xi. 22, etc. 
 
 Only in a single passage (Luke xiii. 35) is the construction of ore 
 with the Subjunctive extant and received : ov /jlyj iSjjte p,e, e<os ^$a o? e 
 EiTnjTE. Yet the Subjunctive etTnp-t here as respects its force man- 
 
232 D. CAUSAL SENTENCES. [§ 139. 
 
 ifestly depends rather on the idea of end contained in 2u)s, as is plain 
 from the sense or from a comparison of the parallel passage Matt 
 xxiii. 39 (eojs av eiTn^i-e), and ^fci ore forms a parenthetic insertion 
 quite superfluous for the sense (and hence omitted also by mss. of 
 repute [cod. Sin. among them]). 
 
 5) A faulty construction is that of (os in a temporal sense (cum 
 Luke xii. 58) with the Subjunctive and av, since in this case, at 
 200 least in Attic prose, it either has a thoroughly telic force (but is never 
 so used in the N. T.), or signifies as, and then, as introducing a relative 
 clause, takes av according to rule ; so in the N. T. in 1 Thess. ii. 7 
 (see 29 above, p. 227). Three times, however, ujs av with the Sub- 
 junctive occurs decidedly in a temporal signification (as soon as) : 
 most clearly in 1 Cor. xi. 34 ra Xonra us av eXdu) Stara^o/iai (Vulg. 
 cum venero), Phil. ii. 23 ws av d</)i8(o (Vulg. ut venero), and probably 
 also Eom. xv. 24 (see § 144, 7 p. 294) ; cf. Joseph. B. J. 2. 14 ; 3. 8 ; 
 Prov. i. 27 ; Clem. Ep. 1. 12 (is idv). For examples of (is av with 
 the Indie, in the Sept. see Winer 309 (290). 
 
 B. §139, m. 39; H. §760c.; C. cf.§641; D. §580; J.§843; G.§§60,62. 
 
 34 The employment of the Optative in temporal clauses, and cor- 
 responding relative clauses, to denote repetition is unknown in 
 
 / the N. T. The N. T. language employs for this purpose, either the 
 Indicative with av according to 13 p. 216 (see the examples there), 
 or the Subjunctive with av, as, for instance, with oo-axis 1 Cor. xi. 2.5, 
 26; Eev. xi. 6. The proper particle of repetition, oirore, oirorav, is 
 never used in the N. T. ; and even in Luke vi. 3 (where Lchm. [so 
 Treg.] has given ore after the best mss. [Sin. also]), if oirore is pre- 
 ferred with Tdf., it would not have the iterative force. 
 
 B. §189, m. 41; H. §878; C. §703<1.; D. §583; J. §848; G. § 67. 
 
 35 The rule laid down in reference to the use of npiv or Trplv ■^ is 
 observed in the N. T. most accurately : — the Subjunct. and Optat., 
 where they occur, appearing in every case after a preceding negation 
 (Luke ii. 26; xxii. 34 var. ; Acts xxv. 16); whereas in all the pas- 
 sages with the Infinitive, the main clause contains no negation. 
 Of the Indicative after Trpiv there is no example extant. 
 
 D. Causal Sentences. 
 B. § 139, m. 42-44; D. §§ 615 sqq. ; J. §§ 801 sqq. ; G. §§ 80, 81. 
 
 36 In the construction of causal sentences there is no deviation ■ 
 from ordinary usage (viz. that the Indie, is employed when the 
 cause is represented as external or objective, the Optat. when 
 it is subjective), farther than that they are treated only as inde- 
 
§ 139.] THE MOODS. 233 
 
 pendent sentences, i.e joined to the Mood of independence. Also, 
 when subjective reasons are specified, the N. T. ..anguage, 
 even in the Acts, employs (according to the general remarks 
 in 11 p. 215) instead of the Optative only the Indicative ; 
 as. Acts vi. 1 ijivero <yoyyv<7fib'; twv 'EWyjviaTWV, oti irape- 
 OewpovvTo ai %»j/3(xt aiircov, x. 46 e^e(7Tr)<Tav, oti . . . eKKej^yrai, etc. 
 The most common causal particles are on, Sioti, Iwd, cTretSij, less 
 frequently is. These particles are often used as co-ordinating 
 particles, and then are to be translated hj for (Germ, denn), as Rom. 
 iii. 6 Ittu TTuls KpLvii b 6e6s ; In the compounds Sio and 8i6irep the co- 
 ordinating force is the prevalent one ; hence their frequent construction 
 with the Imperative, or the Subjunctive in its stead: Sio tidyfieire 
 (Acts xxvii. 25), Sioirep ^euycTc (1 Cor. x. 14), Sio Ix'uft.w x°-P"' (Heb. 
 xii. 28), etc. 
 
 E. Final Sentences. 201 
 
 B. §139, m.45; H.p.275sq.; C.§624; D.p.597sq.; J.5805; G.§§43sq. 
 
 The two particles of design "va and otts)? (never, &>?) — nega- 3? 
 tively Xva fir], 0Tra><; /iij, or even simply fii] (/iT^TTore, /M^Tro3<;, etc.) 
 — are joined almost uniformly to the Subjunctive, rarely 
 to the Future (38 p. 234). At the same time it is to be 
 noticed, tliat the practice (beginning to show itself even in old 
 classic authors, e.g. Thucydides) of using instead of the Opta- 
 tive the Subjunctive, even after historic tenses and in 
 the midst of narration, as the Mood especially suited to the 
 expression of a purpose striving to become actual (see B. 1. c), 
 has become the established rule in the N. T., as may be seen 
 from innumerable examples : thus, after Lva, Matt. xiv. 36 
 TrapeKoKovv Xva a^^rnvTaL, xii. 10 ; xix. 13 ; Acts xxvii. 42 ^ovXr) 
 eyeveTO, "va . . . arroKTeivcoaov, firj tk Siacpvyji (Rec. -yoi), John 
 iv. 8 after the Pluperf. aTreXrjXvOeurav 'lva wyopdawcnv ; after 
 OTTci)?, Acts viii. 15 ; ix. 2, 24 ; xxv. 3 irapeKoKovv . . . otto)? 
 fieTaTre/islrrjTai etc. 
 
 Of the Optative not an example is any longer found ; and that 
 yvoi, TrapaSot (also after historic tenses) accordingly are not Optatives, 
 but Subjunctives, has already been remarked on p. 46 ; e.g. Mark v. 
 43 SteoretXaTO iva yvoi, ix. 30; xiv. 10 aif^Xdcv IVa iropaSot (cf. vs. 11), 
 Luke xix. 15 ; John xiii. 2. Only in Eph. i. 17 and iii. 16 has Tdf. 
 [eds. 2, 7] adopted the Optative Sarj after 'va ; yet even the acceptance 
 of these Optatives would not touch the rule,^ since 1) here the Optat. 
 
 ^ Lchm. has in both passages the Subjunctive (once in the form S<iri, and once 
 in the form S^, [Treg. Tdf. ed. 8 with cod. Sin ,■? in i. 1 7 Sipv, in iii. 1 6 5$] ) ; and thus 
 30 
 
234 E. FINAL SENTENCES. [§139. 
 
 stands in both cases after leading tenses, and 2) the Optat. in both 
 passages should be explained as the Optative in the proper sense, viz. 
 of a wish (not as the Mood of a dependent statement), and therefore 
 be taken rather as independent, very much as in one passage the 
 Imperative even is used after "va, viz. in a quotation given without 
 verbal change : 1 Cor. i. 31 iva . . . 6 Kav;^(u/;i€vos iv Kvpito Kavxa-crOui. 
 
 The addition of av to oiriai has likewise passed almost, com- 
 pletely out of use, it being found only in a few passages by Luko 
 (Gosp. ii. 3.5; Acts iii. 19) and solitary quotations from the 0. T. : 
 Acts XV. 17 (after Amos ix. 12 Alex.) ; Rom. iii. 4. 
 
 B. § 189, m. 47 ; H. § 756 i C. § 624 b. ; J. § 811, 2 ; G. p. 68 ; W. 289 (271). 
 
 38 The rule which holds in classic usage, that the Future 
 Indicative can stand only after oVco?, never after ha, is not 
 
 202 applicable at all to the N. T. : since 1) according to 8 above, p. 
 213, 6'7Tcq<; is joined to the Subjunctive almost without excep- 
 tion ; and 2) after "va itself the Future is given (and accepted) 
 several times indubitably. See Thorn. Mag. p. 186, ed. Ritsohl.' 
 
 The most frequent and unquestionable use of the Future after iva 
 is in the Apocalypse (cf. 33, 3) p. 231) — where it was for the most 
 part displaced by the Rec. — frequently in immediate connection with 
 a Subjunct. (agreeably to 7 note, p. 211) ; as, iii. 9 iva ^fovo-tv koi 
 TTpoarKW^CTOvcnv . . . KoX yvCxTLV, xxii. 14 "fa ta-rai . . . Kai (.'urlXdmcnv, vi. 
 4, 11, etc. But it occurs elsewhere also, as Luke xx. 10 (Sojtroucrtv), 
 Acts xxi. 24 where accordingly yvdaovToi can be also included as a part 
 of the final clause, just as in Luke xxii. 30 'iva I'o-^ijre /cal Trtvrjre . . . koL 
 KaditreaOe (Vulg. et sedeatis), Mark xv. 20 {a-Tavpwa-ova-Lv), iii. 2 {Kwrrj- 
 yoprja-ova-iv [not Tdf.]), John xii. 20 (irpoaKwria-ova-iv) ., 1 Cor. ix. 15 Tdf. 
 [eds. 2, 7 ; not 8] (kevwuci), xiii. 3 Tdf (KOAiO^ao/jML), Gal. ii. 4 (/cara- 
 Sov\ii)crovcriv), 1 Pet. iii. 1 (KepSjj^^o-ovTai), Luke xiv. 10 Tdf. [Treg. 
 cod. Sin.] {ipei, al. EtTjy), Phil. ii. 11 Tdf. (Ka/ii//); /cal iiop-okoyi^creTai, al. 
 [so Treg. cod. Sin.] -cnjrai), and besides as a vai-iant John xvii. 2 etc. 
 
 39 Remark. A few examples also are extant of "va with the Indic- 
 ative Present, as above, in the case of lav and orav. Since, how- 
 ever, the relation expressed by the Subjunctive or the Future is in- 
 comparably more important in clauses indicating purpose than after lav, 
 orav, etc. (cf. the Latin constructions after cum, si, ut), all such cases, 
 if other considerations do not sustain them or the text is not certain, 
 give rise to a suspicion of clerical error in later times, when, as is 
 
 harmonizes with the ordinary construction of verbs of entreating etc., according to 
 42 p. 237. But in this case the restoration of the spelling of the Vat. MS. (5# 
 in both instances) deserves preference. Cf. 62 p 256. 
 
§139.] THE MOODS. 235 
 
 Well known, the Modal relations underwent a constantly increasing 
 corruption. Lchna. has taken the Indie. Present into his text in three 
 passages only : it is the almost unanimous reading in 1 Cor. iv. 6 
 (<^ucrioCtr6l€ [so Tdf. Treg. cod. Sin.J), Gal. iv. 17 (^^XoBre [so Tdf. Treg. 
 cod. Sin.]), less certain in 2 Pet. i. 10 ha Trotcicr^e (Tdf. Troiua-dai [so 
 Treg. cod. Sin.J cf. 42 p. 237). Perhaps it is no accident that in all 
 three passages the Present has the circumflexed form, and so 
 they can be reckoned among the cases (described on p. 38, in § 137, 
 10 b) p. 205, and in 3 above, p. 209) where the Present on account 
 of its having the circumflex on the last syllable takes the place of the 
 Future. Tdf., moreover, has adopted the Present in several other 
 instances also : John xvii. 3 (tva yivwa-Kova-iv [so Treg.]), Gal. vi. 12 
 (8u!>KovTai), Tit. ii. 4 {a-iiitf>povi^i>vcnv [with N* ; so Treg.]), Rev. xiii. 17 
 (Svvarai [eds. 2, 7]) ; cf. Acta Petr. et P. 58, 81 ; P. et Thecl. 1 1 etc. 
 Yet the Subjunctive has everywhere weighty authorities in its favor, 
 especially cod. Vat. [and in the last four bibl. passages, except Tit. 
 I.e., cod. Sin. also], and is consequently to be preferred to the Indicative, 
 especially in the last three passages, where the idea of purpose is 
 predominant. Only in -the passage from John (xvii. 3) has the Indie, 
 in addition to the emphatic external attestation, some internal prob- 
 ability also in its support ; since, as the following section will show, 
 John is much less rigorous than others in his employment of the 
 particle iva, and its original telic force is often obscured by him, as in 
 fact in the above passage : avrr) Se eoriv ^ aiwvws ^wt], 'iva yiviixxKova-iv 
 cre etc. Cf. 45 p. 240. 
 
 On the Force of the Particle tva in the N. T. 
 
 As 'iva is one of those particles used most frequently and 40 
 peculiarly in the N. T., it seems to be necessary to give a com- 203 
 plete survey here of the N. T. use of the same.i 
 
 It is not to be denied, that the use of this conjunction in- 
 creased steadily the farther the Greek language departed from 
 the classic period, but especially in the popular dialect ; and 
 that gradually a multitude of relations were expressed by it 
 for which in the literary language other particles or other con- 
 structions were employed. An indication of the facts is afforded 
 even by an external comparison of the Acts or the Ep. to the 
 Heb , composed as they are in the spirit of classic Greek, with 
 
 1 Compare with this the expositions given by Winer 457 sqq. (426 sqq.) [cf, 
 3.34 sqq. (314 sqq.)] ; Fritzache, Excurs. ad Matt. pp. 836 sqq. ; [see also Jelf § 803 ; 
 Green, N. T. Gram. pp. 170 sq. ; Ellicott on Eph. i. 17 ; Sojihocles, Glossary etc. 
 ^ 88 sq. and Lexioon sub voce]. 
 
236 THE PARTICLE tva. [§ 139. 
 
 one of the Gospels written more in the popular phraseology, 
 particularly the Gospel of John. This Gospel employs the 
 particle ha nearly a hundred and fifty times (his Epp. twenty- 
 five times), whereas in the much more extensive book of tlie 
 Acts it appears only sixteen times, and in the Ep. to the Heb. 
 twenty times. The Acts still tises now ha now ottw? ; but in 
 John, with the exception of a single passage (xi. 67, wliere Xva 
 immediately precedes), the other final particle has wholly dis- 
 appeared. 
 
 4i On a general survey of the clauses Introduced by ha, we 
 find the principal deviation from classic usage to consist in 
 the fact, that tlie particle makes its appearance, not only as 
 usual after complete predicates — so that the clause as a 
 superadded statement of design stands in a certain external 
 independence as respects tlie leading predicate (in order that, 
 to the end thaf), but also after so-called incomplete pre- 
 dicate ideas (e.g. OeX.eiv'), and serves to subjoin to them their 
 necessary complement. In good prose, as is well-known, 
 the Infinitive is used in this latter case ; or after certain pre- 
 dicates (as TcapaicaKelv, etc., see B. § 139, m. 45) oVa)? also, 
 never (or at least but very seldom) Xva. This classic iise of 
 OTTO)? just mentioned may be regarded as the commencement 
 of the later prevalent res61ution or periphrase of the Infinitive 
 by means of Particles. In the place of ottco? (by which the 
 clause at least still preserved the form of an indirect question) 
 appeared first of all with such predicates as irapaKaXelv etc. 
 (see 42) the pure particle of design ha. Gradually, however, 
 the number of the (incomplete) predicates after which the In- 
 finitive — formerly the only construction used — was re- 
 
 204 solved by a, clause with iW, increased more and more;^ so that 
 the proper telic force of the particle constantly receded further, 
 or was blended with the senses of other particles (as on, ajo-re) ; 
 see below. Even in the language of the majority of the N. T. 
 writers this use is by no means still in its initial stage, but has 
 already become considerably extended, as will appear from the 
 following paragraphs. 
 42 Thus much, however, is still to be laid down as respects the 
 
 1 In modern Greek the Infinitive has at length completely disappeared, and is 
 only expressed by the particle vi (which came from tva) with a Subjunctive fol- 
 lowing ; as, vk (piyu, v^ ypi^ji. See MuUach, Vulgarspr. S. 373. 
 
§ 139.] THE MOODS. 237 
 
 N. T. : that "va cannot as in the later Greek arbitrarily take 
 the place of every Infinitive (and so even of on after verba 
 dicendi), but the predicates after which it stands are still in 
 the main of such a nature that the dependent clause can 
 be regarded as a statement akin to a specification of 
 purpose. 
 
 This is the case, in the first place, with all predicates which 
 can be referred to the notion of a wish, request, com- 
 mand, admonition. 
 
 These are in particular the following: OiKav, irapaKoXuv, Siao-TtWe- 
 aOtu, etTTCiv/ irapayyeXXeiv, dirayyeWctv, (e.g. 2 Thess. iii. 12 tva iarOmcriv, 
 for which previously, in vs. 10, oti with the Imperative had been used : 
 oTi . . . fi.y)8l la-Oierta, of. 51 p. 245), KTjpva-creLv, ypatjaiv (e.g. Mark xii. 
 19 where the on before Iva is superfluous, or rather the two kinds of 
 statement residing in ypa<f)av are intimated by on and iva, ix. 12, etc.), 
 ■irpo(Tei)(e.a-6(u, and the substantive vpoa-evxi^ (e.g. Eph. vi. 19 ; Phil. i. 9 ; 
 respecting the Optative with it see 37 p. 233, above), Seio-^ai and ipoir^v 
 in the sense of beseech, ivreXXiarOai, ivTo\a? SiSovai and kapL^dveiv, 
 alTela-Oai. Here belong, also, all those passages where the sense re- 
 quires us to supply the idea of entreaty etc. suggested by Iva, e.g. 
 Kdfji,TrTeLv yovara Eph. iii. 16, (rvvia-Tavai commendare Rom. xvi. 2, 
 SiafiapTvpio-Oai 1 Tim. V. 21, avaa-fUiv Tov o)(\ov to Stir up and entice 
 Mark xv. 11 ; Luke xx. 10 dTrecrreiktv SovXov, tva Siicrova-iv with the 
 order that etc. ; and often in clauses where the demand is expressed by 
 the form of the sentence, to wit, by the Imperative, e.g. ^SAeTrc iva 
 TrXripois (Subjunct.) Col. iv. 17, a-TrovSatraTt iVa TroLucrfie (see 39 p. 234), 
 TrXiqpwTaTC ftov Trjv )(apii.v iva to airb <j)povrjTe Phil. ii. 2, ^T^reiTe Iva 205 
 irepia-a-evrjTe 1 Cor. xiv. 12, etc. 
 
 For the same reason tva connects itself readily with the ideas to 
 counsel, admonish, threaten, adjure, as j3ov\r] iyivero, uvve/iovKeva^avTO 
 Iva diroKTiiViiKj-Lv auTous, iTreTi/irjo-ev airois tva /aijScvi Xiywa-iv, l^opKitfn o-e 
 tva Tjiuv etTiTjs, a-vvereOcivro tva, etc., and in general occurs after many 
 other predicates and constructions, in so far as by the action contained 
 in them something is to be striven for or averted, — hence after the 
 ideas to exert one's self, to seek, to equip one's self, to prepare, to be on 
 one's guard, etc., as ^njTeiv, iraparrjptiv, Slwkciv, ^tjXovv, (Toi/xd^tLv, ^rjTelv 
 tvKaipiav, <f)v\da<Te(j'6ai, etc. 
 
 1 EiVeiy and other verba dicendi acquire in this way the force of KeKfifiv, 
 lis Matt. XX. 21 flire Iva Ka0t<ra<riv, Mark iii. 9 etc., and it is remarkable that this 
 latter verb, Ke\eieiv, is never joined to Xm, but always to the Infinitive. The 
 influence of the Latin construction with jvhere may have contributed to this ; 
 hence also the (unclassic) construction with the Infin. Pass., see { 141, 5 p. 275. 
 
238 THE PARTICLE tvo. t§ 139, 
 
 43 Further, ha is used after many predicates iu order to desig- 
 nate tlie effect contained in the dependent clause as one 
 designed, one included within the province of the subject's 
 volition. In this way the force of Iva approximates essen- 
 tially to that of the (apparently opposite) particle wo-re. 
 
 Consequently, when lexicographers and commentators adduce among 
 the significations of iva those of wo-re also, they are by no means to be 
 condemned as holding erroneous philological views. For every effect 
 or consequence, so far forth as it is to be regarded not as one which 
 is merely external and resulting as a matter of fact, but as intended 
 and striven after by the subject, falls thereby under the idea of finality. 
 Hence, not only do the Latin writers employ for both purposes one 
 and the same particle {ut), but also in Greek &<m when it governs 
 the Infin. is reckoned with reason by many grammarians (see e.g. 
 Baumlein, Schulgr. § 690 sq. fcf. D. p. 597]) among the final particles ; 
 and there are cases enough where the final reference in uxm is so 
 predominant that we can only translate it by in order to (see below, 
 50 Rem. p. 244 ; Baumlein, as above ; Matth. Gr. § 531, Anm. 2). In 
 point of fact the majority of the predicates adduced in this and the 
 following section are in Greek writers predominantly connected with 
 SxTTi. Accordingly iva is connected frequently with the ideas to effect, 
 to make, to compel, to persuade, to admit, to confer, etc.. as, ironiv 
 Mark iii. 1 4 ; Luke xviii. 41 tL ctoi deXw; ■Koirjaw ; 6 Se eiTrev • ti'o 
 dva/3A.6i//<u, Rev. xiii. 15 Lchm. ;^ nOivai John xv. 16 (OrjKa i/iSs wa 
 i/jLil's vTrdyrp-f Koi KapTTov <j>eprjTe ; SiBovai, especially in the Apoca- 
 lypse in the common construction iSoOr] avrw 'iva etc., further in iiovcriav 
 SiSop-ai, Acts viii. "L9 Sore Ka/iol rrjv l^ovcrlav TavTrjv, iva . . . KajxpavQ, 
 Mark xi. 28 tis croi ri/v iiovcriav Tavr-qv eSuixev, iva ravra Trotijs ; ayya- 
 pevav Matt, xxvii. 32 ; trdOav Matt, xxvii. 20 ; atpLevai Mark xi, 16 ; 
 £is T^v KapSiav /SaWetv (rivC) John xiii. 2, etc. 
 
 44 There remain still a great number of predicates aiud con- 
 structions in which the idea of purpose decidedly recedes 
 
 :206 into the background, and 'iva indicates solely a reference 
 to something future and still to be realized, and often the 
 dependent clause contains also merely the completion of the 
 statement given incompletely in the predicate : — in brief, then, 
 cases where the clause with 'iva serves as a periphrasis for the 
 Infinitive (with or without wcrre) alone in use in ordinary 
 
 1 The omission of Vvo in this passage in the text of Tdf. [eds.2, 7, 8; so cod. Sin.] 
 so that the simple Subjunctive aTroKravBSiaiv would depend immediately on voiiiari, 
 somewhat as in Latin the Subjunct. without ut after yac, »me, etc., is very improbable 
 Cf. 49 note p. 243. 
 
§ 139.] THE MOODS. 239 
 
 prose ; particularly for the In fin. Fut are, which hardly con- 
 tinues to be employed in the N. T., or for the Infin. with tov 
 which is much in use there (and with which it often alternates 
 after the same predicates and in the same sense ; see § 140, 
 1*2 sqq. pp. 266 sqq.). 
 
 This is the freest use of iva in the N. T. And although it never 
 stands in the strict eobatic sense (for mrre 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 individual 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. In our language, as a rule, 
 tlie particle thai (which in like manner unites in itself both referencei.j 
 is an adequate translation ; but there are instances where we approx- 
 imate more nearly to the intention of the writer if we translate it 
 - most simply and in a way which corresponds best to the sense of the 
 passage, viz. by the mere Infinitive, even with so that, so as (i.e. wore 
 withthe Infin.). All this will be plain from the 
 
 Examples : John viii. 56 'A/Spaa/i rjyaWid raro, Lva iSrj TTjv rjfiipai 
 r^v ifir]v equiv. to on 6\j/oiTo not that he saw but that he should see. 
 like Rev. xiv. 13 /xaKapioi ol vcKpol . . . iva ava-n-arjo-ovTai, John xv. 
 13 /XEL^ova a.yo.Trf)v ovSeh e)(ei Iva tk rrjv i/'i'xV "-^ov 6rj (equiv. to uxTTt 
 Belvat) which impels him to etc., 1 Thess. v. 4 ovk iuri iv (tkotci, iva 
 ■}] rj/jLcpa vfjMs <Ls /cXeVTij; KaraXalBrj SO that the day could surprise yoii, 
 John ix. 2 Vis rjiiaprev, iva tuc^Xos yew-qOrj no external consequence, but 
 designating the internal causal connection, ordained by a higher power, 
 between sin and malady : so that he should (miist) be born blind, Luke 
 ix. 45 y]yv6ovv to p-^/xa Koi rp/ ■KapaKiKokup.p.ivov ott avTutv, Iva prj 
 a'lxxOiovTai avro not in order that etc. but so that they could not 
 understand it, John v. 20 ixei^ova epya Stt^tt, tva v/aei? 6aviJ.dt,rjTe (not 
 in order that, but) so that ye will wonder, Matt. x. 25 apKerbv to! 
 fjLaOrirrj, iva yivajrai is 6 StSatrKaXos equiv. to to yevetrOaL, Gal. v. 17, 
 etc. That, liowever, many passages were taken by the (earlier) 
 interpreters in the ecbatic sense where the final is altogether admissible, 
 
240 THE PARTICLE tvo. [§ 139. 
 
 in fact necessary (e.g. John vii. 23, etc.), has been shown by Winer 
 457 (426) by a number of examples. 
 207 In accordance now with the foregoing section, we find in the N. T. 
 45 the following predicates joined to this comparatively ecbatic Iva., where 
 the Greek literary language certainly would have used either wan 
 with the Infln. or quite a different construction : cmix^ipuv Matt. v. 29. 
 30, etc. ; apKeiv John vi. 7 ; o/dkctov elvai (see 44 p. 239), i/cai/ov cTi'xt 
 Matt. viii. 8 ; Luke vii. 6 ; xP^Lav tN^cii/ John ii. 25, etc. ; crvvrjOaa iuTiv 
 John xviii. 39 ; fjucrdo'; ianv 1 Cor. ix. 18; koXov Io-tlv 1 Cor. ix. 15 
 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7; not 8] ; t/ioi cXax'crTo'v Icttiv 1 Cor. iv. 3 ; tj mpa ipxerai, 
 IkriXvOai John xvi. 32 (on the other hand vs. 25 Ipxera-i wpa, ore ovKen 
 XaA^o-u) etc.) ; eSwKa ;^pdvov Rev. ii. 21 ; e/x6v jSputfia. icrrLV iva ttoim to 
 Be^TjfiLa etc. John iv. 34; fieL^orepav ovk t^'^ x"/'"'" "''" o.Kov(ji 3 John 4; 
 and when referring to a preparatory demonstrative preced- 
 ing : TToBev fioi TOVTO iva 'dXO-rj npo? /x,€ Luke i. 43 (cf. Protev. 12. 2 ; 
 Acta Andr. 6, — this last Apocryphal book was written early, is a 
 decided imitation of the canonical writings, and exhibits several . 
 instances of the ecbatic iva), toCto icrnv to tpyov, Tva vrio-TEvo-iyTe John 
 vi. 29, avTi] fi i,iiyq Iva yivuKTKovmv (see above, 39 p. 235) John xvii. 3, 
 avTT) rj a.ya.Trq . . . Iva ra<s Ivroka^ TqpSijxev 1 John V. 3 (cf. iv. 17). Yet 
 it always remains for the interpreter to decide which reference in iva, 
 agreeably to the most obvious sense, predominates in every individual 
 case. 
 
 15 That all "the above prescriptions in reference to the signifl' 
 cation and use of 'iva are not rigidly fixed, and cannot be, in 
 consequence of the wide difference in style of the several 
 authors in this particular, has already been intimated, 40 p. 235. 
 Often the example given above is the only one of the kind in 
 the N. T. ; many of the predicates mentioned admit quite as 
 often, sometimes still more frequently, some of them even 
 commonly, of the construction with the Infinitive (witli and 
 without Tov), as diXeiv, ^7]T6cv, TToteiv, irelOeiv, a<f)eivai, iKavov 
 elvai, ')(peiav eyeiv, etc. 
 
 The complete equivalence of the construction with the Conjunction 
 and that with the Infinitive is evident from many passages : — partic- 
 ularly from parallel passages, as Matt. xxvi. 17 toC Oikwi iToifidaw/jLtv 
 (Toi (j>ayiiv and Mark xiv. 12 ttoC! 6e\. ex. iva 4>dyris, John i. 27 a^ios iva 
 Xwo) Tov Ifiavra and Acts xiii. 25 a^ios Xvaai to viro^fxa ; — or from 
 those in which both constructions are dependent immediately upon a 
 single predicate and united into a single sentence, as 1 Cor. ix. 15 Tdf 
 [eds. 2, 7 ; not 8 J kuXov /u.oi ixoXKov avoOavuv ^ to Kavf^qixd fiov tva ns 
 Ktvujo'ei, Rev. vi. 4 &6drj airm XafSelv rrjv elpijvrjv Ik t^s -y^s xai iva oXXtj- 
 
§ 139.] THE MOODS. 241 
 
 A.ODS a-(j}d4Qva-Lv ; — or where the mss. are divided between the two 
 constructions, as 2 Pet. i. 10. 
 
 Remark. In conclusion, mention may be made here of the rather 4? 
 frequent elliptical constructions with ha (aXX' iva etc.). One species 
 of them, where the governing idea is implicitly given in the predicate 
 'of the leading clause, has already been treated of above in 42 p. 237. 
 Often an entire clause, or some such thought as 'this happened' etc., 
 is suppressed, as it either is easily to be supplied from the context, or 
 if added would have been cumbersome and prejudicial to the simplicity 
 of the sentence, which is sufficiently intelligible without it (cf. the 
 similar instances § 151, 24c) p. 395) ; as, Mark xiv. 49 Ka6' r^fiipav 
 r^fir/v . . . Kal ovK iKpaTT^crari fji,e • dXX Xva vXrjpioOuxriv ai ypacjjai, John ix. 
 3 ovre oiiTos r/ixapTev, oure . . . , d\X lua <f>avep(oOyj etc., XV. 25 ; 1 John 208 
 ii. 19, cf. John xiii. 18 ; xiv. 30. Similarly Luke xvii. 2 Xva-ireXei 
 ai™ €t At^os TrepiKeiTai . . . ^ ti'a crKavSaXicrrj than if he lives to etc.. 
 Gal. ii. 9, 10 Sepias eSioKav ijjt,ol (cat ^apvajSa Iva lyjixets et; ra Wvtj . . . ■ 
 fiovov rS>v TrTU>)(Siv tva ft vij/ao veiju)/xei/. 
 
 Further, we shall find that by means of such elliptical constructions 
 with tva — very much as in the case of the rare Infin. Fut. (according 
 to 44 p. 239) — the far more rare Participle Future (see § 144, 
 10 p. 296), which the classic language likes so much to employ to 
 express a purpose, was avoided, or even periphrased, as appears from 
 the following examples: Rev. vi. 2 i^XBev vlkSiv koI iva vtKijo-j/, 
 John i. 8 OVK. r)v e/ceti/os to ^Ss, dXX' iva jxaprvp-qoyj irepl tov (fxaro^, Eph. 
 V. 27 Tyjv iKKXyjcriav, p-r] e)(ovcrav aTTiXov r) pvrlSa, dXX Iva rj ayt'a koI 
 a/iu)/A09 (dependent as respects construction on Trapaa-T^o-rf). 
 
 Lastly Lva is used (quite as in classical writers the elliptical ottcos 
 B. m.46; H. §756a.; C. §626; D. §611; J. §812,2; G. §45N.7) 
 as a circumlocution for the Imperative: either after a 
 preceding verbum dicendi, as in Mark v. 23 Xeyu^v on to Ovyarpiov fiov 
 ecr;(Ctru)S ^X^' ' ^va iX6iav etti^^s toi? ^^tpas avrrj, ti/re troidrj; or 
 
 without such antecedent, as in 2 Cor. viii. 7 akX', u>a~7rep irepLo-a-eveTe ... , 
 Lva Ka\ iv ravrg rfj )(a.pt,TL Trepicro-evrp-e ; or in continuation of a fore- 
 going Imperative, as Eph. iv. 29 ttSs Adyos a-a-irpo's ij.r) iKiropevia-Oo}, 
 oAA.' et Tts . . . ti/a So) xapiv, V. 83 eKaoro? ayairctTa) t^i/ kavrov ywaiKO, tj 
 Se yvvTj iva cj)0^rjTai tov avSpa. 
 
 The restrictive conclusion with ira p.7], as Philem. 19 tva 
 p.fj Xiyoy croi ori . . . 7rpo(70cf>eLXu? (cf. 2 Cor. ii. 5 tva /irj iin/3apS)), cor- 
 responds to the Latin constructions ne dicam and the like. 
 
 B. § 139, m. 50; H. § T20; C. § 624; D. § 538; J. § 814; G. § 46. 
 
 After verbs of fearing etc. Q^o^eladai, ev\a^el<x6ai) our 48 
 
 81 
 
24-2 pX^irtiv, op^v ji'*), ETC. l§13i 
 
 ihat h rendered, as in the classics, by /ijy ; (that not, Lat. ne non 
 liy IJ.7] ov according to § 148, 11 p. 364). Of tlie dependen 
 moods only the Subjunctive (agreeably to the use in fiua 
 clauses) is still employed after /M-q, even after historic tenses 
 as. Acts xxvii. 17 ^o^ov/xevoo /mt) . . . iKiriacoaiv, i^epovro, 29 
 xxiii. 10 (fjo^TjOek m SiaairaaOrj eKsKevaev. After leading tenses 
 2 Cor. xi. 3 ; Heb. iv. 1, etc. ; Subjunctive in connection wit 
 the Future, 2 Cor. xii. 20, 21. 
 
 In Acts V. 26 Lchm. [Treg.J i<j)3/3ovvTo yap t6v Xaov, fuj XidacrOSxTi] 
 the subordinate clause does not seem to be dependent on e<^o/3oCi/Ti 
 but to belong as a telic specification (for ii/a //.rj Xi6. as Tdf. et a 
 actually read, after A) to what precedes, since if it depends on itpo^ovvrt 
 it ought, according to the analogy of the familiar construction (otS 
 ere on), to have been so framed that rov Xaov might have Ipeen il 
 Subject, as in Thuc. 4, 1 08 Toy's (vfjifjux^ovi cc^o/SoBi/to, ;li^ airoaTuia-i. 
 Yet it is more probable that the sentence, when compared with th 
 similar passage Gal. iv. 11 (<^o/3oB/x,at i/^ias, /Ji-rj ttws et/cij KfKOTri'aKa « 
 i/xtti), contains a blending of two constructions {i(j>o/3. rov kaov, an 
 l4'ol3. /uij \i6acrdwcriv) ; or rather, that after the analogy of the instance 
 given in § 151, 10 p. 383 there is a bound from the Active coustructio 
 209 over into the Passive (consequently for /x-ij Xiddcn] or XlOolctuktiv 17/Aas 
 Further, the reading ;u,ij Xi^. is not only the better attested (codd. Va 
 Sin. etc.), but the other (iva jix^ \l6.) would rather appear to be 
 correction of it than vice versa ; cf. besides, Ep. Barn. 6 and the quit 
 similar instance in Thuc. 4, 8, 7. More difficult is it to explai 
 
 by the same analogy the change in the passage from the Ep. to th 
 Gal. (iv. 11), if we avail ourselves merely of the recorded word 
 But the thought which was in the mind of the apostle when he bega 
 the sentence {<^opovjxai v/jlols) was something like, 'I fear that y 
 may render futile my endeavors'; for which by a change of constructio 
 the thought at once was presented, 'that I have labored for you i 
 vain.' On the use of the Indie. Perfect (KeKoniaKa) in order to s( 
 forth the object of fear as an already existing fact, as it were, or t 
 anticipate it, cf. Hermas Aland. 12, 5 ; Protev. 14. 1, the correspondin 
 examples from Greek authors in B. I.e., and below, § 148, 10 p. 3t3, 
 49 Remark. The two verbs /SAe-Tretv and opav are often use 
 tropically, in the sense of ^vXacra-ia-Ocn, to be on one's guard, take heei 
 Hence they take also the same constructions as this verb, viz. eitht 
 a noun with d.Tr6 and the Gen. (see § 147 under Atto p. 323), or a ver 
 with ij.-q (not iva //.ly ; for in 2 John 8 /SXcircre eavirovs, tva firj airoXecrrj- 
 etc. the first clause forms a complete thought, and the clause whic 
 follows is a subjoined specificatiori of end). Now since both thes 
 verbs always immediately precede the clause negatived by fi^ in tl 
 
5 139.1 THE MOODS. 243 
 
 Impel ative form, they appear almost like a ple.mastic addition, 
 after the fashion of the very similar constructions in Latin with vide, 
 cave ne etc. The Mood is as usual in sentences expressing apprehen- 
 sion and warning the Aorist Subjunct., as Matt, xviii. 10 opare jxij 
 Karai^povrjtrriTf. Ii/bs tovtwv, xxiv. 4 jSAeTrere /atj ns vfxai TrXavijo-j;, Mark 
 xiii. 5 ; Luke xxi. 8 pXeireri fiTj TrXawjSijTe, Acts xiii. 40 ; 1 Cor. x. 1 2 ; 
 1 Thess. V. 15 ; Heb. xii. 25 ; yet the Future also, which so frequently 
 alternates with this Subjunct., may take its place, as Col. ii. 8 ySAcTere 
 ix-^ Tis lo-Tttt, Heb. iii. 12.^ • 
 
 Finally, there are a few passages where those Imperatives (opa, 
 opare) must really be regarded as thoroughly pleonastic addi- 
 tions, they being prefixed to another Imperative (or Subjunctive 
 in its place) negatived by //.^, and even to a positive Imperative 
 without anything intervening (cf. § 151, 32 -p. 402) ; as, Matt. ix. 30 
 opaTf /jLTjStl'i yivcDO-Kcrco, viii. 4 opa /iijSci/i eiTrj;?, Mark viii. 15 opare 
 jiXiirere. diro t-^? ^up.ijs tS>v $. ; hence also in Matt. xxiv. 6 (opare ji-l) 
 Opoilade) the form dpoiicrde is not to be taken as Indicative (for the 
 Future), but as Imperative. 
 
 The case is different with the actual Indicative in Luke xi. 35 
 <T KOTT ei ovv fjiij TO <f>Qi<s TO iv cro\ ctkoto'; itTTiv. Since, that is to say, 
 o-KOTTciv is never used in the sense of <^vA.ao-o-eo-^at, like the above two 
 verbs (hence in Gal. vi. 1 the clause with p.ri is to be construed as a 
 pure telic clause, ibr Iva pJri etc.), but uniformly in its proper significa- 
 tion to look at, regard, the dependent clause is to be taken as an 
 indirect question in the Indicative (see H. below) : see to it whether 210 
 the light . . . is not etc. 
 
 On the elliptical opa /tij see § 151, 24 b) p. 395. 
 
 P. Illative Sentences. 
 B 5139, m. 52 8qq.; H. §§770. 771; C.§671d.| D. §596; J.§863; G.§§65,3; 98. 
 
 As respects sentences expressing consequence, the N. T. 50 
 writings depart but little from the general rules. With wo-xe, 
 so far forth as at the beginnhig of a clause it is the co- 
 ordinating particle (itaque), the Indicative is joined (Matt. 
 xii. 12, etc.). And even when the Subjunctive follows 
 (1 Cor. V. 8 WO-T6 eopTd^Q)fiev etc.) the particle is co-ordiuating, 
 since the Subjunct. here is the Conjunct, adhortativus described _ 
 in 4 above, p. 209, and therefore only takes the place of the 
 
 1 The positive injunctiou rendered by the Future after Spa in Heb. viii. 5 
 (Spa iroiiireis etc., a quotn.) is not to be explained by the omission of 'iva, butresults 
 solely from the literal translation of the Hebrew, and is founded consequently 
 upon no N. T. usage. 
 
244 ^- ILLATIVE SENTENCES. [§139 
 
 Imperative, which after w<7T6 is pretty frequent, *.g. 1 Cor. iii. 
 21 ; iv. 5 ; x. 12 ; xi. 33, etc. 
 
 But whenever it is the subordinating particle (ita uf), the 
 construction with the Infinitive (Ace. with Infin.) is almost 
 tlie only one in use : and that, too, both when the dependent 
 clause contains the purely natural consequence of the leading 
 action,! as Matt. viii. 24 ; xiii. 2, etc. ; and when it is a designed 
 consequence, as Matt. x. 1 ; xii. 22 ; Acts xiv. l,etc. See the 
 Remark. 
 
 Of the use of (Sore in the sense of so that with the Indicative (which 
 then of course represents the consequence obj ectively, as a fact 
 acGomphshed) there are but two instances : once after ovtuis John iii. 
 16 (ovTus 7jya.irrj(rev . . . mm tov viou avrov eSu)K€v), and once almost 
 in the co-ordinating sense {itaque) Gal. ii. 13. After t o o-oJ to s 
 Hkewise <So-t€ (not oo-os B. m. 67) is used, and with the Infin. Matt. 
 XV. 33. Of is with the Infin. instead of uctte, according to Greek 
 usage, there is but one example in Acts (xx. 24), which to judge 
 from the copious variants seems to have almost ceased to be intelligible 
 to the copyists, etc. 'Os occurs as a variant in Luke ix. 52 (sup- 
 ported by N B). 
 
 Eemaek. Since, as was remarked above (43 p. 238), oicrTc unites 
 in itself both references — that of result and that of design, there 
 are cases where, as in iva. the ecbatic (44 p. 238), so in <ScrTe the 
 final, force predominates ; or at least, while the issue is still future, 
 it is anticipated or represented in thought as if already realized. 
 211 That in Greek authors also this usage is by no means unknown (see 
 e.g. Lys. or. 19, 16), and hence even in them, too, SxTTt. and oVios are 
 found after the same predicates, has likewise already been remarked 
 above. Of also eis to followed by the Infin. in § 140, 10 p. 264. The 
 most marked passages of the sort in the N. T. are the following: 
 Matt, xxvii. 1 a-UfiPovXiov tXa^ov ol dpp^icpcis, SxTre OavaruKrai avrov 
 (where cod. D explains the (Sctte by tva davaTwaova-iv), — but after the 
 same predicate oVoos with the Subjunct. as usual stands in Matt. xxii. 
 16 ; Mark iii. 6 ; further Luke iv. 29 i^ayoi/ avrov . . . wa-re KaraKprj- 
 fivia^ai avrov (where again many mss. and the Rec. have ets to k.), 
 ix. 52 ihrriXOov eis liwfuijv Sa/^apciTuiv, Siare hoi.)i.aaai avrm, xx. 20 'iva 
 
 1 This case is by far the more frequent one with ffiiTTe and the Infin. in the N. T. 
 (and is also common enough in classic writers, see B. m. 53 and 54), because for 
 the second, the designed consequence, the particle 'Iva was employed (according to 
 what was said above, see 40, 43 sqq. pp. 235 sqq. ) by many writers, particularly .Tohn ; 
 hence, as matter of fact, this Evangelist no longer uses S>im with the Infin., and 
 even So-re with the Indie, (after oBtb) occurs only once in his writings, sea 
 above. 
 
S 139.] THE MOODS. 245 
 
 eTTiXajScDvrai avrov Xoyov, wcrre rrapaSoivai avTov ry aip)(fj. Matt. XV. 33 
 also is to be taken most naturally in this sense. 
 
 G. Declarative Sentences (with 8ti). 
 B. § 139, m. 58 sqq. ; H. §§ 733 sq. ; C. §§ 643 sq. ; D. §§ 590 sq. j J. §§ 800 sq. ; G. §§ 69 sq. 
 
 The only particle which belongs under this head is oti ; for 51 
 £0? is always to, be translated hy how. The Optative as the 
 Mood of indirect assertion is in this connection completely 
 excluded, because in its stead the Indicative everywhere 
 makes its appearance, as Matt. xvi. 20, 21, etc. But even this 
 use of the Indicative with oti is frequently not observed, as 
 the N. T. writers (like the Seventy) prefer to introduce dis- 
 courses ill the direct form, even twice or thrice iu succession 
 in one and the same sentence. This is done either without 
 the intervention of a particle (in which case the more recent 
 editions [but not Tdf.'s 8th] begin the clause with a capital 
 letter), or (after a mode in use even by the Greeks, B. m. 61 ; 
 G. § 79) by means of the particle oti, whicli is then redundant. 
 (In this case recent editions [except Treg.'s] do not use the 
 capitals,! and also put no stop after oti, — a procedure whicli 
 sometimes where the third Person is used, or the same Person 
 in both the dependent and the leading clause, causes am- 
 biguity.) 
 
 Examples occur in great number everywhere : of direct discourse 
 twice in succession, John i. 1 5 Ae-yajv OiItos riv ov et-n-ov 'O ip)(6jj,€vo<; 
 yeyovev etc. (see on this § 151, Id) p. 377), v. 12 ^pmrijcrav Tts icTTiv 
 6 avOpcuTTo^ 6 enriav croi ^Apov Kal TrepnrixTeL ; of both kinds (with and 
 without OTt), John x. 36 i/xels Xeytn on' /3A.acr<^7j;u.ers, otl (becai~se) 
 eliTov Yio'! Tov 6eov dfi,i (see on this § 141, 1 p. 272) ; of direct dis- 
 course three times, John x. 34 airtxpiOrf Ovk ta-riv yeypa/A/ievov on • 
 iyi) £«ra ©eot ecrre ; further, of otl before the 2d Pers. Sing, of the 
 Imperative, John ix. 11; xiv. 9 (cod. Sin., on which Tdf. remarks, 
 tale on non inferri sed expelli solet), before the 3d Pars., 2 Thess. iii. 10. 
 
 The Subjunctive as the dependent Mood is impossible (because 
 experience has already decided the matter, cf. B. m. 58), and hence 
 where it occurs it must be taken as the Subjunctive in independent 
 clauses (see above, 2 sqq. p. 203), as Rom. iii. 8 <^acriV rive's ij/iSs Xiyav 
 OTI, IT o 11^ crdi fjiev to. KaKo., Iva ikO-g to, dya^oi (conjunct, adhort. or 
 dubit. ; upon the construction see further § 141, 3 p. 274) ; or it takes 212 
 the place of the Future, according to N. T. usage, e.g. after ov p,rj: 
 
 1 On the other hand, if 8ti is written with a capital, it belongs to the direct 
 iisoiiirse itself, e.g. 1 Cor. xii. 15, etc. Cf below, 59 p. 252. 
 
246 6- DECLAKATIVE SENTENCES. [§ 139 
 
 Matt. V. 20 Aeyo), on ov /jltj iuriXB-qTe £ts Tr/v ^aaiXeiav tCiv ovpaviov, Mark 
 xiv. 25 Aeyo) vjjuv, on ovKen ov /j-rj ttLio, etc. 
 
 Respecting Iva after etTreii/ and other verba dicendi see 42 note p. 237. 
 
 B. § 139, m. 59, 60; C. § 639; J. § 801, 8. 9; G. § 113, NN. 7, 9; § 56. 
 
 B2 After fJu/xv^n-Kecrdai and the like, our that is only given in the N. T. 
 by oTt (not ore) . On the other hand, c i is frequently found instead 
 of on after Oavfia^eLv, as Mark xv. 44 IltXaTos idavfiacrev, el ^Stj 
 riBv-qKOi, 1 John iii. .1 3 /i-^ 6av/xa Jctc, 6t ixiaei v/xS.'s 6 /cdcrftos. Similar 
 examples are Luke xii. 49 ri diXw, d ijSiy h/rj^B-q (see above, 10 p. 215), 
 Acts xxvi. 8 S.TTUTT0V KpLverai Trap vp.7v, et o deos veKpoifs iyeipei ; Heb. 
 vii. 15 KardSijAdi/ ItTTLv, et . . . avUrTorai, lepcvis erepoi; (cf. VS. 14). 
 
 B. § 139, m. 61; H. §743b.; C. §644; J. §802, Obs. 8; G. §79. 
 
 B3 Among the examples of on before direct discourse may also be 
 reckoned the case where, instead of a construction by means of the 
 verbal adj. or the Impersonal Set, the Imperative itself makes its 
 appearance, as 2 Thess. iii. 10 iraprj-yyeXXo/xci/ i/uv, on ti tis oi 6eXei 
 ipyd^ecrOai,, /iwySe iaOdrw (cf. the example from Thucyd. in B. m. 36 — 
 m. 61 in ^he last ed. ; the similar case with ei fi-rj in § 149, 4 p. 359; 
 and in 42 above, p. 237, the other construction with ha and the 
 Subjunct.). 
 
 Respecting the redundant on before the Ace. with Infln. (Acts 
 xxvii. 10) see § 151, 10 p. 383. 
 
 H. Intekeogative Sentences, Direct and Indirect. 
 B. §139, m. 62sqq.; H. §§824sqq.; J. §§871sqq.; G. §§63sqq. 88. 
 
 B4 The practice just mentioned of quoting language almost 
 exclusively in the direct form, has as its natural consequence 
 that the form of the direct interrogative sentence has 
 become by far the predominant one. In order not to scatter 
 too much our treatment of a topic of great importance lor the 
 comprehension of the N. T. writings, we will bring together 
 here into a single summary the entire N. T. usage (in other 
 respects as well as mood) of both kinds of sentence. 
 
 Direct interrogative clauses which have not already an 
 interrogative pronoun, as rt?; to; or an interrogative adverb, 
 as 770)9, TTou, etc., at their head, are, as is well known, in both 
 the ancient languages (contrary to the usage of German and 
 other modern tongues) generally introduced by an inter- 
 rogative particle. But in the popular or colloquial language, 
 which designates interrogative clauses plainly enough merely 
 by the interrogative accent, this aid was slighted, as a rule, 
 
§ 139.1 THE MOODS. 24T 
 
 even by the Greeks and Romans; and its frequent use was 
 probabl}- characteristic ratlier of the literary language. 
 
 Agreeably to what has been said, the language of the N. T. has 
 employed, in by far the majority of cases, the popular mode of in- 
 troducing interrogative clauses without an interrogative word. 
 And tliis it has done not only (as happens for the most part in the 
 historical books) immediately after a verbum quaerendi in the fore- 213 
 going narrative, — as John ix. 19 rjpuyrrja-av ovrds laTiv o vios i/iuiv, 
 ov ArytTC on rvc^Xos iyewqdrj ; v. 6 \iya ai™ ■ SeXeis vyvq's ytvicrdai ; — 
 but also (as often happens in the epistolary style, in protracted 
 arguments, etc.) without a preceding verbum quaerendi ; in which 
 case the presence of an interrogative clause, therefore, is only to be 
 discovered by the connection, as I Cor. ix. 11; 2 Cor. iii. 1, etc. , 
 Questions which expect an affirmative answer are, at least as a rule, 
 distinguished by a direct negative {ov, oixh ovhe, oi8eis, etc.) placed 
 at the very beginning of the clause ; as, John xi. 8 oixi SaJSexa wpaC 
 eicnv TYJ's fifiipat; ; vii. 42 ov)^ r) ypa^r) airtv on etc. This form of 
 question is especially characteristic of Paul, who accordingly, assuming 
 tacitly the affirmative answer of the persons addressed, often uses several 
 such interrogative clauses in succession, as 1 Cor. ix. 1 sqq. 
 
 The practice of distinguishing the interrogative clause by 55 
 an interrogative particle, although the less frequent, is 
 yet not an uncommon, practice ; but the manner of doing so, 
 or the choice of the particle, deviates more or less from 
 ordinary usage. 
 
 The particle a pa (formerly employed most frequently), cor- 
 responding to the Latin -ne and by no means always expecting a 
 negative answer, appears, at the most, only in Luke's writings (Gospel 
 xviii. 8 ; Acts viii. 30) ; for in Gal. ii, 17 6i 8c . . . evpiO-qp-iv aixapTrnXoX, 
 apa Xpio-Tos djCiapTtas Suxkovos the form apa (as invariably with Paul) 
 is with Lchm. and many interpreters to be preferred, but the clause 
 nevertheless to be taken as a question : ' is then, forsooth, after all, 
 Christ' etc. ; cf. the quite similar clauses, yet without the interrogative 
 form, in ii. 21 ; iii. 29 ; v. 11 etc. 1 Cor. xv. 18, and on the apa, often 
 used thus in questions by Greek authors, Plato, Gorg. p. 477, etc. 
 On the whole, perhaps as respects the N. T. writers the conjecture 
 has considerable probability, that a precise distinction (which more- 
 over even in Greek authors it is hard to carry out, see Ph. Buttm. 
 on PI. Charm. 15; Ellendt, Lex. Soph, sub voce; Klotz ad Devar. II 
 160 sqq.) between the two particles has been lost sight of; hence, too, 
 the illative particle so often stands at the beginning, see § 149, 18 
 p. 371. 
 
248 H. INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES. , [§ 139. 
 
 Very common, on the other hand, is a question (anticipating 
 a negative answer) by means of the Particle /u.i? (see B. 
 § 148, 5 ; H. § 829 ; C. § 687 ; D. p. 559 ; J. § 873, 4 ; G. p. 
 84) forwliich /i?jTt is often used ; Bng. surely not? or simply, 
 perhaps, possibly (spoken in a doubting tone). 
 
 Matt. vii. 9, 10 /x-^ \i6ov . . . /j-ij 6(j>iv cinSwcrct ai™; surely he will 
 not give Mm a stone . . . a serpent ? Luke xvii. 9 /irj e)(ei x^P'" '''V 
 SovXm ; is he perchance -thankful to the bondman ? vi. 39 ix-qn Swarat 
 ■nj^A.05 Tv<t>X.6v oStjjuv ; in reply to which we have again a question, 
 but with oixh nonne ? Matt. xxvi. 22, 25 /i?Jn eyiji €C/j,i, pafi/Si : 
 (ahhough the answer follows, crv eiTras), Mark ii. 19; Acts vii. 28; 
 Rom. iii. 5; Jas. iii. 12; and often in John: iii. 4; vi. 67, etc. (cf. 
 . also 62 p. 256). This form of interrogation we must conceive of as 
 having sprung originally from an indirect construction, as ' I hope, 
 am of the opinion, that he surely will not ' etc. ; and this thought 
 several ancient mss. suggest immediately after a question of the sort 
 214 in Luke xvii. 9 by the addition ov SokG. Peculiar to Paul is the use, 
 instead of the answer to such questions, of the well-known negatory 
 formula (Gen. xliv. 7 ; Luke xx. 16) fjutj ■yivono, as Rom. iii. 4, 6; ix;. 
 14; xi. 1, 11. 
 
 If in such questions the predicate is negatiyedbesides, that 
 can be done according to the rule (§ 148, 11 p. 354) only by the 
 direct negation ov ; the question requires then an affirmative answer 
 {nonne), as Rom. x. 18 /a^ ovk ijKovaav; /Jievovvyc etc., 19 jxr] 'IcrpaijX 
 oiK eyvoi ; npuiro'; M.wvcrrj's Xiyei etc., 1 Cor. ix. 4, 5, 6 ; xi. 22. 
 
 Quite in the same way arose, from the form of indirect inter- 
 rogation, the direct interrogative sentences (particu- 
 larly frequent in the writings o'f Luke) with el preceding. 
 Then el is superfluous, precisely as ort was in the declara- 
 tive sentences treated of in G. p. 245 ; and the usage, as in 
 that case, is to be accounted for by the constant tendency to 
 pass over into direct discourse. 
 
 The direct nature of such interrogative clauses becomes incontes- 
 tably evident from sentences like Luke xxii. 49 uirav • Kvpu, e i 
 iraTa^o/xev h p.a-)(a.Lpa. ; xiii. 23 Kvpie, d oXiyoi ol crM^o'/xevot ; Acts i. 
 6 ; xix. 2 eiTrei/ • ci TTvAixa ayiov eXaySere iruTTeuaavTe's ; xxi. 37 UaCAos 
 Xeyei • el efeo-riV |U.ot ewctc ti tt/dos a-i; xxii. 25 ; xxiii. 9 ; Matt. XX. 15 
 Tdf (where, however, Tdf in his 8th ed. has correctly altered ei again, 
 with codd. Vat. Sin. etc., into ij; the Lat. versions also give uniformly 
 either an or aut), Mark viii. 23 Tdf (after cod. Vat. ; in his 8th ed. 
 Tdf. reads again /SXeira after cod. Sin.) ; cf 56 p. 249. Hence we 
 may probably take without hesitation those clauses also as direct, 
 
§ 139.] THE MC ODS. 249 
 
 which externally differ in nothing from the form of the indirect ques- 
 tion (with €t whether), as Acts vii. 1 eiTrev o dpp^tepeiis • et apa. Tavra 
 owTu)? £;^et ; Matt. xii. 1 lirqpuirrjiiav aiiTOV XiyovTCi • el t^tcmv tow 
 a-d/B/iaariv depaTreveiv ; xix. 3. This usage is found, moreover, in the 
 Sept. also, e.g. Gen. xliii. 6 ; Judg. xiii. 11 ; 1 Sam. x. 24, etc., which 
 translates in this way the Hebr. n, which likewise stands before direct 
 questions and indirect, see Gesen. sub voce. 
 
 The particle ovkovv (B. §149 m. 18; H. §866 a.; C. § 687c.; 
 D. § 535; J. § 791 Obs.) in the single passage in which it occurs 
 (John xviii. 37) is not interrogative, but illative in reference to what 
 precedes ; but the clause (as above with apa) is an interrogative clause 
 of the first kind (cf. 54 p. 246) : ovkovv fSaaiXev? et a-v ; ergone rex es ? 
 thou art then (according to what thou sayest) a king ? 
 
 Direct double questions (without a material interrog- 56 
 atiye word, as rt'?, ttov, etc.) are properly marked, as with 
 us, only by the i] {or) in the second clause, consequently 
 merely by the tone, in the popular fashion spoken of 54 p. 246 ; 
 as. Matt. xi. B crii el 6 ip'Xp/Mevo^,.'^ erepov Trpoa^SoK&fiev ; Mark 
 xii. 14 e^ecTTW Souvat Krjvaov Kaiaapt, rj ov ; S&fiev, tj fir) Sufiev ; 
 Doubtful instances, with the pleonastic ei (65 p. 248) at the 
 beginning, are: Luke xiv. 3 Lchm. where Tdf. [Treg.], com- 
 paring the parallel passage Matt. xii. 10, have expunged el [Sin. 
 om.J, and Luke vi. 9 where all three editors have preferred 
 the form of an indirect question. 
 
 From strict double questions (i.e. those whose members mutually 
 exclude each other) thgse cases are to be carefully distinguished, 
 where to an antecedent question — instead of the answer, or in com- 
 pletion and continuation of the first question — a second is subjoined 
 and connected by rj. For example : after an interrogative clause 21ti 
 of the first kind (with ov). Matt. xii. 3 sqq. ovk aveyvwre, ti iTroLrjcnv . . . ; 
 ^ OVK aveyvwT€ iv tm v6p.<a etc., xx. 15 Lchm. [Tdf. Treg.J,(Tdf. [eds. 
 2, 7] d) ; after a question negatived by fii^ (55 p. 248), 1 Cor. ix. 8 
 fii) Kara avBpuyjrov ravra A.a\uj, ■^ koI 6 i/d;u.os ravra ov Xiyei ; 9 p-r] tcov 
 ^otbv p,iX.u T<3 ^€(3, •^ St' ■fip.a.i 7ravT(os Xcyet ; i. 13; Matt. vii. 1 6, etc. ; 
 after a double question. Gal. i. 10 apn avdpw-irov; TtdOio ^ tov 6e.6v ; r] 
 t,rjTu> avOpunroL^ apecrKuv ; The same particle (Ji) stands also, as an 
 does in Latin, with a simple antithetic question after a preced- 
 ing categoric clause ; as, Matt. xxvi. 53 ; 2 Cor. xi. 7 ; xiii. 5 ; 1 Cor. 
 S.W. 36 (where even the double rj involves no double question), etc. 
 
 Indirect interrogativ? clauses are dependent on a 57 
 verbum quaereiidi, diceiidi, cognoscendi, etc., which 
 
250 H. INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES [§139, 
 
 sometimes must first be educed from the predicate of the lead- 
 ing clause, or suppli id ; as, after iyivero (^CKoveiicLa iv avTol'i 
 (Luke xxii. 24), /SaXXoyre? KXijpov, rk tL aprj (Mark xv. 24), 
 ^v Tapa'xo'i, Ti apa 6 IleTpo'i iryivero (Acts xii. 18). They 
 divide themselves into two classes, according as they are 
 introduced 
 
 A. by a merely formal interrogative word, pointing out the 
 interrogative clause as such (num, whether). The interroga- 
 tive particle uniformly employed with simple, positive, inter- 
 rogative clauses is el, as Mark xv. 44 iwrjpcoTrjcrev avTov, ei 
 vaXai airkOavev, xv. 36 ISco/xev, el ep')(erai 'HXia^, John ix. 25 
 61 ajjMpToiX.o'i icTTiv, ovK olSa ; in negative clauses (whether not, 
 whether not perhaps) simply /a^ { /j-ij-ttotb) , as Luke iii. 15 
 SiaXoyt^Ofiivoiv TTcivTcov -irepl rov 'Iwavvov, firjirore auTO'; eirj 6 
 Xpia-To^ (with which may be compared the fj,i] after ^e-n-ere, 
 Spare, in 49 p. 242). 
 
 With indirect double questions the full form of interrogation 
 (usual with Greek writers) by means of the two particles Trdrepoi/ 
 . . . ^ appears but once viz. John vii. 1 7 yvuKrerai, irorepov ek tov 6eov 
 i(TTLV, 71 kyii air ifjuavrov XaXS. Elsewhere cere is used instead even 
 twice, as 2 Cor. xii. 3 eire iv (rutfj-an, eire X'^P'^ '■""'' o'wfjLaro^, ovk ol8a, 
 6 Oeo's oiSev ; or the question is resolved into two, as 2 Cor. xii. 2 
 ctT£ €1/ crutp-an, ovk otSa, clre cktos crw/iaTos, ovk olSa. In by far the 
 majority of double questions, however, the direct interrogative 
 form is chosen (with the simple -ij in the second clause), see 66 p. 249. 
 
 B. by a material interrogative word, i.e. by a pronoun or 
 a pronominal adverb of place, time, manner. The language, 
 as is well known, created interrogative words (in the form of 
 relatives) for this special purpose, such as oo-rt?, 6iroio<;, ovov, 
 oTTOTe, oTTCi)?, Btc, wliicli it employs as substitutes for the simple 
 relative forms 6'?, oto<;, «?, etc., in designating indirect inter- 
 rogative clauses. As, however, at all times, even in indirect 
 questions, the direct interrogative pronouns rk, •rrolo'i, etc., 
 very frequently make their appearance, this is the case in a 
 still higher degree in the N.T., owing to the strong inclination 
 of its authors to employ direct forms of statement. 
 
 21 3 Examples of both kinds are found everywhere : as, after oTSa indi- 
 rect interrogation, oISci/ Jlv ^et'av ^X^re ; oirav iyiii vTrdyui oiSarc ; ei8v2a 
 o yiyovev ; ovk olSaTe oioi Trvevp.aTO's iare, etc. direct interrogation, ovk 
 ^8« Tts i(7TW ; Ti Xeyets c 'vk olSev ; ovk ol&a irov iOrjKav, irodev ^\6ov, Ttola 
 
S139.] THE MOODS. 261 
 
 q/j-ipif 6 Kvpios epxerai ; and in connection with the familial construction 
 (§ 151, 1 p. 377) otSd (re Tis £tj ovK oTSa v/uSs tto^ci/ icrri ; with other 
 predicates, as Matt. vi. 28 KwraitdOere to. Kpiva ttSs av^dvova-iv, Luke 
 Xll. 36 npocrSfy^o/xivoi tov Kvpiov iroTe avaAwcnj etc. Both species are 
 united in one sentence, as 1 Tim. i. 7 ju,-^ voovvtk p,-qT€ a Xiyovmv iJ.riTi 
 irepi TLvoiv Sca/^e^SatoCi'Tai, — a combination which in Greek authors also 
 is not rare ; see the examples in Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 57 ; Schneidewin 
 on Soph. Oed. Tyr. 71. 
 
 Remark. It is to be note^ as a deviation from the regular usage 
 (which, however, occurs likewise even in Greek authors) that the 
 preference for the direct interrogative form is so great, that this form 
 is not only substituted for the ordinary indirect question, but is some- 
 times chosen even where according to rule only a pure relative 
 clause is allowed to stand. But this occurs only after predicate ideas 
 which have a certain affinity with verba sentiendi etc., so that the un- 
 derlying thought can or must be traced back to the form of an indirect 
 question. This takes place most frequently both in Greek authors 
 and in the N. T. after the verb exEt" {ovk (-x^iv), as Matt. viii. 20 ovk 
 e)(ei TTov -T'^v Ke^iaXrjv kXLvq (equiv. to he knows not etc.), Mark viii. 
 1, 2 OVK i)(Ova'LV Tt (fxiyoicrcv, TJuke xii. 17 ovk e)(u) ttov cruvd^u) Toy's Kap- 
 7rov9. Cf. 1 Cor. XV. 2 tivl \6y<a eii^yyeXitra/fiji/ vluv el /carcp^CTC. On 
 the other hand the construction is regular in Luke xi. 6 ovk exoi 8 ira- 
 paOrjO-uy airsu, Heb. viii. 3 9(€tv Tt o irpofTtveyKrj. The indirect question 
 after this predicate is the more admissible, as exew is very often con- 
 strued with the Infinitive, after the manner of verba sentiendi 'etc. 
 {ovk exova-iv diraTroSowai aoi Luke xiv. 14, etc.) ; hence both modes 
 of expression are united: Acts xxv. 26 aarjiaXh n ypdij/m ovk txoi • 
 . . . oTTus (Txu) Ti. ypdijjw. After the analogy of this verb still other 
 verbs are found construed in the N. T., as Matt. x. 19 So^ijcrtTat vixlv 
 Tt XaX-^o-cVe (equiv. to ye will have etc.), Luke xvii. 8 iTOLp-aa-ov ri 
 Benrvrjcrui (brachylogically equiv. to that I may have what etc.). Cf. on 
 this topic Bhdy. p. 443 ; and among the passages from Greek authors, 
 Plut. Mor. p. 606 C. <tv tL Kpka.% \iyei<i irotets, ov -ri vow ex^av uvOpuyTro^, 
 Callim. Ep. 30 (and Bentley's note), Schol. on Soph. Oed. Col. 3. Jn 
 the Sept. also the usage is not unknown, as Deut. xxix. 18 ; Ps. 
 xxxix. 6. 
 
 Moreover, the following passages come into consideration here : 
 Matt. xxvi. 62 and Mark xiv. 60 ovSh dTroKpivy, tI ovtol crov Kartj.ix.ap- 
 Tvpovaiv ; Hardly is Tt to be taken here in a purely relative sense 
 (equiv. to S, Vulg. ad ea quae). That something must be supplied 
 here is obvious, as a direct reference of Tt to ovhiv ii impossible. It 
 is most simple to supply a verbal idea like to hear, so that the abbre- 
 viated thought if rendered graimmatical'.y complete would run : an- 
 
252 H. INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES. [§ 139. 
 
 swerest thou nothing (hearing) what these witness against thee ? cf. 
 § 151, 25 p. 395. That the ancients, too, construed the passage in 
 this way is apparent from the manner in which the Evang. Nicod. 
 (Pars I. B) 2. 1 as it were paraphrases the words : kiyu 6 XliXaros 
 
 'A K O 1J € 1 S Tt OVTOL CTOV KaTafUXpTVpOVfTlV, Kol OVK aTTOKpLVT]. ActS xill. 
 
 25 Tdf. [eds. 2,7] ri'va (Lchm. [Tdf. Treg. cod. Sin.] rl) /xe vTrovoelre 
 etvat, OVK ei/n. cyw. Here the first clause in its dependence on the lead- 
 ing clause is decidedly relative, hence according to rule instead of riva 
 strictly ov ought to have stood ; but, instead of this, the first clause 
 has retained the form which it would have had if not in dependence, 
 217 viz. the form of an interrogative clause. Obviously the placing of the 
 dependent clause before the leading clau'se occasioned the anomaly. 
 Similar is Jas. iii. 13 rt's o-o^os koL tTruTTrifiMv iv v/juv, Sei^drto ra ipya 
 aiToii etc. Here the first clause is commonly taken as an independent 
 direct question, and accordingly an interrogation mark placed after 
 ijLttv. But the disruption of clauses produced in this way, as well as 
 the wholly unprovoked asyndetic transition to Seifttrco without any sub- 
 ject, renders it probable that the two claiuses are to be separated (with 
 Lchm.) only by a comma. Then an inversio structurae (cf. §-151, 8-11 
 pp. 381 sqq.) has taken place here as in the preceding example. The 
 direct interrogative form of the first clause, occasioned by its precedence 
 and retained by the immediate proximity of such a predicate as SetfaTO), 
 passed (owing to the construction that follows) naturally over into the 
 force of the kindred relative clause ; (cf. the Germ, wer when it pre- 
 cedes). Lastly, Mark xiv. 36 dW ov ri eyi) 6eXui, dXka tL crv is trans- 
 lated iti the Vulg. by the relative: quod volo, and accordingly a pre- 
 dicate like jivicrBm was as a rule supplied. But neither the meaning 
 nor the form of the sentence permits such an addition. On the con- 
 trary, the direct negation (ov) as well as the pronoun rt render an 
 ellipsis in harmony with an indirect interrogation (Fritzsche, quaeritur; 
 Meyer, the question is) apparently more justifiable. 
 59 But indubitable instances of the opposite case also occur, viz. in 
 which the Relative or indirect form of interrogation is employed 
 in a decidedly direct interrogative sentence. To be sure, 
 all constructions of the sort (like most of the preceding examples) are 
 founded in a faulty or negligent treatment of the forms of phraseology 
 established by the literary language ; and hence the occurrence par- 
 ticularly of this second case in native Greek writers has been emphat- 
 ically disputed (see Bhdy. p. 443 ; Schaef. on Demos, p. 1199). Nev- 
 ertheless, after what Lobeck (ad Phryn. p. 67) has adduced, all such 
 irregularities in earlier writers can hardly be set aside by arbitrary 
 emendation ; and to supply a verbum sentiendi and the like in every 
 individual case, would amount to nothing else than giving the force of 
 
§ 139.]- THE MOODS. 253 
 
 direct question to the Relative form (see Ph. Buttm. on Plat. Meno. 
 G). Thus in the N. T. an instance, textually quite unquestionable, is 
 Matt. XX vi. 50 ein-cv avroi- 'Eraipe, e^' o irapei. ; (Vulg. ad quod venisti ?) . 
 Since elsewhere, neither in the N. T. nor, according to Lobeck's ex- 
 press testimony, in profane authors also is any example to be found of 
 the simple relative so used (but only of the compound oo-ti9^, the 
 interpreters have objected to taking this €<^' o in the sense of eVl tL, and 
 sought to remove the irregularity of the expression by the assumption 
 of an aposiopesis ; but this here would be likewise irregular (cf. § 151 
 V. p. 396), and is quite at variance also with the character of the 
 [lassage, in which there is no motive for leaving the thought incom- 
 plete. We reach the natural and only congruous interpretation of the 
 words solely by the assumption of the faulty use of o in the sense of 
 an interrogatory exclamation, — a use, however, which does not seem 
 to be more faulty than the use of rk spoken of in 58 p. 251, and in 
 view of the examples which follow is by no means without analogy. 
 
 'H \ I K o s is loosely used in an interrogative exclamatory sense in 
 Jas. iii. 5 tSoii, rjXiKov ■n-vp rjXiicfiv vX-qv avaiTTU. Cf. the Homeric usage 
 in B. §139, m. 35 a. p. 373. 
 
 In particular, however, is to be traced to the later use of the rel. 21 i 
 pron. oo-Tts in direct questions (see Lobeck and cf. Apollon. Adv. p. 
 550) the fact that often in the N. T. o,tl in the sense of ti or 8 to, rt 
 wherefore ? (Tdf. [so Treg.] writes it then without the diastole ort) 
 stands at the head of a direct question ; see Lchm. praef. p. xliii. ; 
 Epist. Barn. pp. 16, 18, 20 ed. Dress. The passages are the follow- 
 ing : Mark ix. 11 iirripiiyruiv Xe^ovre^ ■ O, ti Xeyovcrtv ol ypa/i/xaTeis, OTt 
 'HA.t'av Set IXOiiv TrpCtrov ; 28 eTrr/pdniv airbv • '0,ri Tj/xeLSOvK ■IjSvviqd-ijiJ.ev 
 eK^aXelv avro (Euthym. : to o, ti avrl tov S i a tI etc., which is actually 
 given by several mss. see Tdf.'s crit. note), Mark ii. 16 Tdf. [Treg. J 
 "O, Tt fiera Tu)y afxapTwXwv iaOUi KoX iriva; Probably also John viii. 
 2') etTTEv o 'If/(Toi)s ■ T^v o.p-)^rjv o, Tt /cat XaXSt vp,iv ; Commonly this 
 clause is taken not as a question, but by construing oTt as a pure rela- 
 tive. But even the ancient Greek interpreters took o, Tt here in the 
 sense of Sto, Tt, which best suits the passage ; see on the whole passage, 
 which is exegetically very difficult, tucke's Com. ,"0, Tt is found 
 besides as a noteworthy variant in Mark ii. 7. Matt. vii. 14 also must 
 be taken into consideration. Here Tdf. has restored the original read- 
 ing of the Vat. codex [and Sin.J, confirmed also by Origen, on arrevT] 
 fj TTvXr] etc., and has not treated the clause as a question, but taken the 
 OTt as parallel to the first oVt in the 13th vs. in the sense oi for. The 
 most natural sense, however, is given by the old reading Tt [so Lchm. 
 Treg.J with the force of an exclamation (Vulg. quam), although else- 
 where, in the N. T. at least, ti is not used in this way ; see Meyer. If 
 
254 H. INTERROGATIVE SENTENCES. [§139 
 
 the reading on is genuine, this also (in view of the use just treated of, 
 and that of the Sept. immediately following) may be taken in an ex- 
 clamatory sense. Yet, owing to the want of precedents from other 
 tjuarters, a positive decision in this passage cannot be given just yet. 
 
 In the Sept. also the use of on in the sense of Sia ti is found ; as, 
 1 Chron. xvii. 6 'O, rt ovk wKoSofiTJo-aTc /not oIkov KeSpivov ; compared 
 with the parallel passage in 2 Sam. (vii. 7) tva ti ovk (UKoSo/AijKare etc. ; 
 and the Heb. rr? , which in 2 Sam. vi. 20 and Cant. vii. 6 is translated 
 by Ti (with exclamatory force), is rendered in Jer. ii. 36 by o,ti (in 
 the same signification) : o,ti KaTe<^pdi'i;cras o-c^dSpa tov SeurepScrat ras 
 oSou's a-ov, cf. also Herm. Vis. iii. 10 sub fin., Evang. Nicod. xiv. 3. On 
 the combination ri on see § 149, 3 p. 358. 
 
 60 As respects Mood, both with direct and indirect questions 
 the construction with the Indicative is by far the most com- 
 mon. As this usage, which again springs from the predilection 
 for direct forms of statement (hence the Present Indie, is so 
 often used even in narration after historical tenses), is ren- 
 dered sufficiently familiar by classic Greek, only a few exara- 
 ples need be- given here : Luke vi. 7 irapeTrjpovvTo avrov, el ev 
 Tw aa^jScLTcp Bepairevet, John x. 6 ovk eyvoocrav Tiva fjv a eXaXet, 
 ix. 25 ; Acts x. 18 eirwddvovro el Hifiav evOdhe ^evi^erat, Mark 
 viii. 23 Lchm. [Tdf. Treg.j. Respecting Luke xi. 35 see 
 above, 49 p. 243. In dependent discourse, consequently, the 
 Indicative in most of the N. T. authors takes completely the 
 place of the Optative, which in this case (according to what 
 
 :219 was said above, 11 p. 215) still appears only in the writings of 
 Luke: Gospel i. 29 SieXoyC^ero 7roTa7ro<i eirj, iii. 15; viii. 9; 
 XV. 26 ; xviii. 36 ; xxii. 23 ; Acts ii. 12 Sin. ; xvii. 11 ; xxv. 20 ; 
 xxi. 33 Lchm. [Tdf. Treg.j. See furtlier 62 below, p. 256. 
 
 The mood of subjective opinion which in Greek authors so often 
 comes into use in these clauses, viz. theOptative with av, is found 
 (agreeably to 17 p. 217) likewise only in Luke: in direct question, 
 Acts xvii. 18; viii. 31, in ii^direct, Luke i. 62; vi. 11 ; ii. 46; 
 Acts V. 24; X. 17; according to Tdf.'s text [eds. 2, 7] also ii. 12; 
 xvii. 20 ; xxi. 33 ; as a variant in Luke xv. 26 [Treg.] ; xviii. 36. 
 
 61 On the other hand, after what has been said in 11 p. 215, 
 and 18 p. 218, it will be easily understood that most of tiie 
 remaining N. T. writers give admission in these sentences, in 
 addition to the Indicative, to the construction with the Sub- 
 j u n cti ve ; here therefore in the form of tlie Conjunct, dubita- 
 itjvus or deliberativus (2 p. 208). This Subjunctive construe- 
 
§ 139.] THE MOODS. 255 
 
 tiou they employ both with direct and indirect questions ; 
 particularly, too, after historical tenses, where classic usage 
 would certainly have availed itself of the Optative with or 
 without av. 
 
 That this Subjunctive is interchanged with the Put. Indic- 
 ative has already been remarked, 2 p. 208. Still more fre- 
 (juently, however, the fluctuation of the mss. (and editions), 
 often alluded to, between tlie forms (externally diSering but 
 slightly) of the 1st Aor. Subjunct. and the Fut. Indie, may be 
 observed here also. 
 
 As the examples of this Subjunctive in direct questions have already 
 been given in 2 p. 208, we will only exhibit here (by adducing a 
 numbiT of passages) the extent of the usage in indirect interroga- 
 tion (yet commonly by means of the direct interrogative word) : 
 
 a) The Subjunctive, after leading tenses : Matt. vi. 25 /iij /iept/Avare 
 tL (jxiyriTe, xv. 32; viii. 20; Mark vi. S6 ; viii. 1, 2; xiii. 11 ; Luke 
 xii. 5, 11, 22, 29; John xii. 49, etc.; after historical tenses: Mark 
 ix. 6; xiv. 1, 11 e^^ret ttw avrov -n-apaSoi (see 37 p. 233), 14, 40; 
 Luke xxii. 2, 4; Acts iv. 21, etc. 
 
 b) The Future Indicative, after leading tenses : Matt. xxiv. 3 ; 
 Mark xiii. 4 ; 1 Cor. vii. 1 6 ; after historical tenses (which takes 
 place again a-; in 5.5 p. 248, 60 p. 254, in consequence of the discourse 
 passing over into the direct form) : John xxi. 19 ; Mark iii. 2 [Tdf reads 
 the Pres.J, with which, according to § 137, 10 p. 203, also the passages 
 with (pxofxaL, virdyui and similar Presents may be reckoned, as Luke 
 xvii. 20 ; Mark xiii. 35 ; John iii. 8, etc. Cf. Eph. v. 15 ; 1 Cor. iii. 10. 
 
 c) Both forms in one sentence: Matt. x. 19 [Tdf Treg. cod. Sin. 
 Subjunct. bis]. The recent editors are divided between the two 
 forms in Mark ix. 6 [yet Treg. Tdf. now Subjunct. with Lchm. ; so 
 cod. Sin.J, Rom. viii. 26 [all now Subjunct., so cod. Sin.], 1 Cor. vii. 
 32 sq. [ditto] ; and moreover the mss. vary in many passages, as 
 Matt. viii. 20; x. 19; Mark xi. 18; Luke xii. 36; xix. 48; Phil. i. 
 22. etc. 
 
 The clauses that belong under this head with ottjus after such predi- 
 cates as ^rjTEiv, (TVfjLJ3ov\iov TTOieiv, Trapatrjpeiv, etc., have already been 
 included in the previous sections (8 p. 214, 37 sqq. p. 233 sqq.). 
 
 B. § 139, m. 66; J. § 877 Obs. 5 ; U. p. 158. 220 
 
 Sometimes in Greek a clause placed after a leading clause is yet to 62 
 be regarded as dependent on a verbum sentiendi understood, like 
 the Homeric at kc rvxinfju, ai xe TiiOrjTai (see reff.), the prosaic iav ttojs, 
 the Latin si forte, the Germ, ob etwa, i(to see) tDhether possibly etc. 
 
256 GENERAL EEMAEKS ON THE MOODS. [§133 
 
 Several corresponding constructions connected with various conjunc- 
 tions are found in the N. T., commonly with the Subjunctive or 
 the Future in its stead, in Luke (after historical tenses) with the 
 Optative also. An example with el Kai and the Subjunct. has 
 already been mentioned 22 p. 221 : Phil. iii. 12 Sluikoi, d Kat KaTaXd/3ai; 
 further, with ei tto)?: Phil. iii. l\{ijviJ,ix,optj>it,6ii,evo';), ei ttcos KaravT^cra) 
 £ts T-qv i^avda-Tacriv (probably also a Subjunctive), Rom. xi. 14 ttjv Sia- 
 Koviav JJ.OV Sofa^co, e? ttms Trapat,ir]\i!>r(a fiov rrjv crdpKa kol cruxrm Tivas e^ 
 iiurojc. Acts xxvii. 12 (^idevro ^ovXrjv dva^O'^vai) , ei ttids SwotvTO irapa- 
 X£i/xd(Tai ; with el a. pa: Mark xi . 13 ISliiv crvKrjv ^X.9ev, d apa ti €u- 
 pT^a-u Iv airfi, Acts xvii. 27 (^ivoiria-cv etc.), £( apa yt tprj\a(f>ri(T€iav airbv 
 KOI evpoiiv. 
 
 Under this head belongs also the clause with the negative interrog- 
 ative jxr] TTOTc (5.5 p. 248) and the Subjunct. 2 Tim. ii. 25 Set t^ttiov 
 elvai . .. , p.ri irore Siuj; (better Sui, Tdf. [Treg. Sin. ?J Sco?; ; cf. 37 riote 
 p. 233) avTOK o 6«6? ficTOLvoLav i.e. waiting to see whether God may 
 not perchance give etc. ; as well as the similar constructions after 
 Scla-Oai to pray: Acts viii. 22 8e),'6jjTi tov 6tov, d apa a(j)€6-^creTat 
 croi etc. Rom. i. 10 Seop.evo's, d ttw? ySr/ ttotc cvoSco^Tjcro/tat. 
 
 Gesteeal Remarks ok the Moods. 
 B. § 139, m. 67; H. §§ 728. 729; C. § 617; J. §§ 410-414; G. App. I. 
 
 63 From the entire course of the preceding exposition of the 
 use of the Moods in the N. T., we derive witli confidence the 
 four following particular conclusions : 
 
 1) That the law respecting consecutlo temporum so called, 
 (ill Greek more correctly modorurn), viz. that in dependent 
 clauses leading tensesare followed by tlie Subjunctive, histori- 
 cal tenses by the Optative, does not apply at all to the great 
 majority of the N. T. writings, and retains but a limited appli- 
 cation even in the writings of Luke. In Luke the Optative 
 is sjtill recognized as the dependent mood after historical 
 tenses only in certain conditional sentences (24 p. 223), in indi- 
 rect question (60, 62 p. 253 sq.), and once after nrplv f/ (33 p. 
 231) ; but in all other dependent clauses it is no longer current. 
 
 2) That the Su. bjui.ctive (or its substitute the Future) 
 to a great extent supplies the place of the disappearing or 
 wanting Optative as a dependent mood, and also of the Opta- 
 tive with dv as the mood of subjective assertion (cf. 7, 8, 
 11, 18, 21, 29, 33, 34, 37 sqq., 61 sq.). 
 
 3) That the inclination, which begins to appear even in 
 221 classic authors, to substitute the form of direct discourse for 
 
§ 139.] THE MOODS. 257 
 
 the indirect — (agreeably to wiiich the clauses of transition to 
 indirect discourse often stand in the Indicative of that 
 tense which would have been employed in direct discourse) — 
 has come in the N. T. to possess still more general sway (see 
 21, 29, 36, 51, 60) ; and further, as the result of this, 
 
 4) That the discourse often bounds quite out of the indirect 
 form into the direct (see B. § 139, m. 69), — a transition 
 'which strictly speaking involves in every instance a variatio 
 structurce, and hence,, with other similar cases, will receive 
 particular consideration again under this heading below, § 151, 
 11 p. 385. Here belongs the frequent use of direct discourse 
 after oTt (51 p. 245), the less common direct interrogation 
 after el (55 p. 248), and the Imperative after iva and oti (37 
 p. 234, 53 p. 246). 
 
 The Imperative. 
 
 B. §139,m.72; H. § 723 ef. 710a.; C. §655 cf. 597; D. pp. 549 sqq. ; J. § 420 cf. 413, 2 ; 
 
 G. §§84sqq. of. p. 37. 
 
 Of the periphrastic modes of expressing the Imperative, the 64 
 categoric by means of the Future Indicative and the 
 direct negative ou is not uncommon in the N.T. Although 
 a similar construction occurs also in Greek writers, and else- 
 where too, owing to the close relationship between the two 
 forms of time (see Pritzsche on Matt. v. 48), yet the usage, so 
 far forth as the Imperative is actually in this way peri- 
 phrased, is in the N.T. at least derived from the Septuagint. 
 
 For we must here consider, a) that the construction occurs almost 
 exclusively in literal quotations from the 0. T. ; and b) that the 
 expression in these quotations is for the most part negative, which 
 is solely owing to the circumstance that the Imperative in Hebrew is 
 not negatived, but the Future is used instead (see Gesen. Lehrg. 771 
 [Gr. § 125, 3 c.]), and this subsequently was literally translated by the 
 Sept. ; e.g. oi <j>ov€vcreK, ov fi,ou)(ivcra<s Matt. v. 27,' ovk iKTreipdcreK Kvpiov, 
 ovK iTriBvix-qa-evs, etc. More rarely does this use of the Future occur 
 without a negation : and rather . in continuation of other Futures 
 already negatived (e.g. from the Sept. of Lev. xix. 12), as Matt. v. 33 
 (quotn.) OVK iiriopK-^aeK, a,TToSu>crws Se t(3 Kvpiia Toiis opKOv; crov, — or of 
 the Imperative, Matt. xix. 19 rlp-a tov Traripa /cat fJi,7jT4pa, kol ayain^a-eLi 
 Tov irXTjaLov etc. ; or with a certain difference of tone, as Matt. vii. 5 
 t/c/SaXe TTpSiTov . . . , Kcu Tore SiaySXe'i/'tts eK^aXav etc. (The un-negatived 
 
 ^ On the other hand, in free reference the common Grenk construction is em- 
 ployed : /ii) (poveiaris, iiii noixficys Mark x. 19; Luke xviii 20. 
 
258 THE IMPERATIVE. l§ UO. 
 
 Fifth Commandment is always in the Imperative : ti/ao tov iraripa 
 etc., side by side wich the other negatived ones in the Future, just as 
 in the Sept.) 
 65 Proui this Hebraistic circumlocution for the Imperative we 
 222 must carefully distinguish the classic Greek circumlocution, 
 externally quite the same, viz. also by means of the Future 
 negatived by ov, but in the form of a question; in this way 
 the Greek expressed not a negative (as in the preceding case) , 
 but a positive command. This circumlocution, favorite with 
 classic writers (see reff. and B. § 137 N, 6), is found however 
 but once, and that too in Acts xiii. 10 ov iravcrrj SuuTTpecpojv ra? 
 68ous' Kvpiov ; wilt thou not cease ? i.e. cease. 
 
 On the common periphrasis of the Imperative by means of the Aor. 
 Subjunct., and that peculiar to the N. T. by means of the elliptical 'iva, 
 see 6 p. 211 and 47 p. 241 ; and on the Imperative as a rhetorical 
 substitute for a hypothetical clause or a participle, see 28 p. 227 
 above and § 144, 2 p. 290, — after ha, oxn-e, on, Nos. 37, 50, 53. 
 
 The Ikpinitite. 
 B. § 140, 1 ! H. §§ 763, 764 ; C. § 663 ; D. §§ 584 sq. ; J. §§ 66^-666 ; G. Chap. V. 
 
 1 The Infinitive as the subject of a sentence with such predicates 
 as Set, KoXov icrnv, irpocrrjKei, etc., and further as the complement 
 of an incomplete predicate idea, as after the ideas to be wont, to 
 he able, to be willing, etc., is very common, and needs no further 
 illustration. As predicates with an Infin. following which 
 are especially current in the later or biblical language, we may 
 notice fi/reti' to seek, endeavor (this occurs even in Demosth., 
 e.g. Lept. p. 495, 497), a<^ievai, to permit (on the construc- 
 tion with the Subjunctive alone after ac^e? see § 139, 4 p. 210), 
 hehorai, iBodrj (cf. 4 below, p. 261) avTU> jvavai etc., for which 
 the Apocalypse prefers to let a clause with iva follow, ac- 
 cording to § 139, 43 p. 238). 
 
 It follows, from what was said § 139, 11 sqq. p. 215, that after the 
 ideas to request (with which in the N. T. lpu>TS,v belongs), to command, 
 to exhort, and the like, the Infinitive can indeed stand (most frequently 
 so, always in Greek style, in the writings of Luke ; as, with ipwrqv 
 Acts iii. 3, hiitrOai xxvi. 3, Trapaiv^v xxvii. 22, often after trapaKoKiiv, 
 also in Paul's writings, etc.), but in its stead, agreeably to Hellenistic 
 or Common Greek usage elsewhere, a periphrasis by means of the 
 Conjunction tvais wont to make its appearance. 
 
 On KkKivuv see § 141, 5 p. 275. 
 
§ 140.] THE INFINITIVE AFTER SUBSTS. AND ADJS. 259 
 
 B. §140, N. 1; H. §711; C. §§598.660; D. p.ESO; J. §408; G. p.38. 
 
 The Infinitive Future after verbs whose idea has ref- 2 
 erence to the Future is little used, viz. only a few times after 
 fieWeiv in the Acts. The N. T. language employed instead 
 either the Infin. Aorist (so especially after ekirlt.eiv') or the 
 Infin. Present (so almost always after fieXXeiv). Where the 
 future is to be designated more distinctly, on with the Indie. 
 Future regularly makes its appearance. 
 
 Examples of fi.eXXetv with the Present Infin. are found every- ^23 
 where, see the lexx. ; with the Future Infin. (icrecrBai) Acts xi. 28 ; 
 xxiii. 30 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] ; xxiv. 15 (25 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7]) ; xxvii. 10 ; 
 with the Aorist Infin. Acts xii. 6 ; Gal. iii. 23 ; Rev. iii. 2, 16 ; xii. 4; 
 Matt. XX. 22 Vat. « 
 
 Examples of the Aorist Infin. after iXiri^nv, and that too (ac- 
 cording to § 139, 20 p. 219) uniformly without av, are frequent; see 
 the lexx. The Future Infin. is found once as a variant of cod. B in 
 Acts xxvi. 7 ; on the other hand on with the Future Indicative occurs 
 in Acts xxiv. 26 ; 2 Cor. i. 13 ; xiii. 6 ; Philem. 22. 
 
 B. §140,2; H. §767; C. §663g.; D. §586; J. §667; G. §93. 
 
 The simple Infinitive dependent on a substantive or an } 
 adjective belongs to the rarer constructions of the N. T., 
 other constructions being as a rule preferred in its stead, eg. 
 iva with the Subjunct., &a-Te with the Infin. (see p. 244), ew to 
 followed by the Infin., the Infin. with rov (see below, p. 266 sq.). 
 
 The classic mode of expression with the simple Infin. is found most 
 fi'equently in the Ep. to the Heb. (cf. Introd. p. 1 sq.) ; as, iv. 1 xara- 
 XeiTro/xivr]^ eTrayyeXt'as fl(TtX6£iv (Vulg. introeundi) eis t^v KaTaTrauo-iv 
 airrov, vi. 10 ovk olSikos 6 6eo^, i-iriXa04<TOat rov epyov vfjiSiv (Vulg. Ut 
 obliviscatur), v. 11 Xo-yos Svo-ep/XT^i/cwos Xeyeiv (Vulg. ininterpretabilis 
 ad dicendum). Here belongs also the phrase Sira aKoveiv in Mark 
 and Luke ; in Matt. cod. Vat. [and in xiii. 9, 43 cod. Sin. also] omits 
 the Infin. adjunct ; so Tdf. also, [Treg. puts it in brackets]. 
 
 In other cases when the Infinitive stands after substantives 
 and adjectives, these latter constitute, togetlier with a verb of 
 some sort, an incomplete verbal idea of wliich tlie Infin. con- 
 tains the necessary complement Qlnfin. expletivus). 
 
 Thus, for example, )(p€iav ex'^ /SaTma-OTJvai, oTreXOeiv, ypa^nv, ypa- 
 <l>ea-OaL, etc., instead of the common 8a, ■7rpo<rqKeL followed by the Ace. 
 and the Infln., Matt. iii. 14; 1 Thess. iv. 9'; v. 1, etc., i$rj\dev Sdy/^a 
 
 1 In this passage authorities are equally divided between XP''"" 'X^'"'* (Rec. 
 Grsb. [Tdf. Treg. N*]), and xp'^"" ^xof-^" (Lchm.) ypi^tiv i/uv. Since the 
 
260 THE INFINITIVE. [§ 140. 
 
 ^apa KaurajQos (equiv. to K. eKcXevcrev) a.iroypd<f>ia-6ai iracrav rrjv oikov- 
 fih/riv Luke ii. 1, iS66-q rj xap« auTi; (equiv. to ixapia-drj or simply eSd^ij 
 see 1 p. 258) (.vayyMa-aa-Oai Eph. iii. 8, o^^iXh-r)^ larlv (equiv. to 
 otjivXeC) irotiya-oi Gal. v. 3, iyevero opfii] tZv lowSatW (equiv. to ot lov- 
 Satoi wpfiT^a-avTo) vftpitrai Acts xiv. 6, apKeroi ea-riv (equiv. to apKu) 6 
 irapeXrjXvOm XP°^°'> • • ■ Kareipyda-OaL 1 Pet. iv. 3. Hence the Infin. is 
 quite common after such predicates as i^ova-iav ix^iv (1 Cor. ix. 4, 5, 6 
 224 Lchm. [Tdf. Treg.l), Kaipbv ex^'v, Swards ei/it, oEvvarov iariv, iKui/ds 
 elfjii, iiova-ia (sc. iariv Rev. ix 10), as they all stand for the ideas to be 
 able, to be unable, to be in a condition, etc. After the same analogy, 
 but more free, is 1 Cor. vii. 39 (17 yvvrf) eXev&ipa icrrlv (5 BeXei. yap.-qdrivaL ; 
 further Sspa icrrlv with the Iniin. in Rom. xiii. 11 (Spa ^Srj 17/ia? i^ vttvov 
 iy€p6yjvai (Vulg. correctly : hora est surgere, not surgendi), Eev. xiv. 15 
 &pa. rikOo' 6eplcrai • erot/Aos d/ii, a|tds elfii etc. After all these predicates, 
 however, the other and above-mentioned constructions also were wont 
 more or less to appear instead of the simple Infinitive ; see above. 
 
 Remark. In Greek authors the syntactical license mentioned in 
 B. note 2 p. 384, viz. of letting a Genitive (a noun) and an Infinitive 
 (a verb) depend simultaneously upon one and the same substan- 
 tive, although the noun standing in the Gen. strictly speaking belongs 
 to the Infin. (and consequently ought to stand in the Ace), is by no 
 means rare (see Kiihner, ausf. Gr. [ed. 1] II. p. 610 [J. II. p. 642]). 
 An instance of it occurs in Rev. xi. 18 yjXOiv rj opyrj a-ov Kai 6 icaipos 
 Tuv v^Kpuiv KpidTjvaL Koi tovvai etc., consequently for the regular rjX&iv 
 6 Kaipb; rov tows vtKpov? KpiB^vai} Rom. ix. 21 e;^6i efoVCTiav toB 
 wrjXov iK rov avrov (f)vpa,paroi Troirjcrai etc. is of another sort ; here we 
 can either make rov nrjXov depend on tj>vpdp.aro^, or refer both words, 
 the noun and the verb, to e^ovtriW, yet so that the Infin. serves epexe- 
 getically to explain the substantive. 
 
 earlier reading is the more difficult on account of the Active Infin., and a com- 
 parison witli V. 1 (■YpiS,(t>faSai) may easily have occasioned the correction ^x'A'e'', 
 deWette and Tdf. have returned to it. The use of the Active Infin. for the Passive 
 is thoroughly established (cf. rh Siovra, elireii/ and the like, B. ^ 140, 2; J ^ 667, 
 obs. 5), and occurs accidentally with the same phrase xp^'"" ^X^'" {^^^ faUuwed 
 hy an Infin. with rov) in Heb. v. 12 xp^l"" eX^^e rov SiSio-Keiv ufias (if with the 
 majority we put a comma after tii^as, see 13 below, p. 268 nots As \pdav ix^iv 
 in the signification to need (which predominates here as in v. 1; hence in both 
 instances ^x^ ''f) according to § 132, 12 p. 164 takes the place of the impersonals 
 Seietc, it shares with them also the same constructions of nouns and verbs (i.e. 
 Genitive and simple Infinitive). 
 
 1 Very probably, in accordance with the style of the Apocalypse, the absolute 
 Accusative also which follows according to the Mss. [Sin, also] (Lchra. [Treg.]), 
 Toiis ni/cpoi/s Kai Tous ixiyihovs, is to be referred to the pervasive force of this leading 
 predicate (to be punished, judqed) ; since, Kaip6s being so far off, in itoad of the 
 Genitive the subject Accus. (§ 141) could or must now make its appearance. 
 
§ 140.] THE ARTICLE WITH THE INFINITIVE. 261 
 
 B. §140, 8; H. §765; C. §663^.; D. §607; J. §659; G. §97. 
 
 After complete predicate ideas also the simple Infinitive 4 
 (but always alternating with the periphrastic constructions 
 mentioned 3 p. 259) is still employed very frequently in the 
 N. T., as 'in classic authors, to express the design or de- 
 signed result (where in Latin the gerundial construction 
 is commonly used). 
 
 This occurs most frequently after verbs which express a motion 
 or direction whither (cf. below, 16y) p. 270), as ■^X.dofj.ev wpoa- 
 Kvvfjaai. Matt. ii. 2, rt efiJX^arc iSctv Matt. xi. 8 sq. ; Luke vii. 25 sq., 
 7r/J0€A.eucr£Tat enuTTp&fiai, KapSlai irarepuiv Luke i. 1 7, -^XOov KaraXvcraL . 
 Matt. V. 17, PaTnixTOrjvai Luke iii. 12, dcniKOev XpterTos . . . iij,(f>avL(T6rjvai 
 inrep rifiuiv Heb. ix. 24, tis avaj3T^(T€Tat . . . XpLcrrbv Karayayelv Rom. X. 6, 
 7, ai'T^)(6rj CIS Trjv iprjinov . . , TreipacxOrjvai Matt. iv. 1, 6.Troa-Te\X.ei avTOVs 
 KtjpvcrcreLv Mark iii. 14; cf. 1 Cor. i. 1 7; x. 7 (quotn.) etc. and similar pre- 
 dicates, as StSdvat: iSiiiKari /Uot (ftayuv Matt. XXV. 35, eScaxav airia ttlcIv 
 ofos xxvii. 34 (Pass. eiTrei' SoOrjvai airy (fiayuv Mark V. 43 etc.), Ka^oiis 
 TO TTvev/xa iSiSov a-Ko^diyyecrOai. aurots Acts ii. 4; Xa/jifi dveiv: Mark 
 vii. 4 aXXa TToXXa. a TrapiXajSov Kparciv ; but also after those in which 
 the idea of motion recedes more : Acts v. 31 tovtov apxriyov /cat o-unripa 
 v<j)wcr€V ... , Sovvai /jLerdvoiav, XV. 10 tl iretpa^cTC tov Oeov, irriB^vai t,vy6v 
 etc., 2 Ppt. iii. 2 8ieyeip<o v/jluiv Trjv elXiKpiv^ Stdivoiav, /jivrjadrjvai (Vulg. 
 ut memores sitis). Paul, too, avails himself not infrequently of this 225 
 Infinitive to denote design (cf 10 below, p. 264) ; as, 2 Cor. x. 13, 16; 
 xi. 2 ; Col. i. 22 ; iv. 6, etc. 
 
 B. §140,N.4; H. §772; C.§665; D. § 607 a. Obs. ; J.§662,5; ©.§100. 
 
 Examples of the use of the Infinitive in parenthetic clauses, — 6 
 except the phrase ws «ros eiireLv (once in Heb. vii. 9) borrowed from 
 the rhetorical classic usage, — are not found. 
 
 The Article (t<5) with the Infinitive. 
 B. §140,5; H. §778; C. §664; J. § 678 of. 670; G. §§90; 96. 
 
 The Infinitive may take the Article {to'), and it acquires 6 
 in this way not only the appearance, but to a certain degree 
 also the nature, of a substantive, inasmuch as it is declined, 
 serves as the subject or object of a clause, and sometimes (in 
 addition to the article) is still more closely limited by pronouns ; 
 as, 2 Cor. vii, 11 avro tovto to' Kaia debv Xinrridrivai irocrrjv 
 KaTetpyda-aTO or-irovBrjv, Heb. ii. 15 Bia travTo'; tov ^rjv evo'^pi 
 ?iaav hovXeia<;. In other respects the Infinitive uniformly re- 
 tains its verbal nature ; since, as may be seen from numerous 
 
262 THE INFINITIVE. [§ 140 
 
 examples, it does not as in other languages (e.g. Germ. Ital.) 
 take the attributive adjuncts of a substantive (in the fcrm of 
 Genitives or Adjectives), but always and without change the 
 constructions which go with a verb as such, (and placed gen- 
 erally between the Article and the Infinitive). 
 
 Remark. Only the Infin. ^fjv seems to have been early construed 
 quite as a substantive (like ^w-^) ; hence we find it not only connected 
 with an Adjective in the above passage from Hebrews, and frequently 
 in the Ep. of Ign. ad Eph. written about a.d. 100 : to aXrj6ivbv t,rjv 
 (Cap. xi.), 6K ToB TrpoKu/xivcnj ^gv (Cap. xvii.), but even with the Gen- 
 itive : Ep. Ign. ad Magn. I (rj/jiMv), V {atrrov) ; ad Smyrn. IV to 
 aXrjOivov TjfJLutv ^rjv, 
 
 B. §140, 5a. and b., and N. 5; H. §778; C. §664; J. §678; G. §96. 
 
 7 The Infinitive, rendered a substantive by means of the 
 Article, is wont to stand 
 
 a) As the Subject of a clause in general sentences ;- 
 Examples are pretty numerous. The predicate is as a rule a noun 
 (subst., adj., pron.), with or without the copula, as TrXelov, KaXov, 
 alcr)(p6v, TrepuTCTov, dvayKaiorepov, (jyofiipov, Xpioros, KspSas, Tt ecrriv 
 (Mark ix. 10 ; Phil. i. 2 1, etc.), less frequently a verb, as Matt. xv. 20 
 rb avunrofs )(epcrt.v cj^ayuv ov koivoT tov avOpwirov, Rom. vii. 18 to 6iKeiv 
 ■jrapa-Kinai ft,oi, to 8e KaTtpyd^icrOai to Kokov ov, Phil. i. 29 v/uv i)(apL(T6r] 
 TO . . . TTUTreviiv etc. 
 
 Remark. After a preparatory Demonstrative in the leading 
 clause the Infin. following stands according to rule (B. § 140 N. 5) 
 without the Art., the place of which is supplied by the demonstra- 
 tive ; as, Jas. i. 27 Opr/crKiia Kadapa avTiq 1(ttiv, iincrKi7rTea-6ai etc., Eph. 
 iii. 8 (see 3 p. 260), 1 Thess. iv. 3 toito icrTiv OiX-qp-a tov d^ov . . ., 
 aTriy^^adai vp.d'i ano t^? TTopviUt-i, elSivai etc., where, however, subse- 
 quently (vs. 6) for perspicuity's sake, after the intervention of several 
 lengthy specifications, the last Infin. again takes the Article : to /h^ 
 vTrepfiawuv etc. Cf. with this the examples in B. I.e. N. 6. 
 
 8 b) As the Object of the clause, — if the Infinitive is not a 
 mere complementary predicate of an incomplete verbal idea 
 
 12Q (®-g- ^V'^'iv, j^ovKecrOai, etc.), but is to be regarded as the real 
 object of the predicate in the clause, and consequently serves 
 as a circumlocution for an abstract substantive, so far forth as 
 that is the object of the clause. 
 
 Examples of this construction also are numerous enough : Matt. 
 XX. 23 and Mark x. 40 to KaOio-ai . . . ovk ea-Tiv ip.bv Sovvai, Acts xxv. 
 11 ov TrapairoC/itti to aTToOaviiv (death), RoQ'. xiii. 8 o^EiXere to &XXi^ 
 
§ 140.] THE INFIN. AFTER PREPOSITIONS. 263 
 
 \ovs d-yan-av (reciprocal love), 1 Cor. xiv. 39 (prophecy, speaking with 
 tongues), 2 Cor. viii. 10, 11 ; Phil. ii. 13 (the willing and the per- 
 formance), ii. 6 (equality with God), iv. 10 (your care for me). In 
 Phil. i. 22 also the term alp-qfTOfiai is to be supplied from what follows. 
 In 2 Cor. x. 2 Siofiai to jx-q Trapwv Bapfyqaai etc. Paul has employed 
 this mode of expression in a bold, almost violent, yet very expressive 
 way: literally, I entreat (viz. of you) the not being obliged to be severe, 
 i.e. I pray you not to force me to severe proceedings against you 
 (when I arrive in Corinth). In other passages the text varies, as in 
 1 Thess. iii. 3 where Lchm. Tdf. Treg. have adopted the Ace. (to [so 
 cod. Sin.]) in place of the former Dat., so that now to jx-qhiva aalvviOai. 
 depends immediately on vapaKaKicrai;^ so in Acts iv. 18 where Lchm. 
 [and Tdf.] (after B [n*]), and in Luke vii. 21 where all three editors 
 omit TO. 
 
 Remark. In this case (cf. 7 Rem. p. 262) after a preparatory 
 demonstrative the insertion of the Article with the following Infinitive 
 seems, so far as the few passages will permit us to form a judgment, to 
 have been more usual : Rom. xiv. 13 toBto Kpivare /xaWov, to fjurj rSivai 
 irpocrKop.jt.a rio dSeX^u, 2 Cor. ii. 1 tKpiva ejnavrcS toSto, to p.rj TtaXiv iX.OeLV 
 etc. But without the Art. in 1 Cor. vii. 37. 
 
 B. §140,5c); H. §779sq.; C. §663; D.p.5985q.; J. §678; G. § 94. 
 
 Tlie genuine Greek practice (which disappeared gradually 
 in later Greek) of subjoining to a clause adverbial adjuncts 
 (which in other languages are generally given by means of 
 entire subordinate clauses) by means of the Infinitive used 
 substantively and governed by a Preposition, is still in full 
 force in the N. T., at least in the better written portions. Thi.'; 
 construction is employed most frequently by Luke, as well in 
 the Gospel as in the Acts, by the author of the Ep. to the Heb.^ 
 also by Paul who has quite mastered it ; very rarely by Johr. 
 (only four times in the Gospel), and never in the Apocalypse. 
 The (old) prepositions thus used are dvTi, Bid, iv, ek, /jLerd, irpo, 
 and 7r/309. In reference to their use we may note the following ; 
 
 avTC, but once : Jas. iv. 15 dvTt tov \iyeiv v/uas instead of etc. 
 
 Sid, only with the Accusative, instead of a subordinate causal clau-".*? 
 with because {quia, eo quod), is very common: Matt. xiii. 5, etc. 
 
 ev is used in two ways: 1) in a temporal sense, to denote con- 
 temporaneousness or duration, while, during ; as, Matt. xiii. 4 iv tu 
 OTretpetv avTOV a /lev eirtcrev etc., 25 iv 7u KaOevSav ovTois ■^X6iv etc., 
 
 ' According to Lchm., Reiske, Cobet (Praef. ad N. T. p. 90) we are to read 
 MT)!!e!' aaaivsa-Bai i.q. &-xeeallai, xaA.f7raif ipepeiv. [Cf.Valckonaer's Opusc. II. 246 sq.J. 
 
264 THE INFINITIVE. [§ 140 
 
 Acts xi. 15, etc. In ordinary prose, as in Latin, the construction of 
 the Gen. absolute would have been preferred ; hence Luke who uses 
 this Infin. construction most frequently, particularly in connection with 
 iyivero Se (see § 141, 6 p. 276), unites both modes of expression with 
 227 the same sense in one sentence, as Luke iii. 21 lyivcro Se Iv tZ fiaim- 
 crOrjvai a-n-avTa tov Xaov Kat 'Irjcrov paima-OivTOi avc<f)(drjvai tov ovpavov ; — 
 or the Infin. with iv stands instead of an ordinary participial clause, 
 and the mode of expression appears still more strange (see on this 
 especially § 141, 3 p. 274), as Luke x. 35 o,tl av ■n-potTSaira.vrjo-rj's, eyu) 
 iv 7(3 iTravip^^ecrOai /a€ (equiv. to iTravtXOiiv) aTToStocru) aoi, Acts viii. 6 
 
 Trpo(Ttl)(ov 01 o)(X.oi iv Tto &KOVUV avTovi Kol /SXeTTctv (Vulg. audienies 
 
 et videntes), Luke xi. 37 iv h\ tuS AaXijo-at avrov (equiv. to cti XoXovvto) 
 ipfOTo, avTov ^apLcralos. It is not to be overlooked that the frequent 
 recurrence of this mode of expression in the Gospel of Luke con- 
 tributes essentially to distinguish its language from that of the Acts, 
 where we meet with it far more rarely. 2) to subjoin to the predicate 
 adverbial adjuncts in which iv preserves its proper or instrumen- 
 tal force (in, by\, nearly for the Lat. Gerund in the Ablative or with 
 in and the Ablat. ; as, Acts iv. 29 86s tois SoijXois (tov . . . iv roi t^i/ 
 ^eipa (TOV iKTuvuv etc., Heb. ii. 8 (Vulg. in eo quod), viii. 13 iv t<3 
 Xiyeiv ' KaLvyv' ■n-eiraXatWei' t^v TrpiLrrjv (Vulg. dicendd). In other cases 
 it may appear doubtful (although the sense would be little affected 
 thereby) whether we should allow the instrumental force or the tem- 
 poral to predominate ; e.g. Luke i. 21 iBavp^atpv iv ™ ^ovi^€iv avrov 
 iv T(p va^ (Yalg. mirabantur quod tardaret ; the ordinary construction 
 of Gavpa^uv however is with iwi, see § 133, 23 p. 185 ; 6avp.d^€iv iv 
 also occurs in Ev. Thom. 15, 2), Mark vi. 48 ' Pa.aa.viiflp.ivov: iv tu 
 ekaivav (Vulg. in remigando), cf. Luke xii. 15 ; Acts iii. 26. 
 
 Rarely for the instrumental use of the Infin. we find the simple 
 Dative : 2 Cor. ii. 1 3 ovk i(T-)(r]Ka avtcnv to) p,-!] evpelv jxi Tltov. Re- 
 
 specting 1 Thess. iii. 3 see 8 p. 263, above. 
 10 € t s followed by an Infin., a construction employed by Paul with 
 especial fondness (in Rom. alone seventeen times), serves 1) to state 
 the design, accordingly for tva and like ad with the Gerund in 
 Latin, — either connecting itself immediately with the verb, as Matt. 
 XX. 19 TrapaStiio'Ovaiv avrov toi? i6v€a-Lv eh to ip-irai^ai (Vulg. ad inlu- 
 dendum), xxvi. 2 TrapaSt'SoTat €ts ro a-ravpwOrjvaL (Vulg. ut cruci figatur ; 
 for which John, who never employs this construction, says, agreeably 
 to his usage, Iva a-ravpoiOrj xix. 16; cf. § 139, 40 p. 236), Ileb. viii. 3 
 iras ap)(L€p€v? eh to rrpocrffyipeiv Bwpd re Kai OvrTia% KaBlararai, ix. 28 ; 
 1 Cor. xi; 22 olKLa<s e^ere eh ro iarOiew Kal iriveiv, xi. 33 ; Acts iii. 19 : 
 vii. 19, etc. ; — or forming an independent final clause, as Rom. iv. 11, 
 18 ; xi. 11 ; xii. 2 ; xv. 8, 13 ; 1 Cor. x. 6 ; 2 Cor. iv. 4 ; Gal. iii. 17; 
 
S UO.] THE INFIN. APTER PREPOSITIONS. 265 
 
 Eph. i. 12, 18 etc., and alternating with tva, as Phil. i. 10; 1 Thess. 
 ii. 16 ; Heb. ii. 17, particularly if one telic specification is dependent 
 on another, as Rom. i. 11 ; iv. 16 ; 1 Cor. ix. 18 ; 2 Thess. iii. 9. 
 
 2) as in classic Greek, statements of design so often include within 
 themselves' those of result and vice versa (see § 139, 43 sq. p. 238 sq., 50 
 Rem', p. 244), so &.<s with the Infin. can be employed in stating the 
 result, i.e. the designed consequence, accordingly for wo-re ita 
 ut ; hence it occurs sometimes as a variant in the oldest MSS. instead 
 of that final SiaTe (§ 139, 50 p. 243). In this sense many passages are 
 to be taken ; as, Rom. i. 20 ra aopara avrov rots Troi'^/Aaa-tv. voov/j.eva 
 KaOoparat . . . , eis to €1^01 auToiis di/OTroXoy^ovs ; ^ see besides vi. 12; 
 vii. 4, 5 ; 2 Cor. i. 4 ; viii. 6 ; Heb. xi. 3, etc. 
 
 3) it frequently stands also where ordinary usage would have beep 228 
 satisfied with the simple Infinitive (with or without the Art), 
 and ill particular for the Infin. (Pres. or) Future after predicates 
 whose signification looks forward, such as 8t8dvat, SacrOai, ipiar^v, 
 fiapTvpav, (ohtestari) etc., and which for the same reason admit also of 
 
 the construction with Iva (§ 139, 42 p. 237) ; as, Rom. xv. 16 Sta Tyjv 
 "XpLpi-v Ti]v SoOeicrav fioi, ets to eivai fji,e Xeirovpybv 'Irjcrov Hpurrov, 1 Thess. 
 ii. 12 /lapTvpovnevoi €ts to ■ireparaTeiv v/jlols dfiws tov Oeov, iii. 10 Sf o/tevoi 
 ek TO iSeiv vfji.mv to irpotrunrov, Phil. i. 23 t'^i/ iiriOvfilav e)(<j)V ch to avaX.v- 
 (rai KoX (Tvv XptxrrS dvai, 2 Thess. ii. 2 epcorS/tev VjtiSs e« to fir) Ta)^e<ii's 
 aaXevB^vai v/;ia'; . . . /jirjSe OpotifrOai, 6 vvv to KaTi^ov 0i8aT£, ets to OKOKa- 
 \v(f)OTJvaL avTov ; naturally connected with this use stands 
 
 4) the epexegetic Infin. with ets to (in respect to, to (the intent 
 that), with which is to be compared the Infin. with toB in 14 p. 268) ; 
 as, 1 Thess. iv. 9 deoSlSaKTol core ch to dyairav dXA.-^\ous, Rom. iii. 26 
 TTpos TTjV tvSfi^iv T^s StKatocTWijs ovTov, CIS TO etvai avTov SiKaiov etc., viii. 
 29; 2 Thess. i. 5 li/Sciy/xa t^s SiKaia; Kpureios . . . eh to KaTa^tiod^vai Ujuas 
 etc., Jas. i. 19 Tup^s eis to aKoCo-ot, ^pa.Bv's els to XaXrjcraL, Rom. xii. 3 
 ^poveiv eh To,a-a)<j)poveiv, 1 Cor. viii. 10, etc. In these cases we likewise 
 ■put either simply the Infin. with to, or the Conjunction that. 
 
 /i£Ta only with the Accusative, and always in a temporal force II 
 (after, after that), as often in Greek authors also ; as, Heb. x. 15, 26 ; 
 Matt. xxvi. 32 ; Mark i. 14 ; Luke, Acts, etc. 
 
 Trpo Toij followed by the Infin. — likewise only in a temporal 
 reference — serves frequently as a periphrasis for the conjunction vp iv 
 with the Infin. (hence after positive sentences) and is interchanged 
 with it : Matt. vi. 8 ; Luke ii. 21 ; xxii. 15 ; John i. 49 ; xvii. 5 ; xiii. 
 
 1 That in this passage interpreters have at all periods, even the most recent, 
 diverged in two just opposite directions, the ecbatic and the final, is one proof 
 more that the two relations (as so often with 1i/a and Sore) lie u idistinguished 
 side hy side. 
 
 34 
 
266 THE INFINITIVE. [§ 1« 
 
 19 irpo Tov ytvio-Oa\ (for wliich in xiv. 29 Trplv yevicrdai), Acts xxiii. 15 
 Gal. ii. 12, etc. 
 
 irpos, used only with the Accusative, means in accordance with it 
 original signification primarily with reference to the fact that etc., a 
 Luke xviii. 1 eXeyev Trapa^oXriv avrois irpos to Seiv navTore 7rpo(Tevxe(T0a 
 Xeymv etc., Matt. xxvi. 12 VoCto iiroiijo-ev wpos to ivTacjuacra^ /u.e ; thei 
 and interchangeably with ets (even in the variants, as Jas. iii. 3), ii 
 a final signification: Mark xiii. 22 ; Eph. vi. 11. 
 
 Of the other (improper) prepositions, we find used in this wa; 
 civeKev (for which commonly the simple Genitive appears) but once 
 2 Cor. vii. 12, on account of the preceding eiv^Kev ; and eu)9, also bu 
 once : Acts viii. 40. 
 
 The IlTFINlTIVE WITH TOB IN THE N. T. 
 
 B. § 140, NN. 10, 11 ; H. § 781 ; C. § 664 d. ; D. p. 480 ; J. §§ 482, 678 b. ; G. §§ 94 sq. 
 
 12 This form of expression, which in the earlier Greek writer 
 is on the whole pretty rare but in later writers becomes mor 
 
 229 and more frequent, belongs to those constructions of which th 
 language as well of the Old T. as of the New is especially fon( 
 of availing itself; and which, since the limits of its employmen 
 were materially enlarged, contributes much to the peculia 
 complexion of the biblical diction. Hence, it is necessary t 
 give here a connected exposition of the entire usage. 
 
 The general use of the expression, however, does not prevent th 
 existence of a great diversity in this respect among individua 
 N. T. writers. John in consequence of his decided predilection for iV 
 (§ 139, 40 p. 236) makes no more use of this construction than of ei 
 TO (10 above, p. 264) either in his Gospel or his Epistles. Matthew 
 uses it often, but Luke the most frequently and with the most varie 
 application (twenty-five times in the Gospel and perhaps about as ofte; 
 in the Acts). In Paul's and the other Epp. it recedes somewha 
 before the other and similar construction with eis ro. In Mark an 
 the Rev. we are almost in doubt whether it occurs., Cf. in general o 
 this subject the extended discussions in Winer, p. 324 sqq. (304 sqq.] 
 and Fritzsche, Com. on Matt. Excurs. II. p. 843 sq. 
 
 13 The construction is founded, as its external form shows, in 
 Genitive relation ; and hence must be understood and es 
 plained from the nature of this case. To facilitate our reviei 
 of the instances that occur, we will distribute them into th 
 following classes : I. those in which the Infin. with tov i 
 governed immediately by some word contained in the leadin 
 clause. — which is either a) a Substantive, or b) an Adjective 
 
1 140!] THE IKPm. WITH ToB IN THE N. T. 267 
 
 or c) a Verb ; II. those in which the Infin. with rov stands 
 more by itself, constituting a clause independent of the leading 
 clause so far as the case is concerned. 
 
 I. The Infinitive with tov stands in immediate dependence 
 on a term which is contained in the leading clause, and ex- 
 presses an incomplete thought, to which it stands in the 
 same relation as the Infin. expletivus in 3 p. 259, above : that 
 is to say, it contains the necessary complement, generally in a 
 final sense, of that incomplete idea. Cf. the similar construc- 
 tions with 649 TO in 10, 3) p. 265, and with tW in § 139, 41 sqq. 
 pp. 236 sqq. 
 
 In accordance with the general rules respecting the Genitive 
 (B. § 132, 1 and 7) this Infinitive is dependent 
 
 a) On a Substantive. 
 
 "We should much mistake the nature of most of the clauses falling 
 under this head, were we to regard the Infin. with tov (after the fashion 
 of the Lat. gerund in -di) as a Gen. dependent on a noun in such a 
 way that the Infin. takes pretty nearly the place of an abstract sub- 
 stantive in like relation, as ars scribendi the art of writing. For the 
 Greeks, with their copious store of abstract substantives, and the 
 facility with which in case of necessity they could at any time form 200 
 new ones, had almost no need of this mode of expression. On the 
 contrary, the Infin. with tov retains its entire verbalnature and 
 force, so that it depends merely outwardly upon a substantive in 
 the leading clause. This is evident, partly from the fact that it is often 
 accompanied by its own Subject (in the Ace. according to the 
 rules of § 141 pp. 272 sqq.), see the examples subjoined ; and partly 
 from the circumstance, that Latin writers in the extant cases either 
 would not, or could not, have used their gerund in -di, as Rom. xi. 8 
 cSfjKev 6<^6aXixovi tov fijij pX.iir(iv /cat Srra rpv /jlt] aKoveiv, in Latin not 
 oculos non videndi, aures non audiendi, but ad non videndum etc.. or, 
 as the Vulg. renders it, ut non videant, . . . audiant. It is uniformly 
 necessary, therefore, to take the substantive on which the Infin. 
 appears to depend and expand it, with a verb either present in the 
 clause or to be supplied, into a verbal predicate idea, upon which the ' 
 Infinitive adjunct, whether with its subject expressed or understood, 
 is then made to depend, quite in the way in which in c) below it 
 depends on verbs. For example, Luke i. 67 ttj 'Ekicra^eT ink-^crOrj 6 
 Xpovoi TOV T€Kelv avTTjv not the time of her delivery was fully come, but 
 the fuU time came that she should be delivered, cf. ii. 6 ; ii. 21 iirX'^a-dtj- 
 a-av rjfjiipat, okto) toS TrepiTtfi-eLv airdv Vulg. not literally, as it is in the 
 habit of doing : circumcidendi eum, but (Passively, cf. the note below), 
 
268 THE INFINITIVE. [?140. 
 
 ut circumcideretur, xxii. 6 e^»;ret cvxaiptav tov Trapaoovvai avrov (for 
 which ha is used in the parallel passage Matt. xxvi. 16) ; Acts xiv 
 9 ej^et ■kCo-tw tov uwOrivai (Vulg. ut salvus jieref), xx. 3 iyivfTo yvwfii^ 
 (i.e. he resolved, hence the preceding Partic. jrovqa-a^ in the Nom. con- 
 strued ad synesin according to § 144, 13 b) p. 298) tov vTroo-rpi^eiv 8t<i 
 M., xxvii. 20 TrepLrjpeiTo IXwh naaa tov o-oJ^ecr^at ij/xas, Eom. viii. 12 
 6<j>eLXeTai icrpiv (eqiiiv. to o0€tA.o/x€i') tov ^yv etc., XV. 23 iirLTroOiav t)(a)i' 
 (equiv. to hruroQZiv) tov IXOav (cf. Phil. i. 23), 1 Cor. x. 13 Trotijcret rqv 
 cKySao-cv TOV Svvaa-Oai vTreveyKUv (Vulg. ut possitis sustinere), Heb. v. 12 
 Lchm. ^etav ^x^tc tov SiSao-Keti' v/xas (personal object) tlvo. (subject 
 Ace.) TO, o-Totx^la (material object) t^s apx^s etc.,' 1 Pet. iv. 17 o 
 Kaip6<; (sc. eoTii') tov ap^aa-Qiu to Kpf/xa (lit incipiat). The Infinitive 
 alone often stands in the same circumstances (as may be seen from a 
 comparison of the examples in 3 p. 269), and in point of fact in some 
 instances the tov has now be'en expunged by the editors as a later 
 addition, e.g Rev. ix. 10; xiv. 15, and probably also in 1 Cor. ix. 6 
 Lchm. [Tdf. Treg. ; so cod. Sin.]. The instances which approximate 
 most closely to the use of the Latin gerund in -di are perhaps Luke x. 
 19 SiSui/jLi i/uv TYjV i^ovcriav tov Trwriiv eiravm otj>iU)v, 1 Cor. ix. 10 Jtt 
 IXttSil tov ixerix^iv, although even these admit of being easily referred 
 to the above category. 
 14 Remark. On the other hand, the Infin. with tov is often found also 
 231 (quite in accordance with the examples from classic authors given in 
 B. § 140 N. 11) as an epexegetic a d d i t i o n to an abstract substan- 
 tive, as though a verbal periphrasis and explanation of it (cf. 10, 4) 
 p. 265) : Rom. i. 24 Trapc'SioKev avTov's . . . £« aKaOapdlav tov aTifjid^ecrOai 
 TO. awfiaTa avrwv, 2 Cor. viii. 11 ij TrpoOv/xla tov 64X.UV, Phil. iii. 21 KaTa 
 TTjv ivipyeiav tov SvvcurOai avTov etc., Luke xxi. 22 rjfiipai. e/cSiKiycrEUS 
 avTai doTiv tov TrXrjaO^vai iravTa tol ye.ypafi.jx.iva, Acts ix. 1 5 crKevos exXoy^s 
 OTTt'v /x,oi ovTOS TOV jSaoTao'ai to ovo/jid fiov, xiii. 47 (quotn.) tWuko. ere 
 CIS <j>ui's idvuiv TOV iivaL (r€ £ts (rtarqpiav etc. Only in this way is to be 
 explained the construction (in other respects also quite anomalous) in 
 Rev. xii. 7 lyivero TroXe.px)'; iv tm ovpavio, oMt^a^X Kai oi ayy eXoi 
 avTOV TOV woXipJrj'Tai jU.€Ta tov SpaKOVToq instead of the emoXiix-qaav of the 
 Text. Recept., which aims to avoid the harshness, but falls into another^ 
 mistake. The Nominative is used ad synesin with the Infin., since the 
 latter takes the place, so to speak, of a subordinate clause with a finite verb. 
 
 1 So according to Lchm. ; and compare Dem. Lept. 40, where likewise three Aces, 
 are united. The other construction, which Tdf. [so Treg.] follows : toD SiSduKetv 
 vims, Tim ri ffToixeia etc. differs hut little in sense, and has the interpretation of 
 Origep {Si5d(rKe(^0ai), the Vulg. [ut vos doceamini), the version in cod. Claromon- 
 tan. [doceri vos) et al. in its favor. Since this construction also harmonizes with 
 the genius of the language (cf. the example from Luke ii. 21 above, and § 140, 
 3 p. 259 note) a decision is difficult, indeed from a grammatical point of 
 view absolutely impossible. See Bleek. 
 
§ 140.] THE INFIN. WITH toO IN THE N. T. 269 
 
 b) On an Adjective contained in the leading clause. As 15 
 a rule this also constitutes together with the copula the predi- 
 cate of the clause, and the Infin. with tou contains the neces- 
 sary complement. Yet, by virtue of the verbal nature inher- 
 ing in Adjectives, they are also by themselves capable of this 
 construction. 
 
 The connection is the simplest when the Adjective already permits 
 of itself the construction with the Genitive, as 1 Cor. xvi. 4 eav a^iov 
 ■g Tov Ka/^e iropeitcrBai, Rom. vii. 3 (XevOepa eorii' dirb tov vofiov, rov /xri 
 eivai avrrjv /toixaXtSa ; but it occurs also with other Adjectives, as Acts 
 xxiii. 15 Iroi/iot icrij,iv tov iveXelv avTov (cf. with this the Infin. alone in 
 3 p. 259), Luke xvii. 1 avivSeKTOv Icmv TOV firj ekOciv to. o-Kcii'SaA.a, 
 xxiv. 25 (S avdijToi KOL PpaZih tov TrurTtvav (cf. the construction with 
 «s TO in 10 p. 265), 
 
 c) On averbalidea contained in the leading claxise. This 16 
 is by far the most common use of the Infin. with tov. It is 
 essentially identical with the two preceding constructions, and 
 differs only externally in the circumstance that the governing 
 predicate idea here is a verb, there a noun. Further: as in the 
 construction with an Adjective, it is wholly a matter of indif- 
 ference whether the verb is elsewhere construed with the 
 Genitive or not; and that the Infin. with tov stands again 
 
 in most evident analogy with the similar use of Xva, ek to with 
 the Infin., and the Infin. alone, may be seen on comparing the 
 respective sections. 
 
 We will classify the examples under the following heads : 
 
 a) the construction finds its (rather superficial) occasion in the cir- 
 cumstance that the verb according to general usage is capable of being 
 construed with the Genitive ; as, Luke i. 9 (Kaxiv toC 6vix,ia.(rai, (in 
 connection with nouns, however, Xnyxa-veiv in the N. T. is construed 
 only with the Accusative, see § 132, 8 p. 160 and cf. Bhdy. p. 176), 
 Matt. xxi. 32 ov i/,eTep.e\'i^6yjTC tov TrUTTevaai avT^, 2 Cor. i. 8 l^airopr)- 
 O^vai TOV i,rjv. 
 ' P) the construction takes place if the verbal idea is of a negative 
 kind and intimates that something is to be avoided, averted etc., these 
 predicates (according to B. § 132, 4) being likewise capable of taking 232 
 the Gen. [Gen. of separation]. In this case, moreover, the negative 
 ju, ^ is as a rule also added to the I n f i n . (cf. § 148, 13 p. 355). Luke 
 iv. 42 KaTU\ov avTOV tov /t^ TropevecrOcu dir' avrStv, Xxiv. 16 oi 6ef>0aX.iJ,oi 
 avTuiv ixpaTOVVTO tov /m) imyvlovaL avTOV, Acts X. 47 /aijti to vStop KcuXDcrat 
 SvvaTai TK TOV fi^ jiaTrTUrOrjvai tovtovs ; xiv. 18 /coTSTravo'av tov% o;(\ovs 
 
270 THE INFINITIVE. _ [§1-40 
 
 Tov fiYj 6v€i.v, 1 Pet. iii. 10 (quotn.) Trava-drw Tr/v yXwcra-av airo kukov koI 
 X^iXf) TOV ix,rj XoX^trat SdXov, Acts xx. 20, 27 oiScv VTrttTTtiXa.fi'qv tot; ju,^ ' 
 di/ayyciXai vfuv. The omission of n-ri is decidedly contrary to the main 
 usage and very rare : Rom. xv. 22 ivf.KOTrroixrp' iroXXoKis rov iXOuv irpbs 
 vfias. 
 
 y) after verbs of motion to indicate the purpose of the motion, 
 alternating with the simple Infinitive (see 4 p. 261) : Matt. xiii. 3 ; 
 Luke viii. 5 iffjXdtv 6 airupiov tov cnreipai (but in Mark iv. 3, according 
 to the recent editors, without tov), Luke xxiv. 29 eloTJXOev tov /ieivai 
 (Tvv avTol';, Heb. X. 7 (quotn.) t]ku> tov irotijo-ai to OiXrifjia. crou, Matt. iii. 
 13 TrapayCverai tov PwKTw6rivo.i vtt avTOV, Luke Y. 1 Lchm. iTriKuirOai 
 aiiTta TOV aKovtiv, Acts xviii. 1 hnO-qa-iTai aoi tov KaKwcrai <t€. 
 
 8) also after other words signifying action, which need an 
 additional statement to complete their thought in order to express the 
 purpose or the result designed by the action : accordingly, for ha 
 (which may be rendered in English that . . . should) after the predi- 
 cates spoken of § 139, 41 sqq. pp. 236 sqq.; as, Jas. v. 17 Trpoyrjviwro tov 
 fjiij ySpe^at (commonly iva), Acts xxi. 12 TrapeKaKov/xev tov jxrj avafialveiv 
 avTov €« 'I. (commonly Iva, ottios, or the simple Infin.), xxiii. 20 avve- 
 6e.vTo TOV ipvnrja-ai ae (iva .John ix. 22 ; Infln. alone Luke xxii. 5), xv. 
 20 CTrio-TciXai avToi's tov dirc^eo-^ai diro tS>v a.Xio'yrjfj.a.Tiov (Infin. alone 
 xxi. 25), Luke iv. 10 (quotn.) ivTeXurai avToi's tov Sia<^uXdfat ere. So, 
 moreover, after irouiv (cf. iva § 139, 43 p. 238) Acts iii. 12, KaTavevtiv 
 Luke V. 7, Kpiveiv Acts xxvii. 1 (cf. 1 Cor. vii. 37 var.), to Trpoa-umov 
 ioTr/pi^ev Luke ix. 51, Si^voifci/ tov vovv tov crvvievai (caused them to 
 understand) xxiv. 45. In an exceptional way the Infin. with tov 
 stands once after iyiv^To even : Acts x. 25 ws Si lyivero tov eicrtKOiiv 
 TOV Uerpov (so also Act. Barn. 7), for which elsewhere the simple 
 Infin. is always used (§ 141, 6, c) p. 277). Cf. the Latin ut after 
 _fit, etc. 
 
 II. The other case — that in which the Infin. with tov stands 
 after complete predicates (accordingly for iva in its proper 
 signification, in order that, eo consilio uf), so tliat it is to be 
 regarded as an independent telic clause — is very common ; 
 and finds adequate explanation in the general use of the Gen. 
 (to express causal departure and direction upon, B. §132, 8, 
 9). Hence the assumption of an ellipsis (eVe/ca, '^dpiv) is 
 superfluous. 
 
 For examples see Matt. ii. 13 ; xi. 1 ; xxiv. 45 ; Luke i. 77, 
 79 ; ii. 24, 27 ; xii. 42 (Tdf.) ; Acts iii. 2 ; vii. 19 ; xx. 30 ; 
 
 ' Classic usage would have demanded in this case the double negative lih o6, 
 (because the leading verb is itself negative, cf. B. § 148 Note 6, 2) p. 427); G. p 198, 
 
§ 140.] THE INFINITIVE FOB THE IMPERATIVE. 271 
 
 xxvi. 18 ; Rom. vi. 6 ; xi. 10 ; Gal. iii. 10 ; Phil. iii. 10 ; Heb. 
 xi. 5. 
 
 Remark. In the Sept. the use of the Infin. with tov occurs to a 233 
 still greater extent almost. See a great number of examples (to be 
 found on almost every page) in Winer, p. 325 sq. (305). 
 
 B.§140,7; H.§784; C.§670; D. § 526; J. §671; G.§101; W. 316 (296). 
 
 Of the Infinitive instead of the Imperative, as it 
 is sometimes used in the classics, there is no single instance 
 wholly unquestionable ; since everywhere the leading mark of 
 this Infiu., viz. the addition of the Subject in the Nominative, 
 is wanting. The usage, too, is predominantly ppetic (see the 
 examples in the Gramms. ll.c, and of. Bhdy. p. 388). Hence 
 it is more correct grammatically, to regard the Absolute 
 Infinitives which actually occur in this sense as resulting from 
 an elliptical mode of expression ; and that is perfectly accor- 
 dant with the unartificial and popular diction of the N. T. 
 
 In explaining them we may assume an ellipsis of the simplest pre- 
 dicate, perhaps Xiyw, for which analogous cases enough are to be found 
 also in the N. T. writings; see §151, 24 b) p. 394. This suggests 
 Itself most naturally, in fact necessarily, not only when the subject is 
 At hand in the Accusative, as Tit. ii. 2 Trpeo-jSvras vrj^aktovs dvai, 
 ircjuvdvs, crui<f>f}ova^ etc. (see the analogous instances from classic authors, 
 B. § 1 41, N. 6), but authenticates itselfelsewhere also, as in the salutation 
 ^aCpeiv, by the accompanying Dative; see § 151, 24a) p. 394. The 
 assumption of this ellipsis is amply sufficient in the remaining cases 
 also, and the occasion of the ellipsis may always be discovered from 
 the nature of the individual passage. Thus in Luke ix. 3 we are not 
 to assume with many interpreters a variatio structurae in explaining 
 the Infin. (/it^Te . . . tx^iv), — as if the beginning of the discourse after 
 iiirev were direct, and then the words fniJTe ava Svo p^tTwi/as ^x^'" depended 
 again in indirect discourse upon etwev, and subsequently in the follow- 
 ing verse the discourse continued in the direct form again ; on the con- 
 trary, the language is to be construed as flowing unbroken in a direct 
 form,' and with ex^iv a predicate like Xeyw, the idea of which is easily 
 suggested by the context, is to be supplied. The dependent negative 
 
 1 Discourse springs far more naturally from the (unwonted) indirect form over 
 into the almost uniformly employed direct form (see § 151, 10. 11 p. 383 sq.) ; as 
 is the case in the very passage parallel to the above viz. Mark vi. 9. 
 
272 THE ACCUSATIVE AND INFINITIVE. [§ 141. 
 
 (/tiTTe) was retained, because the Infin. ej^av (not Xeyw) is negatived, 
 and owing to the Imperatival east of the entire passage, w^ich is 
 further continued in the following verses. FurtTier, in Rom. xii. 15 
 quite absolutely : x'^P^''^ jnera )(aip6vT<i>v, KXaUiv /actol KXaiovTu^v. Here, 
 too Imperatives immediately precede, from which, since the connection 
 necessarily requires the Infinitives to be taken in an imperative force, 
 a predicate like Xeyw (or even M) is to be supplied. In supplying 
 some such term here we are the more justified as the entire passage is 
 conspicuous for its great laxity of structure (notice the Participial 
 clauses that precede and follow, standing in like manner absolutely), 
 234 merely giving the thoughts and leaving the grammatical connection of 
 them entirely to the reader. Cf. other passages of the sort under the 
 head of Anacoluthon below, § 151, 12 p. 386. Finally, Phil. iii. 16 
 irX^v m ,0 l(j>66.<Tafiev, tm ain^ <ttoi)(Cv occurs likewise between pure 
 Imperatives, and Subjunctives in their stead ; so that the apostle 
 deemed the addition of a governing predicate to be no longer necessary 
 for the understanding of his words. 
 
 The Accusative and Infinitive. 
 B. § 141, 2; H. § 773; C. § 666; D. § 684; J. § 672; G. cf. f § 73. 105. 
 
 1 It has often been remarked already that in the rather loose 
 style of the N. T., notwithstanding great facility in handling 
 this construction, the substituted conjunctions (oti, Xva) are 
 far more frequent. And in particular, lengthy passages given 
 in sermone obliquo no longer occur ; because in such cases the 
 direct form of statement (preferred even in the briefest 
 statements) takes its place ; see especially §139 E. pp. 233 sqq., 
 and G. pp. 245 sq. Not infrequently is a protracted oblique 
 discourse avoided by a sudden transition into the form of direct 
 discourse ; respecting this see in its place §151, 11 p. 385. 
 
 John X. 36 affords an example of the great predilection for the 
 direct form of statement ; here, after kiyerc, the direct discourse con- 
 sisting fiaerely of a single word (jSA-ao-^ij/ucis) comes in, although the 
 subordinate clause which follows (on elvov etc.) is construed as if 
 €/Ac /3Xao-<^r;/i.ctv preceded, and the fact too that the entire apodosis 
 begins with a Relative (ov 6 jrar^p ^yiaa-ev) would sooner lead us to 
 expect the Infin. after Xiyere; moreover, see i. 15 and other examples 
 in § 151, 1 d) p. 377, ani § 139, 51 p. 245. Further, under this head 
 belongs the direct discou se (current also in our colloquial speech) after 
 verbs of asking, th; words of the asker himself being at once 
 introduced (consequently in the Imperative) instead of the contents 
 of the request in the Infinitive, as Luke xiv. 18 ipiaTo) a-e, e^e ft« 
 
§ Ul .] THE ACnUSATIVE AND INFINITIVE. 273 
 
 traprfr-qfiLhov, Phil. iv. 3 ; Acts xxi. 39 hiojixLi a-ov, hriTpexpov /xoi etc., 
 Luke ix. 38 Lchm. Seo/tiot a-ov, iirij^Xeij/ov,^ 1 Cor. iv. 16 irapaKaXSi i/iSs, 
 fUfirjToi fiov yivecrOf. In narration, however, according to custom, 
 another Xcyaiv is inserted before the direct request : Matt. viii. 31 ; 
 xviii. 29 ; John iv. 31 ; Acts xvi. 15, etc. 
 
 As a peculiarity in the use of this construction it is to be 2 
 noticed, that the Infinitive in dependent discourse not only takes 
 the place of the Indicative, but also of the Imperative (or 
 Subjunctive), so far forth as it would have been employed in 
 direct discourse ; and that consequently the simple Infinitive 
 often includes the idea of obligation, necessity, or per- 
 mission. This is the case especially after such predicates as 
 contain a wish, request, or summons (heicdai, ev)(ea6ai,, irapa- 
 KaXeiv, ivapaivelv, ivriWea-dat, etc.) ; but not infrequently also 
 after Xejeiv, icripvaaeiv, and the like, so far forth as they are 
 used instead of the more expressive terms to command etc. 235 
 (cf. § 139, 42 note \ p. 237) ; further, after the predicates to 
 believe, to trust, in so far as the idea to consider one!s self as 
 authorized etc. is at the same time contained in them. On 
 this usage, which belongs to classic Greek, cf. Bhdy. p. 371 
 and the works there referred to. 
 
 Although the Infinitive is used in this way not merely of what 
 happens but of what ought to happen, yet we are not obliged on this 
 account to supply Sctvin order to explain it, but the usage results 
 solely from the general philological principle (see Kuhner on Xen. 
 Mem. 2, 2, 1) that the Infinitive in itself is a verbal form without re- 
 lation, and that it acquires in every case its more precise signification 
 from the context. That sometimes (when the governing word is a 
 general term, such as ihtciv, ina-Tiviw) ambiguity is easily occasioned 
 by this mode of expression cannot be denied ; hencfe in suph cases the 
 decisioii rests wholly with the reader who carefully examines the con- 
 text. A few examples of such Infinitives after less expressive pre- 
 dicates, with or without a subject expressed, are the following : Eev. 
 X. 9 (mriXOa, Xkyusv avrio Sovvai /tot to /3i^XapiSiov, Acts Xxi. 4 eXiyov 
 T(o HaijXa) /JLTj iirifiaivtiv eis 'Icpoa-oXvjJM, 21 Xeyw jir) ■n-ipiTejx.vew avrovi 
 TO. TSKva juijSe tois tOeffLv Tnpnrartiv (cf. XV. 24 Grsb.), Rom. xiv. 2 os 
 
 ' It is surprising that Tdf. rejects this reading, in spite of its attestation by cod. 
 Sin., and has adopted iiti^\e\\/iu into his text. Nowhere in all Greelc literature 
 has a Middle form of im$\4Tra (except the Future) been preserved ; and even the 
 Sept. has 4iri$\e'fiov more times than can be counted, never iiTi0\e\jiat. The 
 reading ein$\e'fiai' {cod. Vat. etc.) is to be accented im$K4i\/ai [so Treg.], and is 
 nothing more than a (Grecizing) emendation of the Imperat. 4irtfiKe\^oy. 
 85 
 
274 THE ACCUSATIVE AND INFINITIVE. [§ 141 
 
 /X£v iruTTeuei <^ayetV iravra (deWette : essen zu durfen, that he may eat), 
 ii. 21 6 K7]pv<T(Tu>v fj-r] kA-etttciv, 6 \eyu3v fx-q fj,oi^ivuv, 2 Cor. iv. 6 6 tvirwv 
 £K a-KOTOvs <^ms Xa/Ai/'at, Eph. iv. 22 i8LSd^6i]T€ a-rroOicrBai u/tas . . . tov 
 vaXaibv avdpoiirov. So also with the Infin. after wcrre, 2 Cor. ii. 7 ficrre 
 |U,aAAov ifxa.'s xapicracrOai Kal TrapaKaXecrai ; the Infin. with to, e.g. after 
 KpLvuv 2 Cor. ii. 1 ; Eom. xiv. 13 ; and the Norn, with the Infin. 2 Cor. 
 X. 2, etc. 
 
 B. § 141, ST. 8 ; H. § 823 ; 0. § 659 J. 898, 4. 
 
 3 An analogous instance to that quoted (B. I.e.) from the Anab. (6, 4, 
 18) — in which the leading clause is attracted by a parenthetic 
 verbum dicendi and passes over into a subordinate clause with am — 
 is found in Rom. iii. 8 koX (supply ti) p-rj, KoBm tfiacrtv tii/cs i7j«.a? Xeyeiv, 
 oTi Troirja-wpLef ra KaKo. etc., where according to our idiom on is super- 
 fluous. So likewise E^. Nicod. 15, 1 (cf. 15, 6). Cf. § 139, 51 p. 245 
 and Meyer on Rom. I.e. 
 
 B. §141,]Sr.4; H. §775; C.§667! D.§b88; J.§673. 
 
 4 The omission of the subject in the Infinitive clause when it 
 is identical with that of the leading clause is commonly 
 observed in the N. T. Yet deviations occnr : the subject — 
 and that, too, in the Accusative — being separately 
 expressed again, 
 
 a) after verba dicendi, especially in the 3d Pers. (in which 
 case, according to §127, 14 p. Ill sq., the full Reflexive 
 form eainov -ov'i etc. is almost always chosen), but for the 
 most part only when perspicuity and emphasis required the 
 repetition ; 
 
 b) in such Infinitive clauses as subjoin to the leading clause 
 a temporal or causal limitation (§ 140, 9 sqq.), not so much for 
 
 236 emphasis' sake as by designating the particular subject to 
 deprive the clauses of the universal character which they would 
 otherwise have. 
 
 Examples of a) after verba dicendi — in the 3d Pers. (like the 
 Lat. Se), Luke ZX. 20 aTriaTaXav c-yKa^erevs vTroKpivopivovi iavTovs 
 SiKatous eti/ai, xxiii. 2 keyovra iavrbv Xptcrrov eivai, Acts V. 36 ©evSas 
 Ac'ywv, elvai rtva iavTOv viii. 9 ; XXV. 4 ; Rev. ii. 2, 9 ; iii. 9 ; but 
 avTov only in Acts xxv. 21 tov TlavKov (TriKaXearapivov TTjprqBrjvai avTOv; 
 — in the 2d Pers. Eph. iv. 22 (see 2 above, p. 274) where the separ- 
 ation of the dependent clause from its governing word {i8i%a-)(6riTt) by 
 the parenthetic clause occasioned the repetition of the subject (vp.a<s), 
 2 Cor. vii. 11 (rvvea-T-^a-aTe iavTow (see § 127, 15 p. 113) ayvoix; elvai, 
 Heb. x. 34 Lchm. [Treg. Tdf. Sin.J yiviaa-KovrK ^x*'" '""Toiis Kpetcrcrova 
 
§ 141.] KfKtiav ETC. WITH THE INEIN. 275 
 
 vjrapliv. In classic writers likewise cases of the kind are found, but 
 on the whole far less frequently (see the Gramms. as above). 
 
 b^ in temporal etc. subordinate clauses (a use which in the Apoc- 
 ryphal writings of the N.T. has become almost universal) : Matt. xxvi. 
 32 ; Mark xiv. 28 /actoi to iyepd^vai /xe irpoa^ta v/j.a.'s, Luke x. 35 eyo) iv 
 r<a i7rav€p)^€(T6aC jxs aTfoSwcriii croi, xxii. 1 5 (^CTreOvfiijcra) wpo tov p-e iraOeiv, 
 John ii, 24 (^imcTTtvev airov) 8ta to avrov yivatcrKeiv Travras, Heb. vii. 24; 
 2 Cor. ii. 13 (ovk ta-XT^Ko) r<a p-rj eipeZv pe TItov. The case is different 
 in Rom. xv. 16 where the leading subject governing the Infin. clause 
 (eh TO elval pe XuTOvpyov) is not iyih but Oca's (virtually contained in 
 the Passive clause So^ero-av iirh tov Geov). Finally, with regard to the 
 fact that in all these passages given under b) the Reflexive form 
 which according to rule ought to have appeared has not been chosen, 
 see what is said § 127, 13 p. 110. 
 
 On the Ace. and Infin. in hortatory sentences see § 140, 18 p. 271. 
 
 On the Constkuction of KeXeveiv, ahd similar WpRDS, with the Infin. 
 
 It has already been remarked, p. 237 note ^, that KeXeveiv S 
 in the N. T. only admits of being construed with the Ace. and 
 Infin., never of being conn'ected with a resolved clause and 
 the particle "va ; and in this respect the language of the N. T. 
 coincides with ordinary usage. ^ But the influence of the Latin, 
 use of jubere is unmistakable in this particular : that the 
 Passive Infin. and Ace. is so often connected with Ke\evei,v 
 instead of the Active usual in ordinary Greek. 
 
 As a rule, where nothing but the idea is required, the A o r i s t 
 Pass. Infin. is chosen ; as, Matt, xviii. 25 eKeXoKrei/ airov TrpaO^vat . . . 
 Kai airoSoOrjuai, xiv. 9 ; xxvii. 58, 64 KeXeutroi' acr(f)aXuTOrjvai, tov t6.(J>ov, 
 Luke xviii. 40 eKe'Xeucrcv airov a.)(6rivai., Acts xii. 19 ; xxi. 33, 34; xxv. 
 21 (where the change from the Aor. Infin. to the Pres. Infin. is to be 
 noticed, cf. xxv. 4) etc. It may be remarked further, that only 237 
 Matthew and Luke employ KeXevio/ ; but the other writers avail 
 themselves uniformly of other verbs instead, as h/rkXKi(rdai, irapayyeX- 
 kiiv, Krjpvua-eiv, eiTreti/, and that, too, either followed by ti/a, according to 
 
 1 Only in one passage, Matt. xv. 35, is the Dative given with Infin. following by 
 a considerable number of mS3. ; ixiK^vaei/ rots ^x^"" woireffe?!/. This reading Tdf. 
 eds. 2, 7 (even against the authority of B and the express statement of Origen, 
 which Lchm. [so Treg.] followed) has retained, out of regard for other ancient 
 authorities, (and especially the parallel passage Mark viii. 6), with Grsb. Rec. etc. 
 (According to the concurrent testimony of codd. "Vat, and Sin. however the pas- 
 sage runs Koi TrapayyeiXas t$ ix^f avaireafiv eVI r^v yrfv ^\tt$sv; and Tdf. 
 also has rightly adopted this reading in his 8th ed.) 
 
276 Iy^vcto' FOLLOWED BY AN INFIN. ETC. [§1*1- 
 
 § 139, 42 p. 2368q.,or the Infinitive construction. But the same unclassic 
 construction with the Aorist Pass. Infin. is found after these predi- 
 cates also, in so far as they are intended to represent the precise idea 
 of KcXeveiv ; as, Mark v. 43 itirev So6fjvai airy (fiayeiv, vi. 27 ivha^ev 
 h/exOrjvai Tr]v Ke<l)aXr]v avrov. Acts V. 21 aTreoreiXav axO^vai airrov's, XXV. 
 21 eVufaXeo-a/ieVou rrjprjOrjvax aiirov (see 4 p. 274), sxii. 24 ctTras fjida-Ti^LV 
 aveTo^ea-Bai avrov, 1 Thess. v. 27 yivopKLt,u>) avayvwrdyvai rqv eTnoroA^v. 
 To the scribes who wrote the mss. (especially D and B) the construc- 
 tion still seemed rather strange, and hence they often emended it into 
 the Infin. Active; see the variants on Mark v. 43; vi. 27; Acts 
 xxii. 24. Hence it is very probable that in Mark viii. 7 eiTrtv irapare- 
 Gr/vai. (Lchm.) is the original reading, — as cod. A actually gives and 
 the variant TrapaOrjvai leads us to conjecture. The reading irapaTiOivcu 
 (Tdf. [eds. 2, 7 ; Treg.]), which again is supported particularly by B 
 and D, might easily have arisen by correction owing to the similarity 
 of form, but by its Present form does not agree well with the 
 passage. The same remark holds of Mark x. 49 Lchm. elTrev aurov 
 <jxiivt]6rjvai ; so not only by far the greater number of mss. give the 
 passage, but the Latin versions also render it, which they would not 
 have done if the translators had had~before them the other reading 
 (.^(ov^ort avrov, Tdf. [Treg. J after [n] B C). 
 
 On the Construction of lyivero followed by an Infinitive and a 
 Finite Verb. 
 
 S A conspicuous peculiarity of the historical style in the N.T. 
 (with the exception of John's Gospel) is the frequent occur- 
 rence of the Aoristic phrase Kal iyevero or iyivero Se, by 
 which the narrative of new events is announced, and at the same 
 time connected with what precedes. It arose from the familiar 
 Hebrew expression iriii, and passed over from the translation 
 of the Seventy into the narrative language of the N. T. In 
 the first three Gospels, almost without exception imme- 
 diately after this formiila a specification of time is sub- 
 joined (likewise after the mode of Hebrew discourse) : and that 
 either by an adverbial phrase (eV fiid t&v rjfLepwv, /Med' rjfjApa^ 
 T/36t9 etc.), or by a clause with ore (in Matt.) or ox; (in Luke), 
 or by a Genitive Absolute, but ordinarily by an Infinitive clause 
 introduced with eV (§ 140, 9 p. 264). The construction which 
 tlien follows is of t h r e e f o r m s ; according as 
 
 a) The occurrence itself (again after Hebrew precedent) is 
 given in a Finite Verb connected by Kai: as 
 
 238 Mai-k ii. 15 Kai eyevero (Tdf. [Treg. J yivtrai without ev to) iv 7(j 
 
§ 141.] iyivtro TOLLOWED BY AN INFIN. ETC. 277 
 
 KaTaKeitrdai avrov . . . Koi iroXXol TcXSi/ai owaviKavTO t(3 'irjcrov, cf. IJuke 
 V. 1, 12 ; ix. 51 ; X. 38 ; xiv. 1 ; xvii. 11 ; xix. 15 ; xxiv. 4, 15 ; Matt. 
 IX. 1 Ktti eyivero avrov avaKeifiei/ov, kul l8ov iroXXot . . . awaveKeiVTO, 
 Luke ii. 15 koi iyivero, is a/ir^Xdov . . . kol ol avOpumoi evjrov, v. 17 koi 
 eyeceTO iv (jllS tw ■^[lepZv, /cot airbs ^v SiSdcTKuyv, koI ^crav etc., viii. 1,22. 
 Somewhat different, and departing from the Heb. idiom, is Acts v. 7 
 cyevero oe <J)s wpSiv rpiSiv Stacmj/id xai ij yvvij e'urijXOcv. Or 
 
 b) The occurrence is given, indeed, in a Finite Verb, but 
 without Kai. This is the most frequent construction. 
 
 Matt. vii. 28 k<u lyivero, ore eTeAco-ev o 'Ijyo-ovs rovi Xoyovs toutous, 
 tieirXrifTcrovTo, cf. xi. 1 ; xiii. 53 ; xix. 1 ; xxvi. 1 ; Luke i. 23 icai iyi- 
 ViTo, (OS i7rXi^o-6rja-av a'l ■^fiipai . . . , aTrrjXOiv, cf. VS. 41 ; xi. 1 ; xix. 29 ; 
 Mark i. 9 koL iyivero iv ekeivois tois i^/itpats, ^Xdev 'Irjcrov?, cf. Luke i. 
 69 ; ii. 1 ; ii. 46; vi. 12; vii. 11 ; ix. 37 lya/ero Se iv rfj e^^s ■op-^pif, 
 KarekOovrwv avTCiv, o-ui'iji'Tijcrei' airw 0)(Xos, cf. xi. 14; XX. 1 ; Mark iv. 
 4 (cat iyevero iv Tu a~7relpetv, o p-kv Ittectev etc. cf. Luke i. 8 ; ii. 6 ; viii. 
 40 ; ix. 18, 83 ; xi. 1, 27 ; xvii. 14 ; xviii. 35 ; xxiv. 30, 51. It is to 
 be noticed, moreover, that in these sentences the predicate of the lead- 
 ing clause almost always stands in the first place, i.e. directly 
 after the specification of time, except in Mark iv. 4 ; Luke xi. 27 ; 
 xxiv. 30 ; xviii. 85 ; i. 8, where (but generally for perceptible reasons) 
 this arrangement is departed from somewhat. Hence, in Luke ix. 57 
 Lchm. the comma must be put after 6Sa< ; according to the reading of 
 Tdf. [Treg., who omit iyevtro] the passage does not belong under this 
 head. Or 
 
 c) The occurrence stands (dependent on iyevero') in the 
 Ace. with the In fin. The subsequent facts are then 
 either subjoined in a finite verb, Mark ii. 23 koI iyevero irapev- 
 •rropevecrdai avrov Sia twv cnropifiwv, koX rjp^avro ol fJt,a6rjTaL etc. 
 cf. Luke vi. 1, 6, or follow likewise in the Infinitive, Luke iii. 
 21, cf. xvi. 22. 
 
 This mode of expression, as that which approximates most nearly to 
 the genius of the Greek language, is employed almost always by Luke 
 in theActs, e.g. xix. 1 iyivero Se iv tcu tov AttoXXo) sivat iv K.opLvOto, 
 TlavXov 8i£\66vTa ... iXOeiv, cf. ix. 37; xvi. 16; xxviii. 17, — he, 
 besides, divesting the idiom more and more of its strictly Hebraistic 
 complexion by omitting the clauses specifying time (so even in the 
 Gospel, xvi. 22 ; further. Acts iv. 5 ; ix. 32, 43 ; xiv. 1 ; xxviii. 8), or 
 making them precede (ix. 3), and then by rendering iyevero itself 
 dependent on a conjunction (e.g. xxi. 1 ws Se iyivero avax6rjvaL ■^/iSs 
 etc. ct^ xxi. 5 ; xxvii. 44), and finally by connecting the Dative with 
 
278 ATTRACTION Wnu THE INFINITIVE. [§14i 
 
 it {avTok xi. 2G, /Aot xxii. 6). Cf. Credner, Einl. ins N. T. p. 133. 
 On the construction with tov and the Infin. see § 140, 16, 8) p. 270. 
 7 Remark. Also the analogous formula used in the prophetical books 
 of the 0. T. ("■"!!, Sept. koi iurai followed by the Fut.) is found 
 unaltered in the N. T., yet only in literal quota-tions, and always, 
 as in the corresponding passages of the 0. T., without a following koX ; 
 as. Acts ii. 17 eo-rat iv rais lax6.rai.<s ■fi/Ji.ipOii';, eK^^eai ctTro tov TrvevfiaTO'; 
 etc. 21 Koi io-Tai, ttSs . . . crioOiQa-eTaL (cf. Rom. x. 13), Acts iii. 23 ia-rai 
 239 8e, irao-a ij/vxr) . . . iioXiBpevOrjcrerai (a free quotation, after the Heb., 
 of Deut. xviii. 19), Rom. ix. 26 (quotn.). 
 
 Attkaction in Connection with the Infinitive. 
 B. §142,2; H. §774,1.2.3; C. §667; D. §583sq.; J. §672sq. 
 
 1 The general rule that predicative and other declinable 
 adjuncts (Participles, etc.) with the Infin. stand in the Nom- 
 inative if the (omitted) Subject of the Infin. is identical with 
 that of the leading clause ((^atr/coi'Te? elvai ao<jioi Rom. i. 22, 
 ifjMpTvpijdrj elvai BiKaio<; Heb. xi. 4), needs no further illustra- 
 tion ; still less, the rule that such adjuncts stand in the Accu- 
 sative when they refer to a preceding word in the same case 
 (jcaTeicpLvav avTov elvai evo')(ov Oavdrov Mark xiv. 64). 
 
 Of the more refined use of Attraction (which, however, was often 
 neglected even by the best Greek authors), by virtue of which predi- 
 cative adjuncts with the Infln. referring to a Genitive or Dative 
 in the leading clause are put in the same case (t^eo-Tt /toi -yevc'cr^ai eiSai- 
 //.on etc.), no example can be adduced from the N. T. It occurs only 
 occasionally in connection with subjoined Participial adjuncts, 
 although even here the Accusative has become more usual. See on 
 this in its place § 144, 20 b) p. 305. 
 
 B.§142,N.2; H.§774sq.; C.§667; D.cf.§589; J.§§674.676; G.cf.§93N.2. 
 
 2 Of the Impersonals Trpiirei, Trpoa-iQKei, e^ecm, crvfiPalva and the like, 
 wpeTTtt {wpiTTov iuTLv) occurs in four constructions: 1) as commonly 
 with the Dative and the Infin. (Matt. iii. 15) or with the Infin. to be 
 supplied. Tit. ii. 1 kdXei a irphru (sc. \aXuv) rrj etc. ; 2) with the 
 Dative after irpen-ci and a following Accusative adjunct with the 
 Infin., see the example Heb. ii. 10 in_§ 144, 20 b) p. 306; 8) the 
 Dative with wpiiru is attracted by the following Infin. and as its Sub- 
 ject passes over into the Accusative (Ace. and Infin.), 1 Cor. xi. 13 
 Trpiirov Icttlv yvvalxa d/caTaXuTrroi/ Trpocrevxia-dai ; 4) in a personal con- 
 struction, Heb. vii. 26 rotowos tj/juv cVpcTrci/ oip)(iepevi. "E^ccttiv 
 {iiov icrnv) has as a rule the Dative and Infin. ; Luke, however, also 
 uses the Accus. an(/ Infin. in vi. 4 ovs ovk i^ecrriv cftayeLv, el fi-xi p-Qvov? 
 
§ 142.] THE INFINITIVE. 279 
 
 Toiis iepel^, and according to the best mss. [Sin. also] in xx. 22 
 Tdf. [Treg.J ; the Ace. occurs, besides, several times as a variant in 
 cod. B (Mark ii. 26 [so N also, and now Tdf.]), and iuOrigen. Both 
 these constructions (with the Dat. and with the Ace.) occur also with 
 eyevero in the Acts, see § 141, 6, c) p. 277. On the construction of 
 8« see § 131, 3 p. 147. 
 
 B. § 142, 3. 4; H. § 775; C. § 667; J. §672, 4. 
 
 Examples of a Nominative adjunct with an Infln. used subtan- 3 
 tively with the Article, or dependent on a Preposition, are extremely 
 rare (because in sentences of this kind according to N. T. usage the 
 Subject of the leading clause, if identical with that of the Infin., is re- 
 peated, and then stands in the Ace. according to the rule § 141, 4, b) 
 p. 274) ; as, 2 Cor. x. 2 Sco/uai Sk to /ic'^ Trapiav Bapfyqaai etc. (see on 
 this § 140, 8 p. 263. 
 
 In clauses with (So-tc and irpiv we find no example of the Nomina- 
 tive and Infin. ; but only of the Infin. alone, hence without the repeti- 
 tion of the Subject (Matt, xxvii. 1, etc.), and of the Ace. and Infin., 240 
 but with a new Subject, Matt. i. 18, etc. 
 
 B. § 142, N. 3 ; C. § 667 ; J. § 672, Obs. 1 ; .673, 2 sq. 
 To such an example as viricT^ero a i t 6 s Trotijcreu' (in which airos is 4 
 not the Subject, otherwise it would have been in the Ace, but only an 
 attributive adjunct belonging to the omitted Subject qf the Infin.) 
 an analogous instance occurs in John vii. 4 oiScis yap tl iv Kpmrrta 
 TTotet Kai fijTct a i T o s hr Trapprjcria itvax. For so all the editors (except- 
 ing Lchm.) and the commentators read. But we cannot with many in- 
 terpreters regard airos as merely a resumptionTsf the Subject ; in such 
 cases the language of the N. T. requires under all circumstances the 
 Accusative (and that, too, of the Reflexive tavTov etc.). The examples 
 quoted by Liicke (Com. Vol. II. p. 190), viz. Matt. xii. 50 ; Mark xv. 
 43, have no force in proof of the resumptive use of airds with an 
 Infinitive; cf. on the other hand for the opposite use (of kavTov 
 etc.) the examples cited in § 141, 4, a) p. 274. On the contrary, aurds 
 here has its original signification self, and is nothing more than an 
 attributive adjunct in the Nominative belonging to the omitted subject ; 
 subjoined by the writer not for antithesis (to rt) or emphasis, but solely 
 for perspicuity's sake ; and hence ought not to receive much stress : 
 and yet seeks himself to be manifest} Against the other reading avrd 
 (which rests, moreover, only on weak authority) Liicke declares him- 
 self most positively, and with reason. According to it ^i^reii/, which 
 
 1 For this interpretation see Kling In the Stud. u. Krit. for 1836, p. 153. Liicke 
 did not assent to it, perhaps only because he objected to the too great prominence 
 given to an antithesis. 
 
280 RELATIVE SENTENCES. [§143, 
 
 everywhere else as an auxiliary verb is joined only to the simple Infin. 
 and the' Ace. of the Obj ect, would be construed like a verbum sen- 
 tiendi with the Infin. and the Ace. of the Subject; for this no pre- 
 cedent can be found. That reading could only be justified if instead 
 of ilvai such a verb as Troaja-ai. followed. 
 
 Relative Sentences. 
 B. §143; H. §§511sqq.807sqq.; C. §§65l8qq.562a.; D. §§401 sq.; J. §§ 818 sq, 833 Ob8. 2. 
 
 I As a special peculiarity in these sentences mention must first 
 of all be made of an indubitable Hebraism which has passed 
 over from the language of the Old Testament into certain parts 
 of the New. 
 
 The Seventy, in translating the original, very commonly im- 
 itated the Hebrew mode of expressing the Relative (iirs with a 
 separated Personal pronoun following) in this way : to the 
 Relative Pron., placed at the beginning of the Relative clause, 
 they subjoined (but never immediately, and likewise only 
 in the oblique cases as in Hebrew) the Pron. avT6<; in the same 
 case : e.g. the Ace. Lev. xvi. 32 ov av ^la-coaiv avrov (iriS-urN), 
 241 the Geii. Ruth iii. 2 o5 ^? //.era roiv Kopaaocov avrov ('nizix with 
 sufiix following), the Dat. Neh. viii. 12 eV Tot? Xojok, oh 
 ijvcopiaev avroX^ (ort-iiox), 1 Kings xiii. 10 iv rfj ohm^fj ffKdev 
 iv avrfi (na-^irx); frequently also with the Preposition repeated 
 and with Adverbs, as Ex. iv. 17 ; Lev. xi. 32, 34 ; Josh. xxiv. 
 13, etc. In Greek authors a similar construction only, not the 
 same,, is found ; see Fritzsche ad Lucian. p. 109. 
 
 In the N. T. the Hebraizing language of the Apocalypse most fre- 
 quently employs this mode of expressing relation, and that without 
 laying in the least any sort of emphasis thereby upon the pronominal 
 adjunct ; as, iii. 8 7)v oiStis Swarai Kkiurai airijv, vii. 2 ois IhoBrj auToic, 
 9 ; XX. 8 ; xiii. 12 ; and likewise with the Efelative adverb, ottou . . . 
 eKEt xii. 6 Tdf. [^socod. Sin.], 14, ob-ov . . . hr airrSiv xvii. 9. In other 
 writers it occurs only as a somewhat rare exception, e.g. Mark vii. 25, 
 and probably rather in certain national sayings, as Matt. iii. 12 ; Luke 
 iii. 16, 17 ; Mark i. 7, or in quotations from the O. T., as Acts xv. 17 
 (e^' oSs . . . eir' avTovs), Rom. iii. 14 cod. B, 1 Pet. ii. 24 Tdf [«*] o5 
 . . . avrov. 
 
 But the emphatic addition of avrb tovto io o (quod ipsum) Gal. ii. 
 10 (cf. Lucian. Abd. 6) does not belong here ; and avros in the Nom- 
 inative can in Relative clauses have only the signification self: 1 Pet, 
 ii. 24. 
 
§ 143.] CONSTRUCTION OP RELATIVE SENTENCES. 281 
 
 B. §143,2! H. §503a.; C. §496; J. § 818. 
 
 The general rule, that in Relative clauses which refer back 3 
 to the First or Second Person the verb must stand in the 
 same Person, is not disregarded in the New Testament, (but 
 commonly a Participle then takes the place of the Relative 
 clause, see § 144, 9, b) p. 294). Hence we find in Jolin viii. 
 40 avOpooirov . . . o? XeKoKrjKa, because avdpoyirov is in apposi- 
 tion with the fie preceding. 
 
 Rev. ii. 24 vjuv Se rots Xoiirots Tots ev ©varnpoW) oaroi ov/c t\ova'iv etc. 
 is, indeed, a deviation ; but the construction is to be referred to the 
 underlying simple thought, to those among you (jovs Xoittois) who have 
 not etc., hence to be explained as a constr. ad synesin. 
 
 B. §143,4; H. §B13b.; 0.5500; D. p.862; J. §821, 3. 
 
 That the Relative (09, San';') conforms in Gender to the 3 
 Substantive of its own clause, instead of that of tlie preced- 
 ing clause to which it strictly refers, is a very common con- 
 struction in the N. T. also, as may be seen from the examples; 
 with wliich in general § 129, 6 p. 128, should be compared. 
 
 Mark zv. 16 aiXijs o icmv Trpavraptov, Acts xvi. 12 $iXtWous, ^tw 
 ctTTtj' irpwrq ttoXis, Gal. iii. 16 (nripfiaTi, os scrrtv XpttrTo's, Col. i. 27 Tdf. 
 and Eph. i. 14 Tdf. [Treg.j (where both readings, os [so nJ and 0, are 
 almost equally attested), vi. 17 ; iii. 13 (but in Col. iii. 5 -ijtk probably 
 refers only to TrXeovelt'a), 1 Tim. iii. 15 ; 1 John ii. 8 ; Rev. iv. 5 Lchm. 
 [Tdf. Sin.], V. 8 (if we refer ot to OvfiLaixdrwu). This construction is 
 in most cases more natural than the regular one ; especially if the 
 predicate in the Relative clause is a Personal pronoun, as 1 Cor. iii. 17. 
 
 CONSTRUCTIO AD SyNESIN WITH THE RELATIVE. 242 
 
 B. §143,5; H. §523; C. §499; D.p.362; J. § 819. 
 
 With the contents of this paragraph must be compared the 4 
 detailed statements made previously : §§ 127, p. 105 sq. ; 123, 
 p. 80 ; 129, p. 129 sq. What was there said applies in general 
 in its full extent to Relative sentences also. Referring, there- 
 fore, as respecis the general subject to those sections, we give 
 here at once the examples relating to Relative sentences : 
 
 a) The Relative in the Singular refers to an antecedent 
 Plural ; as, 
 
 Acts xxiv. 1 1 ov TXctous tlcTLV fioi rjixipax hu&SKO, atf> ■^s (sc. rjfjiepai) 
 
 ave^riv ; and there is no reason for explaining otherwise the Sing, in 
 
 Phil. iii. 20 : ev avpavdi<s VTrdp^ei, i^ ov (sc. ovpavov) Kai crmr^pa aTrexSe- 
 
 ^ofjieOa, — the license here is the more natural as the preceding Plural 
 
 86 
 
282 CONSTRUCTION OF RELATIVE SENTENCES. [§ 143. 
 
 is to be understood only as a Singular and the word (ovpavo?) is used 
 indiscriminately in both numbers ; see p. 24. 
 
 b) The Relative in the Plural refers to a collective term 
 in the Singular ; as, 
 
 Luke vi. 17 ttX^^os ttoXv, oi ^XOov, Acts xv. 36 Kara TrSo-av iroXiv, iv 
 oTs etc., xxii. 5 irav to irpia^vreptov. Trap' &v etc. But in Rom. vi. 21 
 before ei^' oh an idea like TotaSra or toiovtovs sc. Kapirovs is to be sup- 
 plied, according to § 127, 5 p. 105. 
 
 c) The Relative accords with the natural Gender of its 
 antecedent substantive (cf. § 123, 7 p. 80): — most frequently 
 after reKvov, reicvca, stands in the Masculine. 
 
 Gal. iv. 19 ; John i. 13 ; 2 John 1 ; Philem. 10. Further, iraLSapiov 
 ev, OS John vi. 9, tOvrj oi Acts xv. 17; xxvi. 17, cf. Rom. ii. 14 sq., 
 OripLov 09 Rev. xiii. 14 (Rec. o [so cod. Sin.]), oi/d/xaTa oi iii. 4 (Lchm. 
 [T.Tr.Sin.] a). Then in reference to the Person of Christ : Ke(j>aXrj oi 
 Col. ii. 19, and in the celebrated passage 1 Tim. iii. 16 according to 
 the reading now (and indeed by Griesbach) received : ixMcrrrfpiov, o s 
 [so n] i<fyavepiL6r] etc. ; see the commentaries on the passage, and cf. Col. 
 i. 27; Eph. i. 14in3 p. 281. 
 
 Remark. Under this head also must be brought the case, where the 
 Relative, if referring to material or abstract objects, stands in the 
 Neuter Plural instead of the Masc. or the Fem. (as in the case 
 of the Demonstrative avrd § 127, 8 p. 106), having less regard to the 
 grammatical gender of the word, than to the general neuter idea (of 
 things etc.) which it expresses ; cf. § 129, 4 p. 127. Thus in Acts xxiv. 
 17 sq. Tdf. [eds. 2, 7], the oldest mss. [Sin. also, followed by Lchm. 
 Treg. and now Tdf.] give, indeed, cXeij/AooTjva? ttoi^o-uv kol Trpoo-c^opds, 
 ev als etc. ; but this reading betrays more the correcting hand of the 
 copyists than the common reading iv oh. 
 
 d) The Relative refers to a noun which is only implied in 
 the leading clause (cf. § 127, 8 p. 106). 
 
 2 Pet. iii. 1 ravrj^v Btvrepav i/uv ypai^M iina-To\r]v, iv ah etc. where 
 from SeuT^av iTrujToXi^v the term " two letters " is to be educed ; Phil, 
 ii. 15 TEKva 6eov fiiaov yevea's a'KoXiS.<;, iv ois (^oLvOpiinroK ryji yev. aKoX..) 
 etc. 
 
 B. §143,6; H. §§243. 525;8.; C.§B57; D. §892; J. §8.34. 
 
 243 Relative clauses are naturally and originally subordinate or 
 
 6 secondary clauses, and hence strictly ought always to append 
 
 only subordinate thoughts immediately dependent on the 
 
 leading clause, or adjuncts of individual members of it. But 
 
 the influence of Latin upon the later Greek language is un- 
 
§ 143.] CONSTRUCTION OF RELATIVE SENTENCES. 283 
 
 mistakable, in the fact that Relative clauses so often either 
 stand in Latin style quite at the beginning of a sentence, or 
 serve as a continuation of the leading clause ; yet. in such a 
 way that in b o t h cases they contain leading thoughts, and 
 thus assume the relation of co-ordinate leading clauses 
 (hence 09 is equivalent to koL o5to?, et hie etc.). 
 
 Yet this usage is employed less by those authors who wrote in the 
 popular language, than by those who wrote a literary and periodic style. 
 Hence this mode of expression, though originally the less idiomatic, is 
 found most frequently of all in the writings of Luke, particularly in 
 the Acts ; often also in the Epistles, because these compositions strive 
 after an extended periodic structure. This is less the case in the 
 Evangelists, even in the discourses which occur there. A portion of 
 these clauses still evince their characteristic as subjoined leading 
 clauses by inserting immediately after the Relative the additional con- 
 nective KoI (just as in the German sentence washer auch that). 
 
 Examples are very numerous. a) Without koi: John xix. 
 
 17 (but not vi. 21 where eis rjv vTnjyov is a subordinate adjunct to 
 yjji). Acts V. 16, 36 ; vii. 20 ; ix. 3.5, 39 ; xi. 28 ; xiv. 8, 9 ; xvii. 10 ; 
 xxvi. 12 (iv oh), 19 (oOev quare), xxviii. 15 ; Gal. iv. 24, etc. On Acts 
 xxiv. 14 see § 151, 10 p. 383 ; on Rom. xvi. 27 § 144, 7 p. 293. 
 
 b) With Kai: Luke x. 30; Acts i. 11; x. 39; xii. 4; xiii. 22; xxviii. 
 10 ; Gal. ii. 10, etc. On Acts xxiv. 6 see § 144, 7 p. 293. Cf also 
 § 149, 8f ) p. 363. This combination is common in later authors. 
 
 B. § 143, 7 b.; H. § 818 Eem. d. ; C. § 662; J. § 833. 2. 
 
 The usage that when two successive co-ordinate Relative 
 clauses have one and the same antecedent the Demonstra- 
 tive (aOTo?) takes the place of the Relative in the second 
 clause, harmonizes so closely with the character of the popular 
 language (hence it is so frequent even in Homer) that in the 
 N. T. also many examples of it are found, as Luke xvii. 31 
 6? earat enrl rov ScofiaTO<; koX ra aKem) avrov iv ry oIkIo,, /Mr) 
 Kara^dTco, cf. xiii. 4 ; John i. 33 ; Acts iii. 13 Tdf. [ed. 8 omits 
 avTov, so n], 1 Cor. viii. 6 ; 2 Pet. ii. 8, etc. 
 
 A portion of these instances may be fitly traced also to the circum- 
 stance that the N. T. writers were familiarized by the O. T. with sud- 
 den transitions from relative, participial, and other subordinate clauses 
 to leading clauses (in continuation of the subordinate clauses ; cf. on 
 the Hebrew, Gesen. Lehrg. 802), and hence often employed this 
 construction of their own accord; see on this in its place § 151, 8 sq. 
 p. 381 sq. 
 
284 CONSTRUCTION OF RELATIVE SENTENCES. [§ 143. 
 
 Reiiakk. Also of the more delicate construction (cf. B. § 143, 8 ; 
 J. § 825), when the case of the Demonstrative occurring in a closely 
 244 connected subordinate clause following the Eelative is assumed 
 by the Relative, and, the Demonstrative being dropped, both clauses 
 are thus blended externally into one (as oh idv tk 8u equiv. to oi, idv 
 Tis avTOK Su), an example occurs (so far as the great fluctuation of the 
 MSS. permits us to discover the text) in Matt. vii. 9 Tdf. [ed. 7 ; ed. 8 
 om. iav, so Treg. cod. Sin. J : rts eo-rtv i$ r/tiuiv avOpwiro's, ov iav airr]- 
 crei (i.e. OS, iav avrov aiT'^trci) o vloi avTOV apTOV, /X'^ XWov £7riSaJo-et avT(p ; 
 In this case we encounter the additional irregularity that the last 
 clause, instead of continuing the Relative construction, passes over into 
 a direct question introduced by /x.^. Cf. the parallel passage from 
 Luke in § 151, 10 p. 384. According to the other reading (which drops 
 idv) the Eelative construction alluded to disappears. 
 
 B.§143,12; H.§809; C. §664c.; D. p. 364; J.§824,U. 
 
 7 Examples of Relative clauses where the governing noun (or 
 antecedent so-called) is incorporated into the Relative 
 clause (but without the Article and not immediately after the 
 Relative) are, Mark vi. 16 8y iya direKe^dXio-a ^Imdvvqv, ovto'; 
 ■^yepOr), Luke i. 4 ; xxiv. 1 ^ipovaai a fjToiixaa-av apwfiara, John 
 vi. 14, etc. On Phil. iii. 18; Pliilem. 10, etc. see §123, 3 p. 
 77 sq. 
 
 Slightly anomalous is Acts xxi. 1 6 (tvv7JX.6ov . . . ayovrcs Trap* <o fevi- 
 (r6S>iJi.€v Mi/ao-u)ct Ttvi KuTrpiiu, dp^atoi jxaBiyr^. According to the above 
 rule this would express the following thought : ayovTes Mmo-wva tivo 
 Kvirpiov, Trap (S ^evurOw/jiev ; so in fact it is understood by the Vulgate 
 (which here is guided by a correct grammatical instinct) and several 
 expositors, But the context and probable facts in the case stand 
 opposed to this, and require the meaning (which Luther, deWette, et al. 
 express) who led us to a certain Mnason etc. Many, among them 
 Winer 214 (201), have accordingly explained the Dative MvdariavL as 
 a species of local Dative, made it depend immediately on ayovres, and 
 resolved it by irpos TAvda-wva. Not only has this interpretation (as 
 deWette has remarked) its difficulty, but, apart from the rarity of such 
 a Dative, the Greek would not be good ; since in this case the words 
 must of necessity have been arranged thus : S.yovn's (sc. ijjuas) Mvao-uvi 
 rail Kinrpio), nap' m etc. The position of the words, moreover, is the 
 very thing which forces us to the only correct interpretation (proposed 
 by Bornemann, Schol. in Luc. p. 177), according to which the words 
 are indeed to be construed according to the above rule, but as follows : 
 ayoiTES (^/uSs) TTopo Mj'oo-oji'a Tiva K.vTrplov, Trap ui etc. This gives, too, 
 
§ 143.] ATTRACTION IN RELATIVE SENTENCES. 285 
 
 the sense demanded by the majority of interpreters, and alone suited 
 to the passage. The contraction of the two clauses into one is easily 
 explicable, owing to th6 similarity of the two adjuncts (Trapo nva and 
 irapd Tivi), and acquires still more grammatical probability if we sub- 
 stitute in the first place Trapa with the Dative. For this use of a Dat. 
 dependent on a Preposition with a verb of motion is by no means 
 unusual, and is found both in Greek authors and in the N. T. ; see 
 § 147 under Trapa p. 339. The omission of the object i7/u.5s, at which 245 
 however no one would take offence, occasioned the erroneous assump- 
 tion (early disseminated by the rendering of the Vulgate) that Mva- 
 a-oiva was the object of oiyovres. If this were what Luke had wanted to 
 say, he wo.uld for perspicuity's sake not only have placed Mvaa-un/a in 
 the Accusative immediately with ayovres, but probably also have 
 subjoined a local specification, as IkuOo/ etc. 
 
 Attbaction in Relative Sentences. 
 B. §143,13; H. §808; C. §654a.b.; D. §402; J. § 822. 
 
 Of the constructions pre-eminently peculiar to the Greek 8 
 tongue, perhaps none became more the usage of all times and 
 dialects, than that known under the name of Attraction in 
 Relative sentences. It is so thoroughly rooted in the craving 
 for external symmetry inborn in all native Greeks, and 'in the 
 general propensity to subordinate grammatical precision of ex- 
 pression to beauty of form, that it passed over also into the 
 popular language and almost suppressed the regula:r form of 
 expression.^ Hence numerous examples of it, moulded thor- 
 oughly in the spirit of the best Greek prose, are found in all 
 parts of the N. T. : — most frequently, again, in Luke, yet also 
 not seldom in John and in the Epistles, less prominently in 
 Matt., Mark, and the Revelation. In the Sept, also this con- 
 struction is current (see e.g. Deut. xiv. 23 ; xv. 18 ; xvi. 2, 
 5, 18, etc.). 
 
 We will arrange the examples as follows (cf. B. I.e.) : 
 
 Ordinary examples of the Genitive (according to the model 
 /«.€TaStSo)s airS tov ctltov ovnep — instead of ovTrcp — ^X"*) • Matt, xviii. 
 19; Luke v. 9 [Treg. and] B, xv. 16; John iv. 5, 14; vii. 39; xv. 
 
 1 In fact examples are not wanting where the regular construction has been 
 altered into the other by the copyists, or at least it is very doubtful which read- 
 ing was the original one; see below, and the variants on Mark xiii. 19 (Lchm. 
 [Treg. Tdf. cod. Sin.] SJc), xiv. 72 ; John ii. 22 (JiOhm. [Treg. Tdf. cod. Sin.] Sv), 
 iv. 5, 50 (Lchm. [Treg. Tdf.] Bv), vii. 39; Tit. iii. 5 (Lchm. [Treg. Tdf. Sin.] &), 
 Rev. i. 20 (Lchm. [T. Tr. Sin.] oSs) ; cf. the note on 9 p. 286. 
 
286 ATTRACTION IN RELATIVE SENTENCES. [§ 143. 
 
 20 ; xxi. 10 ; Acts i. 1 ; iii. 21, 25 ; vii. 17, 45 ; ix. 36 ; x. 39 ; xxii. 
 10 ; 1 Cor. vi. 19 ; 2 Cor. i. 6 ; x. 8 ; Eph. i. 8 ; Tit. iii. 6 ; Heb. ix. 
 20 (quotn.), vi. 10 ; Jas. ii. 5 ; 1 Pet. iv. 11 ; 1 John iii. 24 ; Jude 15. 
 
 Ordinary examples of the Dative (according to the model eS 
 Trpoo-i^epcrai tois <^i\ois oh — instead of ovs — €x€i) : Matt. xxiv. 50 ; 
 Mark vii. 13; Luke ii. 20; v. 9 ; ix. 43; xii. 46; xxiv. 25; John 
 xvii. 5, 11; Acts ii. 22; vii. 16: xvii. 31; xx. 38; 2 Cor. xii. 21; 
 Eph. ii. 10 ; 2 Thess. i. 4; Rev. xviii. 6. 
 
 It is to be noticed that in the itajority of the passages referred to 
 246 there is not the least fluctuation in the text ; only cod. D has some- 
 times (quite alone) the Accusative instead of the other two cases. 
 
 B. §143,14; H.§809; C.§B53; D.p.864sq.; J.§824II. 
 
 9 The noun of the antecedent clause is incorporated into the 
 Relative clause (but according to 7 p. 284 not placed imme- 
 diately after the Relative) and assumes also the case of the 
 Relative; as, 
 
 Luke iii. 19 Trepl ttcivtcov Ssv lTrolr)<Te.v Trovrjpmv o HpcoSTjs, xix. 37 TTtpi 
 wacxuiv &v elSov SwajMeoiv, Rom. iv. 17 (see 11 p. 287). Similar is 2 Cor; 
 X. 1 3 Kara to jxerpov tov xavdvos, ov i[i,epuTev rj/uv 6 6eos fj-erpov, e^iKiadai 
 a)(pi Koj. vfjiMv (see de Wette). Here belongs also Acts xxv. 18 if we 
 adopt [so Treg.] the text of B E etc. viz. Trepi oi) oi Karfjiyopoi ovSeixiav 
 alriav c<j)€pov, &v tyo) uirevoow Trovijpfiv.' 
 
 B. § 143, 15; H. § 810; C. § 554 N. : J. § 822. 
 
 10 The noun or pronoun (jovrcov, tovtoi<;, etc.) in the antece- 
 dent clause is wholly omitted so that the Relative stands quite 
 alone in the case which properly does not belong to it, accord- 
 ing to the example fie/Mvrj/j,evo<; &v eTrpa^e (i.e. t&v Trpar/fidrmv, 
 &v for a eirpa^e) ; also when dependent on a Preposition (cf. 
 ■§ 127, 5 p. 104 sq.) : fiij Oopv^dre ecj) oh av Xeya. 
 
 Luke ix. 36 air-^yyeiXav ovSlv &v iwpaKov, xxiii. 41 afia &v iTrpd^afiev 
 
 1 Whether the last word irovt\pdv or irovTtpSiv, pronounced superfluous by 
 many commentators (condemned also by Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] but given by the oldest 
 MSS. [N* irotinpd]) is to be admitted into the text, is a question on which textual 
 ■criticism has probably yet to come to a decision. Grammatically viewed there is 
 nothing against the addition in either form. But (in opposition to Meyer [1]) the 
 preference is probably to be yielded to the reading, voviipdv (adopted by Lchm. 
 [Tdf.]) as the less common, because here the change of Troi/TjptJi' into troi/ripvv would 
 take place even more easily than usual, owing to the position of the word ; cf. the 
 preceding note, p. 285. The meaning is : Among all the accusations which they 
 brought forward, there was not, as I surmised, a bad one (they brought forward no bad 
 one). Both the alteration of the word into ■iroiriipSiv and its omission (since it is 
 contained by implication in iirev6ovv) may very easily have been the work of cor- 
 recting copyists or commentators. 
 
§143.] ATTRACTION IN BELATIVE SENTENCES. 287 
 
 diroXa^u./Savo/xev, John vii. 31 irXciova o-ijjueia iroMjo-ci &v ovtoi iiroirjcrev, 
 xvii. 9 (epan-oi) irepl mv 8«8(OKas /*ot, Acts viii. 24 ; xxi. 19, 24 (arising 
 from a KaT'/jxrivTai quae docentur), xxii. 15 ; xxv. 18 (see the note on 
 9 p. 286) ; Rom. xv. 18; 1 Cor. vii. 1 ; 2 Cor. xii. 17; Eph. iii. 20; 
 Heb. V. 8 ifiadtv axf) &v eirajBev t-qv inraKoriv, 2 Pet. ii. 12 €v oTs ayvoov- 
 <nv /3Xao-<^7;ju.owTes. Here belong also Acts xxvi. 22 (where the Par- 
 ticiple too 'is drawn into the attraction ; see § 144, 20 p. 305), and 
 xxvi. 16 respecting which see 11 below. 
 
 All the examples quoted hitherto follow strictly the leading 11 
 rule of attraction, viz. that the Relative if unattracted would 
 have stood in the Accusative. But so great was the fondness 
 for this construction that it was employed also where, strictly, 
 attraction was not grammatically admissible. For, since by 247 
 means of it members belonging together could be so joined 
 together as to blend into one externally rounded and recog- 
 nizable whole, the N. T. writers were unwilling to be deprived 
 of this advantage even in cases where strict usage was opposed 
 to it. 
 
 A portion of these cases may. to be sure, be referred to constructions 
 with the Accus., as 2 Cor. i. 4 t^s irapaKX-^o-ews •^s TrapaKaXovfjieBa, Eph. 
 i. 6 Lchm. [Treg. Tdf. N*] t-^s x°-P'-'''°'^ avrov ^s ixo-pirwaeif 7jfj.S.s, iv. 1 
 T^s kXtjo-ccos ^9 iKkrjOrjTf. (cf. 1 Kings viii. 29 ttJs rrpotrev^^^ ^s irpoa-ivxe- 
 rai), — all which are founded on the familiar construction treated of 
 § 131, 5 p. 148. More free, yet sustaining a certain analogy to the 
 same usage, are Acts xxiv. 21 i^uvijs ^s txpa^a (cf. Isa. vi. 4 t^s ^wi^s 
 ^S £K€Kpayov) and Jude 15 tSiv tpymv do-c/Seias avTZv S>v rja-i^rja-av. But 
 the following stand out of all analogy : 2 Thess. i. 4 dXlKJ/^criv als 
 avix^a-de (see however § 132, 9 p. 161), Acts i. 22 ews rijs ■fjp.tpa'; ^s 
 a.veXrjiJ.(ji6r] (Vulg. qua adsumptus est), Rom. iv. 17 KareVavTi o5 iirC- 
 crrevaev Oeov ante deum, cui credidit (since in this sense iria-TivEiv tlvo. is 
 wholly contrary to usage ; see § 133, 4 p. 173 sq.), 1 Tim. iv. 6 var.. 
 Acts xxvi. 1 6 jjidprvpa Siv re ciScs S>v re o^^iycro/iai <toi (quibus apparebo 
 tibi). In this last passage the first clause &v re elSes is perfectly reg- 
 ular, but the second is drawn into the attraction manifestly only for 
 symmetry's sake, which is not readily sacrificed to grammatical strict- 
 ness by a Greek writer (like L'uke)'; cf. Jude 15. On Acts xiii. 39, 
 however, see § 147, 30 p. 342. 
 
 B. §143, N. 6; H. §811a.; C. §554d.; D. p. 364; J. § 822 Obs. 10. 
 
 Relative Adverbs also sometimes undergo attraction. Examples 12 
 
 1 The variiition of cod. Vat. ano sundry versions [Zv eiSes /ie etc.) can only be 
 founded in a misunderstanding of the passage (perhaps cf Sf for &s). 
 
288 THE PAETICIPLE. [§ 144. 
 
 from the Is. T. are Matt. xxv. 24, 26 (rvvdyw odiv (equiv. to eKtWev 
 onov) ov Sic^-KopiruTo. Cf. with this § 127, 5 p. 105 and the similar 
 kind of attraction in § 151, 2 p. 377. 
 
 B. §143, 17; H. §817; C. §634o.; D. §404; J. §824. 
 
 13 Of the so-called attractio inversa — (a species of anacoluthon 
 where the antecedent is attracted by the Relative aad takes its 
 case ; see the details in the general Grammars) — a few wholly 
 unquestionable instances are- found. 
 
 Thus in the oft-repeated quotation from the 0. T. (Ps. cxvii. 22) 
 XlOov ov aTreSoKi'/iao-av oi oiKoSo/ioCvres, oStos iyevqOT] etc. Matt. xxi. 
 42, etc. ; but in 1 Pet. ii. 7 Lchm. [Treg.j Xt^os ov [Xidov ov Tdf. N*]. 
 Further, Luke i. 73 (Sia^^K?;?), opKov ov &iJ.ocrtv irpos Aj3paa.fi etc., 
 1 Cor. X. 16 Tov apTov ov Kkwfiev, ovxi Koaxovia iurlv etc. On Acts 
 X. 36 Tdf. [n*] see § 131, 13 p. 153 sq. An antecedent general pro- 
 nominal idea is likewise attracted by the Relative in Luke xii. 48 
 TravTt w iS66rj ttoXv, iroXi; ^-ifrqQ-qo-erai Trap' avTOV. Cf. here § 151, 
 
 4 p. 379.' 
 
 B.§143,19; H.of.§822; 853 b.; 767; C.§641; J. 836, 6. 7; G.§60. 
 
 14 A general Relative clause (os av etc.) sometimes takes the place of 
 248a conditional clause with idv (also a species of anacoluthon); 
 
 as. Matt. X. 1 4 os av /j-rj Sc^i^Tat v/itts . . . , iiep)(6p.evoi iKTivd^are tov 
 Kovioprov etc., xxiii. 16, 18 os av o/xocnj iv tS vaw, ovSiv icrnv. Cf. the 
 opposite case in § 149, 6 p. 360. 
 
 The Paeticiplb. 
 B. §144; H. §784D.; C. §673; J. §662; G. Chap. t1. 
 
 1 With respect to the use of Participles by the several N. T-. 
 writers a few general remarks must first be premised. As in 
 course of time Infinitive constructions in the ancient languages 
 were gradually resolved into conjunctional clauses (§ 141, 1 p. 
 272), the like takes place also with the Participle. Every one 
 conversant with Greek literature knows with what predilection 
 in its classic period participial constructions are employed, and 
 how the entire system of its structure of sentences depends in 
 great part on the employment of these clauses. Yet the arti- 
 ficial periodic structure produced by their aid is rather a pro- 
 duct of the refined (rhetorical) literary language and re- 
 mained pre-eminently a characteristic of it, while the plain 
 popular language of all periods — (read the lively and circum- 
 stantial descriptions, narratives, comparisons of Homer) — 
 preferred, instead of length) and involved periods, to give, 
 
§ 144.] THE PARTICIPLE. 289 
 
 rather, the individual members is independent clauses with a 
 finite verb, and to indicate the mode of their connection by 
 some of the simplest particles. Since, moreover, this analytic 
 mode of construction suited more the genius of Oriental ex- 
 pression (and accordingly prevails in the books of the 0. T.), 
 it was natural that, particularly in the language of the 
 Gospels marked especially by the national peculiarities 
 (Luke's not excepted, cf. § 141, 6 p. 276), the employment of 
 participial constructions should noticeably recede before the 
 construction by means of finite verbs, and that numerous com- 
 binations by means of conjunctions (especially KaC) are pre- 
 ferred where the classic literary language would without doubt 
 have availed itself of the construction with the Participle, or 
 of other subordinate dependent clauses. 
 
 The following passages will illjistrate in general what has been said : 
 Matt. vii. 27 koX Karejlrj rj ppoyy] koX Tj'fSov oi irora/Aol kcCl arvevcrav oi 
 avt/xoi. KOi irpoa-iKoij/av rij otKi'a iKuvr/, koI arecrtv, kol tjv rj TTTmcris air^s 
 fieytiXrj, viii. 14—16 koX ik6ti}v 6 'IrjoroCs etc., Mark i. 12, 13 ; Luke xviii. 
 32—34 irapaSoO'qcreTai kol , . . avojT^creTat ' koX avroi owScv tovtujv <Tvvr)- 249 
 Kav, KoX Tjv TO pjjfua tovto KtKpvix,ix.iiiov air airSni, koX ovk iyivuxTKOv to 
 Xeyofieva, xix. 2, 3 Koi iSov av-qp Btc, John iv. 47—50 ; Matt. xxi. 46 
 compared with the parallel passages, etc. ; see also §151, 31 p. 401. 
 A multitude of similar exanlples may be adduced also from the Apoc- 
 alypse. On the other hand, Luke in the Acts is removed' the farthest 
 from this form of narration ; the language of this book in its manner 
 of employing participial constructions approximates quite conspicuously 
 to the style of the classic Greek writers, and in passages reproduces 
 completely the traits of the Greek mode of thought and expression 
 (read in particular the speeches put into the mouth of the persons that 
 make their appearance, e.g. of Peter in Chaps, ii. and iii., of Paul in 
 Chaps, xvii. xxii. xxiv. xxvi., of Tertullus in Chap, xxiv., in part also of 
 Stephen in Chap, vii., or separate historical sections such as iv. 13-24; 
 xvi. 18-23, 27 ; xix. 1-9 ; xxvii. 30, etc.). The Epistolary writings, 
 particularly those of Paul, and still more the Epistle to the Hebrews, 
 likewise frequently employ participles, since for the treatment of didac- 
 tic and dogmatic material no form of expression was better suited than 
 the philosophic, finished, language of the learned Greeks of that day. 
 Yet it is not to be denied, that in handling participial constructions 
 classic dexterity in many respects fails the authors of these Epistles, 
 and that their periods, on account of the very excess of participles, 
 relative and other subordinate clauses, parentheses, and changes of 
 structure, are often deficient in perspicuity and prepare grave difRcul- 
 3T 
 
290 ^HE PARTICIPLE. [§ U*. 
 
 ties for the interpreter; see, for example, the first chapters of the 
 Epp. to the Ephesians and the Colossians. 
 2 One mode of resolving a periodic combination of clauses 
 into juxtaposed independent clauses has already been spoken 
 of (§ 139, 28 p. 226) in connection with hypothetic construc- 
 tions. Par more extensive would a collection prove to be of 
 those instances from all parts of the N. T. in which, instead 
 of Participles (usual in the classic literary language) standing 
 in some kind of temporal or causal relation to the leading 
 clause, the finite verb is introduced, to which then the leading 
 verb is subjoined by Kai. 
 
 Since an enumeration of all the passages of the sort belongs rather 
 to a work on N. T. Rhetoric than to a Grammar, it may suffice to • 
 illustrate the usage in separate characteristic examples : Matt, xviii. 
 21 TTOcraKK d/iapTijcret ets e/it o dSeXi^os fiov Kai a<j>r](r(iy avTW ; where 
 certainly every native Greek would have written tu . . . ajxapTrja-avTi, 
 since the first clause stands temporally in a subordinate" rela- 
 tion to the second ; Luke xxiv. 18 o-u fi.6vo<; TrapoiKeis ItpovaaXyjft. <cai 
 ovK lyvios Ta yevo/JLiva iv avrrj ; John vii. 4 oiSei? iv KpvwrQ tl Troiel Kai 
 t,rjTei avTos iv Trapprjcria cTvai, vi. 60 oStos icmv o apros • • • , Lva tis eg 
 avTov "jfittyg KOI /jLTj mroOavri, iii. 19 avrrj ottiv rj Kpitrvs, on to <^(us 
 iK-qkvOev . . . Kai rjya.irr](rav fxaXXov to ctkotos rj to c^cus, Eom. X. 20 
 aTroToXjio. KCLi Xc'yet. Also with an adversative Particle : Eom. vi. 17 
 Xa.pi<s ™ 6c({), on ^re SouXoi t^s dftapTtas, virrjKovcraTi Se etc. 
 
 Here belongs, further, the juxtaposition of two Impera- 
 tives of such a sort that the emphasis lies only on one of the 
 250 commands given. This likewise is in accordance with a mode 
 of popular speech (cf. the Latin divide et impera, i.e. divide if 
 thou wilt conquer). 
 
 Thus the frequent epxov koI 'iSe (instead of the literary iXOutv tSc or 
 epxov 'iva iSjys) John i. 47 ; Rev. vi. 1, 5, 7, ipevvrjo-ov Kat tSe John vii. 
 52, still more plainly Eph. iv. 26 (quotn.) 6pyit,ecr0e xai ju,-^ a.p.apTdvfTt 
 where it is impossible to understand the first command as direct (cf. 
 Mehlh. Schema am koivov etc. 1833). Further, the combination of an 
 Imperative with a following finite verb in the Future; as, ipxeo-Se- 
 Kai oij/€crde John i. 40 Tdf. ^Treg.], otTeiTe Kat So^^crcrai ■ Kpoven koX 
 avoLyrjaerai Matt. vii. 7 (Luke xi. 2),apaT€ Kai evprjcreTi Matt. xi. 29, etc. 
 
 B. § 1«, 1; C. cf. § 679; D. cf. §§ 420, 421 Obs. 5; J. cf. §§ 705, 2. 4; 759 Obs. 4; W. 350 aq. 
 
 (328 sq.). 
 
 3 Participles take the place of subordinate clauses only. 
 There are many passages, particularly in Paul's Epistles, where 
 
§ 144.] THE PARTICIPLE APPARENTLY INDEPENDENT. 291 
 
 Farticiples appear to stand independently ; and hence it has 
 been frequently asserted that in the N. T. even leading 
 clauses are formed in Hebrew fashion (see Gesen. Lehrg, 
 p. 791 ; Gr. § 131, 2) by means of Participles. Such an as- 
 sumption, however, would militate fundamentally with the 
 genius of Greek (prose) usage ; (not even the Seventy take 
 this liberty even where they had a Participle before them in 
 the Original). The probability of this assertion, therefore, in 
 Paul's case must be disputed at the outset, since even from the 
 most Hebraistic books of the N. T. no sure instance of such 
 a usage can be brought forward. It would be unreasonable 
 likewise to wish to apply to the language of such a writer as 
 Paul the isolated precedents extant in classic Greek poets 
 and earlier prose authors (which, besides, are all capable of a 
 proper explanation). On the contrary, all the examples 
 adduced as of this class may be brought substantially under 
 some one of the following heads : 
 
 a) The Participle appears to stand independently in incom- 4 
 plete citations from the O.T., or those quoted from 
 memory. « 
 
 For instance : 1 Cor. iii. 19 o Spacrcro/itvo^ roiis a-offxuvs iv ttJ rravovp- 
 yla avTuiv. Here it is plain even from the Article that the Participle 
 can only hold the place of a S ubj ect, and consequently cannot pos- 
 sibly itself be predicate (with ia-rlv understood), but a complete predi- 
 cate (/3ovXr]v aiiTUiv i^&TTijaev according to Job v. 13) is to be supplied, 
 provided Paul designed to give a complete thought here where he was 
 only concerned with the contents of the given words of the quotation ; 
 cf. Heb. i. 7 (after Ps. civ.), Matt. ii. 18 (after Jer. xxxi. 15). In this 
 way we can explain, too, most simply the Participle St8oi!» in Heb. viii. 
 10 and X. 16, viz. as a quotation according to the Alexandrian text' 251 
 from Jer. xxxi. (xxxviii ) 33. For to connect it grammatically with 
 SuxO-qaofiai is SO harsh as to seem hardly conceivable, and the connection 
 with iiriypafio is prevented by km. 
 
 b) In proverbial phrases. 5 
 These, as is well known, appear in all languages often as gram- 
 matically incomplete sentences (see e.g. Matt. v. 38), since the supply 
 of what is necessary to render the sentence grammatically complete is 
 
 1 In cod. Vat. it is given completely BiSois 5^<ra etc. The quotations in theEp. 
 to the Heb., however, agree almost always with the text of the Alexandrian codex, 
 (those in the Pauline Epistles more with the Vatican codex) ; see Bleek, Heb. Vol. 
 I. p. 369 sqq. 
 
292 THE PARTICIPLE. [§ 144. 
 
 made unconsciously and involuntarily by the hearer himself, and in 
 all such quotations it is the sense only which is important, not the 
 grammatical construction. E.g. 2 Pet. ii. 22 kvoiv hruTTpi>^a<i hn to 
 iSiov l^ipafw. • Ss X-ova-a/xevr] tis kuXut/jlov ^op^opov. 
 
 6 c) The Participle is to have a finite verb supplied to it 
 from the context, as was often the case also in Greek authors 
 (see B. § 151, IV. 5, and compare the chapter on Ellipsis below, 
 p. 39*0) ; and 
 
 d) The Participle stands anacoluthically, the sentence for 
 any reason (generally in consequence of parenthetic inser- 
 tions) following another construction or even breaking off and 
 remaining incomplete (cf. the chapter below on Anacoluthon, 
 p. 378). 
 
 To one of these last two heads are almost all Participles apparently 
 standing absolutely to be referred, especially in Paul's writings. But 
 as respects the individual cases, especially if both modes of explana- 
 tion appear to be grammatically admissible, the opinions of the most 
 reputable interpreters are not infrequently divided. As the number 
 of passages is very considerable ; as, further, an evident struggling 
 with expression has often interrupted the grammatical sequence of 
 thought and forced it into the background, and the correct understand- 
 ing of the several passages for the most part requires a student to 
 enter somewhat thoroughly into the context, not only grammatically, 
 but also doctrinally, historically, rhetorically : the grammarian must 
 restrict himself, at least in this connection, to establishing the existence 
 of the two classes of cases described, and to illustrating their nature 
 in a few prominent examples.' 
 
 Examples of c) are, Eom. v. 10 sq. et -yap ixOpol ovres etc. Here 
 not only has Kau;((o^evot been taken as a finite verb by many modern 
 interpreters, but the variant Kavx<ip^Oa (as an ancient interpretation) 
 is extant. Nevertheless the Part, must be regarded as a "tardily sub- 
 joined" adjunct to o-uSijcrd/tE^a ; see the comm. of Fritzsche, deWette, 
 252 Meyer. 2 Cor. viii. 19 sq. ov fiovov St, aAAo. xat ^"poTovrjSeis etc., a 
 parenthetic clause (left at the same time incomplete) which, since it 
 stands out of all construction, is to be completed with the aid of the 
 preceding Relative clause as follows : who not only on this account 
 (iu T<a evayy. i.e. as a publisher of the gospel), but also as one chosen 
 by the churches, is held in respect; the crTtXXo'/iei'ot following is 
 connected again most simply with the leading predicate oTJven-e/xi/ra/M.ei/. 
 
 1 On account of their obvious structural difficulties, such sentences even in 
 ancient times wore forced to undergo attempts at emendation of all sorts ; see e.g. 
 the various readings on Kom. v. 11 ; 2 Cor. viii. 21 ; Heb. vii. 1 ; 1 Pet. ii. 11. 
 
'§144.] THE PARTICIPLE APPARiiNTLY INDEPENDENT. 293 
 
 In the following verse (21), however, if with Tdf. [eds. 2, 7; not 8, 
 Treg. cod. Sin.] we read rrpovoovfievoi yap, we should be obliged again 
 to take the participial clause parenthetically and supply with it such 
 an idea as, J do this etc. (cf. § lol, 24 b) c) p. 394sq.). Mark xii. 5 
 where for oBs fji,kv Sepon-cs, oBs Se aTroKTevvovres a predicate like they 
 maltreated is to be derived from dTreKTeimv (cf. § 151, 23 d) p. 392). 
 See, besides, Heb. vii. 1-3 (according to the difficult reading [so 
 too n], adopted by Lchm. [Treg.], os o-wavT^tras etc., what is neces- 
 sary to complete it grammatically being given in the second verse), 
 1 Pet. ii. 18 (oi otKcrai, vTr<na.(r(T6jj.a>0L etc.), iii. 1 (ai -yui-aiKcs, viroracr- 
 o-d/xevat etc.), 7 (ol ai/Spes, (ruvoLKovvre's etc.) — with all which Parti- 
 ciples the appropriate predicates are to be supplied from the context ; 
 see the commentaries. Since such Participles absolute often cannot 
 be otherwise translated than by finite verbs, too great compliance 
 with our usage has led to the taking as leading clauses of yet many 
 other Participles, the grammatical coherence of which either with 
 preceding or following clauses has been satisfactorily proved by the 
 more sharp and discriminating criticism of recent interpreters ; see, 
 for instance, 2 Cor., v. 12; Rom. xii. 6 (where before e;(ovTes Se none 
 of the larger marks of punctuation is to be placed), xiii. 11 (referring 
 to vs. 8), Heb. xii. 15 ; 2 Pet. ii. 1 (dpvoij/xcvot, tirdyovrcs etc.), iii. 5 
 (where the participial clause begins with ii vSutos), etc. 
 
 Examples of d) are, 2 Cor. v. 6 Oappovvrei xat eiSoVcs etc. Here 
 the Participles are anacoluthic ; for after the parenthesis Sid ttio-tcojs 
 •ydp etc. the sentence, attracted by the predicate of the parenthesis 
 and resuming the initial OappovvTes, takes another turn : dappov^^v he 
 etc. In 2 Pet. i. 17 {XafOav yap irapa. Oiov etc.) the construction is 
 
 completely broken off with vs. 17 ; in vs. 18 a different construction 
 follows, the subject changing or rather reverting to the preceding one 
 (in vs. 16), and the grammatically incomplete thought which began 
 with vs. 17 being incorporated as object (ravTrjv rr/v c^tov^v) into this 
 following clause. John xiii. 1 (dyajr^o-as . . . ^yaTrijo-cv), where the 
 sentence, begun with Trpo Se t^s eopr^s etc., led astray by the intervening 
 dyaTT^o-as, suddenly passes over to a conclusion that does not correspond 
 to the first participial clause (etSws etc.). In the following verse the 
 interrupted sentence is not indeed grammatically completed, but con- 
 tinued in the interrupted narrative. In John vi. 22 Eec. the 
 participial clause (tSui/ [Lchm. Tdf. Treg. etSov, cod. Sin. etSci'] ori 
 etc.) is taken up. again in vs. 24 by ore ovv u8ev [cod. Sin. Kat iSovtcs 
 oTt etc.]. Acts xxiv. 5 (evpovTK ydp etc.) where the discourse, 
 instead of giving the leading clause belonging to the Participle, con- 
 tinues in the 6th verse in a Relative construction, just as in Rom. xvi. 
 25-27;- (cf. the doxology in Act. Polycarp. 20, and the similar case 
 
294 THE PARTICIPLE. [§ 144. 
 
 Acts xxiv. 18 in § 151, 10 p. 383). Rom. xv. 23 sq. Lchm. [Tdf. 
 Treg. N*] (run Si h7jk€ti etc.) where the participial clause iTrnroOiav 
 €)(<ov etc., owing to the pare-nthesis cXtti'^oj yap etc., is left unfinished, 
 and the discourse returns n vs. 25 to the original vwl Si of vs. 23, 
 see Lchm. vol. 11. pref. p. ix, [and Tdf.'s note on vs. 24 in his ed. 
 8] ; the addition eXeutro/siat Trpos w/ias appears to be (an emendation) 
 of later origin. To be sure, on this method of explaining them, the 
 sentences acquire for the most part a very irregular and anomalous 
 253 aspect. Yet compare the great multitude of similar changes in con- 
 struction (a liberty of which the N. T. writers, and foremost among 
 them Paul,.made a very extensive use) with the Participle in 13 
 p. 298 below, and in different connections § 151, 12 p. 386, § 123, 5 
 p. 78. 
 
 8 Remark. The former practice of construing even participial clauses 
 which stand in indubitable connection with finite verbs as leading 
 clauses, because, strictly taken, they contain not subordinate but rather 
 co-ordinate adjuncts of the action expressed by the leading verb, rests 
 upon an oversight of the laws of the Greek language ; e.g. Jas. ii. 9 
 ei 0€ ■n-potrumoXrijA.TrTeLTf, afuipnav ipyd^icrOe, IKeyxojJ^tvoi vtto tov vo/j-ov 
 is irapafiaTai ; see also Luke iv. 15 {iSiSao-Ktv . . . Soia^op.ivo';), Rom. 
 iii. 24, etc. Modern exegesis has already shown suificiently the error 
 of such an interpretation. 
 
 B. § 144, 1 and N. 1; H. § 785; 0. § 878; D. §§ 393b., 192; J. §§ 451. 696; G. § 108. 
 
 9 Participles take the place in particular of Relative 
 clauses; in which case the Participle as a rule has the 
 Article before it, cf. §125, 3 Remark, p. 93. This is, to be 
 sure, a general principle of the Greek language. But since 
 the N. T. in employing it manifestly goes farther than the 
 ordinary usage, we will here give a view of the cases by classi- 
 fying them. The Participle stands in place of a Relative 
 clause 
 
 a) After a Substantive likewise rendered definite by the Art. ; as, 
 Jas. iii. 6 ij yXuxjora KaOitTTWrai iv tois jxiXicriv ijfitov, rj cririXovara oXov to 
 crio/ia etc. Yet the substantive can also stand without an Art. in 
 the cases specified § 125, 3 p. 92; proper names, too, as a rule then 
 dispense with the article (cf. B. § 124, 3), as 1 Thess. i. 10 'Itjctovv, toi/ 
 pvofievov ^fias. 
 
 b) After Personal Pronouns, since they uniformly take the place 
 of a definite substantive, as Rom. ix. 20 crvi tis ei, 6 dvTaTro/cpii'o/xei'os, 
 xiv. 4; Jas. iv. 12 crii tis el, 6 Kpivtuv (for which in the passage from 
 Jas. the Rec. Grsb. etc. have after seveial mss. os KptVets), Rom. viii. 
 
§ 144.] THE PARTICIPLE INSTEAD OF A RELATIVE CLAUSE. 295 
 
 4 €v rj/xiv, TOts irepnraTovo'iv, Eph. i. 12, 19 rj/ias, Tovi TrporjX-iriKOTai, tous 
 TTtoTe Jovras, 1 Cor. viii. 10 a-e tov l;;{ovTa ; rarely after the Demons. 
 Pron. aiiTos in place of the 3d Pers., John i. 12 eSwKtv airots i^ovcriav . . . 
 
 TOIS TnCTTeVOVCTlV. 
 
 c) Also when the (1st and 2d) Person is not expressed separately 
 but contained in the verbal ending (on which cf. § 129, 13 p. 132), as 
 Heb. iv. 3 eUjep^6iJ,i6a eis t^v KaraTravcrtv, oi irto'TCucrai'TCS, vi. 18 iva 
 irapaKXtjo-LV Ip^to/xev, ot KaTatf>vy6vTe^, 1 John v. 13 tfoijv fxere aimviov, oi 
 
 iriO-TEJJOVTCS. 
 
 d) In appositional adjuncts to the Vocative, for the same reason. 
 See the examples of this in § 129 a. 6 p. 141. 
 
 e) When the Participle takes the place of a Substantive, and 
 accordingly stands alone without referring to an object expressly 
 mentioned. Here the insertion of the article is required, inasmuch as 
 in general, according to B. § 124, 1, the genus is designated {he 
 who, such a one as) ; if, however, the Participle expresses indefinite 
 individuals, or those for any reason not more closely designated, 
 either tW, nvh is wont to stand with it, or it is used alone without 254 
 an article. 
 
 Examples of this very common usage are, Rom. iii. 11 Tdf. ovk 
 (XTTiv 6 (Tvviuiv, OVK toTiv 6 eK^rfTtov TOV 6i6v as it wcro, this class of men 
 is not to be found among them ; but in vs. 12 ovk ia-rw ttoimv [Tdf. o 
 with n] (sc. tW) xP'?"'™'''?'''*! Matt. xxv. 29 tm 1)(0vti Trarrt So^^o-eTat • 
 TOV 8e fxJrf CYOVTOS, koX o ej^et apOiQcrerai dir avTov, 2 Cor. xi. 4 et 6 ep^d/x.ci'os 
 aXXov 'hjcrovv Krjpva-a-ei} Without the article, Mark i. 3 (fxjyvr] jSoiov- 
 
 TOS iv T-rj ip'Tjt'-i^, Rev. ii. 14 e)(€K iKCi KparovvTa^ T^v 8iSa)(r)v BaXadfj., 
 Eom. iii. 1 2 ; Matt. xxiv. 38. With rts, particularly in the periphrasis 
 for a finite verb by means of the Participle with etvai (see 24sqq. 
 pp. 308 sq.), as Mark xiv. 4 ^a-dv rive? ayavaKTOvvm etc. 
 
 f ) Thus far the insertion of the article in the above cases is perfectly 
 regular. But the N. T. departs somewhat from ordinary usage 
 (although a few scattered examples are found in Greek authors also, 
 see Bhdy. p. 3x8; Winer 110 (104)) in this respect, that even when 
 the indefinite and general pronominal words (such as rts, oAAos, Ircpos, 
 iroXXoi) are expressly inserted, the Participle can retain the article ; 
 as, Gal. i. 7 nves ela-iv ol Topacrtroi'Tes v/u.as. Col. ii. 8 p-rj tis lorai o 
 o-uXaymymv (cf. Ignat. ad Eph. 8 /AjjSe/ita tpis 57 Bwafievrf), Luke xviii. 9 
 eiTTiv wpos Ttvas rovs TmroidoTws, see besides Jude 4 in § 125, 3 Rem. 
 
 1 Even if the object which the writer has in mind in using the Participle is 
 subsequently mentioned, the Participle must nevertheless first of all be so con- 
 strued • for example, John v. 45 i<ntv i KaTiryopav iftuv, Wavaijs not, Moses is he 
 who acctises you,, but, there is one who accuses you, Moses. Cf. with this the case 
 where the Participle with the Art. takes the place of a Predicate, in § 129, 1, b) 
 p. 124. 
 
296 THE PARTICIPLE. . [§ 144. 
 
 p. 93 ; Acts iv. 12 ovhi yap ovo/xa €(Ttlv hepov, to SeSofiivov iv avOpui-iroK, 
 John xii. 12 oxA.os rroAtis o e\9uiv eis t^v koprqv, Mark xv. 41 aXXai 
 •n-oWai ai avajSacrai, 2 John 7 TroXXot irKdvoi i^XOav . . . ol /jltj o/ioXoyow- 
 T£i;. To these add the other examples in § 125, 3 Rem. p. 93. in 
 which the participle with the article is subjoined to an indefinite 
 substantive or one standing in a predicative relation. In all these 
 cases the article intimates that the Participle is an Adjectival 
 adjunct (and consequently takes the place of a Relative clause), not 
 a limitation pertaining to the verb (and so to be resolved by a Con- 
 junction). Nevertheless the Greeks, however, would even then have 
 preferred the Participle without the article, or a complete Relative 
 clause. 
 
 Remark. On the practice of the Apocalypse to subjoin without 
 alteration the Participle in the Nominative (as an apposition) to 
 other Cases, see § 123, 5 p. 78. 
 
 B. §144, 3; H. §789(i.; C. §598b.; D. p.599i J. §811, 3; G. §§108, IST. 1; 109,6. 
 
 10 The Future Participle (which, moreover, in the N. T. 
 has become a rarity, e.g. with the Article, to iaofjuevov Luke 
 xxii. 49, 6 TrapaSdocrcov John vi. 64, to 'yevrjcro/j.evov 1 Cor. xv. 
 37, TO, XdX'qd'qcjofjbeva Heb. iii. 5) is found as a substitute for a 
 filial clause only in the Acts : viii. 27; xxiv. 11 (ffkdev etc.) irpoff- 
 Kvvrjamv, xxiv. 17 iroirjaoiv, XXV. 13 aaTToaS/Mevoi, ; and with (is 
 (to express the purpose as it exists in the mind of the subject, 
 B. § 144, N. 14 ; H. § 795 e. ; C. § 680 ; J. § 701 ; G. § 109, N. 
 4) in the Ep. to the Heb. xiii. 17 aypvirvovau' . . . w? \670i' 
 d7roScucro//Te?. 
 
 255 Elsewhere to express the purpose the Infinitive is employed, or 
 Conjunctions, even in passages where the use of the Participle would 
 have been more convenient (see the examples in § 139, 47 p. 241 and 
 cf. § 140, 4, 10, 13, 17), — or the Present Participle is used according 
 to the following paragraph. 
 
 B. § 144, N. 4; H. § 789 Eem. g. ; J. of. § 397. 
 
 11 The Present Participle, besides its ordinary use to ex- 
 press a continuing action and simultaneousness, expresses in 
 the N. T. the following relations also : 
 
 1) In connection with the article it is often used without any 
 temporal reference, merely to present the idea of the verb either in the 
 form of a substantive or an adjective, in the same way that the 
 Pres. Infinitive* (yet in this case interchangeably with the Aorist) 
 often serves to designate the verb's idea as such. For example, 
 
6 144.] THE PRESENT PARTICIPLE. 297 
 
 Eph. iv. 28 o KXejTTiov fuqKiTi. KkeirreTiii, Matt. 2^xvu. 40 o KoraXvoiv tov 
 vaov Kol . . . oZkoSo/aSv, ctuktov trtavTov, Kev. XX. 10 o 8ia/8oXos 6 TrXavwv 
 auTous, 1 Thess. i. 10 'Itjo-oBv, tov pvofifvov -^fiSii etc. Hence in John 
 (vi. 33, 41, 50, 51) there is a difference between o apros o KaTafiaivoiv 
 (a conception) and o apros 6 KOTajSas (with a temporal reference), see 
 Lucke. 
 
 2) Like the Indicative it often includes in itself the Future force, 
 and hence is used, especially in connection with m, even to express 
 the end or object; see on both points § 137, 10, 11 pp. 203 sqq. 
 and 144, 22 p. 307. 
 
 3) Like the Indicative (§ 137, 10 c) p. 205) it is used also of the 
 intention (de conatu): Matt, xxiii. 13 ip,ets tows elcrfpxoiJi.ivcrv; ova 
 a<j>ieTe elaeXOciv, Acts xxviii. 23 IlaBAos l^eriOero . . . Tru&(i>v avTovs jrept 
 TOV Irjcrov (whereupon subsequently, oi /tiev hreiOovTo, oi Sk r/TricrTovv). 
 So in the evangelic narrative Judas before executing the betrayal is 
 a,lmost always called 6 ■TrapoSiSovs, e.g. Matt. xxvi. 25 (in Lat. versions 
 qui traditurus erat), 46, 48 ; Mark xiv. 42, 44 ; John xviii. 2, 5 etc. ; 
 but in reference to the betrayal as accomplished 6 n-apaSous, Matt. x. 4 ; 
 xxvii. 3 Lchm. [Treg.]. 
 
 B. §144,4; J. §706; W. §45,3. 
 
 In sentences which contain two or more Participial clauses, 12 
 whether in immediate succession or separated by a finite verb, 
 we find in general (even in those writers that rather rarely 
 employ the Participial construction) th(J rule observed, that 
 only co-ordinated Participles are connected by /cat or re; 
 as, Matt. iv. 23 ; xxvii. 48 ; xxviii. 12, etc. Othei-wise, par- 
 ticularly if the narrative advances from one fapt to another by 
 means of them, the Participles are placed side by side without 
 any connective. 
 
 Of this genuine classic usage a great many examples are still found : 
 particularly in the Acts, as xxii. 26 d/covtros o iKaTovTapyrj^ irpoa-iXOmi 
 dirijyyeiXtv Xcycuv, xvi. 27 tSibi' tos Gvpw; avcaryixitfa?, cnrao-d/ici/os fx,a,)(ai,pav 
 ^/icAAei/ lavTov dvaipeZv, vop.iljm' etc., xxiv. 5, perhaps also xiii. 27 (if 
 with Lchm., vol. II. Pref. p. viii, we expunge the kcli before ras ^was, 
 since the passage in its extant form can hardly be defended gram- 
 matically) ; but also in the Gospels, as Matt. iv. 13 KaraXvjTwv Trjv 
 lHatfipW iX$iiV KaTWKTja-ei' etc., 24 (TrpotriyveyKai/ avria etc.), xxvi. 44 
 (d<^eis . . . Xiyoiv), Mark v. 15 Oewpova-iv tov Sai/xoi'i^d/xevov Ka6-^p.evov 
 ifia.TiAjp.o'ov (cat cruxjipovovvTa, 26 sq. (ttoXXo, 7ra9ov(Ta kol oaTrav^craa'a . . . 
 aKova-aa-a . . . eXdovaa), iii. 5 ; Luke vii. 37, etc. ; and in the Epistles, 
 as 1 Cor. xi. 4 ; 2 Tim. i. 4 ; 2 Pet. ii. 1, etc Sometimes the mss. 256 
 
 vary, since there are cases enough where in point of fact both inter- 
 88 . 
 
298 THE PARTICIPLE. l§ 144, 
 
 pretations are admissible ; see, for example, Matt. iii. 1 sq. (Lchm. 
 omits KOI, Tdf. [ed. 7] gives it [ed. 8 omits it, ,0 cod. Sin.]), xxviii. 2, 
 and elsewhere. 
 
 B. § 144, N. 5 ; C. §§ 604 b. ; 659 ; J. §§ 707 sqq. 
 
 13 The cases where Participles share in the so-called constructio 
 ad synesin or sensum with respect toGenderandNumber 
 are already to be found in the exposition of this construction 
 given § 129, 8 p. 129 sq. It remains here to make mention 
 of the instances where this construction occurs in reference to 
 Case. These are all either anacoluthic, i.e. have arisen 
 in consequence of a mental change of construction (cf. 7 above, 
 p. 293), or to be explained by the fact that the Participle 
 refers, not to the grammatical, but to the logical Subject 
 of the leading clause. We will arrange the examples according 
 to the Cases; yet it is to be noticed that here only those 
 instances are considered where the Participle stands in the 
 Nominative instead of another Case. For the instances of 
 the Genitive and Accusative belong under the head of absolute 
 cases, consequently to § 145, 6 p. 317. 
 
 The Participle, then, (without the Article, cf. § 123, 5 
 p. 78) is found in the Nominative 
 
 a) Where the precise grammatical coimection requires the Gen- 
 itive; these are pure instances of the second* class, the Participle 
 being referred to the logical, instead of the grammatical, subject of the 
 preceding or following leading clause: Jude 16 to a-T6f/.a avrmv 
 XoXei viripoyKa, 6av jxa^ovTCi (equiv. to kakova-iv etc.), Acts xix. 34 
 e7riyvdi/T6s Se . . . cfxovT] iyevero fxla Ik TravTuv (equiv. to iraires cKpa^av). 
 Further, see Col. ii. 2 (ai KapSiai avrSiv, <TD/a/3i/3acr^vres), 2 Cor. vii. 5 
 (crap^ rjiJLuiv . . . OXi^opievoC) , ix. 11 and 13 (TrXoDTi^o/nevoi . . . Sofdi^oi/rfs, 
 making reference to vss. 10 and 12) ; perhaps also Rev. v. 12 since 
 Xt'yovTcs owing to the Gander can strictly speaking refer only to avruiv 
 (yet according to § 129, 8 b) p. 130 another mode of explanation is 
 also admissible, which gives the same sense), 2 Cor. i. 7 (see Meyer). 
 From the 0. T. belongs under this head the frequently occurring 
 p^/ia Kvpiov . . . Xiywv, as in Gen. xv. 1 ; 1 Kings xvii. 8 (Al. text) ; 
 1 Sam. XV. 10 ; 2 Sam. vii. 4, etc. 
 
 b) Instead of the Dative, the construction taking a diiFerent turn, 
 as Acts XX. 3 irotTjcras fj-^va^ Tpw . . . eyevero yviLp-r/ rov v7ro<TTp€<f>iiv 
 (see § 140, 13 p. 268) ; or the Participle refers to the logical Subject 
 of the leading clause, as Col. iii. 16 6 Xoyos tov Xpio-roC evoiKetTui ev 
 v/uv . . . SSda-KovTe's etc. (where we are not with Lchm. to assume a 
 
§ 144.] THE PARTICIPLE IN THE NOMINATIVE. 299 
 
 parenthesis), Acts xv. 22 sq. eSo^ev tois dffooroXoK . . . ypdij/avTK. On 
 the other hand, in Eph. iii. 18 the Participles may (with Lchm.) be 
 suitably referred to the grammatical subject in i^urxyairiTe (see § 151, 
 18 p. 389), and likewise in Phil. i. 30 l^o""* together with Tn-vpoixevoi 
 etc. to <7TijK€Te. The first hand reading of cod. Vat., ex o v, can hardly 
 be founded in a mistake of the copyist, but looks like an emendation 
 occasioned by the extremely great hyperbaton. 
 
 c) Instead of the Accusative: — in every instance in consequence 
 of a change of construction, as Mark ix. 20 ihu>v avrov, to Trvevfia ev6vq 
 ccrirapafev airov, where the sentence, instead of continuing in the 
 Passive, suddenly takes an Active turn, and hence the subject changes 
 (cf. the similar examples in § 1.51, 10 p. 383) ; most naturally after an 
 antecedent Ace. and Infin., since this construction easily and naturally 
 changes in the mind, especially after parenthetic clauses, into a direct 257 
 statement, as Eph. iv. 2 TrapaKaXS v/iSs TrepiTrar^crat (equiv. to TrepiTrar^- 
 cTttTe), avexpix-evoi etc., 2 Pet. iii. 3 (^fjivrjcrOTJvai , . . yiviLcrKovTes) and prob- 
 ably also 1 Pet. ii. 11, where, however, several mss. .even (see Tdf.'s 
 crit. note) exhibit the alteration aTrexeaOe. 
 
 Remark. The examples from the Revelation where the Participle 
 stands in the Nominative (with or without the Article) and the con- 
 struction requires a different Case, have not been included here, 
 because they in part may be referred to the observation in § 123, 5 p. 
 78, in part are a consequence of the connection of clauses peculiar to 
 that book, and spoken of § 151, 12 p. 386. 
 
 B, § 144, 5 and N. 6 ; H. Bf. §§ 788. 801 ; C. § 677 e. f. ; D. § 578 ; J. § 693 ; G. § 112, 2. 
 
 The familiar Greek idiom, according to which what witli us U 
 is a subordinate circumstance is expressed in Greek 
 by the finite verb and the leading idea by a Participle 
 dependent on that verb, has in, the N. -T. in the case of Xav- 
 Odveiv and its associated verbs almdst completely disappeared, 
 only a few instances of it being adducible (almost exclusively 
 from Luke and the Ep. to the Hebrews) : Heb. xiii. 2 eXaOov 
 Twe? ^evta-avT€<;, Luke xxiii. 12 Trpovirrjp'x^ov iv e')(6pa oWe?, 
 Acts viii. 16 V7rfjpy(pv /SeySaTrrfcr/iei'ot, xix. 36 KwrearaXnevoi (cf. 
 18 p. 304), Matt. xvii. 25 irpoi^Qaaev dinov X&yav. 
 
 What f Isewhere admits, with more or less plausibility, of being com- 
 prised under this head (which, however, owes its establishment to 
 our modern linguistic sense) restricts itself to the following : The 
 idea again {iraXiv) is sometimes given by Luke, after Hebrew prece- 
 dent (see Gesen. Lex. sub C)D];i, and Lehrgb. 824; Gr. § 139, 2 and 
 3 a.) or the Sept. (Gen. iv. 2 ; Ex. x. 28 ; aiv. 13 etc.), by t poo- ti- 
 
300 THE PARTICIPLE. l§ 144. 
 
 e^o-Oaihut with an Infinitive followiDg (cf. Ep. Clem. 1, 12), as Luke 
 XX. 11, 12 TrpocriOeTO hepov Trc/Ai/'ai Sovkov (on the other hand in the 
 parallel passage Mark xii. 4 TrdXiv airia-TuXev ; so the Seventy some- 
 times render qo*] by WXiv, as Gen. viii. 10), Acts xii. 3 irpoa-iOeTo 
 o-vXXaySciv Tov Uirpov ; and vice versa (cf. the Homeric aXro Xa^wv), as 
 irpoo-^ets dirtv TrapajSoX'^v Luke xix. 11. The idea continuinff, per- 
 sisting, Luke expresses by iTrip-ivw with the Participle (cf. John 
 viii. 7), Acts xii. 16 i-irifiivsv Kpovijiv, or ov StaXeiTro), Luke vii. 45, 
 after the analogy of Trau'ctr^at (15 below). The expression iriXicrev 
 SuiTdxra-wv (Matt. xi. 1) also may be fitly translated by the adverb 
 adequately, sufficiently/. On OiXtiv followed by the Infin. see § 150, 8 
 p. 375 ; cf. also 8 above, p. 294. 
 
 B. § 144, 6 ; H. §§ 796 aq. ; C. § 677 J D. §§ B91. 692 ; J. §§ 681 sqq. ; G. 5 113. 
 
 15 On the other hand, the rule according to which certain 
 verbal ideas, particularly those of internal and external per- 
 ception, of learning, of ceasing, take after them their com- 
 plementary clauses (which we as a rule express by the 
 Infin. with to or a clause with thaf) in the form of a Parti- 
 ciple, is pretty accurately observed by the N.T. writers ; only 
 that in cases where both constructions, the Participle and the 
 Infinitive, are admissible (e.g. with aKoveiv, elSevai), they give 
 the preference to the latter, but still more frequently introduce 
 the complementary verbal idea as a subordinate clause, with a 
 conjunction (ort). 
 258 The instances that occur, arranged according to Cases, are 
 the following : 
 
 a) The Participle in the Nominative. 
 
 Thus with TravecrOai Luke v. 4, frequently in the Acts, the Ep. to 
 the Heb., and by Paul, see Wahl; with ct>aivecr6ai Matt. vi. 16, 18 
 (but not Rom. vii. 13) ; with inrapxeLv (only by Luke and in the Epp., 
 cf. 14 p. 299 and 18' p. 304) ; with KaXw's ttouiv and ev ■Kpaxrav 
 Acts X. 33 ; Phil. iv. 14 ; 2 Pet. i. 19 ; '3 John 6 ; Acts xv. 29. Fur- 
 ther, ov Tpip,ov<nv j3Xa<7^-r)ii.ovvTK 2 Pet. ii. 10 (after the model of 
 aio^wEcr^ai), jj/q iyKaKS>p,ev to KaXov rroLovvTfs (like TravfirOai) Gal. vi. 9; 
 2 Thess. iii. 13. On the other hand, with verbs of emotion, as 
 ayaXXiaa-Oat (Acts xvi. 34), ^alpfiv (John xx. 20 ; Phil. ii. 28), Parti- 
 ciples stand in the ordinary participial relation, containing as they do 
 the reason of the emotion. With eixapuTTeiv the statement which 
 gives the reason or the contents of the thankfulness is almost always 
 introduced with on; hence in 1 Cor. xiv. 18 the former reading XaXSv 
 (which arose from the omission of the connective) has now been 
 
§ 144.] THE PARTICIPLE AS A COMPLEMENTARY CLAUSE. 301 
 
 changed with reason into the XaXfi of the MSS. [it also]. On 1 Tim. 
 V. 13, see 17 p. 303.* 
 
 b) The Participle in the A c cu s a ti ve, or construction of the 
 Ace. with the Participle ; this occurs most frequently with 
 verbs of internal and external perception and of learning. 
 
 Thus with oLKoveiv (see under c)), opSv Mark i. 10 ; Acts viii. 23 ; 
 Heb. ii. 8 etc., ySXeVetv Matt. xv. 31, Mark, Luke, Acts, etc., Gewptlv 
 John vi. 19 ; x. 12, Acts, etc., yivuxrKuv Mark v. 30, Luke, Acts, Heb., 
 but most frequently with ort," iTria-raa-dai Acts xxiv. 10 (xxvi. 3 var., on 
 which see § 145, 6 p. 317), ivp(xxKav very often. Matt. xx. 6 ; Rev. iii. 
 2, etc.,, hence with the Pass, the Particip. is in the Nom. as Matt. i. 
 18 ; Phil. iii. 9 etc. (cf. 18 p. 304), o/xdXoyeii/ 1 John iv. 2 ; 2 John 7. 
 For the references in all these cases see the Lexicons. Other verbs 
 which are frequently so construed in Greek authors, — e.g. besides 
 eiSei/at (see note ^), yaCpew (see a)), the verba narrandi such as av-, 
 air-, KaToyyeWciv, XaXctv (with the exception of Acts xxvi. 22, see 20 
 below, p. 305), — are joined almost exclusively to on, more rarely to 
 the Ace. with the Infln. 
 
 c) The Participle in the Genitive, only with a/coiJeii'. It 16 
 is necessary to bring together here into a single summary the 
 diversified verbal constructions of this verb, just as in § 132, 
 17 p. 165 sq. we exhibited its construction with nouns. 
 
 Since according to p. 166 the Genitive with axovav designates the 
 person whose speech or sound is immediately perceived (instead of 
 which, however, an abstract substantive indicating a sound often appears 
 by metonymy), 
 
 a) It can only be connected with the Genitive and Participle 259 
 where an immediate hearing or perception occurs ; and the Participle 
 too must in every instance be the Present, owing to the simulta- 
 neousness of the two actions of speaking (or sounding) and hearing. 
 Examples are very numerous : with persons, Mark xii. 28 ; xiv. 58 ; 
 Acts ii. 6, 11 ; vi. 11, 14 ; viii. 30 etc., Rev. vi. 3, 5 ; viii. 13 etc., and 
 with <jiwni<; (instead of the person himself) Acts xi. 7 ; xxii. 7 ; Rev. 
 xiv. 13 ; xvi. 1. 
 
 On the other hand, the Accusative with okovuv designates simply 
 
 1 On the pre-eminently Alexandrian use of ibplaKeaBai with a Participle for eTvat 
 with a Participle, which increased more and more as time went on, see Dind. in 
 Stephanus's Thesaurus sub voce, p. 2418. 
 
 2 Its synonym ei54vai is never found with the Participle (yet cf. 18 p. 304), 
 but always either with the Infin. (Luke iv. 41 ; 1 Pet. v. 9), or with 8t(, or with an 
 indirect question. In the last two cases the subject of the dependent clause often 
 lingers as an object with the leading verb (according to ^ 151, 1 p. 377) : oM, ae 
 ■ts el, iyvwv ffe '6ti el, accordingly as if an incipient Participial or Infinitive clause. 
 
302 THE PARTICIPLE. [§ 144 
 
 the object of the perception. In construction with nouns alone, 
 therefore, strictly speaking only a thing i.e. an abstract, such as Xoyov, 
 tfxjyvrjv,^ can be joined to aKoveiv in the Accusative, see § 132, 17 and 
 the note, p. 166. But if the object of the perception is expanded 
 into an entire clause, aKoveiv acquires primarily the signification of 
 mediate hearing, or internal perception (learning). Inasmuch as, 
 further, the subject of this dependent clause (which moreover may be 
 any term whatever, person or thing) is attracted to aKovtiv as o b j o c t, 
 its predicate (if the clause is not dependent on a conjunction) passes 
 over either 
 
 /3) into the Infinitive : Ace. and Infln. ; or 
 260 y) into the Participle : Ace. and Particip. 
 
 The difference between these two constructions is the general one 
 (cf. B. p. 402 Note) viz. that the Infin. presents the idea of the verb 
 indefinitely, while the Participle exhibits an action or state in a clear 
 and definite relation to another ; — the Infin. names the action gen- 
 erally, the Particip. describes it. Still it hardly allows itself to be 
 reproduced by us in the translation, since we in both cases must em- 
 ploy a resolved construction with the conjunction that. The oonstruc- 
 
 1 It makes no difEcnlty that a Present Participle can be added as an appo- 
 sition to such an object-Accusative, as to any other substantire, without forming 
 the construction of the Ace. with the Particip. which follows under 7) below, in- 
 asmuch as aKoietv retains its proper signification of to hear (not the. secondary one 
 ■ of to learn, be informed). Several instances of this are, actually extant; Acts ix. 
 4 ; xxvi. 14 (cf. Rev. v. 13) iJKoujep (ptnniiv Aeyoua-di' etc. This is in sense hardly 
 ; to be distinguished from iJKov<rey. <j><ii;ifis \(yoiaris (so, too, without a Part, axoieii' 
 . \6fovs and K6-yuv, see p. 166), but yet taken closely is to be translated he heard a 
 voice which said etc. Here comes into consideration a passage from Mark (v. 36, 
 ■" locus perdifiBcilis," Tdf.) : & St 'lt\irovs axoicas (Tdf. [Treg. cod. Sin.] 7ropoKoi!<ros) 
 •rbc h6yov \a\6viieiiov Kfyfi etc. This sentence, too, owing to the signification 
 I (to hear) cannot be brought under the following construction (7) of the Ace. with 
 I the Participle. But according to the analogy of the examples j ust mentioned 
 there would result the rather incongruous sense, as he heard the word which or as it 
 'Was spoken, — a pleonasm hardly conceivable. Por while in the other examples 
 the addition Keyovaav was necessary, owing to the direct discourse which followed 
 and was immediately connected with it, in this case every occasion of the sort 
 quite disappears. Less surprising and more natural would it be to take the Par- 
 ticiple as a simple attributive adjunct to \6yov (juSt as we say, the spoken word). 
 But then N.T. usage (which here can hardly be convicted of the slightest anomaly, 
 see. § 125, 1 p. 90) would demand the adjectival position, therefore either rhu 
 \6yov Thv Ka\. or t1)c Ao\. K6yov. The corruption of the passage is certainly very 
 ancient, as the variants shew. But it is very significant that the Vatican codex 
 •actually exhibits the attributive position mentioned (riv \6y. riy \aK.), and not 
 less important that cod. D and many (Old Lat.) versions wholly omit the com- 
 pletely superfluous addition KaKoiiitvov, but have instead simply rbv K6yov or roi- 
 70V ^iv Kiyoy, The original reading, as I think, has been preserved either in these 
 last or in the position of the words in cod. Vat. 
 
§ 144.] THE PARTICIPLE WITH AKoieiv. 303 
 
 tion of the Ace. and Infinitive occurs only in John xii. 18 ^icovtrav 
 TovTo avTOv TTeiroifiKivai, 1 Cor. xi. 18 d/covw a')(icrfi.aTa iv v/uv vTrd.p\€iv ; 
 that of the Ace. and Participle is somewhat more frequent : Luke iv. 
 23 ocra riKova-afiev ycvo/icva «is Kaffi; Acts vii. 12 aKowcras oi/ra trma fli 
 Aly., 2 Thess. iii. 1 1 ; 3 John 4. The difference between these pas- 
 sages and those with the Ace. and Participle in the preceding note is 
 obvious : in those dicoveiv still has the signification to hear, here the 
 mediate sense to learn ; in those only the Present Part, was used, after 
 the style of the examples under a) ; in these any Participle whatever 
 may be subjoined to the Ace., since the clauses are no longer contem- 
 poraneous. 
 
 S) Instead of the two preceding constructions the verbal forms are 
 most commonly resolved into aclause with on; of this examples 
 are found everywhere, Matt. iv. 12 etc. Finally, 
 
 «) As after every vcrbum sentiendi, an indirect question takes 
 the place of the objective clause: Matt. xxi. 16. djcovets rt oJtoi 
 \iyov(Tiv ; 
 
 That in the last two cases the subject of the subordinate clause can 
 stand as the object of aKovuv follows from § 151, 1 p. 376. 
 
 Remark. Only in a single passage does the Participle (after jt^av- 
 ^dvciv) appear to be used in a way opposed to the genius of the language 
 viz. 1 Tim. v. 1 3 ajua Se Kat apyai fjMvOdvovo'ii' Treptep^OjUex'ai ra? oiKta; 
 etc. According to the general rule, fw.v$iv<o wv can only mean / per- 
 ceive, notice, that lam; on the other hand, the signification Ilearn 
 to he belongs exclusively to the construction with the Infinitive, and 
 indeed occurs just before (vs. 4) : fuwOaviTwrrav cuo-c/Seiv Koi . . . asroSi- 
 Bovai. Now although the Infin. as a more general verbal form can take 
 the place of the Participle (cf. B. p. 402 (465) note), yet the reverse 
 is never the case. Nevertheless this Participle has been taken in 
 this sense by the majority of translators (Vulg., Luther, deWette) : 
 tkei/ learn to go about etc. To avoid this grammatical error other 
 methods of interpretation have been proposed by the interpreters. 
 Sometimes /uu/ddveiv has been taken in the sense of to be accustomed, 
 in the habit of; this meaning, however, ftavOdveiv never has, at least in 
 the Present, and even in the Preterite it would require in this sense 
 the Infinitive, since a Greek could have had no other idea before his 
 mind than to have learned. At other times dpyoi has been rep- 
 reeented as the word immediately dependent on (/.avBdi/ovaw, so that 
 by supplying the copula (tivai) it would mean, they learn to be idle etc. 
 (Winer, Meyer [i.e. Huther]). Against this supposition, however, 
 there are — apart from the sense — most weighty objections, viz. 1) 
 the position, according to which afyyai must imperatively be taken as 
 an attribute of the subject ; 2) the ellipsis of the Infin. elvou, since 
 
304 THE PARTICIPLE. [§ 144 
 
 according to both general and N. T. usage (see 18 below) we are war- 
 ranted in supplying only the Participle oucrai, and the possibility of 
 taking the passage in the way described is afforded only by the addi- 
 tion of the Infin. elrat ; 3) usage. For what is adduced from other 
 writers as a warrant for it, proves on closer examination to be insuf- 
 ficient. The reference to Plato, Enthyd. p. 276 (ot d/xadel^ apa a-otpol 
 [iavOdvovai) is not in place, since there the (perfectly senseless) addi- 
 261 tion uo(f)oi has been discarded on MS. authority, and the passage from 
 Dio Chrys. (or. 55 p. 558 %jiKpa.rq% fiev Trais wv iixiivOave XiOoioos ttjv 
 Tov TraTpcx; rix^V^) i^ of quite another sort. Considering the textual 
 certainty of the Participle in the above passage, and the employment 
 — elsewhere so absolutely correct — of the Participle on the part of 
 the N. T. writers, there is hardly any other choice left us than, accord- 
 ing to Bengel's proposal, to assume here that the mode of expres- 
 sion is anacoluthic, so as to give rise to the meaning " discunt quae 
 obeundo domos discuntur," What they 7repiep)(6iJi.evai, ras otVi'as learn 
 is sufficiently indicated, not grammatically indeed, but as respects the 
 sense, by the following epithets dpyal, (fikvapoC, TrepUpyoi, XaXovcrai to 
 IJii] ovTa; and the specific thought Bengel supplies (statum familiarum 
 curiose explorant), which perhaps as too gratuitous and far-fetched has 
 damaged his interpretation somewhat, is not needed. 
 
 B. § 144, N. 7; C. § 677 d. ; J. § 682, 3 ; G. § 113, N. 6. 
 
 Ill The omission of the Participle civ, ovra etc. in these 
 complementary clauses is usual in the N. T. also, in fact rather 
 more common than its insei'tion. Cf. 22 p. 308. 
 
 Thus with SiaTeXeiv, Acts xxvii. 33 acriroi StOTeXeiTe; with <^ai'- 
 vtaOai, Matt, xxiii. 27, 28 tjiaivovTai wpaloi, SiKoiot, 2 Cor. xiii. 7 ; 
 Rom. vii. 13; with oTSa, Mark vi. 20 ctSus avrov avSpa ayiov; with 
 d(j>'eivaL (to leave) Luke x. 30 Lchm. [Treg. Tdf.] d^c'fTes ■^fji.tdanj ; 
 andvery often with eipio-K€ti/, Luke ix.36; xxiii. 4, 22; Acts v. 10 etc., 
 1 Cor. iv. 2 ; Gal. ii. 17 etc., 2 Pet. iii. 14 ; Rev. ii. 2 ; v. 4 etc. (quite 
 elliptical are Mark xiv. 16; 2 Cor. xi. 12). The omission is most 
 natural with vTrdpxeiv, since this word as a synonym oi eTvai already 
 includes in itself w: Luke viii. 41 ; ix. 48 ; Acts ii. 30 ; xxi. 20 etc. 
 See Wahl. 
 
 B. §144, N. 10; J. §433 0b8. 
 
 19 The phrase o (caXou/ixevos, frequently employed in the writings of 
 Luke (and a few times in the Rev. also), uniformly takes its proper 
 position (Ptcp. between the Art. and Subst.) : ry KaXovfjievg crTct/sa (Lk. 
 i. 36), ^ifiu>va Tor KaX. ^r)Xwr^v (vi. 15), etc. (In Greek writers the 
 appellation also intervenes between the Art. and the Participle ; as, 
 Tto)i' hrjixfov KaXov/xeviav, tovs 'PctVoDs KaXov/j.ivovs, Thuc. Xen.). On the 
 
§144.] THE PARTICIPLE IN ATTRACTION. 305 
 
 way in which the other N. T. authors express themselves, see § 129, 6 
 p. 128. 
 
 B. § IM, N. 12 ; C. § 667 d. ; J. § 682, 674 sq. 
 
 The Participle also (in Greek authors frequently, in the N.T. 20 
 rarely) suffers attraction. Three classes of cases occur, 
 "which rest, however, essentially on the same principle : 
 
 a) The clause with the Participle is already, as a Relative 
 clause, attracted ; cf. pp. 285 sqq. Then the Participle, which as 
 respects its form belongs to the Relative (and which consequently 
 had there been no attraction would have stood, like the Relative, 
 in the Ace.) , is changed with it into the same case. 
 
 This case occurs in Acts xxvi. 22 ovBh/ iKrb<s Xeyiav S>v re ot Trpoc^^rai 
 ikaXfjcrav //.ekXavruyv yLvtcrOai, arising from oiScj' tovtuiv o . . . eAaXij- 
 uav //.iXXovra yLveardai — (a genuine classic example). Cf. § 123, 3 
 p. 77. 
 
 b) The Participle dependent on an Infin., if as a closer 
 limitation of the same it ought, according to the general rule 
 (B. §141, 1), to have stood in the Accusative, is attracted 
 
 by a noun which stands in the leading clause (and which at 262 
 the same time is the subject of the Participle), and assumes the 
 case of this noun. 
 
 This case is a legitimate extension of the familiar construction 
 fieari fnoL etvai euSaifLovi (B. § 142, 2). What the predicate adjective 
 eiSaijiiovt undergoes here takes place also with entire participial clauses ; 
 and as in this example both constructions are admissible (etSai/now and 
 -fiova), so also in the N. T. And in fact the remark made above (cf. 
 § 142, 1 p. 278) that the N. T. likes to employ the regular and more 
 simple construction with the Ace, while classic usage prefers the other 
 case (as a rule the D a t i v e)<, holds good here also. An evident in- 
 stance of attraction is given in 2 Pet. ii. 21 Kpeura-ov rpt airois /x^ eVe- 
 vrtDKevai . . . ^ iTriyvovcriv hnirrpapai etc. (for which eiriyvovTas also 
 (aight have stood). Further, in the Acts (the style of which harmo- 
 lizes most with this, idiom) xv. 25 Lchm. [Treg.] ESofei/ rifuv . . . exXela- 
 nei/ots TriiJ-xl/ai etc. (where Tdf. [so cod. Sin.] has preferred the other, 
 just as good Greek, reading cKXe^a/iivov?, which is given in vs. 22 
 vithout var.), xxvii. 3 Lchm. [Treg. Tdf cod. Sin.] iweTpeij/ev (sc. 
 ivTto) . . . TTopevOivTi Tuxetv etc. (where Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] reads with the 
 najority of more recent MSS. vopevOevTa), xvi. 21 edrj a ovk i$(a-Ti,v rnuv 
 TopahexecrOaL ovBk TroLelv 'P<D/xatois ovcriv ; see also the example from 
 txii. 17 in § 143, 2 p. 315. Elsewhere the Accusative is always 
 ised : and that not only where the Dative in the leading clause is 
 emitted (1 Pet. iv. 3), or where the Participle stands after the Infin. 
 39 
 
306 THE PARTICIPLE. [§ 144- 
 
 (Acts xi. 12 Lchm. [Treg. Tdf.], xxvi. 20, cf. Matt, xviii. 8), but' also 
 where the Participle precedes, in which case the Greeks, owing to the 
 proximity of the Participle to the noun in the leading clause, would 
 certainly have preferred attraction ; as, Luke i. 73 sq. tov SoC^at rjfuv 
 .. . pvaB ivrai; Xaxpevuv, Acts XXV. 27 SXoyov yap /ioi SokeI Tre/i- 
 irovTO. ... o-ij/Aavat, and especially Heb. ii. 10 hrpanv avrZ (sc. 6ea>), 
 ■iroXXovs Diois ets 8df av dyayovra tov ap)(rjyov . . . TeXeiCxrai. The 
 reader, therefore, here must not allow himself to be misled by the 
 ordinary classic usage and refer dyayovra, owing to the identity of 
 case, to the following apyrf^ov (instead of to God, avrS). 
 
 c) The Participle, althougli in signification belonging to the 
 leading clause, is attracted by a different and nearer case 
 (with which of course it must have the same subject) in a 
 subordinate clause. 
 
 This case occurs in Rev. xvii. 8 {OavfuuxBrjaovToj, oi kwtoikovvtk & 
 . . . /SXtTrdvTtoi' etc.) where /SXiirovTe? is manifestly a correction. Cf. 
 § 145, 1 sq. p. 314 and the use in B. § 141, N. 3. 
 
 B. § 144, 8 and N. 13 ; J. § 696, Obs. 6 ; G. p. 218 sq. 
 
 21 Particles are employed in connection with Participles. 
 
 Thus in particular, after an antecedent participial clause, oiirw? 
 
 serves to resume the same in the leading clause ; as, Act's xx. 
 
 11 ai/aySa? Be koI KXacrwi . . . ovTWi i^fjXdev, xxvii. 17 ; cf. John 
 
 • iv. 6. Cf. § 149, 1 p. 357. 
 
 Of cTrara in the same sense there is but a single example (and that 
 rejected by the modern editors) : Mark vii. 5 («r£iTa arcpuiTuxnv accord- 
 ing to many mss., see vs. 2). 
 
 Of the usage (see B. p. 404 note) by which a Participle, rendered 
 a substantive by means of the Article, is taken up again by an 
 Adjective Pronoun (ovto's, eKeivos), there are many examples: 
 263 Matt. xxiv. 13; Mark vii. 15, 20; Luke ix. 48; John i. 18; v. 11; 
 vii. 18; Acts ii. 22 ; xvii. 6; xv. 38; Rom. xiv. 14; (on Mark xii. 
 40 see § 123, 5 p. 79). All these examples are predominantly rhet- 
 orical in their nature. The same thing happens often after substan- 
 tives alone, and after Relative clauses, in order to bring the idea in the 
 leading clause out again with a certain rhetorical emphasis, as John 
 xii. 48 ; Rom. vii. 15, 19 ; ix. 6, 8 etc., and after the Infin. used sub- 
 stantively, as Phil. i. 22 (see § 149, 8 d) p. 362). The case is different 
 with the pronoun avrds. This, if it stands with the leading verb in 
 the Nominative after a Participle, has its proper sense self, as 
 1 Pet. V. 10; but if it stands in an oblique case its use is founded 
 in the pleonastic style of the N. T. writers, which has been often 
 
§ 144.] THE PARTICIPLE WITH <is. 307 
 
 alluded to already (see § 130, 2 p. 142), and of which more will be 
 said below, § 145, 2 p. 315 (cf. § 151, 4 and 5 p. 379 sq.). 
 
 B. § 144, N. 14 ; H. §§ 793, 795 §. ; C. §§ 598 b. ; 675 e. ; 680 ; J. §§ 701 sqq. ; G. § 109 N. 4. 
 
 No example occurs of the addition of the words are, ola, 22 
 olov to Participles where the latter specify an objective reason. 
 On the other hand, the aonnectioii of w? with a Participle is 
 very common. We will bring together' the cases that occur 
 under the three followin_g heads : 
 
 a) The participial limitation is to be conceived of as uttered 
 from the mind of the speaking or acting subject, no matter 
 whetiier the statement it contains rests on a matter of fact or 
 merely on a supposition, (jguippe qui, as [Germ, afe] one 
 who etc.). 
 
 For example, 1 Pet. ii. 13, 14 iTrorayip-e tu /SatnXei ois vTrepixovri etc. 
 (subjective motive), Luke xvi. 1 Sk/JAiJ^j; is Stao-KopTri^uv etc. (state- 
 ment of the people), 1 Cor. vii. 25 yvu)(i.iqv hSxiifii is •^Acij/xcVos etc. 
 (personal conviction), 2 Cor. vi. 9, 10 (general notion, which however 
 is straightway corrected in the following clauses ; cf. on the contrary 
 the objective statements in vss. 3, 4), Rom. vi. 13 ; Heb. xii. 27 ; xiii. 
 3, etc. The understanding of such clauses is commonly facilitated by 
 expanding them into participial clauses like eiSdres, vo/x.i^oi'Tes, XeyovTcs 
 oTt followed by a finite verb (cf. Acts xxvii. 30 Trpo^acrci u)s /teA\ovT(ui' 
 etc.). 
 
 b) The limitation rests on a comparison, whether with 
 given or only supposed facts, objects, views, (^perinde ac, velut, 
 quasi, tanquam, as [Germ. wie\ one who etc.). 
 
 For example. Acts iii. 12 r/iuv rl arevitjere, is «8t^ Suva/Act ■TreTroirjKoo'iv 
 etc., xxiii. 15 is /Ae'AAovras SiayiviLcrKeLV (Vuig. tanquam cognituri), 20 ; 
 1 Cor. iv. 7 tL Kavxaacu is fir) A.ajSuJi' (quasi non acceperis), v. 3 ; 2 Cor. 
 X. 14; Col. ii. 20; Heb. xi. 27. 
 
 c) It contains, when the Participle stands in the- Future, 
 a statement of purpose, uttered in the spirit of the acting 
 or speaking subject. 
 
 This case occurs (since Future Participles are so rarely used, see 
 10 p. 296) but once: Heb. xiii. 17 aypvTrvova-iv is Xoyov (liroSooo-oi'Tes. 
 But since the Present, both in the Indie, and in the Participle 
 (according to 11 above p. 296, and § 137, 10. 11 pp. 203 sqq.), so 
 often contains telic and other statements having reference to the 
 future, we may unhesitatingly bring under this head also Rom. xv. 264 
 15 eypaij/a v/uv, is e.iTavajji,ijXvr)(T kuiv iixas etc., 1 Thess. ii. 4 outms 
 \aXovntv, ov)( is avOpdnroK apctrKOiTES aXXa dtif. 
 
308 THE PARTICIPLE. t§ "* 
 
 Remark. It is to be noticed besides, that examples of tlie parti- 
 cipial structure with cos are found in all four cases, and have been 
 given above (on ois before the Gen. absol. see 'particularly § 145, 7 
 p. 318) ; further, that the Participle is sor&etimes to be supplied 
 from the context, as Eph. vi. 7 fier eSvoias SouXeuovres, <!)? t(3 Kvpua wai 
 ovK ardptiiroK, Col. iii. 23; 1 Pet. iv. 11, etc.; but particularly, that 
 according to N. T. usage (see 18 p. 304) the Participle wv, oi/tos etc. 
 is regularly dropped, feo that the (predicative or adverbial) adjunct 
 thereto pertaining is left standing alone. with <J>s: 1 Pet. ii. 12 xara- 
 kaXovcrw i/^wv cus KaKOTTOuav SO. ovTosv, Bom. xiii. 13 <Iis iv iJ/Acpo, (sc. 
 pi/Tes) ev<TxriiJ-6vu)i irepnraTi^craiJi.ev, John vii. 10 etc. See in general 
 Wahl under cLs. 
 
 B.§144,N.1B; H.§795f.; C.§674f.; D.§§ 621.622; J.§697d; G. § 109, N. 5. 
 
 23 That Participles are to be taken in a restrictive sense {although) 
 is sometimes indicated simply by the connection, as Matt. xxvi. 60 
 mix ^^pov, troWuiV 7rpoo"eA.6ovT(uv ijjcvSo[juapTvpo}V ; but commonly by the 
 addition of the particles Koin-ep and kuitoi, especially in the Ep. to the 
 Heb. (iv. 3; v. 8; vii. 5, etc.). The anticipatory position of ofiwi, 
 which as respects the sense is not expected until later, occurs in 
 1 Cor. xiv. 7 o/x.(os ra a\jrv)(a, i^oiv^i' SiSovto, where a Kaiircp is to be 
 derived from the o/iios for the Participle StSoWa, Gal. iii. 15 ojucus 
 av6pii>7rov KeKvpij>iX€vrjv hiaOrjKrpi oiScis oBeru (where Ojotcos is antithetic 
 to the idea avOpunrov k€k. Scad.). 
 
 Circumlocution fok simplk Tense-forms bt means op the Pakticiple 
 
 WITH etvoi (^tveo-Boi). 
 
 B. § 144, 9 ; H. § 797 ; C. § 679 ; J. § 375 ; W. p. 348 (328 sq.) 
 
 24 It has been remarked in general, that the farther ancient 
 languages become removed from their origin, the more their 
 formations both in the department of nouns and of verbs are 
 gradually resolved into their component parts ; accordingly 
 we find periphrases (not only of unusual tenses and those 
 difficult of formation, but also of very common tense-forms) 
 by means of elvat (^yiveadai) and Participles becoming more 
 and more common in the later language. To be sure, a similar 
 periphrastic mode of expression is found at all periods, and in 
 the best writers, both of poetry and of prose ; since in many 
 instances it is entitled to preference above the common mode. 
 Yet even a superficial comparison shows that the above- 
 named construction appears incomparably more frequently in 
 the N. T. writings than elsewhere, indeed that it is of such 
 prominence as to impart to individual portions of the N. T. a 
 
§ 144.] THE PARTICIPLE AND etvoi IN PERIPHKASIS. 309 
 
 certain distinctive character which distinguishes their style from 
 others. As it would be uncritical and erroneous amid the 
 innumerable phrases of the sort found in the N. T. to discern 
 in all cases solely a periphrasis for a simple tense-form, so 265 
 on the other hand it would be a false and fruitless endeavor 
 to claim that in every single instance they differ syn- 
 ta"ctically from the simple tense. In our attempt now to 
 classify the cases, regardless of the question whether a given 
 construction is to be taken in the periphrastic or the proper 
 sense (for a strict separation of them into these two classes is 
 neither theoretically nor practically feasible), the number of 
 examples is so copious that we must at the outset disclaim any 
 attempt at completeness in details. We remark 
 
 1) That only those passages can be taken into consideration 
 where the Participle has no Article, since when connected 
 with the Art. the Participle must at once be construed as 
 standing by itself i.e. as a part of the sentence separate from 
 the copula, whether it be as subject (aX?;0e? ecynv to yivo- 
 fievov, Ti9 icmv 6 TrapaSiSovi; ere, etc.), or as predicate noun 
 (cru el 6 ep^o/j.evo';, i/yttet? eare oi \aXovvTe<;, see § 129, 1 p. 
 123 sq.), or as an attributive (^ovrof iartv 6 avdpayrro<i 6 Bi,SdaKcoit 
 etc.) ; and 
 
 2) That a combination of the verb ehai (ycveadai} with the 
 anarthrous Participle in a periphrastic sense can only take 
 place if the Participle is of the Present or the Perfect 
 tense ; since, as will appear from the exposition that follows, a 
 circumlocution with the anarthrous Aorist Part, does not 
 and cannot occur.^ 
 
 1 The correctness of this statement is at once apparent on a comparison of 
 parallel passages. Thus the sentence tIs itov TJi/zaro; (Mark v. 30) cannot be 
 resolved Into tIs ?iv a^/'ii/iifi'os, but can only le rendered ris (^i> or iirTtv) 6 atfid- 
 Ufvos (Luke vili. 45); for tIs <tui iSicKev tt)v i^ovalay touttji/ (Matt. xxi. 23; 
 Mark xi. 28) we find not rls iariv Sois (rot, but tIs cVtu/ 6 Sois aoi tijv i^ovirlav 
 Tairriy (Luke xx. 2) ; and for the Aorist iS6vTes ot iioBriToi ^yavi,KTr]aav (Matt. 
 xxvi. 8) not ^aav ayavaKriitravTes, but only ^(rav hyavaKTovvrcs (Mark xiv. 4). 
 Accordingly, where the Aorist Part, occurs in connection with ilvat it always 
 has the article: oStJ? sartv 5 ^riSeis (Matt. iii. 3), S yevi/ifvos iv Tp iKK\ri(ri(f (Acts 
 vii. 38), d TTop6i]!ras ( Acts ix. 21), & iraph rijv dHhii trjrapeis (Matt. xiii. 19), 6 trirelpas 
 i(Tr\v 6 Sii^oKos (xiii. 39), ris iariv 6 iiaWas (re (Matt. xxvi. 68 ; Luke xxii. 64) 
 etc. Hence in Luke xxiii. 19, where the mss. are divided between ^v ffKr/Sels (Tdf. 
 [Treg.]) and Pe0\rifi4yos (Lchm.), from a grammatical point of view the second 
 reading is certainly the preferable one ; and its existence in the oldest mss. proves 
 St least that offence was early taken at the tmusual character of the other verbal 
 
310 THE PARI ICIPLE. [§144 
 
 The combination, then, of the verb elvai, with a Present or a 
 Perfect Part, without the article is employed 
 266 a) If the writer wants to have the predicate of the sentence 
 
 25 taken more in a substantial and qualitative than in a 
 verbal sense, i.e. if not the idea of the action expressed by the 
 verb as such — as it is contained in a finite verb — holds the 
 place of the predicate, but the idea of the verb exhibited 
 participially in the form of a noun (whether substantive or 
 adjective). 
 
 Thus the sentence avaKpLv6p,eda, ev to/i ovtos a-ea-oxrTai (Acts iv. 9) 
 plainly differs from p^apiri icrre crecToxr/u.ci'ot (Eph. ii. 5) in this : that 
 the predicate of the first is purely verbal (by what means he has been 
 recovered), that of the other nominal (ye are recovered persons, saved 
 ones). Furtlier, John v. 7 oAAos -irpo J/aoB Kara^aivei (comes down 
 before me) is different from Jas. i. 17 vav 8iupij;u,a rikewv avmO^ icmv 
 Kara/Saivov (is one coming down from above, this is its attribute ; cf. 
 iii. 15 ovK ea-Tiv avaiOev KwripxpfLevn}, eiriyao<i, \pvxi-icq etc.). The dis- 
 tinction is the same when we say, the hairs of your head have been 
 numbered (ijpiO ix-qvr ai Luke xii. 7), and are (things) numbered (ripi6ii.7i- 
 ixivai ela-iv Matt. X. 30), or between / live (^S Rev. iii. 1) and / am 
 living (i.e. the living one ^Zv et/xi i. 18). 
 
 Among the numerous examples of this sort we select — with the 
 Perfect Part., KeKa\vp,p.ivos (hidden, dark), jote/xEo-TUjitcVos (filled, 
 full), Tmriopuifi.a/oi (hardened), ye.yovia's (old, natus, cf. p. 55 s.v.), 
 TeT€\ei(U/AeVos, evrjyyekurp.ivo's, ^-ytacrjUeVos, a:rrjWoTpui>fii.ivoi, r/XwiKOTe^, etc. ; 
 with the Present Part, ttoiovv Kapirov, KapTro^opovjxevov of such a 
 nature that it bears fruit, fruitful), Xoyov ix"" (^cbtional), ^xuiv KT-^para 
 ■jToWd (rich Matt. xix. 22 ; Mark x. 22, instead wAoiJo-tos o-^dSpa in 
 Luke xviii. 23), §v iiTroTatro-d/ievos (subject), l(t9l eiivoSiv, IcrOi i$ov(rLav 
 ex<vv, etc. In consequence of this adjectival nature of the Participles, 
 they can occasionally with the aid of the Part, uiv enter into a new 
 participial formation, as Eph. iv. 18 ; Col. i. 21 ovtes a.TrrjWoTpuap.ivoi, 
 
 i(TK0TL(Tp-€VOL. 
 
 26 b) Although the idea of duration resides in the simple 
 tense-forms of the Present and Imperfect, it does not belong 
 to them invariably,^ but does to the periphrases with the 
 
 form. But it is still, more probable that both $\r)$els and 0eP\rin4vos are later 
 additions (hence the variation), and in point of fact cod Sin. omits both. 
 
 On the periphrasis for the various tenses by means of that and a Participle 
 (particularly also with the doubtful or poetic Aorist Part. ) see Dind. in Steph. 
 Thesaur. su> «>( pp. 258, 259 ; Cobet, Nov. Lect. 307, 621; var. Lect. 322 ; Person, 
 Adv. 294 (260). 
 
 1 Hence instead of the Moods of the Pros, (which, in contrast with the Moods 
 
§ 144.] THE PARTICIPLE AND ttvoi IN PERIPHRASIS. 811 
 
 Participle and the Pres. or Imperf. of elvai; hence the latter 
 are pre-eminently suited to denote continuous actions 
 or states. 
 
 Accordingly eorus, 7rpotr8Ej(o/*evoS| irpocrSoKoiv elfu, yivov yfirfyoplov 
 (Rev. iii. 2), ^v irfipa^ofj.evo^ (Mark i. 13), ■^a-av Sia jravTos aii/ovrres 
 Kou ev\oyovvm (Luke xxiv. 53) are more expressive than laryjica, 
 irpoahoKui, ypyjyopei, CT-Eipofero, etc. ; ^(rav vr]<TTevovTei (Mark ii. 18), 
 K07nyA.ci;oi/T€s cCT/xei' (2 Cor. ii. 17) more emphatic than ev^orcuov, KaTrq- 
 ktvo/jiiv, etc. In the Future, which in its simple form does not 
 discriminate between the two ideas of duration and instantaneousness, 267 
 the periphrasis is the only expedient by which to express definitely 
 the idea of duration. Thus everybody feels the difference between 
 erccrOe fiurovfuevoi (Matt. x. 22 etc.), Icrj; o-imttuiv (Luke i. 20), avdpioirovi 
 org ifiyypSnv (Luke v. 10), \epov(TaXi]jX arrai iraTovfLevq vtto lOvSiv (Luke 
 xxi. 24) and fiiaTjOT^a-ea-de, ^(oypijtreis, etc. Both species of Future are 
 united in Mark xiii. 25 (arovrai Trtjrrovrcs ... a-aXeuO-^ovTcu) . Also 
 the Perfect Part, with l<ro/iai by no means always forms a periphrasis 
 for the Futurum exactum, but on the contrary serves to transfer to 
 the future as continuous the qualitative idea expressed by the Parti- 
 ciple; as. Matt. xvi. 19 3 ai/ S^cnjs (Fut. exact.), lorat SeSe/xeyov, o av 
 XuoTjs, €<rrai XeXvfiLevov (not, will have been bound, hnt will remain 
 bound etc.), xviii. 18; Luke vi. 40, and in connection with the simple 
 Future in Luke xii. 52. 
 
 Remark. It is not to be overlooked, that with many predicates in 
 fi'equent use this mode of expressing continuance has become almost 
 the established usage and suppressed the simple forms of the verbs. 
 Thus the already mentioned use of ^v koA^^cvos for iKaOriiJ.r]v (see 
 p. 56), yeYpaji.it.evov iariv for the ordinary yeypairrai, o iariv keyoixevov, 
 fi.e6epiJ.r]Vfv6iJL€vov, a lariv dAAiyyopov/Atvo, etc. Hence ijv SiSda-Kotv, ^v 
 (iyevtTo) Kr)pv(Tauiv, ^airriimv, means simply he was teaching, preaching, 
 baptizing, not he was a teacher, a baptizer etc., as may be seen from 
 the additional adjuncts appended (e.g. the object. Matt. vii. 29 ; Mark 
 i. 22 ; adverbial qualifications, Mark i. 39 ; John i. 28 ; iii. 23). 
 
 c) In both the former cases (a) and b)) the emphasis always 27 
 rests upon the Participle as the proper predicate, and ehai, is 
 simply a copula. But often it was of importance for the writer 
 to give more prominence to the idea of being, existence, 
 residing in the verb, than is done by the simple tense-form. 
 This is accomplished likewise most naturally by joining the 
 Participle to ehai (generally preceding). 
 
 of the Aor., denote duration pre-eminently ; cf. p. 201 ) the periphrasis is manifestly 
 avoided, indeed hardly occurs. Hence in Jas. ii. 15 Lchm. Siaiv is certainly a 
 later addition. 
 
312 THE PAETICIP]>E. [§ 144 
 
 The Participle in such cases is either itself the subject of elvai, as 
 Matt. zxiy. 38 ■^arav Iv rais ■^fitpai'S Tpioyovres kul invovTe's, yafiowrei Kai 
 iKyafii^ovTi^, Rom. iii. 12 ovk &mv ttoiZv ^^rjcrroTrjTa ; or commonly 
 an attributive to the expressed subject, as Acts xxv. 14 av^p n's ia-Tiv 
 KaraXeXei/i/Aei/os iiro 3>'^\ikos Se'cr/iios, xxi. 23 e'unv avSpcs TcVo-apfs tvx^v ■ 
 eXoi'Tcs. In particular, under this head belongs the popular (oriental) 
 manner of narrating, as the narrator at the beginning of his narrative, 
 or as often as a new person or object is introduced, by 
 means of the Imperf. rjv or rjarav lingers as it were a moment on the 
 object which is to be discoursed about, and then with a Participle 
 following the subject continues his account, quite after the mode in 
 which new events are introduced by lyivero M etc. (§ 141, 6 p. 276). 
 Examples are found especially in the Gospels : Matt, viii., 30 ^v 8J 
 fiaKpav an avruiv ayeXri . . . ^oa-KOixivi], xxvii. 65 ^crav yuvatxts . . . 6eia- 
 povfrac, 61; Markii.6; iii. 1 Tdf. [Sin.] (cf. Matt. xii. 1 where i8ou takes 
 the place of the ^v), v. 11 ; xv. 40 ; Luke ii. 8 ; John ii. 6 ; xi. 1, etc. 
 28 d) Also, after deducting all the cases already mentioned, 
 268 there are still a great many examples remaining, where the 
 union of the Pres. Part, with the 3d Person of the Imperf. 
 ^p, yaav, stands in narration simply for the historical Imperfect 
 (alone in use in such cases in Greek authors) as distinguished 
 from the momentary Aorist. These instances we are the more 
 justified in taking pre-eminently for periphrases in the strict 
 sense, as there are two writers especially who have a decided 
 preference for employing them, viz. Mark and Luke. 
 
 The following may pass for examples of such periphrases in the 
 midst of a narrative. In mentioning them we will cite at the same 
 time those parallel passages where, instead of the periphrasis, the 
 simple Imperfect or the Aorist or another construction, e.g. a subor- 
 dinate participial clause, makes its appearance. From Mark: rjv 
 Ka6evS<ov (iv. 38, eKiiBevStv Matt. viii. 24), Kpd^uiv (v. 5), KaTaKOTn-aiv 
 (v. 5), ^aav trvXXaA.o5)i/T£s (var, uweXdKovv, ix. 4; cf. Matt. xvii. 3; 
 Luke ix. 30), dva^aivovres (x. 32, cf. Matt. xx. 17), ^v Trpodyw (x. 32), 
 Tjaav ayavaKToSvres (xiv. 4, for which the Aorist in Matt. xxvi. 8, see 
 note on 24 p. 309), rjv o-vyKa6rjfi,evo<s (xiv. 54, iKad-qro Matt. xxvi. 
 58; Luke xxii. 55). From Luke: rjv ■srpoa-e.vxop.evov (i. 10), hiaveuuiv 
 (i. 22), ^v Bavfi.d.S^ovTK (ii. 33), ^uav areviiflVTii (iv. 20), yjv <TVV£)(oii,fvr) 
 (iv. 38, cf. Matt. viii. 14), rjv icrTU)<; (v. 1, cf. Matt. iv. 18), vTroxuipwv (v. 
 16), ^(rav (caTaKetjuei/oi (v. 29, cruvavcKcii'TO Matt. ix. 10), ■^v SiawKTepkvmi 
 (Luke vi. 12), iKJidWiav (xi. 14, iOepaTreva-ev Matt. xii. 22), TJa-av wapa- 
 Tfipov/jievoL (xiv. 1), lyyitpyTK (xv. 1), ^v Bthav (xxiii. 8), rjtrav wopev- 
 ojitevot (xxiv. 13), rjv Kaiop.ivr) (xxiv. 32) ; and quite as frequently in 
 the Acts : i. 10, 14 ; ii. 2 ; viii. 1, 28, etc. 
 
§ 144.] REDUNDANT PARTICIPLES. 313 
 
 e) Lastly, it can only be regarded, grammatically, as a cir- 29 
 cumlocution, that in the Perfect and Pluperfect Passive 
 (sometimes also Active), where in the ordinary language a 
 periphrasis was already in general- use "in individual forms 
 (as the 3d Pers. Plur. of the Pass., the entire Subjx^nct. and 
 Opt.), the periphrastic forms with the Perfect Part, have 
 become very prevalent also in the remaining Persons of 
 the Indicative, perhaps in consequence of the influence of 
 Latin iipon the later language. The majority of instances 
 of the sort are, moreover, from Mark and Luke again. 
 
 Thus, for example, the Pluperfect appears periphrased in Mark 
 i. 33 ; XV. 26^1' 17 iTTiypafftij cjri"y€ypa/iijU.£viy, Luke ii. 26 ^v avria Kt^^prrj/ia- 
 TitTfjiivov virb tov ■meiiw.To^, i v. 16, 17; v. 17 ; viii. 2; xxiii. 19 (see 
 24 note, p. 309), 38, 51, 53, 55 ; Acts i. 17 ; xiv. 26 ; xvi. 9 Lchm. 
 [Tdf. Treg.J, xxii. 20 ; xviii. 25 ; xix. 32 ; xx. 13 ; xxi. 29 ; xxii. 29, 
 and so also by other writers, e.g. Paul, but on the whole more rarely. 
 
 Redundant Pabticifles. 
 B. § 144, N. 19; H. § 788,- C. § 674; J. cf. § 696 0b3. 1; 70B, 4; G. § 109 N. 8. 
 
 Here mention must be made of an acknowledged Hebraism, 30 
 particularly of the Greek 0. T. The Seventy, namely, often 
 added to a finite verb the Participle (Present or Aorist) of the 
 same verb, always placing it close beside, indeed as a rule, 269 
 before the finite verb. That in this way a special emphasis 
 was not always aimed at, but that the combination is solely an 
 imitation of the Hebrew construction with the Infin. absol., has 
 already been remarked in connection with the similar case in 
 § 1-33, 22 p. 183. Thus we find in the Sept. ijlkt&v ifilarjo-a, 
 dva^dvTe<; dva^rja-o/j-eOa, -rraTa^af iraTd^a, e^ar/ev eadxov, ^acn- 
 Xevcov ^aaCKevaei'i, Kvptevcov KvpievcreK, djelpovTe<s rjyeipav, 
 i^aipcov e^ripev, iropevofievri iropevofiai, fia^ofievo'i ifia'^eaaTO 
 and many others, even when the Heb. text presents no similar 
 construction; as, Exod. xxiii. 26 (Piel), Gen. xix. 17. 
 
 To the language of the N. T. this construction is strictly 
 speaking foreign, since it is found only in quotations, viz. 
 Acts vii. 34 IBcbv elSov, Matt. xiii. 14 ySXeTrovre? ^^freTe, Heb. 
 vi. 14 evXoycbv evXoyrjcra) cre km ttXtjOvvcov irXrfdvvS) ere. 
 
 This species of pleonasm must have appeared still more strange to 
 a native Greek, hence as a matter of fact nothing altogether similar is 
 found in classic literature ; see the exposition of the subject by Lobeck 
 40 
 
314 CASES ABSOI;UTE. [§ 145. 
 
 in his Paralipomena p. 532, and the examples quoted there. Of a 
 different sort, on the other hand, (as results from the very position 
 of the Participle), and belonging to Greek, usage, are such examples 
 in the narrative style as cXaXijo-tv airois Xiymv Matt. xiv. 27 etc., Luke 
 xxiv. 6 ; John viii. 12 ; Acts viii. 26 etc. (cf. xxvi. 14), Rev. xvii. 1 etc. 
 (for which in Mark vi. 50, according to 1 and 2 above pp. 288 sq., we 
 find iXtiXrja-ev ... Kal A-tyei), etirei/ . . . Acyajv Mark xii. 26 ; Luke xx. 2, 
 MTTt •ytvaJo-KovTe? Eph. V. 5. But in Acts xiii. 45 the disagreeable, 
 indeed un-Greek, tautology (avrcXeyov . . . avTi\.iyovTi<;), which is 
 especially surprising in the Acts, is not confirmed by the oldest mss. 
 31 Remark. On the common transition from participial clauses into 
 the finite verb as a continuation of a participial clause, see § 151, 
 8 p. 382. 
 
 Cases Absolute. 
 B.§lffi,2.3; H. §§790, T91o.; C. §§.675, 658 b.; D.p.4S5sq.; J. § 695, 2 b. ; G. §§ 110, 111. 
 
 1 In the N. T. also Passive Genitives Absolute are pretty 
 rare (e.g. Matt. i. 18; Rom. ix. 11, etc.), and in no wise 
 formed like the Passive Ablativi consequentiae in Latin (see 
 particularly the instance in Heb. ix. 19, which is neither Latin 
 nor Greek). In general, however, the N. T. writers are 
 thoroughly conversant with the employment of the absolute 
 construction according to the laws of the Greek language ; 
 only they go farther in this respect, that they disregarded 
 grammatical accuracy (more frequently than Greek 
 270 writers allowed themselves to do so) by employing this con- 
 struction even when the subject of the participial clause was 
 not only present in the governing clause in an oblique case, 
 but even as its subject. Most of these instances, however, find 
 their natural explanation in the circumstance (cf. reif. above) 
 that the Gen. absol. precedes, and so the influence of the 
 leading clause at the beginning of the sentence was still some- 
 what in the background. That in this way often an (un- 
 Greek) accumulation of Pronouns must result, has 
 already been remarked § 130, 2 p. 142. 
 
 In reference to the text we find here again such noticeable dis- 
 agreement in the mss. (and consequently in the recent editions also) 
 that a decision is often difficult : on the one hand, because it might 
 just as easily happen that copyists of Greek education, taking offence at 
 the inaccurate construction, should seek to remove it by alterations (for 
 the most part trifling), as that others, once accustomed to a construc- 
 tion employed on the whwle so often, or in order to produce identity 
 
§ 145.] CASES ABSOLUTE. gl5 
 
 of expression in parallel passages, should write it eveia where originally 
 the regular idiom had been employed ; and because, C)n the other hand, 
 the compass of the writings is not considerable enough to establish 
 accurately the usage of the individual writers in this respect. Cf. the 
 similar observation in § 127, 26 p. 118. We arrange the examples 
 under the two heads : 
 
 a) Tlie Genitives absolute precede their leading clause, I 
 which already contains the subject of the pai'ticipial clause; 
 and that 
 
 o) In an oblique case: — hence either in the Dative, as Matt. 
 ix. 18 ravTa avTOv XoXoSi/tos auTOW, iSoi) ap)(wr tls iXBwv irpoo'tKvva 
 avT^, ix. 10 ; xviii. 24 ; xxiv. 3 ; xxvi. 6 ; xxvii. 17, besides also v. 1 
 Tdf. [Treg.J, viii. 1, 5, 28 Lchm. [Treg. Tdf.], xxi. 23 Lchm. [Treg. 
 Tdf.], Mark xiii. 1 ; Luke xii. 36 (see 4 p. 316), xiv. 29 ; xvii. 12; 
 xxii. 10 a.<TeX.66vTij)v v /jlZv ch rifv iroXtv crwavr^a-ei i/Aiv, John iv. 51 ; 
 Acts iv. 1 (xx. 1 8 Lchm.) ; or in the Accusative, as Matt, xviii. 25 
 11,7] ixovTO'S avTov (XTToSowait, tKiXevcrcv avTOV 6 Kuptos irpadrjvai, Mark 
 V. 18 ; ix. 28 Lchm. [Treg. Tdf.], x. 17 ; xi. 27 ; xiii. 3 ; Luke ix. 42 ; , 
 XV. 20; xviii. 40; xxii. 53; John viii. ,30; Acts xix. 30; xxi. 17; 
 XXV. 7 ; xxviii. 17 ; 2 Cor. xii. 21 fiij ttoXiv iXdovroi fiov raireii/olcrct fxe 
 6 fleo's fj-ov. But if it is present in the leading clause as a G e n i t i v e, 
 the employment of the Gen. absol. with the subject expressed 
 is even more irregular than with the Pative and Accusative, because 
 it might easily have been avoided, but especially because in this way 
 an accumulation (to a Greek ear far more disagreeable still) of 
 altogether identical pronouns must often arise. Since, how- 
 ever, precisely the same thing ocvjurs with participial clauses in the 
 Dative and Accusative (^i/ifSavn airu, i]KoKovBi)(Tav oi™ etc., see the 
 examples in § 130, 2 p. 143), the genuineness of sentences of this 
 kind also is not to be doubted: Matt. vi. 3 o-oi) Se ■n-ounivTO'i . . . ixr) 
 yvdrru) rj a.pwTf.pa. crov, V. 1 Lchm., xxvii. 19; Maik ix. 28 Lchm. 
 [Treg. Tdf cod. Sin.J (where the Ace. may have arisen from emendation . 
 as easily as the Gen.), xiii. 1 ; Luke xv. 20 ; John iv. 51 airoS Kara- 
 )8atVoVTOs, ot SoCXoi avTov vTT-qvTrfcrav aiTM. > 271 
 
 /8) Likewise as subject, so that leading clause and subordinate 
 both have the same subject; as. Matt. i. 18 ■ fivrj<rTev6eia-rj^ ■nj's 
 /xTjTpos avTov . . . evpeOr] iv ycurrpl ix'>'>"''''-j where the harshness of the 
 construction is moderated by the parenthesis {Trplv rj etc.). In Acts 
 xxii. 17 all three oblique cases in direct succession are in this way 
 
 1 Of the opposite case also, viz. that the subject of the leading clause is 
 contained in the antecedent Gen. abeol. in an oblique case (Genitive), iin instance 
 occurs in Heb. ix. 19 \aKi\9elinis viaiis iyTO\TJs iTrh Muvircai;, AajSiii (sc Mavirrjs) 
 rh olitto . . ipdnTurev. 
 
316 CASES ABSOLUTE. f§l45 
 
 united in a single sentence : eyivero Se /u, o t viroarpiij/avTi cts lep. Kai 
 itpoaar^ofx.ivov /Jiov ev to! tspw yevecrOai fxe ev CKCTTatrei. 
 
 3 b) The Genitives absolute follow the governing clause. 
 Since the anomaly of this structure is too conspicuous, and 
 grammatically is even hardly to be justified, but few such 
 examples are found. 
 
 2 Cor. iv. 18 KaTefyya^erai rifi.iv, firj aKoirovvrwv rifi,S>v to liXeTro/ieva, 
 probably in order to connect the participial clause more independ- 
 ently with the entire leading clause, not merely with the single 
 word fifuv. Heb. viii. 9 (quotn.) ^v iwoiqcTa. iv rj/Jiepa IwiSaPoixivov 
 IX.OV TJys xeipo'i aiirSiv etc. after a perfectly un-Greek construction in the 
 Sept., so that the instance can hardly be reckoned as belonging to the 
 Gen. absol. construction. For, apart from the grammatical error of 
 employing the Gen. absol. where the subjects are identical, a native 
 Greek could not possibly add the temporal adjunct (ev fnnipa) besides, 
 since this is already contained in the very construction, and the words 
 if immediately dependent on Iv yip-epa, must have run, y eTreXajSd/LHjv 
 (as Justin Mart, cum Tryph. lip. 228 actually writes ; cf. Lam. iii. 57 ; 
 Ps. xvii. 1 ; Lev. vii. 35), or at least with the Infin. toC i-7n\aj3ear6ai 
 //.e. Consequently the construction employed (which occurs also 
 Baruch ii. 28) is nothing more than a thoughtless imitation of the 
 original Hebrew (■'P''tnri Di'^a, cf. Gesen. 320), of which no other 
 similar example is to be found in the N. T. On Rev. xvii. 8 
 (6av/ixa<7^i;Toi'Tat . . . ^XeiroVTuiv) see § 144, 20, c) p. 306. 
 
 B. §145, 4; H. §791 a.; C. §676a.; J. §695 0b8. 1; G. §110, IN. 2. 
 
 4 It is rare that an instance occurs where the Participle (if its 
 subject is obvious from the context) stands alone in the 
 absolute case, — owing to the propensity of the N. T. writers 
 to insert the pronouns everywhere (§ 130, 2 p. 142). 
 
 Luke xii. 36 tva JASovtos koj, Kpovcravro^ €v6iu><s avoiiwa-iv avria (cf. 
 2 a) a p. 315), Acts xxi. 10 eirip.ev6vT(i>v 8e (Grsb. Eec. add rjiJiMv [cod. 
 Sin. awTuJv]) KaTrjkOev tk etc. Rom. ix. 11 (see § 129, 15 p. 133 sq.). 
 Cf besides Luke viii. 20 Tdf. (dTrijyyeXij avrS Xcywrtoi/ [eds. 2, 7]) 
 and the various readings on Matt. xvii. 14, 26 (Lchm. [Treg. Tdf. cod. 
 Sin.]). 
 
 B. §145, 6; J. §699. 
 
 5 On the pretended D a t i V e 8 absolute for the Gen. abs. see § 130. 
 2 note ^ p. 143. The state of the case is different if the subject of such 
 an apparent Dative absol. contains itself the notion of time or instru- 
 
 272 raent; in this case the employment of the Dative with the Participle 
 is not only admissible (see the examples in the Gram."), but even if 
 
§ 145.] CASES ABSOLUTE. 317 
 
 the N. T. is now restored, after mss. [Sin. also], with perfect confidence 
 instead of the former Genitive, Matt. xiv. 6 yevecrioK Se yevof/.ivoK tov 
 Rpuioov d}p)(i^cra.TO etc. 
 
 B. § 145, NN. 4, 6, 7 ; H. §§ 792 sq. j C. § 675 d. sq. ; J. §§ 70O sq. ; G. § 110, 2 sq 
 
 Nominatives and - Accusatives absolute. The 
 instances in the N. T. which may be brought under the head 
 of Nom. absol. have already, so far forth as the Participle is 
 used as such (i.e. without an article), been quoted and treated 
 of in full above, under § lU, 6, 7 p. 292 sq. and 13 p. 298 ; 
 but in so far as it is used with the article, the examples fall 
 under § 123, 5 p. 78 and § 151, 4 sq. p. 379 sq. Hence it remains 
 for us here to speak of the possible occurrence of an Accusa- 
 tive absolute. The peculiar classic use, however, of the 
 Accus. absol. viz. with w? preceding (ia-iayjra, to? Travra'; etSoras 
 he was silent as if all knew i.e. because he thought all 
 knew) does not occur in the N. T. Hence, whatever else of 
 the sort is found there, must, like most Nominatives absol. 
 according to p. 298 above (cf. B. § 145 N. 6), be explained 
 as anacoluthic. 
 
 The construction, however, can be pointed out with confidence only 
 in a single instance : Acts xxvi. 3 rj^yyjfWLi ifi.auTov fxaKapiov im a-ov 
 /xeAAui/ d7ro\oy€Lcr6ai, j«.a\io-Ta yviLa-rrjv o v T a or e iravrum etc. That 
 the clause is actually an Accus. absol. is proved by the express in- 
 sertion of the Subject (ere) with ovto, whereby all connection of the 
 participial clause with some other portioiHof the sentence is prevented. 
 It is to be explained as having arisen from a construction altered 
 while in the mind, probably in view of what precedes, so that the 
 intended thought was / esteem myself happy that thou art appointed my 
 judge} Moreover, several interpreters would discover an Accus. 
 absol. also in Eph. i. 18 (Jva S(3 vjuv irvcv/ia a-o<j>ia's ..., ■7rc<^(«Tio-/x.€- 
 vous Tovs offiOaXfiov^ T^s KixpSi'as i/juiiv), the Participle not being 
 referred to 6(l>6a\fjiovi but to the persons addressed. That it cannot 
 be such, follows from the fact that the subject, hence in the form ifxai, 
 is not expressed (as it is in the preceding passage). Consequently the 
 Accusative must be connected by anacoluthon immediately with the 
 preceding Dative vfuv. But in opposition to that, too, it maybe 
 remarked, 1) that such a license, although perhaps it might be de- 
 fensible in classic authors (especially poets), in the N. T. at least — 
 even in Luke — can only be shown to occur with the Nominative, as 
 
 1 Cf. with this the very similar sentence in the Act. Andr. (the style of which 
 often reminds one of Luke) § 13 : ouS' &v aoi irurreiiru, tStdv /lov ffavrhv \iyovji at. 
 
318 CASES ABSOLUTE. J§145 
 
 the case whose construction is the loosest, see the exposition in § 144, 
 13 p. 298 ; 2) that the choice of the Accusative of the Participle 
 (without an expressed subject) would be the more surprising here, 
 as the employment of the regular Dative (7re<^a)Ttcr/Aei/ois) referring to 
 the preceding v/jilv was so natural. Hence, on grammatical grounds 
 the other explanation (see § 125, 5 p. 94) unhesitatingly deserves the 
 preference, as the more probable ; the more so as the sense also is by 
 no means opposed t6 it. 
 
 B. §145, N. 7! H. §793; C. §675d.; J. §701aq.; G. §113,N. 10. 
 
 7 Analogous to the examples of af with the Participle 
 (§ 144, §2 p. 307) is the appearance of the same particle in a 
 similar sense before the construction of the Gen. absol. (Of 
 
 273 the Ace. absol. with to? there is no example, as was said in the 
 preceding paragraph.) 
 
 1 Cor. iv. 18 <I)s /u.'^ lp)(Ofi.ivov /jlov irpos vfia.'S, i<f)V(n<L9Tfj(rav Tives, 2 Cor. 
 V. 20 7rpe(jl3evo/i.ev, <os tov 6eov TrapaxaXovvTos, 1 Pet. iv. 12 ((is ^ivov 
 OTJ/i^aiVoi/TOs), 2 Pet. i. 3 ois Travra tijs dcia's Svi/a/xccus SeSaprjixevrj^ etc., — 
 all which are to be taken as subjective motives of the following 
 main action, and therefore, as on p. 307 above, to be resolved by ciSores 
 OTi, or even simply by yojtit^ovrcs, X.eyovre'i on . . . 
 
 B. §148,N.10j H. §792; C. §675b.; J. § 700: G. §110,2. 
 
 8 Impersonalsinan absolute participial construction stand, as is 
 well-known, in the Accusative. No instance, however, occurs in the 
 N. T., except that Paul, instfiid of the short parenthetic clause el tvxoi 
 (used a few times, 1 Cor. xiv. 10 ; xv. 37), employs in 1 Cor. xvi. 6 
 the neuter Ace. tvxov. This tvxov, however, is used nearly in an 
 adverbial sense even in classic writers, as Xenophon, Plutarch, et al. 
 (see Pape under Tvyxdvav), and ought not to be taken otherwise here, 
 since the leading mark of an Impersonal used verbally, viz. the 
 dependent clause, is wanting : irpos v/xSs, tvxov {if it so chances, perhaps), 
 ■7rapap,ivS> Kal etc. With i^ov however (Aots ii. 29 ; 2 Cor. xii. 4) 
 co-TtV if always to be supplied. Respecting dp^d/jLcvov (Luke xxiv. 
 47) see § 150, 7 p. 374. 
 
 1 Eemaek. a peculiar, but genuine Greek, example of the blending 
 
 of two very current constructions, the absolute Participle and the Ace. 
 and Infin., is found in Acts xxiii. 80 p.rjvvOua-ri's Si p.oi eTri/SovXiJ? €is tov 
 avSpa p,eX\€iv i(Tecr6ai, e^a-UTjjs erreixifia Trpos en-', which arose from the 
 underlying grammatical combination p.-qwOivToi (or ii,r]vv6iv, see B §'145 
 N. 10) fLOL, eKijSovXrjV ih TOV avBpa pxXXeiv ea-ea-Oai. See on this topic 
 fof blended constructions) in general § 151, 10 below, p. 383. 
 
§ 146.] ADVERBS. 319 
 
 Adverbs. 
 B. §116, 4; H. §B88sq.; C. §703, 1; D. §488; J. §B26aq. 
 
 The number of Adverbs which being joined to the Genitive 1 
 have acquired almost the force of Prepositions, and hence 
 are often employed as periphrases of the ordinary prepositions, 
 may be increased from the N. T. The particulars here which 
 are of importance grammatically, are the following : 
 
 From the old preposition avrC arose by composition and derivation 
 (besides the common Ivavtiov towards, in presence of, and mniKpi over 
 against), evavri before (coram), air ivavn and Karivavri over 
 against, in presence of, also against in a hostile sense (Acts xvii. 7) ; 
 from avd the common etrdvw with the force of vtrep with the Ace. in 
 a local and immaterial sense above, over, in a numerical sense more 
 than (see the constr. in § 132, 21 p. 168) Mark xiv. 5 ; 1 Cor. xv. 6. 
 A preposition, unknown to the earlier writers (and that probably first 
 arose in the East), with which principally the Seventy render the 27 I 
 Heb. i3Sb and ''5"'?3, is ei/uTrtovin various constructions, to which for 
 the most part our prep, before i.e. in conspectu, ante oculos corresponds, 
 and often in circumlocutions for the Dative, see § 133, 3 sqq. p. 172 sq. ; 
 also compounded Kar^vunrLov, in the same signification. The 
 adverbs lixTrpoa-Oiv' before, ante, and 6-rrLaui back, behind, even for 
 awo (Matt. xvi. 23, where immediately afterwards it is employed in 
 altogether a different sense), are used in various peculiar constructions 
 and significations ; also in circumlocution for simple cases (see e.g. 
 pp. 172, 176, 184). The word Icos, until, rarely used elsewhere as 
 a prep., is frequently found in the N. T. connected with the Gen. as 
 well in a local as a temporal reference, particularly in Matt, and Luke. 
 As a conjunction connecting clauses it stands as often in connection 
 with the Relative ov, otov, as without it ; (so /*exP'' °-XP')- "^'"^ can 
 also be prefixed to other prepositions (and adverbs, see 4 p. 320, and 
 cf. the Germ, bis) ; as, Iws fh (""po?) 'BrjOavuiv, eojs im r-rp/ 6aXacTcrav, 
 luK efw Tiys 7ro\€<os. The neuter fie'o-ov is once found used quite like 
 a prep, in the sense of /xcra or fiera^v: Phil. ii. 15. 
 
 Still more diffuse, and more or less Hebraistic, circumlocu- 
 tions for simple prepositions are formed by means of the 
 substantives trpocroairov (csb), X^^P (T)' ""'"oV* (f^s), 
 
 For example: ■jrpo tt poo- (ottov for the simple Trpo, commonly with 
 persons, once even metonymically in a temporal reference, Acts xiii. 24 
 (jrpo TTpodijnrov T^s elcroSov avrov) ; cItto it pocrilnrov (7??'?) for the 
 simple (XTrd (Acts, Rev.) ; further, iv TrpoerwTru, Kara Trpoa-wirov, eis 
 irpouijiirov followed by the Genitive, see the Lexx. With x"V P^""" 
 
320 PREPOSITIONS BEFORE ADVERBS. [§146, 
 
 ticularly the instrumental Sta ;)(€tpds and Sia xE'pSi' ; see on these .md 
 other phrases with x^V § 133, 20 p. 182. "With o-rd/xa, the analogous 
 Sia o-To/iaros, see ibid.' With 6tj)da\fws : Matt. xxi. 42 ; Mark xii. 
 1 1 (quotn.) eo-Tiv davfiaa-rrj iv oqb^aX/Aots ■^fi.uiv, Luke xix. 42 tKpv^i) anra 
 o^OakfjLwv arov etc. 
 
 B. §146,N.2; H §626; D. t)p. B26, 572; J. §§529,2; 773 Obs. 4. 
 
 2 Instead of the ordinary aveu, Luke uses twice the poetic anp: 
 xxii. 6, 35. TlXyjv except, when it is to serve as the connective of 
 clauses, is commonly in the earlier writers joined with other conjunc- 
 tions (ci, dAAa, oTt, etc.). In the N. T. however, as in general in later 
 writers from Aristotle on, it often stands alone as an adversative 
 conjunction. • Cf. Iws. 
 
 B. §146,N.3; cf. W. §81,3. 
 
 3 Substantially under this head (of the Dative with adverbs) belong 
 such examples as Matt. viii. 34; John xii. 13 i^XOev ets vTravrqa-iv ria 
 'IrjcroC, where the Dative is governed by the entire verbal idea (equiv. 
 to w^vTijo-er) ; on the other hand, in Matt. xxv. 1 the Gen. tov vvfitjilov 
 depends immediately on the Substantive imavTrjcrw. 
 
 275 Prepositions ebfoeb Adveebs. 
 
 4 The facility with which prepositions connected themselves 
 with other words, or were employed in composition, or were 
 themselves, especially in the earlier language, used adverbially 
 (cf. B. § 147, N. 5 ; H. § 615 ; C. §§ 703 b., 706 ; J. §§ 640, 644), 
 occasioned a great multitude of constructions or compositions 
 in part entirely new, — adverbs coming to depend on 
 prepositions just like substantives. 
 
 Analogous to the above (1 p. 319) mentioned combinations with 
 £0)5 (viz. etas ek, etos eiri, etc.), we find also not only the regular ex- 
 pressions, with article prefixed, tws tov vvv, €u)s r^g a-^fxepov, but also 
 without an article and in direct connaction, tcos apn, ecus mre, ems koto), 
 ecfls ecrto e« (Mark xiv. 54), ?(i)s cuSf, Itos urjixepov, Iws hrriXKL'; (as we too 
 say until now, to here, etc.); likewise a/na, in the expression a/xa 
 Trpwt, Matt. XX. 1. Further, of the old prepositions we find a-rro 
 thus used (it corresponding then entirely to our since), — in the phrases 
 am Tore from (since) then, Atto irepvcri since a year ago, <iiro irptot «u)s 
 ecTTrepa?, aw' apn ; on the other hand with the article, airo tov vvv, , — 
 
 ^ Hebraistic, also, is the construction ^irl iTT6iiaTos Suo liapripav (on the state- 
 ment of two witnesses, Matt, xviii. 16; 2 Cor. xiii. 1, cf. Deut. xix. 15), and the 
 expression — an imitation of the iv arSpiaTt ^o/iipatas used very often by the Sept. — 
 TTfo-ovvTat trrSnaTi fmxaipas, Luke xxi. 24 ; cf. Heb. xi. 34 (e(^v7'oi' crrii/MTa naxalpv^) 
 and Geseu. sub fiB no. 3. 
 
§ 147.] PREPOSITIONS. 321 
 
 and ETTt before adverbs of number without affecting their meaning, 
 €7ri TpK, ifj) oMoj^. Hence combinations of the sort were regarded also 
 as actual compositions, and accordingly written in one word, as aTraprt, 
 £0a7raf, avrnrepa ' ; further virtpXiav, inrepeKTrepurcrov, vTrepdvo) (Lchm. 
 writes even yirepeyia as one word in 2 Cor. xi. 23), iTroKaru), cKTraXat, 
 irapavTLKa. 
 
 In general, however, this use takes place only to a limited extent 
 and rather in certain customary and established phrases. That it 
 reaches back to pretty early times, may be seen froip KUhner, ausf. 
 Gr. § 620 [Jelf § 644] ; Kriiger, Sprachl. § 66, and the examples for 
 the entire language in Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 45 sq. 
 
 Respecting the pleonastic combinations dTro p,a.Kp66ev etc. see p. 70. 
 
 PREPOSITIONS. 
 B.§147; H.§§614sqq.; C.§§688sqq.; D.§470sq.; J. §§ 472. 614sqq. 
 
 An acquaintance with prepositions, as respects their use and 1 
 their signification, is of great and pervading importance for 
 the understanding of the N. T., since they, in the first place, 
 were so often substituted for the constructions by case usual 
 elsewhere (cf. p. 142), and secondly, deviate in their sig- 
 nification, both as respects its contents and its compass, not 
 unessentially from the ordinary usage. But to give an ex- 
 haustive exposition of the subject would far transcend the 
 limits of this grammar (indeed the complete exhibition of 
 the N. T. vtse of the two prepositions ev and eh alone would 
 require perhaps the space of a book) ; and the grammarian 
 may the more readily desist from the" undertaking, as the 276 
 subject has already found minute consideration in the special 
 lexicons.^ Here, as everywhere, he must confine himself 
 merely to pointing out the prominent and distinguishing 
 peculiarities of usage. 
 
 Prepositions with the Gbnitivb. 
 
 'ANTI. In the signification of this preposition (^instead of, 
 for) no deviation occurs, from ordinary usage ; as, John i. 16 
 Xdpi^ clvtI ')(apiTo<i grace for grace. 
 
 'Alio is one of the prepositions most frequently used as 2 
 
 1 This, and not ivTiwdpav, almost all the Mss. [Sin. also] have in Luke viii. 26. 
 This (otherwise poetic, see Stephanus, Thes.) form in -o is found as early as Po- 
 lybius. Tdf. accentuates it, after mss., ImTlirepa; yet the accentuation according to 
 analogy deserves the preference, since " nulla est in accentibus codicum auctoritas." 
 
 2 See in particular the clear and well-arranged separate articles in Wahl's clavis 
 minor. 
 
 41 
 
322 PREPOSITIONS WITH THE GENITIVE. [§ 147 
 
 well in the 0. T. as in the New, and often in a manner de- 
 viating from the ordinary usage. Its fundamental signification, 
 viz. departure from the exterior of an object, is of course 
 the prevalent one in the N. T. also. Yet this, as well as all 
 those delicate shades in the signification of airo which the N. T. 
 has in common with classic Greek, remains excluded from our 
 exposition; and even those individual instances where the 
 preposition is used in a pregnant or especially characteristic 
 sense, referrible nevertlieless to its fundamental meaning, we 
 must leave to the exegete,^ turning our attention at once to 
 
 1 This mode of proceeding — the only one which suits the scientific criticism of 
 the present day — has, as matter of fact, come into general use now among recent 
 commentators, and thus a multitude of absurd assertions in reference to individual 
 senses of this preposition (and others) have been expelled from the province of 
 N. T. exegesis. Oft this account, respecting such' details in the use of the prepo- 
 sitions we refer to the commentaries. Eor since such passages are by no means 
 few in number, a detailed explanation Snd tracing out of the sense from the 
 fundamental signification in every individual case, however instructive such a 
 treatment might be for an acquaintance With the grammatical handling of these 
 prepositions on the part of the N. T. writers, would carry us much too far. To 
 render this evident once for all, we will here treat as briefly as possible of a 
 number of such instances in the case of the prep, ciirb : Acts viii. 22 (cf Heb. vi. 1 ) 
 lXiTav6y)ffov wir'b ttjs KaKias aov rairjis for in the idea of fieravoiiif is included at the 
 same time that of turning one's s elf away (Luther renders it very freely 
 repent for etc., similarly deWotte on account of etc.), 2 Thess. ii. 2 aaKtvBriviu imh 
 Tov vo6s to be thrown into violent mental agitation so as to lose one's senses. 
 Acts xvi. 33 Trapa\afi(i)v avTohs . . . iKovir^v anh t&v irK'qywv, the Vulg. renders 
 freely lavit plagas, but literally to wash away the blood or the dust^rom the 
 wounds, 2 Tim. i. 3 ^arpeiiw t^ fleip airi wpoy6va>v from ray forefathers i.e. in the 
 way inherited from my forefathers, as they did, Col. ii. 20 aireBdum aiiv Xpiar^ 
 a-rh Tuv (Troixfiau tov K^tTfjiOUf 2 Cor. xi. 3 tfyo^ov/xai /at; ^daprj to voii^aTa v/jluu aTrh 
 TTjs oTrAiJTrjTor, Rev. xviii. 14 irdpTa rh Xafiirp^ oirtdXeTo airh croC, — in these last 
 three passages the idea of turning away or of separation is plainly to be perceived in 
 the verbal idea itself (in the case of i.vodavftv and a-niKKvaBai. in their very outward 
 composition), Rom. ix. 3 jivxif'-ri'' aviBf/ia ehat airh rod Xpurrov to be accursed and 
 thus fall from fellowshipwith Christ, Heb. xii. 15 baTepwv airh t^s x°-P'-'^o^ "t 
 Beoi keeping aback i.e. at a distance from grace, Rom. vii. 2, 6 etc. KarapyitaBM 
 airb- ToC vofiou, TOV Xpt<rTov, i.e. the law, Christ, has no influence on a man, and con- 
 sequently he is released from the law, f -om Christ, Matt, xviii. 7 oval t^ K6(Tfia> 
 cmh ray aKavtdXaiv on account of temptation, i.e.' the woe comes upon it from etc. 
 , Heb. V. 7 eiaaxovaBeXs aTt}> t^s evKa^eias on account of, in consequence of, his piety 
 (see the recent coram.). Acts xx. 9 Kartv^x^eh airh tov Sirmv in consequence of, as a 
 result of, the sleep (cf. d) above). Matt. xi. 19 ; Luke vii. 35 eSiKauiB-n n cro<pia i-wh 
 Tuv t4ki/uv ai/Tris is justified on or in her children, i.e. taking her children as our 
 point of departure (considering their works) we perceive wisdom to be justified, 
 exalted above the calumniation of mockers; but otherwise in Acts xiii. 39 airb 
 TfivTav av (i.e. d</>' Sx) ovic {iSvfiiBriTe SiKaiuBrifai Iv v6p.<f Mtouire'ais justified and 
 thereby freed from all etc., likewise in Luke v. 15; viii. 2 TiBepaTrevfievos inrh 
 wvfviJLaTav healed and freed from spirits ; similarly Rom. vi. 7 ; Heb. x. 22. In 
 
§147.] PREPOSITIONS WITH THE GENITIVE. 323 
 
 those respects in which the usage of the N. T. (and essentially 
 also that of the Old) differs from common usage, viz. in that 
 the prep, airo is employed where native Greeks would have 
 preferred/ -a) a case alone, b) the prep, sk, c) the prep. 
 Trapd, d) the prep. viro. 
 
 a) That the language of the N. T. often employed the prep- 27 f 
 osition airo (extended avro irpoacoirov, see p. 319) where the 3 
 earlier Greek was satisfied with the Genitive alone may be 
 seenfrom § 130, 1 p. 141 ; § 132, 2. 5. 7. 12. 17 etc. pp. 156 sqq. ; 
 and that with verbs which otherwise ordinarily were joined 
 with two objects-Accusative, one of the nouns by virtue of a 
 different conception of the thought is construed with airS, see 
 § 131, 6 p. 149 and § 134, 5 p. 189. Here we must attend to 
 still another and altogether analogous use of diro, which like- 
 wise has already been incidentally mentioned : viz. the ideas 
 to be on one'' s guard, to protect, to be ashamed, to fear, 
 and the like, as ^vXao-o-etv, ^vKdaaeaOai, (f>o^ela6ai, alcryv- 
 veaOai, pKeirPiv, 'irpo(Te')(eLv, irpoai'^eiv eavT& (in the 0. T. also 
 iKarrjvai, TTToriBrjvai, aTeXkecrOab, etc.), frequently take after 
 them the object of the fear etc. in the Genitive with diro. 
 
 See the examples above in § 135, 3 p. 192, and in the lexicons, 
 under the several words. Compare also eic below, and on Acts v. 35 
 (TTpoo-ix^o' iavTta ivl tois etc.) under em p. 337. This construction 
 might be regarded as an expansion of the classic use of (jivkdcra-eiv 
 (Xen. Hell. 7, 2, 10 ; Cyr. 1, 4, 7) ; but more probably it grew to such 
 an extent under the influence of foreign idioms, viz. of the Latin (cf. 
 
 specifications of time often merely the name of the person is used, brachylogically, 
 as airh 'Afipadfi since the time of Abraham; metonymically dirb a?jitoTos 'AjSeA, etc. 
 1 We expressly say preferred, and thereby admit that even in Greek authors 
 occasionally the mode in which the N. T. writers are wont to express themselves 
 can be met with as an isolated phenomenon. Yet it would be very rash to insist 
 on inferring a general usage on account of isolated passages in classic authors 
 (how often an author in the moment of writing creates new constructions !) ; and 
 indeed the bringing together of parallel passages, often from out of the way and 
 sometimes from extremely heterogeneous writings by profane authors, has in 
 many cases done more harm than benefit to the interpretation of the N. T. To 
 be sure, the leginnings of a corruption may be sometimes pointed out in nativ& 
 authors ; then to establish the peculiarity of the N. T. usage it is absolutely neces- 
 sary to shove how what in Greek authors remained an isolated phenomenon, 
 without inUvdnce on the general (or more correctly, the literary) usage, became 
 in the N. T. customary and not infrequently the rule. Far more frequently, 
 however, iheN. T. usage has quite another origin than phenomena, externally 
 similar, in classic writers ; and then the explanation of it, and of the particular 
 passages in which it occurs, must be derived from other sources than the classics. 
 
324 PREPOSITIONS WITH THE GENITIVE. [§147 
 
 the constructions cavere, timere, tueri, ah aliquo) on the later Greek, 
 and of the Hebrew use of yq and •'iBa upon the language of the Old 
 and N. T. particularly; (of. Gesen. under N'n^, nnn, lad, \!5ia). 
 Examples of the same construction in the Sept. are of airo, Jer. 
 X. 2 ; xii. 13 ; xxxi. 13 ; ii. 36 ; Ps. cxx. 7 ; Josh. vi. 18 ; Deut. i. 29 ; 
 Ecclus. xvii. 14, etc. oi airh Trpoauiirov (iJBa), Jer. i. 17; Ezek. 
 ii. 6 ; iii. 9 ; Mai. ii. 5 ; Josh. xi. 6 ; Eccl. viii. 12, etc. 
 4 b) a-TTo stands where a more exact designation of the relation 
 would have required e'«. Of this the following passages may 
 serve as examples : 
 
 Matt. vii. 16 ctTro tZv Kapiru>v iTTiyvuxreirOe, where Ik would have been 
 the more precise expression (cf. the variants on vii. 20 Lchm.), Heb. 
 xi. 34 i&>ivafi,0}6r]crav am acrOeveia^, Rev. xiv. 3, 4 ayopacrOrjvai am T^s 
 7^s, am Tuiv avOpunruiv. Also in the periphrases for the partitive Gen. 
 279 with TTiveiv, ia-OUiv, -^opTd^ea-Oat, yep,L^tiv ordinary usage would certainly 
 have preferred ek (see § 132, 12 p. 163), likewise in such phrases as 
 06 airo T^s iKKXT]<TMs Acts (xii. 1^, 01 am rrji atpfcreo}^ (xv. 5), Ip^eiv to 
 evSvfjLa am rpi)(!av Ka/x-^Xov Matt. (iii. 4, cf. Xdpva^ am o-iSijpou App. 
 B. C. 4, 44), avSpes evXaySets am -^ai/Tos eOvovs Acts (ii. 5), etc. In 
 specifications of descent, am in Greek writers designates rather the 
 more remote and general, « the more immediate and special, origin. 
 Nevertheless in the N. T. the combinaiions 6 dm Na^apa^, 6 am 
 'Aptfi,a6aia^, ovStU dm rrj^ tfivX^'S, Jjv ^iXitttto^ dm BrjOaa'iSd (John i. 45, 
 although e/c T^s TrdXetos immediately follows in apposition) are quite 
 as frequent as the regular ol dm KiXiKias, etc. Both prepositions 
 occur in their proper relation in Luke ii. 4 dve/Sri 'Iwuijcf) dm -nji 
 TaXiXaias ek ttoXeus ^a^apdO. 
 
 6 c) where usage would have preferred irapd. 
 
 Thus mention has already ^(§ 132, 17 p. 166) been made of the 
 thoroughly unclassical construction of dm with aKovav. It occurs far 
 more commonly still with /xavOdvetv, — and that not only when it 
 has the signification to learn on (i.e. from the case of) a person or 
 thing, as Mark xiii. 28 etc. dm r^s (rviajs fidOert ttjv Trapa^oX-qv, Matt. 
 xi. 29 /Aa^ETE dir i/jiov, but also in the signification to be informed, 
 cognoscere, hence for vapd, as Gal. iii. 2 toBto OeXw p.a6w/ dij> vp-wv, 
 Col. i. 7 KaBibq lp,d6e.Te. dir' "Evatjipd (on the other hand, Trapd in. 2 Tim. 
 iii. 14), — and with other verbal ideas, as Xafi^dvuv and its com- 
 pounds,' Matt. xvii. 25, 26 ; 1 Cor. xi. 23 ; Col. iii. 24 ; Heb. vi. 7 ; 
 3 John 7, Savtia-acrOai Matt. v. 42 ; further, in constructions like 
 
 ^ Yet the construction with irapd is likewise frequent with these verbs, and in 
 particular is always used when the recipient takes a thing from the giver iin- 
 mediately; see the exposition in Winer p. 370 (347) note. 
 
§ 147.] PREPOSITIONS WITH THE GENITIVE. 325 
 
 6 eTraivoi yei/^o-erat e/cao-TO) (Xtto tov dfov, iX'^w ti aTTO Ttvos (1 Cor. iv. 5 ; 
 vi. 19 ; 1 Tim. iii. 7), and after substantives, as Sofa d<j> v/aSv 1 Thess. 
 ii. 6, Siad'qKrj am opovi ^ivS, Gal. iv. 24, frtj^aov aTTo (tov ^cXojuev Ihtiv 
 Matt. xii. 88, and the like. 
 
 d) Where the Greeks preferred viro. Primarily with A ctive 6 
 verbs to designate the motive (Lat. pros, our for, out of, 
 from), as Matt. xiii. 44 airo Trj<i ')(apag avrov vTrar/ei, koI •jrcokei 
 iravra (on the addition, likewise unclassic, of the Pron. avrov 
 see § 127, 26 p. 118 ; on the other hand, without a Pron. Acts 
 xii. 14), Matt. xiv. 26 airo tov (f>6/3ov mpa^av, Luke xxii. 45 
 Kot/j^wfievovi diro rij'i Xvirris ; similar to this use are such ex- 
 amples as aTTO TOV o^ov ovK i^BvvaTo Luke (xix. 3), ovk la-^Qjov 
 . . . cbTrb TOV TrXrjdov's tcjv I'^Ovcov John (xxi. 6), ovk eve^Xerrov 
 diro T97? S6|ij? TOV ^turo? Acts (xxii. 11). In the second place, 
 with Neuter Verbs containing a Passive idea, and even with 
 actual Passives, to designate the personal author, hence 
 precisely for mro and the Gen., or the Latin a with the Abl.; 
 sometimes also to denote the cause, and so for the Dative 
 with the Passive otherwise usual. 
 
 This last-mentioned use has, indeed, been often disputed; but incor- 280 
 rectly, if we compare the examples given below, in all of which the 
 Greeks would hardly have expressed themselves otherwise than by 
 vwo, or by means of very different constructions. That the possibility 
 of this use has been doubted, is solely owing to the fact that earlier 
 expositors, ungrammatically enough to be sure, asserted that airo was 
 used in the N. T. indiscriminately for inro, and quite in the same sense. 
 The correct explanation, on the contrary, is this : that in cases where 
 the Greeks used ' vw6 to designate an internal causal relation, the i 
 N. T. writers contented themselves (more frequently than is the case 
 in the classics') with a more external statement of relationship by 
 means of dTrd, just as they (according to b) p. 324) so often used the 
 same preposition where the more exact view of the relation required 
 cK. The intrinsic force of aJrd, accordingly, is on our supposition in 
 no wise altered, but only the construction with this prep, set as a loose 
 and inexact usage over against that which grammatically is preferable 
 and more correct. Yet it is to be carefully noticed, that even in the 
 N. T. the lax usage is only exceptional and the construction with 
 vTTo or the Dative to be assumed as a rule throughout, as well 
 as that many passages were referred to this usage by the (earlier) 
 
 ' For that at least analogous modes of expression are to be found also in earlier 
 writers, and consequently that the above supposition is philologically well founded, 
 may be seen in Poppo on Thv.c. 1.17. 
 
326 PREPOSITIONS WITH THE GENITIVE. [% 147 
 
 expositors where the interpretation of am m its original sense appears 
 to be thoroughly admissible ; (cf. the note on p. 322 and Winer 371 
 (348) note). Perhaps, too, it is not accidental that in several of the 
 following examples the governing verb itself is already compounded 
 with dm ; cf the example from Acts xv. 38 in § 151, 2 p. 377. 
 
 Examples: 1) With Neuter verbs, Matt. xvi. 21 7roA.A.a vaOeiv 
 dm Toiv 7rpea-j3vT€pii)v (var. vm), cf. Mark viii. 31 etc. ; 1 Thess. ii. 14 
 var., 2 Thess. i. 9 SIkijv ncrovcriv diro TrpocruJTroi; rov KvpLov koI dm t^s 
 Sofij? rrj<; la-)(io'i aiiTov. Similarly Rev. xviii. 15 ol 7rA.ouT^crai/T€s air 
 avr^s (deWette, die von ihr d. h. durch sie reich geworden, ihM became 
 rich from her, cf. Ik below). 
 
 2) With actual Passive s,.Mark viii. 31 [u^ro] ; Luke ix. 22 ; xvii. 
 25 TToXXa iroBtLV KoX dirotoKifnatTBrivai dm tu>v Trp-cr^vripuiv etc. cf. 1 Pet. 
 ii. 4 var., Acts ii. 22 dvSpa dTroEeSeLyp.€vov dm tov 6e.ov^ 2 Cor. vii. 13 
 dvaTTiTtavTai to irvAjxa avrov dm rnVToiv vfiwv, Jas. i. 13 dm 6 tov Trupa.- 
 tpp-ai, v. 4 {ixut6o%) 6 dTrecTTtprjixevos a^ i/iwv (kept back by you), Rev. 
 xii. 6 TOTTOV rjTOLfjLacTiJievov dm tov deov, Acts iv. 36 i-TrtK^TjOel^ Bapi/aySas 
 dm Tuiv ctTToo-TdXcov where dm has only by the recent editors been re- 
 stored instead of the vm of the Rec. ; likewise x. 33 iravi-a to. irpoore- 
 TayijLeva croi dirb [Lchm.J tov Kvplov (var. irapa, and vm [the latter 
 given by cod. Sin. and adopted by Tdf. and Treg.]).^ 
 
 To the above examples the following also may be added, ICor. i. 30 
 iyevT^drj cro<f>[a -^/uv dm 6eov (for ^eo's appears here as the efficient 
 cause, see the Comm.), Matt, xxviii. 4 dm tov <j>6^ov avTov icreia-drjo-av, 
 Jude 23 )(LTuiva dm Trjs aapKos ccririXwjLce'vov, Rev. ix. 18 d'jre.KTdvd'qarav 
 281 o-'^o Tuv TpiSiv TrkrjyZv tovtoiv, a peculiarly turned" expression for they 
 died of (from) the wounds (cf. 2 note p. 322). 
 
 Rbmakk. On the local specification d;ro a-TahCwv etc. see § 131, 11 
 p. 153. 
 
 1 'EK. Although this preposition often appears in peculiar 
 phrases, yet it departs in no point essentially from the ordinary 
 usage ; hence for its use in the main the reader may be referred 
 to the exposition given in the dictionaries and the general 
 grammars. Further, since the idea of the prep, is so forceful 
 and transparent that it could hardly be obscured by the modi- 
 fications of usage, a brief reference here to a few particular 
 cases will suffice. 
 
 Owing to the affinity in signification between e/c and an 6, it is 
 
 1 In Luke i. 26 also the better attested reading (codd. Vat. Sin. [also Tdf. Treg.] ) 
 is iirfo-TiiAT) airh toS fleoC ; and this is not to be translated, away from God. 
 
 2 The existence of these variants in the best and oldest mss. is a proof that thai 
 loose use of oinJ was known, and that an endeavor was made to get rid of it by 
 various corrections of a classic tone. 
 
§ 147.] PEEPOSITIONS WITH THE GENITIVE. 327 
 
 natural that both should often serve to denote, one and the same 
 relation; hence both are united in John i. 45 (see 4 p. 324), 3 Cor. 
 iii. 5 ; Rev. ix. 18, and with a certain distinction in Luke ii. 4 (see 4 
 p. 324). Hence, further, (as follows from what is said in § 132) with 
 so many verbal ideas the Genitive was more closely defined now by c/c, 
 now by diro. Thus ju.€Tavo6Tv in the Rev. is uniformly joined to 
 Ik (see Wahl) instead of to ciTrd (see 2 note p. 322), and Trjpetv 
 (Siarripav) is construed not like the other verbs signifying to be on 
 one's guard etc. (see 3 p. 323) with djro but with Ik, John xvii. 16; 
 Acts XV. 29 ; Rev. iii. 10. It serves (far more frequently than aTro, 
 and rather in a classic acceptation) to designate the author or the 
 cause with Neuter and' Passive verbs: so, for example, very com- 
 monly (like ex in Latin) after yevvriOrjvaL, as well as the corresponding 
 predicates iv •yatrrpt e;<etv Matt. i. 18, koi'tijv ^\etv Rom. ix. 10; further, 
 after the Neuter verbs dTro6aveiv, arawov €;(etv, TrXovrsiv (cf. aTrd), ^■rjv, 
 ^(uij icTTiv £fc Tivos, KCKOTTtaKojs cf oSotTToptas aud the like, after Passives 
 like dicjiskeiaOai, S€SoiJ,ivov idTtv, XvTreTcr6ai, ^riiJ,iov<j0ai, (rvve)(ecrOai, dSi- 
 KiitrOai, and in such phrases from the Rev. as Trvpovcrdai Ik Trvpos, 
 aKOTOvaOai Ik Kanvov, (j>toTi^f.(T6aL Ik Sdfijs. Cf. also 2 Cor. i. 11 ; Eph. 
 iv. 1 6 and the Commentaries on these passages. 
 
 On the divers constructions of eicat and yiVecr^ai with Ik, both in a 
 proper and in a tropical sense, see § 132, 11 p. 162 sq. On the peri- 
 phrasis with Ik for the Partitive Gen., and the construction (to be 
 referred to this Gen.) with BiSovai, Xap-fidveiv, ipayuv, iaOUiv and the 
 like see ibid. 6, 7 p. 159, and with the idea of fulness ibid. 12 p. 163. 
 On the (substantival) phrases with e/c and the article see § 125, 9 p. 95. 
 Lastly, by means of e/c are formed many adverbial expressions, as ix > 
 pL^uiv radicitus, ef air^s ilKco, e/c Seftas, ef apurrepas, e/c Sevripov, e'f 
 iKavov, cK Trepuxa-ov, Ik crv/Ac^wvov, ef di/dy/crjs, i$ Icrxvo?, the Hebraistic 
 e"K KoiXia's fji,rjTp6i (cf. Isa. xlix. 1 ; Judges xvi. 17, etc.), and many others. 
 
 Owing to the obviousness of the relations tliey express, the 8 
 two opposite prepositions iie and et? were employed in all sorts 282 
 of brachylogical and pregnant plJrases, the meaning 
 of which is easily suggested by the phrase itself or by the 
 context. 
 
 B^or example : irapeyeveTO 1$ 68ov, Trdre avaXvcrri eic twv ydfiwv, TrXe/ceii' 
 orTi^avav ef oKavdZv, ttouiv (jipayeXXiov i/c CT)(oiviiov, 6 mv e/c t^s y^s e/c 
 T^s y^? i<TTiv /cat e/c t^s y^s XaXet John iii. 31, XaXeu' c/c tov Kocrp-ov 
 1 John iv. 5, e/c tuiv iStW John viii. 44, e^ etXt/cptveias, e/c deov 2 Cor. 
 ii. 17, avafijivav to ' vlcK e/c tSo/ ovpauZv SC. ip)(op,evov 1 Thess. i. 10. 
 Similar constructions with ei's are the following : Matt. x. 27 8 ew to 
 oSs aKoveri SC. AoA.ij^ei', Acts xi. 22 r/KovcrBrj 6 Adyos eU to. uira t^s 
 
328 PREPOSITIONS WITH THE DATIVE. [§ 147 
 
 eKKXrjo-ia's, Luke vii, 1 iTrk-^puitrev iravTa to, p-qfiara avTOV eis ras aKoun 
 roil Xaov (i.e. which he spoke to or in their ears), Matt. x. 9 /x.^ laf 
 (njcrOi )(pva-ov ets Tas ^<!>vas (in order to put it into etc.), Acts xvi. 24 
 Tovs TToSas rjcrcjjaXuraTO ets to $vX.ov sc. STjcras. See besides, Mark x. 10 ; 
 John xvi. 21 ; 2 Cor. v. 5 ; viii. 24; 1 Fet. iii. 20; — on etvai ek oIkov, 
 tk T-^i' KoiTijv, 15 below, p. 332 ; — on evop^os ets Trjv yUwav and the like, 
 § 132,23 note 2 p. 170. 
 
 That general predicates, like to be, to go, to come, are often omitted 
 with both prepositions may be seen in its place, § 151, 24, b) p. 394. 
 
 nPO. On the Hebraistic circumlocution Trpb irpoawTrov see 
 § 146, 1 p. 319 ; on irpb with the Infin. for trpiv, § 140, 11 
 p. 265 ; and respecting irpo e^ '^ftspav etc. § 131, 11 p. 153. 
 
 Pkepositions with the Dative. 
 9 'EN is by far the most common of these prepositions, and 
 used in the most diversified references, both proper and tropical, 
 external and internal. See the classification in Wahi's smaller 
 clavis ; and on the numerous constructions of eV with verbs 
 instead of the simple cases §§ 131-183. For our purpose (cf. 
 1 above, p. 321) we select the following : 
 
 a) There are a number of passages in which iv is joined to 
 verbs which contain the idea of motion, so that ep stands to 
 a certain extent for eh; axid, on the other hand, ek is often 
 found connected with the idea^of rest (see ek p. 332). 
 
 Although in presence of the countless examples of the correct 
 grammatical use of these two prepositions in the N. T. there cannot 
 be any talk of a complete obliteration of the distinction between them, 
 it would nevertheless be idle, — in fact, contrary to the simple and 
 natural interpretation of many passages, and prejudicial, — if we 
 should attempt to deny that, as compared with the literary usage of 
 classic prose, there is a certain carelessness and license in the employ- 
 ment of both ; and this is in perfect harmony with the popular style 
 of expression, (cf. the numerous passages in Homer where iv is used 
 in the same way). In reference to iv there is the less reason for the 
 denial, as according to p. 71 the local adverbs eK«t, iv6d.Sc, ttov, oirov, 
 etc., are so often construed with verbs of motion ; and similar observa- 
 283 tions may be connected with other prepositions, see under eVi, irajrid, 
 Trpds. The idea of the preposition itself, however, remainsin all such 
 cases unaltered. When, therefore, iv stands with a verb of motion, 
 it does not thereby receive the signification of ets ; on the contrary, 
 grammatically this is always to be explained by the circumstance that 
 the writer has in view the result of the motion, or the sphere i n 
 
§ 147.] PEEPOSITIONS WITH THE DATIVE. 329 
 
 which the motion occurs, rather than the motion itself. Compare 
 with this the Latin construction of in and the Ablat. with verba 
 ponendi, etc. So we find, in analogy with that Latin usage, the 
 following verbs joined to eV: nSe'va^ (also riOea-Oai in a tropical 
 sense) and lo-ravai (a-T^a-ai) together with their compounds; as, 
 Matt, xviii. 2 ; xiv. 3 ; xxvii. 29, 60 ; Mark vi. 29 ; ix. 36 ; xv. 46 ; 
 Luke i. 66 ; xxi. 14 ; xxiii. 53 ; John xix. 41 ; Acts iv. 7 ; v. 4 (iOov 
 iv rrj KapSia <rov), 18, 25, .27 ; vii. 16; ix. 37; xix. 21 (6ea-6ai iv rm 
 Trvevfiari), 2 Cor. v. 19. But the construction with ek continues at 
 the same time in use; cf. Acts v. 18 with iv. 3; v. 25 with xii. 4; 
 Mark vi. 29 with Acts xiii. 29. In other passages, with these verbs 
 all reference to the whither is excluded, as Acts v. 27 (differently 
 xxii. 30), Rom. ix. 33 ; 1 Cor. xii. 18, 28, etc. While with these verbs 
 the construction with h> became, perhaps in consequence of Roman 
 influence, a species of usage, isolated instances of something wholly 
 analogous are found with other verbs of motion : thus in particular 
 with the closely related verb StSo'vai, as John iii. 35 (cf. xiii. 3), 
 2 Cor. i. 22; viii. 16 ; further, with iXOeiv and its compounds, Luke 
 ix. 46 ; xxiii. 42 ; 1 Thess. i. 8 ; Rev. xi. 11, vTrox'^pe'Lv Luke v. 16 
 {Kara^aiveiv John v. 4), 'a.iro(TT iWeiv Matt. x. 16; Luke x. 3, 
 Tri/jLTreiv Phil. iv. 16, iri'irTetv (cf. Pape sub voce) Heb. iv. 11. 
 And then belong here, ejuySairTcir ttjv xeipa ev tu rpv^Xlo) Matt. xxvi. 23, 
 EorpoKrav to. i/xurta iv rrj oSu Matt. xxi. 8 ; Luke xix. 36, iwuTTpiipai 
 oTret^eis iv tjipovfjcra SiKaCutv Luke i. 17, cf. Mark v. 30, to Icntapnivov 
 iv Trj KapSCa Matt. xiii. 19, rj dyd.7nj iKKi^yrai iv rais KapSiai's Rom. v. 5. 
 On the other hand, the following admit of a different explanation : 
 1 Cor. vii. 15 iv elprivr] KtKhrjKev 17/ias o ^£os, and Eph. iv. 4 ixX'^drjTe iv 
 uia iXTiBi, see the Comm. ; and if ayairr] is joined as well to eh nva 
 (2 Cor. ii. 4, 8 etc.) as to €v nvi (2 Cor. viii. 7 ; cf. 1 John iv. 9, 16), 
 the reason is contained in the nature of ayaTrrj, — an idea which now 
 may be conceived of as active, and now at rest. 
 
 b) Although the niimerous shades of signification of iv are 10 
 all to be traced back more or less closely to the original idea 
 of the preposition, yet in one respect in consequence of Oriental 
 influence (cf. § 133, 17 p. 181) an element originally alien 
 to the idea of the prep., and at yariance with the ordinary 
 Greek usage, has become blended with it. That is to say, ev 
 in the Old and New Testaments is very commonly used, like 
 the prep, a in Hebrew, to designate the means: and that not 
 only with things (equiv. to the instrumental Dative), but also 
 with persons (eruiv. to Scd with |;he Gen., Latin adjuius, opera'). 
 
 We will sele»t Dnly a few of the examples, since they are to be found 
 
330 PREPOSITIONS WITH THE DA.TIVE. [§147. 
 
 on almost every page: Luke xi. 19, 20 Iv BetK^cjSouX, Iv SaxTw'Xo) 6eov 
 €K/3aAAetv Tci Sai/ioi/ia, Matt. xxii. 43 iv irvivfiaTi. xaXei avTov Kvptov in, 
 284 the Spirit i.e. impelled by the Spirit ; and so frequently iv 6ew, iv 
 Xplo-Tw 'It/ctov, iv tZ ovofiaTi Kvpiov, Xpio-Tov, iv TrvevfiaTi dyuo, iv to) 
 *A8a/A, iv a-apKL, etc., Acts iv. 7 iv voia Svvafiei rj iv iroiia oi/ofinri iizovq- 
 o-are toBto; 9 iv tlvi oDtos o-OTCDCTTat ; 10 iv to) 6v6p.aTi I. Xp., ec totjto) 
 oiiTos irapia-nqKiv vyvfj'S, I Cor. v. 8 iopTa^Mfi-ev p-rj iv ^vpy ttoXcllS, . . . 
 dXV iv a^vpoLs etc. See also on the addition and the omission of iv with 
 the instrumental Dative, § 133, 19 p. 182 ; and on the diversified con- 
 structions (arising from this) of iv with verbal and adjectival ideas, 
 particularly with verbs expressing emotion, §§ 131-133 pp. 146 sqq. 
 On the Infin. with iv see § 140, 9 p. 263 sq. When, on the contrary, 
 iv seems to stand for a-vv (i.e. with the accompaniment of) it is always 
 to be referred to the idea among, in the midst of, — as Matt. xvi. 28 
 ipXopevo's iv rrj fiacriXeia. airov (not to his royalty, but in the midst of, 
 or in the splendor of, his royalty; see Fritzsche in loc. and cf. § 133, 
 22, b) p. 184), Luke xiv. 31 iv 8iKa )(tXid(nv uwavrijo-at tw pera etKotn 
 XiXidSav ipxopev(f, — or is to be explained as an instrumental iv by 
 supplying a verbal idea, as avOponros iv Trvicvpari axaOapjia (Mark i. 23, 
 § 125, 11 p. 96), euripx^Tai iv alpari Heb. IX. 25, iv pajSSu) tkOui i) iv 
 aya/Trrj Trvf.vpa.Ti, t€ rrpaijTijTos ; 1 Cor. iv. 21. 
 
 11 c) Among the various combinations of etvai, Qylvecrdai, 
 e^etv) with iv, we give prominence (as a peculiarity) to the 
 mode of periphrasing the predicate belonging to elvai etc. by 
 means of iv and an abstract term in the Dative. 
 
 Thus often in Luke, as iv i^ovcria rjv 6 Xoyos airov his discourse was 
 powerful (iv. 32), ol iv Tpv<j>r] inrdpxpvTes the luxurious (vii. 25), yvvri 
 ovcra iv pva-fi aipaTO'S a flowing woman (viii. 43), vvd.p)(u>v iv jSacrdvoK 
 suffering pain (xvi. 23), iv 'ix^pa, etvai, iv KpipMTi etvat, etc. John vii. 4 
 iv Trapp-qaiq, eli^ai to be manifest, 1 Thess. ii. 6 iv /3dpei ftvai to be esteemed 
 (or severe) ; further iv Sofj;, iv VTrepoxfi, iv aKpo^vcrTtg., iv TTcpiTopyj tlvcu, 
 ej(£iv iv rfi dcrdevelif., iv iiriyvtaaa, iv kroipw, iv TrapajSdcrei, yLveo-dai, etc 
 
 12 d) Not less peculiar are many adverbial expressions 
 formed with iv and the Dative, particularly if they stand in a 
 measure where the classic language would sooner have em- 
 ployed a participial clause or an adjective with mv. 
 
 Such (eagerly and often used) adverbial phrases in the N. T. are 
 the following : iv dXrjOeia, iv iKTCveiq,, iv StKaiotruvjj, iv croijita, iv Trpavrrp'L 
 (equiv. to dXij^ols, exTcrGs, BUaioi, aocfjol ovtes, etc.). Acts ii. 46 pere- 
 \dpj3avov Tpocfyrji iv ay oXKidtra K(u dfjuXoTijTi KapSt'as (equiv. to dyaX- 
 X.iwp€V0L Koi d^tXeis ovtcs), 1 Cor. xv. 42, 43 trTraperai iv (f)6opa, iv 
 dn/Ata, iv da-OiVfif • iyttpirai 'ev d<j>6apcrLi}, iv So^g, iv Svvdp.a, cf. VS. 44. 
 
§H7.1 PREPOSITIONS WITH THE ACCUSATIVE. 831 
 
 Thus such a phrase joined to a substantive, without the addition of 
 S)v or any other participle, often takes the place of an Adjective 
 belonging to the same (cf. § 125, 2 p. 91, 11 p. 95 sq., and the examples 
 quoted there) ; as. Tit. iii. 5 epya to. ev Si/caiocrwi/i;, 2 Pet. ii. 7 rj Iv 
 &<Tt\yeia di/acrrpo^Tj, 13 -q Iv rj/J-fpa Tpv(jyq. The combination of iv 
 
 ■with the Neuter of the Relative, iv m, is used as a Conjunction (in 
 classic authors also, see Pape's Lex. I. 720, and cf. e| ov, dvff Si/, etc.), 
 sometimes in a temporal sense (Mark ii. 19 ; John v. 7, etc.), some- 
 times in a tropical, quatenus, quaprbpter, on the ground of this, that, 235 
 see Fritzsche on Rom. viii. 3 ; Liinem. on Heb. ii. 18 ; vi. 17. As 
 a brachylogical peculiarity we may notice, further, Rom. xi. 2 
 £v 'HXi'a i.e. in the history of Elijah ; cf. hn tow ySarou in 23 p. 336 
 and other parallel modes of expression in deWette's Introd. to the 
 O. T. § 78. 
 
 Remaek. The extremely surprising cornbination ([given by codd. 
 ^tAB and] adopted by Lchm. [Tdf. Treg.]) in Acts xxvi. 20 toI's iv 
 Aa^uacTKo) Kat hi Iepo(To\viJ,oK wacrav re rrjv )^u)pav rijs louSat'as 
 could only be explained by the ellipsis of some such Participle as 
 h/oiKovcTLv ; but for this quite unusual ellipsis no analogous example is 
 found, since no such Part, can be supplied here, as in Rev. xii; 12 
 TiChm. (see § 131, 14 p. 154), from what precedes. Hence Tdf. [eds. 
 2, 73. has retained the reading eU ■Kaa-av tc, (which, indeed, is also not 
 congruous, and looks like an emendation made in the interests of 
 grammar) . > 
 
 XTN, like cum in Latin (or sammt in Germ. [Eng. together 13 
 withy), is often used instead of Kai; as, Mark iv. 10 rjpwrmv 
 avTov ol irepX avrov avu Tovi ScoSbku ra? 'irapa^o\d<;, ix. 4 ; Tiii. 
 84 ; Luke xxiii. 11 ; Acts iii. 4 ; x. 2 ; xxiii. 15 ; 1 Cor. xvi. 
 19 ; Eph. iii. 18, etc. 
 
 Yet this phrase is no Latinism, at least the constructio ad synesin 
 customary in Latin authors (i.e. the use of the Plural with a preceding 
 or following Singular) is not found in connection with it. 
 
 Peculiar is the meaning besides, ad (i.e. super), in Luke xxiv. 21 
 cnii' TToxriv tovtok rpCTrjv ravnjv ij/icpav 5yei ; Vulg. super hcec omnia, 
 de Wette hei alle dem. 
 
 Peepositions with the Acousativb. 
 
 ANA, a preposition used but rarely in the N.T., is employed 14 
 most commonly * 
 
 1) In distributive adjuncts; in which connection we may 
 notice, that according to p. 30 it is treated as an adverbial addition, 
 for example before the subject, dva els eKocrTos Rev. xxi. 21, or before 
 
332 PREPOSITIONS WITH THE ACCUSATIVE. [§ 147 
 
 the object,^ Matt. xx. 9 IXaySoi/ avii. Brjudpiov, John ii. 6 uSpt'ai x'^P°^'^"-^ 
 avb. (jLerpr/Tas Svo ■^ Tpets, Rev. iv. 8 e^ov ava. VTipvyoM e^, cf. Protev. 
 J-ac. 7. 2 ; 8. 3 ; and 2) in the phrase dva ixiaov throughout, as Matt, 
 xiii. 25 ; Mark vii. 31, in the midst of Rev. vii. 17, and simply inter, 
 between, 1 Cor. vi. 5 Siaxptvai dva p-icrov tov ahe\<f>ov avrov where the 
 abridged form of expression (the use of the Singular with the omission 
 of the second party to the controversy) is noticeable. 
 
 15 EI^. The custom of connecting ew immediately with 
 verbs of rest has already been spoken of under ev (9 p. 328). 
 The rudiments of this brachylogical form of expression are 
 to be found in the popular language of all ages, and this idiom 
 has its analogies in all languages ; cf. the examples in B. 
 286 under ek p. 414 (480). Yet since the N. T. writers have 
 made a far more extended use of this liberty than is made 
 in the ordinary literary language, it is necessary to specify 
 here in detail the various species of construction, so far as the 
 examples given in the N. T. extend. 
 
 a) The expression with eh arose from its being attracted 
 by a verb of motion, present in the sentence, to which it in 
 part also belongs. 
 
 We are the more justified in explaining the extant instances in this 
 way (by the ay^pxi am kolvov), agreeing as it does perfectly with the 
 classic literary usage, as they are almost all from the writings of Luke : 
 xxi. 37 i^ip\6 p,ev o^ YjvXi^iTO €11 TO opos, Acts ii. 39 vfuv yap icrriv 
 f) cTrayyeXia... KOt iracnv tois £'S fiaKpdv, oerous av etc., vii. 12 
 OKOvtrots ovTa (Tvrla €is AiyxnTTOv iiaTricrreiXev tow iraTepai ■tjp.wv, 
 Matt. iv. 13; ii. 23 i\6u>v KaTaKrjcrev els ttoXiv Na^., similarly Acts 
 vii. 4. Hence the same mode of explanation is with reason to be 
 applied also to Luke ix. 61 iTiTpupov fj,oi a-!roTd^a<r6ai rots cis tov oXkqv 
 fiov (see Meyer), and in Acts xii. 19 eU rtp/ Kaiadpeixiv is to be referred 
 not merely to KaTeXOiav but also to 8ieVpi;8Ev. 
 
 18 b) Or it follows a verb of rest in which the (previous) idea 
 of motion is still contained, as the idea to place one's 
 self is in cnrivai,, and in Kadl\jEw Kadfja-dai that of seating 
 one's self, etc. (This case likewise is not uncommon in 
 Greek authors). 
 
 For example, Mark xiv. 60 dvaorTas 5 apxttpev? eis p.ea-ov eirripuiTtja-ev, 
 Luke vi. 8 OTrjdi eU to p,i<rov, John XX.%9, 26; xxi. 4 earr; eh to 
 aiyiaXov, 1 Pet. V. 12 ; Mark xiii. 3 Ka0r]p.ivov eis to opos twv iXaiwv, 
 2 Thess. ii. 4. Analogous are Acts xx. 14 <ruvipaKev rjp.lv eh t^v 
 ' 'Aa-a-ov, Heb. xi. 9 'A^paa/i irapwKTftTO' eh yrpi T^s e;rayy€A.uis ; cf. Acts 
 vii. 4. 
 
s 
 
 § U7.] PREPOSITIONS WITH THE ACCUSATIVE. 333 
 
 c) Or it is used with the verbs elvai and yiveaOat. IJ 
 The ideas of these verbs, being wholly general, and therefore 
 easily definable, acquire by being connected with ek the force 
 
 of equally general verbs of motion (to come, go) ; (cf. from 
 earlier authors Herod. 1. 21 ; 5. 38 ; Thuc. 6. 62, etc.). 
 
 Examples of yivt'o-O oTare Luke i. 44 U19 eyeVero rj <t)(uvij ek to. Sito, 
 /lov, Acts XX. 16; XXV. 15; Gal. iii. 14, — which require no further 
 explanation. More characteristic, on the other hand, are tlje ex- 
 amples with eivai, Luke xi. 7 eis ttjv koltt/v euriv (popularly, are to — 
 Germ, zu — bed i.e. gone), Mark ii. 1 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] riKovaO-q on «ts 
 oIkov eoTtv (Lchm. [Treg. Tdf. cod. Sin.] ev oIkw), John i. 18 6 wv eis 
 Tov koXttov tov Trarpos, 1 John v. 8 01 rpew ets to tv tla-iv, cf. John xvii. 
 23 ; Acts viii. 23 eis yap ^okrjv TriKpi'as . . . opS ere ovra, Col. i. 6 tov 
 eiayyeXiov tov TrapovToi ets wp.as. Whether Luke iv. 23 ocra rjKova-a/ji,ev 
 yivofjieva els ttjv JLatjiapvaov/j., iroirjo'ov koi SSc iv Trj Trarpi'Si also belongs 
 here may be doubtful, since if we translate it in Capernaum, the idea 
 of motion (even antecedent) is excluded. Hence Meyer thinks that 
 Ets here has the tropical sense of on (unto). Yet the other inter- 
 pretation is more natural, and corresponds better with the second 
 clause. Cf. the examples in the following paragraph. 
 
 d) But there still remains a number of instances which can 18 
 not without violence be adjusted to any of the above rules. 287 
 Hence we are compelled ' here either to s u p p 1 y a missing 
 idea of motion, or (as in the majority of cases is doubtless 
 more probable) to recognize (as above in the case of iv) a 
 more negligent use of etV, and consequently the beginnings 
 
 of the subsequent obliteration of the distinction between the 
 two prepositions. (Hence we find countless passages with ek 
 where complete rest is expressed in the Apocrypha of the N. T.) 
 
 For examples of this from later writers, see Jacobs ad Anth. Pal. 
 p. 49 (10), 712 ; Stephanus sub eis (p. 292 sq.) ; Protev. Jac. 4. 4; 
 5. 1 ; Thom. 11. 1 ; Nicod. 15. 1, 4; Herm. Vis. 4. 3 ; and the htera- 
 ture on the whole subject as referred to in Winer p. 418 (389). 
 Further, notice from the N. T., Acts viii. 40 eipe^ij ek "A^wtov sc. ikOdiv 
 or yiv6fi.evo%, Mark i. 39 tjv Krjpvcro'iav eU ras crwayuyas avrlov eU oXiyi' 
 Trp' Ta\. where an unforced interpretation, particularly of the second 
 CIS, hardly permits us to take it otherwise than as equivalent to Iv oXj; 
 Tg TaX., xiii. 9 napaSuxrovtriv ip.as eis (rvveSpia Kai eis crvvayioya^ Sapi^cr€(r6e 
 where in view of the parallel passage and to avoid asyndeton we 
 should not with Lchm. [Treg.] and Meyer put a comma after o-vi/aywyas, 
 Acts ii. 27, 31 iyKaT€\ei<j>d7i eis a,Sov (^v Tdf. [bis, so J( ; but Lchm. 
 
334 PREPOSITIONS WITH THE GEN. AND ACC. [§147 
 
 Treg. only in 27] see § 132, 27 p. 171), xix. 22 iTritrxev XP°^ov ti> 
 'Ao-i'av, xxi. 13 SeBrjvai Koi an-oOiiviw eh 'lepovcraXrjfi. iToC/j-w ex<^, xxiii. 11 
 'iia/j.aprvpaa-dai els 'lepovaaXrjfjt., eh 'Vu>ii.r{v, XXV. 4 rripeitrOai tov IlavAov 
 €is KaicrapEtav, Mark i. 9 e^airTiiOr] eh tov 'lop8ai/r;i/ (in the Jordan") : 
 and its use in connection with the simple article, Mark xiii. 16 6 eis 
 TOV ay p6v hardly different from Matt. xxiv. 18 6 ev t(3 aypto; also in 
 Mark x. 10 the reading £is ttjv oktav is now restored as the only 
 correct one in place of ev ry oIkio. Cf. also the examples given above 
 in 8 p. 327 sq. 
 
 In the passages where eh has a tropical, metaphysical, sense, since 
 in them the idea of rest or of motion is at the most only secondary, it 
 must be left to the interpreter to decide which meaning is best suited 
 to the context in every particular case. But in general the notion 
 of aim (corresponding to that of motion) is in such instances by far 
 the prevalent one; cf. Winer 416 (388). 
 
 Remark. On the circumlocution for the predicate Accusative 
 with verbs signifying to make to be, to elect, by means of eh and the 
 Ace., and on the corresponding (Old Testament) use of eh with ttvai 
 and yCvea-Oai, see § 131, 7 p. 150 ; on the circumlocution for the 
 Dative by means of eh, see § 133, (3 p. 172). Adverbial ex- 
 pressions, as eh TO. a/xerpa, eh to Kevov, eh Trepurireiav, iTrep/SoX-^i', etc., are 
 formed like those given in B. p. 414 (480) and to be explained in the 
 same way. 
 
 Prepositions with the Genitive and Accusative. 
 ■19 AIA. The N. T. use of this preposition, both when it is con- 
 nected with the Gen. and with the Ace, presents no anomalies. 
 Even when according to our ideas it seems to express other 
 relations, the interpreter will invariably bring to light a sense 
 suited to the context if he endeavors to trace back its sig- 
 nification to the two fundamental ideas (through and on 
 account of). 
 '288 To the adverbial phrases given in the Gramm. (B. p. 414 ; H. § 629 
 fin. ; D. § 478 fin. ; J. § 627, 3 f.) may be added from the N. T. Si' 
 vTTOfi.ovyp, St» Ad-you, Sta TrpocTKo/t/^aTos, Sia ^pixykiav. Si' oiKiyuw, Sia ttoXXSi', 
 Si' 0A.0V, etc. 
 30 TLATA. In respect to this preposition also, only a few trivial 
 peculiarities deserve to be noticed. 
 
 Peculiar to Luke is the local signiflcition of Kara with the Gen. 
 ■throughout ; but always in connection witii the Adject. 0A09, so that in 
 this way the relation is designated which the Greeks render by a.va: 
 and the Aec, 'as Koff oA.ijs t^s trepiy^pov Luke iv. 14, Koff oXijs t^s 
 
§ 147.] PREPOSITIONS WITTl ALL THUEE CASES. 335 
 
 louSaias xxiii. 5; Acts ix. 31, Ka$ oXrjs tiJs 'Iottjt^s 42; x. 37. In a 
 tropical sense hostile direction is by far its most common force; 
 hence in Gal. v. 17 ea-tSu/tetv Kara tivos is not a mere periphrasis for 
 the Gen. On o/avvuv, i^opKi^eiv, Kara, nvos see § 131, 1 p. 147. An 
 isolated use of Kara and the Gen. is its use as a periphrasis for an 
 adjectival notion, as 2 Cor. viii. 2 ^ Kara ^ddov; nruxEta deep pov- 
 erty, with which has been compared Strabo 9. 5 ia-rl to fiavruov avrpov 
 Kolkov Kara /8a0ovs. On the periphrases for the Genitive, the 
 Possess. Pron., and also an attributive Adject, with a substantive, by 
 means of k a t a and the Accusative (r/ koto. Oeov Xvirrj, ol Kara, (jfva-iv 
 k\ou&o(,), see § 132, 2 p. 156 and 10 Rem. p. 162. On Kara with 
 distributive adjuncts see p. 30; and here again, as above with 
 avd, it is to be noticed that the expression formed in this way with 
 Kara is joined to the verb as object, Acts xxi. 19 efiyyetro KaO' fv 
 
 iKOaTOV. 
 
 'TIIEP and the Genitive is often used by Paul (after the 21 
 fashion of later writers, see B. p. 415 ; H. § 633 b. ; D. § 480 ; 
 J. § 630, 2) for irepi and the Genitive. 
 
 Thus with verba sentiendi etc., as 2 Thess. i. 4 ; Eom. ix. 27, etc., 
 also in the sense of as respects, 2 Cor. viii. 23 etre virlp Tltov, Koivmvoi 
 e/uos, etc. In the mss. it is often interchanged with vepi, as in 2 Cor. 
 i. 8, etc. 
 
 virip with the Ace. is used in later writers, (as Trapd is in 
 the earlier classics), after Comparatives and similar verbal 
 ideas to designate the object surpassed. 
 
 Just so in the N. T. ; as, Luke xvi. 8 (fipovi/jLurrepoi imep tous vlovi 
 rov (^(OTos, Heb. iv. 12 TOit-iaTepoi {nrep Tracrav ji.6.)(a.ipav. Gal. i. 14 Trpok- 
 KOTTTov virip iroWovi, 2 Cor. xii. 13 rjcrcrioOriTe iirep ra? \ot?ras iKKXrjO-La';. 
 Hence it imparts, just as Trapd does, to the preceding predicate a 
 comparative force by simple juxtaposition : Matt. x. 24 ovk ta-nv fia- 
 6rp-r]'s inrep tov SiSocr/caXoi' more than his master, x. 37; Acts xxvi. 
 13 ; Phil. ii. 9 oVo/ia to virkp vav ovofia. On the adverbial inrtp in 
 inrep eyoj and Other combinations see § 146, 4 p. 321. 
 
 Prepositions with all Thkbe Cases. 
 
 'AM.0I and IIEPI. Of these two prepositions the first is 22 
 not found in the N. T. There is no example also of Trept with 
 the Dative, the local reference of this combination being 
 transferred completely to the construction with Trepi and the 
 Accusative. 
 
 On the periphrasis 01 mpC Tiva see § 125, 8 p. 95. IlEpi and the 289 
 Gen. is employed, as in ordinary Greek usage, only in a tropical 
 
336 PREPOSITIONS WITH ALL THREE CASES. [§ 147 
 
 reference (de), and hence in Acts xxv. 18 Trept ov does not belong to 
 tTTaOivTfi but to i<j)epov. Sometimes it stands in the sense of virip for 
 (as, on the other hand, virep is used for irepi, see virep p. 335) : Matt. 
 xxvi. 28 ; Gal. i. 4 ; Heb. v. 3. 
 
 23 'Em is in use in the N. T. in almost all the manifold shades 
 of signification which it has in Greek authors. We select the 
 following as peculiarities : 
 
 eVt with the Genitive. The signification in presence of, 
 coram (B. p. 416), springs from the original notion of ap- 
 proximation, of being in immediate proximity Qon, itpon, 
 near by') ; and in a temporal reference the signification im- 
 mediately in, at or during, corresponds precisely to this local 
 signification. 
 
 Both meanings may often be pointed out in the N. T. : a) of 
 place, Mark xiii. 9 e;rt i^ycfidvtov koI /SatrtXewv crTaOi^crecrOt, Matt, 
 xxviii. 14 Tdf. [cod. Sin.] iav aKova-Oy tovto iirl tov rfytfiovo'; coram 
 procuratore, like Acts xxiii. 30 Xiyuv Im <rov, of. 1 Cor. vi. 1, 6 ; 
 1 Tim. V. 19 ; vi. 13, etc., hence ■^ Kavp^cris i;u.Sv fj hri Tltov (2 Cor. 
 vii. 14) my encomiums of you uttered before Titus ; b) of time. 
 Matt. i. 11 eiri T^s /teToiKEo-t'ai; Ba/SuXwos, Rom. i. 10 lin tS>v Trpo(re.V)(piV 
 fiov Seop.evo'i, Eph. i. 16 ; Philem. 4, and in this way is explained most 
 simply the brachylogical expression ovk aviyvtare . . . im. tov fidrov 
 (Mark xii. 26) or Muuo-ijs iiL-qvua-tv km. -nji ^Sdrou (Luke xx. 37), very 
 much as we say at i.e. in the occurrence at the bush ; cf. Iv 'HAt'oi in 
 12 above, p. 331. 
 
 Moreover, under the tropical meanings it is to be noticed also that 
 Xiyew etc. Ini nvos is not synonymous with ircpi tivos, but in accordance 
 with the primary sense of etti can only mean, what is said concerns, 
 is aimed at, has reference to, etc., as Gal. iii. 1 6 ou Aeya • Kat tow 
 (Tiripixamv, a>s eTri ttoWSi', oAA ujs e<^ bio's • Kal rm (nripfjiaTi etc. In 
 Acts xxi. 23 evxrjv e^o^'^'^s c<^' mvrZv means literally having a vow 
 upon themselves. Among the adverbial expressions we may notice 
 the pretty common ctt' aXrjOeiws in truth, actually, truly, as Mark xii. 
 14, 32 ; Luke iv. 25 ; Acts iv. 27, etc., for which in Matt. xxii. 16 Iv 
 aXrjOela is used (differently in John iv. 23 sq., xvii. 19 ; 3 John 3, 
 etc.). 
 
 24 eVt with the Dative. The signification on, upon, unusual in 
 good prose (for which iirl with the Gen. is used), is found in 
 the N. T. pretty frequently ; and that 
 
 a) With ideas of r e s t, as Matt. xiv. 8 So'? /aoi eVi mraKi Tr]v KecjtaXrjv 
 'Iwdvvov, Mark ii. 4 Tdf. [ed. 7], vi. 39, 55 ; John xi. 38 ; with both 
 cases at the same time, Acts xxvii. 44 ovs ftXv im cravi<rw, ovs S« iiri 
 
§ 147.] PREPOSITIONS WITH ALL THKEE CASES. 337 
 
 nvwv etc.^ To this is to be referred in a tropical sense the meaning 290 
 on the ground of; for similar to the sentences im, Tavry rfj irerpa oIko- 
 8ojU.^<70) TTjv iKKXrjcnav (Matt. xvi. 18), CTrotKoSo/nijStVTes ettI t<5 de/x^klia 
 (Eph. ii. 20), are Heb. viii. 6 iirl KptLTToa-Lv «7rayyeA.tats vevofji.06 iTTjrai 
 (of. vii. 11), Eph. ii. 10 KTicrOivre'S cm Ipyois ayaOols, Phil. ii. 17 et /cai 
 o-TTEi/So/nai £7rt rfj Ovcriq, Kal keiTovpyia etc., further, the common phrases 
 iir eA,7rt8t, XaXctv, SiSa(TK«tv, 8i)^i<r0ai Tiva im tu 6v6iJ,aTL tivo's (Acts iv. 
 17; y. 28 ; Matt, xviii. 5, etc.) on the ground of hope, the name, etc., 
 tjjv i-TT apTw and many other verbal combinations, see § 133 pp. 174 sqq. 
 
 b) With ideas of motion, as Acts viii. 1 6 (to TrveC/xa) yjv iir ov&evl 
 airrwv iimreTntoKO's, particularly again in the tropical sense, so that then 
 it is often to be rendered by towards (adversus and ergo), for, or 
 generally with regard to, as Luke xii. 52 8ia/Ae/x«p«r/i£i'oi rptis em Sva-lv 
 Koi Svo cTTi rpurCv ; so in the following verse, and in fact alternating 
 with eiri and the Ace, John xii. 16 raCra ■^v iir airw yeypa^/x,ei/a. Acts 
 xxi. 24 Sairavria-ov iir avTois, Rom. x. 19 (quotn.), 2 Cor. ix. 14 xdptv 
 Tov deov i<j> vfjuv. Gal. V. 13 iir iXevdepia iKkrjQrfTe, Rev. X. 11. 
 
 With iiri and the Dat. also many brachylogical phrases are 
 found, as Acts v. 35 ^rpoue^eTe JauTois €7ri tois avOpwiroi's tovtoi^ ti 
 /leAAcre irpaa-creiv not beware of these men (see avro and €/c), but take 
 heed to yourselves in your treatment of these men, so that thus it belongs 
 just as well to the main predicate Trpoa-ixere as to the predicate of the 
 subordinate clause irpda-yeiv, see § 151, 16 p. 388; Mark vi. 52 ov 
 (TvvtJKav ivl Tois aprots as if, they remained hardened at the loaves i.e. 
 they did not understand the occurrence with the loaves. 
 
 eiri with the Ace. designates as usual a movement upon or 23 
 
 teudency tovoarda something, in a local and a figurative refer- 
 
 euce. But as eiri with the Dat. is used with verbs of motion, 
 
 so, on the otlier laand, eVt with the Ace. often stands in a 
 
 relation of rest, and that too as well in a local as in a tropical 
 
 view. Hence the frequent fluctuation in the text of the mss. 
 
 between the two cases — more frequent than with almost any 
 
 other preposition ; hence the double construction of many 
 
 verbs, e.g. those expressing an emotion, further of Triareveiv, 
 
 Tveiroidivai, eX-iri^eiv, etc., with irri nvt and iiririva §§ 131-133 ; 
 
 hence, finally, one and the same writer often employs in the 
 
 same circumstances both constructions without a perceptible 
 
 1 Here too the style of Luke approximates to classic usage, in that he is decid- 
 edly averse to the construction with the Dative in this (outward) signification. 
 Hence in Acts ix. 33 M xpafidTTov is now read again (s& cod. Sin.], in Luke v. 
 25 Tdf. [Treg. cod. Sin.] itfi' t KareKeiTo (see No.' 25), and also in Acts vii. 33 
 authorities differ [Lchni. Tdf. Treg. cod. Sin. «>' ^]. On the other hand, Luke 
 xix. 44; xxi. 6; xxiii. 38; Acts iii. 10, 11 fall hnder i different head. 
 
338 PREPOSITIONS WITH ALL THUEE CASES. [§ 147 
 
 difference, even close together (see Luke xii. 53 in 24 p. 337). 
 Compare with this the similar pbservations in reference to the 
 loose employment of both cases under "Tj-apd and tt/jo? p. 339 sq., 
 as well as the free use of the two prep, iv and ek p. 328 sqq. 
 
 Example? of iiri with the Ace. in a relation of rest are found 
 everywhere Under the signification (moving) over may be brought 
 also, Matt. xiv. 29 TepiTrarijcat im to. vSara, Mark XV. 33 o-zcoros cycVcro 
 £^' oXtjv T-qv yrjv, Rev. xiv. 6 cuayycXtcrttt iirl ttSi' edvoi etc. ; in other 
 instances, as in the case of €is, the idea of antecedent motion is included 
 291 in the verb, as Icmycrav im rows TrdSds avrCiv, ein tt/v Ovpay Rev. iii. 20 ; 
 xi. 11 ; Acts X. 17, KoBiifiiv and KaOrja-Oai Im to TeX.iaviov, tov irvXuva, etc. 
 Matt. ix. 9 ; Mark ii. 14 ; xi. 2 ; Luke v. 27 ; John xh. 15 ; Rev. iv.- 
 4, etc. (hence ai/cVctrcv etti to ctt7)6o's John xxi. 20 lai/ on the breast) ; 
 but there still remain many passages where the idea of motion must 
 be supplied outright, or that of rest predominates (cf. eh p. 333), as 
 Matt, xviii. 12 atfyqcru (ra irpo/Sara) Itti to, op-q (not, up on the moun- 
 tains — implying motion, but leaveth them upon or at the mountains), 
 , Mark iv. 38 ■qv KaOevSayv im to Trpoa'K€<j>d,\aiov, John i. 32, 33 ; iii. 36 
 fxivei 67r' awTov, Acts iv. 22 ; 1 Pet. iv. 14 to irvtvixa i(f> v/j.as dvairaucTai, 
 Rev. iv. 4 cTTirjiavovs £Tt Tots Kc^oXas, V. 1; vii. 15; xx. 1, etc. To 
 these may be added also the Accus. in the additive relation, as 
 \l6o<; eVi XWov Matt. xxiv. 2, X-uin;i/ i-n-i XvTrrjv Phil. ii. 27, also Luke 
 xi. 17 oIkos iirl oTkov ■jrarTei, i.e. iiouse after house falls, in this case 
 elsewhere the Dative is used, as Mark xiii. 2 (many mss. [so Sin., 
 followed by Treg. Tdf.] read here also em XiOov) ; and the formula 
 im TO avTo together, as well with words implying motion as with those 
 of rest, Luke xvii. 35 ; Acts ii. 1, etc. This last term, however, has 
 become completely an indeclinable adverb, like many other adverbial 
 expressions with em, as em Tpk, e(j> iKavov, etti )(p6vov, e(j>' ocrov, em 
 ' irXeiov and the like. 
 
 Further, we may notice as a peculiarity the construction of the 
 Gen. and the Ace. after im connected together in a single sentence, 
 Rev. xiii. 1 6 ; xiv. 9 em tov fueTwiTrov avTOV ^ im tyjv X"/"* airoC. 
 
 Remark. The quotation in Acts xv. 17 e(j> o£s eTtixeKXriTai to 6vop.d 
 /xov eir avTovi arose from a verbatim translation of the Hebrew 
 (is iBU; x'np?), literally my name is called upon ti em, i.e. they are 
 called after my name. 
 
 26 META. The signification and use of this preposition agree 
 in all points with ordinary Greek usage ; except that the N. T. 
 writers like to periphrase, in a brachylogical way by means of 
 fierd and the Gen., attributive limitations which otherwise 
 were commonly expressed by means of adjectives or participles. 
 
§ 147.] PREPOSITIONS WITH ALL THREE CASES. 339 
 
 For example : ^kOiu jotera Swd/iems clothed with might, TrepiySXeVo) /x,€t' 
 opyrj'i angry, fji,e.Tii. aio-p^wrjs o-ptg etc. (equiv. to ala-xwo/xevos:). In a 
 similar way /aetoi with the Ace. is used brachylogically : John xiii. 27 
 ju.«Ta TO i/fu/Aiov, t6t€ e'uTrjXOev etc. a/?er the morsel. On the peri- 
 phrasis with jnera for the Dative with verbs of association etc., see 
 p. 177. 
 
 IIAPA. Since the Dative designates in general approx- 2? 
 i mat ion, when TrajoaandtheDat. are construed with verbs 
 of motion the construction is not so much perfectly grammatical 
 in itself considered, as in harmony particularly with what was 
 said above under eV and ivL It is wrong, therefore, to remove 
 by emendation (whether with or without MS. authority) such 
 instances even from classic writers (especially the later), see 
 e.g. Xen. An. 2, 6, 27; Plut. Them. 5 ; Dio C. p. 15, 97 R. 
 The general usus loquendi, that is to say of the literary 
 language, was established, to be sure, upon the idea that rest 
 is associated with Trapd and the Dative ; but relics of the less 
 exact mode of expression continue to come to light here and 292 
 there. 
 
 In the N. T., the Dative with Trdpa in Luke xix:. 7 Trapa d/iapT(i)\<3 
 avSpl e.urrj\6ev KwraXva-ai may perhaps be connected (by the o'x^yna dird 
 KoLvov) as well with iixTrjXBev as with KaraXBo-at (its position draws it 
 to acrriXOiv), and in ix. 47 ItrTrjo-ev airo wap lo.vT<a may be explained 
 after the analogy of o-T^crat kv (see 9 p. 329). But we should compare 
 and connect with these instances the example under Trpds below, and 
 what was said above, p. 284, on Acts xxi. 16. That Trapa with, the 
 Ace, however, is used to denote rest, is quite common in all writers, 
 see B. p. 4,18. The three tropical senses of Trapa with the Ace. 
 there given are all to be found in the N. T. — the second {on account 
 of) but once it is true, viz. 1 Cor. xii. 15, 16, but so much the more 
 frequent are the other two : heyond (praeter) and more than. In this 
 last sense the construction with irapa takes the place of the Gen. of 
 comparison or ^ with the requisite case, not only after comparatives 
 themselves (particularly in the Ep. to the Heb. for example i. 4; iii. 
 8 ; ix. 23 ; xi. 4 ; xii. 24 cf. Luke iii. 13), or comparative ideas, as 
 oXXos (1 Cor. iii. 11), iXarTovv (Heb. ii. 7, 9), virep<l>pov€2v (Rom. xii. 
 3), but even when associated with the Positive it imparts to it the 
 force of a comparative, as Luke xiii. 2, 4 dfiapTcoXot Trapa Trdiras, 
 di^ctXerat eyevovro Trapa TravTa? Tous dv^piuTrous. Cf. also the reading 
 of cod. Vat. [and Sin. also] in Luke xviii. 14 Lchm. [Treg.], and the 
 similar phenomena above in connection with virtp p. 335, and with ^ 
 § 14ff, 7 p. 360. 
 
340 PREPOSITIONS WITH ALL THREE CASES. [§ 147. 
 
 28 nPO^ with the Genitive is only once extant, and then 
 used quite in classic style: Acts xxvii. 34 tovto tt/dot t^? 
 v/Meripa^ awTrjpia'i xmdp')(ei. 
 
 Also Trpos with the Dative is rare. But in Luke xix. 37 eyyi^ovros 
 ^8rj Trpos T^ Kara^dcra tov opovi, eyyl^ovTos does not mean when he 
 was near, but as he came near (to) the mountain. Cf. Trapd. 
 
 TT/jo? with the Ace. corresponds to all the manifold shades 
 of signification given in the grammars ; only, after the analogy 
 of irapd with the Ace. (which see, p. 339), it is more frequently 
 used than by classic writers to denote rest also, and without 
 the accessory notion of aim. 
 
 For example : Matt. xiii. 5 6 ai aSeXt^al airov irpos 17/x.as eicriV, xxvi. 
 18 TT/Dos o-e TTotM TO iracTp^a, Mark vi. 3 ; xiv. 49 ; John i. 1 ■^v Trpos tov 
 6e6v, 1 John i. 2 ; Acts v. 10 ; xii. 20 o/io^u/iaSoi/ ■irap^a-av Trpos avToi', 
 1 Cor. ii. 3 ; xvi. 7 eXTTL^u) iirifieLvai Trpos v/xSs (cf. iiri with the Ace. 
 p. 338), 2 Cor. v. 8 (cvSoKoCp.ei') ci/Sij/t-^o-at Trpds tov Kvpiov etc. (see 
 Wahl p. 279). In view of such unquestionable passages, it is un- 
 necessary to search in others after an idea of motion or of aim (whether 
 expressed, or first to be supplied) if the simple notion of rest suffices, 
 and the immediate connection of the preposition with that appears to 
 be the most natural; see e.g. Rom. iv. 2 ; 2 Cor. 1. 12. 
 
 An example of Trpos inaComparative clause (see Trapa above, p. 
 339) is Rom. viii. 18 to. ira6rip.aTa. ovk a^ia Trpos t'^v ixiWovarav So^av, 
 cf. Ignat. ad Magn. 12 Trpos eva up-Sv ovk djxi. Brachylogical and 
 elliptical phrases, such as n Trpos crc, d/iapTaveiv Trpos 6avaTov and 
 the like, are easily explained by the vigorous force of the prep. 
 Adverbial expressions, as in the Greek writers, are Trpos <^B6vov, 
 293 Trpos Kttipov, Trpos wpav {for the moment, for a short time) and others. 
 On the periphrasis with Trpds n for the Dative, see pp. 172, 177. 
 
 29 'TUO is no longer construed with the Dative. In con- 
 nection with the Genitive and Accusative, the following 
 particulars may be selected as peculiar in its use : 
 
 vTTo with the Gen. is used with Passives not infrequently when a 
 thing or an abstract notion is the efficient cause. In such cases, 
 because the cause appears thus personified as it were, the expression 
 is more forceful than the simple Dative, as Luke vii. 24 KaXafiov viro 
 av^ixov a-aXevofnevov, viii. 14 rnro p,€ptp.vw/ , . . ou/ATrvtyovTai, Rom. xii. 21 
 p-ri vLKw vrro tov kukov. Matt. viii. 24 etc. (see Wahl). On Heb. vii. 7 
 see § 128, 1 p. 122. Neuter verbs which contain a Passive sense 
 prefer the connection with « and aTrd, see these prep. pp. 325 sq. 
 Instances of xnro are found only with ylvea-Bai (which thus becomes a 
 
§ 147.] POSITION OF PREPOSITIONS. 34I 
 
 complete Passive) — as Luke xiii. 17 ix.'^ipev eirt wacriv rots w airov 
 yu/Oju.evflts, Acts xx. 3, etc. — and, agreeably to their significations, witli 
 Trdo-p^eti/ (Matt. xvii. 12, etc.) and v'Trofx.ivnv (Heb. xii. 3), once 
 also with TrXijyas \afji,liaviLv i.e. vapulare 2 Cor. xi. 24 As 
 peculiar, we may notice the elliptical and brachylogical mode of ex- 
 pression in 2 Cor. ii. 6 17 £ir6Tt/x.ia r} vtto tuiv itXaovuiv where the missing 
 Passive notion is to be derived from iiririfiia, and in Rev. vi. 8 &7ro- 
 KTiivai viro tu>v Q-qpCuiv t^s yijs i.e. juhere (aliquem) interfici a hestiis 
 (with which has been compared irpoayopeuetv viro K-qpvKos in Herod. 9. 
 98, see Wesseling). The second class of cases, also, described in 
 the Gram., viz. where imo is used with Actives, an abstract idea being 
 subjoined as the moving cause of the action (e.g. from fear, ^/br shame), 
 are rendered in the N. T. not by v-tto, but by diro again and ck ; see pp. 
 325 sq. Whether in Rom. xiii. 1 ovk eo-tii/ i$ova-ia d jxr] imo 6eov sc. 
 SiSoiiivrj (Lchm. [Treg. Tdf.]) or aTro diov (Tdf. [eds. 2, 7]) is the 
 original reading is hard to decide, as they are equally attested by mss. 
 [Sin. inro], and both may be defended philologically. With the 
 Accusative, inro responds to the question where (taking the place 
 of the missing construction with the Dative) more frequently almost 
 than to the question whither (cf. the classic usage), particularly with 
 elvai and ■ytVecr^at, in a local and a tropical reference : under ; as, John 
 i. 49 ovra viro t^v crvKqv, Matt. viii. 9 i)(<ov xnr e/jtavTov arpantiiTa^, 
 1 Cor. X. 1 ; Gal. iii. 25 ; Bom. iii. 9 ; vi. 14, etc. 
 
 B. §147, N. 2; J. § 650; W. p. 419sq. (391sq.); S. p. Ixxxireq. 
 
 When two or more substantives connected together 30 
 by conjunctions depend on the same preposition, the 
 preposition is sometimes repeated, sometimes written but once. 
 As a ruling principle in such cases, the following may be laid 
 down : by omitting to repeat the preposition, the writer gives 
 an intimation that he regards the members rather as homo- 
 geneous, belonging together, or united into one whole ; by 
 repeating it, that he wants to have them taken as independent, 294 
 of a dissimilar or even contrary nature. 
 
 From this principle it follows, 1) that the prep, must always 
 • be repeated in the adversative relation (dWa, 8e, ov), and likewise 
 in the disjunctive (■?, ou fiovov . . . dAAct Kat, ovtc . . . aJne, etc.) if 
 the members are antithetic and after comparatives ; as, John vii. 22 
 OVK Ik toxi Mcoi;cre(us ecrnV, dA.\' Ik t3>v iraTiptav, Acts viii. 34 (Xeyet) wepi 
 eavTcv ^ irepX iripov tivos; Col. iii. 17 iv Aoyu ^ iv epyu, Eph. i. 21 ov 
 
342 POSITION OF PEEPOSITIONS. [§ 147. 
 
 fjiovov iv T<3 alS>vi TovTia dX\a kou, iv ru //.eWovri, cf. Luke^ XX. 4 ; 
 1 Thess. i-'s ; ii. 6 ; Rom! iv. 10 ; v. It ; 1 Cor. iv. 3, 21 ; Gal. iii. 2, 
 5 ; A(3ts XXV. 8, etc. On the other hand, 2) if the members in 
 the disjunctive relation are similar, or if they stand in the cop- 
 ulative relation and so are united by KaC (re, re koJ,, Kat ... xai), 
 the preposition is either repeated or not, according as the members 
 either are to be regarded rather as independent and separate, or aire 
 united into one whole, into a single composite expression. For ex- 
 ample : with 7], the preposition repeated, Acts iv. 7 hi voia Swdfjiei ^ 
 iv TTorn ovofJiaTi euoirjuaTe tovto, 1 Cor. xiv. 6 \aXr)fTu> r] iv airoKaXvxj/ei 
 ■^ iv yviixra ^ iv ■irpo<j>r)Te.iq, rj h> 8t8ax3> John vii. 48 ; 2 Cor. ix. 7, etc. ; 
 with 7), the preposition not repeated, Heb. x. 28 Im Sucrtv rj rpurlv 
 fidfiTvaLv, Mark xiii. 32 Trepl t^s rjp,ipas Ikcivij; ^ tijs Zpas oiSets oTSei/, 
 1 Tim. V. 19 ; ii. 9 ; 1 Pet. i. 11, etc. ; with koi etc. the preposition 
 repeated, Mark vi. 4 (an/Aos) iv ry TrarptSt avrov /cat iv rots o-uyyevicriv 
 avTov Koi ev ttj OLKiq. avrov, Luke xxii. 33 /cat eh <f>vXaKrjV kol els Odvarov 
 ■TTopevea-Oai, Mark ix. 22 Koa eh irvp e^akev kol eU vSara, 1 Cor. ii. 3 iv 
 Aa-OeveCq. koX ev <^6j3ia km ev Tpofuo, Acts xxvi. 4 ev t<3 eBvei fj.ov ev re 
 'lepoa-oXvp.ois, 1 Thess. i. 6, etc. ; with Kat etc. the preposition not 
 repeated, very common, Mark xiv. 43 Trapayiverai ox^os /aetcI p-axanpSiv 
 KM ^vXuiV Trapa, twv dpy(iepiti>v Kai tS>v ypa/jL/jLaTeiiiv koI tS)v wpecr^VTepw, 
 Acts i. 8 'iv Te 'lepovcrakrjiJi, Koi irdari ttj louSai'oi, x. 39 ; vi. 9 ; xiv. 21, 
 etc. ; Phil. iv. 3 fiera. koX KXij/hevtos koI twv XoittSv crvvepyZv p-om. Both 
 constructions are united in Phil. i. 7 ev rots Secr/xois p-ov koX ev rg 
 aTTokayia. koli Pe^aiAtrei tov evayyekiov, where, therefore, the last two 
 members constitute one whole, etc. In general, in this second class 
 of cases (i.e. where the members are homogeneous and the relation 
 .copulative) no absolutely fixed rule can be laid down, since 
 the repetition or non-repetition of the prep, rested solely in- the 
 writer's choice and way of looking at the subject, — is often more a 
 matter of feeling and rhetorical accent than of logical discrimination ; 
 and hence often in precisely the same cases the preposition is found 
 repeated and not repeated ; cf. e.g. Luke xxiv. 27 with Acts xxviii. 23 ; 
 Matt. iv. 25 with Mark iii. 8, etc. This holds tr le particularly, also, 
 when the Relative depends on the same prep, as the corresponding 
 Demonstrative, since even in Greek authors both constructions 
 (with and without the repetition of the prep.) occur equally. For 
 example : without repetition. Matt. xxiv. 50 iv rip.epa yj ov Trpoa-BoKo, 
 Luke i. 25 ; Acts xiii. 39 (see above 2 note p. 322), Acts xiii. 2 eis 
 TO epyov o ■jrpoa-K'KkTjp.ai avTov^ (where the construction spoken of 
 § 131, 10 p. 152 may also have had influence) ; with repetition, 
 John iv. 53 iv eKeivrj rfj &pa iv ■§ elirev [Tdf. om. first cv]. Acts vii. 4 ; 
 XX. 18 dirb TtpuiTtji yjp,epa^ d<j> ^! iTrifir/v etc. 
 
§147.] • POSITION OF PEEPOSITIONS. 343 
 
 B. §147, N. 8(Germ.ed.); H.§616; J.§651; S. p. Ix3cxiii. 
 
 When upon a substantive governed by a prepos.tiou a 31 
 limiting Genitive also depends, there are two general 
 classes of cases as respects the preposition's position : 
 
 a) In case the nouns have no article, it is a fixed rule 295 
 that the preposition can never be separated by the limiting 
 Genitive from its substantive, when tliis substantive (governed 
 
 by the prep.) itself stands in the Genitive, even though 
 the meaning excludes all possible ambiguity. 
 
 Hence we always find, €f ipywv vo/xov, ott 3.Kpov yyj'S, irpb KarajHoX^i 
 Koa/Jiov, €^ ap^fQ^ KTLcreoi's, air dvaroX^s rjldav, Sta Tprnnq/jiaTos pa^iSos, Slo. 
 Xovrpov TraXuyyivetria.'s etc., and the pronouns a-cni, fx,ov, avTOv, etc., which 
 so often stand b e f o r e their substantives, then follow them without 
 exception ; thus, aw 6<fidaXft.!iiv crov, ck vcoTi/ros /tou, tK Se^tSv avTOv, 
 Sta and eK fiea-ov avrwv, etc. , From this unquestionable observation it 
 follows, that, wherever the sense might be ambiguous, the grammatical 
 rule alone must decide. Accordingly, 2 Cor. iii. 18 a.Tro Kvpiov ttvcv- 
 /jLaros can only mean from the Lord of the Spirit, and Matt. xxiv. 31 
 /ueru o-dXirtyyos i^iuv^s fJnydXr]'; only, with a trumpet of loud sound (see 
 § 132, 10 p. 161). In phrases where the prep, governs a different 
 case from the Genitive, the limiting Gen. can indeed be inserted 
 immediately after the prep., as Matt. xiii. 33 €ts aXeipov a-dra rpia, 
 Rev. vii. 17 iirl ^uijs 7r?jyas iSdriov where, however, it was necessary 
 on other grounds also that ^(u^s should precede (see § 132, 1, b) p. 155). 
 Yet this arrangement is extremely rare (compare the — critically 
 uncertain, too — elliptical combinations ev Aiyvirrov, ek aoou, in § 132, 
 27 p. 171), and writers had become already so wonted to the natural 
 arrangement that even here they uniformly said, eh a(j>ecnv diJuipnUv, 
 6ts ava.cTTaa'LV veKpwv, et? Krjirov eavTov, eir eXmBi ^unjs a.lwviov, etc. On 
 the hyperbaton Trpo e^ ■^jj.epZv tov Trdtcrxa and the like, see § 131, 11 
 p. 153. 
 
 b) But if the noun governed by the preposition has the 
 article, when there are two Genitives, at least the article 
 of this governed noun must stand directly after the prep., and 
 the second Gen.,, dependent on this substantive, may be inserted 
 ac<!ording to the general rule ; as, iic t^? Kaiaapo<; olKia'i, e'/c 
 T?7? TOV Bia^oXov TToyiSof;, Sm t^s v/iS)v Seijcreco^, Bia r^s erepmv 
 o-TTouSij?, etc. 
 
 Commonly, however, even this does not take place, but the nouns 
 follow in succession, as dn-o toC v6p,ov t^s afiapnas, c/c rCiv rjSovwv vp-Siv, 
 y,€Ta tS>v Aa/iirdSo)!' iavrSyv, Ik t<ov )(£ipo>v ■qiilav, avv rg Sum/iei rcru Kvpiov, 
 
344 NEGATIVES. • [§148. 
 
 etc. The pronouns /aou and crov, which, as is well known, cannot 
 be inserted between thp article and substantive, stand accordingly, as 
 a rule, likewise afterwards {iiro tov ■jraTpo's ij.ov, etc.) ; but they can 
 sometimes, owing to their propensity to precede their substantive 
 (§ 127, 19 p. 115), be placed quite at the beginning, i.e. even before 
 the preposition, as Matt. viii. 8 tva /aou iiro rrpi crriyrjv f to-eX^r;;, 
 John ix. 15 Trrjkov hriO-qKiv /lov eirl tovis o^^aXjuovs (cf. vss. 6, 11, and 
 § 151, 14 p. 387) ; and so with avrov, John xv. 10 aiiTov ev rfj ayoTrrj. 
 
 B. § 147, N. B ; H. § 615 ; C. §5 703 b. 706 ; J. §§ 640. 644. 
 
 32 Strictly speaking, no examples are found in the N. T. in which 
 prepositions continue to be used adverbially; and all the instances 
 which might be reckoned under this head reduce themselves to (in 
 part newly formed) compounds ; see § 146, 4 p. 320. 
 
 296 B.§147,N.9; H. §§583, 605; C.§699i J.§641; W. p. 425sq. (369 8q.). 
 
 33 That prepositions which by themselves govern the Genitive or the 
 Dative, govern (especially ev, crvv, Trpo) the same cases also when 
 compounded with verbs, is a well-known fact; see the lexicons 
 under crvv^rjv, cruvikdiiv, (ruveTretrOai, truvavaKeitr^ai, (rvvcrTavpovv, evTvy- 
 )((i.veiv, €/x.ySX«r£ii/, ifi^piimatOai,, ip.p.a'av, evi)(€iv, tfiirat^eiv, t/XTrXtKCiv, 
 iKTriTTTUv, €Krwa.cTCTav, irpoa-Trjvai, TrpoTTopfvecrOai, etc. With other verbs 
 the repetition of the preposition (or of a synonymous one) prevails, 
 especially with verbs compounded with airo and ek, see under £/xj8aA.- 
 Xeiv, CK/SaXXeii/, (XTrcp^av, aTroo-njvai, omaipeiv, iKtropeoetrBai, 4'raXXacr(reii', 
 airikauviw, aitoKpvima', ttTOTrXavoiv, Trpoiojpvcrcrfiv, ivevkoyeicrOai, etc. 
 
 ' Negatives. 
 B. §148; H. §832; C. §686; D. §528; J. § 789. 
 
 1 In no respect, perhaps, has the language of the N. T. ad 
 hered more closely to the usage establislied by the literary- 
 language, than in the employment of the two negatives ov and 
 //,■)] with their compounds ; so that it proves to be easy to point 
 out analogies in classic usage for the deviations even that 
 occur. Hence, for the general principles in all. their extent, 
 we refer the reader to the specifications given iu the Grammars, 
 and here need make mention only of particular instances of 
 somewhat rare and peculiar use. 
 
 B. §148, 2 b) and note; H.§835; C.§686i.sq.; D.§631; J. § 744,1; W. p. 4778q. (445sq.) 
 
 2 The use of oi in the protasisof.a conditional sentence 
 occurs in the N. T. relatively very often ; so that we are 
 justified in inferring a difference in usage, since in classic 
 
§148.] NE,}ATIVES. 845 
 
 writers this use is only exceptional. ' It is true, the attempt 
 has been made to explain the individual instances all according 
 to the analogy of those which occur in classic authors, and 
 consequently to consent to recognize merely an extension in 
 the N. T. of a usage elsewhere rare. This method of treatment 
 may be applied, indeed, to a portion of the extant passages, 
 but is decidedly inapplicable to many, and is especially opposed 
 by the circumstance that whereas after el the predicate is so 
 often negatived by oii, this never occurs under the same 
 conditions in clauses with idv; (cf. e.g. Matt. vi. 15 with 
 Mark xi. 26). The usage of the N. T., on the contrary, may 
 be referred to the following simple and almost invariable 
 principles : 
 
 1) The first form of hypothesis (§ 139 A. pp. 220 sq.), i.e. 
 
 el with the Indicative as expressive of objective certainty, 297 
 takes the direct negative ov. Exceptions are extremely 
 rare : 1 Tim. vi. 3 el' rt? eTepoSiSaaKoKei ical firj Trpoa-efyxerai, 
 'KoyoK etc. 
 
 2) The second form of hypothesis (eav with the Subjunctive), 
 and the fourth (et with a Preterite Indicative), require in- 
 variably^ the dependent negative firj. (The third 
 species of hypothesis, el witli the Optative, occurs in the N. T. 
 only in a positive form.) On Matt. xxvi. 24 and Mark xiv. 21 
 see 3) d. p. 347. 
 
 3) The combination Sktcxs el /j-tj (see 13 p. 355) even 
 when followed by the Indicative, the compound el fitj (used 
 for tlie most part elliptically, i.e. without a predicate) in the 
 signification except, nisi (see § 149, 4 p. 359), after a preceding 
 negative or interrogative clause, as well as the elliptical for- 
 mula el B'e fiv, el Sk fiv ye(_^ 151, 23, e) p. 393) are, like 
 estabhshed conjunctions or adverbs, no longer capable of 
 changing their outward form. 
 
 Now since 2) and 3) admit of no exceptions and are perfectly gram- 
 matical, it is only necessary here to establish the first class. We 
 will so arrange the examples as first of all to exhibit those which 
 stand in obvious analogy with those from classic authors treated of in 
 li. I.C., and then proceed to those which ..epart more or less from the 
 ordinary usage. 
 
 a) The predicate of the conditional clause negatived by ov 3 
 is found in evident antithesis to a positive notion (com- 
 
 4i 
 
346 NEGATIVES. I§ 148 
 
 monly the same, but softietimes synonymous), either in what 
 precedes or m what follows (see B. § 148, 2. g). 
 
 For example: in what precedes, Mark xi. 26 Lchm. dc^t'eT* 
 Lva etc. . . . £1 S^ v/xeis ovK aijaUre, ovBi 6 irarrjp a.<^ri<TU^ John v. 47 €i 
 yap €iri(rTew€Te etc. . . . «i St tois Ikuvov ypdiJi,iA.acnv ov inaTeveTe, iris 
 
 etc.. Acts XXV. 1 1 £t /i€V OVV OlSikSi ..." £t 8e OvSiv icTTLV S)V OVTOl KaTTj- 
 
 yopovalv fiov. So in Rom. viii. 9 ; 1 Cor. vii. 9 ; Jas. iii. 2 ; in w h a t 
 follows, 1 Cor. ix. 2 « aX\ots ovk el/A aTroaToXoi, aWd ye \fuu ii/xi, 
 John X. 37 61 ov ttolS) to. epya . . . , ei Sk ttolS) etc., Luke xi. 8 ei koi ou 
 Buxru avrS . . . , Sid ys rrjv avaiSuav avTov 8co(rei avrio (cf. the Similarly 
 formed sentence in xviii. 4), 1 Cor. xi. 6 ei yap ov KaraKaXvimTaL yvv-q 
 with reference to the following KaTaKaX-UTrTeo-^u. 
 
 In all the ahove passages the dependent negative would be in no- 
 wise erroneous, and by the Greeks would perhaps have been preferred. 
 298 More necessary, on the other hand, is the use of the negative ov even 
 according to classic usage, when to the negatived predicate another, 
 still in the protasis, is immediately so appended or contrasted with an 
 adversative particle that the entire emphasis falls upon this second 
 part (cf. 8 p. 352) ; as, Jas. ii. 11 ei St ov /ioijj^ewets, <^ov€ueis 6e, 
 2 Pet. ii. 4, 5 ei yap o 6€os dyyiKiov dfjtapT-qcrdvTiav ovk iifiUcraTO, dAXa . . . 
 wape'ScoKcv eis Kpiiriv etc. (cf. with this the example II. xv. 162, B. p. 493 
 Germ. ed.). 
 
 b) For the same reason as in a) the negative bv may be 
 grammatically defended also in the following pretty common 
 class of sentences (though the Greeks, however, here also 
 would have perhaps preferred for the most part the dependent 
 negative) : where a negative protasis is associated with em- 
 phasis, or rather contrasted, with an apodosis likewise 
 negatived (or negatively conceived). 
 
 The plainest example of this is 1 Cor. xv. 13-17 ei avda-ra^K vfKpHv 
 ovk eerrtv, ovBi Xpio-rbs eyTyyeprat ■ ei Se Xpicrros ovk iyt^yepraL, Kivbv 
 dpa TO K-qpvyjjLa fjii.Syv • . . . XpuTTOV ovk ^ycipev, uirep apa v€Kpol ovk 
 iyupovTai • tt yap viKpoi ovk iyeCpovrat, oiSe etc., Rom. xi. 21 el . . . ovk 
 iejieuxaTO, ovSe (Tov (^ciVerat, Luke xvi. 31 ei Muvcretos . . . ovk aKOvovaw, 
 ov&' idv Tts eK veKpwv avaarfj ireiarO-^aovTai, 2 Thess. iii. 10 et tis ov 6e\ei 
 epyd^eodai, ix-rfie la-OuTU). See besides Heb. xii. 25, and, with the 
 substitution of a question instead of a negation in the apodosis, Luke 
 xvi. 11 sq. £1 . . . OVK eyeve(T6e, to aXr)0ivov tis vjiZv Tria-Tevaei; Kai el etc., 
 John iii. 12 ei ou iricmveTe, ttus . . . iri(rT£W(r£T£ ; 1 Tim. iii. o et tls . ■ . 
 
 1 If vs. 26, which is wanting in several ancient mss. [Sin. also], was really first 
 transferred (as is said) from Matt. vi. 15, then at least the alteration made in 
 the words of Matthew turns out to correspond perfectly with N. T, usage. 
 
§ 148.] NEGATIVES. 347 
 
 ovK olBiv, irSs EKKXijutas i-irijxeXT^treTai ; cf. 1 Cor. XV. 29 ; XV. 32 (sub- 
 stantially) ; and several of the passages quoted under a) may be 
 brought under this head also, as Mark xi. 26 ; John v. 47 ; Acts xxv. 
 11 ; Rom. viii. 9. 
 
 c) Further, an endeavor has been made to bring a number 
 of passages under the rule proposed by Hermann (ad Vig. 
 p. 831), according to which ov is said to stand in conditional 
 clauses when it blends as it were with the negatived word into 
 a single (positive) notion. Since, however, this view aifords 
 no satisfactory objective test, but, on the contrary, all con- 
 ditional clauses in which the predicate is negatived may be 
 brought with more or less ease under this category (e.g. ov 
 ^eiBofiai equiv. to (pdeipm, ov/c dicoveo equiv. to dv ]ko6<; elfii, ov/c 
 olSev equiv. to wyvoei, ov Swarai equiv. to aSvvarov icrnv, etc.}, 
 we can with tolerable confidence bring under this head only 
 those passages in which a different part of the clause from the 
 predicate is negatived, and consequently the predicate is 
 evidently positive. 
 
 For example, 2 Cor. xii. 11 mSiv vorepr/o-o . . . , ei koI oiSiv ei/xt, 
 Jas. i. 23 el Tts d/cpoarijs koyov icrrlv Koi ov ttoijjt^s where only the 
 notion iroiiynys in antithesis to dxpoarTjs is negatived (yet without 
 constituting a single idea), and the predicate remains positive. But 
 Luke xii. 26 ci ovv ovBk iXd^urrov SvvacrOe, tl irepl ru>v XonrCtv /jLtpi/jivaTe 
 does not belong under this head, since by ovSi the predicate is also 
 negatived, so that the sentence belongs with the passages under b). 
 The other passages, also, with a negatived predicate adduced under 299 
 this head, we have already distributed under the first two more 
 obvious rules ; as, 1 Tim. iii. 5 ; Luke xvi. 31 ; Heb. xii. 25 ; 2 Pet. 
 ii. 4; Jas. ii. 11. 
 
 d) In justification of the direct negative, reference has 
 also been made to the special emphasis with which the 
 predicate alone is rendered prominent as negatived. This 
 may be afHrmed with reason of the two parallel passages Ulatt. 
 xxvi. 24 and Mark xiv. 21 koKov rju avrm, el ovk iyevv^Orj 6 
 avdpcoTro'i iiceivo'; (where, moreover, the direct negation appears 
 to find an adequate occasion in the evident approximation of 
 the sentence to the first form of hypothesis, cf. § 139, 27 c) 
 p. 225), and also of John i. 25 t/ /SaTrrtfet?, el ai) ovk el 6 
 Xpiaro'i (y^i.e. since thou certainly art not etc.). 
 
 Yet since the majority of such passages coincide with one of the 
 objective characteristics propoviuded under a) and b), and accordingly 
 
348 NEGATIVES. [§ 148. 
 
 have already been quoted there ; further, since without Such objective 
 indications the interpreter is left to decide solely according to his 
 feelings whether he will recognize a special emphasis or not ; and 
 especially, since in the N. T. the direct negative makes its appearance 
 in clauses with the Indicative almost without an exception 
 (cf. 4 below), the circumstance above mentioned is not of itself suited 
 to constitute a separate class or rule, at least for the New 
 Testament. 
 
 e) Finally, the following additional examples are to be 
 noticed as those which do not admit of being classed under 
 any one of the above rules, and consequently belong to the 
 characteristically free usage of the N. T., according to wliicli 
 conditional clauses of the first kind are uniformly 
 negatived hj ov: 
 
 Luke xiv. 26 £t ni epp^erat tt/jos fie koX ov fxixra tov TraTipa . . . ov 
 SwaTtti etc., 2 John 10 (cf 1 Tim. vi. 3), 1 Cor. xvi. 22 ei t« ov tjuXfi 
 TOV Kvpiov, -IjTO} avaOifia, 2 Thess. iii. 14 ei tis oi;^ iiTraKovei ra Xoyo) . . . 
 TovTov (TrjficLovcrue, 1 Tim. v. 8 ei ns ruiv I8mv ov Trpovou, ttjv ttlcttiv 
 TIpvrjTai, Rev. XX. 15 £t Tts oiix cvpiOr] iv t^ ySiySXco . . . ipXyjOf) etc. 
 Hardly would any classic writer have employed the direct negation 
 in any of these passages, even on the assumption of a special emphasis 
 in the negative. On the other hand, in Matt. xxvi. 42 ov is used 
 more with reference to cav p,ri immediately following (with which the 
 clauses with ei /^ij nisi after an antecedent ov are to be compared, see 
 § 149, 4 p. 359) ; and in John x. 35 the clause koX ov Swarat XvOr^vai 
 7) ypatjirj is to be taken as independent and parenthetic. 
 
 4 The use of the negative in Relative Sentences is quite 
 like that in conditional sentences, as in general the former 
 share in all essential particulars the nature and construction 
 of the latter, (see B. § 139 B.). Accordingly, relative sen- 
 tences in the Indicative, whether of a general nature or not, 
 are almost exclusively negatived by ov, so that sentences 
 ■with uri are extremely rare ; on the other hand, relative 
 sentences in the Subjunctive with av (eav) are without any 
 exception negatived by /*»;. 
 
 300 Examples with ov: Matt. xii. 2 ; Mark ii. 24 ; Luke vi. 2 iToiovtnv 
 ■ o ovK c$ea-Tiv ttouiv iv aa^fiiXTm, Matt. x. 38 os ov XajnySavei tov UTavpov 
 ... oiiK ecTTLv /MOV alios, Gal. iii. 10 (quotn.) ttos os ovk i/iiiivei etc., and 
 after oWts with the Indie. Luke xiv. 27 ; xv. 7, etc. ; further, in 
 antithesis (similar to the instances unfolded above in 3 a) and b)), as 
 Matt. xiii. 12; Mark iv. 25 os ex« ... kw. Ss ov^ e-xa, Rom. vii. 15, 
 
§ 148.] NEGATIVES. 349 
 
 19 O OeXu) . . . o oil 6eX.to, xy. 21 (quotn.) ols ovk anjyycXij, otpovrai, 01 
 ovK aKT^Koaxriv, <ruv^(ToiKrtv, iv. lo o5 yap ovk iutlv vo/xos, ov8k irapajSao-ts. 
 Cf. besides, in 12 below, p. 354, the sentences with two (mutually 
 annulling) negatives in two clauses dependent on one another. 
 Examples with /a 17 and the Indicative (never in the historical 
 writings), 2 Pet i. 9 oi yap fjii] vdpe(Tnv TOtJTa, tv(1>\6^ iarw, Tit. i. 11 
 StSao-Kovres a firj Set On the fii^ in Col. ii. 18, critically very doubtful 
 [wanting in 8<* and omitted by Treg. Tdf.] (and in no wise necessary 
 to the sense), see Meyer. Examples with /n'^ and the Subjunctive 
 aro very common in all parts of the N. T. e.g. Matt. x. 14, etc. ; also 
 in antithesis, Luke viii. 18 cf. Matt. xiii. 12, etc. 
 
 On the other hand, in all illative, causal, and declarative 
 sentences, the language of the N.T. follows closely the ordinary 
 Greek usage. 
 
 Accordingly, after toprre with the Indicative bi is regularly used. 
 Matt. xix. 6 ; Gal. iv. 7, etc., after ware with the Infln. invariably fjurj 
 (see 6) ; further, after on (because and that), KaOon, eirei, cTretSjj, etc., 
 uniformly ov, Luke i. 34 ; 1 Cor. i. 21, etc. John iii. 18 on (because) 
 ix,r) Tr£7r«7TeuK«v is to be regarded solely as a deviation from ordinary 
 usage (hence instances of the sort are often to be found also in later 
 writers, especially Lucian, see Herm. ad Vig. p. 806 ; Cobet, var. Lect. 
 315 sq., and on the usage of Arrian and Lucian, EUendt prasf. ad Arr. 
 p. 24; Du Mesnil, Stolp. Progr. 1867 p. 43) ; and on Heb. ix. 17 
 (cVet ix,ri TTore lo-^uci) see 10 p. 353. Also after on in the signification 
 that, i^rj is sometimes used in later writers, e.g. App. B.C. 3, 96. 
 
 B.§148,2a.; H.§83T; C.§686c.; D.§5940ba.; J. § 745; W. p. 48l8q. (449). 
 
 With the Infinitive, the N. T. writers are so in the habit 
 of using the dependent negation, that they negative a state- 
 ment by /a ■^ where the direct negation was not only admissible, 
 but in Greek authors even more usual ; so that, in point of 
 fact, examples of ov with the Infinitive are hardly to be met 
 with longer. 
 
 Hence, in particular, j«.^ stands (as in Greek authors) without ex- 
 ception with an Infinitive introduced by the Article, Matt. xiii. 5 ; 
 Rom. xiv. 13, 2 1, etc. ; further, after (Scttc, Mark ii. 2 ; 1 Cor. i. 7, etc., 
 no exception to which is established by Rom. vii. 6, since here only 
 iraXaionjTt in contrast with Kaivorrjn is denied, and not the Infln. 
 M^ stands also after verba dicendi, etc., so far forth as a preference, 
 counsel, wish, command is contained in them, and after predicates 
 like Set, 80KU fjioi, KaXov ianv, aXoyov larnv, etc., as Matt. v. 34, 39 ; 
 sxiii. 23; Luke xxi. 14; xxii. 40; Acts i. 4; xv. 28; 2 Pet. ii. 21; 
 
350 NEGATIVES. [§148. 
 
 301 Eph.iv. 1 1 ; Rom. ii. 21 ; xv. 1, etc' But also where the lufin. clause 
 (after the verba dicendi, etc.) contains only a declaration, and the 
 Greeks use, at least in part, the negative ov, we always find /t^ ; as, 
 Luke XX. 7 aireKpWrjo-av fii] elSevai etc.. Matt. xxii. 23 ; Mark xii. 18 ; 
 Luke ii. 26 ; Acts xxiii. 8 ; 2 Cor. xi. 5. 
 
 Remark. In cases of accumulated (intensified) negation, the main 
 rule (B. § 148, 6, cf. 11 below p. 354) requires the same kind of 
 negative to be used with the Infln. as with the predicate, — consequently 
 ov ; as, Luke xx. 40 ovKen iroXfjLwv iTrepwTq.v o v Sev, John iii. 27 ov 
 SvvaTOLi avBpoiiroi Xajw,)3avav ov&iv, V. 19, 30 ; Rev. v. 4, etc. 
 
 B.§148e(f); H.§839 C.§686((1); D.p.B54; J. §746;.W. p. 4828qq. (4508qq.). 
 
 With Participles (as in Greek authors and under the 
 same conditions as there) both kinds of negation occur ; only 
 in circumstances where either is admissible (see b below), the 
 disposition to employ /i?? etc. is incomparably stronger. 
 
 a) If the Participle has the Article (cf. the Infin.), it is 
 regularly negatived hj fit] ; thus, o fif) &v fjuer e/j-ov, rol<i fir] 
 ire'TrXavijfievoi';, ol firj iSovrev Kal TTOcTTevaavTeii, etc. 
 
 Only those cases are exceptions where antithesis occurs, as Rom. 
 ix. 2.5 (quotn.) rrjv ovk rjyaTrr]fji,ev7iv yiya.-mqji.iv'qv, 1 Pet. ii. 10 ol ovn 
 7jKeqft,€voi, vvv he. iketjdivTes, Gal. iv. 27 (quOtn.) (jTilpa fj ov TiKTOvcra 
 (Heb. sib), Rom. iv. 12. In Eph. v. 4 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] the reading 
 TO. OVK av-^Kovra would be an exception also,^ but the reading is by no 
 means established [Tdf. now withTreg. Lchm. cod. Sin. a ovk avrJKev^ > 
 cf. Rom. i. 28. 
 
 b) Should the Participle have no Article, /j,ij is used 
 lunqualifiedly when the participial clause is equivalent to a 
 -hypothetical sentence, and so is to be resolved by if; as, elSori, 
 .KM fir) -TTOioovTi, afiuprlu avT(S iartu (Jas. iv. 17 ; Matt. xiii. 19, 
 etc.). On the other hand, if the participial clause contains 
 ■an actual matter of fact, and so is to be resolved by means of 
 a Relative, or by since, whilst, during, without, etc., it is neg- 
 .atived (often when the circumstances are altogether the 
 same) sometimes by ov, sometimes, and indeed more com- 
 monly, by fiTj. 
 
 1 In Acts xix. 27 [Treg.] Tdf. (/cicSuceiei . . . els oiSiv \ovB\v ed. 8] KoyurBriviu) 
 rather the single fragment of the sentence (oviiv) is negatived, although usage 
 elsewhere would nevertheless have led us to expect firiSev, and hence the other 
 strongly [yet not by cod. Sin.] supported reading (Aoyio-fl^ircToi Lchm ) perhaps 
 is to be preferred. On 2 Tim. ii. 14 see 8 p. 352. 
 
 2 In Greek authors also such cases, when no antithesis occurs (as in Ar. Eccl. 
 187), are extremely rare, e.g. Luc. adv. Ind. 5^4 xv^epv^v oiiu elSiis koI linteietv ft^ 
 lieiicAeTiiKilis. 
 
§ 148.] NEGATIVES. 351 
 
 The o.'iginal difference between the two negatives (although in 
 point of fact no longer adhered to in employing them) is still evident 
 in such sentences as Matt. xxii. 11, 12 sl&ev avOpuTrov ovk ivSeSv/j-ivov 
 (who had not on), but subsequently elarjXOe'; fj,^ cxujv li/Sii/ixa (although 
 thou hadst not etc.), 1 Pet. i. 8 ov ovk tSoi/res (having in point of fact 
 not seen him) dyaffSre, eis ov dpri /j.^ opSivTK (although ye do not see) 
 wiffreiJovTEs 8e etc. Examples of the less common negative o4 (ovhiv) 
 in a Participial clause which is temporal or causal, or to be resolved by 
 means of a Relative, are Luke vi. 42 (ov pXiir-tov), John x. 12 ovk mv 
 srouiijv explained by ov ovk ia-nv to. Trpd/Sara iSia, Acts xxvi. 22 ovhtv 502 
 cKTos \iyuni, xxviii. 17 oiSei/ 7rot»J(ras (although in point of fact), 
 vii. 5 (Gen. absol.), 1 Cor. ix. 26 ttuktcuo) &% ovk aepa Sepav, Gal. iv. 8 
 OVK eiSoTcs, Col. ii. 19 ; Heb. xi. 1, 35. Examples of ov in consequence 
 of the emphasis of antithesis, are 2 Cor. iv. 8, 9 iv iravrl OkiPofievoi 
 aXX ov (mvoyfiopovfLevoi, airopovixivoi. aXK ovk iiajropov/jbevoL etc., Phil, 
 iii. 3 ot TTveiJ^aTt Oeov XarpevovrK . . . koI ovk iv aapKL TreTTOiOore^, 1 Cor. 
 iv. 14 OVK ivTpiTTwv vfi.S.'s ypii(j>ii> ravra, dW cos etc. ; and because a 
 particular part of the sentence (rather than the whole) is denied, 
 are Luke vii. 6 ^8rj avrov ov fnaKpav direj^ovro?. Acts xvii. 27 ; xxvii. 
 20 ^ct/ioivos OVK oXtyow iiriKei/Jbivov. 
 
 'Everywhere else the dependent negative firj is used, even with the 
 most definite matters of fact, and in cases tfioroughly concrete. Ex- 
 amples are so abundant in all parts of the N. T., that it is enough to 
 give a few corresponding to those above with oi, or passages quite 
 parallel : Matt, xviii. 25 //.rj ej^ovros avrov airoSovvai, £K£\euo-Ev etc., xxii. 
 25 fir] i)(wv (Tirep/cia d^^ef Tr)v ywalxa, 29 TrXavaorOe, (jltj etSores (because) 
 ToLs ypatfta.'s firjSi etc.. Acts v. 7 ; ix. 26 ; xii. 19 'HpcuSTjs CTri^TjT^o-as Kai 
 firi €vpi)v iKiXeva-ev etc., xvii. 6 ; Luke xviii. 2, etc. ; even in antithesis, 
 Mark v. 26 fji,7j8ev d><j>e\r]0tia'a, dWa /uSAAov eh to j^cipov iXOov<Ta, Acts 
 ix. 7 £tO-T^K£lC7-aV £V£Ol, dK01J0lT£S /A £ V T^s (buiv^'s, /irjSfi/a Se 6£0)poCvT£S, 
 
 2 Cor. vi. 9. 
 
 c) When the Participle with elvai is used as a periphrasis 
 for a finite verb (§ 144, 24 sq. p. 308 sq.), the dependent neg- 
 ative /u,??' must be used, even in the most concrete cases, if it 
 is not the copula (and thus the entire sentence), but the 
 Participle alone, that is to be negatived. 
 
 Accordingly we must distinguish Luke vi. 43 ovk eoriv SevSpov KaXov 
 TToiovv Kapirov craTrpov, xxiii. 53 iv fivrifiarL, ov ovk tjv ouSek ovttu) KeCfievoi, 
 xii. 6 ; John iii. 24; Rom. iii. 12 ; 2 Cor. ii. 17 ; Jas. iii. 15, etc., from 
 Luke xiii. 11 ^v ovyKVTrTOva-a koI firj Syvaiiivrj avaKv\j/ai, i. 20 ta-y 
 (riMTrmv koi firj 5uvajU.£Vos Xa\^a-ixi, Acts ix. 9 ^v ■q/iipa'S rpelt f»,rj 
 
 PXeTTUlV. 
 
352 NEGATIVES. [§ 148 
 
 d) Lastly, the Pauticiple is negatived by /a?; (sometimes 
 even in case of antithesis, cf. 8 below), whenever the entire 
 sentence to which the Participle belongs requires the de- 
 pendent negation. 
 
 Of this case also there are many examples : 1 Cor. vii. 29 (tovto 8« 
 'fy^ft'i) Iva pt e^ovTES ywaiKas u>s fi-r) c^ovres waiv, kcll ol /c\atoi/Tes d)S /.HJ 
 etc., Eph. V. 27 Iva TrapacTTi^a-rj ecSo^ov Trjv iKKXrjaiav fn-rj i)^ovaav etc., 
 Phil. iii. 9 tipe6S> fjJq €)(w/ etc., Eom. xii. 16, 17, 19, etc. 
 
 B. §148,2g. (Germ, ed.); J. § 744, 1 Obs. ; W. p. 479 (446 aq.). 
 
 8 Several examples of the use of the direct negative, in 
 sentences which otherwise prefer jirj, as soon as the negatived 
 word stands in sharp antithesis (marked by aXkd, Be, el firf) to 
 some other and following part of the sentence, have already 
 been given above, see 3 a) p. 345, 7 a) and b) p. 350. According 
 to this principle the direct negative makes its appearance iu 
 such cases (although by no means necessarily) even in sentences 
 which positively require /a^j, as final and imperative 
 sentences ; see 7 d) above. The difference between these two 
 modes of expression is this : when the direct negative is used, 
 the negatived part of the sentence is, as it were, brought out 
 303 conspicuously from the rest (by siipplying some such word as 
 Xe7(B), and the emphasis falls on what follows introduced by 
 aWd, etc. (cf. 3 a) p. 345) ; on the other hand, where firj is 
 used, both parts of the sentence remain equally related to the 
 whole. 
 
 Examples : 1 Pet. iii. 3 lav Icttw o v ;^ o i^taOev . . . Koer/tios, dW o 
 KpvTTTO's etc. whose adorning ought to be not (or, / do not say) the out- 
 ward . . . but etc., Rev. ix. 4 iva /ir; dSiKijo-ouo-tv tov )(6pTov riys yijs, o v 8 6 
 TrSv )(\uipbv ovSi Trav SivSpov, et jjir] tovis avOpWTTOvs etc. Cf. 1 Cor. v. 
 10 eypaij/a p,rj frwavajxiyvvcrOai tois TropvoK, oi ttcivtods etc., on this see 
 § 161, 19 p. 389. On the other hand, 1 Pet. v. 2, 3 Trotjudvore . . . /iij 
 avayKaa-Tiiii aXX. eKOVcrlui';, fjir] aia-)(poKep8ii>'s aXKa wpo6vp,<jy<; fiy^he. etc., 
 Phil. ii. 2—4 irX-qpaa-aTe fiov rr/v ■^(a.pa.v iva to avTO <j)povrJTe, . . . firj tcl 
 iavTuiv a-KOTTovvTe's, aXXd etc., John xviii. 40, etc. 2 Tim. ii. 14 /j,^ Xo- 
 yop.a.xu (Tdf. [Treg. cod. Sin.] \o- 'oiJ.a)(ej.v) iir ovSlv xpJ7cri/.toi/, without 
 an adversative clause following, is more surprising, and only to be 
 explained by the emphatic prominence given to an individual 
 word. 
 
 On oil, as a second an d-i ndependent negation of a particular 
 part of a sentence, in sentences with /iij, see lip. 354. 
 
§ 148.] NEGATIVES. 353 
 
 B. §148,N.3; H. §840; C. §§686a.j 686fe.; D. §634; J. § 745, Obs. 5. 
 
 Examples of negatived substantives, i.e. of substantives trans- i 
 formed by the negative into their opposites and blending with it, as it 
 were, into a single word, occur only in O. T. quotations. The negative 
 then is always oi, because compounds of the sort are formed in Hebrew 
 with tA, Eom. ix. 25 ; 1 Pet. ii. 10 ot Trore ov A.ao'?, vvv 8e Aao's, Rom. 
 X. 19 iir ovK i6veu In Greek elsewhere both species of negative are 
 met with, see particularly B. and J. as above. 
 
 On the negative with the Imperative, and the Subjunctive as its 
 substitute, see § 139, 6 p. 211. 
 
 B. §148, 4 and N. 5; H. §§720d.; 846; C. §626; D. §538sq,; J. § 814; G. §46N. 4. 
 
 On /xj; as the conjunction after verbs and notions of fear and 
 anxiety, see § 139, 48 p. 241 sq. Of the usage according to 
 which sentences with yit?^ (/i»y7ra)?, /LtT^Trore), when no verbum 
 timeudi is expressed, contain the idea of fear or anxiety, 
 the N. T. also affords a few evident examples. Thus, with a 
 Subjunctive following. Matt. xxv. 9 Xiyovaai,' fit^Trore ov fir; 
 apKecrr) rj/uv koX v/uv ; and with a Future following, Rom. xi. 21 
 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7 ; ed. 8 omits fj,7jTro}<; with Lchm. Treg. cod. Sin.] 
 /itjyTrcu? ovSe aov ^eia-erai. See on the second negative in both 
 sentences No. 11 following. 
 
 As, according to B. § 139, m. 50 ; G. § 46, N. 5, etc. (cf. Gal. iv. 1 1 
 above in § 139, 48 p. 242), in sentences where a verb of fearing is 
 expressed, a preterite Indicative may be used after /u.^ in order to 
 represent the object of fear as in a degree an actually existing fact, 
 so here too ; as. Gal. ii. 2 avi^rjv Se koI aveOe/iTjV airots to evayyikiov . . . 
 Kar ISmv 8e rots SoKoCcrti', jttJ? tws £is Kevov Tpi)((o rj thpap.ov i.e. in the 
 anxiety lest (or, in order to see whether, cf. Luke xi. 35 in § 139, 49 
 p. 243) perchance my efforts are, or have already been, in vain. So 
 recent interpreters, — with this difference only, that they unnecessarily 
 still want to retain %pix<^ as a Subjunctive. On the contrary, it is in 
 the Indicative as really as the following ltpo.fx,ov, and glancing at the 
 latter presents in advance the notion of the present as a like object of 304 
 anxiety. 1 Thess. iii. 5 eirepAJ/a eh to yvuivai t^v iriariv vp.u>v, /h^ttu)? 
 iirtipaa-ev i/ias 6 Trcipa^cov (cai cis Kevov yivryrai 6 /coVos ij/icov, fearing 
 (or, in order to see whether) perchana the tempter has tempted you, 
 and my labor thus might become in vain. Heb. ix.J7 &a6^Ki; 
 j8e/3aia, ettei )u,^ ttotg ttrxuei ore ^g 6 haOifji.ivo': affords an example of 
 the use (which increased more and more in later Greek) of /iijTroxc ' 
 with the Indicative, the notion of anxiety or of doubting inter- 
 45 
 
354 NEGATIVES. [§ 148 
 
 rogation residing in the negative having gradually receded, and so 
 fiiyTTore being used almost like ovtotc in the sense oi probably never} 
 
 On /A^ as an interrogative particle, see § 139, 55 p. 248; 
 and on ov /u;^ as a strengthened negation with the Fut. and the 
 Subjunct, ibid. 7 p. 211sq. Of fj-r] ov as a mere intensification 
 there is no instance. 
 
 B. §148,N.7a.; H. §846; C. § 713 sub fln. ; D. §537; J. § 750. 
 
 11 Similar negatives as a rule streagthen each other, or the 
 second is only the continuation of the first. Hence in 
 sentences already, for any reason, negatived by (the conjunc- 
 tion) (irj, as soon as a particular part of the sentence is 
 to be negatived again, and independently of the first negation, 
 this must be done in every instance by the other form of 
 negation, that is to say by ov. 
 
 Examples from classic authors after the ju^ implying anxiety (Lat. 
 ne non) may be seen in the Grammars. From the N. T. we have 
 2 Cor. xii. 20 (fto/Sovfjiai /h^ttcos iXdHiv ov)( oiovi 6eX.ia evpio v/xas ; see 
 further Matt. xxv. 9 and Rom. xi. 21 in the preceding paragraph. 
 For the same reason, in an interrogative sentence with the ij,-^ of 
 doubt, as soon as an, affirmative answer is expected (nonne), not 
 ix-q again but ov must be introduced as the second negative ; for 
 examples of this, see § 139, 55 p. 248. 
 
 B. § 148, N. 7 b. and N. 8; J. § 747; W. p. 498 (464). 
 
 12 Cases may occur, however, in which two similar negatives 
 destroy each other, inasmuch as both the sense and the natural 
 position of the words exclude all ambiguity. In the N. T. there is 
 only one passage where similar negatives destroy each other in one 
 and the same sentence: 1 Cor. xii. 15 eav etVi; o ttovs, ... ov 
 rrapa tovto ovk vttw €K to?) (r<i/AOTos. Plere it "was necessary to use 
 the same negative twice, because the nature of the sentence did not 
 
 305 permit any other than the ol jective form of negation either at the 
 beginning or in the middle ; and that they mutually destroy each other 
 follows from the sense inevitably. 
 
 1 Still more frequently, in the writings e.g. of Aristotle, and especially in the 
 literary language of the Alexandrians (the Grammarians, and the Seholiasts), it 
 iBay be rendered simply by perhaps (i.e. tates), which sprang by abbreviation 
 from the complete sentence Spa fiiivore followed by the Subjunctive : see to it lest 
 perchance etc.; as, Arist. Eth. Nic. 10 init. {^■fi irore ov Ka\as toDt) \4yiTai), 
 iii. 2 (/i^jtot' ov Xiyovat rh alriov). Mil with the Indie, also is so used; as, 
 ApoU. Adverb. 567. On this subject see further, Steph. Thes. sub voce ; Bhdy. 
 p. 397 ; Devar. ed. Klotz I. p. 137. 
 
§ I -18.1 NEGATIVES. 855 
 
 Oil the other hand, a double self-destroying negation for the 
 purpose of an emphatic aflfirmation is more common in two 
 sentences immediately dependent one on the other, viz. a 
 leading clause and a Relative clause dependent upon it, 
 after the analogy of the classic usage discussed in B. § 148, 
 N. 8 ; C. § 559 c. ; J. § 824, 2 (yet without such attraction 
 as in ovSeU oa-rif ov, ovSevl otw ov etc.) ; as, Matt. x. 26 
 ovBev ianv KeKaXvfifiivov o ovk a7roKaXv(f)d'i]!7eTai, koX Kpmrrov 
 o oil jvaxTdiQaeTai,, xxiv. 2 ov fir) dtjjeOy wSe XlBoi iwl Xldov, os 
 ov KaTaXv6rj(TeTai, Mark xiii. 2; Luke viii. 17; xii. 2; xxi. 6. 
 Here belong those sentences, also, in which, instead of the 
 negatived leading clause, the form of a question is chosen ; as. 
 Acts xix. 35 T^? eaTiv avOpanraiv o'i ov jcvaxxKei etc., Heb. xii. 7 
 Tt9 yap uto? ov ov TraiSevsL TraTrjp. 
 
 B.§148,N.9; H.§838; C.§713d.; D.§595; J. 749; G.pp.lQSsq. 
 
 The pleonastic use, too, of ixr) in dependent Infinitive 
 clauses after predicates which include within themselves a 
 negative force, has been preserved, at least in certain parts 
 of the N. T. (e.g. Luke's writings), especially with the Infini- 
 tive introduced by Tov. 
 
 See examples of this last kind in § 140, 16 p. 269. We have, 
 besides, without tov, Luke xx. 27 oi di/TtXcyovres avatxTainv fi-q etvai, 
 xxii. 34 Tdf. Itos rpis &rrapvr)(rg fji,rj eiSevai fxi, Heb. xii. 19 Trap-QTTjaavTO 
 li/q Trpoa-TeOrjvaL avroZs Xoyov, Gal. V. 7 Tts v/tias iveKOiptv Trj aKr]6ela, /xrj 
 ■n-ddicrOai. Analogous is the pleonastic ov when an Infin. is resolved 
 inio a clause with on, 1 John ii. 22 6 dpvou/u.ei'os on 'It^ctoCs ovk 
 ecTTiv 6 XpuTTO's, cf. Mark ix. 38 Lchm. [Tdf. cod. Sin.], and from 
 classic authors, Demosth. Phil. p. 124 extr. ; Xen. Anab. 2, 3, 25 ; 
 Ath. 2. 17, etc. Pleonastic also is the negative in the common 
 phrase e/cros €t /u.17 i.e. except if, except it be, as 1 Cor. xiv. 5 p.€L^(av 6 
 ■iTpo(f>^ev(j)v, . . . EKTOs et p-rj Siepprivevy, xv. 2 ; 1 Tim. v. 19 ; see Lob., 
 ad Phryn. p. 459, and on the Subjunct. § 139, 22 p. 221. 
 
 Remark. In Rom. iv. 19 Lchm. [so Treg. Tdf.] in his text has 
 omitted the ov before Karevoricrev, with the oldest authorities [cod. Sin. 
 also]. But since the context seems to require a negation, other editors 
 have adopted ov, which likewise is sufficiently attested; or it is 
 thought necessary, at least to supply the direct negative ov with 
 KaTevo-qcrev from the p.^ with do-^ci/iyo-as. That a single negative can 
 belong awo Kowov to t w o notions is certain (see, among others, Poppo 
 on Thuc. 1,12; O. Schneider on Isocr. 4, 3 ; Grot, on Eur. Tro. 638 ; 
 Mehlhorn on the Schema otto kolvov p. 14 sq. ; Kriiger, Gram. § 67, 8 
 
356 NEGATIVES. [§ 148, 
 
 Anm. 4) ; e.g. Luke viii. 12 tva fuj ina-TevaavTes (Tioduicnv, and cf. the 
 command ofyyi^etrde koa, ixrj d/iapravere in § 144, 2 p. 290. But whether 
 Greek usage permits the direct negative to be supplied from the 
 dependent negative is more than doubtful. Further, against either 
 supplying or adopting ov makes the manifest reference of the words 
 to Gen. xvii. 17 ; for only to this passage, not to Gen. xv. 5 sq., does 
 306 the express mention of the vcKpwa-K rrj? juijTpas Sa/apas in the nine- 
 teenth vs. point us. But then the words (jltj aa-div^cras rfj ttio-th 
 seem to be at variance with the narrative in Gen. xvii., and still 
 more with the positive KOTci'dijtrei' immediately following, as well as 
 with the drift of Paul's entire argument. In order to solve this 
 difficulty the assuftiption is perhaps justifiable, that the words /iij 
 a.<r6evri(TWi rrj mora are to be taken proleptically, and that the 
 true consequent clause does not "begin till the twentieth vs. (eh Sc rijv 
 eirayyeXlav etc.). The words KaTevdr/crev etc. form, then, not so much 
 a parenthetic insertion to designate more precisely the passage of the 
 O. T. which the apostle had in mind, as an antithesis to the following 
 ov SieKpWr], such as is otherwise wont to be indicated by the particles 
 fjbev . . . 8e ; hence the thought is as follows : not wavering in faith, he 
 considered, indeed, his senility and the deadness of Sarah's womb, but 
 in reference to the promise of God etc. The want of jxiv would 
 indeed be an offence in a classic writer ; but how often in all parts of 
 the N. T. the sharpest antitheses are given merely by a simple Se (see 
 examples in § 149, 11 p. 364 and the note on p. 121), or even by Koi 
 (see the examples under § 149 8,-b) p. 361 sq.), is well known; how 
 much more occasion for this liberty was there here, where the writer 
 might have contented himself with the simple participle ((caravo'^tras), 
 but, as he wrote, was precluded from that by the do-^ei/'^o-as which 
 he had just used. This construction of the passage, moreover, is by 
 no means destitute of parallels in the composition of the apostle. On 
 the contrary, a number of passages stand in the plainest analogy to 
 it : where two members of a sentence are connected with each other 
 by ovK . . . dXKa (Se), and yet the thought in the first member is not to 
 be denied absolutely, but only relatively in reference to the 
 leading thought, in order, as Winer 497 (462) aptly says, "to 
 direct undivided attention to the second and principal thought, the first 
 comparatively disappearing from view," accordingly for rhetorical 
 reasons; cf. Fritzsche on Mark, Exc. II. Such passages are — from 
 the historical writings Matt. x. 20 ; Mark ix. 37 ; Luke x. 20 ; John 
 xii. 44 ; Acts v. 4 ; — from the Epistles, 1 Cor. xv. 10 ; 1 Thess. iv. 8, 
 cf. also 1 Cor. i. 17 and deWette's Comment. As in all these passages 
 the writer hurries over the negative and parenthetic thought to the 
 second and positive member, so Paul above hurries over the first and 
 positive mtmber tp the second and negative (ov SieKpWrj). 
 
§ H9.] (OS, oiVciis ; iva, ; 8ti. 357 
 
 Otheb Paeticles. 
 B. §149, m. 1; H. §§875; 795a.; C. §711a.; J. §§626, Oba. 1; 696, Oba. 5. 
 
 'Os, ovTOii. The combination of is with a preposition of direction 1 
 (versus) seems to have been unknown to the N. T. writers ; for in the 
 only passage where it occurs (Acts xvii. 14 cos im Grsb. Tdf. [eds. 2, 
 7]), the most important authorities [cod. Sin. also] read lus im, which 
 Lohm. [so Tdf. Treg.] has adopted. The accented dSs for ovtws also 
 is not found. 
 
 It is an extension of the familiar idiom by virtue of which 
 ouTo)? stands after participial clauses in order to resume 
 them again in the conclusion (§ 144, 21 p. 306), when, the 
 participial clause being wanting, this adverb by a somewhat 307 
 easy and popular mode of expression completely takes the 
 place of the participle; as, Acts rii. 8 eScoKev avrm Blo- 
 67JKi]v TrepiTOfj,rj<; ■ koI ovrwi (i.e. after this happened) iyewTjaev 
 Tov 'laaaK, xxviii. 14 ; 1 Cor. ix. 24 ovk o'iBaTe etc. ; ovrcoii 
 (i.e. TovTo elBore'i') rpe')(eTe, xiv. 25 ; Gal. vi. 2 ; 1 Thess. iv. 
 17 ; 2 Pet. i. 11. 
 
 In this way it passes over insensibly, like the Latin sic, into the 
 meaning of the connective then, so then, as Acts xvii. 33 ; Eev. iii. 16. 
 Quite analogous to this is its use after aprotasis with el (almost 
 pleonastically like the German so, but more emphatic and resuming 
 the protasis) to mark the beginning of the apodosis ; as, 1 Thess. iv. 
 1 4 et yap TrttrTEuo/tev OTt 'IijtroSs OTriOaviV Koi avicTTrj, outws koX 6 Oeb'i a^et 
 etc., Rev. xi. 5 ei Tts airov^ OiXa dSt/c^crat, ootojs Sei avrov a.TroKTav6f)va.l. 
 
 B. § 149, m. 2; H. § 508 b. ; C. § 566 a. ; J. § 882, 1. 
 • "Iva. Of the elliptical use of iva tl (equiv. to 8ia ti; wherefore?) 2 
 with an Indicative following (which occurs even in the earlier writers : 
 Aristoph., Plato), there are many examples in the Old Test, as well 
 as the New, and in later writers generally ; as, Matt. ix. 4 ii/a tC 
 ivBvfieiaOe irovqpa iu rats KapStaii vfLuiv ; xxvii. 46 ; Luke xiii. 7 ; Acts 
 iv. 25 (quotn.), vii. 26 ; 1 Cor. x. 29 ; cf. Herm. ad Vig. p. 847. 
 
 B. §149, m. 3; H. §§868; 869; C. §701, N.; D. p. 671; J. §§800sq.; 802 Obs. 8. 
 
 "Otl. Like the English <Aa< (cf. Germ. c?ass, Ital. cAe, French 3 
 ' que), oTi is the most frequent (subordinating) conjunction, 
 and employed in manifold phrases ; for, besides its common 
 and most general sense (that}, like the corresponding particles 
 just mentioned in other languages, it is used sometimes pleo- 
 nastically, sometimes elliptically, and sometimes passes over 
 into the signification of other and more pointed particles 
 (especially because}. 
 
358 PARTICLE& [§ 149 
 
 On the pleonastic use of on after verba dicendi see § 139, 51 
 p. 245. 
 
 To the elliptical, belongs the expression t t o t t (which may 
 be compared with the Lat. quid quod; but it is uttered without any 
 rhetorical emphasis) in such sentences as Luke ii. 49 i-t oti i^rjTure 
 /ie; (why is it that etc.), Acts v. 4, 9 ; Mark ii. 16 Lchm., — where, 
 however, Tdf. [so Treg.] after cod B has given the preference to the 
 interrogative on (§ 139, 59 p. 252), — and often in the Sept., as Gen. 
 xviii. 13 ; xliv. 4 ; Judg. ix. 28, etc. ; with the ellipsis supplied, John 
 xiv. 22 Ti yiyovev otl -^/uv /ueWeis i/i^avL^eiv crtavTov; John vii. 35 nov 
 ovTos fiiWei, TTOpEViaOai,, oti, ij/acis oi)( f.vprjo'oix.ei' airov ; is to be explained 
 by a different kind of ellipsis ; it arises from the two thoughts Whither 
 will he go ? and How is it to be that we are not to find him ? united 
 into a single sentence by abbreviation, in popular fashion. Similar 
 is Matt. xvi. 7 oi Sc SieXoyt^ovro Xeyovres " oti aprotis ovk JXdySo/tci', 
 where he says this because, or he has reference to the fact that etc , is 
 to be supplied. Of an elliptical nature, further, is the combination 
 (peculiar to Paul) o)s oti in the sense oi quasi ; 2 Thess. ii. 2 cos on 
 evecTTTiKev rj rjfiepa tov Kvpiov abbreviated from, as (happens when it is 
 the case) that the day of the Lord is at hand. Similar, but with more 
 of the common meaning of oti, accordingly as if that, because, is the 
 308 use of m OTI in 2 Cor. v. 19 ; xi. 21 (see Meyer on the passages, and 
 the instances of (os on which he quotes from Greek writers ; and on 
 the not infrequent use of (us oti in later writers, especially in the 
 Alexandrian literary language, see Bast on Greg. Cor. p. 52). on 
 equivalent to ^9i\ov otl in 1 Tim. vi. 7 Lchm. [T. Tr. «*] (Tdf [eds. 2,7] 
 S^kov otl) is exceptional. On the elliptical ou;^ oti see § 150, 1 p. 372. 
 
 B. §149, m. i; H. §872; C. §701f. sq.; J. §§850sq.; 860, 5. 
 
 4 El. The elliptical use of el in oaths is a Hebraism current 
 in the Sept. and transferred thence into the N. T. This el arose 
 from the literal translation of the Hebrew ox , which imparts 
 a negative force to the contents of the oath, and hence xb n» a 
 positive force indeed I of a truth I, see Geseu. Lehrg. p. 844 ; 
 Or. § 152, 2 f. 
 
 Examples of d from the Sept. are, 1 Sam. iii. 14 ; 2 Sam. xx. 20 ; 
 xi. 11 ; Ps. xcv. 11, etc., less frequently idv Cant. ii. 7 ; Judg. v. 8, also 
 the Infin. with /ju-j Gen. xxi. 23, (the affirmative intensification sb dk 
 is either not translated at all, as Josh. xiv. 9 ; Isa. xiv. 24 ; Job xxx. 
 25 ; xxxi. 36, or by rj fi-^v Job i. 11 or el /jlt^ xxii. 20, etc.). This mode 
 of expression is evidently founded in an ellipsis (Aposiopesis), a 
 thought being reserved in the mind which in other passages of tljo 
 O. T. is expressed, and is commonly translated by the Sept. as follows : 
 
§149-] HH.i^;lir€C. 359 
 
 TaSe TTotijcrai troi o 6eb<s koI raSe vpoa-Oat), e.g. 1 Sam. iii. 1 7 ; 2 Sam. 
 lii. 35, etc. In the N. T. this d is found in Mark viii. 12 (where it is 
 interpreted in the various readings by ov), and several times as a 
 quotation from Ps. xcv. 11 in the Ep. to the Heb., viz. iii. 11 cf. 18; 
 iv. 3, 5. On the other hand, ei /aiJi/ in Heb. vi. 14 is positive, like 
 the ri fjLT^v in use elsewhere, and (according to Etym. mag. 416, 60) 
 only a different (itacistic) way of writing it ; and in fact, in Gen. xxii. 
 17 (whence the above passage is taken) the MSS. offer both readings. 
 But it is construed with the Indie, except in Judith i. 12 where the 
 Infin. (current in Greek writers) is given : w/Aoo-e ei [{.r/v cKStKijo-av. 
 
 The elliptical use of the combined particles « i fuj (which have 
 become almost a single conjunction) in the sense of except, nisi, 
 after a preceding negation, is so general that passages in which the 
 predicate is added, as Mark vi. 5, are very rare ; and the phrase 
 became so established in this sense, that, like eire . . . etre in § 139, 22 
 p. 220 sq., it was retained even where the construction would sooner 
 lead us to expect e a v /it^ (Matt. xxvi. 42 ; Gal. ii. 16, etc., cfi 6 p. 360), 
 as Mark vi. 8 iva /AiySev atpwo-tv el fjiij pdySSoi/ etc., ix. 9, etc., and the 
 clause dependent on it was insensibly changed even as respects its 
 form into a leading clause, as 1 Cor. vii. 17 ei (jlyj, eKao-ru) ms ifj.ipura' 6 
 Kvpioi, ovTias TrepLTraTeiTw, — with which may be compared the 
 similar grammatical phenomena in connection with tva (§ 139, 37 
 p. 233), oTi (§ 139, 53 p. 246), <5o-tc (§ 139, 50 p. 243). All that has 
 been said holds also with more or less force as respects the extended 
 combinations of particles tl p,ri ti (on which see § 139, 20,22 
 pp. 219 sq.) and ektos el /aij (see ibid 22 p. 221, and § 148, 13 
 p. 355). 
 
 B. §149, m.6; H.§877,5; D. p. 569; §617 Obs.; J. §§ 839, Obs. • 860,2. 
 
 'ETreL In consequence of a brachylogical mode of expression, 5 
 this conjiinction plainly has in several passages the signification 
 since or for otherwise, — it being necessary to supply or repeat 
 from the immediately preceding context the supposition sug- 
 gested by our particle otherwise, else. 
 
 For example : Rom. iii. 6 p-rj aSt/cos 6 deoi • . • , ewel ttios Kpivei 6 Oeb's 
 Tov KotT/jiov; for otherwise how etc. (sc. ei aSiKos o Oeos), xi. 6 eirei r/ 
 Xapii ovKeri yiverai x^P'S (sc. el e^ epyw keip.p.a yiyovev or simply ei If 309 
 epyu>v ylveraC n) ; . . . eirel to epyov ovKeri Icttw epyov (sc. el )(6-P''''i- or 
 Xapw sc. ecTTLv), xi. 22 eirel koI (Tv eKKOTt'^a-rj, sc. eai' p.rj eTrt/ieiVijs etc., 
 Heb. ix. 26 ; x. 2 in both which instances a hypothetical protasis of 
 the fourth kind is to be supplied for the apodosis, which is evidently 
 constructed on this model (cf. § 139, 14 and 15 p. 216). So, too, 
 1 Cor. V. 10, on which see § 151, 19 p. 390. See besides the very 
 similar idiom with aXXd ia 14 p. 369. 
 
360 PARTICLES. [§ 149. 
 
 B. §149, m. 6. 
 
 idv. By a certain inaccuracy of expression idv stands once ap- 
 parently for OS dv in Mark x. 30, 31 oiSets iariv os a.(J3rjK€v oUiav . . . , 
 eav fj-rj A.a/3T7 etc. (D os dv). This construction arose and is to be 
 explained in the same way as d ft-rj {lav jj-tj) nisi, by which the pre- 
 ceding negative is destroyed (see above, 4 p. 859), so that the meaning 
 here is nearly as follows : no one leaves etc. unless he receives, i.e. 
 every one who leaves etc. will receive. 
 
 The contracted Kav (from xat idv) stands several times, by an ellipsis, 
 without a finite verb (cf. Demosth. p. 415, 24; Soph. El. 1483) 
 almost adverbially in the sense of, if only, at least (in which sense 
 it occurs times without number in later writers and the Apocrypha) ; 
 as. Acts V. 1 5 Iva ip)(0[j.ivov Hirpov Kav 17 (7Kia liruTKidayj i.e. {/^ (it were) 
 only his shadow, Mark vi. 56 ; 2 Cor. xi. 16 v. hi ijlt^ ye, Kav cos dcjipova 
 
 B. § 149, m. 7 ; H. § 860 i C. §§ 713 h. J 611, 513 ; D. p. 669 ; J. §§ 875 Obs, 3 ; 779 Ob3. 3. 
 
 71. To the examples cited here of ij ov after a negative (or inter- 
 rogative) clause instead of the simple ^, a parallel is apparently given 
 in 1 Thess. ii. 19 rts yap rjfi,u>v cXttIs r) xapa . . . r) ovy^i Kat vp.el'ij Yet 
 since the antecedent question is not to be taken in an exclusive 
 (negative) sense, as the /cat before u/A£ts proves, the clause ^ oi^'t etc. 
 is to be joined to the first question as a second, which, because it 
 assumes an affirmative answer, is negatived by ov. 
 
 Ou the other hand, indubitable instances are found of the 
 other power of ij mentioned here, viz. to impart to a Positive 
 notion the force of a Comparative ; as, Matt, xviii. 8 ; Mark 
 ix. 43, 45 KoXov earlv ere kvXKov, "xmXbv ela-ekOeiv rj etc., Luke 
 XV. 7 Xobpci earai, (sc. fjueitfuv) eirl evl d/jLapraiKQ} fieTavoovvTt rj 
 etc. Accordingly it imparts to the signification of Oekm the 
 force of maUe in 1 Cor. xiv. 19, and to Xvatrekelv the force of 
 Roiius esse in Luke xvii. 2 ; cf. the parallel passages above from 
 Matt, and Mark. See the similar phenomena under wrep 
 (p. 835) and irapd with the Aco. (p. 339). 
 
 B. § 149, m. 8 ; H. §§ 865-57 ; C. § 701 ; D. §§ 549 sqq. ; J. §§ 768 sq. 
 
 T£, Kai. The particle re, which is but rarely employed in the Gospels, 
 is used by Luke in the Acts with fondness, sometimes simply for the 
 ordinary Kai (ii. 37 ; iv. 33, etc.), sometimes in the combination re Kai. 
 But where these two particles do not connect immediately with one 
 another two similar or parallel terms, they can only signify and also, 
 the T-e in such case belonging to the sentence and Kai to the single 
 word, as Acts xxi. 28 ovt6% icmv 6 dvOponroi 6 . . . navra's iravra)^ 
 
§149.] ri-.KdC. 361 
 
 StSoMTKwv, en T€ KOI EXXijvas tlcriQyayev, Rom. i. 27 Tdf.* [cod. Sin.j. 
 In the reverse order, xai connects the sentence, tI the particular term, 3 10 
 as Acts xxvi. 10 koi ttoAAoijs re twv ayiiav . KaTiKkeuj-a etc. A double 
 T£ rarely appears except in composition or with corresponding particles 
 (cite, /Ji-jre, idv re), as Acts xxvi. 16 ; xvii. 4 ; Heb. vi. 2. 
 
 Kai is by far the most frequent of all the Greek particles in 
 the N. T. ; and as it is used not only beyond comparison more 
 frequently than in the Greek literary language, but also' in 
 another sense often, or rather under other circumstances, it 
 contributes much to the peculiar complexion of the N. T. style. 
 This extended use of KaC (particularly in the Gospels, see § 144, 
 1 p. 288 sq.) proceeds from the practice, characteristic of all 
 popular languages, of placing in juxtaposition, with the simplest 
 counection and as independent little sentences, the several parts 
 especially of an historic narrative, which in a more choice style 
 are wont to be wrought together into a single whole. In the 
 Homeric language, and in part also in Herodotus, this takes 
 place commonly, indeed, by means of several of the many little 
 copulative conjunctions (re, Si, pa, etc.) ; but in the N. T., 
 predominantly by /cat'. Hence connection by means of Kat 
 appears, times without -number, in part for participial con- 
 structions (§ 144, 1 and 2 pp. 288 sq.), in part where the 
 Greeks would have employed divers other particles. But we 
 are not on this account warranted in supposing that it any- 
 where includes any other than its characteristic and proper 
 signification (^and, also, even}. The leading cases in which 
 its use deviates more or less from the ordinary usage are the 
 following: 
 
 ii) With the use of km in place of a Participle agrees its employ- 
 ment, where, as a rule, the first of two independent sentences 
 connected by Kai expresses the relation of time for the second (the 
 leading) sentence ; as, Matt. xxvi. 45 ■^yi/cei' ^ wpa koL 6 vlog rov 
 avOpuyirov irapaSlBoTat, Mark XV. 25 ^v_ 8e wpo rptT?/ kol ia-Tavpiocrav 
 avTov, Luke xix. 43 ; xxiii. 44 ; John x. 22 Lchm., Acts v. 7 ; Heb. 
 viii. 8. Cf. the various constructions with koi eyevero § )41, 6 p. 
 276. 
 
 b) Very commonly the N. T. language, particularly in the Gospels, 
 
 1 Here, however, the other reading (Se Lchm. [Treg. marg.]) seems to be pref- 
 erable; the apostle, instead of connecting the second member by t^ (o'l t€ Upaevcs 
 etc.), having given his discourse a different and more emphatic turn by means of 
 the words diioims Se rai. Cf. Wine) 571 (531). 
 16 
 
362 PARTICLES. [§ U9 
 
 contents itself with this most simple method of jonnecting sentences 
 where other Greek writers are wont to employ either a simple 
 adversative particle (Se, akXd, ixevToi), or the corresponsive /j,kv ... 
 Se; as, Luke xx. 19 ; Mark xii. 12 itp^row avrbv Kparrja-ai, kcll iifiolii^- 
 6r}(Tav Tov o)(kov. Matt. xi. 25 iKpvxj/a.^ . . . Kal aireKdKvfa^, Mark vii. 24,; 
 John viii. 49 rt/iu) . . . /cot ^ju.as dTt/xa^ere, vi. 36 (/cat . . . /cat'), xvii. 11 
 ovKCTi 6t;u,t . . . Koi ovToi eitTtV, vll. 30 (comparcd with 44), Luke xviii. 
 311 13 [Tdf. with N and] (B 6 Si), 34 (D dXX'), 1 Thess. ii. 18 (even 
 after a preceding jneV, cf. § 126,-3 p. 102, and Hartung, Part. II. p. 410), 
 Jas. iv. 2, etc. On /cat ov after positive clauses see also particularly 
 below, 13 e) p. 368. 
 
 c) In comparative sentences after As, /carols, the leading clause or 
 the member corresponding to ws etc. is often introduced merely by 
 Ktt^ so that it then seems to stand for ovtws. More correct, however, 
 is the assumption that outws drops out before Kat, and /cat while re- 
 taining its own proper meaning (i.e. also) takes upon itself besides 
 the relation to be expressed by owcos ; as. Matt. vi. 10 yivrjdrJTia to 
 6eX.rjiJ,a, crov (is ev oipav<5 zeal £7rt y^s as in heaven, so (also) on earth, 
 Acts vii. 51 /ca^o/s otJraTcpes v/ioiv /cat vjt.u's, John vi. 57 /cantos eyo) t,S> . . . , 
 Ka\ b rpwymv fn-e t,rja-a etc., xiii. 15, 33 ; Gal. i. 9 ; Phil. i. 20 ; 1 John 
 ii. 18, etc. That a similar use occurs also in Greek authors, see 
 (among others) Kiihner on Xen. Mem. 2,. 2, 2. 
 
 d) There are several passages also, where, after an antecedent 
 dependent clause (protasis), the leading or consequent clause 
 begins with /cat, very much as in Greek authors so often with (the 
 copulative and adversative) 8e (see B. § 149 m. 9 ; J. § 759, Obs. 8) ; 
 as, Luke ii. 21 ore iTrX-qaBrjcro.v at rj/xepai ... , /cat iKXyjOr) to ovofiba 
 avTov Irj(rovs, cf. 22 ; Acts xiii. 19 us iTpo<j>ocl>6prj<jev avrov? ... , Kai 
 Ka^eA.mi' etc., Phil. i. 22 (where after epyov no great punctuation mark 
 is to be placed, cf. § 144, 21 p. 306), 2 Cor. ii. 2 et yap iyu> Xvttu) vp,as, 
 /cat Tts 6 ivcjjpaivijiv /ie etc., Jas. iv. 15 ; Rev. iii. 20 Tdf. [cod. Sin.], 
 X. 7 (see deWettc).^ Sentences in which the consequent clause is 
 preceded by /cat t Sow, as Luke vii. 12 ; Acts i. 10 ; x. 17 Tdf. [ed. 8 
 drops /cat'], have a predominantly Oriental (or O. T.) complexion. 
 
 On the other hand, the N. T. accords with ordinary usage 
 as respects, 
 
 e) The union by means of /cat of two adjectival notions which are 
 not co-ordinate, as in the case of to A. us: Luke iii. 18 ; John xx. 
 
 1 With these sentences belongs also Jas. iv. \5 ^hv i xiptos fleA^o-j; Kal f^(rofte> 
 Ka\ iroiiiirofifv etc., where, however, it is doubtful whether the consequent clause 
 begins with the first Kai or the second ; but grammatically it is preferable to begin 
 it with the first xal, especially as the text now stands wi th a Future in both in- 
 stances [so Lchm. Tdf. Treg., after N etc.]. 
 
§149.] Kai; ti. 363 
 
 30 TToWcl juci/ ovv Kol aAAo oTj/iEta fTroirj(Tev 'Iijtrov?, Acts xxv. 7 iroXXa 
 Kai /3apia aiTtui/xaTa, Tit. i. 10. 
 
 1') /cat in the sense of as (ac) after 6 avro's is not met with in the 
 N. T. (the Dative is always used instead, B. § 133, 2f.). Only in a 
 single passage has /cai the meaning as^ viz. Eph. iv. 10 o /caraySa? afiros 
 eoTiv KOI 6 dva^Sdi;, where probably the 6 before auros has been omitted 
 owing to the o before KaraySas, (yet cf. Meyer [or Ellic.J in loc). 
 The common phrases o/ioius Kai, ajo-auTus /cat, and 6 airos /cat, on the 
 other hand, are of an entirely different nature, and in them xat has 
 only the meaning also (Matt. xxii. 26; xxvii. 44; Mark xiv. 31; 
 1 Cor. vii. 7 ; xv. 48 ; 1 Thess. ii. 14, etc.) ; so too after a Eelative, 
 (is /cat, OTTotog /cat, otrco /cat, on which the general use of /cat after 
 Relatives (§ 143, 5 p. 282 sq.) may be compared ; as, Luke xi. 1 ; 
 Acts XV. 8 ; xxvi. 29 ; Heb. viii. 6. 
 
 g) Kat as strengthening the Comparative, like the Latin etiam : 
 Matt. xi. 9 vat Xeyoj v/xlv, /cat itipurfTorepov Trpo^rjTov, John xiv. 12 
 {and even), 2 Cor. xii. 15 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7 ; 8, Treg. N* om.J, Heb. viii. 6. 
 
 h) Although sentences with /cat according to their grammatical 
 form can contain nothing else than specifications additional to what 
 precedes, yet these specifications may at the same time serve 
 also as explanatory supplements to the antecedent sentence or notion, 
 so that they then sustain the relation of an epexegetical adjunct 3!l 2 
 to the latter. In such cases we are wont to render the /cat by namely, 
 and indeed ; as, John i. 16 e/c tov Tr\r]pu>iJ,aro'; airov irai/res iXa.Pojj.ei', 
 Kw. x^P'-^ °-^''''' X°-P''''°''t l Cor. iii. 5 ; xv. 38 ; Acts xxiii. 6 ircpt e\7rt'8os 
 Kat dvacTTacrecus vcKpiov iyuy KpivofLai. 
 
 i) Oh Kat . . . 8e see 10 p. 364 ; on Kat in continuation of a negative < 
 (equiv. to ovhi etc.) 13 d) p. 368 ; and on the (apparent) omission of 
 Kat 14 p. 369. 
 
 B. §149, m.9; H. §862; C. §§701c,q.; 705a.; D. §§659sq.; J. §§ 764sq.; 7688q. 
 
 Ae. Owing to the prevalent employment of Kai as a particle ' 
 of transition and continuation, the number of passages where 
 the particle Se is used, as in the classics, rather copulatively, 
 i.e. to subjoin a subordinate circumstance in a supplementary 
 way or to form a coimection with what follows, is comparatively 
 small ; as, Matt. xxi. 3 ; John vi. 10 ; Acts vi. 2 ; xxiv. 17 ; 
 Rom. viii. 8, etc. 
 
 In other passages 8c has probably found its way by means of the 
 copyists into the text instead of the more common particles of transi- 
 tion in the N. T. {yap, Kai), which particles have sometimes been 
 restored (e.g. Col. iii. 25 ; 1 Cor. vii. 38 ; Mark xvi. 8 Lchm. [Treg. 
 Tdf. cod. Sin.J, xiv. 2 ; xv. 33 ; Luke xii. 42, etc.) ; or Sc was first 
 
364 PARTICLES. [§ 149 
 
 added by the copyists (as ovv, kolL often were also) to avoid tlie 
 asyndeton displeasing to a Greek ear ; this has been done times with- 
 out number in John, as i. 26 Tdf. [Treg.. cod. Sin. J, 40, 43 ; ii. 4, 17 ; 
 iv. 31, 50, 54; V. 29 ; vi. 43, 45, etc. . Cf. § 151, 33 p. 402. 
 
 Of Se in the Apodosis we find but one example, Acts xi. 17 cJ 
 ovv Tr]v larjv Stupeav e.BwKei' . • • , iyi) Sk Tts ■^ju.r/v etc. This Se Tdf. [eds. 
 2, 7 ; not 8] adopted, in opposition indeed to the oldest mss. [Sin. also] ; 
 but this (genuine classic) use is so rare in the N.T. that we can under- 
 stand the omission of the Se by the copyists (cf. Acts xx. 4, 5). Tdf. 
 has now adopted 6 Se [ed. 7 ; in ed. 8 dropped Se again] in the apodosis 
 in 1 Pet. iv. 18 also, after cod. Vat. On the other hand, aXXA is often 
 found in the apodosis in Paul's writings, e.g. Rom. vi. 5 ; 1 Cor. iv. 
 15 ; ix. 2. 
 
 B. § 149, m. 10 ; H. § 856 b. ; J. § 769. 
 
 10 Kal . . . Se. Of the combination koI . . . Be in the sense of 
 and also, (when the antithesis is stronger but also), there are 
 a great many indubitable, instances : Matt. x. 18 Kal iirl 
 ffyeiM6va<i Se a')(6ri(Tecr9e, Jolin viii. 16 (ov Kpivco') • kol iav Kpiveo 
 Se iyco etc., Matt. xvi. 18 ; Mark iv. 36 Tdf., Luke ii. 35 ; John 
 vi. 51 ; viii. 17 ; xv. 27 ; Acts iii. 24 ; xxii. 29 ; 2 Tim. iii. 12 ; 
 Heb. ix. 21, etc. 
 
 B. § 149, m. 11 ; H.§862a.; C.§70l8q.; D.§5598q.; J. § 764. 
 
 11 Mev . . . Se. In the use of these two particles the N. T. 
 writers, especially Luke, the author of the Ep. to the Hebrews, 
 and Paul, are by no means unpractised. Yet it is not to be 
 overlooked, that, in general, antithetic relationship is far from 
 always being indicated by these particles where native Greeks 
 would hardly have omitted them. In their stead, N.T. writers 
 contented themselves often with the simple Se, and even 
 merely with xai (see 8 b) p. 361 sq.). 
 
 Compare, for instance, the antithetic setting of the language in the 
 maledictions (TaXaviorfioC) in the twenty-third chap, of Matt., particularly 
 313 vss. 3, 4, 8, 11, 23, 24, 25, and often besides in the same chapter. Here, 
 indeed, there is no sharp antithesis ; yet the Greeks would have em- 
 ployed the form of antithesis : /i£v ... Se. Only in vss. 27, 28 is fiw 
 . . . Se actually used. Further, see John v. 29 ; viii. 15 ; Jas. ii. 2, 10, 
 14; iv. 6, the examples in § 127, 32 note p. 121, § 148, 14 p. 356, 
 and many others especially from the Gospels and the Apocalypse 
 (in which fnev is not used throughout). Hence it is probable that, as 
 we saw above (9 p. 363 sq.) in the case of Se' so here, jueV first found its 
 way into the text by the aid of (Grecizing) copyists ; see particularly 
 
§149.] H.«'v. 365 
 
 in the recent editions, Mark i. 8 ; ix. 12 Tdf. (cf. Matt. xvii. 11), Acts 
 V. 23 ; 2 Cor. iv. 12 ; 1 Cor. xii. 20 var.; Matt. xxv. 33 var. Whether 
 in Rom. vi. 21 also (to fiev yap tcXos etc.) fiev is to be expunged [so 
 Tdf. Treg. in text, with N*], because the following wvl Si does not 
 correspond with it, is much to be doubted. Cf. 1 Cor. iii. 4 in b) 
 below. 
 
 B. § 149, m. 13 J H. §862, la.; D. §§562; 567; J. §765, 7 sq. 
 
 Mev. Every clause with /msv to which no following clause 
 with Be corresponds, is properly to be regarded as an aoacolu- 
 thon. Nevertheless, most of the instances of this sort which 
 occur in the N. T. admit (as in the classics) of being referred 
 to certain classes, of which the most evident, perhaps, are the 
 following : 
 
 a) Instead of Se a diiferent adversative particle is substituted ; thus 
 dXXa in Acts iv. 16 ; Rom. xiv. 20 ; 1 Cor. xiv. 17 ; tt A.ij v in Luke 
 xxii. 22, — even icat', see 8 b) p. 361 sq., and on o /xev . . . koL oXXo and 
 the like § 126, 3 p. 102. 
 
 b) In enumerations the particle is often dropped in the second 
 member when it is sufficiently marked as such by some other word, 
 particularly by tTrctra, as John xi. 6; Jas. iii. 17; similarly 1 Cor. 
 xii. 28, — yet here the anacoluthon is stronger, the writer continuing 
 his enumeration (instead of with the pronominal oSs 8e) by means of 
 the adverbial expressions Trptorov, hruTa, etc. In like manner Se is 
 wanting with ^Xoi after oi /xeV in many mss. [Sin. also] in John vii. 
 12 Tdf. (cf. 9 p. 263). In 1 Cor. iii. 4 eyi) ju.ei/ is immediately followed 
 indeed by CTepos Se, but the two corresponding terms are strictly tU 
 and erepos ; yet this slight inaccuracy does not mar the perspicuity of 
 the whole. 
 
 c) Sometimes the first member of the antithesis is marked by /xcV, 
 but the subsequent Se was of necessity dropped because the writer 
 suddenly chose another construction which did not permit the 
 addition of Se: thus Acts iii. 13 where the antithesis is contained in 
 the participial clause (e/ceiVou /cpiVai/Tos), xxvii. 21 where the antithesis 
 is indicated by the more forceful Kai ra vvv in the 22d verse ; so it is 
 in Heb. xii. 9 by ov iroXii /aSWov. 
 
 d) Sometimes the first member, marked by npSrrov /lev, has no cor- 
 responding areira, or other construction in its stead, the writer having 
 lingered so long over the first member that he loses the grammatical 
 sequence of thought, as Acts i. 1 ; Rom. i. 8 ; iii. 2 ; 1 Cor. xi. 18 ; 
 but the same thing happens also without any such reason, the writer 
 leaving it to the reader alone to complete the antithesis begun (the 
 completion being sometimes plainly suggested bythe context) 
 and beginning a new thought which has a greater claim upon him : 
 
366 PARTICLES. [§ 149 
 
 see e.g. Acts iii. 21 ; six. 4 Tdf. [ed. 8 om. /xiv, so cod. Sin.J ; xxviii. 
 22 ; Rom. vii. 12 ; x. 1 ; xi. 13 Tdf. [ed. 8 adds ovv, so Lchm. Treg.], 
 2 Cor. xii. 12; Col. ii. 23 ; Heb. vi. 16 Tdf. [ed. 8 om. /j-h, ; so cod. 
 Sin.]. Now since the copyists in such passages easily took offence at 
 314 /"^ owing to the missing Si, we find occurring here just the opposite 
 of what was described in 11 p. 364, viz. the omission of fiiv in the 
 MSS. ; see Acts iii. 13 ; xix. 4 ; Rom. xi. 13 ; Heb. vi. 16. On fiiv ovv 
 see 16 p. 370. 
 
 B.§U9,m.l5; H. §§858. 859; ,C. §§701a. e.; TlSb.c.; J.§§775j 776. 
 
 13 OvBe, fjL.rjBe' ovre, yi.-r]Te. a) The rule, that the double 
 conjunction ovhk (^fJ-vSe} . . . ovSe (/t^t^^Se) can only appear in 
 continuation of an antecedent simple negative ai«i to 
 connect anew (negative) clause, is found confirmed in the 
 N. T. almost throughout ; see Matt. vi. 26 ; xii. 19 ; x. 9, 10 ; 
 Mark xiii. 32 ; Luke xiv. 12 ; John i. 13, 25 ; Rom. xiv. 21 ; 
 Col. ii. 21 ; 1 Thess. ii. 3 Lchm. [Treg. Tdf. cod. Sin.J, Rev. 
 T. 3 ; vii. 16 ; ix. 4. 
 
 Hence, examples to the contrary must either be so explained that 
 the first negative is copulative and connects the entire sentence with 
 what precedes, making reference to some negatived portion of the 
 same (and so does not mean neither, but also not), as Gal. i. 12 Lchm. 
 [Treg. cod. Sin.J (cf. p. 367 note), — or the negative stands for ne . . . 
 quidem, as Mark viii. 26 (/ii/Se elaeKO-rj^ . . . fjurjSi ctin^s) ft interpreted, 
 see Meyer ; yet the received reading here seems critically to be still 
 
 ■ quite unsettled, see Fritzsche in loc. and Lchm. praef. p. 44. In Vat. 
 Sin. and a few other mss. the second clause is wholly wanting, and 
 Sin. has simply furj instead of the first jLiijSe; Tdf. has now [ed. -8J 
 
 ; adopted this reading. In this way certainly we get rid of all difBculties. 
 What holds true of the double conjunction, holds also for the simple 
 ovSi (firjSi), inasmuch as in the signification and not (not ne . . . 
 quidem) it invariably forms the continuation of an antecedent negative, 
 as well in sentences and larger portions of sentences, as with single 
 words. Examples abound : Matt. vi. 25, 28 ; Luke x. 4 ; xii. 24, 33 ; 
 Acts iv. 18 ; ix. 9 ; Rom. ix. 16 ; 2 Tim. i. 8; Gal. i. 1 ; 2 Pet. i. 8 ; 
 Heb. ix. 12 ; xiii. 5, etc. 
 
 b) On the other hand, the double conjunction ome (/.wjTe) 
 . . . oiire (/iTjre), as a negatived kui . . . kuI, stands as well with 
 entire sentences as particular parts of sentences, sometimes 
 without a previous negative, sometimes with a preceding 
 negative ; in this latter case, the members negatived by oiire 
 .(lUJjTe) constitute ts a rule a composite whole withiu the 
 
§149.] o«Tt...o«Te. 367 
 
 limits of a sentence already negatived, — -not a con- 
 tinuation of that sentence, (just as we say, not . . . neither . . . 
 nor'). 
 
 Examples: without an antecedent negitive, Matt. vi. 20; xi. 
 18 ; Mark siv. 68 Lchm. [Treg. Tdf. cod. Sin.]-, John v. 37 ; Acts xv. 
 10; llom. viii. 38; 1 Cor. iii. 7; viii. 8; Eev. iii. 15, etc.; with 
 an antecedent negative, 2 Thess. ii. 2 di to juij raxews craXevO^vai u;itas 
 jiATjoe Opoeiadai, /XT^re Slo. irvevixaro's fji.'^Te Sia koyov /it ly t e Si iirurroXris, 
 Matt. V. 34sq., xii. 32; Luke ix. 3; Jas. v. 12, and according to 
 preponderant MS. authority [Sin. also] Acts xxiii. 8 Lchm. [Treg. Tdf.], 
 ayyeXov and Trvevfjia then constituting the two members (ra afi<l)6T€pa) 
 of the negative partition. With the (more difficult and probable) 
 reading //tjjSe etc., the two members of the partition are to be taken 
 differently, see the note below. But in John i. 25 the reading now 
 is ovK . . . ovBi . . . oiSe, according to rule. 
 
 Consequently a single ovre (fi^Te) after a preceding simple negative 
 (oi, ovSeli) is, strictly taken, incorrect; since ovre contains no con- 
 tinued negation. And, in point of fact, recent criticism has enabled 315 
 us to set aside on ms. authority several such instances, see e.g. Mark 
 iii. 20 ; v. 3 ; xiv. 68 Lchm. [Treg. Tdf. cod Sin.], Acts iv. 12 ; 1 Cor. 
 iii. 2 ; Eph. iv. 27 ; Rev. xii. 8 ; xx. 4, etc. Where it occurs, we 
 must of necessity supply an additional ovre after the first negative, as 
 in Rev. v. 4 ofiSels a^to? evpedrj avoi^ai to fti/SXlov ovt€ J3\e7reiv avro 
 where the parallel denial of both clauses (dvoT^at . . . ^X-i-n-eLv) is evident, 
 and so an ovre is to be supplied before avol^ai. Hence in vs. 3 also 
 ovre is to be read with Lchm.[T.Tr. Sin.] before /3X«reiv, inasmuch as 
 it is only in this way that the two members dvoi^at . . . ^SXc'ttViv separate 
 themselves perspicuously and plainly from the preceding ov8i . . . oiSe.' 
 
 1 Where it is not possible to supply an oSte, the first (simple) negative must 
 directly take the place of oi/re or |U^t€ (cf. Klotz ad Devar. II p. 709). This 
 case, however, occurs only extremely seldom, and is in every instance accompanied 
 by considerable variation in the MSS., and consequently in the editions also. Thus, 
 in the above passage from Mark (xiv. 68), Tdf. in hi'i 7th ed. reads ovk oiSa oSre 
 eVIffTofiai, but in his 8th ed. oire . . . oire again after codd. Vat. and Sin. ; the 
 reading of cod. B in Luke vii. 33 (^J) . . . |iii)Te) is not adopted ; and in Rev. ix. '20 
 (where Lchm. [so Treg.] reads oSTe lUTevi-qaav) , Tdf. [cds. 2, 7] has restored the 
 correct reading ov fierev. (for which it would be still better to read [so T.] with cod. 
 SinT ouSe) Jas. iii. 12 has been corrupted (see Lchm. 1. prsef. p. xliv). But when 
 o\iS4 (foiSe] is followed by an oBtc (/i-(JTe), the ovS4 negatives (and connects) 
 the enCre sentence, and before the first predicate or mem) ?r an oi/re is to be 
 supplied, as in the above passages (cf. Hartung I. p. 201). Thus Gal. i. 12 Tdf. 
 ouSe 700 fyd) irapa av8pd}irov (sc. o^t^) irapeKa^oy avrh oijrt eSibax^V^' In Acts 
 xxiii. 8, with the reading liTiSe dyyeKov ixi]Ti Tri/fii^o (so Tdf. eds. 2, 7, yet see 
 above) the two notions &yye\ov and irceS/ua arc combined into a single main 
 idea (in connection with which the omission of ifl\Te before &yyiKov was very 
 
368 PARTICLES. [§ l-t9. 
 
 c) If the second or any following member is positive, ovn 
 (/liJ^Tfi) ... re is used (as in Latin neque . . . ef) according tc 
 the grammatical rule ; as, 
 
 Acts xxvii. 20 /a-^te ■qX.lov fj-riTe aarpm' . . . x«'/*'i>''os re etc. Some- 
 times we find the less classic combination (see Klotz ad Devar. II. 
 p. 714; App. B.C. 1,29; Jos. B. J. 1, 13, 6; 2, 18, 5) ovre ... Kai, 
 3 John 10 ovT€ avTos iTrt.Si)(eTai tovs dSeXc^oiis Kai . . . KO}\vei Kai . . . 
 tKjSaXXei, John iv. 11 ovre avrX-qixa e^sis Kai to cjjpiap eoriV ^aOv. 
 
 d) From this last-named construction we must carefully 
 distinguish the usage according to which tcai stands after a 
 simple negative Qov, firj, — but also after ouSet'?, infjiroTe, fjirjTra)<i, 
 etc.) and connects the following clause so closely with the 
 preceding clause (already negatived) that it is brought with 
 the latter under the influence of the same negative, so that 
 
 316 KaL then takes completely the place of the ovhk (/i^jSe) used by 
 the Greeks under such circumstances. 
 
 See Matt. x. 38 ; vii. 6 ; xiii. 15 ; x. 26 ; Luke xii. 2, 58 ; John xii. 
 40 ; 1 Thess. iii. 5 ; Heb. xii. 15 ; Rev. vi. 6, etc. 
 
 When the second clause with Kai is affirmative, the clauses do 
 not belong directly together, and accordingly it is better to separate 
 them by one of the larger punctuation marks ; as, Heb. xii. 5 ; Rev. 
 xii. 8, 9. Cf. e). 
 
 e) On the other hand, if after a preceding affirmative 
 clause the following clause uniting with it to form a single 
 thought is to be negatived, only Kai ov, Kai /xj; can be 
 employed, since ovSi (meaning and nof) and oihe uniformly 
 assume an antecedent negation. And here it is to be noticed, 
 that this combination is introduced when the antithesis is the 
 strongest (just because the antithesis is contained in the neg- 
 ative) ; the weaker contrast, on the contrary, is given by dX)C 
 ov, aWa fir], because aSXd, on the other hand, is the particle 
 which acquires the sharpest adversative force (but, Germ. 
 
 natural) and constitute by virtue of the negative ii-qSi the continuation of the 
 first (/u^ ilvai hvAtnaaiv) ; so that then the ri. aiicpSrepa following can congrji- 
 ously refer back to the two main ideas (resurrection and belief in spirits) thus 
 separated. But in 1 Thess. ii. 3 the double ovS4 is decidedly to be preferred, with 
 Lehm. [Treg. Tdf cod. Sin.]. The combination oite . . . ovSe (see Klotz I.e. 
 p. 714) is anacoluthic, like /jiev . . . Kai and the like, and does not ocour in the 
 N. T. except once in Acts ii. 31 cod. Vat. (not Sin.). But after a double oH-re . . . 
 oire the negative oliSe (i.e. and not or not even) can very well make its appearance 
 again in continuation of the sentence thus negatived; as, Luke xx. 35 Lchm, 
 [Treg.], Acts xxiv. 13 Lchm. [Tdf. cod. S:n.]. On this cf. f) below. 
 
§149.] oi&i; AXXd. 369 
 
 sondei-Ti) after a preceding negative clause, inasmuch as it 
 introduces the following affirmative and sets it over against 
 the negative. 
 
 Examples are very frequent : John i. 20 wixoXoyquiv xai ovk -^pv^a-aTo, 
 Luke i. 20 Icttj (tuottSiv koI fji,rj Sura/xevos kaX^crai, Rom. xii. 14 eiXoyeZre 
 KCLL /jLTj Karapaa-Oe, Matt. XXV. 42-44; xi. 17 ; xiii. 17 ; xxii. 3 ; xxiii. 
 3 ; John i. 5, 10, 11 ; iii. 10, 11, 12, 20; Luke iii. 8 ; vi. 37 etc., Rom. 
 ill. 8; iv. 19 etc., Jas. i. 22, etc. — examples of dXX' oi, John iii. 8 
 TO TTvev/xa irvei . . . dW ovk olSas Tr66ev ep^erat etc., xiii. 10 v/xus KaOapoC 
 €i7T£, dW ov)(i Travres etc. 
 
 But when koI ov or koX /a^ is introduced after a negatived sentence, 
 the two sentences do not stand in a corresponsive relation, but are 
 to be regarded more as independent sentences or clauses ; as. Matt. 
 XV. 32; Luke xii. 29; xviii. 2," etc. Cf. d). 
 
 f) When a single ovBi (as a rule in the midst of a 
 sentence and without a preceding negative) contains an 
 emphatic denial of the notion with which it is connected, 
 it means not even (ne . . . quidem) ; as, Matt. vi. 29 ; Luke 
 vii. 9 ; Acts xix. 2 ; 1 Cor. iii. 2 ; v. 1, etc. 
 
 Even after an antecedent negative it is possible to use this oiSe 
 if no ambiguity arises, since similar negatives when multiplied do not 
 destroy each other ; as, Luke xviii. 13 oi/c rjOikev oiSe roi/s 6(j>daXp,ovi 
 €TTapai. But whether in deteriorating Greek ovte is used, through 
 negligence, instead of-this oiSe, is a question that needs further investi- 
 gation ; the Mss. of the N. T. often exhibit it instead of oiSe, and Tdf. 
 has now adopted it several times into the text (see Luke xii. 26 [ed. 
 7 ; ed. 8 oiSe, with Lchm. Treg. cod. Sin.], xx. 36 [so cod. Sin.J, Mark 
 iii. 20 [so cod. Sin.], and cf. v. 3 var., Theophilus ad Autol. 3. 29 ; 
 Achil. Tat. 10. 20). 
 
 B.§149,m.l6; H. § 868; C.§701b.N.; D. §548(1); J. § 773. 
 
 'AA,Xa. As eirel, according to no. 5 above p. 359, sometimes has the 14 
 signification for otherwise, so aXkd. in John xiii. 10 ovk ex^i xp^iav r/ 
 Tov'S iro'Sas v^/aaOai, aX\' ea-Tiv KaOapo^ oXos means but otherwise. The 317 
 special sense of ov (p-rj) . . . dXA.a has already been discussed § 148, 14 
 p. 355. The combination ov yap d\Xa (no ; but etc.) occurs in Acts 
 xvi. 37. On the elliptical dXAd after negative sentences see § 151, 
 23 c) p. 392. 
 
 In the combination of particles ov jxovov . . . aXKa Kai, the 
 Kai (as is the case with etiam in Latin) is sometimes omitted, 
 and in this way the equipoise of the members is destroyed and 
 
 47 
 
370 PARTICLES. [§ l*a 
 
 the emphasis falls on the second part; (see Klotz ad Devar. 
 II. p. 10). 
 
 This relation of the two parts of the sentence is plainly indicate(? 
 by the adjunct iroXu /xaXAov in Phil. ii. 12 ; but it is evident also with- 
 out any adjunct, as Acts xix. 26 Tdf. [Treg. cod. Sin.] ov fiovov 'E<^eo-o-u 
 aXka o-xcSoi/ 7rd(rrj<; 'Acrias (where the addition of Kai is very probably 
 chargeable to the emendation of copyists), 1 John v. 6 ovk iv tu vSari 
 ULovov, dAA.' iv Tu vSaTL KM iv TO) aijaari. On the elliptical ov //.ovov Se 
 see § 151, 23 f) p. 293. 
 
 B.§149,m.l7; H.§870; C.§§701j.; TOSo.e.; D.§618; J. §§ 786,- 8721. 
 
 15 Tap. An example from the N. T. of yap in direct question 
 (then) is John vii. 41 jjJij yap iK Tq% VaXikaia^ 6 Xpicrros ipx^Tai; so 
 often after strict interrogatives, as rt yap Matt, xxvii. 23 ; ttSs yap 
 Acts viii. 31, etc. To the elliptical use of yap (as it occurs so 
 often in Greek authors, see the Grammars) many passages belong, 
 (see the same in Wahl sub voce); as. Acts xxii. 26; 2 Cor. ii. 17 ; 
 Jas. iv. 14 Tdf. [Treg. J. 
 
 B. §149, m. 18; H. §866; C. §686e.; D. p.671; J. § 737. 
 
 16 Ovv. The particle ovv, which in general likes to append 
 itself to other words, appears very often so closely connected 
 with fjbev as to blend with it, as it were, into a single particle. 
 If now (as happens most frequently by far), no Si answers to 
 this fiev oZv, the fiev is not the corresponsive particle but a 
 shorter form of fiijv (as in fjuevToi) ; hence in Greek authors 
 the confirmatory combinations irdvv fiev oiiv, KOfuSlj fiev ovv 
 (see Hartung II. p. 393). This fiev olv is a favorite particle 
 in transitions ; and even when subsequently a clause with he 
 follows, this clause by no means always stands in a corresponsive 
 relation to the preceding, but simply continues the narration. 
 
 Luke often uses fiXv oSi/'in this genuine classic way, particularly in 
 the Acts (see Wahl). In the Gospel, on the other hand, it appears 
 very rarely ; so too in the other Gospels, (in Matt, not at all, in Mark 
 doubtful). In the Epistles, too, it is often employed in the conclusion 
 as a , strengthened ovv and without a following 8e.' Among the ex- 
 amples see especially Acts i. 18 ; xvii. 30 ; xxiii. 22 ; xxvi. 4, 9 ; Rom. 
 xi. 13 Lchm. [Tdf. cod. Sin.], 1 Cor. vi. 4, 7 ; Phil. iii. 8 (dUu. it-h 
 ovv), Heb. vii. 11 ; ix. 1. 
 318 To fxh/ dvv, become thus a single particle, the particle yf. is some- 
 
 1 On the other hand, the fuv Si) so often used in argument by Greek authors in 
 the same sense, and without Se, nowhere appears. 
 
§149.] (levoCvYe; v^; dpa. 371 
 
 times appended for still greater unity: ij,ev ovvye. This contains a 
 correction of the preceding thought, and, at the same time, a con- 
 firmation of the following, but with a certain ironical tone : immo vera, 
 yea verily. But the fdacing of this compound particle at the 
 beginning of the sentence is quite unclassical (hence censured 
 . severely by Phrynichus p. 342 [ed. Lob.], and perhaps peculiar to the 
 Alex, dialect only, cf. Sturz, Dial. Alex. p. 2(53) : Luke xi. 28 ; Rom. 
 ix. 20 ; X. 18. 
 
 5. pa, ovKovv. On the interrogative S,pa, and the other N. T. in- 
 terrogatives, see § 139, 55 p. 247 ; and on ovkovv (then, therefore, ergo) 
 ibid. p. 249. 
 
 B. §149, m. 23; H. §852, 14; C. § 476 d. sq. ; D. p.570; J. §733. 
 
 The particle of swearing vrj occurs but once, and then in Greek 17 
 fashion with the Ace. : 1 Cor. xv. 31. In another passage (ix. 15) it 
 is a conjecture of Lachmann's (II. prsef. p. xii.). 
 
 B. §149, m. 26; H. §865; C:.§685c.; D. §§548(4); 604; J.§789; W. p. 444 sq. (414) ; 
 
 S. p. xcvi. jj 
 
 "A p a. The question whether the conclusive particle %pa can 
 begin a sentence, whether it then should be written apa or apa 
 (cf. § 139, 55 p. 247), does not affect — at least as a question — 
 the N. T. For although apa is often placed after some other 
 word or words, yet its standing first in this form (cf. the Lat. 
 'igitur^ is no longer a subject of doubt, indeed, is already in 
 such general use that even Luke and the author of the Bp. to 
 the Heb. no longer take offence at it. 
 
 Examples of this use, especially at the beginning of an apodosis, 
 are. Matt. xii. 28 ; Luke xi. 20, 48 ; 1 Cor. xv. 18 ; 2 Cor. v. 15 ; Heb. 
 iv. 9 ; xii. 8, etc. Peculiar to P a u 1 is apa strengthened by ovv : apa 
 ovv (never with the accent thrown back), in which strengthened form 
 it is found standing only in the first place ; as, Eom. v. 18 ; vii. 3, 25 
 etc., Gal. vi. 10 ; Eph. ii. 19 ; 1 Tliess. v. 6 ; 2 Thess. ii. 15.' Another 
 extension of the particle takes place by means of -ye, rather in a re- 
 strictive sense, — standing first: Matt. vii. 20; xvii. 26; Acts xi. 18 
 Tdf. [ed. 8 drops ye, with Lchm. Treg. cod. Sin. J ; following: Acts 
 xvii. 27 (see § 139, 62 p. 256). It is the uniform and settled practice 
 
 1 The same combination of particles occurs likewise at the beginning of 'sen- 
 tences (but written Sp' olv) often in the best prose writers, and in sentences which 
 contain no question ; as, Plato, Gorg. p. 450 c. 477 a. ; Charm. 159 b. ; Euthyph. 
 p. 5a.; Prot. p. 313c.; Xen. Cyr. 4, 3, 8, etc. Although the form of an inter- 
 rogation may underlie such sentences, yet perhaps, considering the original identity 
 of the two particles (cf. Klotz ad Devar. II. p. 167), it is preferable oven here to 
 write &p' olv in order to distinguish them from actual questions with Sp' oh 
 (Theaet. p. 188 a. c. ; Gorg. 449 e'., etc.). 
 
872 PARTICLES. [§150 
 
 in the N. T. to write Spa in the conclusive sense, and S.pa in the 
 interrogative. 
 
 B.§149,m.2T! H.§867,4i C.§720; D.p.572i J. § 790. 
 
 19 Tot. The particle toIvvv stands second, as in Greek authors, in 
 
 1 Cor. ix. 26; first, in Heb. xiii. 13, and doubtfully [yef Tdf. Treg. 
 cod. Sin. first] in Luke xx. 25. Lob. ad Phryn. p. 342 adduces several 
 examples of this later usage. 
 
 B. §150, m. 4; H. §848 0.; C. §717g.; D. pp. 571, 578; J. §§762,2; 891,5b. 
 
 1 Ovx 07 1. In the N.T. also there is an elliptical combination 
 oiix OTL, but it differs -wholly both as respects origin and sig- 
 319 nification from the combination in use . by classic writers 
 (especially Plato). For whereas the classic phrase assumes 
 in every case a negative notion, like it makes no difficulty that 
 etc. (hence its predicate is to be taken again in a positive 
 sense, and ov% ort to be translated although, quamquam, e.g. 
 Plat. Prot. p. 336 JitoKpdrr) eyyvoofiai f^rj iirCKriaeadai,, oii'X^ on 
 -rrai^ei Kai ^ijcrtv eTriK.rj(Tfjbmv elvai), with ovp^; on in the N. T. 
 a positive notion, like I do not mean to say that etc., must be 
 supplied ; so that the predicate belonging to ol/% on is sharply 
 negatived, and receives in the clause following with aXXd, 
 Se, el ^rj its positive antithesis. 
 
 For example, John vi. 46 oi;)^ on tov iraripa iiipaKev rts et jxi] 6 lov 
 irapa rov 6eov, outos eti>paK€v toj/ -iraripa, vii. 22 ; 2 Cor. i. 24; iii. 
 .5; Phil. iii. 12; iv. 17 ov^ on ctti^ij™ to So/xa, aXKa hnipr]Tu> etc., 
 
 2 Thess. iii. 9. The same ellipsis underlies all passages, and hence 
 must be applied also to Phil. iv. 11 : oi;)^ on kciO va-rip-qa-w Aeyiu, literally 
 I do not mean to say that I make this declaration in consideration of 
 my straitened condition i.e. briefly / da not say this etc. 
 
 Kemaek. The ellipsis in ovx olov on, in Eom. ix. 6 ovx oTov Bi 
 on £K7r£7rTu)/cev o Xdyos ToC 6eov, is more difficult. In default of parallel 
 instances in the N. T. (the numerous passages, too, quoted by Wetstein 
 from classic writers are essentially different), the force of this com- 
 bination of particles must be derived solely from the context. As 
 commonly in such cases, many different interpretations have been 
 brought forward ; see the commentaries. Among them all, the most 
 probable assumption seems to be this : that the phrase arose from 
 blending two formulas (see Meyer and Fritzsche in loc), viz. ovx """' 
 followed by a finite verb, and the above ovx °'-'* ^^^ ^^^^ "^X ""^^^ 
 again, is not to be identified with the ovx °^°^ "^^^^ ^^ the classics 
 instead of ovx ottws in the sense of not only not (see B. m. 2), but is 
 
§150.] 8<ros; awos. 373 
 
 without doubt the one sharply censured by Phrynithus p. 372 as a 
 solecism {iv rfj ^/AeSaTrjJ ; Phrynichus was an Asiatic) and explained 
 by ov SijTOD, firj 8qirov (by no means). This signification, united to 
 that of ovx oTi given above, gives as the meaning of the passage from 
 Paul, hy no means do I intend (vss. 1—4) to say, that God's 
 word has come to naught etc. 
 
 B. § IBO^m. 8 ; C. § B56 d. ; J. § 816, 3 e. 
 
 tr o s. Perhaps in imitation of the expression chosen by the LXX i 
 in Isa. xxvi. 20 {ajToKfyi^TqOi. fjiiKpov ocrov ocrov), we find the same turn 
 in Heb. x. 37 In yap fitKpov ocrov ocrov 6 ep^d/ievos rj^ei kol ov )(povieL 
 (the second part, too, an imitation of Hab. ii. 3). This idiom is also 
 not without parallels in Greek authors (Ar. Vesp. 213 rt ovk dTrcKot/iij- 
 6rifJi.ev ocrov ocrov crnkrjv, Arrian. Ind. 29. 15 oAtyot 8e avrSiv crvupovcriv 
 ocrov [oxrov] t^s x'^PV^)- Id the passage before us an ellipsis of the 
 predicate etvai is commonly assumed, so that with 6 ipxop.evo's the 
 conclusion may be said to begin. Yet in view of the above parallels, 
 and of the single p-iKpov or okiyov ocrov used in the same way (see 
 "Wetstein in loc), it is probably better to put no stop after oo-oi', but 320 
 to connect the expression immediately with ijfet as an adverbial 
 adjunct. Compare here the observation made in connection with the 
 constructions of iyivero (§ 141, 6, b) p. 277), that when such a con- 
 sequent clause begins without xat, the predicate is wont to stand 
 before the subject. Accordingly, since the subject stands first here, 
 in case the second clause were to be taken as a conclusion an additional 
 Kai would probably have stood before it ; just as is the fact in John 
 xiv. 19 en jxiKpov, xai o Kocrp.oi fie oiiKen Oewpel, xvi. 16 p,iKpuv /cai 
 ou OeatpeiTi fue, where the second clause is necessarily taken as a 
 conclusion. 
 
 B. § 150, m. 12 ; H. 538 e. ; C. § 667 e. ; J. 5 714 Ob3. 2. 
 
 aXXos. To the familiar use of aXXos with objects of a different 3 
 kind (ai/Spes koI at aXXai yvvaiKes), Luke xxixi. 32 rjyovTo koX Ircpoi 
 8vo KaKovpyoi crvv avTw avaipeOrjvai has been compared. But the 
 passage does not present a grammatical parallel, since a reporter 
 in the strict spirit of the law could hardly express himself otherwise 
 under the circumstances. Moreover, the hearer's feelings, injured 
 possibly by the expression, are straightway appeased by the words in 
 the following verse (iaravpacrav avrov koI tovs KaKovpyov^). On the 
 recourse that has been had to the same idiom to explain hepov in Gal. 
 i. 1 9 (erepov Se tSiv airocTToXurv ovk eTSov ci /xij laKia^ov Tov dSfXi^ov tov 
 Kvpiov), out of immoderate solicitude respecting the facts of history, 
 see the recent commentaries, and cf. Luke x. 1. 
 
374 dX\' 4i ■ u + en. v; Iv Tots; opgdlievos. [§ IStt 
 
 B. § 150, m. 13 ; H. § 863 o. ; C. § 701 m. and N. j J. § 773, 5. 
 
 4 a\X' ij. Not only is there an example in the N. T. — Luke xii. 51 
 ovxj. Xeyai vfiiv, aXX' ^ (sc. Trapeyevofuriv Sovvai) 8ta/iepicr/AoV — of the 
 ordinary use of aJOC ^ (nisi, vnless, except), h\it also of the less usual 
 (cf. B. p. 441 note) where in the preceding clause another and ad- 
 ditional oAXos is expressed; as, 2 Cor. i. 13 ov yap a. XX a ypac^o^tv 
 viuv, aXX' rj a avayivuxTKire etc. But in 1 Cor. iii. 6 diplomatic 
 authority [cod. Sin. also] is opposed to the adoption of aXX' tj. 
 
 B. §150, m. 20; H. §721b.; C. §638g.; D. §517; J. § 856 Ob s. 2. 
 
 5 (u^eXov. This word, in the form o4>£Xov, has become in later 
 writers and the N. T. completely an unchangeable conjunction. On 
 its construction see § 139, 9 and 10 p. 214 sq. ' 
 
 B. §150, m. 24; H. §627; C. §512b.; D. p.396; J. §4M0bs. 5. 
 
 6 ev Tot9. Just as this phrase, as a general neuter expression, is 
 connected immediately with Feminines, so the same thing is done 
 with the (partitive) Genitive TravTuiv, as in Thuc. 4. 52 ras re 
 SXXa% TrdXets xal 7rai/Tu)v /jLaXuTTa rrjv 'AvravSpov. Other instances of 
 the sort in classic writers may be seen in Dorville ad Charit. p. 549 
 (571). Here belongs from the N. T. Mark xii. 28 wola ia-rlv Trptinj 
 TrdvTiav IvToX-q (Rec. iracraii') ; but in Luke xix. 37 the reading of cod. 
 Vat., adopted by Lchm. [Treg.], trtpX wavTw &v elSov Swa/Attov, is not 
 confirmed by cod. Sin. 
 
 On the periphrasis ol irepi rii/a see § 125, 8 p. 95. 
 
 B. § 160, m. 31 ; J. § 696 Obs. 1 ; W. p. 621 (577) ; p. 683 (588). 
 
 7 ap^dfievoi. By a very natural and easily intelligible brevity 
 of expression, this Participle is often joined not only to the 
 adverbial adjunct belonging to the idea of commencement 
 (aTTo), but at the same time also to that of the goal (eo)?) ; 
 
 . as, Matt. XX. 8 (aTroSo?) ap^dfj-evo^ dirb rSiv ia-'^^aTeov eeu? ruv 
 
 irpcoraiv, Luke xxiii. 5 ; (John viii. 9) ; Acts i. 22. So, too, 
 
 with the finite verb ijp^aTo, Acts 1. 1. Another and similar 
 
 321 kind of logically inaccurate expression is Luke xxiv. 27 
 
 dp^afjievo'i wro M.cevaio}'; Koi dirb irdvTuv twv TrpocpTjTMV. 
 
 On the other hand, Luke xxiv. 47 Lchm. (yiypawraL) KripvxOrjvai . . . 
 ixera-vouiv Kai a<^i<riv ajxapTimi ets Traira ra Wvq, ap^d/jLevov am 
 'lepovcraXrjix. If this reading is genuine, and we should apply to it for sub- 
 stance the idiom treated of in B. I.e., we should get the following sense, 
 which suits the passage perfectly : that repentance and forgiveness he 
 preached among all nations, before all, or first of all, in 
 Jerusalem. But the rule that ap^d,[ji,evoi must always agree in form 
 
§150.] iflativ. 375 
 
 with the subject of the sentence would in that case be disregarded 
 here, where fierdvoiav and a<j>€(nv are subject. Yet it is not improbable 
 that this participle — which in this signification is added as a kind of 
 adverbial adjunct to the main predicate, so that even the grammatically 
 correct case in passages from classic authors is somewhat surprising 
 (see the examples in the Gramm.) — was, by frequent use, at length 
 changed into an adverb, and hence assumed the form which in such 
 cases first offered itself, viz. the Neuter (cf. rvxov § 145, 8 p. 318). 
 This assumption has so much the more in its favor here, as , by 
 substituting any other termination of the word we should encounter 
 still greater grammatical incongruities. The rarity of the expression, 
 which occurs only here in this sense, produced many variants. Among 
 them that of cod. Vat. ap^dfjievoi,, adopted by Tdf. [Treg.], deserves 
 most consideration — (instead of it Tdf. in his ed. 7 read -vov again, 
 but in ed. 8 he has with cod. Sin. restored -voi, again) — and is to 
 be explained as an absol. Partic. referring to idvrj, according to § 123, 
 5 p. 78 and § 129, 8 b) p. 130. 
 
 B. §150, m. 86: C. §598. 
 
 'E6i\eiv. Since the trisyllabic form of this verb — which 
 in Greek authors when joined with an Infin. often serves as a 
 periphrasis for the adverb (^willingly, voluntarily) with a finite 
 verb — does not occur in the N. T. (p. 57), the attempt has 
 sometimes been made tliere to extend the same mode of inter- 
 pretation to deXeiv. 
 
 The chief demand for this extension is presented by John vi. 21 
 {rjOiXov ovv XajSeii/ etc.), partly in view of the representation made by 
 Matt, and Mark, partly because if the matter stopped with mere 
 willing, the narrative seems defective and incomplete. But, on the 
 other hand, the interpretation they did it willingly does not cor- 
 respond with the preceding iipo/3-^6rjaav ; for this leads us to expect 
 the idea of emboldened, joyful, which does not lie in ^deXov. Correctly, 
 therefore,, has Liicke acknowledged a diversity in the narrative of 
 John (a diversity which may be detected here in other particulars 
 also), and taken OiXew in its proper signification; which it has, more- 
 over, in all the other passages that have been brought under this 
 head. For everywhere the rendering ' to like, be inclined, to do,' is 
 perfectly sufficient, as in John viii. 44; Mark xii. 38 where Trepnrarelv 
 is the simple object of OeXeiv like the following aa-iraa-fji.ov's etc., Luke 
 XX. 46 where OeXovrmv corresponds to the synonymous ^iXovvtwv that 
 follows. 
 
 Rbmakk. The case is different with the Participle OeXav when 
 it is used absolutely (i.e. without an Infin. following) referring to a 
 
376 ATTRACTION. [§151. 
 
 noun, and the Infln. of the verb which is the predicate in the sentence 
 322 must be supplied (cf. § 151, 23 b) p. 392). In this way arises a sig- 
 nification of OiKiav which we, if we choose to express ourselves in the 
 same brief manner, best reproduce by the adverb purposely; as, 
 2 Pet. iii. 5 XavOavu airovs rovTO ^eXovras (sc. tovto avTow XavOdvcLv) 
 they purposely know not i.e. they choose not to know, Col. ii. 18 />iij8eis 
 v/ioii KaTaPpa/ieviru) OeXmv (so. KaraySpayScuciv v/iSs) iv TaiTUVO<l>po<Tvvrj 
 etc. Yet in both passages various other interpretations have been 
 attempted (see the Commentaries); and .in the latter passage, especially, 
 reference has been made to the usage of the LXX. who are ac- 
 customed to render the Hebrew a ysn by Oikav iv rwi (e.g. 1 Sam. 
 xviii. 22; 2 Sajn. xv. 26; 1 Kings x.'9; 2 Chron. ix. 8). But the 
 absence of other precedents for this use of OiXav in the N. T., as well 
 as the circumstance that the Dative with Iv in the O. T. is always 
 personal (iv croC), restricts us to the first interpretation. 
 
 CEETAIN PECULIAR KINDS OF CONSTEUCTION. 
 
 I. Attkaction. 
 
 B.§151,1.6; J.§893,2; W. pp. 626sq.(681sq.). 
 
 1 To facilitate a survey of the subject, we discuss fully in this 
 place a syntactic phenomenon which reappears in many kinds 
 of sentences, .viz. the practice, very common in Greek, of sub- 
 joining the subject of a dependent declarative sentence to 
 the main predicate to be governed as an object. By this 
 means the great advantage accrues, that the two sentences can 
 be melted in this way in substance and in form completely 
 into one sentence.^ As the subject is rendered sufficiently 
 familiar by the general grammars, we will content ourselves 
 here with a classification of the numerous examples in the 
 N. T. The construction occurs 
 
 a) In sentences with ort, after verba dioendi, sentiendi, etc., very 
 often in all parts of the N. T. ; as. Matt. xxv. 24 tyvtav ere on o-(tA.i;/3os 
 et avdpiDTTO'S, 1 Cor. xvi. 15 otSare ttjv o'lKiav XrecfiavS,, on Io'tIv airap)^^ 
 etc., John viii. 54 ov v^fts Xeyere on 6w ■rjjji.uiv io-riv, iv. 35 ; ix. 19 ; 
 V. 42; Mark xii. 34; Acts iii. 10; iv. 13; xiii. 32; 1 Cor. iii. 20; 
 Eev. xvii. 8, etc. ; also after £;(eiv in the sense of to hold for, regard as, 
 Mark xi. 32 ^Lypv rov 'luidvvrjv ovtcos on Trpo^ijrijs '^v. For emphasis' 
 sake the sulpject may be repeated in the subordinate clause by 
 means of the Demonst. Pron. ovtos (not a^ros, cf. § 144, 21 p. 306), 
 Acts ix. 20 kKYiprutra-tv toj. l-qcrovv on. oStos ia-nv 6 uios tov 6iov. If 
 
 1 Hence it is an erroneous practice to separate by punctuation marks, out of 
 regard for our style of expression, what the language so evidently combines into 
 one whole. 
 
§ 151.] ATTE ACTION. 377 
 
 the predicate is a Passive, the Nominative is used with it, i.e. fhe 323 
 personal construction is introduced, though instances of this 
 are very rare in the N. T. : 1 Cor. xv. 12 ei Xpto-Tos Kr^pvacrerai ex 
 veKpwv OTt ly-ff^epTOX. 
 
 b) In indirect questions after the same verbs ; as, Mark i. 
 24; Luke iv. 34 olSa o-e tU cT, Acts xv. 36 iTrurKeij/ii/JieOa tous aSeXcftovi 
 Trios cxova-iv, John vii. 27 ; xiii. 28 ; Luke xix. 3 ; cf. the examples in 
 § 139, 57 B. p. 250. That in 2 Cor. xiii. 5 (iavrovs ireipdlere, d eo-re 
 (V T-fj TTifTTEi) the clauses are rather to be construed separately, is 
 shown by the antecedent position of eauTow's, so that eavrovs is simply 
 the object of ireipd^cre, just as iavrovg BoKifxa^eTe. 
 
 c) Rarely in sentences with Iva, when according to N. T. usage 
 after certain predicates (§ 139, 43 p. 238) it takes the place of the 
 Infinitive elsewhere in use, as Rev. iii. 9 iroi^o-w airoiis tva ^^ovtriv koI 
 irpo!TKwrj<Tov(Tiv . . . Kcu yvuicriv etc. ; and with jxr) in sentences ex- 
 pressing anxiety, as Acts v. 26; Gal. iv. 11, on both which passages 
 see § 139, 48 p. 242. That Gal. vi. 1 (cr/con-tiiv creavrov, fi-q koj. (TV 
 ■n-eLpaa-Ofji) cannot be brought under this head, follows from the rep- 
 etition of the subject (o-u), and from the signification of the verb 
 (TKon-etv; on it see § 139, 49 p. 243. 
 
 d) In the spirit of this construction, John, in chap. i. 15, instead 
 of using a dependent clause (with on or in the Infin.), follows at once 
 with the direct discourse (on this cf. especially John x. 36 and 
 the other similar instances in § 141, 1 p. 272) : oStos ^v ov etirov 6 
 OTTtcro) [jLov kp-)(6ix.a/o<s ifi-irpoaBiv fiov yiyovev, for which subsequently 
 (vs. 30) the other and ordinary construction appears: vvkp ov eittov 
 OTTiorii) juou tp\eTai etc. 
 
 B. § 151, r. 8 ; H. § cf. 811 a. ; C. cf. §§ 654 d. ; 704 b. ; J. § 647 Obs. 1 ; W. p. 629 (684). 
 
 Of that species of attraction, so common in the classics, 2 
 according to which adverbial adjuncts when they belong to a 
 noun in the sentence, and especially to the article taking the 
 place of a substantive, are attracted by the verb of the 
 sentence (e.g. 6 sKeldev iroKe/jiO'; Sevpo ij^ei the war thence 
 (there) will come hither'), there are several plain instances in 
 the N. T. Those which there is adequate reason for bringing 
 under this head (for too many have been brought under it, 
 cf. p. 70 sq.) are reducible to the two leading classes following: 
 
 a) a reference to the question where is changed into one 
 to the question whence; as, 
 
 Luke xi. 13 o Tarrjp 6 ii ovpavov Sderii irvevfx.a aytov tois alrovcriv 
 avTov, Acts XV. 38 rjitov, tov djroorai'Ta dir' airlov airb Ila/x^uXias km 
 
 48 
 
378 . ANACOLUTHON. [§ 151. 
 
 /x^ wvikBovra. . . . /jlt] (rvfi.vapa\afij3aveiv tovtov (where the interpreta- 
 tion away from Pamphylia appears forced), Matt. xxiv. 17 firj Kara^aro} 
 apat TO. iK rrji; oiKi'as avTov (on the other hand, Mark, avoiding the 
 attraction, appii n Ik t^s otKt'as avTov). Col. iv. 16 is to be regarded 
 rather as a species of brachylogy : rrjv Ik AaoSiKtias (sc. eirtcrToXijv) iva 
 Kcu. vfiii^ avayvSiTi i.e. (according to the understanding of almost all 
 recent expositors) my letter which is now in Laodicea and is to 
 reach you from thence. But the following cases positively do not 
 belong here : Luke xvi. 26 Tdf. ottois oi $iXovT€? Sia^^vai ivOev 7r/aos 
 v/iSs fj-r) SwojVTat, /xrySe oi iKcWev (sc. OeXovre^ StaySiJvat) irpos ij/xas 
 SiaTrepSxTiv, Heb. xiii. 24 aavd^ovTai v/j.a.'S ol am rijs 'iTaXta? with which 
 324 may be compared Phil. iv. 22 dcrir. ol e/c t^s Kaicrapos olkm^ (§ 125, 9 
 p. 95). In Acts xiv. 26 also oOev has its proper force, and the kind 
 of attraction occurring in Matt. xxv. 24, 26 has already been treated 
 of§ 143, 12 p. 287 sq. 
 
 b) a reference to the question where is changed into one 
 to the question whither. 
 
 The instances belonging here (TrScriv tow cis jxaKpav Acts ii. 39, tois 
 CIS Tov oIkov /jtov Luke ix. 61, 6 eU tov ay p6v Mark xiii. 16) have 
 already found their place and explanation § 147, 15 p. 332, and 18 
 p. 333. Acts xxii. 5 (^a^mv koI toiis eKcIo-c ovras) perhaps may also be 
 brought under this head. Yet it is far more probable that cKeio-c here 
 stands directly for e/cet, agreeably to the interchange so often occurring 
 with local adverbs (cf. p. 70 sq.) ; it is used in this way not only 
 often in the Apocrypha, but also in Greek writers e.g. Polybius, Dio 
 Cassius, Themistius, see Lob. ad Phryn. p. 44 ; Steph. Thes. sub voce. 
 The same thing early took place with the local adv. £to-u> (eo-w), see 
 Pape, Steph., and Lob. p. 127 ; just as, on the other hand, c/cci and 
 ivSov answer to the question whither. Examples of etrw in the 
 relation of rest are Eom. vii. 22 ; 1 Cor. v. 12 ; 2 Cor. iv. 16 Lchm. 
 [Treg. Tdf cod. Sin.], Eph. iii. 16, with which are to be compared 
 John XX. 26 (with etmi), Acts v. 23 (with evpo/xev sc. ovto). 
 
 II. Anacoluthon. • 
 B.p.448(524)j H.§886; C. (of. Ind. sub Terb.)i D.§625; J.§900. 
 
 3 No figure of speech or species of construction (so far as the 
 absence of construction admits of being so called) is more 
 current in popular language than Anacoluthon, — sometimes 
 in the narrower sense, as an incomplete sentence: proper 
 anacoluthon; sometimes in the broader, as an altered 
 structure: variatio structurae. Indeed, we may say that 
 the language of the people, or of an ordinary man, always 
 
§151.] ANACOLUTHON. 879 
 
 abounds more or less in anacoluthon (unconscious and un- 
 designed, to be sure). Hence the great number of anaooluthic 
 thouglits, sentences, periods, in all the writers of the N. T. 
 (even those that write the most correctly), since many construc- 
 tions of the sort had passed over into the Greek literary usage. 
 But we ought to consider only those instances as belonging to 
 a grammatical figure of speech which have actually acquired a 
 certain currency in the language, so that they are re- 
 ])eated, either generally or by particular writers; at least it 
 is only these that are fit to be discussed in a grammar. But 
 all such anacolutha as cannot be regularly classified, — since 
 they are the result of the writer's mood at the moment, and 
 are therefore to be explained exclusively or predominantly by 
 the context in every case, — can be considered only incidentally, 
 and belong strictly, all of them, to exegesis. Many of the 325 
 more common anacolutha, or changes of construction (for we 
 neglect for practical reasons to sepai'ate the two kinds of 
 sentences), have already been treated of in this Grammar in 
 other places ; so that, to avoid repetition, only those instances 
 will receive special consideration which could not easily be 
 disposed of elsewhere. We arrange, then, instances of anaco- 
 luthon under the following heads : 
 
 a. The simplest and most natural anacoluthon is that which 4 
 is known in grammar as the Nominative Absolute in the 
 strict sense (to be distinguished from the participial construc- 
 tion of the same name, § 144, 13 p. 298). It arises from the 
 circumstance, that the speaker or writer begins the sentence 
 with a subject immediately before his mind — whether it be 
 the Nominative of a substantive, or of an adj. or partic. with 
 the article used in its stead, or of a pronoun, — and sub- ' 
 seqtiently allows the sentence to take such a turn, that the 
 idea at the beginning no longer remains the subject, but ought 
 to stand in some one of the oblique cases. It is then a very 
 common practice to leave the Nominative standing at the liead 
 of the sentence (which consequently remains unfinished, strictly 
 speaking), and in the sequel to refer back to it by a Pron oun 
 in the requisite case. 
 
 For example, Acts vii. 40 6 Mcjvcrijs ovtos, os e$^yayev i7ju,as eic 
 y^s AiyvTTTOv, ovk o&afnv tl lyivero air (3, Matt. x. 32 n-Ss ovv oo-rts 
 •>fi,o\ayri(Tii iv ifxoi . . . , o/MoXoyrjcruy /cdyi) £i air^, xii. 36 ttolv pfj/Jia apybv 
 
380 ANACOLUTHON. [§151. 
 
 . . . , aTToSuxrovcriv wepl amov \6yov, John vi. 39 Tva irav, o BiSinKev fx-oi, 
 li.ri a.TroXi<T(o i^ airov (cf. § 127, 32 p. 121 sq.), xvii. 2 iva irai/ o (i.e. 
 irdvT£9 0V5, see § 128, 1 p. 122) Se'ScoKas avrS, Suxrr} avTols etc. ; hence 
 in XV. 2 also (ttSv xX-ij/ia ei- e/iot ^u.-^ ^c'pov Kapirov, alpu avTo) we are to 
 take the words ttcLv KX^/xa not as Accusative but as Nominative, — as 
 their repetition by airo shows. On Eom. ix. 10 (PefSsKKa etc; see 
 below, 23 f) p. 393. So the Participle with the article, as John vii. 38 
 6 TrLcrTfvo)v eh ifii ...» TroTa/xol ck t^s /cotXias avTov pevaovcnv etc., 
 Rev. ii. 26 (o vikCiv . . . SoJo-u avrw), iii. 12, 21 ; cf. 5 following. 
 
 This usage so agrees with the character of the N. T. style, 
 that even when in an inserted subordinate clause the same 
 subject accidentally recurs, we can explain the antecedent 
 Nominative unhesitatingly by this construction, and are under 
 no necessity of construing it into the dependent sentence, and 
 so disturbing the natural sequence of the words. 
 
 326 1 John ii. 27 u/Aeis to p^pta/td, o iXd^ere art avrov, p-evei iv vp-iv. 
 The rhetorical figure is called forth here by the antithesis in which 
 the idea placed first stands to another (viz. rts or ol TrXavSvTcs i;u,as) ; 
 and this is elsewhere rendered evident by the addition of p^iv and Ss, 
 as 1 Cor. xi. 14 dv^p ph>, iav Kop,S,, dri/iia avro) Icttlv, yvvrj Se, iav Kop.a, 
 So'^a avT'y la-Tiv, — yet the position of the words in this passage may 
 also be explained according to 18 below, p. 389. 
 
 Similar is Luke xxi. 6 raura a Oewpeire, iXevcrovrai ■^/lipai cv ats ovk 
 atfieO-qcreTaL Xl9o^ etc., where a general pronoun precedes, and the more 
 definite idea is not stated till afterwards. 
 5 Remark. 1. Numerous instances analogous to the above-given 
 examples may be adduced from other Greek writers, from Homer 
 down (see among others Bhdy. Syntax p. 68). But it seems to be 
 an exception, and in conflict with the genius of the Greek language, 
 when the notion that precedes in the Nominative remains the actual 
 subject in the construction following, and yet an additional backward 
 reference is made by means of the pronoun airos (not ovto?, on 
 which see § 144, 21 p. 306) ; — all the more because this pronoun in 
 the Nom. in native Greek writers has only the more pointed 
 signification self. The example under this head is Luke xiii. 4 IkcZvoi 
 ol 8e'/ca Koi 6ktu>, i<j> oSs • • . , SokeZte on avrol o^eiXe'rai iyevovTO etc., 
 cf. with this the same writer's usage treated of § 127, 9 p. 107. It 
 seems to be exceptional likewise, when the term that precedes stands 
 • in the oblique case suited to the construction that follows, and yet 
 the same case of the pronoun avros recurs as though the Nominative 
 had preceded, — an idiom which occurs repeatedly in the Rev., e.g. 
 ii, 7, 17 TM viKovvTL . . . 8u)o-(o avT^ (cf. the examples of a different kind 
 
§ 151.] ANACOLUTHON. 381 
 
 in 4 p. 380), vi. 4 tu (ca5ij/i€vai . . . eSofiij avrio, but is found elsewhere 
 also, as Matt. iv. 16; v. 40, and has its foundation in the copiousness 
 of the N. T. language as respects the employment of pronouns, which 
 has been often touched upon (see especially § 130, 2 p. 142); cf. 
 besides § 145, 2 p. 315. 
 
 Remark 2. Under the head of Nominative Absolute the two 6 
 passages quoted § 131, 13 b) p. 154 (viz. Rom. viii. 3; Heb. viii. 1) 
 may also be brought. It is true that here, as was before remarked, 
 the Neuter form in both instances makes, it impossible to determine 
 the case positively. Yet, since they likewise stand at the beginning 
 of the sentence, they are rather to be regarded as Nominatives, after 
 the analogy of the examples givep above in 4 (especially Luke xxi. 6) . 
 
 Remark 3. Quite unparalleled is the placing of an Accusative 7 
 at the beginning (in a similar manner to the Nom. just described) in 
 2 Cor. xii. 17 /a)j rtva, oli' airecrTaXKa ttjoos w//ias, 8t avrov €7rX,eov€KTrjcra 
 vfiai ; where the Accusative (nva) is subsequently taken up again, or 
 rather almost corrected, by the demons, pron- (St' airoii). This irregu- 
 larity is only explicable by assuming that the apostle, in beginning 
 the sentence, had another construction in mind, but subsequently 
 abandoned it. Such liberties in construction and loose connection of 
 sentences, however, are quite natural in epistolary style (as in con- 
 versation) ; see below, especially 10 p. 383 and 12 p. 386. 
 
 b. The structure of periods in Greek depends in great part S 
 on the artistic management of the various Participial construe- 32'3 
 tions (§ 144 p. 288 sqq.) ; yet grammatical precision of ex- 
 pression was forced sometimes to give way before the demands 
 particularly of force and vivacity, or of symmetry. Probably 
 most of the instances of (anarthrous) participles used ana- 
 coluthically in the Greek writers of tlie classic period are 
 to be explained solely by the endeavor to meet these demands ; 
 (see B. II. 1.). But, speaking generally, the case is different 
 in this respect with the language of the N.T. For, the more its 
 diction approximates to the language of the people, which had 
 no need of artistically constructed periods, or the less the 
 writers were acquainted with the strictly Hellenic culture, 
 the more do instances of anacoluthically used Participles 
 multiply, without there being any rhetorical purpose involved 
 in them. Hence many cases of such anacoluthon are found 
 even in tlie Gospels ; but especially in the lawless language of 
 the Apocalypse, and in the long periods of Paul's Epistles, 
 whicli often exceed all bounds, and consequently are deficient 
 not infrequently in perspicuity. 
 
382 ANACOLUTHON. [§151. 
 
 In SO far as the Participle stands for any reason in a Case 
 out of harmony with the leading clause to which it belongs, it 
 has already been subjected to a thorough and connected ex- 
 amination in § 144, 13 p. 298. In so far, again, as under 
 different relations (whether it be that a finite verb is to be 
 supplied from the context, or that the construction is subse- 
 quently broken off and takes a different turn) it stands 
 absolutely, i.e. without any grammatical connection with 
 its leading clause, it has been treated of in the same section, 6 
 and 7, p. 292 sq. It remains for us to speak here of yet a 
 third peculiarity in the employment of Participles — one which 
 is pre-eminently peculiar to the biblical language, and consists 
 in this: that a participial clause almost imperceptibly passes 
 over into a finite verb, consequently is completed after 
 the manner of a leading clause, yet without losing its force as a 
 participial clause in its relation to the whole sentence. 
 Here manifestly the Hebrew idiom (see Gesen. Lehrgeb. p. 802; 
 Gr. § 131, Rem. 2) has had great influence, since such con- 
 structions are foreign to Greek.i 
 
 No writer in the N. T. is more addicted to this mode of expression 
 than John ; yet with Paul also the same is not uncommon. For 
 example, John i. 32 ri6ia.jj.at. to irveCfta Kar afialvov . . . /cat e/xuviv 
 itr avTov (yet regularly vs. 33), v. 44 ; 2 John 2 8ta ttjv oK-qOuav Trjv 
 •328 {"■ivovaav Iv rifuv, Kal /xeO' rj/xwu icrrai €is tov aiu>va. In similar anaco- 
 luthic style we read, John xv. 5 6 ^ivu>v Iv i/i-oi Kayui iv air (3, ovtos 
 cj>ipu etc., 1 John iii, 24. From Paul's Epistles : Col. i. 6 Tdf. [eds. 
 2, 73 TOV evayyeXiov tov TrapovTos €is i/iSs ■ • . , Kai icrriv KapTrc<j>opoviJ,iVOV 
 etc., 26 TO jimrrripiov to a.TrOK£Kfyv)^t,ivov . . . vvv Se IcjjaveptLdr] etc., 1 Cor. 
 vii. 37 fxTj e.)(wv dvdyKTjv, i^ovaiav 8e £X^'> ^ Cor. vi. 9 (is aTroOvqaKovn's 
 Kal I80V l^fjiev etc., Eph. i. 20 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] (for the other 
 reading KaOiaw; [Tdf. ed. 8, Treg. cod. Sin.] is probably only a cor- 
 rection). On Heb. viii. 10; x. 16 see § 144, 4 a) p. 291 ; besides cf. 
 LuiiB xix. 2 ; Eev. ii. 2, 9, 18 ; iii. 9 ; ix. 1, 17 ; x. 1, etc. 
 9 Remabk. a similar usage to this occurs, when Relative and 
 other Subordinate clauses pass over in the same almost 
 unnoticed manner into leading clauses, and yet the continuation of 
 the sentence so formed (indicated generally by nal or 8e') does not 
 constitute the real leading clause for the antecedent subordinate clause. 
 
 ' Foreign, inasmuch as we are not in the remotest degree warranted in inferring 
 an actual usage from isolated instances of a similar nature arising from negligence 
 Mr other causes; (cf Thuc. 8, 45, 4; 7, 13, 2; I'lat. Phacdr. p. 230 d.; Pritzsche 
 Quacst. Luc. p. 112; Lehrs, Arist. p. 7.")). 
 
§151.] ANACOLTJTHON. 383 
 
 For ex.WQple : 1 Cor. vii. 13 yvvrj t/tk e)(ei avSpa aincrTov Ka\ ovto^ 
 crvvetiSoKei oIkov fx,iT avrrj^, [Jly] d0ter(u tov avSpa, Tit. i. 2, 3 ^(oijs 
 iiiiDVLOv, rjv lirriyyeLkaTO 6 6eo^ irpo )(p6viav . .. , irjjavipuicrev 8e Kaipol's 
 tSi'ots TOV \6yov avTov etc., Rev. xvii. 2. It does not conflict with the 
 character of the N. T. diction to suppose this construction to be present 
 in many other passages ; but the less constrained arrangement of 
 words in the ancient languages often prevents the nature of the 
 clauses (whether leading or subordinate) from being any longer 
 discovered positively. Compare, for example, Mark iv. 16 sq., the, 
 frequent connection of the Subjunctive with the Future (see the ex- 
 amples § 139, 7 note p. 211), and the similar use in § 143, 6 p. 283. 
 Of a different sort, yet springing from the same principle, is Luke x. 8 
 €t! r/v 8' au TToXiv acripyrfcrOf. Kai Se^rnvrat w/aas etc., where the 
 second clause passes over, not indeed into a leading clause, but into a 
 dilferent kind of subordinate clause, as though lav preceded. 
 
 c. This transition from one construction to another, or 10 
 mingling of two different constructions, is often 
 to be found in the N. T. writings. Yet most of the instances 
 are of so special a nature that it is difficult to distribute them 
 under general heads. We confine ourselves, therefore, here, 
 to illustrating the method of such mixed constructions by a 
 number of the most evident examples. 
 
 Acts xxiv. 18 TiV€s Se airo r^? Atrtas 'lovSaioi, ovs eSet cttI (tov irapiivai 
 KOLL KaTTjyopeLv, el rt e)(OLev. The clause rives &l etc. is anacoluthic, 
 whether connected with what precedes or not. The anacoluthon is 
 occasioned by the Relative clause following, which combines 
 logically with the preceding clause into a single thought : but certain 
 Asiatic Jews (who saw me there and maltreated me, see xxi. 27 sqq.), 
 these ought to have appeared etc. In quite the same way an anacolu- 
 thon is produced by a Relative clause in xxiv. 5 sq. and Rom. xvi. 27, 
 on which see § 144, 7 p. 293 sq. 
 
 Acts xxvii. 10 OeuipC), on fj-era. v^peia'; Koi iroXX^s t,r)f>,(,a<; . . . jucWetv 
 ea-ecrOai tov -ttXovv. The sentence begins with ort and passes over into 
 the equivalent construction of the Ace. with the Infin. Something 
 similar occurs often enough in classic writers, see B. § 139 m. 61 ; and 
 compare the twice used on in Eph. ii. 11 sq. (after several parenthetic 
 clauses). 
 
 1 Cor. xii. 2 according to the present reading : otSaTe on ore 'Svri 
 yjTi Trpbs TO. ctSwXa to. a.(^(ova (Ls av rjyi(j-6e dirayd/itvoi. Here, after ex- 329 
 punging the inconvenient ore (as many mss. and editors do), we should 
 encounter no further grammatical difficulty. But just this very 
 circumstance confirms the clause ore iOvri tjtc, and the sense is not 
 
384 AlifACOLUTHON. [§ 151 
 
 opposed to it. The sentence begins with on and. after the parenthetic 
 clause ore Wvr) ^re passes over into an indirect question, very much as 
 we too might say Ye know that, when ye were heathen, how ye then 
 were always led etc. Further, cf. on av ^yecr^e § 139, 13 p. 216. The 
 combination ■^yeo-^c aTraydfiei/ot calls to mind the idiom in § 144, 30 
 p. 313. For the other modes of explaining the passage see the Comm. 
 
 Mark vi. 8 sq. according to the present reading : TrapijyyeiXei' avrots 
 il/a firjiev alpw<TW ws oSbi' fi jx-q pa^Sov . . . , ilAXa iiTroSeSc/j.ci'ovs aavoaXia, 
 Kai jXT) ivSva-rjaOe Svo p^rrau/as. Here a threefold construction occurs : 
 after Trap-qyyeiXev at first tva follows (according to § 139, 42 p. 237;, 
 then the Aocus. of the Participle i7ro8e8e/x,£i'oi;s as if the construction 
 (equivalent to iva) with the Infin. had preceded, and finally a transition 
 to direct discourse (see 11 below, p. 385). The parallel passage 
 (Luke ix. 3) might be explained similarly ; yet it is more probable 
 that Luke has so turned the common source whenqe both writers 
 drew, that another mode of explanation may be admitted ; see on this 
 point § 140, 18 p. 271. 
 
 Luke xi. 1 1 TtVa 81 ef vjj,u>v tov Traripa air^crei 6 vios aprov, /it) Xidov 
 €irt8aio-ei avrto; arose from the blending into one sentence of the two 
 thoughts TLva. i^ vjiZv ah-fjtra o t)i6s aprov ; and ;U,^ X.i6ov eirtSuicrei air<3 
 6 ira-r-qp; Matthew (vii. 9) has united these two thoughts into one 
 sentence differently, but likewise anacoluthically ; see on the passage 
 § 143, 6 Remark p. 284. 
 
 Matt X. 25 dpKCTOV T(3 fx,a6rjTrj iva yivrjrai (is o StSacrKaXos avrov, Kal 6 
 SoSXo? a>s o Kuptos avTov instead of koI t<3 SovXo) apKerov tva yivqTO-i uii etc. 
 
 Rom. ii. 7 sq. dTroSuJcTei rots p.hi ho^av kcX rijjirjv . . . • rots 8e . . . opyrj 
 KOI 6v/i09, where at the last words the apostle had in mind, instead of 
 the Active predicate , (d7ro8oi)i/at) used in the first member (but some 
 distance before), the Passive ; hence the transition from the Accus. 
 to the Nominative. Such blending of an Active and a Passive con- 
 struction is not altogether uncommon ; see e.g. Mark ix. 20 (in § 144, 
 13, c) p. 299), Acts V. 26 (in § 139, 48 p. 242), Rev. xi. 1 iSoOri /ao. 
 KoiXa/xos o/ioios pd/33a), Xeyiov equiv. to iSuiKfv fxoi KaXa/jLov, Xiyuiv; 
 with this may be compared the frequent combination in the Sept. 
 avr/yyiXr] avria, XiyovTK (Gen. xxii. 20 ; xxxviii. 24 ; 2 Sam. XV. 31 : 
 six. 1, etc.). 
 
 Rom. xi. 22 tSe ovv ^prjcrrOTrjTa koI arroro/JLiav Oeov • im fiiv Toiis 
 TTccrdi'Tas aTroroftta etc., where the antecedent Accusatives, in continuing 
 the discourse, are taken up again by the Nom. without the introduction 
 of a new predicate. This is less an anacoluthon than an almost par- 
 enthetic expansion (customary in Greek authors also) of the leading 
 thought ; see among other examples II. f. 395 ; k. 437 ; Plat. Soph 
 p. 266 d. (ti%u Bvo uSrj etc.), p. 218 e. (ti 8^Ta etc.) ; Bhdy. p. 68. 
 
§151.] ANACOLUTHON. 385 
 
 In Gal. ii. 6 the' clause ajro 2e tSv Sokovvtcov elval ti is left incomplete, 
 but after the parenthesis (ottoioi Tro-re etc.) it is resumed in a changed 
 construction by e/xot yap ot 8oko5vt€s etc. 
 
 Gal. ii. 4 : here likewise the clause 8ta 8e tous Trapeio-aKTous ij/evSa- 
 ScX^ous etc. is left unfinished, so that after the parenthesis we must 
 either supply, from what precedes, the thought / did not have him 330 
 circumcised, or we can avail ourselves of the Kelative clause that 
 follows (ots ov8k Trpbs 2>pav etc.) in supplying the ellipsis, and arrange 
 and complete the sentence grammatically thus : rots 8e TrapetcraKTois . . . 
 ovSk Trpos u>pav eifa/A£v. Cf. Acts xxiv. 18 above, p. 383. 
 
 Rev. xxi. 8 tois Se SetXoi? xat ama-TOK ... to fiipos avrSiv iv rrj Xi/wrj 
 etc., where the Dative at the beginning presupposes a verbal predicate 
 (to fall to the lot of), but in consequence of the substantive chosen 
 (to fuepos:) is taken up algain by the Gen. a-uTuv. 
 
 Other examples of the blending of two constructions have been 
 treated of in § 145, 9 p. 318 ; § 129, 14 p. 133 ; § 139, 58 p. 251. 
 
 d. A change of structure very current in Greek authors 1 
 consists in the mingling of the direct and the indirect 
 forms of statement. Of course the transition from the 
 cumbrous and rather disliked indirect form of discourse, to 
 the lively and popular direct form, is more frequent in Greek 
 and N. T. authors, than the reverse. It is not to be overlooked, 
 that Luke, beyond all other writers, has mastered most this 
 genuine Greek mode of expression ; whereas the examples 
 from other N. T. authors result, perhaps, rather from inac- 
 curacy or want of practice in composition. 
 
 Transitions from indirect to direct discourse : Luke v. 14 irap-^yyuXtv 
 auToil ijLTjSevl eiTreiVj oAXa S e i ^ o v etc., Acts i. 4 7rap7;yy€iA.€v Trepi/xevuv 
 TTjv eirayyeXiav rjv -fi KovcraT e,'xiY. 22; xvii. 3; xxiii. 22. On Mark 
 vi. 8 see 10 above p. 384.* Transitions from direct to indirect dis- 
 course : the three parallel passages Matt. ix. 6 ; Mark ii. 20 ; Luke v. 
 24 Lva 81 £i8rJT€ on . . . , iXiTiV t(3 7rapaA.eXu//.eva), where after etSiyre 
 we expect a Xeyo) or Ae^w, but instead the historian straightway comes 
 in (Xeyci) ; Acts xxiii. 23 etrtv • IrotaacraTe a-TparuoTaq . . . , Kn^vr/ te 
 irapaa-Trjo-ai, Mark xi. 32 where in the words of the historian e^o/JoCrTO 
 Tov Xaov we have the conclusion to the scribes' own words dAAa 
 eiTTw/Aev ef Saidpunrmv ; On John x. 36 see § 141, 1 p. 272, and on 
 Luke ix. 3 no. 10 above, p. 384. 
 
 1 When the indirect sentence is expressed by 3ti with a finite verb instead of 
 the Aoc. with tlie Infin., the want of a prescribed sequence of words prevents us 
 (as in 9 abovn in Relative clauses) from telling any longer with certainty whether 
 following cla ises are to be regarded as still dependent on Sti, or stand indepen- 
 dently again John vi. 22 sq. may serve as an example. 
 49. 
 
386 ANACOLTJTHON [§15t. 
 
 12 e. A considerable portion of the larger instances of anacolu- 
 thon consist in tliis : tliat a given antecedent clause either 
 wants altogether its proper consequent clause, or 
 receives it only in substance, not in grammatical form, in one 
 of the following clauses. Now in so far as the suppression of 
 so essential a portion of the sentence takes place designedly 
 and unmistakably for any ethical reason, it can be reckoned 
 among the rhetorical figures ; hence cases of the sort are wont 
 to be treated of in grammar under the special designation of 
 
 331 Aposiopesis (see 26 p. 396). But in so far as the con- 
 sequent clause fails to be given for formal reasons, to avoid 
 some sort of repetition, the instance falls under the head of 
 Ellipsis (see 28 g) p. 393). 
 
 Often, however, the reason for the suppression is an involuntary 
 one, and the anacoluthon solely a result of negligent and loose 
 connection, or called out by the troop of inrushing thoughts, by 
 parentheses of various sorts, by the remote position of the antecedent 
 clause, and other temporary causes. Instances of the sort are found 
 with especial frequency in the writings of Paul, whose sentences, in 
 consequence of his wealth of thought and fulness of heart, often ex- 
 tended to entire pages, so that he not infrequently lost their gram- 
 matical connection. For example, see Rom. v. 12 sq.; ii. 17—21 ; xii. 
 6-8, 15, 16 ; xvi. 25 sq. ; Col. i ; Eph. i. and ii. ; Gal. iv. 19 sq. ; 2 Thess. 
 ii. 3, 4 ; 1 Tim. i. 3 sq. In the Apocalypse such loose constructions 
 are the order of the day, see e.g. i. 12-16 ; iii. 12, 21 ; vii. 4, 9 ; xi. 8 ; 
 xiv. 12, and cf. § 123, 5 p. 78.^ Examples from other writers are 
 Mark iii. 14sqq. ; Heb. iii. 15 sq. ; 2 Pet. ii. 4-10. 
 
 13 Remark. Sometimes the apodosis or conclusion does not correspond 
 to what precedes, because, instead of the consequent clause gram- 
 matically required, words from the O. T. follow unaltered ; as, Rom. 
 XV. 3, 21 ; 1 Cor. i. 31 (see on this las' passage also § 139, 37 p. 234) ; 
 cf. also 1, d) above, p. 377. 
 
 ' The passage ii. 13 in the form given by the mss. and adopted by Lc,hra.[Treg.] 
 does not oifer a distant possibility of a grammatical construction, still less is any- 
 thing analogous to it found elsewhere. In order, therefore, to restore the possibility 
 of a meaning, we must either (with the more modern mss.) interpolate a's [N* iv 
 ah] after T]ii4paLS or read iu ats rjfiepaLs instead of iv Ta7s Tjfiepais. Perhaps the 
 corruption arose from the circumstance :hat some copyist, instead of the original 
 Genitive 'Acriira (see Tdf's note in cd. 7), substituted, on account of the apposition 
 following in the Nominative (^ 123, 5 p. 78), the Nominative form ('Ai/TiVas, which 
 then entailed necessarily the further c) aiigcs (oTs, ev ah, etc.). [Tdf. now reads 
 TTjv irifTTtv fjLou eV Tots ^]fi4pais 'AvTe'iTras ;tc. 1 , 
 
§151.] INVERSION. 387 
 
 III. Inversion (Hyperbaton). 
 B. p. 449 (526) ; H. § 885 ; C. 719 ; D. § 630 ; J. § 904 ; especially S. passim. 
 
 Although the arrangement of words in the ancient languages, 
 taken as a whole, is freer than in the modern, yet it is not so 
 capricious, at least in prose, that words necessarily belonging 
 together could be dissociated without any reason. On 
 the contrary, even in this respect language is confined always 
 within certain limits. The reasons for the separation, which l 32 
 it must bo confessed might often be very recondite according 
 to our judgment, are predominantly rhetorical in nature, 
 and consist iu the requirements of euphony, of emphasis, of 
 the antithetic or corresponsive location of particular members : 
 — or, to express it generally, in the desire, constantly operative 
 both in speaking and writing, to direct the hearer's or the 
 reader's attention, at one time sooner, at another 
 later, to single parts of the sentence, according 
 to the nature of the thought. Here, however, as in 
 the case of anacolutlion, we will pass in review only such 
 instances of hyperbaton as are often repeated or possess a 
 certain resemblance. 
 
 a. The Genitive is separated from its governing substan- 11 
 tive by other parts of the sentence, particularly by the predicate 
 of the sentence. That perspicuity is not impaired, on the 
 contrary often gains, by such an arrangement, appears from a 
 nearer consideration of individual passages. 
 
 Among others look at Mark ii. 28 Kupios ecrnv 6 uios tov avOpmrov 
 KaX TOV cra.ppa,Tov, Rom. ix. 21 ij ovk e^a i^ovaiav 6 Kepa/Jievi tov 
 ■tnjXov (cf. § 140, 3 Remark p. 260), Eph. ii. 3 yjfjiev tckvu ^vo-et opyijs, 
 1 Thess. ii. 13 TrapaXaySwrcs \6yov aKoijs irap rj/juov tov Otov, where Oeov 
 depends on koyov as is evident from what follows (deWette, das von 
 uns verkund'igte Wort Goftes), 2 Cor. iii. 6 Suikovovs Kaivrj^ hiaOriK-q^, 
 ov ypd.p.p.aTO's dXXa Trvevp.aTO's etc., where the two Genitives •ypa/nparos 
 and TTvev/jiaTo^ depend according to vss. 7 and 8 on Sia/coVous. In both 
 these last passages a different arrangement was hardly possible, owing 
 to the double Genitives. 1 Pet. iii. 21 ov o-apKos drrdfleo-is piJirou, where 
 emphasis occasioned the precedence of o-apicd?. See also Acts iv. 33 ; 
 xxii. 9 ; Gal. ii. 6; ii. 9 ; Jas. iii. 3 ; Heb. xii. 11 etc. ; and on 2 Pet. 
 iii. 2 see § 132, 1 b) p. 155. In Greek as in Latin there is a predi- 
 lection for separating the Partitive Genitive in this way from 
 its governing word, sometimes to such an extent that the two words 
 belonging together occupy the first place in the clause and the last 
 
388 INVERSION. [§151. 
 
 (cf. Cic. de Or. 1 , 1, 3, and Kriiger, Lat. Gram. § 684, [S. p. xxxiii sq.]), 
 e.g. John iv. 39 ; xii. 11 ; 1 Cor. x. 27, etc. ; and the Genitive of the 
 Personal Pronouns also, in so far as it serves as a periphrasis for the 
 Possessives, but (according to B. § 133 N. 10) in consequence of the 
 stronger attractive power of the verb is placed nearer it, so that it 
 then takes the place as it were of the Dative required by the verb. 
 See (besides the example from John ix. 6 given § 133, 16 p. 180) 
 John xiii. 6 criJ fiov vMrrets roiis TrdSas; 14 6cj>etKeTe aXkriXoiv viimiv 
 Tous TrdSas. 
 
 15 b. A Participle in apposition to a substantive, and liaving 
 an Infinitive clause also dependent upon it, stands by itself 
 between the subst. and its article and allows the Infinitive 
 adjunct to follow the substantive. 
 
 1 Cor. xii. 22 to. hoKOvvra ft,i\-q tov crdt/jiaTos a<T6€vi(rrepa inrdp)(eiv 
 instead of to, jhcXtj tov 0"uJ/u.aT0S to. Sokovvto, acrOevicrrepa mrapy^uv, Rom. 
 333 viii. 18 ttjv p-iXkovaav So^av dTroKaX.v<f>67Jvai, Gal. iii. 23. In a similai" 
 manner Adverbial Adjuncts belonging immediately to a Par- 
 ticiple having the article stand (not between the Art. and Part, but) 
 outside, as 2 Pet. iii. 2 fjLV-qcrOrjvai twv irpoeLprj/xevuiv pr]p.aT(av im tCiv 
 ■!rpo<l>r]Tuiv; (on this idiom, by no means rare in the classics, see B. 2 2d 
 Germ. ed. § 151, iii, 7, [for examples cf. S. p. Ixxx col. 2]). Hence 
 grammatically it is quite admissible in 2 Thess. ii. 6 vvv to Kwrixov 
 (particularly on comparing other passages where vvv precedes in a 
 similar way, John iv. 18; Acts xv. 10; xxii. 16) to refer the vvv to 
 KaTk)(ov ; yet see Meyer [i.e. Lunemann] in loc. On the other hand, 
 in Rom. vii. 21 recent interpreters have with reason contested the 
 opinion of those who draw tov vojjtov into the Participial clause as 
 object; cf. Winer p. 557 (518). 
 
 16 c. Interrogative Clauses often take the subject of the 
 clause or other words, on which in the course of the question 
 the main emphasis falls, before the interrogative word. 
 
 Thus often av tis d John i. 19; viii. 25; xxi. 12; Rom. ix. 20; 
 xiv. 4; Jas. iv. 12, <jii rt Xc'yets John ix. 17, . . . /cptVcts Rom. xiv. 10. 
 See besides Luke ix. 20; xvi. 11, 12 (in both instances the object, 
 owing to antithesis), xxiii. 31 ; John xxi. 21 ; Acts xv. 10 ; v. 35 (see 
 § 147, 24 p. 337, [S. p. xxiv]). 
 
 17 d. In Relative Clauses this occurs less frequently, and 
 probably only when they precede, owing to the external sim- 
 ilarity they then bear to interrogative clauses, — (hence in 
 Acts i. 2 the adjunct Sta irvevfiaro'; dylov is with reason not 
 connected with the following Relative clause by the majority 
 of recent expositors). 
 
§ 151.] INVERSION. 389 
 
 John iv. 1,8 vvv ov tX'^K, 1 Cor. xy. 36 o-ii o o-Tretpeis, and probably 
 also John viii. 25 ttjv apxrjv o, n koI \a\S> vfjuv see Lucke ii. loc, and 
 X. 29 if, with Tdf. [Treg. cod. Sin.J and cod. Vat. first hand, we read 
 6 irarrjp o SiSioKiv juot, TravTioi/ //.u^ov la~n instead of 6 irar-qp, os 
 Sc'SuKcV ixoi, wdvTuiv fuei^wv icrri. Cf. besides the paragraph on in- 
 verted attraction with Relative clauses § 143, 13 p. 288, [S. p. xxix]. 
 
 e. This transposition takes place, further, in clauses with 18 
 subordinating conjunctions ; so that, in consequence, the em- 
 phasized word precedes the conjunction, — as is so often the 
 case in Latin also. 
 
 For example : before tva, 2 Cor. ii. 4 ttjv ayd-irriv im yvSre, ^v exo 
 ek vjuas, Acts xix. 4; Col. iv. 16; Gal. ii. 10; Eph. iii. 18 Lchm. 
 (see § 144, 13, b) p. 299), 1 Cor. ix. 15 Tdf. ; before idv, 1 Cor. vi. 4. 
 On 1 Cor. xi. 14 cf. 4 above, p. 380 ; before us, Rom. xii. 3 ; 1 Cor. 
 iii. 5 ; vii. 17 ; before Iws, 2 Thess. ii. 7. 
 
 f. Smaller words. Particles, Negatives, because in 19 
 their ordinary place they might easily remain unnoticed, stand 
 not infrequently, in case of emphasis, in a position where, 
 taken with rigorous logic, they do not belong ; but this cer- 
 tainly occurs also often without any other design than regard 
 for euphony and rhythmical flow, — a consideration which in 
 Greek writers (in the N. T. especially with Luke and the autlior 
 
 of the Bp. to the Heb.) readily occasions the displacement of 
 unemphatic words. 
 
 Acts xxvi. 24 TO, TToWd a e ypa/A/xara €is fXixviav TrepLTpiirei, Heb. iv. 
 1 1 Iva fi,rj iv tw auT<3 t t s WTroSciy/Aart tectij, Rom. V. 6 en yap XpiOTOS 
 ovTuiv 17/j.aiv aa&evZv Kara Kaipbv . . . diriOavev, where the ert is repeated 
 again by several ancient mss. [cod. Sin. also] (and Lchm. [Treg. 
 Tdf. J) in the place where it properly belongs (after dcr^eviv). On 3S4 
 the trajection of o/ius see § 144, 23 p. 308. .Negatives trans- 
 posed : Acts vii. 48 dAA' oi;^ 6 vi/'to-ros iv x«poi'OtijTOts Karoi/cei. In 
 Rom. iii. 9 rt ovv ; TrpoexofntOa ; ov iravros, several interpreters have 
 taken ov Tai/rcDs as an inversion for TravTus ov (1 Cor. xvi. 12). It 
 is evident, however, that nothing but deference to our usage (because 
 we invert in translation our corresponding words altogether not, ganz 
 und gar nicht) produced the assumption. lioth adverbial expres- 
 sions ■ffavTws ov and ov Traircos correspond precisely to the N. T. peri- 
 phrases for the negative adjectives by means of ttSs ou and ov ttSs 
 (see § 127, 32 p. 121) ; and as in that case both combinations are 
 rendered by no one, so here the tv\o adverbial expressions may in a 
 similar manner be reproduced by in ho wise (i.e. not at all). The 
 
390 ELLIPSIS. 1§ 151 
 
 separation of the two words (as in the case of the adjei-tive) was 
 impossible in the passage before us, owing to the ellipsis ; but there 
 is nothing to prevent our filling out the expression (in accordance 
 with p. 122) thus: oi Trpoexpfneda ■jrai/Tcos. On the other hand, in 
 1 Cor. V. 10 eypmj/a vfuv firj crvvavaixiyvvcrdaL Tropvots, oi iravTdis Toih 
 TTopvoK etc. the first (dependent) negative, precisely according to the 
 rule in § 148, 8 p. 352, is not continued in the following clause (in 
 this case fj-rj Trdvrws would have been absolutely required) but revoked, 
 or rather in a certain sense restricted, by the second (direct) negative: 
 I wrote to you to hold no intercourse with fornicators ; (by that 1 mean) 
 not completely, not altogether etc., for otherwise {hrel uxfiuXere, see 
 § 149, 5 p. 359) ye must etc. Mark iv. 16 koI ovtol da-Lv o/Aot'tos ot iin 
 Ta 7r€TpijLi87j aneipoficvot dt for kol ojU.oia)S ot e^rt ra tt. o"7retp6fJL€i'ot ovra 
 eiaiv ot etc. In 2 Tim. ii. 6 the assumption of an hyperbaton (vrpiTov 
 belonging to KomuivTa) has been discarded by recent expositors, and 
 in Acts i. 21 «^' fjp.S.'; belongs to the entire predicate eto-^A.f^ev koX 
 iirj\6ev taken as one idea : to go out and in. 
 20 g. Lastly, entire clauses also are sometimes moved 
 forward, sometimes displaced. This occurs, however, more or 
 less in all languages, and the reason for the change of location 
 is, as a rule, plainly to be perceived. 
 
 Somewhat abnormal and unusual, according to N. T. usage, is the 
 placing of the final clause first in John xix. 28 ftera toCto eiSws . . . 
 Iva. Te\eiu:6fj 17 ypa<ji7], Ac'ytt • Suj/ui (see Lucke), xix. 31 ; Rom. ix. 11 
 (see Fritzsche, Com. II. p. 297) ; also the arrangement in John xi. 15 
 )(aip(i> Si i/iSs, Lva TncTTevcrrjTe, on etc. where oTt depends on )(a.lpiii ; and 
 further, the position of the Relative clause in John x. 36 (see on this 
 § 141, 1 p. 272), and of the indirect interrogative clause in 1 Cor. xv. 2 
 8t ov /cat (T(i>t,ea6e, rlvi Xdyu eir^yycA.teraiu.'ijv vu2v €1 KaTe;(6Te. 
 
 Remark. On the phrases vrpb ef ij/xepSr rov 7ra(r;^a, a>s utto crraSiW 
 etc. see § 131, 11 p. 153; and on €7rt o-ToStovs SuiSeKa ;(t\ta8<uv (Rev. 
 xxi. 16) see § 132, 11 Rem. p. 163. 
 
 IV. EiLipsis (Braohtlogt, Pregnant Construction). 
 B. § 161, 1 9 iz. ; H. §§ 880 sq. ; C. cf. Index a. v. ; D. §§ 627, 628 ; J. §§ 891 sq. 
 
 22 A large part of those instances to which with more or less 
 reason the gi-ammatical notion of Ellipsis, or the omission of a 
 il35 P^i'*' of ^ sentence, can be applied, have already been assigned 
 to other places in this Grammar. We will give as complete a 
 reference to them as possible, before we proceed to treat of 
 those cases of ellipsis which ought to be grouped together here. 
 On the ellipsis of the subject, in so far aa it is to be supplied 
 
§151.] ELLIPSIS. 391 
 
 from the context or some other source, see § 129, 14sqq. p. 132 sqq. ; 
 of the substantive with an adjective § 123, 8 p. 81 ; § 134, 6 
 p. 189 ; of a substantive with the article followed by a Genitive or 
 some sort of au adverbial adjunct (o tov, oi irepl, r/ a-^fj-epov, etc.) § 125, 
 7-10 pp. 94 sq.; of the object or of iavTov § 130, 4 p. 144; of the 
 Genitive Kvpiov with wo/ia and of rijs bSov see p. 163; of the pro- 
 nominal words in two connected clauses § 130, 2 p. 142; of an 
 indefinite pronominal term (Ttm) with a partitive Gen., or its 
 periphrasis by means of ck, § 132, 6 p. 158 ; of the copula § 129, 
 20 sq. pp. 136 sq.; of other general verbal notions akin to the 
 copula (as irapeLvat, yiveaSai, eXdelv, our as respects, concerns, etc.) in 
 such sentences as rt e/xot koI croC etc. § 129, 23 p. 137; of ^ after 
 ■n-Xeiov etc. § 132, 21 p. 168; of Sv with i&a, aK^Kei/, etc., § 139, 15 
 p. 216 sq. ; of av with conditional sentences of the fourth kind § 139, 
 27 p. 225; of a Passive idea in the participle with the Dative 
 (consilii) § 133, 24 p. 185; of a finite verb with the participle 
 § 144, 6 and 7 pp. 292 sq. ; of a verb or term of fearing, anxiety, 
 before //.ij, /i-^Trore, etc. § 148, 10 p. 353 ; of Xeyw (in explanation) 
 with the Infin. absol. § 140, 18 p. 271, and with the negative ou § 148 
 8 p. 352 ; on the elliptical mode of expression in proverbs and 
 proverbial phrases § 144, 5 p. 291 sq., cf. below no. 24, a) p. 394; 
 on the elliptical use of et /xt; § 149, 4 p. 359 ; of xav ibid. 6 p. 360 ; 
 01 the ellipsis of an entire clause or thought before oTt§ 149, 
 3 p. 358; before yap ibid. 15 p. 370; before iva, and on the 
 elliptical Tva (dW ti-a) in general,. § 139, 47 p. 241 ; on the ellipsis 
 of the consequent clause in so far as the sentence becomes in 
 •-.his way anacoluthic, see the chapters on Anacoluthon and Aposiopesis. 
 
 Under the head of ellipsis in the broader (improper) sense 
 belong all those cases where certain parts of the sentence are 
 simply not repeated, because they are already contained in 
 what precedes. Since this occurs in all languages, in the 
 following exposition (for simplicity's sake and in order not to 
 heap up a mass of perfectly plain and intelligible examples) 
 regard will be paid to those instances only in which an actual 
 .deviation from our usage occurs. 
 
 a) The member dropped is of such a nature that, were the 
 sentence complete, it would have been repeated without 
 further change of form. 
 
 Passing over such passages as Luke xx. 24 ; Horn. iii. 27 ; viii. 4 ; 
 1 Cor. vii. 3 ; John iv. 26 ; Rom. xiii. 1, etc., where our language is 
 wont for the most part to express itself in the same way, we encounter 
 the greatest peculiarity in the following passages : 2 Cor. i. 6 ; v. 13 ; 
 
392 ELLIPSIS. [§ 151. 
 
 vii. 12, in which passages the predicate, or Hs equivalent, must be re- 
 336 peated in the consequent clause from the antecedent clause ; Rom. 
 xi. 6 where in the antecedent clause as well as in the consequent the 
 predicate must be supplied from what precedes ; John iv. 53 ; Acts 
 xxiii. 34 ; 1 Cor. xv. 27 where in the clauses beginning with on the 
 predicate is wanting; Rom. ii. 28 where the words 'louSatos and 
 TrepvTOfti^ strictly ought to have been expressed twice; Rom. iv. 16 Sia 
 TovTo iK ■RLo-T((ii<;, Lvo. KttTa x'^P"' ('o bc complctcd from vss. 13 and 14), 
 etc. The article is used alone with the omission of a participle 
 (contained in what precedes) in Matt. xxv. 17, 22 6 to, Bvo sc. Xapiav, 
 cf. Gal. iv. 29 and 24 b) below, p. 394. 
 
 b) A portion of the sentence must be repeated from the 
 preceding context, but with a change of form. Here, too, 
 it is superfluous to adduce all the examples, since we often 
 express ourselves in quite the same way. 
 
 For example : Mark xiv. 29 ei irdvTes crKavSaXurOi^aovTai, aXX oiiK 
 iyu) so. CTKai'SaXto-^'^o-OjU.at (as Matt, actually has it), xv. 8 ■^piaro alreZ 
 crdai, Ktt^ws del IrroLu avToi^ SC. irouZv or tva Trovqcrri, 1 Cor. ix. 25 (sG 
 Iva. \6.(iuxnv) , Heb. v. 5 (sc. eSofao-ev aiTov y€vrj6TJvai ap^^iepea), GaL 
 iii. 5 where also, according to 24 b) p. 394, a simple tovto ttjie? may 
 be supplied. Further, see Matt. xxvi. 5 ; Luke xxiii. 41 ; John xiii. 
 9 ; xviii. 40 ; Rom. zi. 16 ; xii. 6 sqq., 1 Cor. xi. 1 ; xiv. 27 ; vii. 21 ; 
 ix. 12; Gal.ii. 16; Phil. iii. 4; Eph.v. 24; 2 Tim. i. 5 ; Heb. xii. 25. 
 Of course ellipses of this sort, especially the more surprising, were 
 apt to be filled out by the copyists, and hence many other- passages 
 where the ellipsis is found in the minority of mss. may originally have 
 belonged under this head; as Eph. v. 22 Tdf. Respecting the 
 instances where the subject is supplied in this way from the context, 
 see § 129, 14, 15 .pp.* 132 sq. 
 
 c) When in a following clause, instead of the negatived 
 member that precedes, the affirmative is to be supplied, 
 an intimation of this is given by the conjunction aXXd (as in 
 the opposite case by aXX' ov Mark xiv. 29 etc.). (Cf. the 
 elliptical ivohl aber in Germ.) 
 
 For example: 1 Cor. vii. 19 ; iii. 1,7; x. 24 /itijSeis to iavTov ^ijteito), 
 akXa. {hut every man) to tov irepov, Gal. vi. }5; Eph. iv. 29. In 
 2 Cor. viii. 5 koi ov kq^ws rfkiriaajxiv, dW ka-vrovi eSoiKai/ etc. the pred- 
 icate is expressed, indeed, in the clause that follows, but instead not 
 in the preceding clause : and (they gave) not barely as we hoped, but 
 even themselves did they give etc. 
 
 d) From a preceding specific 3rm a more general one, 
 
§ 151.1 ELLIPSIS. 393 
 
 or at least a kindr id idea merely, is to be educed for what 
 follows. 
 
 Gom. xiv, 21 KaXov rb [irj (jtayeiv Kpia (ir/Sk irielv oTvov firjSk h w . . . 
 TTpoa-KOTrrei nor in general to do anything etc., 23; Heb. s. 6, 8 
 bkoKavTtifi.aTa koX Trepl dyuaprtas SC. ■irpo(r<j>opa.v, 38 (on which see § 129, 
 15 p. 133), John xii. 5 where, strictly speaking, we must supply with 
 iS66r] the proceeds gained from the sale of the ointment, 2 Cor. v. 12 
 where from crwtoravo/xcv a ypd.<J3op.iv or Xiyofiev tovto is to be derived. 
 On Rev. xii. 12 Lchm. [Treg.J see § 131, 14 p. 154. 
 
 e) After el Be fiij or el Be firj ye (see B. I.e. 7) the 
 ellipsis became, as is well known, so general, that this formula 
 acquired almost the force of an unchangeable particle, serving 337 
 to negative the preceding clause regardless of its form and 
 
 to introduce what follows ; much as we use the word other- 
 wise. 
 
 Hence it stands not only (as in Greek authors) after antecedent 
 negations, Luke v. 36 sq. and its parallels, 2 Cor. xi. 16, but also as a 
 continuation of a condition expressed by idv, Luke x. 6 ; xiii. 9, indeed 
 is even so used that a second clause with idv, taking iip as it were in 
 what follows the ei Se /x^ and paraphrasing it, is added, Rev. ii. 5 
 (cf. Clement's 2d Ep. ad Cor. c. 6). In general it stands readily 
 after Imperatives, so that the predicate in an altered form strictly 
 ought to be repeated according to b) above ; as. Matt. vi. 1 ; John 
 xiv. 11 ; 2 Cor. xi. 16; Rev. ii. 5, 16. 
 
 f ) Particularly characteristic of Paul is the elliptical co'n 
 struction after the formula ov fiovov Be . . . followed by aXKa 
 teal ; what is omitted may in every instance easily be supplied 
 from the context. 
 
 For example: Rom. v. 3, 11 ; viii. 23; ix. 10 (where the second 
 clause also is elliptical, or rather anacoluthic, the antecedent Nom. 
 'PcjSeKKa being taken up again, according to 4 above, p. 380, by the 
 Dative avT^ in vs. 12), 2 Cor. viii. 19 ; On the other hand, more 
 complete is 1 Tim. v. 13 (2' Tim. iv. 8 etc.). In Greek authors also, 
 particularly the later (Diog. Laert., Lucian), a similar usage is found. 
 
 g) Lastly, to avoid repetitions sometimes the entire 
 consequent clause is omitted, or is wrought immediately 
 into the antecedent clause. 
 
 So particularly in comparative sentences (as the same thing 
 often occurs in Latin authors also, e.g. Cic. sen. 2. 5; 11. 36); as, 
 2 Cor. iii. '13 koi ov KaOdnep Mwvffijs iTiOei KaXv/u./^a etc.. Matt. XXV. 
 50 
 
394 ELLIPSIS. [§15I. 
 
 14 sq.; 1 John iii. 12. On this cf. besides 12 above, p. 386, and 
 especially 26 below (Aposiopesis) p. 396. 
 24 The actual ellipses, i.e. those which are.not resorted to 
 in order to avoid a repetition, but where the missing mombei 
 is to be supplied from the words immediately given, are for 
 the most part contained in the list given above (22 p. 390 sq.). 
 Here are still to be mentioned 
 
 a) The omission of the predicate in standing formulas 
 and proverbial phrases, such as are found in all 
 languages (cf. § 144, 6 p. 291). 
 
 For example: n €/*o), koI a-oi (Matt. viii. 29 ; Mark i. 24; Luke 
 viii. 28 ; John ii. 4), to atjtta i<f>' ■^/xSs (Matt, xxvii. 25), 6(j}6a\f/,6v avrl 
 6<j}6a\fj.ov (Matt. V. 38), etc., see the remaining examples in § 129, 23 
 p. 138 ; further, the familiar epistolary salutation xalp^iv, in which 
 the accompanying Dative easily suggests the missing term Xeyu 
 (2 John 10, 11) ; as. Acts xv. 23 ; xxiii. 26 ; Jas. i. 1. 
 
 b) And in other sentences also, when the words actually 
 expressed are sufficiently definite to cause the missing 
 
 338 predicate to suggest itself. 
 
 Thus the term eiTrei/ is omitted when the direct discourse itself 
 immediately follows (as in Lat.), e.g. Acts ii. 38 Iler/oos 8e irpo^ avrovs • 
 fiiTavorja-aTC etc., xxv. 22, probably also 2 Cor. ix. 6 tovto St (so. Xeyoi 
 [Eng. hit this I say} ; deWette, wisset). On this cf. § 140, 18 p. 271. 
 Further, other general terms are omitted whose more precise 
 nature is indicated by a case or an adverb or a preposition (especially 
 tK and tts), as Luke xxii. 26 v/xas 8e ov^ outios (sc. Troiijo-cre), Phil. iii. 
 14 IV 8e (sc. TTotul) cf. Gal. iii. 5, etc.; John xxi. 21 oBtos 8e tC; (say 
 yiverai), Rom. iv. 9 o ixaKapUTjXo^ oStos etti t^k TrepvrofirjV etc. (sc. •yiverai 
 or Xeyerai) , v. ISets Travras a.v6 piOTrovs (sc. atre/Brj, lyivero). Gal. ii. 9 
 Iva, ij/ieis £ts ra. i6vrj, airol Se ets etc. (sc. ip^w/xeda) , iii. 18 eJ yajo Ik 
 vofiuiv rj KKrjpovofhia, v. 8 77 ■muTy.ov-q ovK ck tov KaX.ovvTO'i i7//.as, 13 fwvov 
 fiij TYjv eXtvdepiav eis a.<j)opp.7jv Ty crapKi (where the idea omitted is 
 something like possess, make use of, and is intimated by the p,-^ of the 
 Imperative); The more specific predicates, if they have not 
 already been expressly mentioned in the preceding context, are less 
 frequently omitted, because their omission easily causes obscurity. 
 Yet we easily supply in Gal. i. 20 (l8ov ivuiinov tov Oeov on) the idea 
 I swear, in Rev. vi. 6 (rpcts x<'""''^s Srivaplov) from the accompanying 
 Gen. of price the notion of a verb of buying or appraising, in 2 Cor. ix. 
 7 the term Sotio from the drift of the entire section (chaps, viii. and ix.). 
 1 Cor. iv. 6 is more difficult ; here we must supply with iva [j,a,Oijre to 
 ['cf. p. 138.] 
 
§ 151.] ELLIPSIS. 895 
 
 (lij vTrep a yeypavTai an Infin., say <^pomi/ (which as an explanatory 
 addition is found even in the MS s.). In some passages the ellip- 
 tically used article necessarily points to a Participle (cf. 23, a) 
 p. 392) : Acts xiii. 9 SaCXos, 6 xai IlaBAos sc. /caXou/ncvos, Rom. xiii. 7 
 
 OTToBoTi . . . ™ TOV <l>6pOV (SC. ttlTOWTt) TOV <^6pOV, TM TO TeAo? CtC. 
 
 2 Cor. viii. 15 (quotn.) 6 to ttoXv (sc. cruWeyuv) oiiK hrXiovamv, Kal 6 
 TO oXlyov etc. Several examples quite similar are adduced from 
 Lucian by Du Mesnil, Stolper Progr. (1867) p. 9. 
 
 Remark. Here belongs also the phrase opa p,-^, uttered after the 
 manner of an aposiopesis (no. 26 p. 396) and left incomplete : Rev 
 xix. 10 ; xxii. 9. 
 
 c) To the instances where an entire thought or a 
 complete clause must be supplied (see 22 p. 390) belongs 
 the construction, when, between premise and conclusion, the 
 middle member or logical link is wanting, — the writer in his 
 haste to reach the main thought giving it at once in the form 
 of the conclusion. 
 
 Rom. xi. 1 8 p,rj KaTaKav^Z tSiv KXdSiav • ei Sk KaraKavxacrai, ov ai) rrpf 
 pl^av Paa-rd^eK eta. supply, remember that etc. Likewise, 1 Cor. xi. 1 6 ; ' 
 John ix. 36 n's iuTiv, Kvpu, tva 'KUTTevcrii) eh avrov, 1 John v. 9. Also 
 in 1 Cor. XV. 32 €6 ve/cpoi ovk iyeipovrai, <^dyu)/x6v Kal Tritafiev, avpiov yap 
 aTTo6vricrKop,ev, Strictly taken, such a middle member is omitted, and yet 
 the conclusion ((^ay. Kal mto.) in the spirited style connects finely 
 with the premise. To the same desire to omit superfluous and unes- 
 sential words and give the main thought itself as soon as possible, is 
 to be traced the omission before a Relative clause of the 
 Demonstrative, grammatically required, together with the copula 
 belonging to it ; as, 2 Cor. iv. 6 6 Oeo^ 6 ebruiv Ik ctkotov; <j>u>'s X.dp,{j/ai, 
 OS iXap.\lr£v i.e. he it is who etc. (cf. v. 5) ; Luke viii. 13 ol Se im t^s 339 
 7reT/oa9 (sc. ovrot ilatv) ot, orav aKovcroKTiv etc. 
 
 It is obvious that the majority of ellipses have arisen from J3 
 an endeavor after brevity of expression; hence many 
 of them have been treated by grammarians and interpreters 
 under the designation of Brachylogy (Breviloquence) or Preg- 
 nant Construction. Since, however, it is difficult — so elastic 
 is the idea of Brachylogy — to draw a boundary even ap- 
 proximately precise between it and Ellipsis, it seemed to be 
 more convenient and more promotive of perspicuity to unite 
 all the instances of the sort under the one general head of 
 Ellipsis. 
 
 It may be particularly mentioned here, also, that many of the 
 
396 APOSIOPKSIS. [§151- 
 
 syntactic combinations already treated of in other parts of this Gram- 
 mar may be viewed as brachylogic, inasmuch, as the term or membel 
 omitted, or rather not specially expressed, does not admit of being 
 represented so definitely as in the foregoing paragraphs by one or 
 more words fitting into the context. Thus the usage is decidedly 
 brachylogical, of substituting in comparisons at once the whole 
 instead of the part to which, strictly speaking, the comparison 
 extends ; on this see § 132, 20 p. 167 in connection with § 133, 10 
 p. 177. 
 
 Brachylogic, further, are many of the adjuncts in the Ace. 
 with Passive and Middle notions (see among other examples 2 Cor. 
 vi. 13 and iii. 18 in § 134, 7 p. 190) ; the omission of a verbum dicendi, 
 sentiendi, qucerendi before a direct discourse, sentences with on, 
 questions etc., see § 139, 67, 58 pp. 250 sq., § 141, 1 and'Note p. 272 sq. ; 
 clauses with hru and aXKa in the pregnant signification since then, 
 since otherwise, otherwise however, see § 149, 5 p. 359 and 14 p. 369 ; 
 the adverbial specifications of the departure and the goal at the same 
 time with apx^crOai, see § 150, 7 p. 374; as well as all the numerous 
 instances of the so-called pregnant construction with prep- 
 ositions, see § 147 under the several prepositions, especially under 
 Atto p. 322 sq., €K p. 327, tts p. 332 sq. 
 
 V. Aposiopesis. 
 B. p. 452 (529); H. § 883; D, § 627; J. § 860, 3; 897. 
 
 26 In perfect agreement with the classic examples of Aposiopesis 
 after an antecedent conditional clause is Luke xiii. 9 kuv fjuev 
 TTOiijarj KapTTOv • el 8e fit] ye, et? to fieWov iKKO'yjreK avTrjv. 
 
 Analogous i,n form to this are the following : Luke xix. 42 el eyvcus 
 Ktti (TV Kui ye ev Ty y)ii,epa, aov ravTrj ra ttjOos elpi^vrjv O'ov • vvu Be etc., 
 where the form of the suppressed apodosis is sufiiciently indicated by 
 the formula vvv 8e, which is so often introduced after conditional 
 sentences of the fourth kind (John viii. 40; ix. 41; xv. 22, 24 etc.; 
 1 Cor. xii. 20; Heb. ix. 26; xi. 16), Luke xxii. 42 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7 ; 
 ed. 8 irapeveyKai, so cod. Sin.] (where the reading irapeveyKe [Lchm. 
 Treg.J probably came from the copyists, who either were not ac- 
 quainted with the idiom or wanted to make the words conform to 
 tliose in the parallel passages). Similar also are John vi. 62 ; Acts 
 340 xxiii. 9 ; Rom. ix. 22 ; in these passages the editors indicate the 
 presence of this kind of ellipsis by an interrogation mark (as denoting 
 a thought remaining as it were without answer, or the answer to, 
 which is left to the hearer). 
 
 On the origin of the formula of swearing with ei without an 
 apodosis following, see § 149, 4 p. 358. 
 
§ 151.] PLEONASM. 397 
 
 71. Pleonasm. 
 B. p. 462 (5S0); H. « 884; C. of. Index; D. § 629; J. § 899. 
 
 The majority of pleonastic modes of expressior:, like the 27 
 elliptical, so far forth as they are of a grammatical nature 
 have been considered and discussed at other points in this 
 Grammar, to which the following summary reference may be 
 of ,service : 
 
 On the superfluous use of Pronouns, particularly of the Pron. 
 avTos, the Possessives, and their periphrases by means of the Personals, 
 see § 127, 9 sq. p. 107 sq., 26 p. 118 ; § 130, 2 p. 142 ; of the oblique 
 cases of avros in Hebrew fashion in Relative sentences, § 143, 1 p. 280 ; 
 on o-B Tos and ovrms after Participles (and substantives) with and 
 without the article, § 144, 21 p. 306; on ovro's before clauses with on 
 and IV a, § 127, 6 p. 105; on oiItms at the beginning of the con- 
 clusion, § 149, 1 p. 357 ; on Tts in the combination cTs tk, § 124, 1 
 p. 85 ; on fiaWov with the Comparative, § 123, 11 p. 83 ; on xai 
 after uj?, oxravrws, at the beginning of the conclusion, etc., § 149, 8 c) 
 and f ) p. 362 sq.; on oti befpre the Infin., and before other de- 
 clarative clauses (on, us), see 10 above, p. 383 ; on the Negatives 
 oil and fi-q after predicates in which a negative idea is contained, as 
 well as fi-^ in the formula ektos ei /aj;, § 148, 13 p. 355 ; on ov in ^ 
 ov see § 149, 7 p. 360 ; on the Hebraistic circumlocution for preposi- 
 tions by means of the phrases 8ia )(€ip6^, Bia crTO/ixaTOS, •n-po irpoaiiyn-ov, 
 and the like, § 133, 20 p. 182 ; § 146, 1 p. 319, and § 147 under the 
 several Prep. ; on Participles in such combinations as ehrev, 
 i'KiaX-qcrev Xeycov, the Hebraistic combinations tScbi/ ttSov etc., § 144, 30 
 p. 313 ; on the Dative in similar combinations, § 133, 22 p. 183 sq. ; 
 on the Imperatives op a, fikeireTe before other Imperatives, § 139, 
 49 p. 242 sq. 
 
 The pleonastic fashion of subjoining to local adverb s answering 
 to the question whence the Prep, oltto, «, has been already mentioned 
 on p. 70. A similar redundance (of which numerous examples can 
 be adduced from Greek authors also, see the grammars) occurs, too, 
 with other adverbial expressions, e.g. John xi. 7 erreiTa fjiera tovto, xiii. 
 27 /AETo, TO il/oifj.[ov TOTS (sBO § 147, 26 p. 339), particularly in the 
 repetition in an adverbial form of the idea of the Prep, with which 
 the verb is compounded, as exySaXXeiv and i^dyeiv efcu (Luke iv. 29 ; 
 xxiv. 50, etc.), TrpoSpap.obi' tfji.'TrpocrOev (xix. 4), 7raA.1v avaKdfjLTrTeLV (Acts 
 xviii. 21), with wliich agree the pleonasms with substantives, o 
 olKoSe(Tir6Tr)<; ttjs otKtas Luke xxii. 11, to. /8aia rtov fj>oiviK(j)v John xii. 13. 
 
 A great portion of the pleonasms of the N. T. are of a 28 
 rhetorical nature or belong to the peculiar style of the several 
 
398 PLEONASM. [§ 151. 
 
 writer?, who vary in tlieir fondness for expressing themselves 
 in the verbose Oriental fashion. To these Oriental pleonasms 
 341 belong such phrases as opav 6(p9a\/M}2<; (IJolmi.l); fieXXovcriv 
 ep')(e(76at, ical dpTrd^etv avrov (John vi. 16) ; dvoi^a<; to arofjua 
 avTov Kal dp^dfievo'i aTro Tijs ypatpT]^ TauTi?? ev-rjyyeXiaaTO etc. 
 (Acts viii. 35, cf. x. 34; Matt. v. 2) ; eVa/aa? toi)? 6^ddXp,ov<; 
 Kal 6eaadfj,evo<; (John vi. 5) ; the frequently repeated IBov 
 (often twice and more in the same sentence), ptrticularly in 
 the historic style ; the periphrastic way of expressing a sjmple 
 event by means of iiyeveTo Be, or Kal iyevero, with a finite verb 
 following, or an Infinitive (§ 141, 6 p. 276) ; the tropes ■x^elp 
 Kvpiov, ol 6(f)9aXfiol Kvpiov ; the many phrases and periphra'Ses 
 formed with the word ovo/j-a ; and many others. The subject, 
 consequently, is less of a grammatical nature, than of a stylistic 
 nature in the main. Of the copious details, those which admit 
 of being brought under somewhat definite linguistic heads are 
 the following : 
 
 a) The (frequent) literal and commonly asyndetic 
 repetition of a member of a sentence, particularly in successive 
 parallel sentences, is designed for oratorical effect. 
 
 Thus the forceful threefold c/BX-^Ot] in Rev. xii. 9, the double ISov 
 vvv in 2 Cor. vi. 2, the thrice used Travra avBptawov in Col. i. 28, the 
 threefold uXKa. in 1 Cor. vi. 11, the fivefold Travres (connected by koX) 
 in X. 1 sq. Further, see Rom. viii. 15 (irveCjua twice), John i. 10 {koX 
 6 K0O-/AOS twice), xiv. 27 {Aprjvqv twice, asyndetically), xix. 10 {l^ova-iav 
 exio twice), Matt. xii. 37 (e/c tZv X6y(ov crcm twice), 1 Cor. xiii. 11 (u)s 
 I/TRIO'S thrice, asyndetically), xiv. 24 (imii wavrwv twice, asyndetically), 
 i. 20 (ttov three times, asyndetically), iv. 8 (ijSij twice), 2 Cor. xi. 26 
 (kivSvvois eight times, asyndetically), vii. 2 (oiSeVa three times, asyn- 
 detically), xi. 20 (ei TL1 five times, asyndetically), Phil. iii. 2 (fiki-Trere 
 three times, asyndetically), iv. 8 (oo-a six times, asyndetically), Eph. 
 vi. 12 (TTpos four times, asyndetically), 1 Tim. v. 10 (et five times, 
 asyndetically), 1 John i. 1 sq. (o four times, asyndetically), an entire 
 telic clause twice in 2 Cor. xii. 7. The repetition of the same word 
 in immediate succession in hncrev, hreorev Ba^vXav rj iLcyaX-r], Rev. 
 xiv. 8 ; xviii. 2, is emphatic ; the doubling of the Imperative attests 
 the clamorousness of the demand, as in crravpojo-ov, a-Tavpuia-ov John 
 xix. 6 ; the repetition of the person addressed, anxious solicitude of 
 the speaker in respect to himself, — as Matt. xxv. 1 1 Kvpit, Kvpie, avoi^ov 
 rjpHv, Luke viii. 24 iiruTTiiTa, lwi.crTa.Ta, a.iroWvp,t0a, — or earnest and 
 reproachful admon'tion in respect to the person addressed, as Luke x. 
 
§ 151.] EPEXEGESIS. 399 
 
 41 Ma.p9a, MapOa, /icpi/iv^s etc., xxii. 31 'Sil/j.uiv, St/xuv, '.8ov 6 craTavSn 
 etc., Acts ix. 4 etc. 5aoi;X, Saou\, tC /ac Siu/cets ; 
 
 b) The altered repetition of a particular member 
 aims to give it prominence in order to turn attention to it, 
 sometimes also merely to take it up again in a more suitable 
 position. 
 
 This repetition occurs most commonly by means of the Demonstra- 
 tive ovTos and adverb ovrtos, sometimes in the following clause (see 
 the examples in § 144, 21 p. 306), sometimes in the very same clause, 
 as John iv. 6 'Iijo-oBs KexoTnaKuis . . . ixaOe^eTo ourcos. Matt. xiii. 20 sqq. 342 
 6 8e iin TO. TTtTpwSri criropeis ovtoi icrnv etc., Acts ii. 23 Iricrovv tov 
 Na^oipaiov . . . TOVTOV di/etXoTe, XV. 38 ; Rom. vii. 10 evpiB-q /x.oi ^ kvToX-q 
 7] £15 ^10^, wrn} £15 OavaTov, ix. 6, etc. The periphrastic repetition 
 aims at perspicuity, see the following section. 
 
 c) A peculiar kind of altered repetition, which in the N. T. 
 is especially characteristic of John, but is often found also in 
 all Greek literature from Homer on (see the examples in B. 
 VI.2; J. § 899, 6), consists in the repetition of the negatived 
 contrary, and that too always immediately afterwards and 
 connected by Kai. 
 
 John i. 20 (o/AoXdyr/o-cv koX ovk r/pvi^cTaTO, 1 John i. 6 ij/evS6iJi,€6a koI 
 oi TToiovfiev TTjv aX-^Oeiav (yet here with a certain difference), ii. 4, 27 
 aXriOi's icTTLV koX ovk arnv \pe.v&o<;, Luke i. 20 (TLioTrSiv Kai p.-q hwap.evo's 
 XaX-^crai, Acts xviii. 9 XdXa KOI fjiij crttoTnjoTjs, Heb. xii. 8 voOoi icTTe Koi 
 ovx vLoi; cf. John i. 3, etc. Both emphasis and perspicuity are the 
 aim of this mode of expression. 
 
 d) Those instances in which an entire clause (antecedent 
 or parenthetic) is repeated for the sake of perspicuity belong 
 rather to Exegesis or Stylistics. See e.g. Rom. vi. 16 m 
 Trapiardvere eavTovf . • • & viraKoveTe, — at which Lchm. (II. 
 praef. x) takes offence without reason ; see Meyer in loc. 
 
 VII. Epbxegesis. 
 B. p. 453 (630); C. § 668; J. § 667; 835, 2. 
 
 Epexegetical additions in the books of the N. T., especially 29 
 in the mss., are innumerable. Many of these, however, long 
 ago came into suspicion with N. T. critics as probably being 
 glosses and interpretations added by some later hand, admitted 
 into the text of the mss. by the carelessness of the copyists, 
 auS thence into the printed editions; and they have now, 
 
400 ZEUGMA. [§ 151. 
 
 through the labprious, acute and comparative criticism of 
 recent editors, been removed from the text. 
 
 A large part of the genuine epexegetical additions are announced 
 by the adverbial rovria-nv (see p. 11), particularly in the Epp. to the 
 Rom. and the Heb. ; see the lexicons. But there are many also 
 without that adjunct: thus the Infinitive, with and without toB, 
 after abstracts, in explanation or extension of their meaning, as Rev. 
 xiii. 6 I3\aa-cj>r]fjiia's 7rpo9 tov 6e6v, ^Xautfirjixrja-ai, to ovo/j-a avTOV (cat rrjv 
 (TKTjvrju avTov Kol Tov's iv TO ovpavQ (TKrjvovvTa^ ; see the exx. with tov 
 in § 140, 14 p. 268; after Pronouns and Adverbs to designate 
 them more closely, as 1 Cor. xvi. 21 vg ifj-rj X"P' HavXov, John ix. 13 
 ayovcTLV avrov 7rpo5 Toiis $apicratovs, tov iroTe. TV(f>X6v, Acts viii. 38 ; 
 1 Thess. iv. 3 tovto iariv to OiXrj/ia tov O^ov, 6 dyittcr/xbs i/Jiuiv, Jas. iv. 1 
 ovK ivTevOev, €k tSiv rjSovSiv vfiSsv ; (cf. with this the preparatory 
 ovTos, etc., § 127, 6 p. 105), Mark ii. 20 ; Luke v. 35 tote . . . iv iKiivy 
 Trj rjixipa. or Ikuvhii rats ^/iepats (cf. the opposite case John xiii. 27) ^^ 
 and also after words of other kinds that need explanation, e.g. John 
 843 vi. 1 irepav r^s ^aXacrcnjs rijs raXtXatas, r^s TtySc/DtdSos, Eph. i. 7 iv <a 
 exo/jLev rrp/ (XTroXijTpmcrtv, ttjv a.(j>e(nv tu>v TTapa.iTTU>jj.a.Tii>v, 13 o Xoyos t^s 
 aXrjBe.la';, to evayye'Xtov t^s auiTrjpLaq v/auv; Rom. viii. 23 vloOeaMv 
 direKSi)(6fjLevoi, ttjv a.-!ToXvTpoi(nv tot) o-m/xaros T/fiSsv, Phil. iv. 18 ; Eph. 
 ii. 15, etc. To determine how far additions connected by (cat also 
 are of an epexegetical nature as respects sense, is a matter for 
 the interpreter ; as respects grammatical f o r m, they cannot be 
 denominated epexegetical, owing to the connection by (cat; see § 149, 
 8 h) p. 363. 
 
 Remark. On Rev. ii. 5 (el 8c fi-q . . . ikv jxr] fierai/oiycrjjs) see 23, e) 
 p. 393. 
 
 VIII. Zeugma. 
 B. p. 463 (530 sq.); H. § 882; C. § 497; D. § 628; J. § 895, 5. 
 
 30 That in the N. T. there are indubitable instances of this 
 grammatical figure of speech may be seen frbm the fol- 
 lowing examples : 
 
 1 Cor. xiv. 34 Tdf. [eds. 2, 7] oi yap iTnTpcTrerai airats XaXeti', dAXa 
 v-KOTacrcrto-Oai etc., where imTp. strictly suits XaXetv only, and from it is 
 to be derived the requisite notion of necessity for vjroracro-eo-^at (hence 
 the early alteration into the Imperative : vTroTaacria-duia-av Lchm. 
 [Treg. Tdf. cod. Sin.]), Luke i. 64 aveiaxOt] to a-TOfia airoC trapa^pyjij.a 
 
 1 Here belongs also Acts xix. 40 liriSsvhs aiViou ivipxavroi, irep! oTi Swi\(T6ii.e6a. 
 Sovvai \6yov ttjs irvcrTpoiprjs rairiis, which arose from /iriS. air. InrdpX; 8t( or Iva 
 TTcpl Toirov (so. vepl ttjs uvffTpo^^s toiJtijs) Sui/Tjo-ii/iteflo etc. , On this cf. § 139, 32 
 p. 229 sq. 
 
§ 151 ] ASYNDETON. 401 
 
 Kal ^ yXcocroTx avrov (cf., on the other hand, Mark vii. 35 rjvoLyrjaav 
 avTOv at aKoai, koI iXvOrj 6 Seo-^uds T^s •yXwcro-jys avrov), 1 Cor. iii. 2 
 ydXa vf^aq eirdTicra, ov fSpSifia. An analogous instance also to those 
 given in the grammars; where the opposite idea must be educed, is 
 found in 1 Tim. iv. 3 KuiXvovruiv ■yajuciv, d7r£;)^ecr6at /3piii/j,dTwv, where 
 from the negative KtoXudi/rcov the positive notion Kckeiovriov or the 
 general Xeyovruiv (cf. § 139, 42 note p. 237 ; § 141, 2 p. 273) must be 
 educed. 
 
 Remark. Acts xx. 34 probably is hardly to be called a zeugma. 
 And that in Jas. i. 9, 10 by assuming this figure to occur, the peculiar 
 force and beauty of the thought is positively impaired, is universally 
 acknowledged now by the interpreters. 
 
 IX. AsTSfDETON (POLTSTNDETA). 
 
 B. p. 453(531); H.§S54; C.§707g.-j.; D.§626; J. § 792. 
 
 The inquiry how far the several clauses, both within the 31 
 confines of a larger period and also the larger clauses among 
 themselves, are joined together by conjunctions, or stand side 
 by side asyndetically, or are connected differently and by 
 means of different conjunctions than is wont to be the case in 
 Greek authors, opens a wide field ; and to treat it exhaustively 
 would require a special and detailed examination in which 
 the style of the individual writers should be carefully discrim- 
 inated. Much that belongs to such a discussion, however, 
 has already been treated of in other parts of this Grammar, 344 
 particularly in §§ 139, 149, 150 ; e.g. the frequent connection 
 of sentences and members of sentences by means of kui (John 
 X. 3, 12 ; Acts xiii. 36 ; xvii. 28 ; 1 Cor. xii. 4 sq. ; Jas. v. 17, 
 18 ; see the other examples of polysyndetic connection in 
 § 144, 1 p. 288 sq.), the use of the simple Se or even Kai instead 
 of fiev . . . Si elsewhere more usual (§ 149, 11 p. 364 ; 8 b) 
 p. 361 sq.), of ovTQ)<; at the beginning of the conclusion (§ 149, 
 
 I p. 357), etc. 
 
 Here may be mentioned also, the connection (certainly unclassic) 
 of historical events, in pursuing a narrative, by means of the adverb 
 Tore, which thus (like the Latin turn) acquires almost the character 
 of a conjunction. This use is particularly current in Matthew, 
 e.g. iii. 15 eiTrev rrpoi avrov • a(^es Sipri . . . rore dif)irja-Lv avrov, iv. 9 sq. 
 Xeyct avr^ • ravrd croi Trdvra Sojcrco ..." rare A.eyet avrm 6 Irjcrovq etfi., « 
 
 II Tore a(jiLr](7LV avrov 6 Sia/JoXos, ix. 6, etc. 
 
 A great number of examples of asyndeton, i.e. of asyn- 33 
 
 51 
 
402 ASYNDETON. [§ 151 
 
 detically repeated single parts of a sentence, are already 
 contained in 28 a) p. 398. It remains for us to consider here 
 the most common instances of asyndetic juxtaposition of a 
 different nature: and 1) those in which single parts of a 
 sentence, 2) those in which entire independent sentences, 
 succeed one another without a connective. 
 
 1) In the case of single parts of a sentence, asyndptic 
 sequence occurs 
 
 a) "With two Imperatives of which the first contains merely 
 the formal introduction to the second and main command, as in Matt. 
 V. 24 viraye SiaXXayi^^i, xviii. 15 vTrayi IXeyiov, Mark i. 44; ii. 9 Tdf. 
 [eds. 2, 7 ; ed. 8 adds koL, so cod. Sin. J, 11 eyetpe S^ov tov Koa^^ardv 
 trov. Cf. with this the combinations opare /SAeTrerc airo . . . , opare 
 IxTjSeh yivwo-Keru), in § 139, 49 p. 243. 
 
 b) In enumerations, — whether consisting of substantives, as 
 Eom. i. 29 sq. i^i^upto-Tas, KaraXaXoD?, v^puTTo.'s etc., 2 Cor. xii. 20 cpis, 
 f5A.os, 6u/xot etc., Gal. v. 20 ; 1 Tim. vi. 4 (see, on the other hand, the 
 polysyndeton in Eev. v. 12, etc.), or epithets, as 1 Tim. iii. 2 sq. Set tov 
 iwia-Koirov avimkrjiJLTrTov etvai, /xtas yvvaiKOi avSpa, vr)<^\iov, CTii>(j>pova 
 etc., Tit. i. 6 ; ii. 4 ; Jas. i. 8, etc. 
 
 c) for rhetorical reasons (cf. 28 a) p. 398), e.g. Mark iv. 39 
 aiuiTra, Tre^i/AcoiTO, 1 Cor. iv. 8 T^8rj KeKopecTfj-evoi icni, ijSrj ETrAotiTTjo-arc, 
 p^ojpts rjfjLwv e/3a(n\eu(raTe, Jas. V. 5, 6 (^irpv^jn^craTe xat l(rTraTaX.-^(TaTe, 
 iOpiij/aTe, icaTeSt/catraTe, icjioveviTaTf), 1 Tim. iii. 16 etc., particularly in 
 contrasting antithetic ideas and clauses, since the antithesis (as in 
 Latin) comes out more emphatically by means of rhetorical asyndeton, 
 than where the contrast is made by the help of adversative conjunc- 
 tions, as 1 Cor. XV. 42 sq. crveipfTat iv (jtOopa, eyuperai iv dc^^aptria ■ 
 (TneipeTai iv anjiia, iytiptrai iv S6^ etc., John iv. 22 vp.a.'S irpoo-KwiiTt 
 o ovK oiSare, ■^/j.eis irporrKVvovixev o oiSafiev, vi. 63, etc. Compare with 
 this the mode of contrasting two sentences in § 139, 28 p. 226. 
 
 3J 2) Entire independent sentences, on the other hand, are 
 sjiibjoined asyndetically to what precedes, especially in the 
 three following cases : ^ 
 
 a) Pre-eminently characteristic of John is asyndeton in the 
 
 g45 narration of historic facts following each other, — their intimate 
 connection being indicated, as a rule, by letting the predicate 
 precede at the very head of the sentence ; as, John • i. 40 \iya 
 auTois etc., 42 evpCcTKU ovtos TrpwTOS etc., 46 ivplq-Kii ^'iXunro's tov Na^a- 
 va^A., 47 Xiyti auTQ), 48 ciSev IijcroBs, 49 Aeyct aira . . . aTr^KpLBr) 'IijcroCs, 
 50, 51 ajriKpLOt] etc.. Matt. XX. 7 Xiyovcriv avTia • ... Xeyci aurois ■ XXV. 
 21 l^ij avTw 6 Kuptos, xxvii. 65 e^ij ourois etc. That this species of 
 
§ 151.] ASYNDETON. 403 
 
 asyndeton has been marred by the copyists times without number, by 
 the insertion of such particles as Be, yap, ovv, etc., see e.g. in § 149, 9 
 p. 363, and cf. the critical commentaries on the N. T. 
 
 b) Further, entire passages of considerable length often stand 
 asyndetically, especially in the didactic style, in order to indicate the 
 commencement of a new subject: see e.g. from the Ep. to the Rom. 
 viii. 16 ; ix. 1 ; x. 1 ; xiii. 1 ; from the 1st Ep. to the Cor. iv. 14 ; v. 9 ; 
 vi. 1 ; vi. 12 ; ix. 1 ; x. 23 ; xiv. 1, etc. 
 
 c) Lastly, smaller, proverb-like, didactic utterances and 
 sayings are put together asyndetically. Of these the Sermon on the 
 Mount and the discourses of Jesus in the Gospel of John afford 
 numerous examples, as well as the many separate commands and 
 exhortations in the hortatory portions of the Epistles and the Apoca- 
 lypse. See Matt, chaps, v. to-vii. ; John iii. 5-8; xii. 19; v. 23, 28, 
 30-33, 35sqq. ; vii. 16sqq. ; 1 Thess. v. 14; James chaps, iv. and v; 
 Rev. ii 10, 11; iii. 2, 6, etc. 
 
I. INDEX OF SUBJECTS. 
 
 The Figures refer to Pages. 
 
 Absolute cases, see Accusative, Gen- 
 
 , \ itive, Participle, etc. 
 
 ACBtractS in the Plur. 77 ; without an 
 (Art. 89 ; in the Ace. with cognate 
 iverb 148, and in the Dat. 183. 
 
 Aceusative, the Alexandrian in v 13. 
 pyntax of 146 sqq. ; with intransi- 
 Itives 147 ; of an abstract akin to 
 (he verb 148, 189 ; double l49, 152 ; 
 jieek 152, cf. 183, 189; pronom- 
 nal neuter instead of a different 
 (ase 15a ; of time and distance 
 i52sq., cf. 170; as an adverb 153 ; 
 k a parenthetic adjunct 153 ; of ex- 
 flamation 154 ; of the object with 
 t]e Passive 148, 188 ; with the Mid- 
 qe 191 sq. ; absolute of participles 
 317, cf;. 374 sq. ; absolute at the 
 bWinning 381 . With Infin. 272 sqq., 
 iiterchanged with Sn 383. 
 
 AetSihe, see Luke. 
 
 Adjectives, lingering in Nom. 78 ; 
 direrging in Gend. or Num. 80 ; 
 foj adverbs 82 sq. ; predicative with- 
 o4 Art. 94, and with Art. 124 ; use 
 of jfieutcr 122 ; Gen. cf a snhst. for 
 let Kari and Ace. for 156, 162 ; k. 
 win Gen. for 335 ; 4v with Dat. for 
 331 verbal 41, 190. 
 
 Adveips: 69,319; adjectives for 82 sq.; 
 neuers as 96, 123; as predicates 
 ]3llin elliptical construction 138; 
 parlciples for 299 ; in cases of at- 
 tradon 377 ; of place, loose use and 
 attrition of 70, 105, cf. 221 note. 
 Cf. Jarticles. 
 
 Adverttal adjuncts in the Nom. 139 ; 
 sepakted from the Part. 388 ; sub- 
 joins to a subst. with the Art. 91; 
 withAit the Art. 95 sq. 
 
 Aeolisrtk 6i, 69. 
 
 Alexanffl-ian dialect l. Forms : Ace. 
 in V iS names of Mts. 22 ; TeVo-fpo, 
 KfKa6li(TiJ.4vos, etc. 29 ; Aorist 39 
 3d Pllr. in -aav 43 ; 4pa\iv6.a 58 
 ^KO, 59t Kitix^oiMai 62 ; Ku/i/iia 62 
 KOTcciiwy 63 ; xeS 68 ; ^Si'Scto, etc. 
 47. Prases and constructions, see 
 Septua^nt. Cf. Language. 
 
 ] Anacolutbon 378 sqq. ; with ii4p 365 
 
 ' Analytical tendency in later (and 
 especially N.T.) Greek: see Eeso- 
 lution. Periphrasis, Possessive ad- 
 juncts. Subject, Object, Pleonasm, 
 avTos, 4yti)j etc. 
 
 Anastrophe 72. 
 
 Antithesis : antithetic arrangement 
 of words etc. with negatives 346, 
 349, 350, 352 ; indicated by Se, Kai, 
 etc. 364 sq.; without aconnective402. 
 
 Aorist, the Alexandrian 39 ; Passive 
 with Mid. or Intrans. force 51 sq., 
 191; in sense of Perf 197 sq.; 
 prophetic 198; proleptic 198; for 
 the Plupcrf 199 ; gnomic (of habi- 
 tude) 201 ; and Imperfect cf. 20"). 
 
 Apodosis wanting 386, 393. Cf 
 Aposiopesis, Se, Kai, ovTots, 
 
 ApOSiopesis : 396 ; cf. 358, 386. 
 
 Apposition 77 sq. ; attracted by the 
 
 Eel. 17 ; in the Nom. for some other 
 
 case 78 ; in the Gen. 78, cf 79 not3; 
 
 . to the omitted subject 132; to the 
 
 Voc. 141. 
 
 Article the, ^Ts for the indefinite 85 ; 
 the definite 85 sq. ; wi th proper 
 names 86 ; with pronouns 87, 119 ; 
 not used for the indefinite 87 sq , 
 93 ; the rhetorical 88, 124; omitted 
 87 sqq., 91 sq. ; with more closely 
 defined substantives 90 sq. ; used 
 twice or thrice 90, 98 ; expressed 
 but once 92 sq., 97 sqq. ; after th'cs 
 and other indefinite expressions 93, 
 295 ; used absolutely, or in lieu of a 
 subst. 94 ; with a Gen. following 
 95 ; with an adverbial limitation 
 95, 96 ; before entire clauses 96 sq. ; 
 with several connected substs. 97sq. ; 
 as a Demonstrative (postpositive, 8s 
 ^eVetc.jIOlsq. Wanting with Poss. 
 adjuncts 119 ; with Demonstratives 
 when predicative 120 ; with predi- 
 cates 124; inserted with predicates 
 124 With the Voc. 140 ; with par- 
 ticiples 124, 141, 309 ; with the Infin 
 266 sqq. 
 
 405 
 
406 
 
 INDEX OF SUBJTCTS. 
 
 Asking, verbs of, see Sparav, Seio-flai, 
 etc. 
 
 Aspiration, before a smooth breath- 
 ing etc. 7. 
 
 Asyndeton 226, 398, 40i sq. 
 
 Attic declension 13, 21 ; Attic Gen. 14. 
 
 Attraction 376 sq. ; of an appositive 
 77 sq. ; with the Infin. 278 ; in re- 
 lative sentences 285 sq. ; faulty 287 ; 
 with adverbs 287, 377 ; inverse 288 ; 
 of the participle 305. 
 
 Attributives, agreement of with sub- 
 stantives 80 sq.; with the Art. 87, 
 89 sq. ; belonging to several sub- 
 stantives 129. See Adjectives, Pro- 
 nouns, Participles, etc. 
 
 Augment : neglected 32, 33, 34 ; 
 double 35 ; superfluous 53, 63. 
 
 Blending of two constructions 318 ; 
 of the Active and the Passive 384 ; 
 of the direct and the indirect state- 
 ment 385. Cf. variatio structurae. 
 
 Brachylogy 395 sq. ; in comparisons 
 167, 177 ; with direct discourse, 
 questions, etc. 250 sq. ; 272 sq. ; with 
 ^Trei, aWd 359, 369 ; with HpxecrSai 
 374 ; with dirtS 322 sq. ; 4k 327 ; els 
 332 sq. For other rcffs. see 396. 
 
 Breathings 7 ; over p 33. 
 Capernaum, v isia irSxn 11 8. 
 
 Cardinals, see Numerals 
 
 I Cases, the oblique 141 sqq. ; of parti- 
 ciples 305, 308. See Ace. Dat. 
 Gen. etc. 
 
 ' Causal sentences 232 sq . ; particles- 
 2-33. . 
 
 'Cities names of, how declined 18; 
 Gend. of 21 ; use of Art. with 86. 
 
 Xflauses, leading instead of su'oordi- 
 nate 289 ; dependent passing over 
 into leading 282 sq., 357, 383 
 
 •Command, construction with words 
 ■ of 275 sq. 
 
 '.Comparative degree, fornix o^ 27 sq. 
 
 for the Pos. 83 ; for the Superl. 83 
 
 strengthening of 83 ; with imep 335 
 . irapd 339 ; irpos 340 ; expressed by 
 
 ^360. 
 • Comparison 27 ; double 28 ; brevilo- 
 
 qucncein 167 sq., 177, 393 ; gnomic 
 
 Aor. in 202. 
 
 Complutensian text 3. 
 
 Compound verbs, construction of 344. 
 
 Conditional Sentences 220 sqq. ; 
 
 rhetorical forms of 226 ; asyndetic 
 juxtaposition in 226 ; Imperative in 
 227 ; use of oii in 344 sqq. 
 
 Conjunctions, displaced 389. See 
 Particles. 
 
 Consonants, mutations of 7 ; doib- 
 ling of 8 ; changes in c 8 ; final 9. 
 
 Constructio ad synesin 80, 105sq., 
 I 129 sq., 281 sq. ; personal construc- 
 
 tion 377. 
 
 Contraction, in substantives 12(qq. ; 
 neglected in oa-rfov 13, in hpiai etc. 
 14, in fi6as etc. 14, in xpvaeici 26 ; 
 in verbs 44 sqq. ; in ixx^^T: 44. 
 Takes place contrary to rule (^/u'ffous 
 etc.) 14. 
 
 Copula, omission of 136 sq. 
 
 Countries, the Art. with namesof 86. 
 
 Crasis 10. 
 
 Dative, with substs. 92, 179 sj.; in 
 elliptical phrases 138 ; of clo.<er lim- 
 itation instead of the Ace. 52, cf. 
 183; of punishment 165; of the 
 Person, or object affected 111 sqq.; 
 periphrasis for (with Prep, es, irp2r, 
 iviiTTiov, etc )172,188; withirffTcuciv 
 173; eKiri^eiv 175; 6fio\oyiii 176; 
 with verbs of approach, contention, 
 etc. 177 ; of exhorting, ceisuring,' 
 etc. 177; withdauT(isl77 ; cimmodi, 
 etc. 178; ethicus 179; of subjec- 
 tivejudgmpnt 179 ; with conpounds 
 180,344; of the Thing 81 sqq. ; 
 instrumental 181, with e»182; of 
 mode, closer limitation, eti. 183 ; of 
 cognate abstract (xop? x^lif '"> etc. ) 
 183 ; with verbs of going 184 ; of 
 emotion 185; consilii 185, of time 
 186 ; two Datives 186 sq.' with the 
 Passive 187; with verbal idjs. 190; 
 with adverbs 320 ; Dativs absolute 
 143 N.2; 316; Pauline Jat. after 
 C^v, o-T^KeiK, etc. 178. 
 
 Dawes's Canon 213 ; see (oodwin in 
 
 Trans, of Amer. Philolog Assoc, for 
 
 1869-70, pp. 46-55. 
 Declension of nouns, nmsual forms 
 
 in first 11; second 12 ; tiird 13 sq. ; 
 
 of foreign proper nanes 15 sqq.; 
 
 anomalous 22 sq. ; o' adjectives • 
 
 25 sq. 
 
 Demonstratives I03sq. ; omitted 
 belbre Eel. 104 sq., 86, cf 395: 
 preparatory (before iVc Sti, and the 
 Infin.) 105, 240, 262, .'G3, cf 400; 
 constr. ad syn. withiOSsq. Sea 
 Pronouns. 
 
INDEX OS" SUBJECTS. 
 
 407 
 
 Deponents Passive 51 ; in passive 
 sense 52. 
 
 Derivation of words 73. 
 
 Direct discourse for oblique 215, 245, 
 248, 257, 272, 377 ; after verbs of 
 asking 272 ; passes into indirect and 
 vice versa 385 ; several direct sen- 
 tences in succession 245. Cf.Vari- 
 atio structurae. 
 
 Distributive expressions 30, 331,335. 
 
 Doric forms 2, 13, 49, 61, 66 ; Gen. 20. 
 
 Doxologies, use of the Art. in 88 ; 
 
 ellipsis of verb in 137. 
 Dual the, not used in N.T. 11. 
 
 Elision lo sq. 
 
 Ellipsis 390 sqq. : of the predicate 
 392, 394 ; of the participle 392, 395, 
 ■•^-cf. Participle; with awd, dA.A.' oli 
 392 ; of a general term 392 sq., 
 394 sq. ; after et Sh t^-li 393 ; of an 
 entire clause 395; of ourcis EO-Tij'395; 
 of a verbum dicendi, etc. 396. For 
 other references see p. 391. 
 
 Emotion verbs of, how construed 147, 
 164 sq, 185, 300,337. 
 
 Enallage of tenses 195. Of preposi- 
 tions, adverbs of place, see Prepo- 
 sitions, Adverbs, etc. 
 
 Enclitics 6. 
 
 Enumerations 402. 
 
 Epexegesis 399 ; such additions often 
 spurious 399 ; epexegetic Infin. 400 ; 
 additions connected by xai epexege- 
 tic at most only in sense 400. 
 
 Feminine Sing, instead of neuter 123. 
 Festivals Jewish names of 23. 
 Pinal letters 5. 
 Final sentences 228, 229, 231, 
 
 233 sqq., 261, 264, 270 ; a Put. Part, 
 for 296; a Pres. Part, for 297; 
 placed first 390. 
 
 Foreign words, spelling of 6; declen- 
 sion of 15 sqq. ; interpreted 128. 
 
 Future the : subjunctive 35 ; Attic in 
 ta 37 ; supposed circnmflexed 38 ; 
 Act. for Mid. .53; Pass, of depo- 
 nents in passive sense 52 ; stands for, 
 and is interchanged with, the Sub- 
 junc. 208, 209, 211sq., 214, 219, 221, 
 222, 228, 231, 234, 243, 255, 383 ; 
 and Subjunc. in one sentence 212, 
 229, 234, 242, 255; f"r the Opf. 
 with &v in supposition 218 ; after 
 idv and brav 222 sq. } with &i/ 228, 
 231, cf. 223 ; for the Impera. 257, 
 cf. 243 note, 290 ; written periphras- 
 ticallj'Sll. 
 
 Gender, see Neuter, Peminine, Ma* 
 culine. 
 
 Genitive the, in apposition 78 ; used 
 for a different case 80 note ; with 
 the superlative 84 ; position of with 
 Art. 93 ; after 01, t6, ri, 95 ; use of 
 154 sqq. ; accumulation of genitives 
 154 ; periphrasis for 156 ; of Poss. 
 Pron. for the objective 157 ; of the 
 country 157 ; of separation 157 sq. ; 
 partitive 158; after adverbs of time 
 159; with ehai, SiS6mt, etc. 159; 
 with verbs of partaking, etc. 160 ; 
 of touching, etc. 160; doubled with 
 verbs 160, 165, 167 note ; for an Adj. 
 161 ; with vl6s etc. 161 sq. ; of ma- 
 terial 162; rhetorical and hebraistic 
 162 ; after ehai and -yt'i/eo-flai 162 sq. ; 
 with words of plenty, etc. 163; of 
 price 164; of accusing 165; of per- 
 ception {i,Kov€ii>)l65 sq. ; of taste, etc. 
 167 ; Gen. of comparison 168 ; with 
 verbs of ruling 169 ; after an Adj. 
 or Part. 169 sq. ; of time and place 
 170 sq. ; elliptical 171 ; a Gen. and 
 an Inf. dependent on oneSubst.260; 
 position of in prepositional phrases 
 343 ; separated from its governing 
 substantive 387 ; of a Pors. Pron. 
 for the Dat. 388. 
 
 Genitives absolute : Passive 314, 
 
 cf. 315 note ; against the rule 315 ; 
 without a subject 316 ; with i>s 318. 
 
 Gospels (the synoptic) peculiarities of 
 their language: ruiHy, etc. 116; tI 
 ifiol (fa! aoi, etc. 138 ; l5oi 139 ; 
 dfia\oye7v 176; virdyeiv 204 ; ^<^es 
 210 ; ci with Opt. not found in 224 ; 
 Sto aicoiiiv 259 ; Inf. with too 266 ; 
 Ki\eieiv 275 ; Ka\ syeveTo 276 ; ^v 
 foil, by Part. 311 ; ij.4v 364. See 
 Matthew, etc. 
 
 Greek the later, see Language. 
 
 Hebraisms, Oriental modes of ex- 
 pression, etc. 1, 75 ; plurals 23, 77 ; 
 its for irpuTos and tis 29 sq., 85 ; Siio 
 Sio 30 ; 071a ayiai> 83, cf 24 ; peri- 
 phrasis of Prepp. by means of arona, 
 Xeip, etc., 90, 182, 187, 319; eTs 
 repeated 102 sq. ; in use of Prons. 
 (cf. Pronouns, ourds, etc.) 118 sq. ; 
 Trasou, etc. 121 ; Pem. for Neut. 123 ; 
 KaX 4ydpeT0 etc., afe^r] iirl KapSiav^ 
 135, 276 ; ri ifiu) xal croi 138 ; Art. 
 with the Voc. 140 ; ex after oixvinv 
 147 ; otfffij' oi/lrjiny, etc. 148 ; SM- 
 UKfiv Tivi 149; Tvoietv, eiVat el's xi 1 50 ; 
 \oyi^i(TBai elfs tl 151 ; Ka.\iiv tvofMt 
 ISl ; SShv Sa\d(r<rTis 153; airS, ix, 
 for the simple Gen. 158 ; Tc/fi/a 
 
108 
 
 INDEX OF SUBJECTS. 
 
 (pwTis and the like 161 sq. ; ivd/nriou 
 172, 180, 319; tnaTevew 17381).; 
 iKirl^tiv 175; iii.oKo'yeiv 176; with 
 4v 181 , 329 ; X"?? x^'P"" ^^^ '^'^ 
 like 183; iropeveadat 65m, etc. 184; 
 ev elp^vy and €is ilpiiV7\tf 184 ; Pres. 
 Part, ftir Fut. Pass. 190 sq. ; ei in 
 questions 248 sq. ; Put. for Impera. 
 257, cf. 243 ; koI e<7Tai 278 ; avriij 
 in Eol. sentences 280 ; participle for 
 finite verb 290 ; wpoaiBeTo 299 sq. ; i 
 iSiij/ elSoi', etc. 313 sq. ; eV ?/^epa fol- I 
 lowed by a Part. 316; inrd after ' 
 tpv\iiiT(7eii/, etc. 323 ; e« KOiAias /xtj- 
 TpiJj 327 ; ei in negative oaths 358 ; 
 Kol ISoi at beginning of apodosis 
 362 ; pleonastic constructions (a.yo'i- 
 |oi Ti o-TiiiUct, etc.) 398. Cf. Sep- 
 tuagint. 
 
 Hebrews, Ep. to the, style of 51 note, 
 75, 142; particular instances of 
 peculiarity: evapeaTeTaSai 185 ; In- 
 fin. after Adjs. and S.ubsts. 259 ; 
 after Prepp. 263 ; participles 289 ; 
 in quoting the 0. T. follows cod. 
 Alex. 291 ; ^avBiveiv, etc. 299 ; 
 irapi. 339 ; ,1161'. . . 5e as used in 364 ; 
 arrangement of words in 389 ; rov- 
 T^a-riv in 400. 
 
 iHiatUS not shunned as in Attic Greek 
 10. 
 
 Hyperbaton 331 sq. ; in cases of ap- 
 position 77 sq. ; oir |U6Tck9roAAcisl04 ; 
 TTpi) 6| I'j/xepwi/, aTrb aToZioii/, etc. 1 53. 
 
 Hypothetical sentences, see Con- 
 ditional, etc. 
 
 Illative sentences 243 ; expressed by 
 E(s Th 264 sq. 
 
 Imperative the, to be supplied 137, 
 138; Perfect and Aorist 206 ; nega- 
 tive 211 ; in the protasis 227 ; after 
 '/i'a234 ; 'iva as a circumlocution for 
 241 ; after So-re 244 ; after on 246 ; 
 expressed by the Put. 257, cf 243 
 note; by a question 258; byanlnfin. 
 271 ; instead of the Infin. after verbs 
 of asking 272; followed by a Put. 
 290 ; two Imperatives connected by 
 Kai 290, without Kai 243, 402 ; repe- 
 tition of 398. 
 
 Imperfect the, used apparently for the 
 Aorist 200 ; de conatu 205. 
 
 Impersonal verbs 135; in the parti- 
 ciple 318. 
 
 Inclination of the accent 6. 
 
 Indeclinable nouns 23 ; with the Art. 
 
 86. 
 Indefinite Pron. the, to be supplied 
 
 159 ; with participles 295. 
 
 Indicative the, Pres. for theSubjttnc 
 208 sq., 210, 222, 227 sq., 231, 
 234 sq.; for the optative 215, 220, 
 231. 
 
 Infinitive the, 258 sqq.; after So-te 244 ; 
 after verbs 258 sq., 261 ; after a 
 Subst. or an Adj. 259; Inf explo- 
 tivus 259 ; dependent with a Gen. 
 upon a single substantive 260 ; in a 
 tclic sense 261 ; in a parenthetic 
 clause 261 ; with the Art. 261 sq. ; 
 as subject 262 ; after a preparatory 
 Demons. 262, 263; as object 262; 
 after a Prep. 263 ; in the Bat. 264 ; 
 with ToD 266; epcxegetic 260 Rem., 
 265, 268, 398;' for the imperative 
 271 ; used absolutely 271 ; with Ace. 
 
 272 sq. ; implying obligation, etc. 
 
 273 ; after KcAeV/eii', etc. 275 ; passive 
 for Act. 275 ; after ko! eyei/ETo 276 ; 
 attraction (Noni. Gen. Dat.) in con- 
 nection with 278 ; separated from 
 its governing participle 388. 
 
 Infiection, the weak (of foreign 
 
 names) 19. 
 Interchange of tenses, see Enallage. 
 
 Interpretations given in the Gr. text 
 
 125, 128 ; see Epexcgesis. 
 Interrogative particles 247 sqq. ? 
 
 not standing at the beginning 388. 
 
 Interrogative sentences, direct . 
 
 246 sq., double 249 sq., instead of 
 indirect 250; indirect 249 sq., 377; 
 Art. before 96 ; instead of Relative 
 sentenccs'251 ; placed first 390. 
 Introductory formula 137. 
 
 Ionic forms 2, 7, 11, 15, 44. See Con- 
 traction. 
 
 James, style of 202, 203 note. 
 
 John (cf. Gospels) peculiarities of: use 
 of TTp&Tos with Gen. 84 ; of Poss. 
 Prons. 115; of the Art. with the 
 predicate 123 sq.; of ifSe 139; of 
 ^vofia avry 139; of TrttXTeietv 174; 
 of eSw/fa and SeSw/ca 199 ; of uirdyetv 
 204 ; of the Pres. for the Put. 205 ; 
 of 'fra 236, 244 note, 264, 266 ; of 
 questions with fi^ 248 ; of asyndeton 
 363 sq., 402 ; of a participial passing 
 over into a leading clause 382 ; of 
 the negatived contrary in repetition 
 399. 
 
 Language popular and the later Greek 
 (cf. the Preface) : use of double 
 comparison 28 ; avairaiitrovTat 6S ; 
 Trie 66 ; eU Ka\ ets 103 ; its loose use 
 of local particles 71, 105, 221 note, 
 377 sq. ; and employment of the re- 
 
INDEX OF SUBJECTS. 
 
 409 
 
 flexives 110 ; of Sans 115 ; «f fSios 
 117 ; of the constr. ad syn. in the 
 Pred. 129 sq. J immoderate use of 
 P> ons. see Pronouns ; use of iSoii 139; 
 of Nora, with Art. for the Voc. 140 ; 
 of the dativus ethicus 179 ; of the 
 tenses 196 ; of the gnomic Aor. 202 ; 
 Ace. after the Pass. 189 ; iwdyeiv 
 to go away 204 ; use of the moods 
 207 ; Indie, for .Subjunc. 209, 210, 
 222 ; S(j)6s 210 ; optative little used 
 215 ; 'tva 236 sq., for an Infin. 258 ; 
 questions without an interrogative 
 word 247 ; elliptical use of Infin. 
 Absol. 271 ; avT6s in place of the 
 Eel. 283 ; attraction 285 ; artificial 
 periods avoided 288 sq., 378 sq., cf. 
 227 ; two imperatives 290, cf 227 ; 
 use of ^</, fiaav with participle 312 ; 
 lax use of h- 328, aiid els 332 ; fond 
 of Kal 361 ; prone to anacoluthon 
 378 sq. Cf. Alexandrian dialect, 
 Resolved, etc. 
 Iiatin words in Greek 16 sq. 
 
 Iiatinisms (on the influence of the 
 Latin language see the Preface) : 
 TToMs rris ^afiapelaSj etc. 78 ; in the 
 use of ouTos, 4Kf7vos, etc. 103 sq. ; 
 
 ^ /■ Voc. without S 140 ; vpodysiu, vpoip- 
 ^etrBai nva 144 ; viK^v 4k 147 j airS 
 and irpd in specifications of time and 
 place 153 ; yaii.r)Srivai with Dat.177; 
 Subjunctive for Optative 215; In- 
 dicative in general relative clauses 
 228 ; in construction of /feA.cufii' 
 and similar words 237 note, 275 ; 
 tva lii] (ne dicam) 241 ; in the use 
 of a Kelative for a continuative 
 Demons. 283 sq.; i.Tr6 with (po^tiirBat, 
 etc. 323 ; cV with nfleVai, etc. 329 ; 
 aiv tor and Z5\. 
 
 XiOCal particles, loose use and attrac- 
 tion of 70 sq., 105, 221 note, 377 sq. 
 Cf. Particles. 
 
 Luke, the style of 75. Details : aviip 
 ipoveis, etc. 82 ; Art. before entire 
 clauses 96 ; airds as Subj. 108 ; 
 Neut. participle 122; Voc. with 5 
 140 ; use of the construction avh 
 KOivoS 142, 160, 332; use of ^Stjj 
 171 ; use of the moods 208 ; the 
 Optative 215, 218, 224, 230, 254, 
 256 ; &v with Sirais 234 ; W and Siras 
 in the Acts 235 sq. ; as with Infin. 
 244 ; Spa 247 ; el in direct questions 
 248; interrogative periphrasis for 
 the Imperative 258; Infin. after verbs 
 signifying to request, etc. 258 ; Put. 
 Infin. after /ieWetv in the Acts 259 ; 
 Infin. after prepositions 263 ; with 
 T»S 266 ; with Ace. after ^feoTic 
 52 
 
 278 sq. ; relative clauses as coordi- 
 nate 283 ; his use of attraction 285, 
 cf 304 ; participles 289 ; KayBaveti), 
 irpoffTifle'coi, etc., with Part. 299 ; 
 d KaKovnems 304 ; participle with 
 ehm 312 ; periphrases with in 330 ; 
 Kard with Gen. in local sense 334 ; 
 M with Dat. 337 note ; irpos with 
 Gen. once 340 ; pleonastic fi-fi with 
 
 the Inf 355 ; use of /xei/ Se 364 ; 
 
 transition to indirect discourse 38S ; 
 arrangement of words 389 ; aposi- 
 opesis 396. On the difference be- 
 tween the style of the Gospel and 
 the Acts see 264, cf. 277. 
 
 Maoedonian dialect i. 
 
 Manuscripts of the N.T. 2. 
 ( Mark, style of, see Gospels. Pond of 
 the periphrastic Part, and dvcu 312 ; 
 (doubtful) use of jnev oSu 370. 
 
 Masculine the, its use for other gen- 
 ders, see constructio ad syn. 
 
 Matthew style of, see Gospels. Ser- 
 mon on the Mt., use of Aor. Subj. 
 and negative imperative in 211 ; 
 asyndeton in 403. His omission o1 
 fiev 364 ; his use of the Adv. t((t6 
 as a Conjunc. 401 ; (does not use 
 Hev olv 370). 
 
 Metaplasms 23. 
 
 Middle the, 191 sq. ; distinguished in 
 
 the N.T. from the Active 193. 
 Moods the 207 sqq. 
 Motion verbs of with the Infin. 261, 
 
 ^ 270. 
 Mountains, Gend. of names of 21 sq. 
 
 USTegationS, how expressed in N. T. 
 344 sq. ; similar sometimes annul 
 each other 354 sq. ; relative denial 
 of the first of two clauses 356 ; mis- 
 placement of negative particle 389 ; 
 periphrasis of negatives 121, cf. 389. 
 
 Neuter the, used adverbially 96, 123; 
 Sing, of adjectives and participles 
 122,Plnr. of ditto 123 ; of aPron. for 
 some other gender 127, 128 ; Plur. 
 with verb in Sing, (or Plur.) 125; 
 Sing, as predicate instead of the 
 Masc. or Fem. 127 ; Plur. of a Pel. 
 referring to a Masc. or Fem. ante- 
 cedent 282. 
 .Nominative the, used in apposition 
 instead of other cases 78 sq., cf 141, 
 298; with iSoi5, ?5e 139; and Ace. 
 blended 139 ; used adverbially 139 ; 
 for the Voc.140 ; double neriphrased 
 by As 150 ; instead of the Ace. aftei 
 verbs of naming 151. 
 
410 
 
 INDEX OF SUBJECTS. 
 
 Nominatives absolute 292, 298, 
 
 317, 379. 
 Ifouns, see Proper Names, Moantains, 
 
 etc., and cf. the Table of Contents. 
 Wumber, see Plural, Singular. 
 Numerals 28 sq. 
 
 Oaths, elliptical use of ei in 3.58. 
 
 Object, a common not repeated 142; 
 repeated 142 ; omission of 144, with 
 partitive Gen. 1.58 ; ellipsis of a 
 suggested 146. 
 
 Objective sentences (with Sn etc.) 
 
 245 sq. 
 Optative omitted in wishes 137 ; as the 
 mood of wishing 214, 233 sq. ; as a 
 dependent mood rarely used in N.T. 
 215, 256 ; with av 217 sq. ; Subjunc. 
 as its substitute 256. 
 
 Oriental expressions, see Hebrar 
 
 isms. 
 
 Parables, use of the Art. in 125. 
 
 Participle the, in the Nom. instead of 
 some other case 78, 298 ; of irregular 
 Gend. or Numb. 80 sq. ; instead of 
 a Rel. clause 78, 93 ; in the Gen. 
 instead of some other case 80 note ; 
 in the Neut. 122; with the Art. as 
 a predicate 124, 309 ; constr. ad 
 syn. with 130, cf. 298 ; with the Art. 
 after the imperative 141 ; Put. and 
 Pres. instead of the Lat. in -ndus 
 190sq.; Aor. and Pres. discriminated 
 201 ; Pres. for Fu t. 206, 297, 307; Put. 
 Is periphrased 241. General use of 
 288 sqq. ; has given way in N.T. to 
 finite constructions 289 ; apparently 
 instead of a finite verb 291 ; ellipti- 
 cal and anacoluthic 292, 298, 382 ; 
 as a substitute for a Eel. clause 294 ; 
 with and without the Art. 294 sq. ; 
 future 296 ; present as timeless 
 296 sq. ; de conatu 297 ; several 
 successive with or without xal 297 ; 
 containing the leading idea (with 
 \aMvsiv etc.) 299 ; instead of, and 
 interchangeably with, a clause with 
 Sti 300 sq. ; after verbs of emotion 
 300 ; Ace. with after verbs of per- 
 ception 301, 305 ; omitted 304, 308, 
 392, 395, see Ellipsis ; in attraction 
 305 ; with particles (is etc.) 306 sq. ; 
 with (Ivai and ■yiveaBat as a peri- 
 phrasis of simple tense-forms 308 sq., 
 351, cf. 124; pleonastic (I'Sij) dSov, 
 etc.) 313; in Gen. Absol. 314 sq.; 
 Dat. 316 ; Ace. 317; Nom. 317, cf. 
 Nom. Absol. ; 4v with Dat. as a 
 substitute for 330 sq. ; /iercj with 
 Gen. as a substitute for 338 ; passes 
 insensibly over into a finite verb 382. 
 
 Particles the, 70 sq. ; lax use of 70, 
 105, 221 note, 378 ; with participles 
 306 sq. ; misplaced 389. 
 
 Partitive Gen. position of 93; peri- 
 phrases for 158; as subject, etc. 158; 
 after verbs 159. 
 
 Passive the, 187 sqq. ; with Prep. 187; 
 with the Dat. 187; with Ace. of 
 thing 188 sq.; of verbs governing 
 Gen. or Dat. 189 ; personal con- 
 struction with 377. 
 
 Paul's style : his use of a periphrastic 
 Gen. 78 ; intermediate location of 
 U|Hayetc. 117; omission of the copula 
 136, 217; use of Dat. (in (^v deVi 
 etc.) 178; use of ev Kvpia 185, cf. 
 1 76 ; free use of Ace. after Pass. 
 190 ; distinction recognized between 
 iv€pye7v and ivepye'icrOai 193 ; sup- 
 posed use of &i> for 4dv 220 note, cf. 
 Ellipsis ; use of cfrt . . . efre 221 ; 
 fond of questions with ou 247 ; use of 
 Spa 247 ; M^ yevoiTo 248 ; Infin, after 
 a preposition 263, cf. 266; use of 
 the participle 289 sq. ; of a partici- 
 pial for a finite clause 382; use of 
 the elliptical as 3ti 358; of the 
 strengthened &pa oiv 371 ; indulges 
 in anacoluthon and loose construc- 
 tion 386 ; use of ellipsis with o6 
 IJi.6voii Si etc. 393 ; the epexegetical 
 TovrfffTlv 400. 
 
 Perception verbs of, constructions 
 with 165 sq., 301. 
 
 Perfect the. Middle has Act. sense 
 194 ; in sense of Aor. 196 sq. ; pro- 
 leptic 198 ; periphrastic forms 313. 
 
 Periphrasis by means of the Gen. 
 78 ; for simple Prep. 90 ; periphras- 
 tic forms of negatives 121; of an 
 Adj. by a Subst. in Gen. 161 ; by 
 Kari with Ace. or Gen. 162, 335; 
 of simple tense-forms by a Part, with 
 €?TOi {yiyecreai) 124, 308, 351 ; of the 
 Infin. by im 236, 239, 259 ; of the 
 Put. Part, by 'Im 241 ; of the Im- 
 perative by 'lya 241 ; by a Put. or a 
 question 257 sq., cf. 243 note ; of an 
 Adj. or Part, by means of 4i/ 330 sq., 
 of fifTd 338 sq . Periphrasis of cases 
 by means of prepositions 142 sqq. : 
 instead of the double Ace. 149 ; of 
 the Greek Ace. 152 ; of the subjec- 
 tive and objective Gen. 156 ; of the 
 Gen. of separation 1 57 sq. ; of the 
 partitive Gen 158; of the dative 
 of the person by means of eii, 
 ivtiiTioi/, 172 sq.; of the Dat. of 
 thing by means of iv, M, 181 sqq. 
 
 Persons names of, see Proper names. 
 
INDEX OF SUBJECTS. 
 
 411 
 
 Personal Construction with Passives 
 
 in attraction 376 sq. 
 Personal pronouns, see Pronouns. 
 Peter', style of 203 note ; his use of 
 
 idios 117 note. 
 Place, particles of, loosely used 71,105, 
 
 221 note, 377 sq. Cf. Particles. 
 Pleonasm : see p. 397 and the refor- 
 
 enoes given there. 
 Pluperfect the, without augment 33 ; | 
 
 endingofSdPlur. Act.43; useofl99; 
 
 periphrastie form of 313. 
 Plural for the Sing. 77, 126, 130, 282 ; 
 
 alleged Plur. excellentiae 77 ; nouns 
 
 Plur. only 23 sq., 77 ; Plur. msges- 
 
 taticus 131. 
 
 Polysyndeta40i. 
 Positive the, instead of the super- 
 lative 83 ; for the comparative 360. 
 
 Possessive pronouns, use of the 
 
 Art. with 87; periphrasis for 116, 
 see Pronouns ; use of iSios for 117 ; 
 Possessive limitations needlessl/ 
 expressed 118,194 ; used objectively 
 157. Cf. Pronouns. ■ 
 
 Predicate the, anarthrous 94, 123 ; 
 with the Art. 1 23 sq. ; of several 
 subjects 129 ; constr. ad syn. in 129; 
 precedes in clauses after koI iyimTo 
 277, cf. 373. 
 
 Pregnant construction 395. 
 
 Prepositions the, general use of 
 321 sqq. ; elision with 10 sq.. Ill; 
 periphrased by substantives 90, 187, 
 319; in elliptical phrases 138; with 
 the Intin. 263; newly formed 319 ; 
 before abverbs 320 ; rule respecting 
 the repetition of with several con- 
 nected substantives 341, and with 
 the Rel. and its antecedent 342 ; in 
 composition 344. 
 
 Present the, circumflexed 38, 205, 209, 
 235 ; historic 196 sq. ; with force of 
 the perfect 203 ; with force of the 
 future 203 sq., 219, 297, de conatu 
 205, 297. See Indicative, Partici- 
 ple, etc. 
 
 Prolepsis 198, 356. 
 
 Pronouns the, 103 sqq. Omission of 
 Demons, before Kel. 104 sq. ; re- 
 dundant 105; constructio ad synesin 
 with 1 05 sq. ; use of avT6s 107 ; per- 
 sonal for reflexive 110, 116, cf. 
 oiToC ; reflexive of 3d Pers. for 1st 
 or 2d Pers. 113 ; ludef. Pron. 114 ; 
 Xnterrog. Pron. 115; use of ians 
 115; periphrases for the possessives 
 115sq. ; use of iSios 117; immod- 
 erate and pleonastic use of 108, 118, 
 
 132, 142, 194; use of the Art. with 
 119 sqq. ; referring as subject to a 
 following predicate 125, 128 ; in the 
 Neut. instead of some other gender 
 128, cf 125; iu Ace. Neut. instead 
 of some other case 152; use of a 
 Possess, instead of the objective 
 Gen. 157 ; Gen. of a Pers. Pron. 
 for the Dat. 388. Cf Demonstra- 
 tives, Possessives, Reflexives, Rela- 
 tives, et" 
 
 Proper names, Hebr. how repro- 
 duced in the N. T. 5 sq ; diversity 
 in spelling 6 ; declension of 15 sqq. ; 
 use of the Art. with 86 sq. See 
 Cities,Countries, Mountains, Rivers, 
 etc. 
 
 Proverbial phrases, etc., copula 
 
 omitted in 136, 138, 394 ; redundant 
 pronouns in 280 ; independent Part, 
 in 291 ; asyndeton with 403. 
 Purpose, see Final sentences. 
 
 Questions, see Interrogative sentences, 
 etc. 
 
 Quotations from the O.T. : Art. be- 
 fore 96 ; subject unexpressed in 133, 
 134 ; imitation of the Hebr. Rel. in 
 280 ; Part, apparently used inde- 
 pendently in 291 ; the Ep. to the 
 Hebr. quotes the Alex, text of Sept., 
 Paul the "Vat. text 291 ; participial 
 imitation of Hebr. Inf. Absol. in 
 313 ; negatived substantives in 353 ; 
 substituted for the grammatical 
 apodosis 386 Rem. 
 
 Beceptus textus 3. 
 
 Beflexive pronouns 110 sqq.; use 
 
 of neglected 112, 116; of the 3d 
 Pers. used for 1st and 2d 113 ; ySios 
 takes the place of II 7 sq. ; expressed 
 with the Middle 194 ; with Ace. and 
 Inf 274. 
 
 Relative pronouns : without an an- 
 tecedent Demons. 104, 286, 395 ; in 
 the Ace. akin to the verb (% Se (a, 
 etc.) 148 sq. ; taking a verb in 1st 
 or 2d Pers. 281 ; conforming in Gend. 
 to the Pred. of their own clause 
 281 ; in the constructio ad synesin 
 281 sq. ; in attraction 285 sq. ; hy- 
 perbaton with 388 sq. Cf 3s. 
 
 Relative sentences : expressed by 
 
 a participle 78 sq. ; Moods in 
 227 sqq. ; to express purpose 228, 
 229, cf. 231 ; interchanged with 
 indirect interrogative sentences 
 229 sq., 251, and even direct 252 sq. ; 
 redundant avros in 280 ; as co-ordi- 
 nate leading clauses 283 ; pass over 
 
412 
 
 INDEX OF SUBJECTS. 
 
 into leading clauses 283, 382 ; blend- 
 ing with a neighboring Demons, 
 clause 284; incorporating into them- 
 selyes the governing noun 284, 286 ; 
 a, general Rel. clause instead of a 
 conditional clause 288 ; pass into 
 subordinate clauses of another sort 
 383 ; anacoluthon occasioned by 
 383. 
 
 Eepetition clauses deno-ting, how 
 framed in N. T. 216, 232. 
 
 Eepetition oratorical 398 sq. ; peri- 
 phrastic 398 ; of the person ad- 
 dressed 398 ; by means of the nega- 
 tived contrary 399. 
 
 Resolved or decomposed lan- 
 guage of the later Greeks (partic- 
 ularly of the N. T.) : resolution of 
 cases by means of Prep. 141 sq. ; of 
 the Infln. by 'li>a, 8ti, etc., 236, 
 238 sq., 272 sq. ; of participial con- 
 structions into leading clauses 289, 
 cf. 401 ; of simple tense-forms by 
 the Part, and ehai 308 sq. Cf. also 
 Periphrasis, Possessives, Subject, 
 Object, Pleonasm, airSs, iyd, etc. 
 
 Hevelation the, negligent, hebraistic, 
 Bolecistic style of 2, 50, 75. Speci- 
 fications ; useof Alex. Ace. in V 13; 
 Kar-fiyup 25 ; tteKQiriaKes 43 ; vikovvti 
 44 ; i ^/z 50 ; e0avfiii(T8riv o9 ; appos- 
 itive Nom 78, cf 299 ; irregularities 
 of Gend. in adjectival adjuncts 80, 
 cf. 130 ; etSov KoX iSou 139 ; vik^v 4k 
 147 ; Gen. in specifications of size 
 163; alvuv with Dat. 176 note (cf. 
 SiSd(TKew 149) ; indyai 204 ; 'li/a with 
 Put. 234; 456671 "va 238, cf. 234; 
 Infln. with to5 and eis rb 263, 266 ; 
 ourds in Hel. clauses 280 ; juTavoiiv 
 4k 327 ; never uses jheV 364. Cf 
 Hebraisms. 
 
 Rivers names of are ]Masc. 21 ; always 
 take the Art. 87. 
 
 Schema, Airi xowoi 160, 178 note, 
 181,187,332,339,355; KoXo^diviov 
 180 ; KO0' '6Kov Koi fi4pos 186. 
 
 Sentences, connection of 401 (and 
 refces. there); anacoluthon resulting 
 from loose connection of 386. Cf. 
 also Apodosis,Clauses, Conditional, 
 Final, Illative, etc. 
 
 Septuagint the, style of, and its in- 
 fluence on the N.T. 1, 76. Syntacti- 
 cal peculiarities : avrSs as subject 
 108 sq. ; lavrov and avrov 111; pleo- 
 nastic use of Prons. 118, cf. 142, and 
 ouTiij, 4y<i, etc., in the Greek Index ; 
 aij^eiv ati^Tiiriv, etc. 148 ; iroie^j/ or 
 CiVat ets Ti 1 50 ; Xoyi^etrdat ets rt 
 
 151; KaK€7i> tuofta 151; uffTejjfui 
 169 ; TTio-Teiif 11/ 174 sq. ; 4\irl(eiv 175 ; 
 alviTv, iixo\oyetv 176 ; dfioioiv 
 177 hot. ; x«p? X"'P^"' '^^'i "T"^- 
 \iaiT6ai and similar verbs of emotion 
 185 ; use of the Aor. 203 ; restricted 
 in its use of moods 208 ; ov it.i] with 
 Fut. and Subjunc. 211, 212 ; Indie, 
 with 46.11 223 ; fond of direct dis- 
 course 245 ; use of d in questions 
 249 ; ^is for 8f 251 ; 3, ti for 8i^ ti 
 254; Infln. with tov abounds in 
 271; employs attraction 285 ; avoids 
 participial constructions 289 ; use of 
 npoa-eSe-To 299 sq. ; iBiiv elSoi), etc. 
 313; airh after (i>vX6.a(reiv 324; 4v 
 instrumental like Hebr. a 329 ; for- 
 mula in oaths 358 sq. ; iaov Stroi' 
 373 ; ei\^iv %v Tii/i 376 ; avr\yy4\-n 
 Keyuvres 384. For peculiarities in 
 forms see Alexandrian dialect. 
 
 Sermon on the Mt., Aor. Subjunc. and 
 Neg. Imperat. in 211; asyndeton in 
 403. Cf. Matthew. 
 
 Singular for the Plural of Substs. 
 ■76 sq. ; predicate 1 26 ; with the Rel. 
 281 sq. 
 
 Subject the, pronominal freely ex- 
 pressed ISlsq. ; unexpressed 132 sq. ; 
 to be supplied by the reader 133 ; 
 partit. Gen. taking the place of 158 ; 
 separately expressed with Ace. and 
 Inf 274 ; subject of a dependent 
 clause made the object of the leading 
 clause 376. 
 
 Subjunctive the, of the Fut. 35 ; of 
 copula sometimes omitted 137 ; de- 
 liberative 208 ; adhortative 209, 243, 
 245'; imperatival 211; Aor. after 
 ou M^ 211sq. 218; takes the place of ■ 
 the Optat. as a dependent mood and 
 after historical ten.ses 215, 223 ,sq., 
 227, 230 sq., 233, 242, 255, 2.56; 
 Aor. with &i/ 219; without &v in 
 general Rel. sentences 228; with 
 particles expressing limit or goal 
 230 ; after So-Te 243. See Final 
 Sentences, Future. 
 
 Substantives derivation of 73 ; syn- 
 tax of 76 sqq. ; Plur. forms for Sing, 
 and vice versa 77 ; omitted 81 sq., 
 189, see Ellipsis ; several connected 
 by Kal and without connective 
 400 sq. Art. with, see Article. 
 
 Superlative expressed by the positive 
 83 ; by the comparative 84 ; for the 
 comparative 84. 
 
 Supposition expressed by theFut. 218. 
 
 Synesin, see Constructio ad Syn. 
 
 Synoptics, see Gospels. 
 
INDEX OF StrajECTS. 
 
 413 
 
 Textus reeeptus 3. 
 
 Temporal particles 230,ef.Particles. 
 
 Temporal sentences 230sqq. j in 
 
 with the Infin. to express time 
 
 263 sq. ; /col iyeiero 276. 
 Tenses use of the 194 sqq. See Aorist, 
 
 Future, etc., also Enallage. 
 Trajeetion, see Hyperbaton. 
 
 Transition from oratio obliqua to 
 recta, etc., see Direct discourse. 
 Participles, Variatio Structurae, 
 etc. 
 
 Variatio structurae 257, 271, 274, 
 
 283, 293, 298, 318, 378.sq., 383. Cf. 
 
 Blending, etc. 
 Verbals in -tos 41(and-Tfos rarel90); 
 
 construction of 190 sq. 
 VerbSji augment of 32 sq. ; forms of 
 
 35 sqq., 42 sq. ; Fat. Subjunc. 35 ; 
 
 Attic Fut. 38 ; Alex. Aor. 39 ; 3d 
 Fut. 40 ; in K,/Jt.,v,p 41 ; contracted 
 44 ; in ij.i 44 sqq. ; deponents Pass. 
 51 ; anomalous list of 53 sqq. ; 
 syntax of 187 sqq. ; active used in- 
 transitively 144 ; finite instead of 
 particijjles 289 sqq. ; construction of 
 compound 344. See Middle, Pass- 
 ive, MoodSjTenses ; and on the con- 
 struction of verbs of asking, etc., 
 see Selffflai, etc., in the Greek index. 
 
 Vocative the, 138 sqq. ; with and with- 
 out & 140 ; Nom. used for 140 sq. 
 
 Voices the, 187 sq. Cf. Middle, Pas- 
 sive, Verb. 
 
 Wisll, Jopula omitted in current for- 
 mulas for expressing 137 ; optative 
 used in 214, 233 sq. ; ha after 237. 
 
 Zeugma 400 sq. 
 
n. INDEX OF GREEK WORDS AND FORMS. 
 
 The Figures refer to Pages. 
 
 a changed into e in y^pei 15 ; in Tiiraepa 
 
 29; KeKaflepitr/icVor 29; in verbs in 
 
 -du 44. 
 -a Gen. -Tjs after a vowel or p 11 ; with 
 
 proper names 17. 
 -o Gen. -OS with proper names 17. 
 -a G«n. -UP in names of cities 18. 
 'A&aplfi, t6 22. 
 i^uiraos, fj 12. 
 aya66s comparison 27. 
 ayaOua-ifri 73. 
 a7o\\i(io|iiai 51 ; constr. of 185 ; with 
 
 Participle 300. 
 &ya\fiia omission of 82. 
 a7aTrosi/ oLydnrji/ 148 sq. 
 aydTTY) with ev and els 329. 
 ayanriT6s constr. of 190. 
 &ye Interjection 70. 
 Sycic 53 ; used impersonally 134 ; and 
 
 its compounds used intransitively 
 
 144. 
 Siyia, rd, fi-yia ayiav 24, 83. 
 -ayiaavi/T] 73. 
 . &yvvfjLt 53. 
 ayopd^etp 7ifj.7js 164. 
 'Aypiinrai 20. 
 ayo}vi^e<r6ai aywi'a 148. 
 a3e\<p6s omission of 94. 
 ^Stjs meaning and construction of 171. 
 aSiiyaTiJ*/ etTTL with Infin. 260. 
 'AepfitA}!/, TO and tj 22. 
 &(up.a, rd 23. 
 a9t^os ctTTiJ 158. 
 
 at and € interchanged 5, 40 note, 
 -oi in 1st Aor. Opt. Act. 42. 
 aixP^^(t>T€V€iv alxti'O.Koxjiav 148. 
 Myvirros without Art. 87 ; Iv Alyiirrov 
 
 171. 
 aii'Eri' constr. of 1 76 note. 
 -aivu Aor. of verbs in 41 . 
 aipeii) 53. 
 
 -aipa Aor. of verbs in 41. 
 alpw : Aor. Pass, in reflex, sense 52 ; sc. 
 
 ayKvpav 146; constr. of 157sq. 
 alax^vitreai ait6 192, 323. 
 alTetv an d compounds constr. of 149 , 1 89 ; 
 
 Aor. Mid. 191 ; Act. and Mid. 193 ; 
 airfia'dat 'iva 237. 
 turi^fiara^ airidfiaTa 73. 
 alufeSt oi 24. 
 
 cut&vios 26. 
 
 ^KaTdircuTToSf iKaTdTTavtrros 65. 
 
 i,Kii'l)v adhuc 153. 
 
 aKoieiv Put. of 53 ; constr. of 165 sq. 
 301 sq. ; Akoj 184; Perf. force of 
 Pres. 203. 
 
 &Kpos in Neut. with Gen. following 94. 
 
 'AkiSaos 20. 
 
 Si\as, [d\a], li\s 24. 
 
 a\Ei(f>E0'8ai with Ace. 192. 
 
 oiA.A.0 elided 10 ; oIik . . . aWd 356 ; for 
 Se365; AaV oi' 368 ; aWd but other- 
 wise 369 ; ou yhp aWd 369 ; 4\\' ij 
 374 ; awd in ellipsis 392. 
 
 aW^Awf 31. 
 
 SiWofiai 54. 
 
 &k\us and erepos 32, 102, 122 ; followed 
 by Part, with Art.93, 295; redundant 
 373. 
 
 SAs, 5, Saols and SAa, t((, 24. 
 
 afiaprdfeiv 54 ; anaprlav 148 ; signif. and 
 constr. of 173. 
 
 i.liiveiv in Middle 194 note. 
 
 a/i(ptdCtMj 49. 
 
 aiiipisvvviu, a.n(pt4(a 49 ; in Mid. 191. 
 
 S;/ rare 72 ; for edv ? 72, 220 ; use of 216 ; 
 with Ind. Pret. 216, 224 ; su{)posed 
 omission of with eSei etc. 216 ; with 
 Subjunc. 217, 231 ; withOptat. 217 ; 
 in interrog. clauses 254 ; Subjunc. 
 with oil fi'ti for oiiK &i> with Opt. 218 ; 
 with Aor. Subjunc. 219 ; iSjs fix with- 
 out M, verb 219 ; omission of 225 
 sq. ; in relative sentences 227 sq. ; 
 with the Put. 228, 231 cf. 222 ; girou 
 Hv 228 ; with particles of time 231 ; 
 with gTTffls 234. 
 
 -OK in 2d Aor. 3d Plur. 43 ; for -oiri in 
 Perf. 43. 
 
 avd 331 ; used adverbially in distrib- 
 utive sense 30, 331 sq. ; &i/h liiaov 
 332. 
 
 hva^aivew Put. force of 204. 
 
 ■iivdyaAOVj avciyaioi^, av^yeay 13. 
 
 hvdyopui, avfix^V^ 51. 
 
 i,iia6eiMTl(eiv ii/uBeiiari 1 84. 
 
 i.vahifii' used intransitively 145. 
 
 'AvaWos 20. 
 
 ii/oTi nveorBou constr. of 158 ; avava^ffovratf 
 ipana6(T0VTal 65. 
 4J4 
 
GREEK INDEX. 
 
 415 
 
 ai/dtrra -arriBt 47. 
 
 avaffTaats vsKpatv 89. 
 
 aicuTTp^ipeit/ 145. 
 
 xtfa(pav4vTes Kvnoov 190. 
 
 'AvSpc'as 18. 
 
 oreiSi) eVJ KapSiax 135. 
 
 av4xoiiai augment 35 ; i.vex^a9at with 
 den. 161. 
 
 ay^KEi' 216. 
 
 av^ip, ivSpes omission and insertion of 
 82 ; when anarthrous 89. 
 
 ai/fiuiraTE^flK 169. 
 
 "Ama, -as 17. 
 
 'AvTOS 20. 
 
 avoiyia forms of 63 ; without object 145. 
 
 ivofios with Gen. 169. 
 
 avopBdieri 34. 
 
 avri 321; dj/fl' Sk 105 ; aurl with verbs of 
 baying etc. 164 ; with Infin. 263. 
 
 &vTt\an$dve<r8at always with Gren. 160; 
 Mid. 194. 
 
 'Ajrrbras 20. 
 
 iamweoa -v accent etc. 321. 
 
 avrtxpuTTos anarthrous use of 89. 
 
 avtoTepos etc. 28. 
 
 SJios constr. of 240 cf. 229. 
 
 dira'y7€AX€ii' 5Vo 237. 
 
 airowT'fjcFu 53. 
 
 aTrapvijiTeTal 53. 
 
 aTrdprt 321. 
 
 amt\ea 54. 
 
 djrefpaffTos with Gen. 170. 
 
 dir6Kpi077, aireKpifaTo 51. 
 
 dire/coTeffTaSiji' augment 35. 
 
 aTrsKTAi/diji/ 41. 
 
 d7rel'o»'Ti 319 
 
 airexft impersonal use of 1 35 ; OTrexeiJ' 
 intrans. 144 ; awdx^"' Perf. force of 
 Pres. 203. 
 
 aTr6 elided 10 ; a-irh 6,vtaQev, p.aKp6Qev, etc. 
 70 ; uses of 321 sq. ; in specifns. of 
 space and time 153 ; before Gen. of 
 separation 1 57 sq. ; with words of 
 plenty 163 ; of hearing etc. 166; af- 
 ter Passives 187; and Middles 192; 
 before adverbs 320 ; for Gen. alone 
 or instead of an Ace. 323 ; for ^/c 
 324; with eV in specifications of 
 origin 324 ; for trapi 324 ; after iiav- 
 edveiv 324; for inr6 325; for Dat. 
 after Pass. 325 ; Inrh vpoatiirou 323, 
 324 ; d^' ^s and aip' ov of time 82, 
 105. 
 
 vmoyiv^aBai with Dat. 178. 
 
 diroScKTo's with Dat. 190. 
 
 diroflj/^o-Kcii' with Ace. 149; with Dat. 178; 
 01 anroBviiffKOVTis 206. 
 
 airoxaXlmTiiv 146. 
 
 dTTo/fpiiiTTeiy constr. of 149 ; in Pass. 189. 
 
 diroKTcivai 4v Qavdrat 184. 
 
 diroKTcyvo), hirOKTaivut 61. 
 
 aiTQKVUj anOKvea 62. 
 
 dTroAAvfti 64 ; oi diroAAii/tiei'ai 206. 
 
 'AiroXXtis inflection 21 
 
 i,iro\oyua6ai tivi 172. 
 
 itiroppiiTT^iv 145. 
 
 ixoaTeWeiy 146 ; cV 329. 
 
 djroffTpe'<;>e(rfloi 192. 
 
 anoTi^aaBai tivi 179. 
 
 atratpiiyfiv constr. of 158. 
 
 ^.TtTaiiTTos 42 
 
 SirTeo-flai constr. of 167. 
 
 'hvipla 8. 
 
 Spo in questions 247 ; interchanged with 
 fipo 247, 371; &pa olv 371; Spay* 
 371. 
 
 S.pa<pas, ippafos 32,, 
 
 dp7^s Fem. dp7^ 25. 
 
 apyvpia, rd 24. 
 
 apecTKeia 12. 
 
 dpeffTiis with Dat. 190. 
 
 'Aperas 20. 
 
 a.piBp.6y used adv. 153. 
 
 StpKiTv Iva 240. 
 
 dpKETbv elvcu Xfa 240 ; with Infin. 260. 
 
 apfiitratrBaL 193. 
 
 apviopuu as Dep. Mid. 51. 
 
 ap^dfieros airo as a fixed formula 79; 
 ap^dnevos 374. 
 
 dp7ra^€li' 54. 
 
 &ppqv and &ptjt\v 7 ; Ace. -av 13. 
 
 'Apreiiias 20. 
 
 apre/juov 24. 
 
 SpxeiK constr of 169. 
 
 apxitv used adv. 1 53. 
 
 -dpxv^, -apxis 73. 
 
 -as Prop, names in 17, 19. 
 
 -as Gen. 5 20. 
 
 atralvoiiaif 263. 
 
 fio-TTiAos 158. 
 
 a(r<pa\7jif -iiv -7) 14. 
 
 d(r^aAi(rd^i/ai 52. 
 
 ir^p 320. 
 
 aiiBepreiy 169. 
 
 ouA.ifo|Uoi with Aor. Pass. 51. 
 
 aii^dva, ai>|(a 54, 145 ; ai^ijiriv 148 ; in 
 Pass. 189. 
 
 aiipa omission of 82. 
 
 avr6i constr. ad syn. with 105 sq. ; loose 
 reference 106 ; for unemphatic he 
 107 sq ; in the Sept. 108 sq. ; for 
 Christ 108; air^ orauVrj? 109; hAto 
 androuTO 109 ; ainoi 109 ; atnh toCto, 
 TOVTO avrh 109 sq., 280 ; ainol ovroi 
 110; use of Art. with 119; Gen. of 
 no longer used with Adj. Prons. 
 117; excessive use of 107, 118, 
 142 sq., 306, 315, 380 ; S airos with 
 Dat. 177 ; supposed resumptive use 
 of with Infin. 279; in relative sen- 
 tences 280, 283 ; after a Part. 143, 
 306 ; eVl t6 avri 338. 
 
 a^ovj ainov, kavTov 1 1 1 sq. ; used for the 
 reflex, of the 1st or 2d Pers. 113 ; 
 position of in reference to the Art 
 116. 
 
416 
 
 GREEK INDEX. 
 
 a<l>aipfw, -o-flai, constr. of 149, 158; in 
 Pass. 189. 
 
 h(j>ai'L(eLi/ sc. xpi^MOTa 146. 
 
 x^Eis 49. 
 
 a.cpeai'Tal, a(j>tciiTal 49. 
 
 S(j>6s with Subjunctive 210. 
 
 aipcKiri^ui 7. 
 
 &ij>iSa> 7. 
 
 oipifVai 'Ipa 238 ; a!()i^> «i with Infill. 258 ; 
 with Part. 304 ; !n the sense of per- 
 mit 210,258; Imje 304. 
 
 SttptovTai 49. 
 
 a(j>aplCu Fut. of 37. 
 
 Sxpis and &xp' 10; moods with 231. 
 
 -dill changed into -4m 44. 
 
 Bda\, A, ^ 21. 
 •jSafleus 26. 
 fialveti/ 54. 
 fidWsiv Aor. Pass, in reilex. sense 52 ; 
 
 intrans. 145 ; eis t. KopS. i!;'o 238. 
 $a,iTTeiv with Gen. 170. 
 iSaTTTifeii/ eV BSari and SSoTl, etc. 182. 
 BaTTTta-Srivai 0iiTTt(Tua 148. 
 Bapax'as 17. 
 Bapi/a/3as 20. 
 BappaBas 20. 
 Bapira/8Ss 20. 
 Bapeu, B^piuoi 54. 
 jSatr/coiVeii/ 41. 
 Ba(Ti\ev(w constr. of 169. 
 Bao'i\ifT(ra 73. 
 Pdros, 71 12. 
 BeBiuos 25. 
 
 Bee^fe/SoiiA spelling 6. 
 B6\tap 6, 
 B)79aria 17. 
 B77flAeE/x, ^ 21. 
 B7(fl<raiM 17. 
 B7]6(payrj -y-f) 15. 
 /Siiifetrflai 53. 
 Bi6w 54. 
 jSAacTTo 55. 
 fi\atrT(ij/etv 55. 
 BKa(r(pTjfis7j^ 146. 
 BKfViiv i.q. <pu\d<ra-etr9m constr. of 242sq., 
 
 323; with Part. 301. 
 Birpvs Ace. Plur. -as 14. 
 ffovKoiiai augment 33 ; BoiKei 42 ; with 
 
 the Subj. 208 ; iBov\6iiriii without 
 
 av217. 
 0OVS, Boas 14. 
 BpMs loll, by Infin. etc. 265, 269. 
 
 Ti^a 17. 
 
 ydfjLot, ol 23. 
 
 7a/ie'to 55, 145, 177. 
 
 yap intei;rog. and ellipt ise of 370. 
 
 yeyuyias i.q. natus 55. 
 
 rESc<4^ inflection 15. 
 
 y4ivva 17. 
 
 refltTT/Ma^^ -»'e7 -Vii 1 5. 
 
 76A(i(rft) 53. 
 
 yiliftp constr. of 163, 164. 
 
 yefii^etv constr. of 163. 
 
 yeieaSai constr. of 167. 
 
 yri omission of 82 ; anarthrous use of 89. 
 
 yrjpas Dat. -ei 15. 
 
 ytmp.ai 55 ; Aor. Pass, and Mid. 52 ; koI 
 iyevero and 4yeveTo S4 135, 276, cf. 
 312 ; ellipsis of 138 ; eU ti 150, 333 ; 
 with Gen. 162 sq.; Put. force of 
 Pres. 204 ; /aAi yevoiTo 248 ; 4y4v. foil, 
 by Infin. and rod 270, foil, by an 
 Infin. and finite verb 276 sq., or by 
 Ace. and Infin. 277 ; with Part, in 
 periphrasis 308 sq. ; followed by 4i 
 330; U7ro340sq. 
 
 yiv6<7Kui 55 ; Pass, with Dat. 187 ; with 
 Part. 301. 
 
 yKSiaaa spelling 7. 
 
 •yfoiAor. Subjunctive 46. 
 
 yvdfiri omission of 82. 
 
 yvtopi^u Fut. of 37. 
 
 yuanTTds with Dat. 190. 
 
 To/ioppa inflection 18. 
 
 yovvirereTi' constr. of 148. 
 
 ypipw, cypa^a in letters 198 ; ypaip. tya 
 or 8ti 237. 
 
 yvnii without the Art. 89 ; omission of 
 94. 
 
 AafjLoffKds 18. 
 
 AaveiS spelling 6. 
 
 Se 363 ; in the apodosis 364 ; often added 
 by the copyists 363 sq., 403 ; ical . . . 
 S4 364 ; /ifn . . , S4 364 sq. ; omitted 
 365. 
 
 Sei 135, 147, 164, 259; to be supplied 
 272 ; not to be supplied 273 ; eSei 
 without &.V 216, 225 sq. 
 
 S6'o;uai 55 ; constr. of 1 64 ; 'Iva 237 ; with 
 ei 256 ; with Infin. 258, and eis 
 265, 273. 
 
 SeUpufu forms of 45. 
 
 S4petv noWds sc. ■iv\7jyds 148 ; in Pass. 
 189. 
 
 Sefffjtios 'IijCToC 169. 
 
 SitTfi6s forms of Plur. 23. 
 
 Seupo, Sevre 70. 
 
 Ati/jms 20. 
 
 Snvaptov Gen. of price 164. 
 
 Sid elided 10; with Gen. of Pers. 182; 
 in modal periphrasis 183 ; after Pas- 
 sives 187 ; with Infin. 263 ; general 
 use of 334 ; in adverbial phrases 334. 
 
 BidBoKos anarthrous 89. 
 
 Sidyuv intrans. 144. 
 
 5taKaT€K4yx^^^°'^ 177. 
 
 SiaKov4<» augment 35 ; Pass. 188. 
 
 Sidxovoi omission of 82. 
 
 SmKpd/fo-floi constr. of 177; SiaKpi9rivai 
 intrans. 52, 
 
 SioKiyetrBat constr. of 177. 
 
 SioAei'iro) (oil) followed by a Part. 300. 
 
 itafAopTvpiiffBaL 'Iva 237. 
 
GREEK INDEX. 
 
 417 
 
 StcuTTfWetrBat Iva 237. 
 
 Siardiraetv and -6<r6ai 193. 
 
 SioTcAerj/ with complement, claust <04. 
 
 SiarWeo-flai Siofl^icrji' 148. 
 
 Starpl^eiv 145. 
 
 SiScCo-Kei;/ constr. of 149; Si5a<rKo\(os 148; 
 in l>ass. 188. 
 
 StSot 46. 
 
 SiSaifii forms of 45 sq., 47 ; in sense of 
 acquire ? 133 ; B. Sojuoto 148 ; constr. 
 with Gen 159; Aor. and Perf. in- 
 terchanged 199; rra238; followed 
 by interrog. clause 251 ; followed by 
 Infin. 258, 260,261, with eis 265 ; 
 eV 329. 
 
 Sifpfiiifeucv 34. 
 
 SiKaiovaBai aTrrf 322. , 
 
 Sid, SioVep 233. 
 
 Siopiaaav sc. ruxos 146. 
 
 Si6ti 233. 
 
 BiirAoSs, -7rA.^s, -■KK6Tepos 27. 
 
 Si^fictu contraction 44 ; with Ace. 147. 
 
 itdsKeiv 'ii/a 237 ; Sltli^a 53. 
 
 Sot 46. 
 
 SoKW /zot, ifxavT^ 111. 
 
 S(i|a fleoS anarthrous 89. 
 
 Sivafiat augment 33; forms, etc. 55; 
 iSvudfiriy without &v 216. 
 
 SiyaiTaty Siivj; 55. 
 
 SwaT6s with Dat. 190; ^twards eifit with 
 Infin. 260. 
 
 Sio iniJection 28 ; SiJo Siio 30. 
 
 S6tk} 56. 
 
 Srf 46. 
 
 S(^77 {SiaTj, Scp-p) 46, 233. 
 
 S^jTjy 46. 
 
 StAiffTj 36. 
 
 e initial in compos, changed into r) 74. 
 
 6 interchanged with ai 5, 40 note. 
 
 -e Voc. in 12. 
 
 ra72. 
 
 4dv, ^v, &v 72 ; iAv for &v 72 ; with Sub- 
 junc. 220; with Indio. 221, 222; 
 negatives after 345 ; in asseveration 
 358 ; i.q. &r i.v 360 ; transposition 
 in clauses with 389. 
 
 iivTf . . . edi/re 221 note. 
 
 lauTdv ellipsis of 144 ; with Ace. and Inf. 
 contrary to rule 274. 
 
 louToS, etc., not avrov, etc., HI; posi- 
 tion of 116; iavTo7s, etc., fbr reflex, 
 of 1st and 2d. Pers. 113. 
 
 40d<rKavfV 41 ■ i 
 
 4ydiJ.riira, H-ytiiio, 55. 
 
 iyyvs, iyyirepovas Fred. 131 ; with Gen. 
 
 or Dat. 170. 
 iyflpa, Aor. Pass, in reflex, sense 52 ; 
 
 intrans. eyeipat, eyeipe 56 ; iyflpfrat 
 
 (Fat.) 204. 
 iyKahia, -rd 23. 
 
 iyKoKiiv constr. of 177; in Pass. 188. 
 53 
 
 iyKava 9. 
 
 eyxaKciaBat OTdtreus 177. 
 
 iyxpt^v constr. of 1 49 sq. 
 
 iyd, etc., N. T. use of with verba 131 sq, 
 
 iSa^i(a Put. of 37. 
 
 4So\LovtTav 43. 
 
 eSe'cTO, iSee7To 55. 
 
 iSiSoTO -€To 47- 
 
 ^SofjLat, <pdyop.ai 58. 
 
 eSoTO -ero 47. 
 
 e^vv 55. 
 
 "EfeKios 17. 
 
 lBe\ut, QeXw 57. 
 
 eSvri as Masc. 130. 
 
 ieie-ri, iriBn 7. 
 
 ei for 1 5. 
 
 El augment 34. 
 
 61 without an apodosis 215 ; with Indie. 
 220; with Subj. 221; with Optat. 
 223 sq. ; with the Pret. 224 ; with 
 Pres. for Pret. 224 ; for Sn after 
 Savp,d(ai etc. 246, cf. 215; redun- 
 dant 248, 249 ; in questions 250 ; 
 negatives after 345 sq. ; in oaths 
 358; €1 Kal, einus, ei &pa followed 
 by Subj. and Opt. (ifperdiance) 256; 
 61 ob 345 ; 61 lii) nisi 34 '5, 348, 359 ; 
 61 Se P.-I], ei Se iiA\ ye 345, 393 ; 
 
 el liiiv 359; 61 fi^ri 219, 221, 359; 
 eKThs 61 fi-fi 359. 
 
 -6ia, abstracts in 12. 
 
 elSav, elSov, iSof, iSa 39. 
 
 elBda 5. 
 
 elSemi never with Part. 301. 
 
 elSov Kal lSo6 139. ^ 
 
 61^17, 6lV^ 69. 
 
 eiKovav 13. 
 
 6lf/cu(n and eiKoatv 9. 
 
 ei\dfj.T]v 40. 
 
 elKKrao/xet/os 34. 
 
 el/ii only in composition 50. 
 
 €1/11 forms 49 sq. ; 6&v koI 6 ^c 50 ; ellip- 
 sis of in .3d Sing. 136 ; in 3d Plur. 
 137; in 1st and 2d Pers. 137; 
 in Subjunc. Optut. Impcrat. 137 ; 
 of Indie, in doxologies 137; eifs ti 
 150; with Gen. 159, 162sq. ; kuI 
 ^arai followed by Put. 278 ; Part, 
 omitted 304, 308 ; with Part, in 
 periphrasis 308 sq. ; eaonat with 
 Perf. Part. 31 1 ; ^y, ?iaav with Part, 
 like iyeviTO Si, etc. 312; V> ^c^av 
 with Pres. Part, in Mark and Luke 
 312 ; with ^.'330. 
 
 AeKfii 10 ; with Inf 266. 
 
 flveiv 57 ; eiViiy accent 57 ; 'tva 237 note; 
 with Infin. 275 ; tlirev omitted 394. 
 
 elpTiicey used absolutely 134. 
 
 -615 Ace Plur. from -eis 14. 
 
 eis with Infin. 264 cf. 244, 259 ; in 
 brachylog. and prcgn. constr.327sq.; 
 with vert=i of rest 328, 329 sq.; in- 
 terchange I with iy 333 ; with thcu, 
 
418 
 
 GREEK INDEX. 
 
 yivfirBai, 150, 333 ; and Ace. after 
 verbs signifying to appoint etc. 150 ; 
 in circumlocution for Dative 172; 
 in adverbial phrases 334. 
 
 €ij rpiiKovTu etc. 30. 
 
 th for irpSiTos 29; for rls 85 ; ets Tis 85 ; 
 in the sense of alter, 6 eVfpos, 30, 102 ; 
 for the reciprocal Pron. 31 ; He- 
 braistic ? use of 102 ; ets . . . ob (fiii) 
 121 ; ?as |,/(Js 121. 
 
 efs Kafl" eTs 28, 30. 
 
 -emaf in 3d Plur. Pluperf. 43. 
 
 eSre . . . dre with Subjunc. 221, in ques- 
 tions 250. 
 
 cTxav 40. 
 
 4k use of 326; in periphrasis 156; in- 
 stead of simple Gen. 157 ; with Gen. 
 of separation 157 ; with part. Gen. 
 156, 158; with words of plenty etc. 
 163; of buying etc. 164; of hearing 
 166; after Passives 187, 327; and 
 air6 326 sq. ; after Neuter verbs 
 327; in adverbial expressions 327 ; 
 in brachylogical phrases 327 ; in 
 phrases with the Art. 95 ; denoting 
 origin etc. 324. 
 
 iKa6f(6ij.-rii', eKaBrtix-riv 56. 
 
 e/cao-Tos use of Art. with 120 ; eXs g/coo-Toj 
 120; aci tTs e/cafrTos 30 ; withPlur. 
 verb 131. 
 
 eKoToi/raeTijs accent 29. 
 
 ^KaTourdpxTjS, eKaTdnTupxos 73. 
 
 ^KSi/Ceil' TL e/c TIJ/OS 182. 
 
 4i{S6aeTai 47. 
 
 ^Kfr71, 378. 
 
 iKiivos and oStos 104 ; use of Art. with 
 119 sq. ; resumptive of Part. 306. ' 
 
 ixtiae 71, 378. 
 
 iiCKaSipri 41. 
 
 iKK\lviiv 145. 
 
 ^KiraKai 321. 
 
 iKThs el ij.il except 221, 345, 355, 359. 
 
 ixTpe-iTfaBai 192. 
 
 iKtl>eiyetv eonstr. of 146 sq. 
 
 ixt^v^, iH.(j>iri 68. 
 
 4KxeeT€ 44. 
 
 4i<X^u, ixxfu 68. 
 
 'EKatiii/j rb 6pos Tiav 4\aiwv. etc., 22, of. 
 151. 
 
 ihittiruv and iKirTiav 7 ; neut. indeclin- 
 able 127sq. 
 
 4Ka.TT6ai spelling 7. 
 
 4\axiiTT6Tepos 28. 
 
 4\i€M, 4\eaa 57. 
 
 ^Keos, t6 22. 
 
 4\evBepow eonstr. of 1 58. 
 
 4\6e7v to be supplied 138. 
 
 e\)co'ai augment 34. 
 
 4\\6'Ya, -aro etc. 58. 
 
 4\niC(ii Fut. of 37 ; const;-uction8 of 175, 
 337 ; with Infin. especially Aor. 
 259; with Srt and Fut. Ind. 259; 
 eV 4\irlSi 337. 
 
 f\ms 7. 
 
 'EAujuas 20. 
 
 eKci 53. 
 
 4)mvTov etc. use of 110 sq. 
 
 4n$piiiuionai Aor. of 52. 
 
 ^/i/tEO-m 8 sq. ; 4y fieffw anarthrous 89 ', 
 with Gen. following 94. 
 
 ifi6s: r^ 4/j.y x^'P^ IlauAou 117. 
 
 4nov for fiou 117. 
 
 4p.irai^ov(nv 64. 
 
 4fiTrnr\Stv 66. 
 
 4fi,T:vea>v with Gen. 167. 
 
 4ij.iropeiiir9ai with Ace. 147. 
 
 eUTtpoaBev 172, 176,319. 
 
 4iKpaviCa Fut. of 37. 
 
 ^K unassimilated in comp. 8. 
 
 4v in periphrasis of Gen. 156, 158; with 
 Dat. inst. 181, 182, 329, cf. 264; not 
 a mere sign of Dat. 181; in modal 
 periphrasis 1 83 ; with Infin. 263 sq. ; 
 with verbs of motion '328 ; for Sii 
 with persons 329 ; with ehai, yivea- 
 6at 33T ; with ex^i" 330 ; in adver- 
 bial phrases 330 ; 4v toij 374 ; 4v ^ 
 105, 331; 4if Kvpi(p Kptarrit etc. 174, 
 175, 185, 330; eV 'HA.19 331; Ic and 
 els interchanged 333. 
 
 ^mvTt, 4i'avTiov 173, 180, 319. 
 
 eySeiKi/vffdai 192. 
 
 4i'SLSi<TKa> 56 ; luStSiffiteaBai eonstr. of 
 191. 
 
 eVSiJeo-flai eonstr. of 191; 4vSieiT8ai iuSvp:a 
 148, 191. 
 
 el'E/fa, ereicef, e'lfCKev 10; followed by 
 Infin. 266. 
 
 evepye'iv and -eio-flai 193. 
 
 4v4xeiv 144; -earBau 161. 
 
 4vBdSe 71. 
 
 ^pi for eyecrrt 72. 
 
 41/1(7x^^1^ 145. 
 
 tvi/ofios with Gen. 169. 
 
 4i/opitl(eii> eonstr. of 147. 
 
 Ivoxos eonstr. of 170. 
 
 4vTe\\e(rBai, 4vToXii,s SiS6vai, %va 237 ; 
 Infin. after 273, 275. 
 
 4vTpa,Tti\iT0VTax verebuntur 52. 
 
 4vrpeTre(rBal riva 1 92. 
 
 4v^iop and /caTcz/iSTrioi' 172, 176,180,188, 
 319. 
 
 HpoKa 64. 
 
 i^ayopi(eaBai 192. 
 
 4^avTfis 82. 
 
 4^eirp4fleTQ 61. 
 
 ^e(TTip eonstr. with 278; 4^6v use of 
 318. 
 
 4^'fipap.p.ai 41. 
 
 4^o/jLO\oye7a6at 176. 
 
 ^lopif/feo/ eonstr. of 147 ; lea 237. 
 
 ^1 ov since 105. 
 
 ^louSEj/ew -(jw 28. 
 
 4\cvB€v4cti -oco 28. 
 
 ^f( jTfo with Infin. 260 ; ^x"" ^th Infln. 
 260. 
 
GELEK INDEX. 
 
 419 
 
 iitau>4(Ttt> 53. 
 
 4irauTxi>>6^ 34 ; ivauTx^veaSiu constr:. of 
 192. 
 
 i-irm>i.yeiv intrans. 144. 
 
 iTrivayxet 27. 
 
 ittivio in the sense otirKiov 168, 319. 
 
 'Eiraippas 20. 
 
 iiTfi 233 ; i.q. for otherwise 359. 
 
 iTTiiSi) 233. 
 
 ?Te£To after a Part. 306 ; without Se 365. 
 
 eTTeaa, eTretrav, ejrctrov 39. 
 
 iTrfx^etv 144. 
 
 ^ir/ with' verbs of accusing 165 ; i<p' f, i.q 
 eVl t/ 253 ; before adverbs 321; with 
 Gen. of place 336 ; of time 336 ; in 
 adverb, phrases 336 ; with Dative 
 
 336 sq. ; with words of rest and of 
 motion 337; in braehylogical phrases 
 
 337 ; with Accusative 337 ; with 
 idea of rest 338 ; additive 338 ; ^jrl 
 •rh aliri and other adverbial phrases 
 338. 
 
 4m0d\\eiv 145 ; im$aX6v 145. 
 ^TTi^Ae'iro) : its use in Mid. and Imperat. 
 
 273. 
 iTiBv/iuv Kori Tivos 335 ; ^viBufiiif 1 84. 
 iiriKaXfTv with Dat. 151 note. 
 4Tri\afi$d.ve(reai constr. of 160, 192. 
 4wt\f\nirfi4yov eVric in Pass, sense 52. 
 iirtfi€i/u (with Participle) expressing con- 
 tinuance 300. 
 eViop/c^o-o? 53. 
 eTtoioiOf 73 sq. 
 iirioTcurBat with Part 301. 
 eViffTBiris meaning of 180. 
 iirloTrjdi 47. 
 ^irunpeipeti/ 145. 
 eTrt<l}avai 41. 
 4'7rt(f}c^iTKtM) 68. 
 4Trovpivtos 25. 
 4pavvdai, 4peuvaa 58. 
 4pydCofuti augment 33. 
 fprtiios Fem. 25. 
 4pri/iovTai Put. ? 38. 
 4pLCa Put. of 37. 
 jpiSila 12; 4pi0e7at Plur..77. 
 Epis, epiSes, epeis 24. 
 'Epfias 20. 
 
 4pp46nv, 4ppi\Briii 57. 
 
 ^pXop.at 58 ; Put. force of 204, 255 ; used 
 for 6?Mi 50 ; 6 4pxiiifi'os of the Meii- 
 siah 204, 206 ; ri 4px6i).(va etc. 204 ; 
 4KB(7i/ 4v 329. 
 4pa)T<ia contraction 44 ; Iva 237 ; wit i 
 Infin. 258; and els 265; followa 1 
 by direct discourse 272, of. Sewfloi 
 -es for -as in Perf. 2d Sing. 43. 
 eo-ft'ai, 60-fla) 58; with Gen. 159. 
 4aTii,Bi)v, l<TTrii> 47, 52. 
 effraKa 48. 
 eordvai 48. 
 
 ioTTiaa intransitively ? 47. 
 ivTiis, iar6s, ioTTiKds 48. 
 
 ?irxaTos in Neut. with Gen. following 94; 
 
 use of with rin.4pa 94. 
 eo-ai not efoai 72 ; in the relation of rest 
 
 378 ; 4(rdnepos 28. 
 irfpos followed by Part, with Art. 93 ; 
 
 superfluous 373, cf. &\Kos. 
 4T0tfj.d(eii' sc. KardKufia 146 ; 'Iva 237. 
 erepo^vye'iii tiA 177. 
 
 cTot/ios 25 ; foil, by Iniin. etc. 260, 269. 
 ?Tos Gen. Plur. -av 14; accent of com- 
 pounds of 29. 
 ei augment of verbs beginning with 34. 
 Eifa 17. _ 
 evaYre^'C" augment 35 ; use of Act. 148 
 
 constr. of 148, 150; Pass. 188. 
 ebapeoTea augment 35; constr. of 185 
 
 Pass. 188. 
 euSoK€M augment of 34; constr. of 185, 
 
 6«5(!ici73-a in quotns. 203 ; tvS6jcriiTcu 
 
 sc. S Beis 134. 
 (vBvSpofifin augment 34. 
 iiiKaiptav (jriTfTf 'lua 237. 
 fivovxiCa augment 34. 
 fvKa^etoBai constr. of 241 sq. 
 ev\o-yi)Tis i Be6s etc. 137. 
 siropea augment 34. 
 evpaK6\uv 16. 
 evpitaris etc. 36. 
 tipiaxa 58 ; augment of 34 ; Act. and 
 
 Mid. 193 ; with Part. i.q. tTrai 301 ; 
 
 with Part, omitted 304; eupeBrjiai 
 
 Tii/i 187. 
 eipov, eupav 40. 
 -fis contracts in 14. 
 evxapuTTflv constr. of 300. 
 eSxoiiai augment 34 ; constr. of 1 77, 237 , 
 
 rivx^iiriv without Sk 217. 
 e<l}ava 41. 
 ^^iijraj 321. 
 e<t)ide, eiriSe 7. 
 eX"" intrans. 144 ; xahas, 4<rxdTas, 144 ; 
 
 Kurd TWOS 1 44 ; ii/ yaaTpl 1 44 ; /ta- 
 
 To Ki<paKris 146; -eoBai. with Gen. 
 
 161 ; Aor. Mid. 191 ; signif. of Mid. 
 
 192 ; ouic e'x. foil, by Kel. clause 
 
 229 ; ovK 4x. ri for S 251, 229 sq. ; 
 
 followed by Infin. 251 ; with ei/ 330; 
 
 signifying to hold for etc. 376. 
 4x48riii, 4xi9w 69. 
 4xB4s not xfle's 72. 
 
 -Eo? giving place to -da 57, 63 cf. 44. 
 -ras Gen. in 14, 26. 
 Uus, Hies ov, etc., constr. of 230sq. 319 
 
 &v with Put. 231 ; with Infin. 266 
 
 as Prep. 319; before adverbs 320 
 
 transposition in clauses with 389. 
 
 f used for o before n 5. 
 
 Zo;cxa?os 18. 
 
 Zaxopi'as 18. 
 
 Qdu> forms and signif. 58 sq. ; constr. of 
 
 149, 178 ; Infin. as a subst. 262. 
 ^Kos gender of 23. 
 
420 
 
 GREEK INDEX. 
 
 fr)\oCc 'Iva 237. 
 
 Zrivas -20. 
 
 frjTE?;/ 'til a 237, 240; with Infin. 258 cf. 
 
 279 sq. 
 fuj) aiivws use of Art. with 90. 
 ^aoi/ construed as Masc. 130. 
 
 77 used for 1 5. 
 
 -71 proper names in 17. 
 
 ^ omitted after irxiov etc. 168 ; in ques- 
 tions 249; 5 o" 360; giving com- 
 parative force 360. 
 
 riye/ioveveiv constr. of 169. 
 
 Tjyeofuu .59; constr. of 169. 
 
 ^SeifTac 51 . 
 
 jjKM 59 ; Perf. force of Pres. 203. 
 
 ^KBa, ^iKSai-, ^KBov 39. 
 
 'HA.(as 18. 
 
 7!\Iko5 in exclamation 253. 
 
 ^Aios anarthrous 89. 
 
 finepa omission of 81 ; in adverbial speci- 
 fications 139. 
 
 ^/iia-vs forms of 14. 
 
 ^iuu» for possessive 116 ; position of 116. 
 
 ^Ke^X^I"'"'' 35. 
 
 Uv 36.. 
 
 ijpefios 28. 
 
 ^fidiTOVV 44. 
 
 -Tjs proper names in 17, ,\9; -rjs Gen. 
 
 -7)20. 
 'Ha-afas 17. 
 ilTTdofiai 59 ; constr. of 168. 
 
 ?l7TT]fJ.a 7. 
 
 ^(pier 49. 
 
 ^X"' gender of 23. 
 
 Ba\(i(rira spelling 7 ; anarthrous use of 89. 
 
 eiWa 59. 
 
 BdvaTos anarthrous use of 89 ; SandTqi 
 TeKeuT^v 184. 
 
 dappeat and Bapaeoj 7. 
 
 eau/uofdi 59 ; Bav/ia 148 ; constr. of 185, 
 264. 
 
 BeaBrivai 52. 
 
 BeKa 57 ; with Subjunc. 208 cf. 240 ; with 
 61 215, 246 ; '/ra 237, 240 ; in the 
 sense of matle 360 ; never equiv. to 
 adverb 375 ; BeKai' used absolutely 
 i.q. purposdij 376 ; BiXeiv ec Tivi 376. 
 
 -9ev, -Be particles of place in 70. 
 
 6e6s Voc. 12, 140 ; anarthrous use of 89 ; 
 ellipsis of as Subj.134; as alimiting 
 Dat. 179 sq. 
 
 Bepi^a Fut. of 37. 
 
 BeapflTe Eut. "i 38 ; with Part. 301. 
 
 0Eu55s 20. 
 
 Stpiof construed as Masc. 80. 
 
 66 tor tB 8. 
 
 6vi](TKa> 60. 
 
 Bpiaii^eiew COnstr. of 147. 
 
 Quinipa inflection of 18. 
 
 flu.noi Plur. 77. 
 
 Bvpai, al 24. 
 
 ei», iBiBv 7. 
 
 I represented in mss. by e( or by ij 5 ; 
 . subscr. omitted in Infin. 4i, in ad- 
 verbs 69 ; -{as an adverbial ending 
 73. 
 
 'Ii£eipos 18. 
 
 'liua!i$ and 'idica^os 6, IS. 
 
 'laii$pris 20. 
 
 'lavyijs 20. 
 
 Xarat, mfl^treTai 52. 
 
 !fSa, Uav 39. 
 
 iiSe and tSov ecce 62, 70 ; with -a Nom. 
 139; in place of ^v 312; repeated 
 398 ; etSov koI idov 139 ; Kal lSoi> 
 before the apodosis 362. 
 
 iSea spelling 5. 
 
 IfSios use of for lauToD etc. 117; ot if8., 
 Ti VS. used substantively 118; in 
 strict sense 118; a favorite word in 
 2 Pet. 118; omission of Art. with 
 119. 
 
 iSo;i see tSe. 
 
 'Up^ ir6\€t not 'UpaT6\et 74. 
 
 'lepefjLias 17. 
 
 'lfpiX<i 15. 
 
 *lepou(raK'f]fi, 7], 'lepoanKvfiaj Tct 6,16,18, 21, 
 
 'lexovias 18. 
 
 -iCa Fut. of verbs in 36. 
 
 'liiiu Aor. of 46 ; forms of 48. 
 
 'Itjitovs 21. 
 
 iKavhv ehai Xya 240; foil, by Infin. 260. 
 
 iKfSOfJUXt 60. 
 
 ifidria, Td 24 ; ellipeis of 82. 
 
 &ain final sentences 229, 233, 377 ; force 
 of in N.T. 235 sq. ; with Indie. Put. 
 and Pres. 234 ; with Impcrat. 234 ; 
 classes of preds. which it follows 
 237 sq. ; nearly equiv. to S<rTe 238 of. 
 264; omission of (■?) 238, 243; in- 
 terchanged with the Infin. (with and 
 without ToC) 238, 240, 264, 267 sq. ; 
 may be translated that, even so thai 
 239 ; in elliptical constructions 241 ; 
 for Put. Part, of purpose 241 ; for 
 the Imperat. 241 ; 'Iva ii.ii ne dicam 
 241 ; 'Im H 357 ; attraction with 377 j 
 transposition in clauses with 389. 
 
 'lopSdvris 17, 21. 
 
 'loiiSa: 20. 
 
 'lowlas 18. 
 
 'hvffiv 48. 
 
 -IF Gen. -€Mj, contracts in 14. 
 
 t<ra as predicate 131. 
 
 IffTijfii, laTdva etc. forms of 44 sq., 47 ; 
 and iTTri<riu with 4v 329 ; o-t^viu with 
 CIS 332 ; with ^7ri 336. 
 
 IxBlis uncontracted 14. 
 
 'laidvva 17. 
 
 'Ia>dvv7\s, 'laidv7]S 17. 
 
 'laras 20. 
 
 'laaris 19, 20. 
 
 ^luffiai 18. 
 
GREEK INDEX. 
 
 421 
 
 if07i^ and Kol iydi 10. 
 
 Kafloipeio-flai, KaheKitv, constr. of 1 58 note. 
 
 Koflopiis constr. of 158. 
 
 KaUCofiai 56, 60. 
 
 Ka6eKi7v constr. of 158 note. 
 
 ico9op(fo)(Koeep(fM)foi-msof 29; Fut. of 37. 
 
 KcfSp, KiBov 49. 
 
 KoeijKei/ 217 
 
 Ki^97)iuai 60. 
 
 Kofl(fa) 60 ; Fut. of 37 ; without subject 
 expressed 134 ; with eU 332 ; with 
 itri 338. 
 
 KoSKTrdvai constr. of 1 50. 
 
 Kai uses of 360 sqq. ; adjuncts with in 
 Nom. 141 ; after a Eel. 283, cf. 362 ; 
 connecting Participles 297 ; k&v if 
 only 360; re Kai 360; Kai te 361 ; 
 instead of temporal and other sub- 
 ordinate clauses 361 ; connecting 
 adjs. not co-ordinate (iroAiis etc.) 
 362 ; for oSrajj 362 ; in the apodosis 
 362, 373 ; ko! ISoi 362 ; i.q. as 363 ; 
 strengthening comparatives 363 ; ep- 
 exegetic 363, cf. 400 ; ko! Se 364 ; in 
 continuation -of a neg. 368 ; ap- 
 parently omitted 369 ; after nega- 
 tives 368 ; Kai oil, kbI |U^ .368. 
 
 Kaia<^as, Koi^as 20. 
 
 (caiTTcp with Part. 308. 
 
 Haiphv ex^iv foil, by Infin. 260. 
 
 Kalaap -os 16. 
 
 Kairoi with Part. 308. 
 
 Koio), KaTaKoicii 60. 
 
 KaKei and Kai eKst 10. 
 
 KOKos comparison 27. 
 
 Ka\€w constr. 151 ; 6 Ka\oi/ievos 304. , 
 
 KaXbv h 217. 
 
 KajU/uvcrat, Kafifivfrai 62. 
 
 Kafj.n6(a for Kara/jL^Q) 62. 
 
 KafjLoi and Kai ifioi 10. 
 
 KOLfXTneiv y6i'aTa 'Iva 237 
 
 K&v and (tol eiii' 1 ; used elliptically 360. 
 
 Kava, 71 21. 
 
 Kdpnri\os, 6 and ^, Xfpfie\, 6 22. 
 
 ■taTti use of 334 sq.; distributive 30 ; with 
 the Greek Ace. 152; with Ace. in 
 periphrasis 156, 162 ; in superscrns. 
 of Qospels 157 ; to express a quality 
 162; with verbs of accusing 165; 
 in periphrases of manner 183 ; witli 
 local Gen. signifying throughout 334 ; 
 use with Gen. dfe an Adj. 335. 
 
 Kara^aiprnv and -0b,s Upros 297. 
 
 KataffK^v constr. of 165, 167. 
 
 KaTaytvdiffKeiv 165. 
 
 KaToSmi^eai constr. of 1 65. 
 
 KaToSvvaffTivftv with Gen. 169. 
 
 KaToKavxaaai 42; constr. of 185. 
 
 KaroKpiv^iv constr. of 165. 
 
 KaraXaXmi Plur. 77. 
 
 Kara\i>eiv intrans. 145. 
 
 KaTanaprvpciv constr. of 165 ; with Gen. 
 178. 
 
 ttaT(JiTao-T05 65. 
 
 KaTapiaBat constr. of 177. 
 
 KarapTiQw Fut. of 37. 
 
 KaTaippoveiv constr. of 165. 
 
 KaTeayuaiv, KBTec£{« 53. 
 
 KaTivaVTi 319. 
 
 KaTeviyriv 63. 
 
 KaTfvdnnup 173, 319, cf. Iv^Ttiov. 
 
 Kariiyopeiv consa. of 165; Pass. 188. 
 
 Kariiyaip 25. 
 
 Kavnarl^etrBai Kavfia 148. 
 
 Kavtro/ifieva, Kavffoa 60. 
 
 Kavxaa-ai 42 ; KavxatrBai construction of 
 
 105; Tii/i 172; ivdTrtovnz. 
 KeSpiiir, (i 21. 
 
 /cei^aj as Perf. Pass, of rlBriuii 50. 
 Keipew 193; KeipeaBai with Ace. 192. 
 KeKoSfpur/ievos 29. 
 KeKoiriaKes 43. 
 KeKpap.€fos 60. 
 KEAEiioi, iKcKevov use of 201 ; never with 
 
 Vro 237 note ; with Infin. Pass. 275. 
 Kepdvvvp.1 60. 
 Kepas uncontracted IS. 
 K^pZaivu) 60. 
 K7)pu| accent 13. 
 icripia-aetv Xva 237, 275; with Infin. 273, 
 
 275. 
 KTj^as 20. 
 K(s spelling 6. 
 KKaitf 60 ; constr. of 147. 
 KXeis inflection 24. 
 
 KXeTTEij' sc. ;(p^jUaTa 146 ; Khi'^a 53. 
 KAeoitos 20. 
 KA^/i7}S 17. 
 
 K\ripomp.e'!y constr. of 160. 
 K\iveiv 145. 
 K\OTral Plur. 77. 
 K\m7ras 20. 
 
 KO^pdPTTjS 17. 
 
 Kotvai/e7v constr. of 160. 
 
 Koivavia constr. of 1 60. 
 
 Kotvwii6s constr. of 1 60. 
 
 K6\irot, oi 24. 
 
 KO/ilCofjiai Fut. of 37 ; Aor. Mid. 191. 
 
 KopPavas 20. 
 
 KopivvvaBai constr. of 167. 
 
 K6aiios anarthrous 89. 
 
 KovaraSla 17. 
 
 Kpd^ta 61 ; Kpa^ov Eiccent 61. 
 
 KpaTiiV constructions with 161. 
 
 Rpias Plur. of 1 5. 
 
 Kpeiffffuv and Kpelrruu 7 ; Kpwnov ^9 
 
 217. 
 Kpf/idi'vviu 61. 
 Kp^iTKns 17. 
 Kpidrjvat meaning 52. 
 Kpina not Kpl/ia 73. 
 Kpliieiv Kpiciv 148. 
 <piiTTa, ixpu^ov 40 ; constr. of 149 ; in 
 
 Pass. 188. 
 tpv^r^j Kpvipy 69. > 
 KTEfyai, KTafi/o), KTevva 61. 
 
422 
 
 GREEK INDEX 
 
 Kvpteidi/ constr. of 169. 
 icipios anarthrous 89. 
 /cojAiSeii' constr. of 158. 
 Kas inflection 21. 
 
 \dPe or \a0e 62. 
 
 Xayxdveiv constr. of 160, 269. 
 
 \depa, KiSpt} 69. 
 
 hjiKeiu Ttyi and fjierd tivos 172. 
 
 \o;u;8offfl Alex, spelling 62 ; t1 ets ti 151 ; 
 
 with Gen. 159; with gerundial In- 
 
 fin. 261 ; with Sm6 and irapd 324 
 
 and note. 
 Xav9dveiv with a Participle 299. 
 Aaifs 13 ; with Plural verb 130. 
 KdffKw 62. 
 \iy(w : Keyu sc. i 6f6s or ^ ypaffi 134 ; 
 
 \eyetif Ka\ws, kukus with Ace. 146; 
 
 Tivi and Trpos Ti;'a 172;. ellipsis of 
 
 271 sq., 352,394; forK«XciJe«'(Infin. 
 
 after) 273, 276 ; dirl rivos and irepi 
 
 TWOS 336. 
 Xeyidtv -i(i>v 16. 
 Xfiira Aor. of 62. 
 Aeufs (-€is) inflection 21, 
 \-fl^^ofiai 62. 
 \.riv6s,i, •^ 12, 81. 
 AiySavos, 6 22. 
 \tfi6s, 7} 12, 81. 
 Mixirdvu 62. 
 KoyiaSrtifat 52. 
 
 Abyifo^a. efi ti 151 ; is 151. 
 Koiiriv adverbially 96, 123 ; toB AoittoG 170. 
 Aouffas 20. 
 AuSSa inflection 18. 
 XvtrneXtiv satius esse 360. 
 Aiio-rpn inflection 19. 
 
 -Iia nouns in 73. 
 
 lia9riT€i€iy constr. of 147. 
 
 MaOeuhs 18. 
 
 imxapi^a Fut. of 37. 
 
 fiaKpdy sc. 636v 153. 
 
 liaKKov pleonastic (with the Compar.) 83. 
 
 fxafioiyas 20. 
 
 Mai/affff^s 19. 
 
 /ioj'fltiveii' constr. of 167; with Participle 
 
 303 ; with Airii and irapd 324. 
 ^apovfl^ireTOi wither away 52. 
 Miipeo -as 17. 
 Mapiiijii and Mopfa 6, 17. 
 liapTvpflv impTvpipM 148 ; with Dat. 1 78 ; 
 
 Pass. 188; with ei'j and Infin. 265. 
 MoTflfas 18. 
 MaTToeios 18. 
 fidxaipa -7j: 11. . , 
 
 '/idx'"^'" ^''■'' periphrasis for Dat. 177 ; 
 
 ndxn" 148. 
 ueyaXwffivri 73. 
 fieyiSTaves 24. 
 fiiBiai, fieBvaKO/iai 62. 
 MeA.€as 20. 
 
 )U6lC(^T6pOS 28. 
 
 /i€AAm augm. 33; withInfin.esp.PreB.259. 
 
 fUKq/iai G£ ; /UfAci |Uoi constr. of 164. 
 
 fiefjL^pdya 17. 
 
 fie/xia/ifiai 41 . 
 
 luixiavToi 3d Plur. 41. 
 
 fiefjufij(rT€Vfi4v7} 32. 
 
 HflJ.(pea6ai constr. of 177. 
 
 iueV introduced by the copyists 364 sq. 
 variations in 365; without a fol- 
 lowing Se 365 ; omitted 366 ; /ihv... 
 S4 364 ; fihv ubv 370 ; /ici/oEi/ye 370sq.; 
 /uev Si5 not found 370 note. 
 
 Ii.evtiv with Ace. 147. 
 
 p,epiit.vS,v with three cases 186. 
 
 )iiaos in Neut. with Gen. following 94 ; 
 fiiaov as Prep. 123, 319; hih, lieiroi) 
 332. 
 
 Miaalas 18. 
 
 ;ueT(£ with Infln. Ace. 265 ; constructions 
 with 338 sq.; used brachylogically 
 339. 
 
 fieraSiSufii constr. of 1 60. 
 
 ixeravoeiv aTr6 322 note ; 4ic 327. 
 
 fieraiTTpafp^ra: reflexive 52. 
 
 Herairx'rip.aTi^a! Fut. of 37. 
 
 Iierexfiy constr. of 160. 
 
 /ueToiKifoJ Fut. of 37. 
 
 fiexpis and /j-exP' 10 ; Moods with 231. 
 
 IJ.'ti liiintos etc. ) final 233 ; after verbs of 
 fearing 241 sq., 377 ; without a verb 
 of fearing expressed 353 ; with the 
 Indie. 243, 353 ; with a following o4 
 248, 354. 
 
 /iil interrogative du^Trore, p.'liri] 248 ; 
 whether not, whether not perchance 250, 
 255 sq. ; /lii ov 248, 354. 
 
 liil negative with the Infin. 269, 349, 355; 
 in conditional sentences 345 ; in 
 relative sentences 348; with parti- 
 ciples 350 sq. ; pleonastic with the 
 Infin. 355 ; cf. oi. 
 
 liijSe 366 sq. ; cf. ovS4. 
 
 finiSfis emphatic substitutes for 121 ; 
 iiti)5eV with Mass. or Fem. snbsts, 
 127, 152 ; liriSei/ <rol elliptically 138, 
 
 liflBds 28. 
 
 fiijfav 13. 
 
 lU^jroTe, oSttote 354; i.q. firais 354 note. 
 
 fi'flTc 366. 
 
 ffilTiip omission of 94. 
 
 fiilTis 31. 
 
 -fju verbs in 44 sq. » 
 
 liiyvieiv constr. of 177, 
 
 f^fpos, fjiiap6s 29. 
 
 filKtov 18. 
 
 fiVTjfioveveiv constr. of 164. 
 
 fjLvrjtrdTJvai 52. 
 
 fioix^Tcu Plur. 77. 
 
 fi6vos and fi6vov 83. , 
 
 liov etc. used for reflexives 110, 115; for 
 possessives 115; position of 343, 344- 
 
 y.io)y KafifiOu 62. 
 
 Mwi/O'Tjs, Mwvirrjs, Maffvs 19. 
 
GREEK INDEX. 
 
 423 
 
 V iit>e\KviTTtK6v 9. 
 
 fparafs'ogic in the Ace. Sing. 13. 
 
 Nafape'ff spelling of 6. 
 
 i'a<js 13. 
 
 Ne'oi' niMv not NeJnroMv 74. 
 
 veKpoi anarllirous use of 89 and note *. 
 
 1-^371. 
 
 v^irTis, i/jjo-reij 26. 
 
 WC«i viinta 63. 
 
 riirau contraction 44; constr. of with^K 
 
 147. 
 1/(1(7), T), and cJkos, t(( 23. 
 yi-nTco ViirretyQal 193. 
 ydiuoj (vitliout tlie Art. 89. 
 yoCs forms of 1 2 sq. 
 vuKTds etc. 170. 
 
 vvv Se after conditional sentences 396. 
 vifTato, Karavinratc 63. 
 
 {ti/i'^irflai constr. of 185. 
 IrjpoiVo? Perfect Pass. 41 ; used intrans- 
 itively 52. 
 ^vpeai, ^vpdu 63. 
 
 i, fi, t6 use of 85 sq. ; with toioCtos and 
 too-oGtoj 87 ; with proper names 
 86 sq. ; never indefinite 87 sq, ; with 
 Poss. Prons. 87; the rhetorical 88; 
 omission of with appellatives 88 sq. ; 
 use of with Part, after indefinites 
 93; with more closely defined substs. 
 90 sqq. ; in lieu of a subst. 94 ; ol 
 irepl Tiva 95 ; oi with following Gen. 
 95 ; with a Gen. or adverbial limitn. 
 . 95 ; with adv. for adj. 95 ; th before 
 sentences etc. 96 ; with connected 
 substs. 98 ; as a demonstrative 101 ; 
 i p-sv ... i Si and its substitutes 
 102; & Si in narration 102; with 
 Prons. iros etc. 119 sqq. ; with Part, 
 as Subst. 123; with Pred. 123 sq.; 
 ToC with Infin. 266 sqq. ; eV toij 374. 
 Cf Article. 
 
 S5e rare 103. 
 
 iSos omission of 82 ; dSbv 9a\iiTa-ns 1 53 ; 
 Tris 6Sov ehtu 163; dSy, &5o7s with 
 vei-bs of going 1 84. 
 
 oSuvaffai 42. 
 
 OClas 18. 
 
 S9ev in attraction 287 sq. 
 
 01 and V interchanged 5. 
 
 otyte, dLUolyoj 63. 
 
 fiTSa forms of 51 ; questions after 250, 
 377; constr. with 301. 
 
 olxla with Pliir. pred. 130. 
 
 otKoSonia augment 34. 
 
 oiKTelpu 64. 
 
 OlKTtpfloi 77. 
 
 -oii> as Infin. ending for -oSv 44. 
 8\os with Art. 94. 
 SWvfu forms of 45, 64. 
 '0\vuira.s 20. 
 ilidpojiai, Ififipo/iUi 64. 
 
 6)U\eTv constr. of 1 77. 
 
 bii^vfii forms of 45 ; constr. of 147. 
 
 inoios 26 ; constr. of 170. 
 
 dfifuovv eiis 177. 
 
 dpiol(i>d7ip.ey 34. 
 
 6iio\oyca> augment 34; ii.i.o\oyiav 148, 
 constr. of 173, 176; with Part. 301 
 
 S/iws position of with Part. 308. 
 
 -OK from the Lat. -um 1 8. 
 
 6vtiSi(ew constr. of 177. 
 
 uvo/ia ouTiy etc with omission of copul.i 
 136; for ro^vofia or dv6/.ia.ii 139; 
 pleonastic 151, 398; Toivoptu 153; 
 used absol. 163 note; ov6i.{aT., iv 
 ov., iit' av. 183, 184, 330, 337. 
 
 OTTiVoi 172, 184, 185, 319. 
 
 &voTe, 6Tr6Tav constr. with 232. 
 
 Sirov, Svoi 71 ; Svov &y with Indie. 228. 
 
 Sjra?s constr. with 214, 233 sq. ; with S> 
 234 ; use of in the N. T. 236. 
 
 ipdw 64; ii(per} 52; with Dat. 187; i.q. 
 ipvKdirafaBai constr. of 242 sq. ; ple- 
 onastic Impera. 243; with Part. 301. 
 304 ; Spa p.ii usedellipticaily 395. 
 
 ipxlCeiv constr. of 147, 237. 
 
 6pos Gen. -ioii/ 14. 
 
 -OS proper names in 18 ; neuters in 14. 
 
 3s Gend. of 281 ; equiv. to Kai o'utos 283 ; 
 6s &•> for 4dv 288; e| oS, a<p' oS, a(f>' 
 fis etc. 82, 105; ts /nec . . . hs Si 102. 
 
 -oaav for -ov 43. . 
 
 da-dxis constr. with 232. 
 
 ts Se for i Si 102. 
 
 fiiTios 26. 
 
 6j litv ... ts Si 102. 
 
 Saos ,373 ; Saov otrov 373. 
 
 SffTis loose use of 115; with Subjunc. 
 and Fut. 219, 228; 8, ti i.q. Sik ri 
 253; Gend. of 281. 
 
 oo'ToCi' forms of 1 3. 
 
 orav with'indic. 222 sq., 230. 
 
 Brf with Subjunc. 231. 
 
 gri significafion of 357 ; in declar. sen- 
 tences 245, 357; redundant 237, 245, 
 274 ; after iuixviiaKia6iu etc. 246 ; 
 before theSubjunc. and Impera. 237, 
 246 ; passes over into Ace. and 
 Infin. 383 ; elliptical t( Sti 358 ; Sis 
 Sti 358 ; equiv. to SriXov Sti 358 ; 
 oux Sti 372 ; attraction with 376. 
 
 8, TI for Sia t( 253. 
 
 8tou, 'iws hrov 31. 
 
 oi, avK, oux 7 ; in direct questions 247 ; 
 with Put. for Imperat. 257 sq. ; in 
 conditional sentences 344 sq. ; neg- 
 ativing only a part of the sentence 
 347,351; inrelativesentences348sq.; 
 in illative, cansal, declarative sen- 
 tences 349 ; after So-te with Indie. 
 349 ; after on etc. ^jrfi etc. 349 ; 
 rare with Infin. 349 ;. with Parti- 
 ciples 3.50 ; for antithesis' sake 352; 
 
 ' distinguished from ij.ii 351, 352 
 
424 
 
 GEEElt INDEX. 
 
 with substantives 353 ; pleonastic 
 355 ; ov fiTi use andconstr. of 21 1 sqq , 
 218, 245 sq. ; oukovu 249 ; ouk . . . 
 aWd (Se) negativing relatively 356 ; 
 ou /j.6vov . . . aWi Kai 369, J93; ou 
 yap awd 369 ; uox Sri, oi/x oTov Stx 
 372 ; ou TrdvTcos 389. 
 
 oS31, 71, 105. 
 
 oud, oiittt 72 ; oiial Fern. 126; constr. of 
 154. 
 
 oiiSe ((UtjSe) single and double 366 sq. ; 
 ouSe Vfith oiire following etc. 367 
 note ; ne . . . quidem 369 ; ouSe, jujSt 
 ih 121. 
 
 ou^eis ; use of ovSf eTs, efs . . . oi'', oh . . . 
 iras etc. 121 ; ouSeV with Masc. or 
 Fem. substs. 127, 152. 
 
 oirflei's 28. 
 
 oSi/ 370; Spa oSi/ 371 ; uiicouy 249; /uey 
 o?;/, ixivowye 370 sq. 
 
 ohpdtrtos 25 
 
 ovpavoi, 01 24. 
 
 Oupias 18. 
 
 oSs : Sra a/coiJeij/ 259. 
 
 oi'T€ (/irjTe) single and doubled 366 sq. ; 
 used tor ouSe? 369 ; oUts . . . Tf (/co() 
 368. 
 
 ouTos (S5e) 103 sq.; and ^keitos N. T. 
 use of 104 ; in specifications of time 
 104 ; omitted before relative 1 04 sq. ; 
 redundantly with forward reference 
 before on etc. 105 ; with and with- 
 out the Art. 119 sq.; as subject 125, 
 128; resumptive 306, 376, 399 ; alirr) 
 and auTf] 109; cf. tovto. 
 
 oSras and o8tm 9 ; as predicate 131 ; re- 
 sumptive of Participle 306 at the 
 beginning of a conclusion 357 ; re- 
 sumptive 399 ; taking place of the 
 Part. 357 ; after a protasis with el 
 357. 
 
 S(/)6\oi/ constr. with 214 sq., 374. 
 
 o^Sa\p.6s in circumlocutions 319. 
 
 6<^Qrivai riui 187. 
 
 o^QT]ffofxai 64. 
 
 i &,X^os TToKis equiv. to vulgus 91 ; Sx^of 
 with Plnr. Pred. 130; and both Sing, 
 and Plnr. 130. 
 
 o4"' with Gen. of time 159. 
 
 iij/€i -t; 42 sq. 
 
 i^Tiaee 36. 
 
 6^(i>i'ia, rd 24. 
 
 i iiii itai & ?iv 50, 204. 
 
 TTarivai 65. 
 
 7ro9r)T((s 42. 
 
 iroTSes «. yvvcuKes 89. 
 
 TraiSfiiai in Pass. 189. 
 
 •jrai^ta 64. 
 
 TrdKiv represented by a fin. verb 300. 
 
 TravotKt not iriLvotKei 73. 
 
 TrdvTt], TrdvTi) 69. 
 
 irdvTtas ov and oil Trdvrws 389. 
 
 irapd, uses of 339; with iiKoictv 166; 
 after passives 187 ; with Dat. after 
 verb of motion 285 ; with Ace. used 
 tropically 339 ; in comparison 339. 
 
 vapaZovvai intrans. 145 note; ets x^*P*** 
 182; b trapaSovs and vapadiBods 
 297. 
 
 TrapaiKc?!/ constr, of 177, 258 ; Infin. after 
 273. 
 
 vapayyih^eiv Im 237 ; with Infin. 273, 
 ' 275. 
 I irapiyetv intrans. 144. 
 
 irapuKaKiiv 'iva 236, 237, 258 ; Infin. after 
 273 ; TrapaKa\€!i> constr. with 270. 
 
 irapapvSip.ev 67. 
 
 vapaTripuv iVo 237. 
 
 irapauTiKa 321. 
 
 TrapeTvai ellipsis of 138. 
 
 irapetaeSutrav 56. • 
 
 ira^eryai/ 40. 
 
 [ira.p£p.pd\\a 149.] 
 
 Tlapfiepcis 20. 
 
 ■Kapopyl^te Fut. of 37, 
 
 TO! with and without the Art. 119sq. ; 
 ov . , . iras and iras . . . ov 121 ; top 
 in a concrete and collective sense 
 122; Gen, Trdvrai' as a general ex- 
 pression with Fem. 374, 
 
 TToTjjp omission of 94. 
 
 iraiia 64 ; constr. of 1 58 ; with Participle 
 300. 
 
 ireiBew 'I If a 238 note, 240. 
 
 TTElfllis 73. 
 
 irfwda forms of 37 ; contraction 44 ; with 
 
 Ace. 147. 
 7reipi{feij' "constr. of 164. 
 TTc'iHTro), ^irefi^pa apparently for Perf. 198; 
 
 eV 329. 
 '!rev8e7v constr. of 147. 
 TTEiroifleVcH constr. of 175, 337. 
 TTspi use of 335 ; with verbs of accusing 
 
 165; oi TTEpi riva 95; in sense o( 
 
 inrep 336. 
 ireptdyeiy intrans. 144 ; and with a new 
 
 object 144. 
 irepi^dxXeLv constr. of 149 ; in Mid. 191. 
 'KepU(rTpa.^ev 34. 
 
 irepiEXEi impers. use of 135 note, 144. 
 TTEpifiiji'^uo-flai in Mid. 191. 
 trepiKfijuu 50, 189 sq. 
 vepiova-ioi 73 sq. 
 JTEpwraTEii/ with Dat. 184. 
 TreptTTOLe'icrOai 192. 
 irepurfTeieiv constr. of 164, 169. 
 ■irspi(T(i6s with Gen. compar. 168. 
 ir€pi7(T6Tepov, irepLtrffOTepus 69. 
 ir4T0fiai 65. 
 
 iridCw 66; with Gen. 161. 
 irUQtij 66. 
 irUaai 42. 
 
 TTlfll 67. 
 
 XliKwros accent 6 ; inflection 18. 
 w(/*7rAi)|iii 66. 
 
GREEK INDEX. 
 
 425 
 
 irlvu forms of 66; with Gen. 159. 
 
 irliTTw 67 ; ill 329. 
 
 irio-Teueo signification and constructions 
 
 of 173 sq., 337 ; ti; KapSla and 4v t. 
 K. 182 ; Infin. after 273. ' 
 iria-Ths if etc. 174. 
 •irKaa-itov 30. 
 TrAeroi/ indecl. 127. 
 
 irAcoi/e/tTcry constr. of 168 ; in Pass. 188. 
 Tr\eovf^iai 77. 
 TrKryyli omitted 82. 
 irATJAoj with Plur. pred. 130. 
 irKniiijiipr}! 11. 
 
 ir\iiv in N. T. 320 ; for Se 365. 
 ttAijo-W as Pred. 131. 
 irAoSs Gen of 13. 
 ttAoCtos, rd and (i 22. 
 ■iTveSjj.a Siytov anarthrous 89. 
 iroSiiiyrii/ 13. 
 iroieH' eS, icaAiiis 146 ; with Part. 300 
 
 with Ace. of time i.q. spend 146 
 
 constr. of 149, 150; Middle 193 
 ^ Ti TTOi^ffo^ef and iroffiffufjiev 209 ; Vi/a 
 
 238, 240; Infin. with toO 270; to 
 
 be supplied 394. 
 irohKd adverb 123. 
 
 vroKis followed by Part, with Art. 93. 
 wovnpiai Plur. 77. 
 iropeieaBat : els and 4v elpijy, 184; Fut. 
 
 force of Pres. 204. 
 jtSppie as Pred. 131. 
 worepov ... ^ 32, 250. 
 TroTifeij/ constr. of 149; in Pass. 188. 
 TloTioKoi 1 8. 
 
 ITQVy TTO? 7 1 . 
 
 iloiiSijs 17. 
 irpaeuts 26. 
 Trp^os, Trpavs 26. 
 irpadrris, trpathris 26. 
 n-patrmJ trpatrtai 30, 139. 
 vpaTTeiv eS, with Participle 300. 
 irpimi 135 ; constrns. with 278. 
 jrpli/ ^ constr. with 231, 232, 279. 
 7rp(( in specifins. of space and time 153; 
 fbll. by ToC and Infin. 265 ; irph 
 
 TTpoaiiTTOU 319. 
 
 irpodyitv intrans. and with new obj. 144 ; 
 Put. force of Pres. 204. 
 
 irpoPdWeiv 145. 
 
 irpoipx^irBai with Ace. of pers. 144. 
 
 irpoKiiTT^iy 145. 
 
 trpooptjop-riP 64. 
 
 ■rp6s with Infin, Ace. 266; with Gen. and 
 Dat. 340 ; with Ace. to denot^ rest 
 340; in comparison 340 ; in elliptical 
 ■' and adverbial phrases 340 ; as peri- 
 phrasis for Dat. 172, 177; ■irp6s fie, 
 Trp6s (re 31. 
 
 7rpoffava\&oai 172. 
 
 vpoaetraurav 40 note. 
 
 irpoffevxo irpotreix^^^^^ 184; 'iva 237. 
 
 irpo(TfX">' '4* ; ^^^ 323 ; 4iri 337. 
 
 ir/joff^AuTOt 74. , | 
 
 vpo<rKa\e7(T6al nva 192. 
 
 TrpocTKove'ii/ constr. of 147. 
 
 Trpo(TKafi0di>fa8ai constr. of 60 sq., 192. 
 
 irpotrvttiw 40. 
 
 npoa-Tieea-eai with Part. i.q. again 299 sq 
 
 irpoa-wjroKijtvpiai Plur. 77. 
 
 irpoaarvoi/ in circumlocution 90, 319. 
 
 irp6Tepos and Tpwros 32. 
 
 ■irpo(t>r)Ttv<ii augment 35. 
 
 fptipa accent and spelling 1 1 ; Gen. -tjj 
 
 11. 
 TtpaTOKKuriat Plur. 77. 
 vptaros and irpanov 83 ; vpuros for '7rp6' 
 
 Tepos 32, 84. 
 ■iTi\r) omission of 82. 
 tniiBdvoimi constr. of 167. 
 
 p Gen. after in -tjs 11. 
 
 p doubling of after augment 32. 
 
 ^aiSjSi spelling 6. 
 
 (Sairifo) Put. of 37. 
 
 ^epav7i(Tfi4voL 33. 
 
 fiepi/jLfjieifOf 33. 
 
 ^€« 67, 
 
 'Piiyvv/ii sc. (pwiir)!/ 146, 
 
 ^^;aa Ktiptov, Kiymv 298, 
 
 pp and po- 7, 
 
 -o-oi 2d Pers. Sing, in 42. 
 
 trir and tt 7. 
 
 adfifimov etc. 23. 
 
 -o-ai in 2d Sing. Pass. 42. . 
 
 ffaATTiXo) forms 37 ; (roAirfffi sc. aoKitiy- 
 
 xriis 134. 
 (ToAtthtt^s 37. 
 2a/Vci}ju<^}' 16. 
 Sa/Acipeia 17. 
 SaouA and 2av\os 6, 18. 
 2'iir<^Eipa, -ijs 8, 11. 
 Sapctff Acc. -ui/a, -dpieva, -va 16. 
 (raTavas 20 ; without the Art, 89, 
 veavTov etc. use of 1 1 0, 
 ffrj/xdvat 41. 
 <rrj/xe?ov ir^piTouTJs 78. 
 (TT^jUctot^d-dai 192. 
 
 -o-flaa-oc 3d Plur. Imperative 42. 
 2lS(^;/ -WIJOS 16, 
 a'lKepa, TO 24, 
 2fAas, it\ovav6s 20, 
 SiAucE/;!, j and ^ 21. 
 
 2^/AW)/ -QIVOS 16. 
 
 Sira, T<i 21. 
 
 (TtvtiTrews 14. 
 
 2i£ii>/. T(! 21 ; ^ 22. 
 
 (THa^/SaAicrd^i/ai etc. sense 52. 
 
 a-Kd-jrreiv sc. 7^^ 146. 
 
 aKeiTToijiai 67. 
 
 S/cevas 20. 
 
 tTKOTTUt/ fi-fj 243, 
 
 (rxdros, t6 22, 
 
 ^(JSojua, Tfz 21. 
 
 'SoKoniii' declension and accent 16. 
 
 a6s 115, 
 
426 
 
 CxREEK INDEX. 
 
 iTov for reflexive 110, 115; for possessive 
 
 115; position of 314. 
 aouSdptoi/ IS. 
 'Xovadfva 17. 
 a-nd<T(w6ai /Mix^'p"" 192. 
 irTTflpa accent 1 1 ; -prjs 11. 
 (TTTeipeiv airdpov 148. * 
 
 a-wKayxvL(€(Td<u sense 52 ; constr. 164. 
 iTwou^dtra 53. 
 <ra and tt 7. 
 (TTaOTtaotJLai sense 47. . 
 (TTaxvs iincontracted 14 
 ^T€(pat/as 20. 
 
 ariiKa forms of 48 ; with Dat. 178 note''. 
 arriyai cf. %(rTrifj.t. 
 aTi)pi(a characteristic 36. 
 aroixetf with Dat. 184. 
 aTOfw. use of in circumln. 90, 183, 187, 
 
 3:d0 and note. 
 ffTpaTeiieff^ai (TTpareiav 148. 
 arpaTii with Plur. pred. 130. 
 
 iTTpaTOTreSdpxv^ 73- 
 
 arpeipew intrans. 145. 
 
 (7rp(i3vvvp.i 67 ; so. K\ivi)if 146. 
 
 ffTpoivviiu 45. 
 
 (Tuyyei/iji/ 13 ; truyyepevtri 25. 
 
 (TuyKaXeiv and -erirflaf 193. 
 
 (FvWafx^dveiv and cuA. eV yaffrpl 146. 
 
 (rv/ji0dK\fiv 145. 
 
 iup.fdi' indecl. 16. 
 
 (rufnr6a'ia (rufiir6(rta 30, 139. 
 
 <rup.(p4pitv 'iva 240. 
 
 iT6/i.<l>vToi with Gen. 169. 
 
 (run<t>a>y€Tf with Gen. and with ^k 164. 
 
 irw unassimilated in compos. 8; used 
 
 for Koi 331 ; besides 331. 
 ffui/eiSuiT^s 12. 
 ff-i/yepye?!/ 193. 
 -(Tui/T) abstract nouns in 73. 
 trvif^Beid etrrir/ ico 240. 
 iTmi)xSv,(Tav meaning and use of 52. 
 (Tvviivai constr. of 167. 
 ffvviovaiv, -louffLv 48. 
 irvvLindvai 'iva 237. 
 avvitav, -Lutf, {'tctiv) 48 sq. 
 irxiC" ITut. of 37. 
 
 Ta$4pvai 17. 
 
 TOTeiy<6flj)T6 reflexive 52. 
 TO vowd adverbially 96. 
 -rdras adverbs in 69. 
 Tabid and rh. aiird 10. 
 rax^s comparison of 27. 
 T6 connecting Participles 297 ; t« xai 
 360 sq. ; xai Tf 361 ; re . . . re 361. 
 TfKfov with Gen. of abstract 161 sq. 
 Te\€i;T({aj 145. 
 TeA.6a? with Part. 300. 
 -T€os verbals in 190. 
 Tepos uncontracted 15. 
 -Te'pojs adverbs in 69. 
 retTffapeffKaLSsKaros 29. 
 reffffepfs, TeaffepdKovTa 29. 
 
 Tcrei/x^j T^Ty;^o 67. 
 
 TTipetv ^K 327. 
 
 t/9i)jui forms of 45, 46 ; constr. of 150; 
 
 5f»'o238; ^1-329. 
 rifiTJs dearly 164. 
 ■ris, t!s 31. 
 Tij, t1 for Indef. Art. 85 ; followed by 
 
 Part, with Art. 93, 295 ; in pregnant 
 
 or emphatic sense 114 cf. p. 127; 
 
 oiinitted 158, 159. 
 t/s, Ti, for simple Rel. and vice versa 115; 
 
 for Tr6Tepos 115 ; ti ifioi (cai <roi 138 ; 
 
 tI irphs ire etc. 138; t( guam 253; 
 
 t/ Sti 358. 
 To/i'uj' 372. 
 
 ToiovTos, TOffot/Tos wlth Art. 87. 
 -Tos verbals in 41 sq., 190. 
 Tiire as a connective 401. 
 Tobvavriou 10. 
 ToSuofia 10 ; used adverbially 139. 
 
 TOUT* ^(TTI, TOuretTTt 11, 400. 
 
 toSto as a preparatory Demons, before 
 ha, 3ti, or the Infin., 105, 240, 262> 
 263 cf. 400. • 
 
 TT and (T(T 7. 
 
 Tvyxdi/a 67 ; ryx^" used absolutely 318. 
 
 V and 01 interchanged 5. 
 
 tytaiveiv iv ttj iriiTTet and t^ niffrei 182. 
 
 uyi^/S Ace. -^ 15. 
 
 BSap or ueTiis to be supplied 82. 
 
 vi6s Voc. 12 ; with Gen. of abstract 161 sq. 
 
 ufierepos use of 116. 
 
 -vp.1 and-tio) 45. 
 
 v/iiv for possessive 116; between Subst. 
 and Art 116. 
 
 vTtdyeui intrans. for temi 144, 204, cf. 255 ; 
 Fut. force of Pres. 204. 
 
 imdpxei" with Part. 300 ; without &v 304. 
 
 inrip for irepl 335 ; with Ace. in com- 
 parison 335 ; adverbially and in 
 composition 321 ; imtp iyd 321. 
 
 •jwepdvai 321-. 
 
 ^TrfpiKTrtptacov with Gen. compar. 168, 
 321. 
 
 imepex^iv intrans. and with new obj. 14 1; 
 with Gen. or Ace. 169. 
 
 InrepKiav 321. 
 
 inri after Passives 187, 340; with Gen. 
 and Ace. 340 sq.; with Aec. par- 
 ticularly after e?y«i, yiveadai 341 . 
 
 vwoSiiaSai constr. of 191. 
 
 6iroKaT(v 321. 
 
 vTTOKpiaeis Plur. 77. 
 
 irroTdynTe reflexive 52. 
 
 iiffTipflv constr. of 158, 169. 
 
 Si^io-Tos without the Art. (iv {i^iaroa) 89 
 and note. 
 
 ipayiLii with Gen. 
 <l>dyf<Tat 42, 58. 
 tpdyoSf <pay6s 73. 
 <j)ai\6yris 17. 
 
 159. 
 
GREEK INDEX. 
 
 427 
 
 ^m'yeo-Boi with Participle 300, 304. 
 
 tpdmi {(paii/j), <t>aiig) 41. 
 
 ^apcui 15. 
 
 <l>aitTKu 67. 
 
 <l>elSfa8at constr. of 165. 
 
 ^epo) 68. 
 
 ipeiyety constr. of 146. 
 
 *5A.i| accent 13; -kos 16. 
 
 (pritri sc. i Beos or tj ypaipii 134 ; with 
 
 indef. Subj. 136. 
 <p6iivQ> 68. 
 (pBovoi Plur. 77. 
 ip9ovciV constr. of 165. 
 *i\?s 20. 
 
 ^ihlTTTOi, 01 21. 
 
 ■^i^iu6^i/ai intrans. sense 52. 
 
 ((>0|8er<reoi constr. with 148, 192, 323; 
 with liii 241 sq. 
 
 tpopeat 37. 
 
 ipopTi^eiv constr. of 149. 
 
 tppayeKKtoif 18. 
 
 tpvKdfftrstv (pvKaKds 148 ; Aor. in Pass. 
 191 ; constr. of 192, 323; Act. and 
 Mid. 193 sq. ; (pvK. Xm 237. 
 
 tpia) 68. 
 
 (paiv^l . . . Keyuv 130. 
 
 Xa^-KoKlPavos (not -kox) Fem. 80 note. 
 Xaipeiv, xapdi/ 148; xo/>? 184; construe, of 
 
 185; 4i> Kvplw 185; with Participle 300. 
 X^^p^o'o/j.aL, x^ovfxat 68. 
 XopW) Ace. x*^P*''<* 13. 
 Xap'T"/"" i'ut. of 37 ; Aor. Pass. 52. 
 Xei\€a>v 14. 
 ;i^et|UUi/o^ 170. 
 Xetp ellipsis of 82 ; use of in periphrases 
 
 90, 182 sq., 187, 319. 
 X^pov&siv spelling 6; Gend. 21. 
 X^^ 68. 
 
 ■XopaCf-v spelling 6. 
 XoprauBiivai constr. of 163, 167. 
 'Hou^s 20. 
 
 X/JEfoK EX"" '"" 240; with Infin. 164, 
 259 note 
 
 Xph constr. of 147, 164. 
 
 Xfi'hi^i'' (for Sun) 164. 
 
 XPIMot/^o) Eut. of 37 ; in Pass. 188. 
 
 Xpiifffln', KoToxp?o-9ai with Ace. 181. 
 
 Xpio'TtS, xp^O^'^a 11. 
 
 XP'"" constr. of 149. 
 
 XpicTTiis anarthrous 89. 
 
 Xpovl(ety Fut. of 37. 
 
 Xpivos omission of 82. 
 
 Xpv(reos 26. 
 
 X^w, x*^^***) X^^^^ 6^' 
 
 X<^pa omission of 82. 
 
 X<('piC'v Fut. of 37. 
 
 Xwpos 18. 
 
 i(icu8E0-flai with Dat. 172. 
 ^uy^trofiai 69. 
 
 S its use with Vocs. 140.. 
 
 £Se as a local particle 71 
 
 aSea 69. 
 
 -uv proper names in 15 sq. 
 
 -up, -rUTTos adverbs formed from 70. 
 
 £i/ omitted 330 sq. 
 
 aveofiat 69. ^ 
 
 Sipa ellipsis of 82 ; ^ ?pxetoi Jv a 240 ; 
 darlii foil, by Infin. 260 ; irphs Span 
 for the moment 340. 
 
 -as adverbs in 69. 
 
 -as. Gen. -0), proper names in 20 sq. 
 
 as after i(toioD>/ 177; us&k ei/u^ti 219sq. ; 
 as &v as soon as vrith Subjunc. 232 ; 
 as cansal particle 233 ; for Shttc with 
 Infin. 244 ; as eiros eliTE^v 261 ; with 
 Fut. Part. 296, 307 sq. ; not found 
 with Ace. abs. 317 ; before Gen. abs. 
 ,318; iisSri 3iS; transposition 
 in clauses with 389. 
 
 So-TE constr. with 243 sq. 279, after to- 
 trovTos 244 ; as instead of 244 ; with 
 telle force 244 ; negatives witi 349. 
 
 6<pf\ov 374. ' 
 
 &(pe- appeared 52, 64, 187. 
 
 ^ra iKoiiEO' 259. 
 
in. INDEX OF PASSAGES CITED FROM THE 
 SEPTUAGINT. 
 
 The Figures refer to Pages. 
 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 Gen. 
 
 ii. 17 
 ii. 24 
 iv. 2 
 
 iv. 25, 26 
 V. 2,3 
 viii. 10 ' 
 xii. 2 
 
 XT. 1 
 
 XV. 5 sq. 
 XT. 6. 
 XT. 13 
 xvii. 17 
 xTiii. 13 
 xix. 17 
 xxi. 23 
 xxii. 17 
 xxii. 20 
 XXX. 38, 41 
 xxxi. 30 
 xxxiii. 10 
 xxxiii. 19 
 xxxiv. 6 
 
 XXXIT. 7 
 
 xxxTiii. 20 
 xxxTiii. 24 
 
 xlii. 7 
 xliii. 2 
 xliii. 6 
 xUt. 4 
 xliT. 7 
 xlv. 16 
 xIt. 27 
 xlvii. 4 
 
 Exod. ii. 21 
 Bxod. iii. 10 
 Exod. iT. 9 
 Exod. iv. 17 
 Exod. V. 13 
 Exod. T. 22 
 Exod. viii. 21 
 Exod. viii. 24 
 Exod. X. 28 
 Exod. xiv. 13 
 Exod. xvi. 27 
 Exod. xvii. 12 
 Exod. xix. 11, 18 
 Exod. XX. 10 
 
 183 
 
 150 
 
 299 
 
 151 
 
 151 
 
 300 
 
 150 
 
 298 
 
 356 
 
 151 
 
 57 
 
 356 
 
 358 
 
 313 
 
 358 
 
 359 
 
 384 
 
 81 
 
 183 
 
 185 
 
 94 
 
 94 
 
 63 
 
 182 
 
 384 
 
 59 
 
 183 
 
 249 
 
 358 
 
 248 
 
 59 
 
 57 
 
 59 
 
 47 
 209 
 
 68 
 280 
 
 47 
 
 43 
 12, 223 
 
 12 
 
 299 
 
 299 
 
 7, 
 
 102 
 
 22 
 121 
 
 Exod. xxiii. 26 
 
 313 
 
 Exod. xxx. 18 
 
 63 
 
 Exod. xxx. 19 
 
 68 
 
 Exod. xl. 2 
 
 30 
 
 Lev. i. 14 
 
 223 
 
 LeT. iv. 12 
 
 68 
 
 Lev. vii. 33 
 
 316 
 
 Lev. X. 6 
 
 211 
 
 LeT. xi. 32, 34 
 
 280 
 
 LeT. xiv. 16 
 
 170 
 
 Lev. xvi. 32 
 
 280 
 
 Lev. xvii. 10, 13 
 
 58 
 
 Lev. xix. 12 
 
 257 
 
 Lev. xxiii. 32 
 
 24 
 
 Num. T. 24, 26 
 
 37 
 
 Num. vi. 3 
 
 24 
 
 Num. xix. 17 ' 
 
 68 
 
 Deut. i. 29 
 
 324 
 
 Deut. xii. 16 
 
 69 
 
 Deut. xiii. 15 
 
 184 
 
 Deut. xiv. 23 
 
 285 
 
 Deut. xiv. 26 
 
 24 
 
 Deut. XV. 18 
 
 285 
 
 Deut. xvi. 2, 5, 18 
 
 285 
 
 Deut. xvi. 13 
 
 81 
 
 Deut. xviii. 19 
 
 278 
 
 Deut. xix. 15 
 
 320 
 
 Deut. XX. 17 
 
 184 
 
 Deut. xxviii. 13 
 
 150 
 
 Deut. xxix. 13 
 
 211 
 
 Deut. xxix. 18 
 
 161, 251 
 
 Josh. ii. 13 
 
 53 
 
 Josh. vi. 18 
 
 324 
 
 Josh. xi. 3 
 
 22 
 
 Josh. xi. 6 
 
 324 
 
 Josh. xi. 19 
 
 145 
 
 J6sh. xi. 22 
 
 17 
 
 Josh. xiv. 9 
 
 358 
 
 Josh, xxiii. 2 
 
 143 
 
 Josh. xxiv. 13 
 
 280 
 
 Josh. xxiv. 20 
 
 143 
 
 Judg. V. 8 
 
 358 
 
 Judg. vii. 14, 18 
 
 15 
 
O T. INDEX. 
 
 429 
 
 •Tudg. ix. 28 
 
 358 
 
 1 Chron. xvi. 86 
 
 176 
 
 Judg. xi. 27 
 
 173 
 
 1 Chron. xvii. 6 
 
 254 
 
 Judg. xiii. 4 
 
 121 
 
 
 
 Judg. xiii. 11 
 
 249 
 
 2 Chron. iv. 6 
 
 63 
 
 Judg. xvi. 17 
 
 327 
 
 2 Chron. ix. 8 
 
 376 
 
 Judg. XTi. 2? 
 
 12 
 
 2 Chron. xi. 22 
 
 150 
 
 Judg. xxi. 3 
 
 12 
 
 2 Chron. xix. 10 
 
 173 
 
 
 
 2 Chron. xx. 19 
 
 176 
 
 Euth iii. 2 
 
 280 
 
 2 Chron. xxxv. 21 
 
 138 
 
 
 
 2 Chron. xxxvi. 31 
 
 183 
 
 1 Sam. i. 2, 5 
 
 17 
 
 
 
 1 Sam. i. 13 
 
 151 
 
 Ezra (2 Esdr. ix. 6 
 Ezra (2 Esdr.) x. It 
 
 12 
 
 1 Sam. i. 17 
 
 184 
 
 30 
 
 1 Sam. iii. 14 
 
 358 
 
 
 
 1 Sam. iii. 17 
 
 359 
 
 Neh. iii. 23 
 
 20 
 
 1 Sam. ix. 9 
 
 151 
 
 Neh. viii. 12 
 
 280 
 
 1 Sam. X. 3 
 
 102 
 
 Neh. ix. 21 
 
 169 
 
 1 Sam. X. 24 
 
 249 
 
 Neh. ix. 34 
 
 143 
 
 1 Sam. xii. 25 
 
 183 
 
 
 
 1 Sam. xiv. 36 
 
 68 
 
 Jobl. 11 
 
 358 
 
 1 Sam. XV. 10 
 
 298 
 
 Job V. 13 
 
 291 
 
 1 Sam. XV. 20 
 
 184 
 
 Job vi. 24 
 
 149 
 
 1 Sam. xvii. 34 
 
 223 
 
 Job vii. 2 
 
 67 
 
 1 Sam. xviii. 22 
 
 376 
 
 Job xvi. 22 
 
 59 
 
 1 Sam. XX. 41 
 
 145 
 
 Job xix. 16 
 
 55 
 
 1 Sam. xxiv. 16 
 
 182 
 
 Job xxii. 3 
 
 223 
 
 1 Sam. XXV. 20 
 
 12 
 
 Job xxii. 20 
 
 358 
 
 I Sam. xxvii. 12 
 
 174 
 
 Job XXV. 5 
 
 67 
 
 
 
 Job xxix. 14 
 
 49 
 
 2 Sam. iii. 28 
 
 158 
 
 Job XXX. 25 
 
 358 
 
 2 Sam. iii. 34 
 
 39 
 
 Job xxxi. 36 
 
 358 
 
 2 Sam. iii. 35 
 
 359 
 
 Job xxxix. 5 
 
 23 
 
 2 Sam. V. 6 
 
 57 
 
 Job xl. 5 
 
 49 
 
 2 Sam. vi. 20 
 
 254 
 
 
 
 2 Sam. vii. 4 
 
 298 
 
 Psalm iv. 2 
 
 64 
 
 2 Sam. vii. 7 
 
 254 
 
 Psalm v. 9 
 
 43 
 
 2 Sam. vii. 14 
 
 1.50 
 
 Psalm V. 12 
 
 176, 185 
 
 2 Sam. xi. 11 
 
 358 
 
 Psalm vii. 2 
 
 176 
 
 2 Sam. xii. 3 
 
 121 
 
 Psalm xiv. 1, S 
 
 121 
 
 2 Sam. XV. 26 
 
 376 
 
 Psalm xvii. 1 
 
 316 
 
 2 Sam. XV. 31 
 
 384 
 
 Psalm xxii. 1 
 
 169 
 
 2 Sam. xvi. 10 
 
 138 
 
 Psalm XXV. 20 
 
 176 
 
 2 Ram. xix. 1 
 
 384 
 
 Psalm xxviii. 7 
 
 59 
 
 2 Sam. xix. 22 
 
 138 
 
 Psalm xxxii. 21 
 
 176 
 
 2 Sam. XX. 20 
 
 358 
 
 Psalm xxxix. 6 
 
 251 
 
 
 
 Psalm xxxix. 7 
 
 185 
 
 1 Kings viii. 29 
 
 287 
 
 Psalm xii. 12 
 
 57 
 
 1 Kings X. 9 
 
 376 
 
 Psalm xliii. 23 
 
 151 
 
 I Kings xiii. 10 
 
 280 
 
 Psalm xlvii. 4 
 
 223 
 
 1 Kings xvii. 8 
 
 298 
 
 Psalm xlviii. 13, 21 
 
 35 
 
 1 Kings xviii. 42 
 
 22 
 
 Psalm Ixv. 14 
 
 61 
 
 1 Kings XX. (xxi.) 13 
 
 85 
 
 Psalm Ixvii. 19 
 
 148 
 
 
 
 Psalm Ixxvii. 22 
 
 174 
 
 2 Kings ii. 25 
 
 22 
 
 Psalm Ixlix. 14 
 
 184 
 
 2 Kings ix. 7 
 
 182 
 
 Psalm Ixxxv. 9 
 
 172 
 
 2 Kings xi. 3 
 
 40 
 
 Psalm Ixxxvii. 6 
 
 69 
 
 2 Kings xviii. 5 
 
 176 
 
 Psalm xcv. 11 
 
 358, 359 
 
 2 Kings xviii. 13 
 
 18 
 
 Psalm ex. 1 
 
 49 
 
 2 Kings xxiii. 34 
 
 18 
 
 Psalm cxvii. 22 
 
 150, 288 
 
 2 Kings xxiv. 4 
 
 69 
 
 Psalm cxviii. 23 
 
 123 
 
 
 
 Psalm cjfviii. 32 
 
 223 
 
 1 Chron. iii. 17 
 
 18 
 
 Psalm cxix. 7 
 
 223 
 
 1 Chron. vi. 77 
 
 22 
 
 Psalm oxx. 7 
 
 324 
 
430 
 
 0. T. INDEX. 
 
 Psalm cxxxii. 13 
 
 22 
 
 Ezek. ii. 6 
 
 Psalm cxlv. 13 
 
 24 
 
 Ezek. iii. 9 
 Ezek. iv. 9 
 
 Prov. i. 27 
 
 232 
 
 Ezek. vi. 2 
 
 Prov. vi. 6 
 
 50 
 
 Ezek. xxii. 5 
 
 Prov. xii. 10 
 
 164 
 
 
 Prov. xxvi. U 
 
 117 
 
 Dan. viii. 3 
 
 Eccl. iii. 19 
 
 169 
 
 Joel iii. 1 sq. 
 
 Eccl. vi. 2 
 
 169 
 
 
 Eccl. viii. 12 
 
 324 
 
 Amos i. 1 
 Amos iv. 7 
 
 Cant. ii. 7 
 
 358 
 
 Amos ix. 12 
 
 Cant. vii. 6 
 
 254 
 
 Jonah ii. 5 
 
 Isa. vi. 4 
 
 287 
 
 Jonah iii. 3 
 
 Isa. vi. 9 
 
 183 
 
 
 Isa. vi. 10 
 
 62,211 
 
 Mic. vi. 14 
 
 Isa. viii. 21 
 
 12 
 
 
 Isa. xiv. 24 
 
 358 
 
 Hah. i. 10 
 
 Isa. xix. 22 
 
 183 
 
 Hab. ii. 3 
 
 Isa. xxii. 13 
 
 205 
 
 Hab. ii. 4 
 
 Isa. xxiv. 3 
 
 183 
 
 
 Isa. xxvi. 20 
 
 373 
 
 Zech. viii. 2 
 
 Isa. xxviii. 16 
 
 174 
 
 Zech. ix. 5 
 
 Isa. xxix. 10 
 
 62 
 
 Zech. ix. 9 
 
 Isa. XXX 19 
 
 183 
 
 
 Isa. xxxii. 15 sq. 
 
 22 
 
 Mai. ii. 5 
 
 Isa. xxxiii. 4 
 
 64 
 
 
 Isa. xxxiii. 15 
 
 62 
 
 Tobit iv. 5 
 
 Isa. xlii. 4 
 
 176 
 
 Tobit V. 12 (13) 
 
 Isa. xlvii. 3 
 
 145 
 
 
 Isa. xlix. 1 
 
 327 
 
 Judith i. 12 
 
 Isa. xlix. 6 
 
 150 
 
 
 Isa. li. 5 
 
 176 
 
 Sap. iv. 4 
 
 Isa. liii. 12 
 
 151 
 
 Sap. ix. 1 
 
 Isa. Ixvi. 10 
 
 183 
 
 
 Isa. Ixvi. 23 
 
 172 
 
 Sir. (Ecclus.) xi. 5 
 Sir. XV. 3 
 
 Jer. i. 17 
 
 324 
 
 Sir. xvii. 14 
 
 Jer. ii. 20 
 
 23 
 
 Sir. XX. 16 
 
 Jer. ii. 36 
 
 254, 324 
 
 Sir. XX. 22 
 
 Jer. ix. 23 
 
 185 
 
 Sir. xxiv. 31 
 
 Jer. X. 2 
 
 324 
 
 Sir. xlvi. 12 
 
 Jer. xii. 6 
 
 174 
 
 
 Jer. xii. 13 
 
 324 
 
 Bar, i. 3 
 
 Jer. XX. 13 
 
 176 
 
 Bar. ii. 28 
 
 Jer. xxi. 10 
 
 36 
 
 
 . Jer. XXV. 1 
 
 18 
 
 Sus. 27 
 
 Jer. xxvi. (xlvi.) 5 • 
 
 183 
 
 Sus. 52 
 
 Jer. xxvi. (xlvi.) 18 
 
 22 
 
 
 . Jer. xxxi. (xlviii.) 9 
 
 183 
 
 1 Mace. i. 6 
 
 Jer. xxxi. 13 
 
 324 
 
 1 Mace. iii. 30 
 
 Jer. xxxviii. (xxxi.) 15, 33 
 
 291 
 
 1 Mace. X. 89 
 
 Jer. xxxviii. (xxxi.) 34 
 
 212 
 
 1 Mace. xi. 40 
 1 Mace. XV. 2 
 
 Lam. i. 17 
 
 22 
 
 
 Lam. iii. 57 
 
 316 
 
 2 Mace ix. 18 
 
 iLam. iii. 43 
 
 62 
 
 2 Mace xi. 16 
 
 324 
 
 ,124 
 
 150 
 
 36 
 
 64 
 
 85 
 
 68 
 
 153 
 153 
 234 
 
 69 
 180 
 
 58 
 
 64 
 373 
 134 
 
 22 
 
 17 
 179 
 
 324 
 
 184 
 20 
 
 359 
 
 59 
 12 
 
 37 
 37 
 324 
 58 
 45 
 37 
 59 
 
 18 
 316 
 
 17 
 S9 
 
 143 
 
 169 
 
 25 
 
 46 
 
 144 
 
 144 
 144 
 
IV. INDEX OF PASSAGES II[ THE NEW TEST. 
 EXPLAINED OR CITED. 
 
 The Figures refer to Pages; those followed by an Asterisk Indicate passages 
 not merely referred to or quoted, but commebtel upoa. 
 
 Matt. i. 6 
 Matt. i. 10 
 Matt. i. 11 
 Matt. i. 15 
 Matt. i. 18 
 
 Matt. i. 19 
 Matt. i. 20 
 Matt. i. 21 
 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt.- 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 
 ii. 2 
 ii. 3 
 
 ii. 4 
 
 ii. 6 
 
 ii. 8 
 
 ii. 9 
 
 ii. 10 
 
 ii. 12 
 
 ii. 13 
 
 ii. 15 
 
 ii. 16 
 
 ii. 18 
 
 ii. 20 
 
 ii. 22 
 
 ii. 23 
 
 Matt. iii. 1 sq. 
 Matt. iii. 3 
 Matt. iii. 4 
 Matt. iii. 9 
 
 Matt. iii. 11 
 Matt. iii. 12 
 Matt. iii. 13 
 Matt. iii. 14 
 Matt. iii. 15 
 Matt. iii. 16 
 Matt. iii. 17 
 
 Matt. iv. 1 
 
 , Matt. iv. 4 
 Matt. iv. 8 
 
 Matt. iv. 9 sq. 
 
 Matt. iv. 1 1 
 
 Matt. iv. 12 
 
 Matt. iv. 13 
 
 16,94 
 
 19 
 
 336 
 
 6 
 
 131, 164, 279,301,314, 
 
 315* 327 
 
 69 
 
 12, 17 
 
 106, 151 
 
 261 
 
 18* 
 
 38, 98, 203* 
 
 158 
 
 231 
 
 144, 166 
 
 184 
 
 188 
 
 49, 27P 
 
 118 
 
 64 
 
 147, 291 
 
 77 
 
 169 {bis) 
 
 6, 332 
 
 298 
 309 
 324 
 113 
 
 108, 182* 204* 
 
 37, 280 
 
 270 
 
 31, 205* 259 
 
 131, 278, 401 
 
 24,63, 112 
 
 124, 198 
 
 261 
 
 58 
 
 45 
 
 401 
 
 401 
 
 303 
 
 6 (bis), 118, 297, 332 
 
 Matt. iv. 15 
 Matt. iv. 16 
 Matt. iv. 18 
 Matt. iv. 23 
 Matt. iv. 24 
 Matt. iv. 25 
 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt, 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 Matt. 
 
 V. 1 
 V. 2 
 V. 3 
 V. 4 
 V. 5 
 V. 6 
 V. 7 
 V. 8, 9, 10 
 
 V. 11 
 
 V. 13 
 V. 15 
 V. 16 
 V. 17 
 V. 18 
 V. 19 
 V. 20 
 V. 21 
 V. 22 
 V. 24 
 V. 25 
 V. 27 
 V. 29 
 V. 30 
 V. 3S 
 V. 34 
 V. 34 sq. 
 V. 37 
 V. 38 
 V. 39 
 V. 40 
 V. 41 
 V. 42 
 V. 44 
 V. 47 
 V. 48 
 
 Matt. vi. 1 
 Matt. vi. 2 
 Matt. vi. 3 
 
 153 
 143, 381 
 312 
 106 {bis), 297 
 297 
 342 
 
 .^15 {bis) 
 
 63, 398 
 
 109, 163 
 
 108, 109 
 109 
 
 109, 147 
 109 
 109 
 
 177, 223 
 
 124, 182 
 
 44 
 
 172 
 
 261 
 
 121, 126, 127 
 
 83, 229 
 
 168* 169, 246 
 
 57, 170* 187 
 
 170* 
 
 115, 402 
 
 31, 46, 231 
 
 257 
 
 110, 170, 240 
 
 110, 170, 240 
 
 53, 257 
 
 349 
 
 147, 367 
 
 168 
 
 291, 394 
 
 37, 122, 219, 349 
 
 S2* 143, 177, 381 
 
 219, 229 
 
 324 
 
 146 
 
 83 
 
 257 
 
 52, 393 
 
 37, 110, -203* 
 
 315 
 
432 
 
 N. T. INDEX. 
 
 Matt. Ti. 8 
 
 265 ' 
 
 Matt. ix. 1 
 
 118* 
 
 Matt. Ti. 10 
 
 52, 362* 
 
 Matt. ix. 2 
 
 49 
 
 Matt. vi. 12 
 
 48 
 
 Matt. ix. 4 
 
 857 
 
 Matt. vi. 13 
 
 137 
 
 Matt. ix. 5 
 
 49,56 
 
 Matt. vi. 15 
 
 345, 346 ; 
 
 Matt. ix. 6 
 
 66, 385, 401 
 
 Matt. vi. 16 
 
 300 
 
 Matt. ix. 9 
 
 338 
 
 Matt. vi. 18 
 
 300 
 
 Matt. ix. 10 
 
 277, 312, 315 
 
 Matt. vi. 19 
 
 111, 14fi(6ts) 
 
 Matt. ix. 14 
 
 123 
 
 Matt. vi. 20 
 
 111, 367 1 
 
 Matt. ix. 15 
 
 204* 
 
 Matt. vi. 22 
 
 125 
 
 Matt. ix. 17 
 
 64, 69* 
 
 Matt. vi. 23 
 
 136 
 
 Matt. ix. 18 
 
 58* 118, 315 
 
 Matt. vi. 24 
 
 9 (bis), 28, 102 {bis) 
 
 Matt. ix. 25 
 
 161 
 
 Matt. vi. 25 
 
 127, 186, 255, 366 
 
 Matt. ix. 29 
 
 52 
 
 Matt. vi. 26 
 
 125, 366 
 
 Matt. ix. 30 
 
 £2 (its), 63, 243 
 
 Matt. vi. 28 
 
 54, 125, 251, 366 
 
 Matt. ix. 35 
 
 106 
 
 Matt. vi. 29 
 
 16, 369 
 
 Matt. ix. 36 
 
 33, 52, 164 
 
 Matt. vi. 30 
 
 49, 206* 
 
 Matt. ix. 38 
 
 55 
 
 Matt. vi. 34 
 
 127, 186 
 
 
 
 
 
 Matt. X. 1 
 
 244 
 
 Matt. vii. 1 
 
 52* 
 
 Matt. X. 4 
 
 297* 
 
 Matt. vii. 2 
 
 182 
 
 Matt. X. 9 
 
 328* 366 
 
 Matl. vii. 4 
 
 115,210 
 
 Matt. X. 10 
 
 366 
 
 Matt. vii. 5 
 
 115, 257 
 
 Matt. X. 14 
 
 288, 349 
 
 Matt. vii. 6 
 
 182,211,368 
 
 Matt. X. 16 
 
 132, 329 
 
 Matt. vii. 7 
 
 63, 290 
 
 Matt. X. 18 
 
 364 
 
 Matt. vii. 8 
 
 205 
 
 Matt. X. 19 
 
 223,251,255 {bis) 
 
 Matt. vii. 9 
 
 223, 248, 284* 384 
 
 Matt. X. 20 
 
 124, 356 
 
 Matt. vii. 10 
 
 223, 248 
 
 Matt. X. 22 
 
 311 
 
 Matt. vii. 13 
 
 253 
 
 Matt. X. 23 
 
 213, 223 
 
 Matt. vii. 14 
 
 253* 
 
 Matt. X. 24 
 
 335 
 
 Matt. vii. 15 
 
 70 
 
 Matt. X. 25 
 
 151* 239* 384* 
 
 Matt. vii. 16 
 
 249, 324* 
 
 Matt. X. 26 
 
 211, 355, 368 
 
 Matt. vii. 20 
 
 324, 371 
 
 Matt. X. 27 
 
 327 
 
 Matt. vii. 21 
 
 122 
 
 Matt. X. 28 
 
 61, 192, 211 
 
 Matt. vii. 22 
 
 183* 
 
 Matt. X. 29 
 
 121 
 
 Matt. vii. 23 
 
 141, 176 
 
 Matt. X. 30 
 
 310* 
 
 Matt. vii. 24 
 
 , 166, 219 
 
 Matt. X. 33 
 
 172, 176, 219, 229, 379 
 
 Matt. vii. 25 
 
 40* 
 
 Matt. X. 33 
 
 172, 229 
 
 Matt. vii. 26 
 
 166 
 
 Matt. X. 37 
 
 89, 335 
 
 Matt. vii. 27 
 
 289 
 
 Matt. X. 38 
 
 348, 368 
 
 Matt. vii. 28 
 
 277 
 
 Matt. X. 39 
 
 112, 193 
 
 Matt. vii. 2? 
 
 311 
 
 Matt. X. 42 
 
 82, 213 
 
 Matt. viii. 1 
 
 143, 315 
 
 Matt, xi. 1 
 
 106* 270, 277, 300* 
 
 Matt. viii. 3 
 
 29 
 
 MaJ . xi. 3 
 
 249 
 
 Matt. viii. 4 
 
 68, 106* 243 
 
 Ma i. xi. 5 
 
 148 
 
 Matt. viii. 5 
 
 143, 315 
 
 Matt. xi. 6 
 
 52 
 
 Matt. viii. 8 
 
 52, 73, 115, 240, 344 
 
 Matt. xi. 8 
 
 49, 82, 191 
 
 Matt. viii. 9 
 
 341 
 
 Matt. xi. 8 sq. 
 
 261 
 
 Matt. viii. 12 
 
 88* 
 
 Matt. xi. 9 
 
 363 
 
 Matt. viii. 13 
 
 73 
 
 Matt. xi. 10 
 
 172 
 
 Matt. viii. 14 
 
 312 
 
 Matt. xi. 11 
 
 84, 169 
 
 Matt. viii. 14 sqq. 
 
 289 
 
 Matt. xi. 12 
 
 53* 
 
 Matt. viii. 20 
 
 251* 255 {bis) 
 
 Matt. xi. 17 
 
 369 
 
 Matt. viii. 22 
 
 112 
 
 Matt. xi. 18 
 
 367 
 
 Matt. viii. 23 
 
 "143 
 
 Matt. xi. 19 
 
 322* 
 
 Matt. viii. 24 
 
 244, 312, 340 
 
 Matt. xi. 21 
 
 224 
 
 Matt. viii. 25 
 
 45 
 
 Matt. xi. 23 
 
 171, 224 
 
 Matt. viii. 28 
 
 143, 315 
 
 Matt. xi. 25 
 
 149, 176, 362 
 
 Matt. viii. 29 
 
 61, 71, 1.38,394 
 
 Matt. xi. 26 
 
 140, 172 
 
 Matt. viii. 30 
 
 312 
 
 Matt. xi. 29 
 
 26* 110, 290, 324 
 
 Matt. viii. 31 
 
 273 
 
 
 
 Matt. viii. 34 
 
 320* 
 
 Matt. xii. 1 
 
 14. 23. 37 
 
N. T. INDEX. 
 
 433 
 
 Matt. xii. 2 
 
 186,348 
 
 Matt. xiv. 3 
 
 
 329 
 
 Matt. xli. 3 
 
 37, 126 
 
 Matt. xiv. 3 sq. 
 
 
 200 
 
 Matt. xii. 3 sqq. 
 
 249 
 
 Matt. xiv. 6 
 
 
 317 
 
 Matt. xii. 5 
 
 23^186 
 
 Matt. xiv. 7 
 
 
 227 
 
 Matt. xii. 7 
 
 165 
 
 Matt. xiv. 8 
 
 
 71, 336 
 
 Matt. xii. 9 
 
 106* 
 
 Matt. xiv. 9 
 
 
 275 
 
 Matt. xii. 10 
 
 233, 249 (5!s), 312* 
 
 Matt. xiv. 14 
 
 
 106 (bis) 
 
 Matt. xii. 12 
 
 23, 243 
 
 Matt. xiv. 15 
 
 
 112 
 
 Matt. xii. 13 
 
 35, 122 
 
 Matt. xiv. 16 
 
 
 132 
 
 Matt. xii. 15 
 
 106 
 
 Matt. xiv. 17 
 
 
 14 
 
 Matt. xii. 18 
 
 185 
 
 Matt. xiv. 18 
 
 
 71 
 
 Matt. xii. 19 
 
 37, 366 
 
 Matt. xiv. 22 
 
 
 230 
 
 Matt. xii. 20 
 
 23, 53 
 
 Matt. xiv. 26 
 
 
 325 
 
 Matt. xii. 21 
 
 37, 176* 
 
 Matt. xiv. 27 
 
 
 314 
 
 Matt. xii. 22 
 
 244, 312 
 
 Matt. xiv. 28 
 
 
 31, 110 
 
 Matt. xii. 23 
 
 124* 
 
 Matt. xiv. 29 
 
 
 338 
 
 Matt. xii. 25 
 
 38* 47, 112, 127 
 
 Matt. xiv. 33 
 
 
 124* 
 
 Matt. xii. 28 
 
 68, 371 
 
 Matt. xiv. 36 
 
 
 233 
 
 Matt. xii. 2ft 
 
 54 
 
 
 
 
 Matt. xii. 32 
 
 367 
 
 Matt. XV. 2 
 
 
 €3 
 
 Matt. -xii. 36 
 
 229, 379 
 
 Matt. XV. 5 
 
 
 213 
 
 Matt. xii. 37 
 
 398 
 
 Matt. XV. 12 
 
 
 51 
 
 Matt. xii. 38 
 
 325 
 
 Matt. XV. 16 
 
 
 153 
 
 Matt. xii. 42 
 
 16 
 
 Matt. XV. 20 
 
 
 262 
 
 Matt. xii. 45 
 
 125 
 
 Matt. XV. 23 
 
 
 44 
 
 Matt. xii. 50 
 
 108, 279* 
 
 Matt. XV. 27 
 Matt. XV. 28 
 
 
 159 
 140 
 
 Matt. xiii. 2 
 
 88* 244 
 
 Matt. XV. 30 
 
 
 112 
 
 Matt. xiii. 3 
 
 270 
 
 Matt. XV. 31 
 
 
 301 
 
 Matt. xiii. 4 
 
 102, 263 
 
 Matt. XV. 32 26*, 
 
 119,139,186 
 
 , 255, 369 
 
 Matt. xiii. 5 
 
 263, 349 
 
 Matt. XV. 33 
 
 
 244, 245* 
 
 Matt. xiii. 8 
 
 30, 102 
 
 Matt. XV. 35 
 
 
 275* 
 
 Matt. xiii. 9 
 
 259 
 
 
 
 
 Matt. xiii. 12 
 
 348, 349 
 
 Matt. xvi. 7 
 
 
 358* 
 
 Matt. xiii. 13 
 
 48 
 
 Matt. xvi. 8 
 
 
 113 
 
 Matt. xiii. 14 53, 
 
 178, 184, 212* 313 
 
 Matt. xvi. 14 
 
 
 102 
 
 Matt. xiii. 15 
 
 62, 211, 368 
 
 !Matt. xvi. 16 
 
 
 124 
 
 Matt. xiii. 17 
 
 369 
 
 Matt. xvi. 17 
 
 
 146* 
 
 Matt. xiii. 19 
 
 125, 309, 329, 350 
 
 Matt. xvi. 18 
 
 200 
 
 337, 364 
 
 Matt. xiii. 20 
 
 125 
 
 Matt. xvi. 19 
 
 24 
 
 72,311* 
 
 Matt. xiii. 20 sqq. 
 
 399 
 
 Matt. xvi. 20 
 
 
 108, 245 
 
 Matt. xiii. 22 
 
 125 
 
 Matt. xvi. 21 
 
 45,98 
 
 245, 326 
 
 Matt. xiii. 23 
 
 30,49 
 
 Matt. xVi. 22 
 
 137 
 
 161,212 
 
 Matt. xiii. 25 
 
 263, 332 
 
 Matt. xvi. 23 
 
 117* 319* 
 
 Matt. xiii. 26 
 
 55 
 
 Matt. xvi. 24 
 
 
 112 
 
 Matt. xiii. 28 
 
 208 {bis) 
 
 Matt. xvi. 25 
 
 
 72, 229 
 
 Matt. xiii. 30 
 
 150 
 
 Matt. xvi. 26 
 
 
 189 
 
 Matt. xiii. 31 
 
 14 
 
 Matt. xvi. 28 
 
 71, 
 
 213, 330* 
 
 Matt. xiii. 32 
 
 44, 54, 84 
 
 
 
 
 Matt. xiii. 33 
 
 343 
 
 Matt. xvii. 3 
 
 52* 
 
 127* 312 
 
 Matt. xiii. 35 
 
 63 
 
 Matt. xvii. 4 
 
 
 71, 103 
 
 Matt. xiii. 37 sq. 
 
 125 
 
 Matt. xvii. 7 
 
 
 52 
 
 Matt. xiii. 39 
 
 309 
 
 Matt. xvii. 8 
 
 
 118 
 
 Matt. xiii. 43 
 
 259 
 
 Matt. xvii. 9 
 
 
 230 
 
 Matt. xiii. 44 
 
 118 i42, 325 
 
 Matt. xvii. 11 
 
 
 365 
 
 Matt. xiii. 47 
 
 159 
 
 Matt. xvii. 12 
 
 
 149, 341 
 
 Matt. xiii. 49 
 
 37 
 
 Matt. xvii. 14 
 
 
 316 
 
 Matt. xiii. 51 
 
 46 
 
 Matt. xvii. 16 
 
 
 33 
 
 -Matt. xiii. 53 
 
 277 
 
 Matt. xvii. 17 
 
 
 140 
 
 Matt. xiii. 55 
 
 17 
 
 Matt. xvii. 19 
 
 
 33 
 
 Matt. xiii. 56 
 
 340 
 
 Matt. xvii. 20 
 Matt. xvii. 25 
 
 
 54 
 299, 324 
 
 Matt. XIT. 2 
 
 108 
 
 Matt. xvii. 26 
 
 316, 
 
 324, 371 
 
434 
 
 N. T. INDEX. 
 
 Matt. x™. 27 
 
 104* 110 
 
 Matt. XX. 32 
 Matt. XX. 33 
 
 
 208 
 63 
 
 Matt, xviii. 1 
 
 84 
 
 
 
 
 Matt, xriii. 2 
 
 142, 329 
 
 Matt. xxi. I 
 
 
 22 
 
 Matt, xviii. 4 
 
 lis, 229 
 
 Matt. xxi. 3 
 
 
 363 
 
 Matt, xviii. 5 
 
 337 
 
 Matt. xxi. 5 
 
 
 179 
 
 Matt, xviii. 6 
 
 174 
 
 Matt. xxi. 7 
 
 
 77 
 
 Matt, xviii. 7 
 
 322* 
 
 Matt. xxi. 8 
 
 116, 
 
 130, 329 
 
 Matt, xviii. 8 
 
 110, 118, 306, 360 
 
 Matt. xxi. 8 sq. 
 
 
 200 
 
 Matt, xviii. 9 
 
 110, 170 
 
 Matt. xxi. 9 
 
 
 137, 184 
 
 Matt, xviii. 10 
 
 243 
 
 Matt. xxi. 11 
 
 
 157 
 
 Matt, xviii. 12 
 
 125, 338* 
 
 Matt. xxi. 12 
 
 
 99 
 
 Matt, xviii. 14 
 
 172 
 
 Matt. xxi. 15 
 
 
 98 
 
 Matt, xviii. 15 
 
 54, 60, 110,402 
 
 Matt. xxi. 16 
 
 
 303 
 
 Matt, xviii. 16 
 
 28, 110, 320 
 
 Matt. xxi. 18 
 
 
 144 
 
 Matt, xviii. 18 
 
 311 
 
 Matt. xxi. 19 
 
 
 52, 85 
 
 Matt, xviii. 19 
 
 229, 285 
 
 Matt. xxi. 21 
 
 52 
 
 Ibis), 173 
 
 Matt, xviii. 21 
 
 54, 173, 290* 
 
 Matt. xxi. 22 
 
 
 173 
 
 Matt, xviii. 22 
 
 30 
 
 Matt. xxi. 23 
 
 98, 143 
 
 309, 315 
 
 Matt, xviii. 24 
 
 315 
 
 Matt. xxi. 26 
 
 
 150, 173 
 
 Matt, xviii. 25 
 
 275, 315, 351 
 
 Matt. xxi. 28 
 
 
 84 
 
 Matt, xviii. 27 
 
 164 
 
 Matt. xxi. 31 
 
 32 
 
 115,204 
 
 Matt, xviii. 29 
 
 273 
 
 Matt. xxi. 32 
 
 
 173, 269 
 
 Matt, xviii. SO 
 
 230 
 
 Matt. xxi. 33 
 
 
 47, 115 
 
 Matt, xviii. 31 
 
 116 
 
 Matt. xxi. 36 
 
 
 84 
 
 Matt, xviii. 33 
 
 217 
 
 Matt. xxi. 37 
 
 
 52*, 192 
 
 Matt, xviii. 34 
 
 230 [bis] 
 
 Matt. xxi. 40 
 
 
 149 
 
 
 
 Matt. xxi. 41 
 
 47, 64, 
 
 143* 229 
 
 Matt. xix. 1 
 
 277 
 
 Matt. xxi. 42 
 
 90, 123 
 
 288, 320 
 
 Matt. xix. 2 
 
 106* 
 
 Matt. xxi. 45 
 
 
 98 
 
 Matt. xix. 3 
 
 249 
 
 Matt. xxi. 46 
 
 
 150, 289 
 
 Matt. xix. 5 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 
 Matt. xix. 6 
 
 349 
 
 Matt. xxii. 2 
 
 
 23 
 
 Matt. xix. 10 
 
 131 
 
 Matt. xxii. 3 
 
 
 369 
 
 Matt. xix. 1 1 
 
 122 
 
 Matt. xxii. 5 
 
 
 102, 117 
 
 Matt. xix. 12 
 
 34, 112 
 
 Matt. xxii. 11 
 
 
 148, 351* 
 
 Matt. xix. IS 
 
 233 
 
 Matt. xxii. 12 
 
 52 
 
 , 71, 351* 
 
 Matt. xix. 1 6 
 
 85 
 
 Matt. xxii. 1 5 
 
 
 244 
 
 Matt. xix. 18 
 
 96 
 
 Matt. xxii. 16 
 
 51 
 
 , 121, 336 
 
 Matt. xix. 19 
 
 257 
 
 Matt. xxii. 22 sq. 
 
 
 39 
 
 Matt. xix. 20 
 
 152, 192 
 
 Matt. xxii. 23 
 
 
 ^50 
 
 Matt. xix. 22 
 
 310 
 
 Matt. xxii. 25 
 
 
 351 
 
 Matt. xix. 25 
 
 38 
 
 Matt. xxii. 26 
 
 
 363 
 
 Matt. xix. 27 
 
 46 
 
 Matt. xxii. 28 
 
 
 163 
 
 Matt. xix. 28 
 
 37, 60, 119 
 
 Matt. xxii. 29 
 Matt. xxii. 34 
 
 
 351 
 52 
 
 Matt. XX. 1 
 
 320 
 
 Matt. xxii. 36 
 
 
 83 
 
 Matt. XX. 2 
 
 164 
 
 Matt. xxii. 37 
 
 
 .143, 182 
 
 Matt. XX. 3 
 
 83 
 
 Matt. xxii. 38 
 
 
 83, 128, 
 
 Matt. XX. 6 
 
 301 
 
 Matt. xxii. 40 
 
 
 126 
 
 Matt. XX. 7 
 
 402 
 
 Matt. xxii. 43 
 
 
 330* 
 
 Matt. XX. 8 
 
 374 
 
 Matt. xxii. 44 
 
 
 49 
 
 Matt. XX. 9 
 
 332 
 
 
 
 
 Matt. XX. 13 
 
 164 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 2 
 
 
 198 
 
 Matt. XX. 15 
 
 248* 249 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 3 
 
 
 364, 369 
 
 Matt. XX. 17 
 
 312 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 4 
 
 
 364 
 
 Matt. XX. 18 
 
 98, 165, 204 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 5 
 
 
 52, 118 
 
 Matt. XX. 19 
 
 264 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 8 
 
 
 364 
 
 Matt. XX. 20 
 
 149, 193 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 11 
 
 
 364 
 
 Matt. XX. 21 
 
 103, 237 
 
 ' Matt, xxiii. 12 
 
 
 112 
 
 Matt. XX. 22 
 
 193, 259 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 13 
 
 
 297 
 
 Matt. XX. 23 
 
 66, 163, 262 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 14 
 
 
 172 
 
 Matt. XX. 2.% 
 
 51 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 15 
 
 
 27* 70* 
 
N. T. INDEX. 
 
 435 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 16 
 
 11, 127, 288 
 
 Matt. XXV. 41 
 
 
 90 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 18 
 
 127, 288 
 
 Matt. XXV. 42 sqq. 
 
 
 369 
 
 Matt, xxiii, 23 
 
 46, 217, 349, 364 
 
 
 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 24 
 
 364 
 
 Matt. xxvi. I 
 
 
 277 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 25 
 
 163, 364 
 
 Matt. xxvi. ? 
 
 
 205, 264 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 27 
 
 13, 163,304,364 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 3 
 
 
 98 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 28 
 
 304, 364 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 5 
 
 
 392 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 30 
 
 50, 160, 224 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 6 
 
 
 315 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 31 
 
 113 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 8 
 
 
 309, 312 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 33 
 
 146, 208 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 9 
 
 
 33 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 34 
 
 1.58 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 10 
 
 
 33 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 35 
 
 69, 138 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 1 1 
 
 
 113 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 37 
 
 18 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 12 
 
 
 266 
 
 Matt, xxiii. 39 
 
 230, 232 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 16 
 Matt. xxvi. 17 
 
 
 268 
 208, 240 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 2 
 
 212* 338, 355 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 18 31 
 
 38 {bis), 131 
 
 , 209, 340 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 3 
 
 255, 315 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 22 
 
 
 248 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 4 
 
 243 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 23 
 
 
 329 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 6 
 
 243* 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 24 
 
 217, 226 
 
 345, 347 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 12 
 
 69 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 25 
 
 
 248, 297 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 13 
 
 306 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 26 
 
 45 
 
 125, 200 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 15 
 
 48,81 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 28 
 
 69, 125 
 
 206, 336 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 17 
 
 54, 378 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 32 
 
 
 265, 275 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 18 
 
 334 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 35 
 
 
 213 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 20 
 
 171 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 36 
 
 
 230 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 21 
 
 212 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 42 
 
 
 348* 359 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 22 
 
 121 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 44 
 
 
 297 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 27 
 
 131 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 45 
 
 96 
 
 182, 361 
 
 Matt. x?.iv. 31 
 
 161* 343* 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 46 
 
 
 297 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 32 
 
 68 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 47 
 
 
 98 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 34 
 
 230 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 48 
 
 
 108, 297 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 35 
 
 212 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 50 
 
 
 253* 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 37 
 
 131 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 51 
 
 
 193 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 38 
 
 10, 295, 312 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 52 
 
 
 64, 182 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 40 
 
 103, 205 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 53 
 
 16 
 
 168, 249 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 45 
 
 91* 270 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 54 
 
 
 208 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 50 
 
 286, 342 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 55 
 Matt. xxvi. 58 
 
 
 56 
 70, 312 
 
 Matt. XXV. 1 
 
 116, 320* 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 59 
 
 214 (bis)* 
 
 Matt. XXV. 4 
 
 116 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 60 
 
 
 308 
 
 Matt. XXV. 6 
 
 171 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 62 
 
 
 165, 251* 
 
 Matt. XXV. 7 
 
 116 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 63 
 
 
 147 
 
 Matt. XXV. 8 
 
 159 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 65 
 
 
 70 
 
 Matt. XXV. 9 113. 213, 218, 353, 354 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 66 
 
 
 170 
 
 Matt. XXV. 10 
 
 25 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 67 
 
 
 32 
 
 Matt. XXV. 11 
 
 398* 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 68 
 
 
 309 
 
 Matt. XXV. 14 sq. 
 
 393 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 69 
 
 
 50, 85 
 
 Matt. XXV. 16 
 
 33 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 71 
 
 
 143 
 
 Matt. XXV. 17 
 
 , 392 
 
 Matt, xxvi, 74 
 
 
 45 
 
 Matt. XXV. 20 
 
 197 
 
 Matt. xxvi. 75 
 
 
 145 
 
 Matt. XXV. 21 
 
 50, 402 
 
 
 
 
 Matt. XXV. 22 
 
 392 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 1 
 
 98, 
 
 244, 279 
 
 Matt. XXV. 23 
 
 50 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 2 
 
 
 6 
 
 Matt. XXV. 24 
 
 197, 288, 376, 378 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 3 
 
 
 98, 297 
 
 Matt. XXV. 26 
 
 288, 378 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 4 
 
 
 57, 1.38 
 
 Matt. XXV. 27 
 
 216, 217* 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 6 
 
 
 57 
 
 Matt. XXV. 29 
 
 295 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 7 
 
 
 164 
 
 Matt. XXV. 31 
 
 37, 119 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 12 
 
 5 
 
 , 98, 188 
 
 Matt. XXV. 32 
 
 37, 52 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 14 
 
 
 121 
 
 Matt. XXV. 33 
 
 365 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 15 
 
 
 ^180 
 
 Matt. XXV. 34 
 
 169 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 17 
 
 
 208, 315 
 
 Matt. XXV. 35 
 
 46, 50, 261 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 19 
 
 
 1.38, .".In 
 
 Matt. XXV. 39 ; 
 
 31 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 20 
 
 
 98, 238 
 
436 
 
 N. T. INDEX. 
 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 21 
 
 208 
 
 Mark ii. 1 
 
 118, 333 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 22 
 
 149 
 
 Mark ii. 2 
 
 * 95, 349 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 23 
 
 370 
 
 Marie ii. 4 
 
 336 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 24 
 
 118, 158 
 
 Mark ii. 6 
 
 312 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 25 
 
 138, 394 
 
 Mark ii. 7 
 
 253 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 29 
 
 329 
 
 Mark ii. 8 
 
 109*, 194 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 31 
 
 64 
 
 Mark ii. 9 
 
 402 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 32 
 
 139, 238 
 
 Mark ii. 11 
 
 402 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 33 
 
 128 
 
 Marie ii. 14 
 
 338 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 34 
 
 66, 261 
 
 Mark ii. 15 
 
 276 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 37 
 
 200 
 
 Mark ii. 16 
 
 253, 358 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 39 
 
 146 
 
 Mark ii. 18 
 
 95, 311 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 40 
 
 141, 297 
 
 Mark ii. 19 
 
 248, 331 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 41 
 
 98 
 
 Mark ii. 20 
 
 385, 400 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 42 
 
 173, 174, {bis) 
 
 Mark ii. 21 
 
 32 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 43 
 
 175 bis) 
 
 Mark ii. 22 
 
 69* 190 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 44 
 
 77, 152, 363 
 
 Mark ii. 23 
 
 277 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 46 
 
 12, 357 
 
 Mark ii. 24 
 
 348 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 48 
 
 297 
 
 Mark ii. 26 
 
 279 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 49 
 
 70, 210 
 
 Mark ii. 28 
 
 387 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 51 
 
 70 
 
 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 55 
 
 312 
 
 Mark iii. 1 
 
 41, 312 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 56 
 
 20,94 
 
 Mark iii. 2 
 
 234, 255 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 57 
 
 153 
 
 Mark iii. 5 
 
 297 
 
 Matt. ?3cvii. 58 
 
 275 
 
 Mark iii. 6 
 
 244 
 
 Matt, xxvii, 60 
 
 116, 329 
 
 Mark iii. 8 
 
 342 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 61 
 
 312 
 
 Mark iii. 9 
 
 237 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 62 
 
 98 
 
 Mark iii. 11 
 
 223 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 64 
 
 27, 52 {bis), 275 
 
 Mark iii. 14 
 
 238, 261 
 
 Matt, xxvii. 65 
 
 52, 142, 402 
 
 Mark iii. 14sqq. 
 
 386 
 
 
 
 Mark iii. 16 
 
 200 
 
 Matt, xxviii. 1 
 
 29* 68, 159 
 
 Mark iii. 17 
 
 128 
 
 Matt, xxviii. 2 
 
 298 
 
 Mark iii. 20 
 
 867, 369 
 
 Matt, xxviii. 3 
 
 5 
 
 Mark iii. 21 
 
 198* 
 
 Matt, xxviii. 4 
 
 326 
 
 Mark iii. 24 sq 
 
 47 
 
 Matt, xxviii. 12 
 
 24* 297 
 
 Mark iii. 26 
 
 112 
 
 Matt, xxviii'. 14 
 
 336 
 
 Mark iii. 27 
 
 54 
 
 Matt, xxviii. 19 
 
 106, 147 
 
 Mark iii. 28 
 
 146 
 
 
 
 Mark iii. 29 
 
 146 
 
 
 
 Mark iii. 31 
 
 127 
 
 Mark i. 2 
 
 l32 
 
 Mark iii. 31sq. 
 
 108 
 
 Mark i. 3 
 
 295 
 
 Mark iii. 32 
 
 56 
 
 Mark i. 6 
 
 58 
 
 Mark iii. 33 
 
 126, 127 
 
 Mark i. 7 
 
 280 
 
 Mark iii. 34 
 
 139 
 
 Mark i. 8 
 
 365 
 
 
 
 Mark i. 9 
 
 6, 157, 277, 334* 
 
 Mark iv. 3 
 
 270 
 
 Mark i. 10 
 
 301 
 
 Mark iv. 4 
 
 102, 125, 277 (bis) 
 
 Mark i. 12 
 
 289 
 
 Marli iv. 8 
 
 30* 45, 103* 
 
 Mark i. 13 
 
 289,311 
 
 Mark iv. 10 
 
 44, 95* 331 
 
 Mark i. 14 
 
 265 
 
 Mark iv. 13 
 
 218 
 
 Mark i. 1 5 
 
 174* 
 
 Markiv. 15 
 
 128 
 
 Mark i. 22 
 
 311 
 
 Mark iv. 16 
 
 390 
 
 Mark i. 23 
 
 96* 330 
 
 Mark iv. 16 sq. 
 
 383 
 
 Mark i. 24 
 
 138, 377, 394 
 
 Mark iv. 20 
 
 103* 
 
 Mark i. 27 
 
 112, 132 
 
 Mark iv. 25 
 
 228, 348 
 
 Mark i. 31 
 
 161 
 
 Mark iv. 27 
 
 55 
 
 Mark i. 32 
 
 56 (bis) 
 
 Mark iv. 29 
 
 46, 145 
 
 Mark i. 33 
 
 313 
 
 Mark iv. 30 
 
 131 
 
 Murk i. 34 
 
 49 
 
 Mark iv. 32 
 
 44,84 
 
 Mark i. 39 
 
 ^ 311, 3.3.3* 
 
 Mark iv. 33 
 
 33 
 
 Mark i. 42 
 
 29 
 
 Mark iv. 36 
 
 364 
 
 Mark i. 43 
 
 52 
 
 Mark iv. 37 
 
 145 
 
 JIark i. 44 
 
 106, 402 
 
 Mark iv. 38 
 
 312, 338 
 
N. T. INDEX. 
 
 437 
 
 Mark iv. 39 
 
 Mark V. 
 Mark v. 
 Mark v. 
 Mark V. 
 Mark v. 
 Mark V. 
 Mark v. 
 Mark v. 
 Mark v. 
 Mark v. 
 Mark V. 
 Mark v. 
 Mark v. 
 Mark v. 
 Mark v. 
 Mark v. 
 Mark V. 
 Mark v. 
 
 3 
 5 
 
 7 
 
 9 
 
 U 
 
 15 
 
 18 
 
 23 
 
 26 
 
 26 sq. 
 
 29 
 
 30 
 
 34 
 
 36 
 
 40 
 
 41 
 
 42 
 
 ♦3 
 
 Mark vi. 2 
 Mark vi. 3 
 Mark vi. 4 
 Mark vi. 5 
 Mark vi. 6 
 Mark vi. 7 
 Mark vi. 8 
 Mark vi. 8 sq. 
 Mark vi. 9 
 Mark vi. 16 
 Mark vi. 17 
 Mark vi. 20 
 Mark vi. 21 
 Mark vi. 23 
 Mark vi. 24 
 Mark vi. 25 
 Mark vi. 27 
 Mark vi. 29 
 Mark vi. 31 
 Mark vi. 33 
 Mark vi. 36 
 Mark vi. 37 
 Mark vi. 39 
 Mark vi. 40 
 Mark vi. 45 
 Mark vi. 46 
 Mark vi. 48 
 Mark vi. 50 
 Mark vi. 52 
 Mark vi. 55 
 Mark vi. 56 
 
 Mark vii. 2 
 Mark vii. 4 
 Mark vii. 5 
 Mark vii. 10 
 Mark vii. 12 
 Mark vii. 13 
 Mark vii. 14 
 Mark vii. 15 
 Mark vii. 19 
 Mark vii. 20 
 
 402 
 
 367, 369 
 
 812 (bis) 
 
 138 
 
 • 16 (bis) 
 
 312 
 
 16, 297 
 
 315 
 
 69, 123, 214, 241 
 
 157, 351 
 
 297 
 
 52 
 
 301, 309* 329 
 
 184 
 
 91, 302* 
 
 105 
 
 106, 140 
 
 163 
 
 46, 233, 261, 276 (bis) 
 
 182 
 
 19, 20, 99, 124, 340 
 
 25, 342# 
 
 142, 359 
 
 144 
 
 30* 45 
 
 359, 385 
 
 ■ 384* 
 
 271 
 
 284 
 
 55 
 
 166, 304 
 
 98, 100 
 
 14, 193 
 
 193 
 
 46 
 
 276 {bis) 
 
 329 {bis) 
 
 34 
 
 144 
 
 255 
 
 132 
 
 30* 139* 336 
 
 30* 40, 139 
 
 17, 227, 231* 
 
 106, 179 
 
 264 
 
 314 
 
 337* 
 
 336 
 
 10, 45, 216, 360 
 
 306 
 261 
 306 
 184 
 149 
 46, 286 
 
 48 
 306 
 
 79 
 306 
 
 Mark vii. 22 
 Mark vii. 24 
 Mark vii. 25 
 Mark vii. 26 
 Mark vii. 31 
 Mark vii. 35 
 Mark vii. 36 
 
 Mark 
 
 viii. 1 
 
 Mark 
 
 viii. 2 
 
 Mark- 
 
 viii. 3 
 
 Mark 
 
 viii. 6 
 
 Mark 
 
 viii. 7 
 
 Mark 
 
 viii. 12 
 
 Mark 
 
 vii 
 
 . 15 
 
 Mark 
 
 viii. 17 
 
 Mark 
 
 viii. 23 
 
 Mark 
 
 viii. 26 
 
 Mark 
 
 vii 
 
 .27 
 
 Mark 
 
 viii. 29 
 
 Mark 
 
 viii. 31 
 
 Mark 
 
 viii. 34 
 
 Mark 
 
 viii. 35 
 
 Mark 
 
 viii. 36 
 
 Mark 
 
 rii 
 
 .38 
 
 Mark 
 
 X 
 
 1 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 4 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 5 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 6 
 
 Mai-k 
 
 X. 
 
 7 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 9 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 10 
 
 Mark 
 
 IX 
 
 11 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 12 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 13 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 15 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 16 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 17 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 19 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 20 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 21 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 22 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 23 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 27 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 28 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 30 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 31 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 34 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 36 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 37 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 38 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 41 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 42 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 43 
 
 Mark 
 
 X. 
 
 45 
 
 Mark i 
 
 X. 
 
 49 
 
 Mark] 
 
 X. 
 
 50 
 
 Mark x. 10 
 Mark x. 11 
 Mark x. 12 
 Ma;k x. 15 
 
 77 
 33, 362 
 280 
 152 ' 
 332 
 401 
 70, 83 
 
 118, 130, 251, 255 
 
 251, 255 
 
 26* 59* 
 
 275 
 
 40* 276* 
 
 359* 
 
 243 
 
 94 
 
 248, 254 
 
 121, 366* 
 
 93 
 
 124 
 
 41, 326 (his) 
 
 112,331 
 
 116,229 
 
 1.52, 189 
 
 192 
 
 213 
 
 312, 331 
 
 103 
 
 255 {bis) 
 
 124 
 
 359 
 
 262 
 
 253 
 
 28 {ter), 237, 365 
 
 149 
 
 130 
 
 112 
 
 31 
 
 140 
 
 130*, 299* 384 
 
 70 
 
 55, 342 
 
 97 
 
 161 (bis) 
 
 143, 253, 315 {bis) 
 
 46, 233 
 
 182 
 
 84 
 
 329 
 
 87, 356 
 
 355 
 
 149, 163, 213, 229 
 
 173, 174, 226 
 
 360 
 
 360 
 
 24 
 
 24 (fife), 113 
 
 328, 334 
 229 
 177 
 212 
 
438 
 
 N. T. INDEX. 
 
 Mark 
 Mark 
 Mark 
 Mark 
 Mark 
 Mark 
 Mark 
 Mark 
 Mark 
 Mark 
 Mark 
 Mark 
 Mark 
 Mark 
 Mark 
 Mark 
 Mark 
 Mark 
 Mark 
 Mark 
 Mark 
 
 X. 16 
 X. 17 
 X. 19 
 X. 20 
 X. 21 
 X. 22 
 X. 24 
 X. 28 
 X. 30 
 X. 31 
 X. 32 
 X. 33 
 X. 34 
 X. 35 
 X. 36 
 X. 38 
 X. 39 
 X. 40 
 X. 45 
 X. 49 
 X. 51 
 
 Mark x 
 Mark x: 
 Mark x: 
 Mark x 
 Mark x 
 Mark x 
 Mark x 
 Mark x 
 Mark x 
 Mark x: 
 Mark x: 
 Mark x 
 Mark x: 
 Mark x: 
 Mark x 
 Markx 
 Mark x 
 Mark xi 
 
 2 
 
 9 
 
 13 
 
 15 
 
 15sqq 
 
 16 
 
 18 
 
 19 
 
 20 
 
 21 
 
 23 
 
 24 
 
 25 
 
 26 
 
 27 
 
 28 
 
 31 
 
 32 
 
 Mark xii. 1 
 Mark xii. 2 
 Mark xii. 4 
 Mark xii. 5 
 Mark xii. 7 
 Mark xii. 8 
 Mark xii. 1 1 
 Mark xii. 12 
 Mark xii. 14 
 Mark xii. 18 
 Mark xii. 19 
 Mark xii. 26 
 Mark xii. 28 
 Mark xii. 30 
 Mark xii. 31 
 Mark xii. 32 
 Mark xii. 33 
 Mark xii. 34 
 Mark xii. 38 
 Mark xii. 39 
 Mark xii. 40 
 Mark xii. 42 
 
 142 
 
 315 
 
 257 
 
 192 
 
 169* 
 
 310 
 
 175 
 
 46 
 
 204* 360* 
 
 360* 
 
 112, 312 {bis) 
 
 165 
 
 64 
 
 126, 229 
 
 149 
 
 66, 148 
 
 66 
 
 262 
 
 188 
 
 56, 276* 
 
 149 
 
 338 
 
 98, 144 
 256 
 
 99, 100 
 200 
 
 49, 238 
 
 255 
 
 223 
 
 41 
 
 41, 177 
 
 204 
 
 228 
 
 223 
 
 S45, 346* 347 
 
 315 
 
 238, 309 
 
 173 
 
 376, 385* 
 
 47 
 
 159 
 
 300 
 
 102* 293* 
 
 163 
 
 40 
 
 123, 320 
 
 362 
 
 249, 336 
 
 350 
 
 237* 
 
 12, 137, 314, 336* 
 
 128, 301, 374 
 
 143, 182 
 
 109 
 
 336 
 
 101* 112 
 
 376 
 
 79* 375* 
 
 79* 
 
 79* 306 
 
 85, 129 
 
 Mark xiii. 1 
 Mark xiii. 2 
 Mark xiii. 3 
 Mark xiii. 4 
 Mark xiii. 5 
 Mark xiii. 7 
 Mark xiii. 9 
 Mark xiii. U 
 Mark xiii. 14 
 Mark xiii. 15 
 Mark xiii. 16 
 Mark xiii. 17 
 Mark xiii. 19 
 Mark xiii. 21 
 Mark xiii. 22 
 Mark xiii. 25 
 Mark xiii. 28 
 Mark xiii. 30 
 Mark xiii. 31 
 Mark xiii. 32 
 Mark xiii. 35 
 
 Mark xiv. 1 
 Mark xiv. 2 
 Marls xiv. 4 
 Mark xiv. 5 
 Mark xiv. 7 
 Mark xiv. 10 
 Mark xiv. 11 
 Mark xiv. 12 
 Mark xiv. 13 
 Mark xiv. 14 
 Mark xiv. 15 
 Mark xiv. 16 
 Mark xiv. 19 
 Mark xiv. 21 
 Mark xiv. 24 
 Mark xiv. 25 
 Mark xiv. 28 
 Mark xiv. 29 
 Mark xiv. 30 
 Mark xiv. 31 
 Mark xiv. 32 
 Mark xiv 36 
 Mark xiv. 40 
 Mark xiv. 41 
 Mark xiv. 42 
 Mark xiv. 43 
 Mark xiv. 44 
 Mark xiv. 47 
 Mark xiv. 49 
 Mark xiv. 51 
 Mark xiv. 54 
 Mark xiv. 58 
 Mark xiv. 60 
 Mark xiv. 64 
 Mark xiv. 67 
 Mark xiv. 68 
 Marie xiv. 71 
 Mark xiv. 72 
 
 Mark xv. 2 
 Mark xv. 6 
 
 Sli 
 
 (bis) 
 
 212, 218, 338 
 
 ,355 
 
 315 
 
 332 
 
 57, 223 
 
 255 
 
 
 243 
 
 
 223 
 
 10, 113, 333* 
 
 336 
 
 
 255 
 
 48, 81* 
 
 130 
 
 
 54 
 
 334 
 
 378 
 
 
 98 
 
 
 285 
 
 
 70 
 
 
 266 
 
 
 311 
 
 68 
 
 324 
 
 
 231 
 
 
 212 
 
 342 
 
 366 
 
 170, 
 
 255 
 
 
 255 
 
 
 363 
 
 295, 309, 
 
 312 
 
 168, 
 
 319 
 
 113, 
 
 146 
 
 46 
 
 233 
 
 24, 46, 233 
 
 255 
 
 208, 
 
 240 
 
 
 53 
 
 
 255 
 
 
 13 
 
 
 304 
 
 
 30 
 
 217,226,345, 
 
 347 
 
 
 206 
 
 
 246 
 
 
 275 
 
 392 
 
 (bis) 
 
 
 132 
 
 213, 
 
 363 
 
 136, 
 
 230 
 
 252* 
 
 51, 54, 
 
 255 
 
 123, 
 
 L35* 
 
 
 297 
 
 
 342 
 
 108, 
 
 297 
 
 
 85 
 
 241, 
 
 340 
 
 
 85 
 
 312, 
 
 320 
 
 
 301 
 
 121, 251* 
 
 332 
 
 165, 166, 
 
 278 
 
 
 50 
 
 867 (ter)* 
 
 
 45 
 
 145* 
 
 285 
 
 
 124 
 
 
 20] 
 
N. T. INDEX. 
 
 439 
 
 Mark xv. 7 
 
 
 33,43 
 
 Luke i. 36 
 
 15, 109, 
 
 120, 304 
 
 Mark xv. 8 
 
 
 392 
 
 Luke i. 37 
 
 
 121 
 
 Mark xv. 10 
 
 
 33 
 
 Luke i. 39 
 
 
 20 
 
 Mark XV. 11 
 
 
 237 
 
 Luke i. 41 
 
 
 277 
 
 Mark xv. 12 
 
 
 105, ,149 
 
 Luke i. 42 
 
 
 83 
 
 Mark xv. 16 
 
 
 128, 281 
 
 Luke i. 43 
 
 
 240 
 
 Mark xv. 17 
 
 
 56 
 
 Luke i. 44 
 
 
 333 
 
 Mark xv. 20 
 
 
 117,234 
 
 Luke i. 48 
 
 
 37 
 
 Mark xv. 22 
 
 
 128 
 
 Luke i. 57 
 
 
 267* 
 
 Mark xv. 23 
 
 
 66, 102* 
 
 Luke i. 58 
 
 
 98, 100 
 
 Mark xv. 24 
 
 
 115, 250 
 
 Luke i. 59 
 
 
 205, 277 
 
 Mark XV. 25 
 
 
 361 
 
 Like i. 60 
 
 
 205 
 
 Mark xv. 26 
 
 
 148, 313 
 
 Ijikei. 62 
 
 
 97, 254 
 
 Mark xv. 27 
 
 
 103 
 
 Luke i. 64 
 
 
 63, 400 
 
 Mark xv. 29 
 
 
 141, 154 
 
 Luke i. 66 
 
 
 329 
 
 Mark xv. 33 
 
 
 338, 363 
 
 Lulie i. 72 
 
 
 119 
 
 Mark xv. 36 
 
 85 
 
 210, 250 
 
 Luke i. 73 
 
 
 288 
 
 Mark xv. 39 
 
 
 82 
 
 Lnke i. 73 sq. 
 
 
 306 
 
 Mark xv. 40 
 
 19, 94, 312 
 
 Luke i. 75 
 
 
 173 
 
 Mark xv. 41 
 
 
 296 
 
 Luke i. 76 
 
 
 89 
 
 Mai-k XV. 42 
 
 
 279* 
 
 Luke i. 77 
 
 
 270 
 
 Mark xv. 44 
 
 196 
 
 246, 250 
 
 Luke i. 79 
 
 
 41, 270 
 
 Mark xv. 45 
 
 
 86 
 
 
 
 
 Mark xv. 46 
 
 
 329 
 
 Luke ii. 1 
 
 
 260, 277 
 
 Mark xv. 47 
 
 
 94 
 
 Luke ii. 2 
 Luke ii. 3 
 
 84*, 109, 
 
 121* 128 
 117 
 
 Mark xvi. 1 
 
 
 94 
 
 Luke ii. 4 
 
 115, 
 
 324, 327 
 
 Mark xvi. 2 
 
 
 29* 
 
 Luke ii. 5 
 
 
 17,32 
 
 Mark xvi. 5 
 
 
 39 
 
 Luke ii. 6 
 
 
 267, 277 
 
 Mark xvi. 6 
 
 
 139 
 
 Lnke ii. 7 
 
 
 112 
 
 Mark xvi. 8 
 
 
 146, 363 
 
 Luke ii. 8 
 
 
 312 
 
 Mark xvi. 9 
 
 
 29 
 
 Luke ii. 13 
 
 
 25, 130 
 
 Mark xvi. 1" 
 
 
 173 
 
 Luke ii. 15 
 
 
 277 
 
 Mark xvi. 18 
 
 
 214 
 
 Luke ii. 16 
 
 
 17,40 
 
 Mark xvi. 19 
 
 
 62 
 
 Luke ii. 18 
 Luke ii. 19 
 
 
 185 
 17 
 
 Luke i. 2 
 
 
 46 
 
 Luke ii. 20 
 
 
 39, 286 
 
 Luke i. 3 
 
 
 27 
 
 Luke ii. 21 
 
 151 26.5,267* 
 
 , 268 362 
 
 Luke i. 4 
 
 
 46, 284 
 
 Luke ii. 22 
 
 
 18, 362 
 
 Luke i. 5 
 
 
 136 
 
 Luke ii. 23 
 
 
 90 
 
 Luke i. 6 
 
 101 
 
 180 {bis] 
 
 Luke ii. 24 
 
 
 90, 270 
 
 Luke i. 8 
 
 
 277 {bis) 
 
 Lul^e ii. 25 
 
 
 18, 136 
 
 Luke i. 9 
 
 
 269 
 
 Luke ii. 26 
 
 188, 231, 232 
 
 313, 350 
 
 Luke i 10 
 
 
 312 
 
 Luke ii. 27 
 
 
 123, 270 
 
 Luke i. 14 
 
 
 68 
 
 Luke ii. 28 
 
 
 107* 
 
 Lukei. 15 
 
 24, 89, 180 
 
 211, 212 
 
 Luke ii. 32 
 
 
 119 
 
 Luke i. 17 
 
 
 261, 329 
 
 Luke ii. 33 
 
 50, 127* 
 
 129, 312 
 
 Luke 1. 19 
 
 
 150 
 
 Luke ii. 34 
 
 
 34 
 
 Luke i. 20 10, 
 
 231, 311, 351 
 
 369, 399 
 
 Luke ii. 35 
 
 117 
 
 234, 364 
 
 Luke i. 21 
 
 130, 
 
 185, 264* 
 
 Luke ii. 36 
 
 
 109 {bis) 
 
 Luke 1. 22 
 
 
 107* 312 
 
 Luke ii. 41 
 
 
 186 
 
 Luke i. 23 
 
 
 277 
 
 Luke ii. 42 
 
 
 18, 163 
 
 Luke i. 24 
 
 
 40, 146 
 
 Luke ii. 43 
 
 
 18 
 
 Luke i. 25 
 
 
 7, 342 
 
 Luke ii. 44 
 
 
 25 
 
 Luke i. 26 
 
 6. 
 
 136, 326* 
 
 Luke ii. 45 
 
 
 206 
 
 Luke 1. 27 
 
 17, 32, 136 
 
 Luke ii. 46 
 
 
 56, 277 
 
 Luke i. 28 
 
 
 137 
 
 Luke ii. 48 
 
 
 126, 129 
 
 Luke i. 29 
 
 
 254 
 
 Luke ii. 49 
 
 
 358 
 
 Luke i. 30 
 
 
 17 
 
 Luke ii. 50 
 
 
 109 
 
 Luke i. 31 
 
 
 146, 151 
 
 
 
 
 Luke i. 32 
 
 
 89 
 
 Luke iii. 2 
 
 
 20 
 
 Luke i. 34 
 
 
 349 
 
 Luke iii. 5 
 
 
 150 
 
 Luke i. 35 
 
 89 
 
 12J, 206 
 
 Luke iii. 7 
 
 
 146 
 
440 
 
 N. T. INDEX. 
 
 I like iii. 8 
 Luke iii. 12 
 Luke iii. 13 
 Luke iii. 14 
 Luke iii. 15 
 Luke iii. 16 
 Luke iii. 17 
 Luke iii. 18 
 Luke iii. 19 
 Luke iii. 21 
 Luke iii. 23 
 Luke iii. 24 
 Luke iii. 29 
 
 Luke iv. 7 
 Luke iv. 10 
 Luke iv. 11 
 Luke iv. 14 
 Luke iv. 15 
 Luke iv. 1 6 
 Lake iv. 17 
 Luke iv. 18 
 Luke iv. 19 
 Luke iv. 20 
 Luke iv. 22 
 Luke iv. 23 
 Luke iv. 25 
 Luke iv. 29 
 Luke iv. 30 
 Luke iv. 32 
 Luke iv. 34 
 Luke iv. 35 
 Luke iv. 38 
 Luke iv. 39 
 Luke iv. 40 
 Luke iv. 41 
 Luke iv. 42 
 
 Luke V. 
 Luke V. 
 Luke V. 
 Luke V. 
 Luke V. 
 Luke V. 
 Luke V. 
 Luke V. 
 Luke V. 
 Luke V. 
 Luke V. 
 Luke V. 
 Luke V. 
 Luke V. 
 Luke V. 
 Luke V. 
 Luke V. 
 Luke V. 
 Luke V. 
 Luke V. 
 Luke v. 
 Luke V. 
 Luke V. 
 Luke V. 
 
 1 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 9 
 
 10 
 
 12 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 17 
 
 19 
 
 24 
 
 25 
 
 27 
 
 29 
 
 33 
 
 35 
 
 36 
 
 36 sq. 
 
 37 
 
 38 
 
 369 
 
 261 
 
 339 
 
 24 
 
 108, 250, 254 
 
 108, 182, 280 
 
 280 
 
 362 
 
 286 
 
 63, 264, 277 
 
 108 
 
 8,21 
 
 8 
 
 163, 172 
 
 270 
 
 118 
 
 334 
 
 108, 294 
 
 6, 123,313 
 
 313 
 
 10, 197* 
 
 42 
 
 312 
 
 161, 178 
 
 303, 333* 
 
 12, 336 
 
 244, 397 
 
 108 
 
 330 
 
 138, 377 
 
 152 
 
 312 
 
 133 
 
 56 (bis)* 
 
 51, 124, 125, 301 
 
 269 
 
 108, 270, 277, 312 
 
 144 
 
 144, 300 
 
 40 
 
 32 
 
 270 
 
 285, 286 
 
 160, 311 
 
 277 
 
 106, 108, 385 
 
 322* 
 
 108, 312, 329 
 
 106, 108, 277, 313 
 
 82, 171 
 
 ' 385* 
 
 337* 
 
 21, 338 
 
 21,312 
 
 95* 
 
 400 
 
 37, 93 
 
 393 
 
 108 
 
 190 
 
 Luke vi. 1 
 Luke vi. 2 
 Luke vi. 3 
 Luke vi. 4 
 Luke vi. 6 
 Luke vi. 7 
 Luke vi. 8 
 Luke vi. 9 
 Luke vi. 11 
 Luke vi. 12 
 Luke vi. 1 5 
 Luke vi. 16 
 Luke vi. 17 
 Luke vi. 1 9 
 Luke vi. 20 
 Luke vi. 21 
 Luke vi. 25 
 Luke vi. 26 
 Luke vi. 27 
 Luke vi. 28 
 Luke vi. 29 
 Luke vi. 30 
 Luke vi. 34 
 Luke vi. 35 
 Luke vi. 37 
 Luke vi. 38 
 Luke vi. 39 
 Luke vi. 40 
 Luke vi. 41 
 Luke vi. 42 
 Luke vi. 43 
 Luke vi. 44 
 Luke vi. 47 
 Luke vi. 48 
 Luke vi. 49 
 
 Luke vii. 
 Luke vii. 
 Luke vii. 
 Luke vii. 
 Luke vii. 
 Luke vii. 
 Luke vii. 
 Luke vii. 
 Luke vii. 
 Luke vii. 
 Luke vii. 
 Luke vii. 
 Luke vii. 
 Luke vii. 
 Luke vii. 
 Luke vii. 
 Luke vii. 
 Luke vii. 
 Luke vii. 
 Luke vii. 
 Luke vii. 
 Luke vii. 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 9 
 
 11 
 
 12 
 
 21 
 
 24 
 
 25 
 
 25 sq. 
 
 27 
 
 28 
 
 32 
 
 33 
 
 35 
 
 37 
 
 39 
 
 41 
 
 45 
 
 47 
 
 50 
 
 Luke viii. 1 
 Luke viii. 2 
 Luke viii. 4 
 Like viii. 5 
 
 
 
 277 
 
 
 
 348 
 
 108, 112 
 
 126, 
 
 232 
 
 
 112, 
 
 278 
 277 
 254 
 
 
 108, 
 
 332 
 249 
 
 
 42 
 
 254 
 
 
 277 
 
 312 
 
 304 
 
 94 
 
 282 
 130 
 
 
 108 
 
 116 
 
 53 
 
 60,61 
 
 141 
 
 
 
 146 
 
 
 
 146 
 
 
 177 
 
 {bis) 
 1,58 
 149 
 223 
 
 
 7,89 
 
 108 
 369 
 66 
 248 
 311 
 
 
 117 
 
 {his) 
 
 108 
 
 ,210 
 
 351 
 351 
 
 38 
 
 ,117 
 
 120 
 167 
 
 
 11, 33 
 
 
 
 99 
 
 
 199, 
 
 328* 
 
 229 
 
 34 
 
 
 240 
 
 351 
 
 
 185 
 
 369 
 
 277 
 
 109 
 
 {bis) 
 
 362 
 263 
 340 
 
 
 191 
 
 330 
 261 
 132 
 
 
 84 
 
 169 
 93 
 367 
 322* 
 297 
 224 
 102 
 
 
 82 
 
 300 
 105 
 184 
 
 
 108 
 
 ,277 
 
 125, 
 
 313, 
 
 322* 
 50 
 
 
 102 
 
 , 27C 
 

 N. T. INDEX. 
 
 
 441 
 
 Lnke viii. 6 
 
 • 68 
 
 Luke X. 4 
 
 
 366 
 
 Luke viii. 7 
 
 68 
 
 Luke X. 6 
 
 
 65, 393 
 
 Luke viii. 8 
 
 30,68 
 
 Luke X. 8 
 
 
 383* 
 
 liiike viii. 9 
 
 254 
 
 Lnke x. 13 
 
 
 130 
 
 Luke viii> 12 
 
 73, 356 
 
 Luke X. 15 
 
 
 171 
 
 Luke viii. 13 
 
 395 
 
 Luke X. 19 
 
 
 213, 268 
 
 Luke viii. 14 
 
 340 
 
 Luke X. 20 
 
 
 185, 356 
 
 Lnke viii. 17 
 
 211,2.29,355 
 
 Luke X. 21 
 
 .lOO 
 
 149, 176 
 
 Luke viii. 1 8 
 
 349 
 
 Luke X. 22 
 
 
 228 
 
 Luke viii. 19 
 
 126 
 
 Luke X. 27 
 
 
 118 
 
 Luke viii. 20 
 
 316 
 
 Luke X. 29 
 
 
 87, 131 
 
 Luke viii. 22 
 
 108, 126, 277 
 
 Luke X. 30 
 
 
 283, 304 
 
 Luke viii. 24 
 
 100, 398* 
 
 Luke X. 35 
 
 
 264, 275 
 
 Luke viii. 26 
 
 321* 
 
 Luke X. 36 
 
 
 87, 131 
 
 Luke viii. 27 
 
 56 
 
 Luke X. 38 
 
 
 108, 277 
 
 Luke viii. 28 
 
 138, 394 
 
 Luke X. 40 
 
 
 57 
 
 Luke viii. 29 
 
 32,54 
 
 Luke X. 41 
 
 
 398* 
 
 Luke viii. 30 
 
 16, 125 
 
 Luke X. 42 
 
 83 
 
 149, 189 
 
 Luke viii. 37 
 
 108 
 
 
 
 
 Luke viii. 38 
 
 55 
 
 Luke xi. I 
 
 277 
 
 {bis), 363 
 
 Luke viii. 40 
 
 277 
 
 Luke xi. 2 
 
 
 223 
 
 Luke viii. 41 
 
 136, 304 
 
 Luke xi. 4 
 
 
 48 
 
 Luke viii. 42 
 
 109 
 
 Luke xi. 5 
 
 
 208,211 
 
 Luke viii. 43 
 
 172, 330 
 
 Luke xi. 6 
 
 
 229, 251 
 
 Luke viii. 45 
 
 309 
 
 Luke xi. 7 
 
 
 211, 333 
 
 Luke viii. 46 
 
 110 
 
 Luke xi. 8 
 
 
 346 
 
 Luke viii. 47 
 
 172 
 
 Luke xi. 9 
 
 
 63, 290 
 
 Luke viii. 50 
 
 173 
 
 Lnke xi. 10 
 
 
 63 
 
 Luke viii. 54 
 
 108, 161 
 
 Lukexi. 11 
 Luke xi. 12 
 
 
 384* 
 222 
 
 Luke ix. 3 
 
 30, 271* 367, 384* 385 
 
 Luke xi. 13 
 
 
 , 377 
 
 Lnke ix. 9 
 
 203 
 
 Luke xi. 14 
 
 109 
 
 277, 312 
 
 Lnke ix. 12 
 
 130 
 
 Luke xi. 17 
 
 
 108, 338* 
 
 Luke ix. 13 
 
 14, 128, 168, 220* 221* 
 
 Luke xi. 19 
 
 
 330 
 
 Luke ix. 14 
 
 139 
 
 Luke xi. 20 
 
 
 330, 371 
 
 Luke ix. 18 
 
 277 
 
 Luke xi. 21 
 
 
 112, 223 
 
 Luke ix. 20 
 
 388 
 
 Luke xi. 22 
 
 
 175,231 
 
 Luke ix. 22 
 
 326 
 
 Luke xi. 26 
 
 
 204 
 
 Luke ix. 25 
 
 112 
 
 Luke xi. 27' 
 
 
 277 (bis) 
 
 Luke ix. 27 
 
 213 
 
 Luke xi. 28 
 
 
 108, 371 
 
 Luke ix. 28 
 
 139 
 
 Luke xi. 31 
 
 
 166 
 
 Lnke ix. 30 
 
 312 
 
 Luke xi. 35 
 
 243* 
 
 254, 353 
 
 I ake ix. 33 
 
 103, 277 
 
 Luke xi. 37 
 
 
 264 
 
 Luke ix. 35 
 
 166 
 
 Luke xi. 39 
 
 70, 98, 141 
 
 Luke ix. 36 
 
 43, 64, 109, 286, 304 
 
 Luke xi. 40 
 
 
 70 
 
 Luke ix. 37 
 
 277 
 
 Luke xi. 42 
 
 
 48,98 
 
 Luke ix. 38 
 
 273* 
 
 Luke xi. 44 
 
 
 51 
 
 Luke ix. 41 
 
 140 
 
 Luke xi. 46 
 
 118 
 
 121, 149 
 
 Luke ix. 42 
 
 315 
 
 Luke xi. 48 
 
 
 178, 371 
 
 Luke ix. 43 
 
 286 
 
 Luke xi. 50 
 
 
 182 
 
 Luke ix. 45 
 
 152, 239* 
 
 Luke xi. 51 
 
 
 182 
 
 Luke ix. 46 
 
 84, 97, 254, 329 
 
 Luke xi. 52 
 
 
 24 
 
 Luke ix. 47 
 
 339* 
 
 
 
 
 Luke ix. 48 
 
 304, 306 
 
 Lnke xii. 1 
 
 
 113 
 
 Luke ix. 51 
 
 36, 108, 270, 277 
 
 Lnke xii. 2 
 
 
 355, 368 
 
 Luke ix. 52 
 
 146, 244 (bis) 
 
 Luke xii. 4 
 
 
 61, 192 
 
 Lnke ix. 54 
 
 208 
 
 Luke xii. 5 
 
 
 255 
 
 Lnke ix. 55 
 
 163 
 
 Luke xii. 6 
 
 52, 121, 
 
 188* 351 
 
 Luke ix. 57 
 
 277* 
 
 Luke xii. 7 
 
 
 310* 
 
 Lnke ix. 61 
 
 179, 332, 378 
 
 Luke xii. 8 
 Luke xii. 9 
 
 
 176, 229 
 53* 
 
 Luke X. 1 
 
 108, 129, 373 
 
 Luke xii. 10 . 
 
 
 146 
 
 Lnke x. 3 
 
 329 
 
 Lnke xii. 11 
 
 
 98, 255 
 
442 
 
 N. T. INDEX. 
 
 
 Luke xii. 12 
 
 90» 
 
 Luke xiv. 32 
 
 181 
 
 Luke xii. 15 
 
 192, 264 
 
 
 
 liuke xii. 16 
 
 34 
 
 Luke XV. 1 
 
 312 
 
 Luke xii. 17 
 
 251 
 
 Luke XV. 4 
 
 230 
 
 Luke xii. 18 
 
 53 
 
 Luke XV. 5 
 
 116 
 
 Luke xii. 19 
 
 66 
 
 Luke XV. 6 
 
 98, 193 
 
 Luke xii. 20 
 
 38, 135, 140, 149 
 
 I .ike XV. 7 
 
 348, 360 
 
 Luke xii. 22 
 
 255 
 
 Luke XV. 8 
 
 230 
 
 Lulce xii. 23 
 
 127 
 
 Luke XV. 9 
 
 98; 193 
 
 Luke xii. 24 
 
 366 
 
 Luke XV. 10 
 
 172, 204 
 
 Luke xii. 26 
 
 347* 369 
 
 Luke XV. 12 
 
 145 
 
 Luke xii. 28 
 
 49 
 
 Luke XV. 14 
 
 12, 108 
 
 Luke xii. 29 
 
 255, 369 
 
 Luke XV. 1 5 
 
 132 
 
 Luke xii. 33 
 
 113, 366 
 
 Luke XV. 16 
 
 164, 285 
 
 Luke xii. 36 23, 
 
 63, 116, 145, 251, 255, 
 
 Luke XV. 20 
 
 315 (bis) 
 
 
 315,316 
 
 Luke XV. 23 
 
 68 
 
 Luke xii. 42 
 
 270, 363 
 
 Luke XV. 24 
 
 58 
 
 Luke xii. 46 
 
 286 
 
 Luke XV. 25 
 
 166 
 
 Luke xii. 47 
 
 82, 189 
 
 Luke XV. 26 
 
 218, 254 (bis) 
 
 Luke xii. 48 
 
 135, 288 
 
 Luke XV. 29 
 
 119 
 
 Luke xii. 49 
 
 215, 246 
 
 Luke XV. 32 
 
 58 
 
 Luke xii. 50 
 
 230 
 
 
 
 Luke xii. 51 
 
 374 
 
 Luke xvi. 1 
 
 307 
 
 Luke xii. 52 
 
 311 337 
 
 Luke xvi. 2 
 
 56, 142, 203 
 
 Luke xii. 53 
 
 338 
 
 Luke xvi. 3 
 
 149 
 
 Luke xii. 54 sq. 
 
 204 
 
 Luke xvi. 4 
 
 134 
 
 Luke xii. 57 
 
 113 
 
 Luke xvi. 5 
 
 ue 
 
 Luke xii. 58 
 
 211, 232, 368 
 
 Luke xvi. 8 
 
 161, 335 
 
 Luke xii. 59 
 
 230 
 
 Luke xvi. 9 
 
 113 
 
 
 
 Luke xvi. 1 1 
 
 388 
 
 Luke xiii. 2 
 
 . 339 
 
 Luke xvi. 11 sq. 
 
 346 
 
 Luke xiii. 4 
 
 109, 283, 339, 380 
 
 Luke xvi. 12 
 
 116, 388 
 
 Luke xiii. 7 
 
 357 
 
 Lulce xvi. 13 
 
 9, 102 (bis) 
 
 Luke xiii. 8 
 
 146, 230 
 
 Luke xvi. 15 
 
 180 
 
 Luke xiii. 9 
 
 393, 396 
 
 Luke xvi. 16 
 
 53, 148 
 
 Luke xiii. 11 
 
 351 
 
 Luke xvi. 19 
 
 56 
 
 Luke xiii. 13 
 
 34 
 
 Liike xvi. 20 
 
 33,34 
 
 Luke xiii. 1 7 
 
 341 
 
 Lnke xvi. 21 
 
 163 
 
 Luke xiii. 19 
 
 119, 12.5, 150 
 
 Luke xvi. 22 
 
 277 (bis) 
 
 Luke xiii. 23 
 
 248 
 
 Luke xvi. 23 
 
 24, 171, 330 
 
 Luke xiii. 25 
 
 63 
 
 Luke xvi. 24 
 
 107* 170 
 
 Luke xiii. 28 
 
 36* 223 
 
 Luke xvi. 25 
 
 42, 103 
 
 Luke xiii. 32 
 
 38 
 
 Luke xvi. 26 
 
 378 
 
 Luke xiii. 34 
 
 112 
 
 Luke xvi. 29 
 
 19 
 
 Luke xiii. 35 
 
 36, 231 (bis)* 
 
 Lnke xvi. 31 
 
 346, 347 
 
 Luke xiv. 1 
 
 277, 312 
 
 Lnke xvii. 1 
 
 269 
 
 Luke xiv. 3 
 
 249 
 
 Luke xvii. 2 
 
 133, 241, 360* 
 
 Luke xir. 4 
 
 142, 160 
 
 Luke xvii. 3 
 
 54 
 
 Luke xiv. 5 
 
 127 
 
 Lnke xvii. 4 
 
 54 
 
 Luke xiv. 8 
 
 23 
 
 Lnke xvii. 6 
 
 52, 225 (bis)* 
 
 Luke xiv. 10 
 
 28, 40, 67, 234 
 
 Luke xvii. 7 
 
 40,67 
 
 Luke xiv. 12 
 
 366 
 
 Luke xvii. 8 
 
 40, 58, 66, 230, 251* 
 
 Luke xiv. 14 
 
 251 
 
 Luke xvii. 9 
 
 248 (bis]* 
 
 Luke xiv. 15 
 
 58 
 
 Luke xvii. 1 1 
 
 108, 277 
 
 Luke xiv. 18 
 
 82, 272 
 
 Luke xvii. 12 
 
 315 
 
 Luke xiv. 20 
 
 55 
 
 Luke xvii. 14 
 
 277 
 
 Luke xiv. 23 
 
 101 
 
 Luke xvii. 16 
 
 108 
 
 Luke xiv. 24 
 
 167 
 
 Luke xvii. 20 
 
 255 
 
 Luke xiv. 26 
 
 100, 348 
 
 Lulce xvii. 22 
 
 7 
 
 Luke xiv. 27 
 
 348 
 
 Luke xvii. 24 
 
 82 
 
 Luke xiv. 29 
 
 315 
 
 Luke xvii. 25 
 
 326 
 
 Luke xiv. 31 
 
 330 
 
 Lnke xvii. 27 
 
 10 
 

 N. T. INDEX. 
 
 443 
 
 Luke xvii. 29 
 
 9 
 
 Luke XX. 11 
 
 300 
 
 Luke xvii. 31 
 
 54, 283 
 
 Luke XX. 12 
 
 300 
 
 Luke xvii. 34 
 
 102, 205 
 
 Luke XX. 14 
 
 ,163 
 
 Luke xvii. 35 
 
 102 {bis), 338 
 
 Luke XX. 15 
 
 149 
 
 
 
 Lulce XX. 1 6 
 
 248 
 
 Luke xviii. 1 
 
 266 
 
 Luke XX. 19 
 
 362 
 
 Luke xviii. 2 
 
 351, 369 
 
 Luke XX. 20 
 
 98, 160, 244, 274 
 
 Luke xviii. 4 
 
 346 
 
 Luke XX. 22 
 
 279 
 
 Luke xviii. 6 
 
 161 
 
 Luke XX. 24 
 
 391 
 
 Luke xviii. 7 
 
 214 
 
 Luke XX. 25 
 
 • 372 
 
 Luke xviii. 8 
 
 247 
 
 Luke XX. 26 
 
 160 
 
 Luke xviii. 9 
 
 93, 175, 295 
 
 Luke XX. 27 
 
 79», 355 
 
 Luke xviii. 10 
 
 47 
 
 Luke XX. 33 
 
 163 
 
 Luke xviii. 11 
 
 34, 140 
 
 Luke XX. 35 
 
 368 
 
 Luke xviii. 12 
 
 23, 159 
 
 Luke XX. 36 
 
 369 
 
 Luke xviii. 13 
 
 140, 362, 369 
 
 Lulce XX. 37 
 
 12, 336* 
 
 Luke xviii. 14 
 
 104, 339 
 
 Luke XX. 38 
 
 162 
 
 Luke xviii. 20 
 
 257 
 
 Luke XX. 40 
 
 ' 350 
 
 Luke xviii. 21 
 
 192 
 
 Luke XX. 46 
 
 375* 
 
 Luke xviii. 23 
 
 310 
 
 Luke XX. 47 
 
 79 
 
 Luke xviii. 28 
 
 118* 
 
 
 
 Luke xviii. 29 
 
 218 
 
 Luke xxi. 6 
 
 337, 355, 380* 381 
 
 Luke xviii. 30 
 
 30 
 
 Luke xxi. 8 
 
 243 
 
 Luke xviii. 31 
 
 178* 
 
 Luke xxi. 14 
 
 329, 349 
 
 Luke xviii. 32 
 
 64 
 
 Luke xxi. 16 
 
 159 
 
 Luke xviii. 32 sqq. 
 
 289 
 
 Luke xxi. 18 
 
 212 
 
 Luke xviii. 34 
 
 189, 362 
 
 Luke xxi. 21 
 
 42 
 
 Luke xviii. 35 
 
 277 {bis) 
 
 Luke xxi. 22 
 
 120, 268 
 
 Luke xviii. 36 
 
 218, 254 \bis) 
 
 Luke xxi. 24 
 
 231, 311, 320 
 
 Luke xviii. 39 
 
 108 
 
 Luke xxi. 25 
 
 23 
 
 Luke xviii. 40 
 
 275, 315 
 
 Luke xxi. 30 
 
 145 
 
 Luke xviii. 41 
 
 238 
 
 Luke xxi. 33 
 
 212 (bis) 
 54 
 
 
 
 Luke xxi. 34 
 
 Luke xix. 2 
 
 108* 289, 382 
 
 Lulce xxi. 36 
 
 47 
 
 Luke xix. 3 
 
 289, 325, 377 
 
 Luke xxi. 37 
 
 22, 332 
 
 Luke xix. 4 
 
 82, 171, 397 
 
 
 
 Luke xix. 7 
 
 339* 
 
 Luke xxii. 2 
 
 97, 255 
 
 Luke xix. 8 
 
 14 
 
 Luke xxii. 3 
 
 89 
 
 Luke xix. 9 
 
 108 
 
 Luke xxii. 4 
 
 46, 255 
 
 Luke xix. 11 
 
 300 
 
 Luke xxii. 5 
 
 270 
 
 Luke xix. 14 
 
 172 
 
 Luke xxii. 6 
 
 268, 320 
 
 Luke xix. 15 
 
 46, 115, 233, 277 
 
 Luke xxii. 9 
 
 208 
 
 Luke xix. 16 
 
 33 
 
 Luke xxii. 10 
 
 315 
 
 Luke xix. 22 
 
 51 
 
 Luke xxii. 11 
 
 397 
 
 Luke xix. 23 
 
 216* 
 
 Luke xxii. 12 
 
 13 
 
 Luke xix. 29 
 
 15, 22, 277 
 
 Luke xxii, 14 
 
 126 
 
 Luke xix. 35 
 
 32 
 
 Luke xxii. 15 
 
 184, 265, 275 
 
 Luke xix. 36 
 
 329 
 
 Luke xxii. 16 
 
 212, 231 
 
 Luke xix. 37 22, 
 
 130, 286, 340* 374 
 
 Luke xxii. 17 sqq. 
 
 211 
 
 Luke xix. 40 
 
 61* 222 
 
 Luke xxii. 18 
 
 159, 231 
 
 Luke xix. 42 
 
 149, 215, 320, 396* 
 
 Luke xxii. 19 
 
 157 
 
 Luke xix. 43 • 
 
 149, 361 
 
 Luke xxii, 20 
 
 206 
 
 Luke xix. 44 
 
 37, 337 
 
 Luke xxii. 22 
 
 365 
 
 Luke xix. 45 
 
 98, 100 
 
 Luke xxii, 23 
 
 97, 254 
 
 Luke xix. 47 
 
 96 
 
 Luke xxii. 24 
 
 84, 97, 250 
 
 Luke xix. 48 
 
 84, 61*, 97, 255 
 
 Luke xxii. 26 
 
 394 
 
 
 
 Luke xxii. 30 
 
 58, 60, 211, 234 
 
 Luke XX. 1 
 
 277 
 
 Luke xxii. 31 
 
 399* 
 
 Luke XX. 2 
 
 309, 314 
 
 Luke xxii. 32 
 
 36 
 
 Luke XX. 4 
 
 342 
 
 Luke xxii. 33 
 
 342 
 
 Luke XX 7 
 
 350 
 
 Luke xxii. 34 2' 2», 
 
 214, 230, 231, 232, 
 
 Luke XX. 9 
 
 47 
 
 
 355 
 
 Luke XX. 10 
 
 139, 234, 237 
 
 Luke xxii. 35 
 
 320 
 
444 
 
 
 N. T. INDEX. 
 
 
 Luke xxii. 37 
 
 
 96, 151 ' Luke xxiv. 28 
 
 70, 108 
 
 Luke xxii. 39 
 
 
 22 Luke xxiv. 29 
 
 270 
 
 Luke xxii. 40 
 
 
 349 Luke xxiv. 30 
 
 45, 277 {bis) 
 
 Luke xxii. 41 
 
 
 108 ' Luke xxiv. 31 
 
 108 
 
 Luke xxii. 42 
 
 
 42, 396* 1 
 
 Luke xxiv. 32 
 
 JSi2 
 
 Luke xxii. 44 
 
 
 70 
 
 T^ulce xxiv. 35 
 
 187 
 
 Luke xxii. 45 
 
 
 325 
 
 Lnke xxiv. 36 
 
 108 
 
 Luke xxii. 47 
 
 
 144 
 
 Luke xxiv. 38 
 
 135 
 
 Luke xxii. 49 
 
 95* 
 
 248, 296 
 
 Luke xxiv. 39 
 
 13, 108 
 
 Luke xxii. 50 
 
 
 85 
 
 Luke xxiv. 45 
 
 270 
 
 Lnke xxii. 53 
 
 
 315 
 
 Luke xxiv. 47 
 
 79, 134, 318, 374* 
 
 Luke xxiii 55 
 
 
 312 
 
 Luke xxiv. 49 
 
 230 
 
 Luke xxii. 58 
 
 
 159 
 
 Luke xxiv. 50 
 
 143, 397 
 
 Luke xxii. 62 
 
 
 145 
 
 Luke xxiv. 51 
 
 277 
 
 Luke xxii. 64 
 
 
 309 
 
 Lnke xxiv. 53 
 
 311 
 
 Luke xxii. 66 
 
 
 116 
 
 
 
 Luke xxii. 67 
 
 
 214 
 
 John i. 1 
 
 124*, 340 
 
 Luke xxii. 68 
 
 
 214 
 
 John i. 3 
 John i. 4 
 
 121, 399 
 124 
 
 Luke xxiii. 1 
 
 
 130" 
 
 •John i. 5 
 
 369 
 
 Luke xxiii. 2 
 
 
 274 
 
 John i. 6 
 
 136 
 
 Luke xxiii. 4 
 
 
 304 
 
 John i. 8 
 
 124, 241 
 
 Luke xxiii. 5 
 
 
 835, 374 
 
 John i. 10 
 
 369, 398 
 
 Luke xxiii. 6 
 
 
 166* 
 
 John i. 1 1 
 
 118, 369 
 
 Luke xxiii. 8 
 
 
 312 
 
 John i. 12 
 
 174, 295 
 
 Luke xxiii. 9 
 
 
 108 
 
 John i. 13 
 
 282, 366 
 
 Luke xxiii. 1 1 
 
 
 149, 331 
 
 John i. 15 32, 
 
 61», 84, 245, 272, 377* 
 
 Luke xxiii. 12 
 
 
 299 
 
 John i. 16 
 
 321, 363 
 
 Luke xxiii. 14 
 
 
 165(6js) 
 
 John i. 18 
 
 306, 333 
 
 Luke xxiii. 15 
 
 
 187 
 
 John i. 19 
 
 125, 131, 388 
 
 Luke xxiii. 1 8 
 
 
 115 
 
 John i. 20 
 
 124, 369, 399 
 
 Luke xxiii. 19 
 
 309* 313 
 
 John i. 21 
 
 124 
 
 Luke xxiii. 22 
 
 
 304 
 
 John i. 22 
 
 131 
 
 Luke xxiii. 30 
 
 
 40 
 
 John i. 25 
 
 124, 347* 366, 367 
 
 Luke xxiii. 31 
 
 
 208, 388 
 
 John i. 26 
 
 48, 364 
 
 Luke xxiii. 32 
 
 
 373* 
 
 John i. 27 
 
 240 
 
 Luke xxiii. 38 
 
 
 313, 337 
 
 John i. 28 
 
 311 
 
 Luke xxiii. 41 
 
 
 286, 392 
 
 John i. 29 
 
 139 
 
 Luke xxiii. 42 
 
 
 329 
 
 John i. 30 
 
 32, 84, 204, 377 
 
 Luke xxiii. 44 
 
 
 361 
 
 John i. 32 
 
 338, 382 
 
 Luke xxiii. 48 
 
 
 116 
 
 John i. 33 
 
 124, 283, 338, 382 
 
 Luke xxiii. 49 
 
 
 93 
 
 John i. 34 
 
 124 
 
 Lnke xxiii. 51 
 
 
 313 
 
 John i. 35 
 
 126 
 
 Luke xxiii. 53 
 
 313 
 
 329, 351 
 
 John i. 36 
 
 139 
 
 Luke xxiii. 54 
 
 
 68 
 
 John i. 40 
 
 39, 290, 364, 402 
 
 Luke xxiii. 55 
 
 
 313 
 
 John i. 41 
 
 167 
 
 Luke xxiii. 56 
 
 
 171 
 
 John i. 42 
 John 1. 43 
 
 83, 84, 117, 128, 402 
 128, 200, 364 
 
 Luke xxiv. 1 
 
 23, 26* 
 
 , 171, 284 
 
 John i. 44 
 
 196 
 
 Luke xxiv. 4 
 
 
 76, 277 
 
 John 1. 45 
 
 17, 324, 327 
 
 Luke xxiv. 5 
 
 
 76 
 
 John i. 46 
 
 402 
 
 Luke xxiv. 6 
 
 
 314 
 
 John i. 47 
 
 62, 290, 402 
 
 Luke xxiv. 10 
 
 
 94 
 
 John i. 48 
 
 139, 402 
 
 Luke xxiv. 1 1 
 
 
 126, 172 
 
 John i. 49 
 
 265, 341, 402 
 
 Luke xxiv. 13 
 
 136 
 
 , 153, 312 
 
 John i. 50 
 
 124, 402 
 
 Luke xxiv. 15 
 
 
 277 
 
 John i. 51 
 
 402 
 
 Luke xxiv. \ 6 
 
 
 161, 269 
 , 136, 290 
 
 John i. 52 
 
 63 
 
 Luke xxiv. 1 8 
 
 20 
 
 
 
 Luke xxiv. 19 
 
 
 82, 180 ! John ii. 1 
 
 157 
 
 Luke xxiv. 21 
 
 108, 134* 
 
 144, 331* John ii. 2 
 
 126 
 
 Luke xxiv. 25 
 
 108, 140, 152 
 
 174,26.9, Johnli. 4 
 
 138, 203, 364, 394 
 
 
 
 286 John ii. 5 
 
 228 
 
 Lnke xxiv. 27 
 
 34 
 
 , 342, 374 
 
 John ii. 6 
 
 312, 332 
 
N. T. INDEX. 
 
 445 
 
 John ii. 9 
 
 
 51,167 
 
 John V. 2 
 
 
 82, 93 
 
 John ii. 11 
 
 
 120, 174 
 
 John V. 4 
 
 
 329 
 
 John ii. la 
 
 
 126 
 
 John V. 6 
 
 
 247 
 
 John ii. 14 
 
 14 
 
 98, 100* 
 
 John V. 7 
 
 229, 
 
 310* 331 
 
 John ii. 15 
 
 
 14, 18 
 
 John V. 11 
 
 102 (bis)*, 306 
 
 John ii. 17 
 
 
 364 
 
 John V. 12 
 
 
 245 
 
 John ii. 18 
 
 
 45 
 
 John V. 18 
 
 
 119 
 
 John ii. 19 
 
 
 227 
 
 John V. 19 
 
 
 229, 350 
 
 John ii. 20 
 
 34 
 
 186 {bis) 
 
 John V. 20 
 
 
 45, 239* 
 
 John ii. 22 
 
 
 174, 285 
 
 John V. 23 
 
 
 403 
 
 John ii. 23 
 
 
 118, 174 
 
 John V. 24 
 
 
 173 
 
 John ii. 24 
 
 108, 112 
 
 175, 275 
 
 John V. 25 
 
 53, 58, 166 
 
 John ii. 25 
 
 
 240 
 
 John V. 28 
 John V. 29 
 
 53 
 
 166, 403 
 364 (bis) 
 
 John iii. 1 
 
 
 136 
 
 John V. 30 
 
 
 350 
 
 John iii. 4 
 
 
 248 
 
 John V. 30 sqq. 
 
 
 403 
 
 John iii. 5 sqq. - 
 
 
 403 
 
 John V. 31 
 
 
 110 
 
 John iii. 8 
 
 
 255, 369 
 
 John V. 32 
 
 
 110 
 
 John iii. 10 
 
 
 369 
 
 John V. 33 
 
 
 178 
 
 John iii. 11 
 
 
 131, 369 
 
 John V. 35 
 
 
 51* 125 
 
 John iii. 12 
 
 
 346, 369 
 
 John V. 35 sqq. 
 
 
 403 
 
 John iii. 15 
 
 121, 
 
 174 {bis) 
 
 John V. 36 
 
 91* 94, 132 
 
 168, 199 
 
 John iii. 16 
 
 121 
 
 174, 244 
 
 John V. 37 
 
 
 166, 367 
 
 John iii. 18 
 
 174 (bis), 349* 
 
 John V. 38 
 
 
 104 
 
 John iii. 19 
 
 
 105, 290 
 
 John V. 39 
 
 
 124 
 
 John iii. 20 
 
 
 369 
 
 John V. 42 
 
 
 113, 376 
 
 John iii. 23 
 
 
 311 
 
 John V. 44 
 
 
 382 
 
 John iii. 24 
 
 
 351 
 
 John V. 45 
 
 
 176, 295* 
 
 John iii. 27 
 
 
 350 
 
 John V. 46 
 
 
 173 (bis) 
 
 John iii. 29 
 
 
 184 
 
 John V. 47 
 
 174, 208 
 
 346, 347 
 
 John iii. 31 
 
 
 327 
 
 
 
 
 John iii. 35 
 
 
 329 
 
 John vi. 1 
 
 
 400 
 
 John iii. 36 
 
 
 338 
 
 John vi. 2 
 John vi. 3 
 
 
 130 
 56, 88* 
 
 John iv. 5 
 
 
 285 {bis) 
 
 John vi. 5 
 
 
 398 
 
 John iv. 6 
 
 56 
 
 306, 399 
 
 John vi. 7 
 
 
 240 
 
 John iv. 7 
 
 
 66 
 
 John vi. 9 
 
 
 282 
 
 John iv. 8 
 
 
 233 
 
 John vi. 10 
 
 
 363 
 
 John iv. 9 
 
 
 66 
 
 John vi. 13 
 
 
 125, 179 
 
 John iv. 10 
 
 
 66 
 
 John vi. 14 
 
 
 125, 284 
 
 John iv. 11 
 
 
 368 
 
 John vi. 15 
 
 
 398 
 
 John iv. 12 
 
 
 126, 199 
 
 John vi. 18 
 
 
 34 
 
 John iv. 14 
 
 159 
 
 213, 285 
 
 John vi. 19 
 
 
 301 
 
 John iv. 18 
 
 
 388, 389 
 
 John vi. 21 
 
 283* 375* 
 
 John iv. 22 
 
 
 402 
 
 John vi. 22 
 
 
 293* 
 
 John iv. 23 
 
 
 204 
 
 John vi. 22 sq. 
 
 
 200, 385 
 
 John iv. 23 sq. 
 
 
 336 
 
 John vi. 24 
 
 
 293 
 
 John iv. 24 
 
 
 123, 124 
 
 John vi. 27 
 
 
 124, 206 
 
 John iv. 26 
 
 
 172, 391 
 
 John vi. 29 
 
 
 105, 240 
 
 John iv. 27 
 
 
 172 
 
 John vi. 31 
 
 
 134 
 
 John iv. 31 
 
 
 273, 364 
 
 John vi. 32 
 
 
 199 (bis) 
 
 John iv. 34 
 
 
 87, 240 
 
 John vi. 33 
 
 
 124, 297 
 
 John iv. 35 
 
 
 82, 376 
 
 John vi. 35 
 
 
 214 
 
 John iv. 39 
 
 
 388 
 
 John vi. 36 
 
 
 362 
 
 John iv. 46 
 
 
 21 
 
 John vi. 37 
 
 122 
 
 211,212 
 
 John iv. 47 
 
 
 33 
 
 John vi. 39 
 
 
 122, 380 
 
 John iv. 47 sqq. 
 
 
 289 
 
 John vi. 40 
 
 
 132 
 
 John iv. 49 
 
 
 54 
 
 John vi. 41 
 
 
 297 
 
 John iv. 50 
 
 
 285, 364 
 
 John vi. 43 
 
 
 364 
 
 John iv. 51 
 
 
 315 (bis) 
 
 John vi. 45 
 
 167 
 
 169, 364 
 
 John iv. 52 
 
 70, 72, 153 
 
 John vi. 46 
 
 
 372 
 
 John iv. 53 
 
 153,173, 
 
 342, 392* 
 
 John vi. 50 
 
 125, 159 
 
 290, 297 
 
 John iv. 54 
 
 
 120* 364 
 
 John vi. 51 
 
 125 
 
 297, 364 
 
446 
 
 
 N. T. INDEX. 
 
 
 John vi. 53 
 
 
 113 
 
 John ix. 4 
 
 58, 231 
 
 John vi. 57 
 
 
 362 
 
 John ix. 6 
 
 180*, 344, 388 
 
 John vi. 58 
 
 
 125 
 
 John ix. 7 
 
 128 
 
 John vi. 62 
 
 
 105, 396* 
 
 John ix. 8 
 
 )24 
 
 John vi. 63 
 
 
 124, 402 
 
 John ix. 10 
 
 63 
 
 John vi. 64 
 
 
 296 
 
 John ix. 11 
 
 245, 344 
 
 John vi. 67 
 
 
 248 
 
 John ix. 13 
 
 400 
 
 John vi. 69 
 
 
 124* 
 
 John ix. 14 
 
 63 
 
 John vi. 71 
 
 
 33 
 
 John ix. 15 
 John ix. 17 
 
 180, 344 
 63 (bis), 388 
 
 John vii. 3 
 
 
 54 
 
 John ix. 19 
 
 124, 247, 376 
 
 John vii. 4 
 
 279* 
 
 , 290, 330 
 
 John ix. 20 
 
 124 
 
 John vii. 8 
 
 
 38, 204 
 
 John ix. 21 
 
 63 {bis), 112 
 
 John vii. 10 
 
 
 308 
 
 John ix. 22 
 
 S3, 224, 270 
 
 John vii. 12 
 
 
 102, 365 
 
 John ix. 25 
 
 250, 254 
 
 John vii. 16sqq 
 
 
 403 
 
 John ix. 26 
 
 63 
 
 John vii. 17 
 
 
 32, 250 
 
 John ix. 30 
 
 9, 63 {bis) 
 9, 63 (bis) 
 
 John vii. 18 
 
 
 118, 306 
 
 John ix. 32 
 
 John vii. 19 
 
 
 199 {bis) 
 
 John ix. 33 
 
 217, 226 
 
 John vii. 22 
 
 199 
 
 341, 372 
 
 John ix. 36 
 
 229, 395 
 
 John vii. 23 
 
 
 240 
 
 John ix. 37 
 
 64 
 
 John vii. 27 
 
 
 377 
 
 John ix. 41 
 
 226, 396 
 
 John vii. 30 
 
 
 66, 362 
 
 
 
 John vii. 31 
 
 
 287 
 
 John X. 1 
 
 120 
 
 John vii. 34 
 
 
 50* 131 
 
 John X. 3 
 
 118, 166, 401 
 
 John vii. 35 
 
 
 358* 
 
 John X. 4 
 
 118, 205 
 
 John vii. 36 
 
 
 50* 131 
 
 John X. 5 
 
 205, 213 
 
 John vii. 38 
 
 
 67, 380 
 
 John X. 6 
 
 254 
 
 John vii. 39 
 
 
 285 {bis) 
 
 John X. 7 
 
 124 
 
 John vii. 40 
 
 
 159, 166* 
 
 John X. 12 
 
 163, 801, 351, 401 
 
 John vii. 41 
 
 
 370 
 
 John X. 12sqq. 
 
 205 
 
 John vii. 42 
 
 
 247 
 
 John X. 14 
 
 124 
 
 John vii. 44 
 
 
 362 
 
 John X. 16 
 
 53, 167 
 
 John vii. 48 
 
 
 342 
 
 John X. 18 
 
 202* 205 
 
 John vii. 49 
 
 
 1.30 
 
 Jolin X. 22 
 
 361 
 
 John vii. 51 
 
 
 134* 
 
 John X. 27 
 
 126, 167 
 
 John vii. 52 
 
 
 204, 290 
 
 John X. 28 
 John X. 29 
 
 54, 211, 212 (bis)*, 214 
 84, 142, 389 
 
 John viii. 7 
 
 
 300 
 
 John X. 32 
 
 205 
 
 John viii. 9 
 
 
 30, 374 
 
 John X. 34 
 
 245 
 
 John viii. 12 
 
 124, 212 
 
 , 214, 314 
 
 John X. 35 
 
 120, 348* 
 
 . John viii. 14 
 
 
 204 
 
 John X. 36 124 
 
 245, 272* 377, 385, 390 
 
 John viii. 15 
 
 
 364 
 
 John X. 37 
 
 346 
 
 John viii. 16 
 
 
 364 
 
 John X. 38 
 
 174 
 
 . John viii. 17 
 
 
 364 
 
 John X. 39 
 
 182 
 
 John viii. 18 
 
 
 110, 124 
 
 
 
 . John viii. 19 
 
 
 226 
 
 John xi. 1 
 
 17, 312 
 
 . John viii. 25 
 
 253* 
 
 , 388, 389 
 
 John xi. 3 
 
 105 
 
 . John viii. 30 
 
 
 315 
 
 John xi. 6 
 
 365 
 
 John viii. 31 
 
 
 173 
 
 John xi. 7 
 
 397 
 
 ' John viii. 36 
 
 
 223 
 
 John xi. 8 
 
 247 
 
 John viii. 39 
 
 
 224* 226 
 
 John xi. 11 
 
 37* 
 
 . John viii. 40 
 
 166, 196 
 
 , 281, 396 
 
 John xi. 15 
 
 390* 
 
 . John viii. 44 7, 
 
 106* 118, 120 
 
 , 327, 375 
 
 John xi. 18 
 
 153 
 
 John viii. 49 
 
 
 115,362 
 
 John xi. 19 
 
 17,95 
 
 ■ John viii. 51 
 
 
 214 
 
 John xi. 20 
 
 56 
 
 . John viii. 52 
 
 
 214 
 
 John xi. 21 
 
 80, 224 
 
 John viii. 54 
 
 
 127, 376 
 
 John xi. 25 
 
 124 
 
 John viii. 55 
 
 
 170* 
 
 John xi. 26 
 
 212 
 
 .John viii. 56 
 
 
 61* 239* 
 
 John xi. 30 
 John xi. 32 
 
 199 
 17, 50, 105, 224 
 
 .-John ix. 2 
 
 
 239* 
 
 John xi. 38 
 
 336 
 
 'John ix. 3 
 
 
 77, 241 
 
 John xi. 44 
 
 189 
 
N. T. INBEX. 
 
 447 
 
 John xi. 47 
 
 88* 209* 
 
 John xiv. 28 
 
 
 204, 225* 
 
 John xi. 49 
 
 85 John xiv, 29 
 
 
 266 
 
 John xi. 56 
 
 218 John xiv. 30 
 
 
 241 
 
 John xi. 57 
 
 46, 224, 236 , 
 
 
 
 
 1 John XV. I 
 
 124 (bis). 125 
 
 John xii. 1 
 
 153 John XV. 2 
 
 
 142* 380* 
 
 John xii. 3 ^ 
 
 163 , John XV. 5 
 
 
 124, 382 
 
 John xii. 5 
 
 134, 393* , John xv. 6 
 
 U)6* 
 
 199, 202* 
 
 John xii. 9 
 
 91* 130 John xv, 7 
 
 
 72 
 
 John xii. 11 
 
 388 ! John xv. 8 
 
 
 87, 198* 
 
 John xii. 12 
 
 91» 130, 296 
 
 John XV. 9 
 
 
 157* 
 
 John xii. 13 
 
 320* 397 
 
 John XV. 10 
 
 
 344 
 
 John xii. 15 
 
 338 
 
 John XV. 13 
 
 
 239* 
 
 John xii. 16 
 
 178, 337 
 
 John XV. 16 
 
 46 
 
 {bis), 238 
 
 84 
 
 John xii. 18 
 
 130, 303 
 
 John XV. 18 
 
 
 John xii. 19 
 
 403 
 
 Jolin XV. 20 
 
 
 53,285 
 
 John xii. 20 
 
 234 
 
 John XV. 21 
 
 
 149 
 
 Johh xii. 21 
 
 17 
 
 John XV. 22 
 
 43* 
 
 226* 396 
 
 John xii. 22 
 
 126 
 
 John XV. 24 
 
 43* 
 
 226* 396 
 
 John xii. 36 
 
 174 
 
 John XV. 23 
 
 
 241 
 
 John xii. 38 
 
 174 1 John XV. 27 
 
 
 364 
 
 John xii. 40 
 
 211; 368 
 
 
 
 
 John xii. 44 
 
 356 
 
 John xvi. 13 
 
 
 204* 229 
 
 John xii. 46 
 
 122 
 
 John xvi. 13sq. 
 
 
 205 
 
 John xii. 47 
 
 167 
 
 John xvi. 15 
 
 
 205 
 
 John xii. 48 
 
 306 
 
 John xvi. 16 
 
 38* 
 
 205, 373* 
 
 John xii. 49 
 
 199, 255 
 
 John xvi. 1 7 
 
 38* 
 
 , 132, 158 
 
 Joh%xii. SC 
 
 132 
 
 John xvi. 19 
 John xvi. 20 
 
 
 205 
 60, 150 
 
 John xiii. 1 
 
 293* 
 
 John xvi. 20 sq. 
 
 
 205 
 
 John xiii. 2 
 
 46, 233, 238 
 
 John xvi. 21 
 
 
 328 
 
 John xiii. 3 
 
 199, 329 
 
 John xvi. 23 
 
 
 72 
 
 John xiii. 6 
 
 205, 388 
 
 John xvi. 25 
 
 
 240 
 
 John xiii. 8 
 
 160, 214 
 
 John xvi. 28 
 
 
 204 
 
 John xiii. 9 
 
 392 
 
 John xvi, 32 
 
 
 240 
 
 John xiii. 10 
 
 122, 369 (bis)* 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 John xiii. 11 
 
 122 
 
 John xvii. 2 36* 
 
 106, 122 
 
 234, 380 
 
 John xiii. 13 
 
 , 151 
 
 John xvii. 3 
 
 90, 235 
 
 (bis), 240 
 
 John xiii. 14 
 
 388 
 
 John xvii. 4 
 
 
 199 
 
 John xiii. 15 
 
 199, 362 
 
 Jolin xvii. 5 
 
 
 265, 286 
 
 John xiii. 18 
 
 122, 241 
 
 John xvii. 6 
 
 
 199 (ter) 
 126, 199 
 
 John xiii. 19 
 
 265 
 
 John xvii. 7 
 
 43 
 
 John xiii. 20 
 
 72 
 
 John xvii. 8 
 
 
 199 
 
 John xiii. 24 
 
 218 
 
 John xvii. 9 
 
 87 
 
 199, 287 
 
 John xiii. 27 
 
 839, 397, 400 
 
 John xvii. 1 1 
 
 
 286, 362 
 
 John xiii. 28 
 
 377 
 
 John xvii. 14 
 
 
 199 
 
 John xiii. 29 
 
 46 
 
 John xvii. 15 
 
 
 327 
 
 John xiii. 31 
 
 198* 
 
 John xvii. 19 
 
 
 132, 336 
 
 John xiii. 33 
 
 362 
 
 John xvii. 22 
 
 
 199 
 
 John xiii. 35 
 
 87 
 
 John xvii. 23 
 
 
 137, 333 
 
 John xiii. 38 
 
 214, 230 
 
 John xvii. 24 
 John xvii. 26 
 
 
 199 
 37, 148 
 
 John xiv. 2 
 
 204 
 
 
 
 
 John xiv. 3 
 
 58, 204 {bis) 
 
 John xviii. 1 
 
 
 21 
 
 John xiv. 6 
 
 124 
 
 John xviii. 2 
 
 
 297 
 
 John xiv. 7 
 
 224 
 
 John xviii. 5 
 
 
 297 
 
 John xiv. 9 
 
 186, 245 
 
 John xviii. 9 
 
 
 199 
 
 John xiv. 1 1 
 
 137, 393 
 
 John xviii. 1 1 
 
 
 199, 208 
 
 John xiv. 12 
 
 204, 363 
 
 John xviii. 12 
 
 
 200 
 
 John xiv. 19 
 
 38* 373 
 
 John xviii. 13 
 
 
 S3 
 
 John xiv. 21 
 
 37, 124 '' John xviii. 15 
 
 
 126 
 
 John xiv. 22 
 
 358 ! John xviii. 17 
 
 
 LW 
 
 John xiv. 27 
 
 93, 398 , 
 
 Jiha xviii. 22 
 
 
 199 
 
448 
 
 N. T. INBEX. 
 
 John xriii. 24 
 
 200 
 
 Acts i. 3 
 
 
 29 
 
 John xviii. 26 
 
 105 
 
 Acts i. 4 
 
 166, 
 
 349, 385 
 
 John XTiii. 30 
 
 224 
 
 Acts i. 5 
 
 
 104* 182 
 
 John xviii. 33 
 
 124 
 
 Acts i. 6 
 
 
 44,248 
 
 John xviii. 34 
 
 H4 
 
 Acts i. 7 
 
 
 163 
 
 John xviii. 37 
 
 132, 167, 249* 
 
 Acts i. 8 
 
 
 62, 342 
 
 John xviii. 39 
 
 208, 240 
 
 Acts i. 10 
 
 77, 
 
 312, 362 
 
 John xviii. 40 
 
 352, 392 
 
 Acts i. 11 
 Acts i. 12 
 
 
 283 
 22,93 
 
 John xix. 2 
 
 149 
 
 Acts i. 13 
 
 
 8,94 
 
 John xix. 3 
 
 45 
 
 Acts i. 14 
 
 
 17, 312 
 
 John xix. 5 
 
 139 
 
 Acts i. IE 
 
 
 9 
 
 John xix. 6 
 
 398* 
 
 Acta i. U 
 
 
 183 
 
 John xix. 9 
 
 199 
 
 Acts i. 17 
 
 
 313 
 
 John xix. 10 
 
 398 
 
 Acts i. 18 
 
 
 62, 370 
 
 John xix. 11 
 
 226* 
 
 Acts i. 19 
 
 
 118 
 
 John xix. 12 
 
 112 
 
 Acts i. 21 
 
 
 390* 
 
 John xix. 14 
 
 139 
 
 Acts i. 22 
 
 
 287, 374 
 
 John xix. 16 
 
 264 
 
 Acts i. 23 
 
 
 8 
 
 John xix. 17 
 
 112,139,283 
 
 Acts i. 25 
 
 
 117 
 
 John xix. 23 
 
 32, 120 
 
 
 
 
 John xix. 24 
 
 163, 194 
 
 Acts ii. 1 
 
 
 338 
 
 John xix. 25 
 
 20 
 
 Acts ii. 2 
 
 
 56, 312 
 
 John xix. 26 
 
 139 
 
 Acts ii. 3 
 
 
 134* 
 
 John xix. 27 
 
 139 
 
 Acts ii. 4 
 
 
 261 
 
 John xix. 28 
 
 390 
 
 Acts ii. 5 
 
 
 324 
 
 John xix. 31 
 
 53, 126, 390 
 
 Acts ii. 6 
 
 9, 
 
 131, 301 
 
 John xix. 32 
 
 122 
 
 Acts ii. 7 
 
 
 7, 124 
 
 John xix. 36 
 
 13 
 
 Acts ii. 11 
 
 
 301 
 
 John xix, 41 
 
 329 
 
 Acts ii. 12 
 
 218, 
 
 254 [bis) 
 
 
 
 Acts ii. 17 
 
 68 
 
 159, 278 
 
 John XX. 3 
 
 122, 126 
 
 Acts ii. 18 
 
 
 68 
 
 John XX. 4 
 
 27, 32, 83, 122 
 
 Acts ii. 21 
 
 
 278 
 
 John XX. 4 nji}. 
 
 196 
 
 Acts ii. 22 
 
 9, 289, 306, 326 
 
 John XX. 8 
 
 122 
 
 Acts ii. 23 
 
 40, 
 
 182, 399 
 
 John XX. 19 
 
 82, 103 
 
 Acts ii. 25 
 
 
 34 
 
 John XX. 15 
 
 17 
 
 Acts ii. 26 
 
 
 7,34 
 
 John XX. 17 
 
 204 
 
 Acts ii. 27 
 
 
 171, 333 
 
 John XX. IS 
 
 17 
 
 Acts ii. 29 
 
 
 318 
 
 John XX. 19 
 
 105, 332 
 
 Acts ii. 30 
 
 
 304 
 
 John XX. 20 
 
 300 
 
 Acts ii. 31 
 
 171* 
 
 333, 368 
 
 John XX. 23 
 
 72 
 
 Acts ii. 37 
 
 
 63* 360 
 
 John XX. 26 
 
 832, 378 
 
 Acts ii. 38 
 
 
 394 
 
 John XX. 27 
 
 139 
 
 Acts ii. 39 
 
 
 332, 378 
 
 John XX. 28 
 
 140 
 
 Acts ii. 40 
 
 
 9 
 
 John XX. 30 
 
 362 
 
 Acts ii. 45 
 Acts ii. 46 
 
 
 216 
 330 
 
 John xxi. 3 
 
 204 (bis}, 210* 
 
 Acts ii. 47 
 
 
 45 
 
 John xxi. 4 
 
 332 
 
 
 
 
 John xxi. 6 
 
 325 
 
 Acts iii. 2 
 
 
 45, 270 
 
 John xxi. 8 
 
 14, 1.53 
 
 Acts iii. 3 
 
 
 258 
 
 John xxi. IC 
 
 159, 286 
 
 Acts iii. 4 
 
 
 331 
 
 John xxi. 12 
 
 388 
 
 Acts iii. 5 
 
 
 144 
 
 John xxi. 18 
 
 50 
 
 Acts iii. 6 
 
 
 56 
 
 John xxi. 19 
 
 255 
 
 Acts iii. 7 
 
 
 161 
 
 John xxi. 20 
 
 338 
 
 Acts iii. 10 
 
 
 337, 376 
 
 John xxi. 21 
 
 388, 394 
 
 Acts iii. 1 1 
 
 16, 81, 337 
 
 John xxi. 22 
 
 81, 138, 231 
 
 Acts iii. 12 
 
 51, 118, 
 
 270, 307 
 
 John xxi. 23 
 
 138, 231 
 
 Acts iii. 13 
 
 104* 283, 
 
 365* 366 
 
 John xxi. 24 
 
 99 
 
 Acts iii. 14 
 Acts iii. 18 
 
 
 82,99 
 183 
 
 Acts i. 1 
 
 140, 286, 365, 374 
 
 Acts iii. 19 
 
 
 234, 264 
 
 Acts i. 2 
 
 10, 388* 
 
 Acts iii. 21 
 
 116, 183, 
 
 286, 36« 
 
N. T. INDEX. 
 
 449 
 
 Actsiii. 23 
 Acts iii. 24 
 Acts iii. 25 
 Acts iii, 26 
 
 Acts iv. 1 
 Acts iv. 3 
 Acts iv. 5 
 Acts iv. 7 
 Acts iv. 9 
 Acts iv. 10 s 
 Acts iv. 11 
 Acts iv. 12 
 < Acts iv. 13 
 Acts iv. 16 
 Acts iv. 17 
 Acts iv. 18 
 Acts iv. 19 
 Acts iv. 20 
 Acts iv. 21 
 Acts iv. 22 
 Acts iv. 25 
 Acts iv.- 27 
 Acts iv. 29 
 Acts iv. 32 
 Acts iv. 33 
 Aets iv. 35 
 Acts iv. 36 
 
 Acts V. 1 
 Acts V. 2 
 Acts V. 4 
 Acts V. 7 
 Acts V. 9 
 Acts V. 10 
 Acts V. 12 
 Acts V. 14 
 Acts V. 15 
 Acts V. 16 
 Acts V. 17 
 Acts V. 18 
 Acts V. 19 
 Acts V. 20 
 Acts V. 21 
 Acts V. 23 
 Acts V. 24 
 Acts V. 25 
 Acts V. 26 
 Acts V. 27 
 Acts V. 28 
 Acts V. 29 
 Acts V. 31 
 Acts V. 32 
 Acts V. 35 
 Acts V. 36 
 Acts V. 38 
 Acts V. 39 
 Acts V. 41 
 
 Acts vi. 1 
 Acts vi. 2 
 Acts vi. 4 
 Acts vi. 5 
 
 278 
 
 364 
 
 124, 286 
 
 264 
 
 315 
 
 329 
 
 106* 277 
 
 329, 330, 342 
 
 310* 330 
 
 104* 330 
 
 125 
 
 296, 367 
 
 376 
 
 208, 209, 365 
 
 54, 184, 337 
 
 263, 366 
 
 180 
 
 39 
 
 54, 97, 255 
 
 163, 168, 338 
 
 183, 357 
 
 126, 336 
 
 7, 264 
 
 121, 131* 
 
 360, 387 
 
 45, 47, 216 
 
 129, 152, 326* 
 
 8, 11 
 
 12, 159* 
 
 172, 329, 356, 358 
 
 277, 351, 361 
 
 358 
 
 304, 340 
 
 16 
 
 173 
 
 360* 
 
 130, 283 
 
 23 
 
 329 {bis) 
 
 63 
 
 162 
 
 193, 276 
 
 365, 378 
 
 97, 254* 
 
 329 (his) 
 
 242* 377, 384 
 
 329 (bis) 
 
 53, 184, 337 
 
 127* 
 
 261' 
 
 155 
 
 113, B23, 337* 388 
 
 114, 274. 283 
 
 210, 220 
 
 220 
 
 163 
 
 233 
 
 62, 363 
 
 100 
 
 79* 82, 173 
 
 57 
 
 Acts VI. 6 
 Acts vi. 9 
 Acts vi. 11 
 Acts vi. 13 
 Acts vi. 14 
 Acts vi. 15 
 
 Acts vii. 1 
 Acts vii. 4 
 Acts vii. 5 
 Acts vii. 7 
 Acta vii. 8 
 Acts vii. 10 
 Acts vii. 11 
 Acts vii. 12 
 Acts vii. 16 
 Acts vii. 17 
 Acts vii. 19 
 Acts vii. 20 
 Acts vii. 21 
 Acts vii. 22 
 Acts vii. 23 
 Acts vii> 24 
 Acts vii. 25 
 Acts vii. 26 
 Acts vii. 27 
 Acts vii. 28 
 Acts vii. 30 
 Acts vii. 32 
 Acts vii. 33 
 Acts vii. 34 
 Acts vii. 35 
 Acts vii. 37 
 Acts vii, 38 
 Acts vii. 39 
 Acts vii. 40 
 Acts vii. 41 
 Acts vii. 42 
 Acts vii. 43 
 Acts vii. 44 
 Acts vii. 45 
 Acts vii. 47 
 Acts vii. 48 
 Acts vii. 51 
 Acts vii. 53 
 Acts vii. 56 
 Acts vii. 58 
 Acts vii. 60 
 
 Acts viii. 1 
 Acts viii, 2 
 Acts viii. 5 
 Acts viii. 6 
 Acts viii. 7 
 Acts viii. 9 
 Acts viii. 10 
 Acts viii. 1 1 
 Acts viii. 13 
 Acts viii. 14 
 Acts viii. 1 5 
 Acts viii. 16 
 Acts viii. 17 
 Acts viii. 19 
 
 
 132 
 
 133 
 
 342 
 
 
 19 
 
 301 
 
 100 
 
 301 
 
 56 
 
 249 
 
 JS2 
 
 (bis) 
 
 342 
 351 
 229 
 357 
 
 
 15,40 
 
 
 34,87 
 
 
 303 
 
 332 
 
 69,94 
 
 286 
 
 329 
 
 - 34, 54 
 
 286 
 
 104 
 
 264 
 
 270 
 
 
 179 
 
 283 
 
 40 
 
 150 
 
 194 
 189 
 
 
 29 
 
 135 
 
 194* 
 
 9 
 
 
 205 
 
 357 
 
 
 69 
 
 205 
 
 248 
 
 93 
 
 125 
 
 337* 
 
 to, 166, 
 
 209 
 
 313 
 
 12, 19, 93 
 
 182 
 
 
 
 S7 
 
 
 
 309 
 
 
 
 69 
 
 
 
 379 
 
 
 
 34 
 
 
 
 145 
 
 
 
 37 
 
 
 
 19 
 
 
 €9, 
 
 286 
 
 1( (6!s; 
 
 ,34 
 
 (bis) 
 389 
 
 
 70* 
 
 3«2 
 151 
 
 63 
 194 
 
 57 
 
 312 
 193* 
 
 
 78, 
 
 106 
 264 
 
 33* 
 
 44, 48, 
 
 114, 
 
 274 
 
 
 125, 
 
 129 
 
 
 48* 
 
 186 
 48 
 17 
 
 
 34, 
 
 233 
 
 
 299, 
 
 337 
 
 45 
 
 238 
 
450 
 
 N. T. INDEX. 
 
 Acts viii. 21 ISO 
 
 Acts viii. 22 256, 322* 
 
 Acts viii. 23 301, 333 
 
 Acts viii. 24 287 
 
 Acts viii. 26 104*, 314 
 
 Acts viii. 27 296 
 
 Acts viii. 28 312 
 
 Acts viii. 30 247, 301 
 Acts viii. 31 222, 223, 524, 254, 370 
 
 Acts viii. 34 341 
 
 Acts viii. 35 150, 398 
 
 Acts viii. 38 400 
 
 Acts viii. 39 54 
 
 Acts viii. 40 266, 333 
 
 Acts ix. 1 
 
 167* 
 
 Acts ix. 2 
 
 163, 224, 233 
 
 Acts ix. 3 
 
 34*, 277 
 
 Acts ix. 4 
 
 6, 112, 166, 302* 399* 
 
 Acts ix. 6 
 
 47,50 
 
 Acts ix. 7 
 
 166, 351 
 
 Acts ix. 8 
 
 63 {bis) 
 
 Acts ix. 9 
 
 351, 366 
 
 Acts ix. 12 
 
 214 
 
 Acts ix. 13 
 
 149, 167 
 
 Acts ix. 15 
 
 268 
 
 Acts ix. 20 
 
 376 
 
 Acts ix. 21 
 
 124, 309 
 
 Acts ix. 22 
 
 9, 69, 124 
 
 Acts ix. 24 
 
 233 
 
 Acts ix. 26 
 
 351 
 
 Acts ix. 27 
 
 160 
 
 Acts ix. 31 
 
 184, 335 
 
 Acts ix. 32 
 
 18, 277 
 
 Acts ix. 33 
 
 337* 
 
 Acts ix. 34 
 
 47, 146 
 
 Acts ix. 35 
 
 16, 18, 283 
 
 Acts ix. 36 
 
 286 
 
 Acts ix. 37 
 
 277, 329 
 
 Acts ix. 38 
 
 18 
 
 Acts ix. 39 
 
 45, 193, 283 
 
 Acts ix. 40 
 
 63 
 
 Acts ix. 42 
 
 174, 335 
 
 Acts ix. 43 
 
 277 
 
 Acts X. 1 
 Acts X. 2 
 Acts X. 10 
 Acts X. 1 1 
 Acts X. 13 
 Acts X. 14 
 Acts X. 15 
 Acts X. 17 
 Acts X. IS 
 Acts X. 22 
 Acts X. 24 
 Acts X. 25 
 Acts X. 31 
 Acts X. 33 
 Acts X. 34 
 Acts X. 36 
 Acts X. 37 
 Acts-x. 39 
 
 93, 139 
 
 331 
 
 106* 
 
 29, 63, 196 
 
 138 
 
 121 
 
 29, 138 
 
 254, 338, 362 
 
 254 
 
 166, 188 
 
 193 
 
 270 
 
 52 
 
 82, 300, 326* 
 
 398 
 
 153* 288 
 
 79* 153, 335 
 
 40, 53, 283, 286, 342 
 
 Acts X. 40 
 Acts X. 41 
 Acts X. 43 
 Acts X. 45 
 Acts X. 47 
 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 
 xi. 7 
 xi. 11 
 xi. 12 
 xi. 14 
 xi. 15 
 xi. 17 
 xi. 18 
 xi. 21 
 xi. 22 
 xi. 26 
 xi. 28 
 xi. 29 
 xi. 30 
 
 Acts xii. 1 
 Acts xii. 2 
 Acts xii. 3 
 Acts xii. 4 
 Acts xii. 6 
 Acts xii. 7 
 Acts xii. 10 
 Acts xii. 11 
 Acts xii. 14 
 Acts xii. 16 
 Acts xii. 18 
 Acts xii. 19 
 Acts xii. 20 
 Acts xii. 21 
 Acts xii. 24 
 
 Acts xiii. 2 
 Acts xiii. 3 
 Acts xiii. 9 
 Acts xiii. 10 
 Acts xiii. 11 
 Acts xiii. 13 
 Acts xiii. 16 
 Acts xiii. 18 
 >Acts xiii. 19 
 Acts xiii. 21 
 Acts xiii. 22 
 Acts xiii. 24 
 Acts xiii. 25 
 Acts xiii. 26 
 Acts xiii. 27 
 Acts xiii. 29 
 Acts xiii. 32 
 Acts xiii. 36 
 Acts xiii. 39 
 Acts xiii. 40 
 Acts xiii. 41 
 Acts xiii. 43 
 Acts xiii. 45 
 Acts xiii. 46 
 Acts xiii. 47 
 A< is xiii. 48 
 
 9 
 9S, 122 
 
 174 
 233 
 269 
 
 301 
 
 82 
 
 306 
 
 126 
 
 264 
 
 174, 226*, 364* 
 
 371 
 
 183 
 
 327 
 
 278 
 
 12, 41, 81, 259, 283 
 
 34, 131 
 
 182 
 
 
 
 324 
 
 
 
 11 
 
 
 
 300 
 
 
 283, 
 
 329 
 
 
 9, 
 
 259 
 
 
 40,47 
 
 
 39,63 
 
 
 40, 
 
 182 
 
 48, 63, 
 
 325 
 
 
 39, 
 
 300 
 
 
 7, 
 
 250 
 
 275 
 
 ,332, 
 
 351 
 
 
 107, 
 
 340 
 
 106* 
 
 48 
 
 
 152, 
 
 342 
 142 
 395 
 
 89, 
 
 140, 
 
 258* 
 144 
 9.5* 
 141 
 29 
 362 
 
 5,86 
 
 
 150 
 
 283 
 319 
 
 
 240, 
 
 252* 
 
 
 141 
 
 162 
 297* 
 
 
 158 
 
 329 
 
 
 150 
 
 376 
 401 
 
 287, 
 
 322* 342 
 
 
 
 243 
 
 140, 175 
 
 ,214 
 
 (bis) 
 
 
 98 
 
 100 
 314 
 113 
 
 ISO 
 
 ,194 
 
 268 
 26 
 
N. T. INDEX. 
 
 451 
 
 Acts xir. 1 
 
 
 244, 277 
 
 Acts xvii. 4 
 
 • 
 
 361 
 
 Acts xiv. 3 
 
 
 182 
 
 Acts xvii. 5 
 
 161 
 
 Acts xiT. 5 
 
 
 260 
 
 Acts xvii. 6 
 
 
 306, 351 
 
 Acts xiv. 6 
 
 
 19 
 
 Acts xvii. 7 
 
 
 319 
 
 Acts xiv. 8 
 
 
 19, 283 
 
 Acts xvii. 10 
 
 
 115, 283 
 
 Acts xir. 9 
 
 
 268, 283 
 
 Acts xvii. 11 
 
 
 96, 254 
 
 Acts xiv. 10 
 
 
 54 94 
 
 Acts xvii. 14 
 
 
 357* 
 
 Acts xiv. 1 2 
 
 
 14 
 
 Acts xvii. 1 5 
 
 
 43, 44 
 
 Acts xiv. 16 
 
 
 184 
 
 Acts xvii. 18 
 
 99 
 
 102, 254 
 
 Acts xiv. 17 
 
 
 66, 112 
 
 Acts xvii. 20 
 
 
 218, 254 
 
 Acts xiv. 18 
 
 
 269 
 
 Acts xvii. 21 
 
 
 34, 83 
 
 Acts xiv. 19 
 
 
 60 
 
 Acts xvii. 27 
 
 42, 256 
 
 351,371 
 
 Acts xiv. 21 
 
 
 19, 342 
 
 Acts xvii. 28 
 
 101 
 
 156, 401 
 
 Acts xiv. 22 
 
 
 385 
 
 Acts xvii. 30 
 
 
 370 
 
 Acts xiv. 26 
 
 
 313, 378 
 
 Acts xvii. 31 
 
 
 286 
 
 Acts xiv. 27 
 
 
 63 
 
 Acts xvii. 32 
 Acts xvii. 33 
 
 
 53 
 357 
 
 Acts XV. 1 
 
 
 183* 
 
 
 
 
 Acts XV. 2 
 
 
 98 
 
 Acts xviii. 2 
 
 
 89 
 
 Acts XV. 4 
 
 
 98 
 
 Acts xviii. 3 
 
 
 83, 152 
 
 Acts XV. 5 
 
 
 324 
 
 Acts xviii. 6 
 
 
 76, 138 
 
 Acts XV. 6 
 
 
 98 
 
 Acts xviii. 8 
 
 
 173 
 
 Acts XV. 7 
 
 
 159 
 
 Acts xviii. 9 
 
 
 399 
 
 Acts XV. 8 
 
 
 363 
 
 Acts xviii. 10 
 
 
 270 
 
 Acts XV. 10 
 
 261, 367 
 
 388 {bis} 
 
 Acts xviii. 12 
 
 
 169 
 
 Acts XV. 12 
 
 
 130 
 
 Acts xviii. 14 
 
 35 
 
 140, 225 
 
 Acts XV. 17 
 
 234, 280, 
 
 282, 338* 
 
 Acts xviii. 17 
 
 
 160 
 
 Acts XV. 20 
 
 
 101,270 
 
 Acts xviii. 21 
 
 
 397 
 
 Acts XV. 22 
 
 20, 53* 98 
 
 , 112, 305 
 
 Acts xviii. 23 
 
 
 146 
 
 Acts XV. 22 sq. 
 
 
 299 
 
 Acts xviii. 24 
 
 
 21 
 
 Acts XV. 23 
 
 91, 100 
 
 103, 394 
 
 Acts xviii. 25 
 
 
 313 
 
 Acts XV. 24 
 
 
 273 
 
 Acts xviii. 28 
 
 
 45, 177 
 
 Acts XV. 25 
 
 
 305 
 
 
 
 
 Acts XV. 28 
 
 
 27* 349 
 
 Acts xix. 1 
 
 
 21, 277 
 
 Acts XV. 29 
 
 
 300, 327 
 
 Acts xix. 2 
 
 11, 
 
 248, 369 
 
 Acts XV. 33 
 
 
 146 
 
 Acts xix. 4 
 
 366 
 
 [bis), 389 
 
 Acts XV. 36 
 
 
 282, 377 
 
 Acts xix. 7 
 
 
 120* 
 
 Acts XV. 37 
 
 
 33 
 
 Acts xix. 8 
 
 150 {bis)* 
 
 Acts XV. 38 
 
 306, 326, 
 
 377* 399 
 
 Acts xix. 11 
 Acts xix. 16 
 
 
 93, 182 
 54, 147 
 
 Acts xvi. 3 
 
 
 51, 112 
 
 Acts xix. 21 
 
 
 329 
 
 Acts xvi. 4 
 
 
 45' 
 
 Acts xix. 22 
 
 
 144, 334 
 
 Acts xvi. 9 
 
 
 148, 313 
 
 Acts xix. 23 
 
 
 7 
 
 Acts xvi. 11 
 
 
 34, 74* 
 
 Acts xix. 26 
 
 123* 370* 
 
 Acts xvi. 12 
 
 
 281 
 
 Acts xix. 27 
 
 151, 158* 350* 
 
 Acts xvi. 14 
 
 
 19 
 
 Acts xix. 30 
 
 
 315 
 
 Acts xvi. 15 
 
 
 273 
 
 Acts xix. 32 
 
 
 15, 313 
 
 Acts xvi. 16 
 
 
 277 
 
 Acts xix. 33 
 
 
 172 
 
 Acts xvi. 19 
 
 
 160 
 
 Acts xix. 34 
 
 
 298 
 
 Acts xvi. 21 
 
 
 305 
 
 Acts xix. 35 
 
 13, 82, 355 
 
 Acts xvi. 22 
 
 32 
 
 {bis), 201 
 
 Acts xix. 36 
 
 
 147, 299 
 
 Acts xvi. 24 
 
 
 28, 328 
 
 Acts xix. 40 
 
 177, 181, 188, 230, 400* 
 
 Acts xvi. 26 
 
 
 48, 63 
 
 
 
 
 Acts xvi. 27 
 
 
 297 
 
 Acts XX. 2 
 
 
 106 
 
 Acts xvi. 31 
 
 
 174 
 
 Acts XX. 3 
 
 146, 268* 
 
 298, 341 
 
 Acts xvi 32 
 
 
 95 
 
 Acts XX. 4 
 
 
 364 
 
 Acts xvi. 33 
 
 
 95, 322* 
 
 Acts XX. 5 
 
 
 364 
 
 Acts xvi. 34 
 
 73 
 
 173, 300 
 
 Acts XX. 6 
 
 
 10 
 
 Acts xvi. 36 
 
 
 43, 184 
 
 Acts XX. 7 
 
 
 29* 
 
 Acts xvi. 37 
 
 
 40, 369 
 
 Acts XX. 9 
 Acts XX. 11 
 
 
 322* 
 10, 306 
 
 Acts xvii. 2 
 
 
 23, 133* 
 
 Acts XX. 13 
 
 
 194, 313 
 
 Acts xvii. 3 
 
 
 385 
 
 Acts XX. 14 
 
 
 332 
 
462 
 
 N. T. INDEX. 
 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 
 XX.. 16 
 XX. 18 
 XX. 19 
 XX. 20 
 XX. 22 
 XX. 23 
 XX. 24 
 XX. 26 
 XX. 27 
 XX. 30 
 XX. 34 
 XX. 38 
 
 M 224, 333 
 
 * ISO*, 315, 342 
 
 93 
 
 270 
 
 204 
 
 147 
 
 244 
 
 158 
 
 270 
 
 113, 172, 270 
 
 401* 
 
 286 
 
 Acts Xxi. 
 Acts xxi 
 Acts xx: 
 
 Acts XXL 
 
 Acts xxi. 
 Acts xxi. 
 Acts xx: 
 Acts xx: 
 Acts xxi. 
 Acts XX 
 Acts xx: 
 Acts xxi 
 Acts XX 
 Acts XX 
 Acts XX 
 Acts XX) 
 Acts xx: 
 Acts XX 
 Acts xx: 
 Acts XX 
 Acts XX) 
 Acts xx: 
 Acts XX 
 Acts xxi. 
 Acts xxi. 
 Acts xx: 
 Acts XX 
 Acts XX 
 Acts xji 
 Acts XX 
 Acts xxi. 
 Acts xx: 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 8 
 
 10 
 
 11 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 16 
 
 17 
 
 19 
 
 20 
 
 21 
 
 22 
 
 23 
 
 24 
 
 25 
 
 26 
 
 27 
 
 27 sqq. 
 
 28 
 
 29 
 
 31 
 
 33 
 
 34 
 
 36 
 
 37 
 
 38 
 
 39 
 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 
 xxii. 1 
 xxii. 3 
 xxii. 5 
 xxii. 6 
 xxii. 7 
 xxii. 9 
 xxii. 10 
 xxii. 11 
 xxii. 15 
 xxii. 16 
 xxii. 17 
 xxii. 19 
 xxii. 20 
 xxii. 22 
 xxii. 24 
 xxii. 25 
 xxii. 26 
 
 21, 277 
 
 206 
 
 190* 
 
 273 
 
 89, 277 
 
 118 
 
 82, 95 
 
 316 
 
 116, 163 
 
 270 
 
 334 
 
 158, 159, 228, 284*, 339 
 
 315 
 
 287, 335 
 
 304 
 
 184* 273 
 
 53 
 
 312, 336 
 
 234* 287, 337 
 
 101, 192, 270 
 
 94, 231* 
 
 40 
 
 383 
 
 125, 196, 360 
 
 313 
 
 69 
 
 9, 218, 254 {bis), 275 
 
 275 
 
 130 
 
 248 
 
 125 
 
 273 
 
 167* 
 
 75 
 
 71* 282, 378* 
 
 35, 278 
 
 40, 110, 301 
 
 387 
 
 286 
 
 325 
 
 287 
 
 388 
 
 305, 315 
 
 174 
 
 69, 313 
 
 217 
 
 276 (Ms) 
 
 73, 248 
 
 73, 297, 370 
 
 Acts xxii. 29 
 Acts xxii. 30 
 
 Acts xxiii. 1 
 Acts xxiii. 3 
 Acts xxiii. 5 
 Acts xxiii. 6 
 Acts xxiii. 8 
 Acts xxiii. 9 
 Acts xxiii. 10 
 Acts xxiii. 1 1 
 Acts xxiii. 12 
 Acts xxiii. 13 
 Acts xxiii. 14 
 Acts xxiii. 15 
 Acts xxiii. 20 
 Acts xxiii. 21 
 Acts xxiii. 22 
 Acts xxiii. 23 
 Acts xxiii. 26 
 Acts xxiii. 27 
 Acts xxiii. 29 
 Acts xxiii. 30 
 Acts xxiii. 34 
 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 Acts xxiv. 
 
 .3 
 
 5 
 
 5 sq. 
 
 6 
 
 8 
 
 10 
 
 11 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 17 
 
 17sq. 
 
 18 
 
 19 
 
 20 
 
 21 
 
 22 
 
 23 
 
 25 
 
 26 
 
 27 
 
 ABts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Apts 
 Acti 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 Acts 
 
 XXV. 3 
 XXV. 4 
 XXV. 6 
 XXV. 7 
 XXV. 8 
 XXV. 9 
 XXV. 10 
 XXV. 11 
 XXV. 13 
 XXV. 14 
 XXV. 15 
 XXV. 16 
 XXV. 18 
 XXV. 20 
 
 313, 364 
 97, 329 
 
 10 
 
 49 
 
 146 
 
 102, 159, 165, 363 
 
 350, 367 {bis]* 
 
 108, 127, 248, 396* 
 
 242 
 
 9,334 
 
 230 
 
 128, 168 
 
 113, 184, 230 
 
 266, 269, 307, 331 
 
 270, 307 
 
 128, 157* 168, 230 
 
 370, 385 
 
 385 
 
 27, 394 
 
 40 
 
 177 
 
 198, 259, 318* 336 
 
 392* 
 
 13, 27, 69 
 
 293* 297 
 
 383 
 
 283 
 
 165 
 
 70, 301 
 
 168, 281,296 
 
 180 
 
 368 
 
 174, 176, 283 
 
 110, 176, 259 
 
 385 
 
 296, 363 
 
 282* 
 
 217, 224 
 
 no 
 
 165, 287 
 
 70 
 
 118 
 
 259 
 
 259 
 
 13 
 
 233 
 
 274, 275, 334 
 
 128, 168 
 
 73, 315, 363 
 
 152, 342 
 
 13 
 
 152 
 
 165, 262, 346, 347 
 
 296 
 
 312 
 
 99, 333 
 
 188, 230, 232 
 
 286* 287, 336* 
 
 254 
 
N. T. INDEX. 
 
 453 
 
 Acts XXV. 21 
 
 112* 230, 274, 275. 276 
 
 Acts xxvii 
 
 .8 
 
 
 277 
 
 Acts XXV. 22 
 
 
 217* 394 
 
 Acts xxviii. 10 
 
 
 283 
 
 Acts XXV. 23 
 
 
 93 
 
 Acts xxviii. 12 
 
 
 186 
 
 Acts XXV. 26 
 
 
 251 
 
 Acts xxviii. 13 sqq. 
 
 
 39 
 
 Acts XXV. 27 
 
 
 41, 306 
 
 Acts xxvii 
 Acts xxvii 
 
 .14 
 . 15 
 
 
 357 
 10, 283 
 
 Acts xxvi. 2 
 
 
 59, 177 
 
 Acts xxviii. 16 
 
 
 73 
 
 Acts xxvi. 3 
 
 258, 
 
 301, 317* 
 
 Acts xxviii. 17 
 
 277, 
 
 315,351* 
 
 Acts xxvi. 4 
 
 51 
 
 , 342, 370 
 
 Acts xxvii 
 
 . 18 
 
 
 33 
 
 Acts xxvi. 6 
 
 
 165 
 
 Acts xxviii. 20 
 
 
 50* 190 
 
 Acts xxvi. 7 
 
 
 177, 259 
 
 Acts xxvii 
 
 . 22 
 
 
 366 
 
 Acts xxvi. 8 
 
 
 246 
 
 Acts xxviii. 23 
 
 150* 
 
 , 297, 342 
 
 Acts xxvi. 9 
 
 
 111, 370 
 
 Acts xxviii. 26 
 
 
 57, 130 
 
 Acts xxvi. 10 
 
 
 68, 361 
 
 Acts xxviii. 27 
 
 
 62 
 
 Acts xxvi. 12 
 
 
 283 
 
 Acts xxvii 
 
 .28 
 
 
 53 
 
 Acts xxvi. 13 
 
 110, 171, 335 
 
 Acts xxviii. 30 
 
 
 118 
 
 Acts xxvi. 14 
 
 136, 
 
 302* 314 
 
 
 
 
 
 Acts xxvi. 15 
 
 
 57 1 Rom. i. 4 
 
 
 
 7t 
 
 Acts xxvi. 16 
 
 287 
 
 [bis)*, 361 
 
 Rom. i. 5 
 
 
 
 131 
 
 Acts xxvi. 17 
 
 
 2S2 
 
 Rom. i. 6 
 
 
 
 158, 169 
 
 Acts xxvi." 18 
 
 
 63, 271 
 
 Rom. i. S 
 
 
 
 115,365 
 
 Acts xxvi. 19 
 
 
 25, 283 
 
 Rom. i. 10 
 
 
 
 256, 336 
 
 Acts xxvi. 20 
 
 
 306, 331* 
 
 Rom. i. 11 
 
 
 
 265 
 
 Acts xxvi. 21 
 
 
 10 
 
 Rom. i. 12 
 
 
 
 110, 117 
 
 Acts xxvi. 22 
 
 93, 287, 301 
 
 , 305, 351 
 
 Rom, i. 15 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 Acts xxvi. 23 
 
 
 42 
 
 Rom. i. 20 
 
 
 
 99, 265* 
 
 Acts xxvi. 24 
 
 
 94, 389 
 
 Rom. i. 21 
 
 
 
 34 
 
 Acts xxvi. 25 
 
 
 27 
 
 Rom. i. 22 
 
 
 
 278 
 
 Acts xxvi. 26 
 
 
 1.52 
 
 Rom. i. 24 
 
 
 
 268 
 
 Acts xxvi. 29 
 
 
 218, 363 
 
 Rom. i. 25 
 
 
 
 137 
 
 Acts xxvi. 30 
 
 
 98* 126 
 
 Kom. i. 26 
 
 
 
 161 
 
 Acts xxvi. 32 
 
 
 217, 226 
 
 Rom. i. 27 
 Rom. i. 28 
 
 
 
 7, 361* 
 350 
 
 Acts xxvii. 1 
 
 
 139, 270 
 
 Rom. i. 29 
 
 
 
 164 
 
 Acts xxvii. 3 
 
 
 305 
 
 Rom. i. 29 
 
 sq. 
 
 
 402 
 
 Acts xxvii. 9 
 
 
 13 
 
 Rom. i. 30 
 
 
 
 89 
 
 Acts xxvii. 10 
 
 246, 
 
 259, 383* 
 
 Rom. i. 32 
 
 
 
 87 
 
 Acts xxvii. 12 
 
 15, 18, 256 
 
 
 
 
 
 Acts xxvii. 13 
 
 
 146, 161 
 
 Rom. ii. 1 
 
 
 
 140, 141 
 
 Acts xxvii. 14 
 
 
 16, 145 
 
 Rom. ii. 3 
 
 
 105 
 
 132, 140 
 
 Acts xxvii. 15 
 
 
 54 
 
 Rom. ii. 7 sq. 
 
 
 384* 
 
 Acts xxvii. 17 
 
 
 242, 306 
 
 Rom. ii. 8 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 Acts xxvii. 20 
 
 123, 268 
 
 , 351, 368 
 
 Rom. ii. 12 
 
 
 
 64 
 
 Acts xxvii. 21 
 
 140, 
 
 217, 365* 
 
 Rom. ii. 13 
 
 
 188 
 
 Acts xxvii. 22 
 
 177 
 
 , 258, 365 
 
 Rom. ii. 14 
 
 93 
 
 106, 223 
 
 Acts xxvii. 23 
 
 
 163 
 
 Rom. ii. 14 
 
 sq 
 
 
 282 
 
 Acts xxvii. 25 
 
 
 233 
 
 Rom. ii. 17 
 
 
 
 42 
 
 Acts xxvii. 27 
 
 
 29 
 
 Rom. ii. 17 
 
 sqq. 
 
 
 386 
 
 Acts xxvii. 28 
 
 
 47* 
 
 Rom. ii. 21 
 
 
 
 274, 350 
 
 Acts xxvii. 29 
 
 
 34, 242 
 
 Rom. ii. 23 
 
 
 
 42 
 
 Acts xxvii. 30 
 
 
 11,307 
 
 Rom. ii. 26 
 
 
 106* 
 
 122, 151 
 
 Acts xxvii. 33 
 
 
 29, 304 
 
 Rom. ii. 28 
 
 
 
 392* 
 
 Acts xxvii. 34 
 
 
 161* 340 
 
 
 
 
 
 Acts xxvii. 35 
 
 
 34 
 
 Rom. iii. 2 
 
 
 
 190, 365 
 
 Acts xxvii. 36 
 
 
 161* 167 
 
 Rom. iii. 4 
 
 
 214, 
 
 234, 248 
 
 Acts xxvii. 37 
 
 
 50, 120 
 
 Rom. iii. 5 
 
 
 
 248 
 
 Acts xxvii. 39 
 
 
 224 
 
 Rom. iii. 6 
 
 
 218, 2.33 
 
 248, 359 
 
 Acts xxvii. 40 
 
 
 24.82 
 
 Rom. iii. 8 
 
 
 245, 
 
 274* 369 
 
 Acts xxvii. 41 
 
 
 11 
 
 Rom. iii. 9 
 
 
 
 341, 389* 
 
 Acts xxvii. 42 
 
 
 233 
 
 Rom. iii. 10 
 
 
 121 
 
 Acts xxvii. 44 
 
 
 277, 336 
 
 Rom. iii. 11 
 
 
 48, 29!j* 
 
 
 
 
 Rom. iii. 12 121, 
 
 295 {bis), 
 
 312, 351 
 
 Acts xxviii. 2 
 
 
 40* 
 
 Rom. iii, 13 
 
 
 43 
 
454 
 
 N. T. INDEX. 
 
 
 
 Kom. iii. 14 
 
 280 1 Bom. vii. 3 
 
 37, 
 
 269, 371 
 
 Kom. iii. 20 
 
 188 
 
 Bom. vii. 4 
 
 
 178, 265 
 
 Bom. iii. 24 
 
 116, 294 
 
 Bom. vii. 5 
 
 60, 
 
 193, 265 
 
 Bom. iii. 25 
 
 116 
 
 Bom. vii. 6 
 
 322* 349* 
 
 Bom. iii. 26 
 
 265 
 
 Bom. vii. 7 
 
 
 124, 226 
 
 Bom. iii. 27 
 
 391 
 
 Bom. vii. 8 
 
 
 33 
 
 Bom. iii. 30 
 
 122 
 
 Bom. vii. 9 
 
 
 59 
 
 
 
 Bom. vii. 10 
 
 91. 
 
 109, 399 
 
 Bom. IT. 2 
 
 340 
 
 Bom. vii. 12 
 
 
 366 
 
 Bom. ir. 3 
 
 134, 173 
 
 Bom. vii. 13 
 
 
 300, 304 
 
 Bom. IT. 4 
 
 53* 88 
 
 Bom. vii. 15 
 
 
 306, 348 
 
 Bom. iv. 5 
 
 53* 174 
 
 Bom. vii. 18 
 
 
 262 
 
 Bom. iv. 7 
 
 48, 105, 137 
 
 Bom. vii. 19 
 
 
 306, 349 
 
 Bom. iv. 8 
 
 136, 214 
 
 Bom. vii. 21 
 
 
 388* 
 
 Bom. iv. 9 
 
 138, 394 
 
 Bom. vii. 22 
 
 
 378 
 
 Bom. iv. 10 
 
 342 
 
 Bom. vii. 23 
 
 
 110 
 
 Bom. iv. 11 
 
 78*, 264 
 
 Bom. vii. 24 
 
 
 162 
 
 Bom. iv. 12 
 
 184, 350 
 
 Bom. vii. 25 
 
 
 187, 371 
 
 Bom. iv. 13 
 
 138, 392 
 
 
 
 
 Bom. iv. 14 
 
 137, 199, 392 
 
 Bom. viii. 2 
 
 
 94, 100 
 
 Bom. iv. 15 
 
 349 
 
 Bom. viii. 3 
 
 154*, 165, 
 
 331, 381 
 
 Bom. iv. 16 
 
 265, 392* 
 
 Bom. viii. 4 
 
 
 294, 391 
 
 Bom. iv. 17 
 
 286, 287* 
 
 Bom. viii. 8 
 
 
 363 
 
 Bom. iv. 18 
 
 131* 174, 264 
 
 Bom. viii. 9 
 
 163, 
 
 346, 347 
 
 Bom. iv. 19 
 
 29* 355* 369 
 
 Bom. viii. 12 
 
 
 268 
 
 Bom. iv. 20 
 
 186 
 
 Bom. viii. 15 
 
 
 140, 398 
 
 Bom. iv. 22 
 
 134 
 
 Bom. viii. 16 
 
 
 403 
 
 Bom. iv. 24 
 
 174 
 
 Bom. viii. 18 
 Bom. viii. 21 
 
 
 340, 388 
 109 
 
 Bom. V. 3 
 
 393 
 
 Bom. viii. 23 
 
 •8* 80, 113 
 
 393, 400- 
 
 Bom. V. 5 
 
 329 
 
 Bom. viii. 26 
 
 
 97, 255 
 
 Bom. V. 6 
 
 389 
 
 Bom. viii. 27 
 
 
 58 
 
 Bom. V. i 
 
 218 
 
 Bom. viii. 28 
 
 
 193* 
 
 Bom. V. 10 sq. 
 
 292* 
 
 Bom. viii. 29 
 
 169 
 
 202,265 
 
 Bom. V. 1 1 
 
 292, 393 
 
 Bom. viii. 32 
 
 
 37, 118 
 
 Bom. V. 12 sq. 
 
 386 
 
 Bom. viii. 33 
 
 
 93, 177 
 
 Bom. V. 13 
 
 58 
 
 Bom. viii. 35 
 
 
 37 
 
 Bom. V. 14 
 
 54, 169 
 
 Bom. viii. 36 
 
 
 151 
 
 Bom. V. 16 
 
 54 
 
 Bom. viii. 38 
 
 
 367 
 
 Bom. V. 18 
 
 371, 394 
 
 
 
 
 Bom. V. 19 
 
 342 
 
 Bom. ix. 1 
 
 
 403 
 
 
 
 Bom. ix. 3 
 
 34, 91, 217* 322* 
 
 Bom. tI. 1 
 
 208, 218 
 
 Bom. ix. 6 
 
 306, 
 
 372* 399 
 
 Bom. vi. 2 
 
 178 
 
 Bom. ix. 7 
 
 
 11 
 
 Bom. vi. 3 
 
 92 
 
 Bom. ix. 8 
 
 120, 125 
 
 151,306 
 
 Bom. vi. 4 
 
 92, 162 
 
 Bom. ix. 10 
 
 327, 
 
 380, 393* 
 
 Bom. vi. 5 
 
 169, 364 
 
 Bom. ix. 11 
 
 121, 133, 162 
 
 314, 316 
 
 Bom. vi. 6 
 
 116, 271 
 
 
 
 390 
 
 Bom. vi. 7 
 
 322* 
 
 Bom. ix. 12 
 
 
 57, 393 
 
 Bom. vi. 10 
 
 149, 178 {bis) 
 
 Bom. ix. 13 
 
 
 134 
 
 Bom. vi. 11 
 
 113, 178 {bis) 
 
 Bom. ix. 14 
 
 
 248 
 
 Bom. vi. 12 
 
 116,265 
 
 Bom. ix. 15 
 
 19 Iter), 64 
 
 Bom. vi. 13 
 
 113, 307 
 
 Bom. ix. 16 
 
 57 
 
 , 163, 366 
 
 Bom. vi. 14 
 
 341 
 
 Bom. ix. 17 
 
 109 
 
 , 194, 214 
 
 Bom. vi. 15 
 
 54, 208 {bis) 
 
 Bom. ix. 18 
 
 
 57 
 
 Bom. vi. 16 
 
 113, 399 
 
 Bom. ix. 19 
 
 
 218 
 
 Bom. vi. 17 
 
 290 
 
 Bom. ix. 20 
 
 294 
 
 , 371, 388 
 
 Bom, vi. 19 
 
 9,98 
 
 Bom. ix. 21 
 
 
 260* 387 
 
 Bom. vi. 20 
 
 50, 179* 
 
 Bom. ix. 22 
 
 
 396* 
 
 Bom. vi. 21 
 
 105, 282* 365* 
 
 Bom. ix. 25 
 
 
 350, 353 
 
 Bom. vi. 22 
 
 179 
 
 Bom. ix. 26 
 Bom. ix. 27 
 
 
 57, 278 
 335 
 
 Bom. vii. 2 
 
 322* 
 
 Bom. ix. 2: 
 
 
 84, 177 
 
N. T. INDEX. 
 
 455 
 
 Rom. ix. 30 
 
 93 {bis) 
 
 Rom. xiii. 9 
 
 
 53,96 
 
 Rom. ix. 33 
 
 174, 329 
 
 Rom. xiii. 11 
 Rom. xiii. 13 
 
 131 
 
 , 260, 293 
 308 
 
 Rom. X. 1 
 
 366, 403 
 
 
 
 
 Rom. X. 3 
 
 117 
 
 Rom. xiv. 2 
 
 
 102, 273 
 
 Rom. X. 4 
 
 123 
 
 Rom. xiv. 4 
 
 47, 141 
 
 , 294, 388 
 
 Rom. X. 6. 
 
 261 
 
 Rom. xiv. 4 sqq. 
 
 
 178 
 
 Rom. X. 7 
 
 261 
 
 Rom. xiv. 5 
 
 
 102 
 
 Rom. X. 8 
 
 131 
 
 Rom. xiv. 7 
 
 
 178 
 
 Rom. X. 9 
 
 176, 182 
 
 Rom. xiv. 8 
 
 163, 178, 
 
 221* 223 
 
 Rom. X. 10 
 
 173, 176 
 
 Rom. xiv. 9 
 
 
 58 
 
 Rom. X. 11 
 
 174 
 
 Rom. xiv. 10 
 
 
 388 
 
 Rom. X. 13 
 
 278 
 
 Rom. xiv. 11 
 
 
 176 
 
 Rom. X. 14 
 
 t3, 105, 174, 208 {bis) 
 
 Rom. xiv. 13 
 
 263 
 
 , 274, 349 
 
 Rom. X. 18 
 
 248, 371 
 
 Rom. xiv. 14 
 
 
 306 
 
 Rom. X. 19 
 
 37, 248, 337, 353 
 
 Rom. xiv. 15 
 
 
 45 
 
 Rom. X. 20 
 
 187, 290 
 
 Rom. xiv. 17 
 Rom. xiv. 20 
 
 
 96, 185 
 365 
 
 Rom. xi. 1 
 
 69, 248 
 
 Rom. xiv. 21 
 
 15, 349, 
 
 366, 393* 
 
 Rom. xi. 2 
 
 69, 331* 
 
 Rom. xiv. 23 
 
 
 199, 393 
 
 Rom. xi. 4 
 
 21, 115 
 
 
 
 
 Rom. xi. 6 
 
 359, 392* 
 
 Rom. XV. 1 
 
 
 113, 3.50 
 
 Rom. xi. 8 
 
 267* 
 
 Rom. XV. 3 
 
 
 386 
 
 Rom. xi. 9 
 
 150 
 
 Rom. XV. 5 
 
 
 46 
 
 Rom. xi. 10 
 
 271 
 
 Rom. XV. 8 
 
 
 264 
 
 Rom. xi. 11 
 
 116, 138, 248, 264 
 
 Rom. XV. 9 
 
 
 176 
 
 Rom. xi. 13 
 
 366 {bis), 370 
 
 Rom. XV. 11 
 
 
 42 
 
 Rom. xi. 14 
 
 256 
 
 Rom. XV. 12 
 
 
 37, 175 
 
 Rom. xi. 15 
 
 128 
 
 Rom. XV. 13 
 
 
 264 
 
 Rom. xi. 16 
 
 137, 392 
 
 Rom. XV. 15 
 
 
 307 
 
 Rom. xi. 18 
 
 42, 185, 395* 
 
 Rom XV. 16 
 
 
 265, 275* 
 
 Rom. xi. 19 
 
 218 
 
 Rom. XV. 18 
 
 
 287 
 
 Rom. xi. 20 
 
 186* 
 
 Rom. XV. 21 
 
 
 349, 386 
 
 Rom. xi. 21 
 
 162, 346, 353, 354 
 
 Rom. XV. 22 
 
 
 96, 270 
 
 Rom. xi. 22 
 
 359, 384* 
 
 Rom. XV. 23 
 
 
 268 
 
 Rom. xi. 25 
 
 86, 231 
 
 Rom. XV. 23 sqq. 
 
 
 294* 
 
 Rom. xi. 31 
 
 157 
 
 Rom. XV. 24 
 
 
 232 
 
 Rom. xi. 33 
 
 S3, 58, 140, 154, 155* 
 
 Rom. XV. 25 
 
 
 204 
 
 Rom. xi. 36 
 
 137 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Rom. xvi. 2 109 
 
 {bis), 110 
 
 , 117, 237 
 
 Rom. xii. 1 
 
 153* 
 
 Rom. xvi. 4 
 
 
 83 
 
 Rom. xii. 2 
 
 264 
 
 Rom. .Kvi. 6 
 
 
 17, 115 
 
 Rom. xii. 3 
 
 265, 339, 389 
 
 Rom. xvi. 7 
 
 
 43 
 
 Rom. xii. 5 
 
 .30 
 
 Rom. xvi. 10 
 
 
 95 
 
 Rom. xii. 6 
 
 293 
 
 Rom. xvi. 11 
 
 
 13, 95 
 
 Rom. xii. 6 sqq. 
 
 386, 392 
 
 Rom. xvi. 12 
 
 
 115 
 
 Rom. xii. 9 sqq 
 
 137 
 
 Rom. xvi. 13 
 
 
 117 
 
 Rom. xii. 13 
 
 160 
 
 Rom. xvi. 17 
 
 
 100 
 
 Rom. xii. 14 
 
 369 
 
 Rom. xvi. 19 
 
 
 60,117 
 
 Rom. xii. 15 
 
 272* 386 
 
 Rom. xvi. 25 
 
 
 186 
 
 Rom. xii. 16 
 
 352, 386 
 
 Rom. xvi. 25 sq. 
 
 
 137, 386 
 
 Rom. xii. 17 
 
 352 
 
 Rom. xvi. 25 sqq. 
 
 
 293 
 
 Rom. xii. 18 
 
 96, 152 
 
 Rom. xvi. 27 
 
 
 283, 383 
 
 Rom. xii 1 9 
 
 352 
 
 
 
 
 Rom. xii 20 
 
 44, 161 
 
 1 Cor. i. 7 
 
 
 349 
 
 Rom. xii. 21 
 
 340 
 
 1 Cor. i. 11 
 1 Cor. i. 12 
 
 
 24, 95 
 21, 163 
 
 Rom. xiii 1 
 
 341*. 391, 403 
 
 1 Cor. i. 13 
 
 
 249 
 
 Rom. xiii. 3 
 
 226* 
 
 1 Cor. i. 17 
 
 
 261,356 
 
 Rom. xiii. 5 
 
 136 
 
 1 Cor. i. 19 
 
 
 64 
 
 Rom. xiii. 6 
 
 109 
 
 1 Cor. i. 20 
 
 
 398 
 
 Rom. xiii. 7 
 
 395 
 
 1 Cor. i. 21 
 
 
 134, 349 
 
 Bom. xiii. 8 
 
 199, 262, 293 
 
 1 Cor. i. 25 
 
 
 168 
 
456 
 
 N. T. INDEX. 
 
 1 Cor. i. 26 
 
 
 •137, 138 ' 
 
 1 Cor. vi. 15 
 
 
 208 
 
 1 Cor. i. 27 
 
 
 123 
 
 1 Cor. vi. 16 
 
 
 134 
 
 1 Cor. i. 28 
 
 
 100, 123 
 
 1 Cor. vi. 19 
 
 77, 113. J63, 
 
 286, 325 
 
 1 Cor. i. 29 
 
 121, 
 
 173, 214 
 
 1 Cor. vi. 20 
 
 
 164 
 
 1 Cor. i. 30 
 
 
 326* 
 
 
 
 
 1 Cor. i. 31 
 
 
 234, 386 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 1 
 1 Cor. vii. 2 
 
 
 287 
 117 
 
 1 Cor. ii. 1 
 
 
 206 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 3 
 
 
 391 
 
 1 Cor. ii. 3 
 
 
 340, 342, 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 5 
 
 
 219* 
 
 1 Cor. ii. 4 
 
 
 73*' 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 7 
 
 102, 
 
 119,363 
 
 1 Cor. ii. 9 
 
 
 135 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 9 
 
 
 .346 
 
 1 Cor. ii. 10 
 
 
 58 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 12 
 
 
 109 
 
 1 Cor. ii. 13 
 
 
 170 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 13 
 1 Cor. vii. 14 
 
 
 383 
 125 
 
 1 Cor. iii. 1 
 
 
 33, 392 
 
 1 Cor. vii 15 
 
 
 127, 329 
 
 1 Cor. iii. 2 
 
 149, 367 
 
 369, 401 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 16 
 
 
 255 
 
 1 Cor. iii. 4 
 
 365 ibis)* 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 17 
 
 133 
 
 359, 389 
 
 1 Cor. iii. 5 
 
 363 
 
 374, 389 
 
 I Cor. vii. 18 
 
 
 226 
 
 1 Cor. iii. 6 
 
 
 54 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 19 
 
 
 127, 392 
 
 1 Cor. iii. 7 
 
 
 367, 392 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 21 
 
 
 226, 392 
 
 1 Cor. iii. 8 
 
 
 98, 117 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 23 
 
 
 164 
 
 1 Cor. iii. 10 
 
 
 255 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 25 
 
 
 307 
 
 1 Cor. iii. 11 
 
 
 339 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 27 
 
 
 226 
 
 1 Cor. iii. 14 
 
 
 34 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 28 
 
 55* 
 
 178, 199 
 
 I'Cor. iii. 15 
 
 
 60 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 29 
 
 
 352 
 
 1 Cor. iii. 17 
 
 
 128, 281 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 31 
 
 
 181* 
 
 1 Cor. iii. 19 
 
 
 291* 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 32 
 
 • 
 
 152, 186 
 
 1 Cor. iii. 20 
 
 
 376 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 32 sq. 
 
 
 255 
 
 1 Cor. iii. 21 
 
 
 163, 244 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 34 
 1 Cor. vii. 35 
 
 
 55* 
 113, 169 
 
 1 Cor. It. 2 
 
 
 304 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 36 
 
 
 132 
 
 1 Cor. iv. 3 
 
 
 240, 342 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 37 
 
 263 
 
 270, 382 
 
 1 Cor. iv. 5 
 
 88* 
 
 244, 325 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 38 
 
 
 363 
 
 1 Cor. Iv. 6 
 
 21,31, 131, 
 
 235, 394* 
 
 1 Cor. vii. 39 
 
 55* 
 
 177, 260 
 
 1 Cor. iv. 7 
 
 
 42, 307 
 
 
 
 
 1 Cor. iv. 8 
 
 215* 
 
 398, 402 
 
 1 Cor. viii. 3 
 
 
 55* 
 
 1 Cor. iv. 9 
 
 
 101 
 
 1 Cor. viii. 6 
 
 
 283 
 
 1 Cor. iv. 12 
 
 
 117 
 
 1 Cor. viii. 7 
 
 
 186 
 
 1 Cor. iv. 14 
 
 119* 192, 198, 
 
 206, 351, 
 
 1 Cor. viii. 8 
 
 
 367 
 
 
 
 403 
 
 1 Cor. viii. 10 
 
 
 265, 295 
 
 1 Cor. iv. 15 
 
 
 364 
 
 1 Cor. viii. 11 
 
 
 45 
 
 1 Cor. iv. 16 
 
 
 273 
 
 1 Cor. viii. 13 
 
 
 37* 
 
 1 Cor. iv. 18 
 
 
 318 
 
 
 
 
 1 Cor. iv. 19 
 
 
 204 
 
 1 Cor. ix. 1 
 
 
 403 
 
 1 Cor. iv. 20 
 
 
 138 
 
 1 Cor.^ix. 1. sqq. 
 
 
 247 
 
 1 Cor. iv. 21 
 
 208 
 
 , 330, 342 
 
 1 Cor. ix. 2 
 
 
 346, 364 
 
 
 
 
 1 Cor. ix. 4 
 
 66 
 
 248, 260 
 
 1 Cor. V. 1 
 
 
 369 
 
 1 Cor. ix. 5 
 
 
 248, 260 
 
 1 Cor. V. 3 
 
 
 307 
 
 1 Cor. ix, 6 
 
 126, 248, 
 
 260, 268 
 
 1 Cor. V. 7 
 
 
 7 
 
 1 Cor. ix. 7 
 
 
 159 
 
 1 Cor. V. 8 
 
 
 243, 330 
 
 1 Cor. ix. 8 
 
 
 249 
 
 1 Cor. V. 9 
 
 
 403 
 
 1 Cor. ix. 9 
 
 
 164, 249 
 
 1 Cor. V. 10 
 
 100* 217, 352, 
 
 359, 390* 
 
 1 Cor. ix. 10 
 
 
 268 
 
 1 Cor. V. 12 
 
 
 138, 378 
 
 1 Cor. ix. U 
 1 Cor. ix. 12 
 
 37, 
 
 221* 247 
 117,392 
 
 1 Cor. vi. 1 
 
 
 336, 403 
 
 1 Cor. ix. 15 
 
 98, 217, 234, 
 
 240 {bis), 
 
 1 Cor. vi. 4 
 
 
 370, 389 
 
 
 
 371, 389 
 
 1 Cor. vi. 5 
 
 
 72, 332 
 
 1 Cor. ix. 17 
 
 
 190 
 
 1 Cor. vi. 6 
 
 
 177, 336 
 
 1 Cor. ix. 18 
 
 88 
 
 240, 265 
 
 1 Cor. vi. 7 
 
 
 113, 370 
 
 1 Cor. ix. 21 
 
 
 60, 169 
 
 1 Cor. vi. 11 
 
 
 398 
 
 1 Cor. ix. 24 
 
 
 357 
 
 1 Cor. vi. 12 
 
 
 403 
 
 1 Cor. ix. 25 
 
 
 392 
 
 1 Cor. vi. 13 
 
 
 138 
 
 1 Cor. ix. 26 
 
 
 351, 372 
 
N. T. INDEX., 457 
 
 I Cor. X. 1 
 1 Cor. X.' 1 sq. 
 1 Cur. X. 2 
 1 Cor. X. 3 
 1 Cor. X. 4 
 1 Cor. X. 6 
 1 Cor. X. 7 
 1 Cor. X. 9 
 1 Cor. X. U 
 1 Cor. X. 12 
 1 Cor. X. 13 
 1 Cor. X. 14 
 1 Cor. X. 16 
 1 Cor. X. 17 
 1 Cor. X. 18 
 1 Cor. X. 21 
 1 Cor. X. 22 
 1 Cor. X. 23 
 1 Cor. X. 24 
 1 Cor. X. 25 
 1 Cor. ^. 27 
 1 Cor. X. 29 
 1 Cor. js.. 33 
 
 1 Cor. xi. 1 
 1 Cor. xi. 3 
 1 Cor. xi. 4 
 1 Cor. xi. 5 
 1 Cor. xi. 6 
 1 Cor. xi. 13 
 1 Cor. xi. 14 
 1 Cor. xi. 16 
 1 Cor. xi. 18 
 1 Cor. xi. 21 
 1 Cor. xi. 22 
 1 Cor. xi. 23 
 1 Cor. xi. 24 
 1 Cor. xi. 25 
 I Cor. xi. 26 
 1 Cor. xi. 27 
 1 Cor. xi. 28 
 1 Cor. xi. 31 
 1 Cor. xi. 33 
 I Cor. xi. 34 
 
 1 Cor. xii. 2 
 1 Cor. xii. 4 sq 
 1 Cor. xii. 6 
 1 Cor. xii. 8 
 1 Cor. xii. 13 
 1 Cor. xii. 15 
 1 Cor. xii. 16 
 1 Cor. xii. 17 
 1 Cor. xii. 18 
 1 Cor. xii. 19 
 1 Cor. xii. 20 
 1 Cor. xii. 22 
 1 Cor. xii. 28 
 I Cor. xii. 31 
 
 1 Cor. xiii. 1 
 1 Cor. xiii. 2 
 1 Cor. xiii. 3 
 
 341 
 
 1 Cor. xiii. 7 
 
 175 
 
 398 
 
 1 Cor. xiii. 8 
 
 137 
 
 19,53 
 
 1 Cor. xiii. 10 
 
 95 
 
 91* 
 
 1 Cor. xiii. 11 
 
 398 
 
 124 
 
 1 Cor. xiii. 12 
 
 55* 
 
 264 
 
 1 Cor. xiii. 13 
 
 84 
 
 66, 261 
 
 
 
 142 
 
 1 Cor. xiv. 1 
 
 403 
 
 26 (bis)* 
 
 1 Cor. xiv. 5 
 
 221, 355 
 
 48, 243, 244 
 
 1 1 Cor. xiv. 6 
 
 342 
 
 268 
 
 : 1 Cor. xiv. 7 
 
 308* 
 
 146, 169, 233 
 
 ' 1 Cor. xiv. 10 
 
 224, 318 
 
 288 
 
 ' 1 Cor. xiv. 12 
 
 237 
 
 160 
 
 1 Cor. xiv. 17 
 
 365 
 
 92 
 
 1 Cor. xiv. 18 
 
 300 
 
 119 
 
 1 Cor. xiv. 19 
 
 360* 
 
 209* 
 
 1 Cor. xiv. 24 
 
 398 
 
 403 
 
 1 Cor. xiv. 25 
 
 357 
 
 392* 
 
 j 1 Cor. xiv. 27 
 
 30, 96, 392 
 
 40 
 
 ' 1 Cor. xiv. 33 
 
 162 
 
 388 
 
 1 1 Cor. xiv. 34 
 
 40, 400* 
 
 357 
 
 1 1 Cor. 3dv. 36 
 
 249 
 
 115* 
 
 j 1 Cor. xiv. 39 
 
 263 
 
 392 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 2 
 
 35, 221, 251, 355, 390 
 
 124*, 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 6 
 
 168, 319 
 
 146, 297 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 10 
 
 356 
 
 94, 127, 177 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 12 
 
 377 
 
 63, 346 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 13 sqq. 
 
 346 
 
 113,278 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 18 
 
 247, 371 
 
 109, 380* 389 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 19 
 
 84, 176 
 
 87, 395 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 21 
 
 138 
 
 203, 303, 365 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 23 
 
 95 
 
 102 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 24 
 
 46 
 
 53, 208, 248, 264 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 25, 
 
 231 
 
 47, 324 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 27 
 
 392* 
 
 157 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 29 
 
 218, 347 
 
 ■ 232 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 31 
 
 1.57, 371 
 
 231, 232 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 32' 
 
 205, 206, 347, 395* 
 
 99 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 33; 
 
 11 
 
 159 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 35 
 
 218 
 
 114 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 36 
 
 131, 140, 389 
 
 244, 264 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 37 
 
 131,224, 296,318 
 
 232 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 38 
 
 119,363 
 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 40 
 
 138* 
 
 130* 216, 383* 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 41 
 
 182 
 
 401 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 42 
 
 330 
 
 124* 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 42 sq. 
 
 402 
 
 102 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 43 
 
 330 
 
 188 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 44 
 
 330 
 
 245, 339, 354* 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 45 
 
 150 
 
 339 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 48 
 
 363 
 
 225 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 49 
 
 37 
 
 329 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 51 
 
 121* 
 
 225 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 52 
 
 37, 134 
 
 365, 396 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 56 
 
 125 
 
 388 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 57 
 
 23 
 
 102, 329, 365* 
 
 
 
 45, 96* 
 
 1 Cor. xvi. 2 
 
 228 
 
 
 1 Cor. xvi. 3 
 
 77 
 
 199 
 
 1 Cor. xvi. 4 
 
 269 
 
 28(6(s), 45, 127 
 
 1 Cor. xvi. 6 
 
 105«, 318* 
 
 28, 36, 60, 234 
 
 1 Cor. xvi. 7 
 
 340 
 
458 
 
 
 N. T. 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 
 
 1 Cor. xvi. 9 
 
 
 63, 137 
 
 2 Cor. iv. 16 
 
 7C 
 
 , 116, 378 
 
 1 Cor. xvi. U 
 
 
 31 
 
 2 Cor. iv. 18 
 
 
 316* 
 
 1 Cor. xvi. 12 
 
 
 204, 389 
 
 
 
 
 1 Cor. xvi, 13 
 
 
 178 
 
 2 Cor. V. 1 
 
 
 116, 155 
 
 1 Cor. xvi. 15 
 
 
 130, 376 
 
 2 Cor. V. 4 
 
 
 53 
 
 1 Cor. xvi. 17 
 
 
 157 
 
 2 Cor. V. 5 
 
 78* 109 
 
 , 328, 395 
 
 1 Cor. xvi. 19 
 
 
 831 
 
 2 Cor. V. 6 
 
 
 293* 
 
 1 Cor. xvi. 21 
 
 
 •100 
 
 2 Cor. V. 8 
 
 
 340 
 
 1 Cor. xvi. 22 
 
 
 49, 348 
 
 2 Cor. V. 12 
 2 Cor. V. 13 
 
 44, 
 
 293, 393* 
 391* 
 
 2 Cor. i. 3 
 
 99 
 
 , 100, 137 
 
 2 Cor V. 15 
 
 
 178, 371 
 
 2 Cor. i. 4 
 
 
 265, 287 
 
 2 Cor. V. 19 
 
 106 
 
 , 329, 358 
 
 2 Cor. i. 6 
 
 99, 117, 
 
 286, 391* 
 
 2 Cor. V. 20 
 
 
 318 
 
 2 Cor. i. 7 
 
 
 298 
 
 
 
 
 2 Cor. i. 8 
 
 
 269, .335 
 
 2 Cor vi. 2 
 
 
 134, 398 
 
 2 Cor. i. 8 sqq. 
 
 
 131 
 
 2 Cor. vi. 3 
 
 
 307 
 
 2 Cor. i. 9 
 
 
 114, 175 
 
 2 Cor. vi. 4 
 
 
 45, 307 
 
 2 Cor. i. 10 
 
 
 32, 176 
 
 2 Cor. vi. 9 
 
 206, 307 
 
 , 351, 382 
 
 2 Cor. i. 11 
 
 
 148, 327 
 
 2 Cor. vi. 10 
 
 
 307 
 
 2 Cor. i. 12 
 
 
 105, 340 
 
 2 Cor. vi. 11 
 
 
 63 
 
 2 Cor. i. 13 
 
 
 259, 374 
 
 2 Cor. vi. 13 
 
 
 190* 396 
 
 2 Cor. i. 15 
 
 
 166 
 
 2 Cor. vi. 14 
 
 
 160 
 
 2 Cor. i. 17 
 
 
 88 
 
 2 Cor. vi. 15 
 
 
 6 
 
 2 Cor. i. 19 
 
 
 20 
 
 2 Cor. vi. 18 
 
 
 150 
 
 2 Cor. i. 22 
 
 
 329 
 
 
 
 
 2 Cor. i. 24 
 
 
 178*, 372 
 
 2 Cor. vii. 2 
 2 Cor. vii. 4 
 
 
 398 
 164 
 
 2 Cor. ii. 1 
 
 178 
 
 263, 274 
 
 2 Cor. vii. 5 
 
 
 298 
 
 2 Cor. ii. 2 
 
 
 362 
 
 2 Cor. vti. 7 
 
 
 91, 117 
 
 2 Cor. ii. 3 
 
 110, 162 
 
 175,217 
 
 2 Cor. vii. 10 
 
 
 162 
 
 2 Cor. ii. 4 
 
 
 329, 389 
 
 2 Cor. vii. 1 1 
 
 109 
 
 , 261, 274 
 
 2 Cor. ii. 5 
 
 
 241 
 
 2 Cor. vii. 12 
 
 172, 
 
 266, 392* 
 
 2 Cor. ii. 6 
 
 
 127, 341* 
 
 2 Cor. vii. 13 
 
 
 326 
 
 2 Cor. ii. 7 
 
 
 274 
 
 2 Cor. vii. 14 
 
 
 34, 336* 
 
 2 Cor. ii. 8 
 
 
 329 
 
 2 Cor. vii. 15 
 
 
 164 
 
 2 Cor. ii. 11 
 
 
 168 
 
 
 
 
 2 Cor, ii, 12 
 
 
 63, 173 
 
 2 Cor. viii. 2 
 
 
 22, 335 
 
 2 Cor. ii. 12sq. 
 
 
 106 
 
 2 Cor. viii. 4 
 
 
 164 
 
 2 Cor. ii. 13 
 
 178 
 
 264, 275 
 
 2 Cor, viii. 5 
 
 
 392* 
 
 2 Cor. ii. 14 
 
 
 147 
 
 2 Cor. viii. 6 
 
 
 265 
 
 2 Cor. ii. 15 
 
 
 206 
 
 2 Cor. viii. 7 
 
 157 
 
 241, 329 
 
 2 Cor. ii. 17 
 
 311, 327 
 
 351,370 
 
 2 Cor. viii, 10 
 
 
 263 
 
 
 
 
 2 Cor. viii. 11 
 
 137 
 
 263, 268 
 
 2 Cor. iii. 1 
 
 45 
 
 114,247 
 
 2 Cor, viii. 12 
 
 
 228 
 
 2 Cor. iii. 2 
 
 
 124 
 
 2 Cor, viii. 13 
 
 
 117, 137 
 
 2 Cor. iii. 5 
 
 114 
 
 327, 372 
 
 2 Cor. viii, 14 
 
 117 
 
 , 137, 150 
 
 2 Cor. iii. 6 
 
 61, 
 
 155, 387* 
 
 2 Cor. viii, 15 
 
 
 395 
 
 2 Cor. iii. 7 
 
 
 387 
 
 2 Cor, viii, 16 
 
 
 329 
 
 2 Cor. iii. 8 
 
 
 387 
 
 2 Cor, viii. 19 
 
 
 393 
 
 2 Cor. iii. 10 
 
 
 10 
 
 2 Cor. viii. 19 sq. 
 
 
 292* 
 
 2 Cor. iii. 12 
 
 
 87 
 
 2 Cor. viii. 21 
 
 
 292,293* 
 
 2 Cor. iii. 13 
 
 
 45, 393 
 
 2 Cor. viii. 23 
 
 
 87*, 335 
 
 2 Cor. iii. 17 
 
 
 124* 
 
 2 Cor, viii, 24 
 
 
 328 
 
 2 Cor. iii. 18 
 
 190*, 193* 
 
 343* 396 
 
 2 Cor. ix. 2 
 
 
 23, 172 
 
 2 Cor. iv. 2 
 
 
 45,57 
 
 2 Cor, ix. 5 
 
 
 25 
 
 2 Cor. iv. 4 
 
 
 155, 264 
 
 2 Cor. ix, 6 
 
 
 394* 
 
 2 Cor. iv. 6 
 
 
 274, 395 
 
 2 Cor, ix. 7 
 
 
 342, 394* 
 
 2 Cor. iv. 7 
 
 
 162, 163 
 
 2 Cor. ix, 9 
 
 
 134 
 
 2 Cor. iv. 8 
 
 
 351 
 
 2 Cor, ix, 10 
 
 
 54, 298 
 
 2 Cor. iv. 9 
 
 
 45, 351 
 
 2 Cor, ix. 1 1 
 
 
 180* 298 
 
 2 Cor. iv. 12 
 
 
 365 
 
 2 Cor. ix. 12 
 
 
 180*, 298 
 
 2 Cor. iv. 15 
 
 
 138 
 
 2 Cor. ix. 13 
 
 92 
 
 , 160, 298 
 

 
 N. T. INDEX. 
 
 459 
 
 2 Cor. ix. 14 
 
 
 337 
 
 Gal. i. 7 
 Gal. i. 8 
 
 93, 99, 295 
 127, 220* 
 
 2 Cor. X. 2 
 
 164, 263* 
 
 274, 279 
 
 Gal. i. 9 
 
 220* 362 
 
 2 Cor. X. 4 
 
 
 179 
 
 Gal. i. 10 
 
 249 
 
 2 Cor. X. 7 
 
 137, 
 
 163, 175 
 
 Gal. i. 11 
 
 148 
 
 2 Cor. X. 8 
 
 
 286 
 
 Gal. i. 12 
 
 188, 366, 367 
 
 2 Cor X. 9 
 
 
 219* 
 
 Gal. i. 13 
 
 91, 205 
 
 2 Cor. X. 10 
 
 
 28, 136* 
 
 Gal. i. 14 
 
 69, 75, 335 
 
 2 Cor. X. 12 
 
 44 
 
 , 48 (his) 
 
 Gal. i. 15 
 
 134 
 
 2 Cor. X. 13 
 
 78 
 
 261, 286 
 
 Gal. i. 17 
 
 110 
 
 2 Cor. X. 14 
 
 
 307 
 
 Gal. i. 19 
 
 373 
 
 2 Cor. X. 15 
 
 
 54 
 
 Gal. i. 20 
 
 394* 
 
 2 Cor. X. 16 
 
 
 261 
 
 Gal. i. 23 
 
 130, 133* 
 
 2 Cor. X. 18 
 
 
 44 
 
 Gal. ii. 2 
 
 353* 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 1 
 
 
 35, 215* 
 
 Gal. ii. 4 
 
 234, 385* 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 2 
 
 
 193* 261 
 
 Gal. ii. 6 
 
 114, 385* 387 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 3 
 
 
 242, 322* 
 
 Gal. ii. 7 
 
 122, 190 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 4 
 
 35, 
 
 226* 295 
 
 Gal. ii. 9 
 
 241, 387, 394 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 5 
 
 
 350 
 
 Gal. ii. 10 
 
 109, 241, 280* 283, 389 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 6 
 
 
 137 
 
 Gal. ii. 11 
 
 188, 191 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 7 
 
 
 150, 249 
 
 Gal. ii. 12 
 
 266 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 8 
 
 
 117 
 
 Gal. ii. 13 
 
 244* 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 12 
 
 
 105, 304 
 
 Gal. ii. 14 
 
 7 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 16 
 
 360, 
 
 393 (bis) 
 
 Gal. ii. 16 
 
 121, 174, 205, 359, 392 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 20 
 
 
 398 
 
 Gal. ii. 17 
 
 247* 304 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 21 
 
 
 358 
 
 Gal. ii. la 
 
 44 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 22 
 
 
 75 
 
 Gal. ii. 19 
 
 132, 178 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 23 
 
 
 321 
 
 Gal. ii. 20 
 
 93, 149 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 23 sq. 
 
 
 96 
 
 Gal. ii. 21 
 
 247 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 24 
 
 29, 82, 3+1 
 
 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 25 
 
 32 
 
 146, 197 
 
 Gal. iii. 1 
 
 41, 140 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 26 
 
 
 398 
 
 Gal. iii. 2 
 
 324, 342 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 28 
 
 
 79* 180* 
 
 Gal. iii. 5 
 
 342, 392* 394 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 29 
 
 
 132 
 
 Gal. iii. 6 
 
 134 
 
 2 Cor. xi. 31 
 
 
 137 
 
 Gal. iii. 7 
 Gal. iii. 8 
 
 120 
 35 
 
 2 Cor. xii. 2 
 
 
 54,250 
 
 Gal. iii. 10 
 
 271, 348 
 
 2 Cor. xii. 3 
 
 
 250 
 
 Gal. iii. 11 
 
 188 
 
 2 Cor. xii. 4 
 
 
 54, 318 
 
 Gal. iii. 12 
 
 106* 
 
 2 Cor. xii. 6 
 
 
 166 
 
 Gal. iii. 14 
 
 333 
 
 2 Cor. xii. 7 
 
 186 
 
 229, 398 
 
 Gal. iii. 15 
 
 308* 
 
 2 Cor. xii. 11 
 
 127 
 
 ,217.347 
 
 Gal. iii. 16 
 
 57, 134, 281, 336 
 
 2 Cor. xii. 12 
 
 
 ' 33, 366 
 
 Gal. iii. 17 
 
 264 
 
 2 Cor. xii. 13 
 
 59 
 
 , 152, 335 
 
 Gal. iii. 18 
 
 394 
 
 2 Cor. xii. 15 
 
 
 363 
 
 Gal. iii. 19 
 
 182, 231 
 
 2 Cor. xii. 17 
 
 
 287, 381* 
 
 Gal. iii. 21 
 
 93, 224, 225, 226 
 
 2 Cor. xii. 19 
 
 t 
 
 103, 117 
 
 Gal. iii. 22 
 
 123 
 
 2 Cor. xii. 20 
 
 24, 187, 242 
 
 , 354, 402 
 
 Gal. iii. 23 
 
 259, .388 
 
 2 Cor. xu. 21 
 
 147,242 
 
 , 286, 315 
 
 Gal. iii. 25 
 Gal. iii. 28 
 
 341 
 
 72 
 
 2 Gor. xiii. 1 
 
 
 320 
 
 Gal. iii. 29 
 
 247 
 
 2 Cor. xiii. 2 
 
 
 100 
 
 
 
 2 Cor. xiii. 4 
 
 
 58 
 
 Gal. iv. 5 
 
 229 
 
 2 Cor. xiii. 5 , 
 
 219, 
 
 249, 377* 
 
 Gal. iv. 6 
 
 61 
 
 2 Cor. xiii. 6 
 
 
 259 
 
 Gal. iv. 7 
 
 349 
 
 2 Cor. xiii. 7 
 
 
 177, 304 
 
 Gal. iv. 8 
 
 351 
 
 2 Cor. xiii 9 
 
 
 117 
 
 Gal. iv. 9 
 
 55* 
 
 2 Cor. xiii. 1 1 
 
 
 123 
 
 Gal. iv. 11 
 Gal. iv. 12 
 
 242 {bis)*, 353, 377 
 152 
 
 Gal. i. 1 
 
 
 93, 366 
 
 Gal. iv. 15 
 
 46, 136, 226 
 
 Gal. i. 4 
 
 
 91* 336 
 
 Gal. iv. 17 
 
 235 
 
 Gal. i. 5 
 
 
 137 
 
 Gal. iv. 19 
 
 231, 283 
 
460 
 
 N. T. INDEX. 
 
 
 
 Gal. iv. 19 sq 
 
 386 
 
 Eph. ii. 4 
 
 
 148 
 
 Gal. iv. 21 
 
 141 
 
 Eph. ii. 5 
 
 
 310* 
 
 Gal. iv. 22 
 
 103 
 
 Eph. ii. 5 aq. 
 
 
 2(12 
 
 Gal. iv. 24 
 
 103* 120, 283, 325 
 
 Eph. ii. 10 
 
 
 286, 3;i7 
 
 Gal. iv. 25 
 
 21 
 
 Eph. ii. U 
 
 
 92 
 
 Gal. iv. 26 
 
 103* 115 
 
 Eph. ii. 1 1 sq. 
 
 
 383 
 
 Gal. iv. 27 
 
 25, 141, 146, 350 
 
 Eph. ii. 14 
 
 
 12,'i* 
 
 Gal. iv. 29 
 
 392 
 
 Eph. ii. 15 
 
 
 92* 400 
 
 Gal. iv. 30 
 
 134, 214 
 
 Eph. ii. 19 
 Eph. ii. 20 
 
 
 371 
 337 
 
 Gal. V. 1 
 
 178* 
 
 Eph. ii. 21 
 
 
 34 
 
 Gal. V. 2 
 
 152 
 
 
 
 
 Gal. V. 3 
 
 260 
 
 Eph. iii. 1 
 
 
 169* 
 
 Gal. V. 4 
 
 40 
 
 Eph. iii. 4 
 
 
 91 
 
 Gal. V. 5 
 
 89, 96 
 
 Eph. iii. 5 
 
 
 99, 186 
 
 Gal. V. 7 
 
 355 
 
 Eph. iii. 8 
 
 28 
 
 260, 262 
 
 Gal. V. 8 
 
 394 
 
 Eph. iii. 10 
 
 
 99 
 
 Gal. V. 10 
 
 175 {bis] 
 
 Eph. iii. 12 
 
 
 99 
 
 Gal. V. 11 
 
 247 
 
 Eph. iii. 13 
 
 91 
 
 115, 287 
 
 Gal. V. 12 
 
 53, 214 
 
 Eph. iii. 16 
 
 46, 233* 
 
 237, 378 
 
 Gal. V. 13 
 
 337, 394* 
 
 Eph. iii. 18 
 
 299* 
 
 331, 389 
 
 Gal. V. 14 
 
 96, 114 {bis), 120* 
 
 Eph. iii. 20 
 
 
 168, 287 
 
 Gal. V. 16 
 
 184, 2i3 
 
 
 J 
 
 
 Gal. V. 17 
 
 239, 335* 
 
 Eph. iv. 1 
 
 92 
 
 , 169, 287 
 
 Gal. V. 19 sq. 
 
 77 
 
 Eph. iv. 2 
 
 
 27, 299 
 
 Gal. V. 20 
 
 24, 402 
 
 Eph. iv. 4 
 
 
 329 
 
 Gal. V. 24 
 
 95 
 
 Eph. iv. 8 
 
 
 122, 134 
 
 Gal. V. 25 
 
 184 
 
 Eph. iv. 9 
 
 
 28, 96 
 
 Gal. V. 26 
 
 16.5* 
 
 Eph. iv. 10 
 Eph. iv. 1 1 
 
 
 363* 
 102 
 
 Gal. vi. 1 
 
 27, 243* 377* 
 
 Eph. iv. 13 
 
 
 1.5.5, 231 
 
 Gal. vi. 2 
 
 357 
 
 Eph, iv. 15 
 
 
 125, 129 
 
 Gal. vi. 3 
 
 114, 127 
 
 Eph. iv. 16 
 
 
 327 
 
 Gal. vi. 4 
 
 116 
 
 Eph. iv. 17 
 
 
 130, 350 
 
 Gal. vi. 6 
 
 160, 190 
 
 Eph. iv. 18 
 
 
 130, 310 
 
 Gal. vi. 7 
 
 37 
 
 Eph. iv. 21 
 
 
 166* 
 
 Gal. vi. 8 
 
 116 
 
 Eph. iv. 22 
 
 111, 
 
 274 {bis}* 
 
 Gal. vi. 9 
 
 118,300 
 
 Eph. iv. 26 
 
 
 56, 290* 
 
 Gal. vi. 10 
 
 210* 371 
 
 Eph. iv. 27 
 
 
 367 
 
 Gal. vi. 12 
 
 186* 235 
 
 Eph. iv. 23 
 
 
 297 
 
 Gal. vi. 15 
 
 114,392 
 
 Eph. iv. 29 
 
 46, 121 
 
 241, 392 
 
 Gal. vi. 16 
 
 184 
 
 
 
 
 Gal. vi. 17 
 
 171 
 
 Eph. V. 4 
 
 
 217, 350* 
 
 
 
 Eph. V. 5 
 
 51* 121, 127, 
 
 129* 314 
 
 Eph. i. 1 
 
 174 
 
 Eph. v. 11 
 
 
 142 
 
 Eph. i. 3 
 
 99, 137 
 
 Eph. V. 12 
 
 
 69, 106* 
 
 Eph. i. 4 
 
 112, 173 
 
 Eph. V. 14 
 
 66, 68, 134 
 
 141, 227 
 
 Eph. i. 6 
 
 155, 287 
 
 Eph. V. 15 
 
 « 
 
 255 
 
 Eph. i. 7 
 
 22, 400 
 
 Eph. V. 17 
 
 
 49 
 
 Eph. i. 8 
 
 286 
 
 Eph. V. 22 
 
 117 
 
 {bis), 392 
 
 Eph. i. 12 
 
 265, 295 
 
 Eph. V. 23 
 
 
 125 
 
 Eph. 1. 13 
 
 400 
 
 Eph. V. 24 
 
 
 ■392 
 
 Eph. i. 14 
 
 281, 282 
 
 . Eph. V. 27 
 
 
 241, 352 
 
 Eph. i. 15 
 
 91, 1.56 
 
 -Eph. V. 28 
 
 
 116,117 
 
 Eph. i. 16 
 
 336 
 
 Eph. V. 29 
 
 
 198, 202* 
 
 Eph. i. 17 
 
 46 {bis), 233* 235 
 
 Eph. V. 33 
 
 SO 
 
 , 159, 241 
 
 Eph. i. 18 
 
 94, 128,265,317* 
 
 
 
 
 Eph. i. 19 
 
 155, 295 
 
 Eph. vi. 2 
 
 
 100, 128 
 
 Eph. i. 20 
 
 382 
 
 Eph. vi. 5 
 
 
 92 
 
 E|ih. i. 21 
 
 341 
 
 Eph. vi. 7 
 
 
 308 
 
 Eph. i. 23 
 
 115, 125, 129, 189* 
 
 Eph. vi. 8 
 Eph. vi. U 
 
 
 37 
 266 
 
 Eph. ii. 3 
 
 50, 101, 387 
 
 Eph. vi. 12 
 
 
 398 
 

 
 N. T. INDEX. 
 
 461 
 
 Eph. vi. 17 
 
 
 128, 281 
 
 PhU. iv. 3 
 
 17, 273, 342 
 
 Eph. vi. 19 
 
 
 237 
 
 Phil. iv. 5 
 
 187 
 
 Eph. vi. 21 
 
 
 91 
 
 PhU. iv. 7 
 
 169 
 
 Eph. vi. 22 
 
 
 109 
 
 PhU. iv. 8 
 
 398 
 
 Eph. vi. 23 
 
 
 96 1 Phil. iv. 10 
 
 59, 185, 263 
 
 
 
 
 Phil. iv. 11 
 
 372* 
 
 Phil. i. 5 ' 
 
 
 157, 160 
 
 Phil. iv. 14 
 
 300 
 
 Phil. i. 6 
 
 
 109 
 
 Phil. iv. 15 
 
 160 
 
 Phil. i. 7 
 
 
 342* 
 
 PhU. iv. 16 
 
 329 
 
 PhU. i. 9 
 
 
 169, 237 
 
 PhU. iv. 17 
 
 372 
 
 Phil. i. 10 
 
 
 265 
 
 PhU. iv. 18 
 
 400 
 
 Phil. i. 11 
 
 
 93, 189 
 
 PhU. iv. 20 
 
 99 
 
 Phil. i. 13 
 
 
 23 
 
 Phil. iv. 22 
 
 378 
 
 Phil. i. 14 
 
 
 175 
 
 
 
 Phil. i. 18 
 
 
 185 
 
 Col- i. 2 
 
 174 
 
 Phil. i. 19 
 
 99, 
 
 100* 117 
 
 Col. i. 4 
 
 91 
 
 Phil. i. 20 
 
 
 99, 362 
 
 Col. i. 6 
 
 82, 333, 382 
 
 Phil. i. 21 
 
 
 262 
 
 Col. i. 7 
 
 324 
 
 Phil. i. 22 
 
 255, 263* 
 
 , 306, 362 
 
 Col. i. 8 
 
 91,117 
 
 Phil. i. 23 
 
 83 
 
 , 255, 268 
 
 Col. i. 9 
 
 82, 149, 189 
 
 Phil. i. 25 
 
 
 117 
 
 Col. i. 10 
 
 12,54 
 
 Phil. i. 26 
 
 
 91 
 
 Col. i. 13 
 
 32, 155, 162* 
 
 Phil. i. 28 
 
 
 128 
 
 Col. i. 16 
 
 196 
 
 Phil. i. 29 
 
 
 174, 262 
 
 Col. i. 19 
 
 34, 134* 
 
 Phil. i. 30 
 
 
 299* 
 
 Col. i. 21 
 Col. i. 22 
 
 198, 3!0 
 173, 261 
 
 Phil. ii. 1 
 
 
 81* 
 
 Col. i. 24 
 
 128, 185 
 
 Phil. ii. 2 
 
 
 237 
 
 Col. i. 26 
 
 189, 382 
 
 Phil. ii. 2 sqq. 
 
 
 3.52 
 
 Col. i. 27 
 
 128,281,282 
 
 Phil. ii. 3 
 
 
 169 
 
 Col. i. 28 
 
 149* 398 
 
 Phil. ii. 6 
 
 
 131* 263 
 
 Col. i. 29 
 
 UO 
 
 Phil. ii. 9 
 
 
 93* 335 
 
 
 
 Phil. ii. 11 
 
 
 211,234 
 
 Col. ii. 2 
 
 155, 298 
 
 Phil. ii. 12 
 
 
 370 
 
 Col. ii. 3 
 
 98 
 
 Phil. ii. 13 
 
 
 263 
 
 Col. u. 8 
 
 93, 100, 243, 295 
 
 Phil. ii. 15 
 
 123 
 
 , 282, 319 
 
 Col. ii. 10 
 
 129* 
 
 Phil. ii. 17 
 
 
 337 
 
 Col. u. 11 
 
 155 
 
 Phil. ii. 19 
 
 
 176 
 
 Col. ii. 13 
 
 101, 142, 143 
 
 Phil. ii. 20 
 
 
 186 
 
 Col. u. 14 
 
 92* 
 
 Phil. ii. 23 
 
 7 
 
 , 110, 232 
 
 Col. u. 15 
 
 106, 147, 194 
 
 Phil. ii. 24 
 
 
 175 
 
 Col. ii. 16 
 
 159 
 
 Phil. ii. 27 
 
 
 338 
 
 Col. U. 17 
 
 128, 129* 
 
 Phil. ii. 28 
 
 69 
 
 , 198, 300 
 
 Col. U. 18 
 
 69, 349, 376* 
 
 PhU. ii. 30 
 
 
 117, 155 
 
 Col. ii. 19 
 Col. ii. 20 
 
 54, 282* 351 
 307, 322* 
 
 Phil. iii. 2 
 
 
 398 
 
 Col. ii. 21 
 
 146, 366 
 
 Phil. iii. 3 
 
 99, 124, 
 
 175* 351 
 
 Col. u. 22 
 
 101, 150 
 
 Phil. iii. 4 
 
 
 17.5* 392 
 
 Col. ii. 23 
 
 366 
 
 Phil. iii. 6 
 
 
 23, 93 
 
 
 
 PhU. iii. 7 
 
 
 59* 
 
 Col. iii. 5 
 
 281 
 
 Phil. iii. 8 
 
 
 370 
 
 Col. iii. 11 
 
 72 
 
 Phil. iu. 9 
 
 87,93 
 
 , 301, 352 
 
 Col. iii. 12 
 
 27 
 
 PhU. iii. 10 
 
 
 100* 271 
 
 Col. iii. 14 
 
 129 
 
 PhU. iii. 11 
 
 
 256 
 
 Col. ui. 16 
 
 149* 298* 
 
 Phil. iii. 12 
 
 221* 
 
 , 256, 372 
 
 Col. iii. 17 
 
 99, 341 
 
 PhU. iii. 14 
 
 
 91, 394 
 
 Col. iii. 18 
 
 217 
 
 PhU. iii. 16 
 
 
 184, 272* 
 
 Col. ui. 19 
 
 140 
 
 PhU. iii. 17 
 
 
 9 
 
 Col. iii. 22 
 
 92 
 
 PhU. iii. 18 
 
 
 77, 284 
 
 Col. iii. 23 
 
 228, 308 
 
 Phil. iu. 19 
 
 
 79*, 124* 
 
 Col. iu. 24 
 
 324 
 
 Phil. iii. 20 
 
 
 281* 
 
 Col. iii. 25 
 
 37, 363 
 
 PhU. iii. 21 
 
 
 37, 2f8 
 
 
 
 Col. iv. 1 
 
 IOC 
 
462 
 
 
 N. T 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 
 
 Col. iv. 6 
 
 24, 137, 261 
 
 ' 2 Thess. i. 1 
 
 
 91 
 
 Col. iv. 8 
 
 
 109 
 
 2 Thess. i. 4 
 
 114 161*, 286 
 
 , 287, 335 
 
 Col. iv. 9 
 
 
 37 
 
 2 Thess. i. 5 
 
 
 153*, 265 
 
 Col. iv. 13 
 
 
 74* 
 
 2 Thess. i. 6 
 
 
 136, 188 
 
 Col. iv. 16 
 
 
 378* 389 
 
 2 Thess. i. 9 
 
 
 326 
 
 Col. iv. 17 
 
 
 237 
 
 2 Thess. i. 10 
 2 Thess. i. 12 
 
 59 
 
 , 175,190 
 100 
 
 1 Thess. i. 1 
 
 
 91 
 
 
 
 
 1 Thess. i. 3 
 
 154 
 
 155 (bis)* 
 
 2 Thess. ii. 2 
 
 265, 322* 
 
 358*, 367 
 
 1 Thess. i. 5 
 
 
 342 
 
 2 Thess. ii. 3 
 
 
 386 
 
 ■ 1 Thess i. 8 
 
 
 329, 342 
 
 2 Thess. ii. 4 
 
 45 
 
 , 332, 386 
 
 1 Thess. i. 9 
 
 
 106 
 
 2 Thess. ii. 6 
 
 123, 
 
 265, 388* 
 
 1 Thess, i. 10 
 
 294. 297, 327 
 
 2 Thess. ii. 7 
 
 123 
 
 , 230, 389 
 
 
 
 
 2 Thess. ii. 12 
 
 
 99, 174 
 
 1 Thess. ii. 3 
 
 
 366, 368* i 2 Thess. ii. 13 
 
 
 40 
 
 1 Thess. ii. 4 
 
 
 307 
 
 I 2 Thess. ii. 15 
 
 
 188, 371 
 
 1 Thess. ii. 5 
 
 
 55 
 
 1 2 Thess ii. 16 
 
 
 26 
 
 1 Thess. ii. 6 
 
 325, 330, 342 
 
 2 Thess. ii. 17 
 
 
 214 
 
 1 Thess. ii. 7 
 
 
 232 
 
 
 
 
 1 Thess. ii. 7 sq. 
 
 
 227* 
 
 2 Thess. iii. 2 
 
 
 99 
 
 1 Thess. ii. 8 
 
 
 64* 
 
 2 Thess. iii. 3 
 
 
 36, 192 
 
 1 Thess. ii. 12 
 
 
 99, 265 
 
 2 Thess. iii. 4 
 
 
 175 (bis) 
 
 1 Thess. ii. 13 
 
 155, 
 
 193, 387* 
 
 2 Thess. iii. 6 
 
 
 43 
 
 1 Thess. ii. 14 
 
 117, 326, Se.-) 
 
 2 Thess. iii. 9 
 
 
 265, 372 
 
 1 Thess. il. 16 
 
 
 265 
 
 2 Thess. iii. 10 
 
 237, 245 
 
 246, 346 
 
 1 Thess. ii. 18 
 
 
 362 
 
 2 Thess. iii. 1 1 
 
 
 303 
 
 1 Thess. ii. 19 
 
 
 116, 360* 
 
 2 Thess. iii. 12 
 2 Thess. iii. 13 
 
 
 237 
 300 
 
 1 Thess. iii. 3 
 
 
 263* 264 
 
 2 Thess. iii. 14 
 
 88, 
 
 92* 348 
 
 1 Thess. iii. 5 
 
 
 353* 368 
 
 
 
 
 I Thess. iii. 7 
 
 
 99, 117 
 
 1 Tim. i. 3 sq. 
 
 
 386 
 
 1 Thess. iii. 8 
 
 
 48 
 
 1 Tim. i. 4 
 
 
 93 
 
 1 Thess. iii. 10 
 
 
 76, 265 
 
 1 Tim. i. 7 
 
 
 251 
 
 1 Thess. iii. 11 
 
 
 42, 100 
 
 1 Tim. i. 16 
 
 
 120* 174 
 
 1 Thess. iii. 12 
 
 
 42 
 
 1 Tim. 1. 20 
 
 
 159 
 
 1 Thess. iv. 1 
 
 
 97, 169 
 
 1 Tim. ii. 2 
 
 
 28 
 
 1 Thess. iv. 2 
 
 
 46 
 
 1 Tim. ii. 7 
 
 
 13,96 
 
 1 Thess. iv. 3 
 
 120, 
 
 262* 400 
 
 1 Tim. ii. 8 
 
 
 26* 
 
 1 Thess. iv. 6 
 
 
 67, 262 
 
 1 Tim. ii. 9 
 
 
 342 
 
 1 Thess. iv. 8 
 
 
 356 
 
 1 Tim. ii. 15 
 
 
 125* 
 
 1 Thess. iv. 9 
 
 
 259* 265 
 
 
 
 
 1 Thess. iv. 10 
 
 
 169 
 
 1 Tim. iii. 2sq. 
 
 
 402 
 
 I Thess. iv. 11 
 
 
 118 
 
 1 Tim. iii. 4 
 
 
 117 
 
 1 Thess. iv. 14 
 
 
 357 
 
 1 Tim. iii. 5 
 
 62, 117 
 
 346, 347 
 
 1 Thess. iv. IS 
 
 
 214 (bis) 
 
 1 Tim. iii. 7 
 
 
 325 
 
 1 Thess. iv. 15 sqq. 
 
 
 122 
 
 ,1 Tim. iii. 13 
 
 
 93 
 
 1 Thess. iv. 16 
 
 
 92 
 
 1 Tim. iii. 15 
 
 
 281 
 
 1 Thess. iv. 17 
 
 
 54, 357 
 
 1 Tim. iii. 16 
 
 175, 190, 
 
 282* 402 
 
 1 Thess. V. 1 
 
 259 
 
 , 2 to (bis) 
 
 1 Tim. iv. 2 
 
 
 190 
 
 ■1 Thess. V. 3 
 
 
 212 
 
 1 Tim. iv. 3 
 
 
 99, 401* 
 
 •1 Thess. V. 4 
 
 
 239* 
 
 1 Tim. iv. 6 
 
 
 100, 287 
 
 1 Thess. V. 5 
 
 
 162 {bis) 
 
 1 Tim. iv. 7 
 
 
 99 
 
 I Thess. V. 6 
 
 
 371 
 
 1 Tim. iv. 8 
 
 
 93 
 
 1 Thess. V. 7 
 
 
 62* 
 
 1 Tim. iv. 10 
 
 
 176 
 
 I Thess. V. 8 
 
 
 89, 162 
 
 I Tim. iv. 12 
 
 
 165* 
 
 I Thess. V. 10 
 
 
 221* 224 
 
 1 Tim. iv. 13 
 
 
 231 
 
 1 Thess. V. 11 
 
 
 31* 
 
 1 Tim. iv. 15 
 
 
 50 
 
 1 Thess. V. 14 
 
 
 403 
 
 1 Tim. iv. 16 
 
 
 144 
 
 I Thess. V. 15 
 
 
 46, 243 
 
 
 
 
 1 Thess. V. 23 
 
 
 129, 214 
 
 1 Tim. V. 4 
 
 
 SOS 
 
 1 Thess. V. 27 
 
 
 147, 276 
 
 1 Tim. V. 5 
 
 
 175 
 
N. T. INDEX. 
 
 463 
 
 1 Tim. V. 8 
 
 118, 348 
 
 Titus ii. 13 
 
 97, 100 
 
 I Tim. V. 9 
 
 55* 128 
 
 Titus iii. 5 
 
 116, 285, 331 
 
 1 Tim. V. 10 
 
 119, 398 
 
 Titus iii. 6 
 
 286 
 
 I Tim. V. 11 
 
 222 
 
 Titus iii. 8 
 
 173 
 
 1 Tim. V. 13 
 
 25, 301, 303* 393 
 
 Titus iii. 9 
 
 24,47 
 
 1 Tim. V. 18 
 
 134 
 
 
 
 1 Tim. V. 19 
 
 221, 336, 342, 355 
 
 Philem. 2 
 
 8 
 
 1 Tim. V. 21 
 
 237 
 
 Philem. 4 
 
 336 
 
 1 Tim. V. 25 
 
 126 
 
 Philem. 10 
 
 78, 282, 284 
 
 
 
 Philem. 11 
 
 198 
 
 1 Tim. Ti. 2 
 
 142 
 
 Philem. 13 
 
 33, 217* 
 
 1 Tim. Ti. 3 
 
 345, 348 
 
 Philem. 17 
 
 161 
 
 1 Tim. vi. 4 
 
 24, 126, 402 
 
 Philem. 18 
 
 58 
 
 1 Tim. vi. 5 
 
 189 (bis) 
 
 Philem. 19 
 
 241 
 
 1 Tim. vi. 7 
 
 358 
 
 Philem. 21 
 
 175 
 
 1 Tim. vi. 13 
 
 336 
 
 Philem. 22 
 
 259 
 
 1 Tim. vi. 15 
 
 100 
 
 Philem. 23 
 
 126 
 
 1 Tim. vi. 17 
 
 176 
 
 
 
 1 Tim. vi. 20 
 
 140 
 
 Heb. i. 1 
 
 94 
 
 
 
 Heb. i. 2 
 
 24* 
 
 2 Tim. i. 3 
 
 322* 
 
 Heb. i. 3 
 
 162 
 
 2 Tito. i. 4 
 
 297 
 
 Heb. i. 4 
 
 339 
 
 2 Tim. i. 5 
 
 392 
 
 Heb. i. 5 
 
 150 
 
 2 Tim. i. 8 
 
 366 
 
 Heb. i. 5 sqq. 
 
 134 
 
 2 Tim. i. 13 
 
 93 
 
 Heb. i. 7 
 
 29i 
 
 2 Tim. i. 14 
 
 93 
 
 Heb. i. 8 
 
 140 
 
 2 Tim. i. 15 
 
 192 
 
 Heb. i. 9 
 
 140, 149, 203 
 
 2 Tim. i. 16 
 
 34,46 
 
 
 
 2 Tim. i. 18 
 
 27,46 
 
 Heb. ii. 1 
 
 67,69 
 
 
 
 Heb. ii. 4 
 
 116 
 
 2 Tim. n. 6 
 
 390* 
 
 Heb. ii. 7 
 
 339 
 
 2 Tim. li. 10 
 
 93 
 
 Heb. ii. 8 
 
 264, 301 
 
 2 Tim. ii. 14 
 
 350, 352* 
 
 Heb. ii. 9 
 
 339 
 
 2 Tim. ii. 16 
 
 47 
 
 Heb. ii. 10 
 
 278, 306* 
 
 2 Tim. ii. 18 
 
 115 
 
 Heb. ii. 11 
 
 137 
 
 2 Tim. ii. 19 
 
 163 
 
 Heb. ii. 13 
 
 175 
 
 2 Tim. ii. 21 
 
 41 
 
 Heb. ii. 14 
 
 160 
 
 2 Tim. ii. 25 
 
 46 {bis), 256* 
 
 Heb. ii. 15 
 
 261 
 
 
 
 Heb. ii. 17 
 
 152, 265 
 
 2 Tim. iii. 11 
 
 32 
 
 Heb. ii. 18 
 
 331 
 
 2 Tim. iii. 12 
 
 364 
 
 
 
 2 Tim. iii. 14 
 
 324 
 
 Hob. iii. 1 
 
 25,99 
 
 
 
 Heb. iii. 3 
 
 19, 339 
 
 2 Tim. iv. 2 
 
 47 
 
 Heb. iii. 5 
 
 191, 296 
 
 2 Tim. iv. 8 
 
 123, 393 
 
 Heb. iii. 6 
 
 129 
 
 2 Tim. iv. 14 
 
 46 
 
 Heb. iii. 7 
 
 167 
 
 2 Tim. iv. 15 
 
 192 
 
 Heb. iii. 10 
 
 57 
 
 2 Tim. iv. 17 
 
 32 
 
 Heb. iii. 11 
 
 359 
 
 
 
 Heb. iii. 12 
 
 170*, 243 
 
 Titus i. 2 
 
 383 
 
 Heb. iii. 13 
 
 120, 231 
 
 Titus i. 3 
 
 190, 383 
 
 Heb. iii. 15 
 
 167 
 
 Titus i. 6 
 
 402 
 
 Heb. iii. 15 sq. 
 
 386 
 
 Titus i. 10 
 
 366 
 
 Heb. iii. 17 
 
 54 
 
 Titus i.n 
 
 349 
 
 Heb. iii. 18 
 
 359 
 
 Titus i. 12 
 
 25, 118 
 
 
 
 Titus i. 13 
 
 182 
 
 Heb. iv. I 
 
 242, 259 
 
 Titus 1. 15 
 
 41* 99, 100 
 
 Heb. iv. 2 
 
 60, 148, 179*, 187 {bis) 
 
 
 
 Heb. iv. 3 
 
 55, 134, 295, 308, 359 
 
 Titus ii. I 
 
 278 
 
 Heb. iv. 4 
 
 81 
 
 Titus ii. 2 
 
 182, 271 
 
 Heb. iv. 5 
 
 359 
 
 Titus ii. 4 
 
 235, 402 
 
 Heb. iv. 6 
 
 148 
 
 Titiis ii. 7 
 
 194 
 
 Heb. iv. 8 
 
 106, 224, 226 
 
 Titus ii. 9 
 
 119 
 
 Heb. iv. 9 
 
 371 
 
464 
 
 
 N. T. INDEX. 
 
 
 
 Heb. ir. 10 
 
 
 117 
 
 Heb. ix. 3 
 
 
 24* 93 
 
 Heb. iv. 11 
 
 
 329, 389 
 
 Heb. ix. 4 
 
 
 26,55 
 
 Heb. iv. 12 
 
 
 335 
 
 Heb. ix. 5 
 
 
 6,21 
 
 Heb. iy. 13 
 
 
 172 
 
 Heb. ix. 6 
 
 
 50 
 
 Heb. ir. 14 
 
 
 161 
 
 Heb. ix. 9 
 
 
 129 
 
 
 
 
 Heb. ix. 12 
 
 26,40 
 
 , 118, 366 
 
 Heb. T. 2 
 
 
 190 
 
 Heb. ix. 14 
 
 
 37 
 
 Heb. T. 3 
 
 
 336 
 
 Heb. ix. 16 
 
 
 136 
 
 Heb. T. 5 
 
 
 392 
 
 Heb. ix. 17 
 
 
 349, 353* 
 
 Heb. T. 7 
 
 
 322* 
 
 Heb. ix. 19 
 
 32 
 
 , 314, 315 
 
 Heb. T. 8 
 
 
 287, 308 
 
 Heb. ix. 20 
 
 
 286 
 
 Heb. V. 11 
 
 
 259 
 
 Heb. ix. 21 
 
 
 364 
 
 Heb. V. 12 
 
 149, 155, 260* 268* 
 
 Heb. ix. 23 
 
 77 
 
 , 136, 339 
 
 Heb. T. 14 
 
 
 94, 163 
 
 Heb. ix. 24 
 Heb. ix. 25 
 
 
 261 
 11, 330 
 
 Heb. Ti. 1 
 
 
 155* 322 
 
 Heb. ix. 26 
 
 216, 217, 
 
 359* 396 
 
 Heb. vi. 2 
 
 
 361 
 
 Heb. ix. 28 
 
 
 264 
 
 Heb. Ti. 3 
 
 
 210 
 
 
 
 
 Heb. vi. 4 
 
 
 136 
 
 Heb. X. 2 
 
 29, 216* 359* 
 
 Heb. fi. 5 
 
 
 167 
 
 Heb. X. 4 
 
 
 136 
 
 Heb. Ti. 7 
 
 
 324 
 
 Hob. X. 5 
 
 
 203 
 
 Heb. Ti. 8 
 
 
 138 
 
 Heb. X. 6 
 
 185 
 
 203, 393 
 
 Heb. vi. 9 
 
 150 
 
 152, 161 
 
 Heb. X. 7 
 
 
 140, 270 
 
 Heb. vi. 10 
 
 
 259, 286 
 
 Heb. X. 8 
 
 70 
 
 185, 393 
 
 Heb. vi. 13 
 
 
 147 
 
 Heb. js.. 12 
 
 
 198 
 
 Heb. vi. 14 
 
 
 313, 359* 
 
 Heb. X. 13 
 
 
 230 
 
 Heb. vi. 15 
 
 147, 
 
 366 (bis) 
 
 Heb. X. 15 
 
 
 265 
 
 Heb. Ti. 17 
 
 
 70, 331 
 
 Heb. X. 16 
 
 
 291* 382 
 
 Heb. Ti. 18 
 
 136 
 
 161, 295 
 
 Heb. X. 17 
 
 
 212 (bis) 
 
 Heb. vi. 19 
 
 13 (bis), 28 
 
 Heb. X. 18 
 
 
 138 
 
 
 
 
 Heb. X. 22 
 
 33, 
 
 189, 322* 
 
 Heb. vii. 1 
 
 
 292 
 
 Heb. X. 23 
 
 
 14 
 
 Heb. vii. 1 sqq. 
 
 
 293* 
 
 Heb. X. 26 
 
 
 265 
 
 Heb. Tii. 2 
 
 
 129 
 
 Heb. X. 28 
 
 
 342 
 
 Heb. vii. 5 
 
 
 44, 308 
 
 Heb. X. 34 
 
 
 274 
 
 Heb. vii. 6 
 
 
 77 
 
 Heb. X. 37 
 
 
 37, 373* 
 
 Heb. vii. 7 
 
 
 122, 340 
 
 Heb. X. 38 
 
 
 134* 393 
 
 Heb. vii. 8 
 
 
 206 
 
 Heb. X. 39 
 
 
 163 
 
 Heb. Tii. 9 
 
 
 261 
 
 
 
 
 Heb. vii. 11 
 
 
 337, 370 
 
 Heb. xi. 1 
 
 
 351 
 
 Heb. vii. 13 
 
 
 105 
 
 Heb. xi. 3 
 
 
 265 
 
 Heb. vii. 14 
 
 
 246 
 
 Heb. xi. 4 
 
 197 
 
 ,278,339 
 
 Heb. Tii. 15 
 
 
 70, 246 
 
 Heb. xi. 5 
 
 34,35 
 
 , 197, 271 
 
 Heb. Tii. 18 
 
 
 116 
 
 Heb. xi. 6 
 
 
 136 
 
 Heb. Tii. 21 
 
 
 62 
 
 Heb. xi. 7 
 
 
 197 
 
 Heb. Tii. 24 
 
 
 94, 275 
 
 Heb. xi. 8 
 
 
 151 
 
 Heb. vii. 26 
 
 
 278 
 
 Heb. xi. 9 
 Heb. xi. 11 
 
 
 332 
 197 
 
 Heb. Tiii. 1 
 
 154* 
 
 , 198, 381 
 
 Heb. xi. 12 
 
 
 133 
 
 Heb. Tiii. 3 
 
 
 251, 264 
 
 Heb. xi. 15 
 
 
 225*, 226 
 
 Heb. Tiii. 4 
 
 
 11 
 
 Heb. xi. 16 
 
 
 396 
 
 Heb. Tiii. 5 
 
 134, 
 
 188, 243* 
 
 Heb. xi. 17 
 
 14, 
 
 197* 205 
 
 Heb. Tiii. 6 
 
 67* 337 
 
 363 (bis) 
 
 Heb. xi. 19 
 
 
 136, 142 
 
 Heb. Tiii. 7 
 
 
 32 
 
 Heb. xi. 20 
 
 
 34 
 
 Heb. viii. 8 
 
 106 
 
 , 177, 361 
 
 Heb. xi. 21 
 
 
 34 
 
 Heb. Tiii. 9 
 
 
 316* 
 
 Heb. xi. 2e 
 
 
 13 
 
 Heb. viii. 10 
 
 150, 
 
 291* 382 
 
 Heb. xi. 25 
 
 
 40 
 
 Heb. viii. 11 
 
 
 214 
 
 Heb. xi. 26 
 
 
 171* 
 
 Heb. nii. 12 
 
 
 212 
 
 Heb. xi. 27 
 
 
 307 
 
 Heb. riii. 13 
 
 
 264 
 
 Heb. xi. 28 
 Heb. xi. 32 
 
 
 106, 197 
 15 
 
 Heb. ix. 1 
 
 
 370 
 
 Heb. xi. 34 
 
 146 
 
 , 320, 324 
 
 Heb. ix. 2 
 
 
 24* 93 
 
 Heb. xi. 35 
 
 
 351 
 

 N. T. INDEX. 
 
 
 465 
 
 Heb. xi. 40 
 
 194 
 
 Jame'! ii. 20 
 James ii. 23 
 
 
 25, 140 
 134 
 
 Heb. xii. 2 
 
 60, 112 
 
 
 
 
 Heb. xii. 3 
 
 341 
 
 James iii. 2 
 
 
 346 
 
 Heb. xii. 4 
 
 10 
 
 James iii. 3 
 
 
 266, 387 
 
 Heb. xii. 5 
 
 368 
 
 James iii. 5 
 
 
 253 
 
 Heb. xii. 7 
 
 355 
 
 James iii. 6 
 
 
 294 
 
 Heb. xii. 8 
 
 371, 399 
 
 James iii. 8 
 
 
 79* 
 
 Heb. xu.' 9 
 
 365* 
 
 James iii. 9 
 
 
 99, 177 
 
 Heb; xii. 10 
 
 102 
 
 James iii. 10 
 
 
 147 
 
 Heb. xii. 11 
 
 163, 387 
 
 James iii. 11 
 
 
 82 
 
 Heb. xii. 15 
 
 158, 161, 293, 322* 368 
 
 James iii. 12 
 
 
 248, 367* 
 
 Heb. xii. 16 
 
 47, 164 
 
 James iii. 13 
 
 
 252* 
 
 Heb. xii. 17 
 
 51* 
 
 James iii. 15 
 
 
 310,351 
 
 Heb. xii. 18 
 
 22, 191 
 
 James iii. 17 
 
 
 365 
 
 Heb. xii. 19 
 
 355 
 
 
 
 
 Heb. xii. 24 
 
 339 
 
 James iv. 1 
 
 
 400 
 
 Heb. xii. 25 
 
 243, 346, 347, 392 
 
 James iv. 2 
 
 
 146, 362 
 
 Heb. xii. 27 
 
 96, 307 
 
 James iv. 3 
 
 
 146, 193 
 
 Heb. xii. 28 
 
 233 
 
 James iv. 4 
 James iv. 6 
 
 
 51 
 
 364 
 
 52* 227 
 
 Heb. xiii. 2 
 
 299 
 
 James iv. 7 
 
 
 Heb. xiii. 3 
 
 307 
 
 James iv. 8 
 
 
 37 
 
 Heb. xiii. 4 
 
 137 
 
 James iv. 9 
 
 
 52 
 
 Heb. xiii. 5 
 
 48, 137, 213, 366 
 
 James iv. 10 
 
 
 52 
 
 Heb. xiii. 13 
 
 372 
 
 James iv. 12 
 
 
 294, 388 
 
 Heb. xiii. 15 
 
 U, 176 
 
 James iv. 13 70, 103* 141 
 
 , 146, 210 
 
 Heb. xiii. 16 
 
 188 
 
 James iv. 14 
 
 
 93, 370 
 
 Heb. xiii. 17 
 
 296, 307 
 
 James iv. 16 104 
 
 , 210* 263, 
 
 362 [bis)* 
 
 Heb. xiii. 18 
 
 131 
 
 James iv. 17 
 
 
 143, 350 
 
 Heb. xiii. 21 
 
 42, 112, 173,214 
 
 
 
 
 Heb. xiii. 24 
 
 378 
 
 James v. I 
 James v. 3 
 
 
 70, 140 
 58, 151 
 
 James i. 1 
 
 394 
 
 James v. 4 
 
 43 
 
 , 158, 326 
 
 James i. 6 
 
 173 
 
 James v. 5 
 
 
 402 
 
 James i. 8 
 
 402 
 
 James v. 6 
 
 
 165, 402 
 
 James i. 9 sq. 
 
 401* 
 
 James v. 7 
 
 
 82,230 
 
 James i. 10 sq. 
 
 202 
 
 James v. 12 
 
 49, 147, 
 
 163* 367 
 
 James i. 1 1 
 
 52 
 
 James v. 13 
 
 
 158, 226 
 
 James i. 12 
 
 136 
 
 James v. 14 
 
 42, 
 
 158, 163* 
 
 James i. 13 
 
 170*, 326 
 
 James v. 14 sqq. 
 
 
 133* 
 
 James i. 14 
 
 117 
 
 James v. 17 
 
 34, 184 
 
 , 270, 401 
 
 James i. 15 
 
 62 
 
 James v. 1 8 
 
 34, 55, 401 
 
 James i. 17 
 
 72, 310* 
 
 James v. 19 
 
 
 1.58 
 
 James i.:18 
 
 62, 116 
 
 James v. 20 
 
 
 119 
 
 James i. 19 
 
 51* 265 
 
 
 
 
 James i. 22 
 
 369 
 
 1 Pet. i. 3 
 
 99 
 
 , 116, 137 
 
 ■James i. 23 
 
 202, 347* 
 
 1 Pet. i. 5 
 
 
 25 
 
 James i. 24 
 
 197* 
 
 1 Pet. i. 7 
 
 
 93, 206 
 
 James i. 26 
 
 119 
 
 1 Pet. i. 8 
 
 
 174, 351* 
 
 James i. 27 
 
 158, 262 
 
 1 Pet. i. 10 
 1 Pet. i. U 
 
 
 5b 
 342 
 
 James ii. 2 
 
 364 
 
 1 Pet. i. 13 
 
 
 175 
 
 'James ii. 3 
 
 49 
 
 1 Pet. i. 14 
 
 
 162 
 
 James ii. 5 
 
 286 
 
 1 Pet. i. 18 
 
 
 91* 116 
 
 Jaimes ii. 6 
 
 202* 
 
 1 Pet. i. 21 
 
 
 176 
 
 James ii. 7 
 
 146 
 
 1 Pet. i. 24 
 
 
 202 
 
 James ii. 9 
 
 294 
 
 
 
 
 James ii. 10 
 
 229, 364 
 
 1 Pet. ii. 2 
 
 
 54 
 
 James ii. 11 
 
 346, 347 
 
 1 Pet. ii. 4 
 
 
 326 
 
 ■James ii. 14 
 
 364 
 
 1 Pet. ii. 5 
 
 
 68 
 
 Jiumos ii. 15 
 
 127*, K9, 311* 
 
 1 Pet. ii. 6 
 
 135, 
 
 144* 174 
 
 James ii. 18 
 
 218 
 
 1 Pet. U. 7 
 
 
 288, 331 
 
466 
 
 
 N. T. INDEX. 
 
 
 ) Pet. ii. 9 
 
 
 116 
 
 2 Pet. ii. 1 
 
 293, 297 
 
 1 Pet. ii. 10 
 
 
 350, 353 
 
 2 Pet. ii. 3 
 
 147, 283 
 
 1 Pet. ii. 11 
 
 
 292, 299 
 
 2 Pet. ii. 4 
 
 54, 346, 347 
 
 1 Pet. ii. 12 
 
 
 94, 308 
 
 2 Pet. ii. 4 sqq. 
 
 386 
 
 1 Pet. ii. 13 
 
 
 307 
 
 2 Pet. ii. 5 ' 
 
 30*, 53, 346 
 
 1 i'et. ii. 14 
 
 
 307 
 
 2 Pet. ii. 6 
 
 78, 165 
 
 1 Pet ii. 15 
 
 
 131 
 
 2 Pet. ii. 7 
 
 32, 331 
 
 1 Pet. ii. 18 
 
 
 293 
 
 2 Pet. ii. 10 
 
 184*, 300 
 
 1 Pet. ii. 19 
 
 
 128* 
 
 2 Pet. ii. 12 
 
 146* 287 
 
 1 Pet. ii. 20 
 
 
 128* 
 
 2 Pet. ii. 13 
 
 37, 331 
 
 1 Pet. ii. 21 
 
 
 62 
 
 2 Pet. ii. 14 
 
 65* 162, 170 
 
 I Pet. ii. 23 
 
 
 54, 145* 
 
 2 Pet. ii. 16 
 
 119 
 
 I Pet. ii. 24 
 
 178 
 
 280 (bis) 
 
 2 Pet. ii. 19 
 
 16S* 
 
 1 Pet. ii. 25 
 
 
 99 
 
 2 Pet. ii. 20 
 2 Pet. ii. 21 
 
 99 (bis), 158, 199 
 217, 305* 349 
 
 1 Pet. iii. 1 
 
 36, 117 
 
 234, 293 
 
 2 Pet. ii. 22 
 
 117, 292 
 
 X Pet. iii. 3 
 
 50, 
 
 162, 352* 
 
 
 
 1 Pet iii. 4 
 
 
 26, 180 
 
 2 Pet. iii. 1 
 
 282* 
 
 1 Pet. iii. ."> 
 
 117 
 
 175, 176 
 
 2 Pet. iii. 2 
 
 99, 155*, 261, 387, 388 
 
 1 Pet. iii. 6 
 
 
 148 
 
 2 Pet. iii. 3 
 
 118,299 
 
 1 Pet. iii. 7 
 
 
 293 
 
 2 Pet. iii. 4 
 
 82 
 
 I Pet. iii. 10 
 
 
 158, 270 
 
 2 Pet. iii. 5 
 
 293, 376* 
 
 I Pet. iii. 12 
 
 
 119 
 
 2 Pet. iii. 10 
 
 60 [bis)*, 206 
 
 1 Pet. iii. 13 
 
 
 224 
 
 2 Pet. iii. 11 
 
 206 
 
 1 Pet. iii. 14 
 
 
 106* 224 
 
 2 Pet. iii. 12 
 
 60* 
 
 1 Pet. iii. 17 
 
 
 224 
 
 2 Pet. iii. 14 
 
 179, 187* 190, 304 
 
 I Pet. iii. 20 
 
 
 328 
 
 2 Pet. iii. 15 
 
 116 
 
 I Pet. iii. 21 
 
 80, 
 
 lli5, 387* 
 
 2 Pet. iii. 16 
 2 Pet. iii. 17 
 
 118 
 117 
 
 1 Pet. iT. 2 
 
 
 54 
 
 
 
 1 Pet. iv. 3 
 
 
 260, 305 
 
 1 John i. 1 
 
 398 
 
 1 Pet. iv. 4 
 
 
 185 
 
 1 John i. 1 sq. 
 
 398 
 
 ! Pet. iv. 8 
 
 
 94 
 
 1 John i. 2 
 
 90, 196, 340 
 
 1 Pet. iv. 11 
 
 88, 137* 
 
 286, 308 
 
 1 John i. 3 
 
 160 
 
 1 Pet iv. 12 
 
 
 18.5,318 
 
 1 John i. 5 
 
 166 
 
 1 Pet. iv. 14 
 
 
 177, 338 
 
 1 John i. 6 
 
 160, 399 
 
 I Pet. iv. 17 
 
 
 268 
 
 1 John i. 7 
 
 160 
 
 1 Pet. iv. 18 
 
 
 364 
 
 1 John ii. 1 
 
 54 
 
 I Pet. V. 1 
 
 
 132 
 
 1 John ii. 4 
 
 399 
 
 1 Pet. V. 2 
 
 
 41, 352 
 
 1 John ii. 5 
 
 11 
 
 1 Pet V. 3 
 
 
 352 
 
 1 John ii. 8 
 
 281 
 
 1 Pet. V. 4 
 
 
 37 
 
 1 John ii. 12 
 
 49 
 
 1 Pet. V. 7 
 
 
 32 
 
 1 John ii. 12 sq. 
 
 198 
 
 1 Pet. V. 8 
 
 
 89 
 
 1 John ii. 18 
 
 43, 89, 362 
 
 1 Pet. V. 9 
 
 
 116, 301 
 
 1 John ii. 19 
 
 224, 241 
 
 1 Pet. V. 10 
 
 37 
 
 116,306 
 
 1 John ii, 21 
 
 122 
 
 1 Pet. V. 12 
 
 
 198, 332 
 
 1 John ii. 22 
 1 John ii. 23 
 
 124, 355 
 176 
 
 2 Pet. i. 1 
 
 97 
 
 100, 177 
 
 1 John ii. 25 
 
 26, 78, 90 
 
 2 Pet. i. 3 
 
 
 119,318 
 
 1 John ii. 27 
 
 380*, 399 
 
 2 Pet. i. 4 
 
 
 158 
 
 1 John ii. 28 
 
 192 
 
 2 Pet. i. 5 
 
 
 109 
 
 
 
 2 Pet. i. 8 
 
 
 366 
 
 1 John iii. 1 
 
 199 
 
 2 Pet. i. 9 
 
 
 116,349 
 
 1 John iii. 3 
 
 176 
 
 2 Pet. i. 10 99, 
 
 116, 214 {bis), 235, 241 
 
 1 John iii. 4 
 
 124, 125 
 
 2Pet. i. 11 
 
 
 99, 357 
 
 1 John iii. 10 
 
 125 
 
 2 Pet. i. 15 
 
 
 53 
 
 1 John iii. 12 
 
 394 
 
 2 Pet. i. 16 
 
 
 293 
 
 1 John iii. 13 
 
 246 
 
 2 Pet. i. 17 
 
 124, 
 
 185, 293* 
 
 1 Jolin iii. 15 
 
 122 
 
 2 Pet. i. 18 
 
 
 293* 
 
 1 John iii. 22 
 
 173 
 
 2 Pet. i. 19 
 
 
 230, 300 
 
 1 John iii. 23 
 
 174 
 
 2 Pet. i. 20 
 
 119, 
 
 121, 163* 
 
 1 John iii. 24 
 
 286, 382 
 

 
 
 N, T. INDEX. 
 
 
 467 
 
 1 John iv 
 
 1 
 
 
 125 
 
 Rev. i. 6 
 
 
 137 
 
 1 John iv. 
 
 2 
 
 
 176, 301 
 
 Rev. i» 8 
 
 
 50* 
 
 1 John iv. 
 
 5 
 
 
 327 
 
 Rev. i. 10 
 
 
 37 
 
 I John iv 
 
 6 
 
 
 100 
 
 Rev. i. 11 
 
 
 19 
 
 1 John iv 
 
 9 
 
 
 329 
 
 Rev. i. I2sqq. 
 
 
 386 
 
 1 John iv 
 
 13 
 
 
 159, 199 
 
 Rev. i. 13 
 
 
 13,26 
 
 1 John iv 
 
 15 
 
 
 124 
 
 Rev. i. 15 
 
 
 80* 
 
 1 John iv 
 
 16 
 
 
 17.5, 329 
 
 Rev. i. 17 
 
 
 40, 124 
 
 1 John iv 
 
 17 
 
 
 240 
 
 Rev. i. 18 
 Rev. i. 19 
 
 
 24, 310* 
 126 (bis) 
 
 1 John V. 
 
 1 
 
 
 124 
 
 Rev. i. 20 
 
 
 154* 285 
 
 1 John V. 
 
 3 
 
 
 240 
 
 
 
 
 1 John V. 
 
 4 
 
 
 23, 122 
 
 Rev. ii. 1 
 
 
 26, 103, 1 19 
 
 1 John V. 
 
 6 
 
 
 124, 370 
 
 Rev. ii. 2 
 
 55 
 
 274, 304, 382 
 
 1 John V. 
 
 7 
 
 
 124 
 
 Rev. ii. 3 
 
 
 43* 
 
 1 John V. 
 
 8 
 
 
 150, 333 
 
 Rev. ii. 4 
 
 
 144 
 
 1 John V. 
 
 9 
 
 
 395 
 
 Eev. ii. 5 
 
 179* 
 
 393 (bis), 400 
 
 1 John V. 
 
 10 
 
 
 174 {bis) 
 
 Rev, ii. 7 
 
 
 44, 380 
 
 1 John V. 
 
 13 
 
 
 174, 295 
 
 Rev. ii. 8 
 
 
 103, 119 
 
 1 John V. 
 
 IS 
 
 
 193, 223 
 
 Rev. ii. 9 
 
 
 274, 382 
 
 1 John V. 
 
 16 
 
 133*, 
 
 179* 187 
 
 Rev. ii. 10 
 
 
 159, 403 
 
 1 John V. 
 
 20 
 
 90* 
 
 104* 199 
 
 Rev. ii. 11 
 
 
 403 
 
 1 John V. 
 
 21 
 
 
 106, 192 
 
 Rev. ii. 12 
 Rev. ii. 13 
 
 
 103 
 
 386* 
 
 2 John 1 
 
 
 
 282 
 
 Rev..ii. 14 
 
 
 149, 295 
 
 2 John 2 
 
 
 
 382 
 
 Rev. ii. 16 
 
 
 179* 393 
 
 2 John 4 
 
 
 
 159 
 
 Rev. ii. 17 
 
 44, 45, 159, 380 
 
 2 John 7 
 
 
 104, 176 
 
 , 296, 301 
 
 Rev. ii. 18 
 
 
 19, 119,382 
 
 2 John 8 
 
 
 
 194, 242* 
 
 Rev. ii. 20 
 
 
 49, 78, 144 
 
 2 John 9 
 
 
 98, 99, 100 
 
 Rev. ii. 21 
 
 
 240 
 
 2 John 10 
 
 
 
 348, 394 
 
 Rev. ii. 23 
 
 
 58, 124, 184 
 
 2 John 1 1 
 
 
 
 394 
 
 Rev. ii. 24 
 
 
 281* 
 
 2 John 12 
 
 
 
 33 
 
 Rev. ii. 26 
 
 
 380 
 
 3 John 3 
 
 
 
 336 
 
 Rev. iii. 1 
 
 
 310* 
 
 3 John 4 
 
 
 28 
 
 , 240, 303 
 
 Rev. iii. 2 
 
 36, 259, 
 
 301,311,403 
 
 3 John 6 
 
 
 
 300 
 
 Rev. iii. 3 
 
 
 46 
 
 3 John 7 
 
 
 
 324 
 
 Eev. iii. 4 
 
 
 282 
 
 3 John 9 
 
 
 
 106 
 
 Eev. iii. 5 
 
 
 173, 176, 191 
 
 3 John 10 
 
 
 
 368 
 
 Rev. iii. 6 
 
 
 403 
 
 3 John 12 
 
 
 
 188 
 
 Rev. iii. 7 
 Rev. iii. 8 
 
 
 24 
 173, 280 
 
 Jude 1 
 
 
 
 94 
 
 Rev. iii. 9 45* 
 
 211,234 
 
 274, 377, 382 
 
 Jude3 
 
 
 
 116 
 
 Rev. iii. 10 
 
 
 155* 327 
 
 Jude 4 
 
 
 13, 56* 93, 97 
 
 , 100, 295 
 
 Rev. iii. 12 
 
 
 78, 380, 386 
 
 Jude 6 
 
 
 
 117 
 
 Eev. iii. 15 
 
 
 50, 215, 367 
 
 Jude 7 
 
 
 
 177, 184* 
 
 Rev. iii. 16 
 
 
 259, 357 
 
 Jude 8 
 
 
 
 146 
 
 Rev. iii. 17 
 
 
 124, 152 
 
 Jude 9 
 
 
 
 68 
 
 Eev. iii. 18 
 
 
 150 
 
 Jude 10 
 
 
 
 51 
 
 Rev. iii. 20 
 
 
 338, 362 
 
 Jude 11 
 
 
 
 184 
 
 Eev. Iii. 21 
 
 
 380, 386 
 
 Jude 12 
 
 
 
 191 
 
 
 
 
 Jude 14 
 
 
 
 35 
 
 Eev. iv 1 
 
 
 54, 63, 130* 
 
 Jude 15 
 
 
 149, 286 
 
 287 (bis) 
 
 Eev. iv 1 sqq. 
 
 
 139 
 
 Jude 16 
 
 
 
 298 
 
 Eev. iv 3 
 
 
 26 
 
 Jude 20 
 
 
 
 117 
 
 Eev. iv. 4 
 
 
 191, 338 [bis) 
 
 Jude 23 
 
 
 
 57, 326 
 
 Eev. iv. 5 
 
 
 12.1, 281 
 
 Jude 24 
 
 
 
 42 
 
 Rev. iv. 8 30 
 
 50*, 70 
 
 (bis), 130, 332 
 
 Jude 25 
 
 
 
 137 
 
 Rev. iv. 9 
 
 
 222 
 
 Rev. i. 1 
 
 
 
 41 
 
 Eev. V. 1 
 
 
 70, 338 
 
 Rev. i. 4 
 
 
 
 60*, 80 
 
 Rev. V. 3 
 
 
 366, 367* 
 
 Rev. i. 5 
 
 
 
 78 
 
 Rev. r. i 
 
 
 304, 350, 367* 
 
468 
 
 N. T. INDEX. 
 
 Eev. V. 6 
 
 
 48, 125 
 
 Rev. X. 8 
 
 62, 63 
 
 Rev. T. 7 
 
 
 • 197 
 
 Rev. X. 9 
 
 39, 62, 110, 273 
 
 Rev. V. 8 
 
 
 125, 281 
 
 Rev. X. 11 
 
 337 
 
 Rev. V. 9 
 
 
 159* 
 
 
 
 Eev. V. 10 
 
 
 169 
 
 Rev. xi. 1 
 
 384* 
 
 Eev. V. 12 
 
 81, 101, 130, 
 
 298* 402 
 
 Eev. xi. 4 
 
 81* 100 
 
 Rev. V. 13 
 
 
 88, 302 
 
 Rev. xi. 5 
 Rev. xi. 6 
 
 221, 357 
 229, 232 
 
 Rev. vi. 1 
 
 
 78, 290 
 
 Rev. xi. 8 
 
 77, 386 
 
 Rev. vi. 2 
 
 
 139, 241 
 
 Rev. xi. 9 
 
 48, 77 (bis), 158 
 
 Rev. vi. 3 
 
 
 301 
 
 Rev. xi. 11 
 
 329, 338 
 
 Rev. vi. 4 
 
 143, 234 
 
 240, 381 
 
 Eev. xi. 12 
 
 54 
 
 Rev. vi. 5 
 
 139 
 
 290, 301 
 
 Rev. xi. 14 
 
 30 
 
 Rev. vi. 6 
 
 164, 
 
 368, 394* 
 
 Rev. xi. 15 
 
 130* 
 
 Rev. vi. 7 
 
 
 290 
 
 Rev. xi. 16 
 
 89 
 
 Rev. vi. 8 
 
 172, 
 
 184, 341* 
 
 Rev. xi. 17 
 
 50* 
 
 Rev. vi. 10 
 
 
 182 
 
 Rev. xi. 18 
 
 260* 
 
 Rev. vi. 11 
 
 57, 61, 65, 77, 
 
 230, 234 
 
 Rev. xi. 19 
 
 63 
 
 Rev. vi. 14 
 
 
 34 
 
 
 
 Rev. vi. 15 
 
 
 14,98 
 
 Rev. xii. 4 
 
 259 
 
 Rev. vi. 16 
 
 
 40, 149 
 
 Eev. xii. 5 
 
 7, 54, 80* 
 
 Rev. vi. 17 
 
 
 47 
 
 Eev. xii. 6 
 Eev. xii. 7 
 
 280, 326 
 268* 
 
 Rev. vii. 1 
 
 
 121 
 
 Eev. xii. 8 
 
 367, 368 
 
 Rev. vii. 2 
 
 
 280 
 
 Eev. xii. 9 
 
 368, 398 
 
 Rev. vii. 3 
 
 
 231 
 
 Eev. xii. 10 
 
 25, 165 
 
 Eev. vii. 4 
 
 78, 
 
 130, 386 
 
 Eev. xif. 11 
 
 7 
 
 Rev. vii. 7 
 
 
 16,21 
 
 Rev. xii. 12 
 
 141, 154* 331, 393 
 
 Eev. vii. 9 
 
 78, 130, 139, 
 
 280, 386 
 
 Rev. xii. 13 
 
 7, 13, 115 
 
 Rev. vii. 12 
 
 
 98 
 
 Rev. xii. 14 
 
 280 
 
 Eev. vii. 15 
 
 
 338 
 
 
 
 Eev. vii. 16 
 
 
 122* 366 
 
 Eev. xiii. 3 
 
 59* 185 
 
 Eev. vii. 17 
 
 155, 
 
 332, 543* 
 
 Eev. xiii. 6 
 Eev. xiii. 10 
 
 400 
 61, 99, 182 
 
 Eev. viii. I 
 
 
 223 
 
 Eev. xiii. 11 
 
 177 
 
 Rev. viii. 2 
 
 
 43 
 
 Rev. xiii. 12 
 
 280 
 
 Rev. viii. 3 
 
 
 36, 90 
 
 Rev. xiii. 14 
 
 13, 282 
 
 Rev. viii. 4 sq. 
 
 
 197 
 
 Rev. xiii. 1 5 
 
 227, 238* 
 
 Rev. viii. 6 
 
 
 112 
 
 Rev. xiii. 16 
 
 36, 338 
 
 Eev. viii. 7 
 
 
 60 
 
 Rev. xiii. 17 
 
 235 
 
 Rev. viii. 9 
 
 
 78, 130 
 
 
 
 Eev. viii. 11 
 
 
 1.50. 
 
 Eev. xiv. 1 
 
 48 
 
 Rev. viii. 12 
 
 
 41 
 
 Eev. xiv. 2 
 
 166 
 
 Rev. viii. 13 
 
 
 85, 301 
 
 Rev. xiv. 3 
 Rev. xiv. 4 
 
 324 
 228* 324 
 
 Rev. ix. 1 
 
 
 382 
 
 Eev. xiv. 6 
 
 65, 338 
 
 Rev. ix. 4 
 
 57, 122* 
 
 352, 366 
 
 Eev. xiv. 8 
 
 155, 398* 
 
 Rev. ix. 5 
 
 
 211 
 
 Rev. xiv. 9 
 
 338 
 
 Eev. ix. 6 
 
 211 
 
 212, 214 
 
 Eev. xiv. 10 
 
 60, 66 
 
 Rev. ix. 8 
 
 
 40 
 
 Eev. xiv. 12 
 
 78, 386 
 
 Rev. ix. 10 
 
 177 
 
 260, 268 
 
 Eev. xiv. 13 64, 
 
 158, 166, 172, 239, 301 
 
 Rev. ix. 1 1 
 
 30, 45 
 
 112, 151 
 
 Eev. xiv. 14 
 
 78, 139 
 
 Rev. ix. 12 
 
 
 126* 
 
 Eev. xiv. 15 
 
 260, 268 
 
 Rev. ix. 13 
 
 
 90, 130* 
 
 Eev. xiv. 18 
 
 14 
 
 Rev. ix. 14 
 
 
 78 
 
 Eev. xiv. 19 
 
 81* 
 
 Rev. ix. 17 
 
 
 382 
 
 Eev. xiv. 20 
 
 81, 153 
 
 Eev. ix. 18 
 
 130 
 
 326, 327 
 
 
 
 Rev. ix. 20 
 
 
 367* 
 
 Rev. XV. 2 
 
 44, 147 
 
 Rev. ix. 21 
 
 
 143 
 
 Rev. XT. 3 
 Eev. XV. 4 
 
 140 
 137, 172, 211, 212 
 
 Rev. X. 1 
 
 
 382 
 
 Eev. XV. 5 
 
 63 
 
 Rev. X. 2 
 
 
 63 
 
 Eev. XV. 8 
 
 231 
 
 Rev. X. 7 
 
 
 199, 362 
 
 
 
N. T. INDEX 
 
 469 
 
 Rev. xvi. 1 
 
 44,301 
 
 Rev. xix. 10 
 
 124, 395 
 
 ReT. xvi. 5 
 
 141 
 
 Rev. xix. U 
 
 63 
 
 Rev. xvi. 6 
 
 66 
 
 Rev. xix. 12 
 
 78 
 
 Rev. xvi. 9 
 
 148 
 
 Rev. xix. 13 
 
 151 
 
 Rev. xvi. 12 
 
 22 
 
 Rev. xix. 14 
 
 130 
 
 Rev. xvi. 19 
 
 151, 155 
 
 Rev. xix. 15 
 
 155, 229 
 
 
 
 Rev. xix. 17 
 
 9,85 
 
 Rev. xvii. 1 
 
 90, 314 
 
 Rev. xix. 20 
 
 80* 
 
 Rev. xvii. 2 
 
 62, 383 
 
 Rev. xix. 21 
 
 163 
 
 Rev. xvii. 3 
 
 39, 80*, 130, 164* 
 
 
 
 Rev. xvii. 4 
 
 164 
 
 Rev. XX. 1 
 
 338 
 
 Rev. xvii. 6 
 
 39 
 
 Rev. XX. 2 
 
 78,89 
 
 Rev. xvii. 8 
 
 59* 78, 306*, 316, 376 
 
 Rev. XX. 3 
 
 231 
 
 Rev. xvii. 9 
 
 280 
 
 Rev. XX. 4 
 
 58, 367 
 
 Rev. xvii. 10 
 
 102 
 
 Rev. XX. 5^ 
 
 58, 231 
 
 Rev. xvii. 13 
 
 44 
 
 Rev. XX. 6 
 
 160 
 
 Rev. xvii. 16 
 
 58, 60, 106 
 
 Rev. XX. 8 
 
 280 
 
 Rev. xvii. 17 
 
 231 
 
 Rev. XX. 10 
 
 297 
 
 
 
 Rev. XX. 11 
 
 146 
 
 Rev. xviii. 2 
 
 398* 
 
 Rev. XX. 12 
 
 63 
 
 Rev. xviii. 3 
 
 43 
 
 Rev. XX. 14 
 
 125 
 
 Rev. xviii. 4 
 
 159 
 
 Rev. XX. 15 
 
 348 
 
 Rev. xviii. 6 
 
 109, 286 
 
 
 
 Rev. xviii. 7 
 
 112 
 
 Rev. xxi. 6 
 
 43 
 
 Rev. xviii. 8 
 
 60 
 
 Rev. xxi. 8 
 
 129, 191, 385* 
 
 Rev. xviii. 9 
 
 61 
 
 Rev. xxi. 9 
 
 81* 
 
 Rev. xviii. 10 
 
 154 
 
 Rev. xxi. 14 
 
 81 
 
 Rev. xviii. 12 
 
 82, 162 
 
 Rev. xxi. 16 
 
 390 
 
 Rev. xviii. 14 
 
 36, 156* 212, 214, 322* 
 
 Eev. xxi. 16 sq, 
 
 163 
 
 Rev. xviii. 15 
 
 326 
 
 Rev. xxi. 17 
 
 14, 29, 153* 
 
 Rev. xviii. 1 6 
 
 82, 87, 154 
 
 Eev. xxi. 21 
 
 30, 331 
 
 Rev. xviii. 19 
 
 40, 154 
 
 Rev. xxi. 22 
 
 126 
 
 Rev. xviii. 20 
 
 141, 182 
 
 Rev. xxi. 27 
 
 121 
 
 Rev. xviii. 21 
 
 85 
 
 
 
 Rev. xviii. 22 
 
 37, 121 
 
 Eev. xxii. 2 
 
 13, 45, 120 
 
 Rev. xviii. 23 
 
 41, 124, 214 
 
 Rev. xxii. 3 
 
 121 
 
 
 
 Eev. xxii. 8 
 
 45 
 
 Rev. xix. 1 
 
 130 
 
 Rev. xxii. 9 
 
 395 
 
 Rev. xfac. 2 
 
 182 
 
 Eev. xxii. 14 
 
 211, 234 
 
 Rev. xix. 5 
 
 176 
 
 Rev. xxii. 19 
 
 SS 
 
 Eev. xix. 7 
 
 112,209,211 
 
 
 
A GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS 
 
 (GEAMMATICAL AND KHETOKICAL). 
 
 The more familiar terms, and those which (like Anacoluthon, Aposiopesis, Asjmdetou, 
 Brachylogy, Ellipsis, Epexegesis, Hyperbaton, Pleonasm, Polysyndeton, etc.,) find special 
 elucidation in the body of the foregoing work, and a place in its Index, are not included 
 in the following List. In preparing it free use has been made of the various books on Rhet- 
 oric, Hermeneutios, Grammar, etc., together with the N. T. Commentaries. 
 
 Aetiologic, giving the cause ; aetiological particles i.e. causal conjunctions. 
 
 Adversative : cf. Metabasis. 
 
 Amphiboly : ambiguity arising from the possibility of two constructions ; as 
 
 in d 5iKaios in iritrreas ^7]frerai (Rom. i. 17). 
 Anacoeiiosis : see Comma nicatio. 
 Anadiplosis or epanastrophe : the repetition of the end of one clause at the 
 
 beginning of the next with an extension of the thought ; as, eflvr) . . . KarefM^e 
 
 ZiKaiotrivriv, iiKaioa vi'-qv 8e T^j/ iK iriffntes (Rom. ix. 30). 
 AnantapodotOU : a conditional (or similar) proposition which wants its apo- 
 
 dosis (or consequent clause) ; as, 2 Pet. ii. i ei yhp etc. (Rom. v. 12 Hcnrep 8i' 
 
 evhs avOpt^TTov etc.). 
 Anaphora or epanaphora : the repetition of one or more words at the beginning 
 
 of successive clauses ; as, oiix ei/n! in 1 Cor. ix. 1, or ris in vs. 7. 
 Anarthrous : without the Article. 
 Anastrophized : having its accent thrown back; as, eyt when i.q. ^wori, 
 
 cf. p. 72. 
 Annominatio : a paronomasia (which see) in which regard is had not merely 
 
 to a resemblance in sound, but in sense as well; as, Rom. i. 28 ouk iSoxi- 
 
 fiaaav rhv Behv . . . TrapedwKev avTobs i Bebs els addxifLov vovf. Win. 638 
 
 (592). 
 Antanaclasis : the repetition of one and the same word in an opposite (or 
 
 different) sense; as, vexpois in Matt. viii. 22. 
 Antiphrasis : the use of a word (generally one having a good sense) instead 
 
 of its opposite; as, oiKoSo/iriBria-fTai {edified) in 1 Cor. viii. 10. 
 Antiptosis : the putting of one Case for another ; cf. Win. 636 (590). 
 Ascensive : augmentative or climactic, as nai in noyii Rom. iii. 7 even I (form- 
 ing an ' ascent' to the iy<i by a tacit comparison, as it were). 
 Attributive : a word etc. used adjectively. 
 
 Catachresis i the abuse of a word, or its bold use in an extraordinary applica- 
 tion; as, 5iA v6fj(.ov TriffTfws Rom. iii. 27. 
 470 
 
A GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS. 471 
 
 Categoric Plural : the use of the Plural denoting a class when but one in- 
 dividual is referred to, — (in order to give vagueness or a certain fulness to 
 the expression) ; as, Matt. ii. 20 TeSK^/cao-t oi fTjToSj/res (referring to Herod). 
 
 Chiasmus or chiasma : a rhetorical arrangement of words or clauses so that 
 they correspond to one another crosswise, like the letter X; as, Matt. xii. 22 
 &aTe rhv ritpKov re. KWtj)hv 
 
 X 
 
 K. XaX^Tv K. $\4vetv 
 Communicatio, or anacoenosis, occurs when a writer associates his readers 
 
 with himself, either adopting their opinions or assuming that they share his ; 
 
 cf. e.g. in Bom. iii. 9 the we of 7rpo€;((!/iEda; with that of irpajgriaiTiiKBa. 
 Comparatio compendiaria : an abbreviated comparison; as. Matt. V. 20, cf 
 
 p. 168. 
 Constructio ad synesin (orsensum): a regard, in construction, for sense 
 
 to the neglect of the grammatical form. See the Index. 
 Constructio praegnans occurs when one clause virtually contains within 
 
 itself another; as, Mark ii. 1 cis oIkov Ian i.e. he has gone into and now is in 
 
 the house, cf. p. 395. Cf. Pregnant. 
 Co-ordinate (cf. subordinate) : descriptive of a proposition or clause which, 
 
 while sustaining a logical relation to another, is so connected with it as to be 
 
 its equal in grammatical rank. 
 Correlation, law of (or of sympathy) : that usage respecting the Article ac- 
 cording to which, if one substantive has another depending upon it in the 
 
 Gren., they either both take the Art. or are both without it. 
 Corresponsive KaC the, introduces a consequence answering to what precedes ; 
 
 as, Zih Ka\ irapeSuKei' ai/Tobs 6 Behs Hom. i. 24. 
 
 Dawes's Canon : see Index. 
 
 Descensive : indicating progress downwards; as, xal in el^e koI eluri Gal. iii. 4: 
 if indeed it be even (i.e. only) in vain. 
 
 Dilogy : sometimes, a (designedly) ambiguous expression; sometimes, a repeti- 
 tion for the sake of emphasis. 
 
 Diplasiasmus : a doubling — whether of words, syllables, or consonants ; as. 
 Matt, xxiii. 37 'Upovaa^iiii, 'Icpau(ra\^/t. 
 
 Dynamic : an epithet applied to the Dative Case viewed as denoting efficiency ; 
 more commonly known as the instrumental Dative, (corresponding to the 
 Latin Ablative). It is also used as descriptive of the Middle Voice, when 
 that voice expresses not merely the action of the verb, but implies also a certain 
 intensity or earnestness as respects the agent. 
 
 Ecbatic : denoting a mere event or ifsue as distinguished from the fulfilment of 
 
 a purpose (cf. telle) ; as e.g. ha in the (alleged) sense of so ihat, see p. 239. 
 Bnallage : an exchange of one gender, number, person, voice, mood, tense, etc. 
 
 of a word for another. Cf. Index. 
 Epanadiplosis : the use of the same word both at the beginning and at the 
 
 end of a sentence ; as, xoipeTc in Phil. iv. 4. 
 Epanalepsis : the resumption of a word or a thought after intervening matter ; 
 
 as, 1 Cor. viii. 4 cf. 1; xi. 20 cf. 18. 
 Epanaphora : see Anaphora. 
 Epanastropbe : see Anadiplosus. 
 
472 A GLOSSAET OF TECHOTCAL TERMS. 
 
 Epanortliosis : the rectification of an expression by qualifying it, or by sub- 
 stituting another in its stead; as, Jjhn xvi. 32 i/ii ii6i'ov a.(l>rjTe- koI ovk 
 elfj-l ^6voif etc. 
 
 Epistrophe or Epiphora : the recurre-jce of the same word at the end of succes- 
 sive clauses ; as, Kaydi in 2 Cor. xi. 22. 
 
 Epizeuxis : the repetition of a word, — generally to express earnestness or em- 
 phasis ; as, Matt. vii. 21 Kupie, xipie. 
 
 Ethical i.e. indicating the state of mind. Prepositions are used ethically when 
 used to denote mental relations. The Ethical Dative is a Dative (generally 
 of a Pron. of the 1st or 2d Pers.) indicating interest or emotion ; it is often 
 untranslatable, cf. p. 179. The Ethical Future is a Future expressing not 
 mere futurity, but what may or ought to take place ; cf. Win. 279 (262). 
 
 Extensive (as contrasted with intensive) use, for example of iraj : viz. to denote 
 frequency as distinguished from force; as, Eph. i. 8 iraero aoi^ia alt (i.e. 'every 
 kind of rather than 'the highest') wisdom. Cf. Win. Ill (105sq.). 
 
 Figura Etymologica : a verb with an Accusative of kindred signification ; 
 as, John vii. 24 xplaui Kptyere. 
 
 Gnomic or iterative Aorist, see pp. 201 sq. 
 
 Granville Sharp's rule (respecting the Article) : 'when Koi connects two 
 personal nouns of the same case, if the Art. precedes the first noun and is not 
 repeated before the second, the latter always relates to the same person' that 
 is expressed or described by the first.' It was applied by him (in "Remarks 
 on the'Uses of the Definitive Art. in the Gr. Text of the N. T." 3d ed. 1803) 
 to proving the Deity of Christ from such expressions as PamAela to5 XpurToO 
 Kol 0eov Eph. V. 5. 
 
 Hendiadys {tn Sio SvoTv) : one notion expressed as though it were two ; cf. 
 
 Win. 630 (585). 
 Hypallage : the transfer of an attribute of one substantive to another; cf. 
 
 iroT^pioi/ . . . 4Kxvi'6iiemp Luke xxii. 20, and Win. 634 (589). 
 HypOtactic : see paratactic. 
 Hysteron Proteron: an inversion of the natural order of words, — what 
 
 should come ' last ' being pat ' first ' ; cf. Win. 553 (514). 
 
 Idiosis : the transfer, by a writer, to himself in his private capacity of what holds 
 
 true universally, or of an entire class ; as in Rom. vii. 7 sqq. 
 Intensive : cf. extensive. 
 IiitOtes, substantially synonymous with Meiosis ; which see. 
 
 Meiosis : the employment of a disparaging or over'-weak expression in order to 
 
 enforce a thought ; particularly, the expression of a thought by denying, its 
 
 contrary; as, ovk iiraina 1 Cor. xi. 22. 
 Metabasis, metabatic, etc., marking a transition ; as Se when its copulative 
 
 force is predominant, — distinguished from the oppositive Se (as it occurs, for 
 
 example, after a negative), and from the adversative iwd. Cf. Win. 441 sq. 
 
 (411 sq.). 
 Metaplasm : a formation from a non-existeiit Nora, or theme ; see Index. 
 Metaschematismus : the transfer to an individual of what holds true of the 
 
 whole class to which he belongs ; cf. 1 Cor. iv. 6. 
 Metonymy: the exclange of one term or name for another with w?ich it has 
 
 some relation ; as, Rom. ii- 27 ri iicpaPvaTla i.q. Ifli/jj vs. 14. 
 
A GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TEEMS. 473 
 
 Mimesis : a lively imitation or reproduct'on of the words etc. of another ; as, 
 Col. ii. 21. 
 
 IN'omen conjugatum : a noun akin in form or meaning to the word with 
 which it is connected; as, Col. ii. 29 oBJti aSJijo-ii'. 
 
 Oxymoron : a pointed expression produced by uniting words of opposite sig- 
 nification ; as, Rom. i. 20 ri a6para . . . (coflopaToi. 
 
 Paraleipsis : the mention of a thing by pretending to pass it by ; as, Philem. 
 
 19 Xva fi^ Keyo) etc. 
 Faratactic the (as distinguished from the hypotactic or syntactic) arrangement 
 
 of clauses, is the ranging of them one after another in simple succession, 
 
 instead of indicating their logical relations to one another ; as. Matt, xviii. 21 
 
 voadKis anap-riiasi eis ijt\ d li,Se\(j>6s fiov koI af^o-u etc. 
 Faratlietic (or loose) compounds (as distinguished from synthetic, which see) 
 
 are those formed by the mere juxtaposition of separate words, as, aKa-?>Mfipdva, 
 
 On parathetic Apposition see Win. 528 (492). 
 Paronomasia : a combination of words similar in sound ; as, Rom. 1. 29 sq. 
 
 iropvefo, TToyiipiif, <j>06mv, <p6vov , . . iavverovs, AffucfleTous, — cf. Win. 636 sq. 
 
 (.591 sq.). 
 
 Polyptoton : the recurrence of different cases etc. of the same word ; as, 2 Cor. 
 ix. 8 iv Trai^Ti niivTOT^ iraaav avTtipKitav ^x^^"^^^' ^^' *^® Latin epigram 
 " Mors mortis morti mortem nisi morte tulisset, AeterniB vitse janua clausa 
 foret" (quoted by Alf. on Heb. ii. 14). 
 
 Predicate, a tertiary, is the predicate of a predicate (which latter is connected 
 with its subject by some other verb than a copula or a verb signifying to 
 name etc.) ; in other words, it is the anticipation of a distinct additional prop- 
 osition (cf. Donaldson, Gr. Gram. ^ 417, 489). It is most conveniently 
 translated by ' taking the tertiary predicate as the primary one, and making 
 the verb which contains the primary predicate dependent on a relative.' For 
 example, in John v. 36 eyi) eX" t^iv liaprvpiav fJLfl(a> toC 'Icoippov the Adj. 
 juflftti, being without the Art., implies an additional (tertiary) predication 
 respecting the (secondary) predicate iiapTvplav, which may be brought out by 
 the translation " The testimony which I have is greater than John." 
 
 Pregnant use of a word ; when it is used to imply a second relation, the ante- 
 cedent or consequent of that which it strictly expresses; as, John viii. 47 i 
 tbv fK Tov SeoS , . . axovei i.e. 'heareth [and obeyeth].' On pregnant construc- 
 tion cf. Constructio Praegnans. 
 
 Prolepsis : anticipation. It may be either of a rhetorical nature, as when an 
 objection is anticipated and answered (e.g. Rom. vi. 15), or of a grammatical 
 i.e. in the reference of a word (cf. pp. 198 sq. 356). 
 
 Prosopopoeia : personification, or the ascribing of personal properties to inan- 
 imate objects or abstract ideas ; as. Matt. vi. 3 itri yvdra ri apiarepi aov etc. 
 
 Prosphonesis or apostrophe : the rhetorical use of direct addi-ess ; as, Rom. ii. I . 
 
 Rational concord : construction according to the sense rather than the form, 
 
 see Constructio ad synesin. 
 Recitative 8ti : a redundant in which the Greek alio ws to remain even when 
 
 a quotation is introduced in direct form ; as. Matt vii. 23 Tiire dfioKoytiirti 
 
 aVTOts ' tin ovdewoTe eyytov v/xai. 
 
 Sense-construction : see Constructio ad synesin. 
 
474 A GLOSSAEY OF TECHNICAL TERMS. 
 
 Sharp, see Granville Sharp's Rule. 
 
 Schema (i.e. figure or construction) : o-xijlia &irh koivoO occurs when d word 
 (or its influence) is common to two clauses, so that its case etc. is determined 
 by the second rather than by that to which it primarily belongs ; as, Acts ix. 
 27 Bapvd^as iinKaffSfifms avrhr ^-yaye where airdu although primarily belong- 
 ing to 4m\. is governed by jjyaye. , See Index p. 412 and under " Luke." 
 
 <rx<ic.O' 'AttikiJv : the use of a Neuter Plural with a verb in the Singular; 
 as, John x. 25 ra ^pya . . . fiapTVpcT irepl ^fxov. 
 
 <r\i\jia BoiMTiov or IIivSapiKiSv : the use of a Masc. or Fem. Plural with 
 a verb in the Singular ; to this Luke ix. 28 eYeVtro . . . axrel fi/ifpat oktJ) has 
 been incorrectly referred, cf. Win. 516 (481), 563 (523 sq.). 
 
 CTXfJua KttT' ii,oXf\v occurs when an individual of a genus (connected by 
 Kai) is distinguished by a separate mention ; as, Acts v. 29 6 Tlirpos koI ol 
 &,n6(rTO\oi. 
 
 , <rxi)|j.a KaG' 8Xov Kal [ifoos: when to a totality (often a Plural) the speci- 
 fication of a particular part is afterwards subjoined; cf. 2 Cor. xii. 7 4S667i 
 mo( (iKdKoifi rfi aapicl, seep. 186. 
 
 <rxii|*a KoXotjiiuviov '• the use of a Dative (often instead of a Gen.) in im- 
 mediate dependence on a substantive; as, 2 Cor. ix. 11 ivxapi<rTlap r<f $e^, cf. 
 p. 180. 
 o'X^lH'"' Tttpovofiao-Ca, cf. Figura etymologica. 
 o-XTiC.ct irpbs TO <rT)|Jiotv(!|i£VOv or voov|Jievov, cf Constructio ad synesin. 
 
 Subordinate : a word or clause so related to another as to be complementary 
 to it and grammatically dependent upon it. 
 
 Synchoresis : a concession made for the purpose of pointing a retort; as, 
 James ii. 19 (Tu Triar^ieis . . . KaXws ■jrote7s • Kal ret Zoufi6via nnTTeiou<Ti etc. 
 
 Synecdoche: the designation of a whole by a part, a genus by a species etc., 
 or vice versa; as, Rom. xiii. 1 Tratra ^vxv vTroraffadffdat let every sow/ (i.e. 
 every person). Hence the Accusative specifying the part etc. is called the 
 Ace. of synecdoche. 
 
 Synizesis : in grammar, the union of two vowels in pronunciation ; in rhetoric, 
 equivalent to zeugma ; which see. 
 
 Syntactic structure : see paratactic. 
 
 Synthetic (or close) compounds (as distinguished from parathetic, which see) 
 are those in which the component elements have been moulded together into 
 one inseparable whole ; as, KOKovpyos. On synthetic Apposition see Win. 528 
 (492). 
 
 Tapeinosis : essentially synonymous with Meiosis, which see. 
 
 Tautology; needless or pleonastic repetition; cf. Luke i. 35 ir/zeC/uo iytoy 
 
 iirf\iv(re'rat . . . Svyafits vyj/iffrov iirnrKtilffet etc. 
 Telic : denoting end or purpose ; cf. Ecbatio. 
 Tertiary predicate : see Predicate. 
 
 Whole and Part Figure : see irxvua Raff iKov koI /tt'poi. 
 
 Zeugma : the connection of a verb, adjective, etc., with a number of words, when 
 it really suits but one of them ; as, Luke i. 64 &»'e^x*') ''^ ardiia airov xal 
 11 yK&aaa. Cf. pp. 400 sq. 
 
^ttmt ^ublkatiims. 
 
 HEEMENEUTIOS OP THE NE¥ TESTAMENT- By Dr. A. Lnmer, 
 
 Professor of Theology in the University of Berne. Translated from the 
 
 German [by Eev. ^bert H. JTewman]. With additional Notes and fuU 
 
 Indexes. Oro-wn Svo. pp. 413. $2.25 
 
 " It is a thoroughly scientific and almost exhaustive treatise on the whole subject. 
 
 It is in three parts : I. The General Principles of Hermeneutics ; II. The Single 
 
 Operations of the Scripture Interpreter; III. The Religious Understanding 
 
 Oar Author adopts the grammatico-historical method, and rightly holds that our 
 dogmatic preconceptions must not be the standard of an interpretation of Scripture. 
 It is with us a fundamental proposition that we are to interpret the Holy Scripture 
 upon the same grammatical, historical, and logical principles on which we interpret 
 any other document, never forgetting, however, that he will with such aid most 
 deeply penetrate into their import whose soul is illumined by the Holy Spirit. To 
 learn how most wisely and accurately to do this, the student can have no better 
 guide than Dr. Immer's erudite volume. We heartily commend it to our young 
 ministers in particular, in the belief that in mastering it they will greatly enrich 
 their teachings of the sacred word." — Methodist Quarterly Beview. 
 
 n. 
 
 AN DTTEODUOTION TO THE GEEEK OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
 
 By Geo. L. Gary, of the MeadviUe Theol. Sem. 12mo. pp. 72. 75 ots. 
 
 This work is designed for the use of those persons who, though previously un- 
 acquainted with the Greek language, would nevertheless be glad to read the New 
 Testament in its original tongue. It contains what is absolutely necessary for the 
 understanding of the New Testament Greek. Prior to publication, these lessons 
 have been used with several classes in the Meadville Theological School, and seem 
 to have answered the purpose for which they were desigied. Those familiar with 
 them have been able to proceed at once (with the assistance of some good N. T. 
 Lexicon and Buttmann's Grammar of the N. T. Greek, — or Winer's) to the 
 reading of the easier portions of the New Testament. 
 
 m. 
 
 A OOMPENDIOUS AND COMPLETE HEBEEW AND OHALDEE 
 Lexicon to the Old Testament; with an English-Hebrew Index. By 
 Benjamin Davies, Ph.D., LL.D. Carefully Eevised, with a Concise 
 Statement of the Principles of Hebrew Grammar. By Edward 0. 
 Mitchell, D.D. Svo. Cloth, $4.25 ; Morocco backs, $4.75. 
 
 In a critical notice of the first edition, made for an American Journal in 1872, 
 by the present editor, it was remarked : 
 
 " It is in many respects an improvement upon either of the Lexicons now in use. 
 Dr. Davies modestly calls himself the editor of the work, but it is anything but a 
 mere revision or compilation. Nearly every page bears evidence of original thought 
 and independent investigation, and many improvements have been made upon the 
 work of previous lexicographers in the handling of roots and derivatives. 
 
 " While the Lexicons of Gesenius and Fiirsf have been made the chief basis, — 
 as they must be for any genuine advance in this direction, — the definitions have 
 all been re-written and condensed without being abridged, so as to make them 
 more convenient for reference, and the whole work less bulky and expensive." 
 
 Practical use of the Lexicon for six years since, and the work of revision, now 
 completed, — in the course of which every article has been compared with Tregel- 
 les's edition of Gesenius, — has served only to confirm the judgment then exj)ressed. 
 So far from being an abridgment, the present edition will be found to contain aver a 
 thousand more Hebrew words or forms than appear in Tregettes's or Eobinson's Geseniits, 
 besides incorporating into the body of the work all the grammatical forms contained 
 in Bobinson^ Analytical Appendix. 
 
 3-79 
 
Books Published by W. F. Draper. 
 
 OardiDcr. biblical Worles by Frederic Gardiner, D.D., Pro- 
 fessor in the Berkeley Divinity School ; vis. 
 
 A Harmony of the Four Gospels in Oreek, acoordmg to the Text 
 of Tii^hendorf, witli a Oollation of the Textns Eeoeptus, and of the 
 Texts of Griesbach, Laohmann, and Txegelles. Bevised Edition, with an 
 Appendix on the Principles of Textual Oritioism, 8to. pp. Ivi and 268 1 
 Appendix, pp. 64. $3.00 
 
 The dictinctive features of this Harmony are, — 
 
 1. A Critical Text, Tiz. the text of Tischendorf' b eighth or last edition, embodying the 
 latest results of textual oritioism. The readings of the Textus Beceptus, where they differ 
 from Tischendorf '3 text, are given in full in the margin. The texts of Griesbach, Laoh- 
 mann, and Tregelles are carefully collated. The relative value of readings as estimated by 
 Griesbach are noted, and original authorities cited in important cases. 
 
 2. All distinct quotations from the Old Testament are given in full in the margin, accord- 
 ing to Tischendorf 's edition of the LXX, together with the vcur. lect, of the Alexandrian 
 text and of the Codex Sinaitieas, and of the several other versions named in the titlo 
 
 8. A choice selection of parallel references has been placed in the margin, chiefly to 
 point out similar language or incidents in other parts of the Gospels, or passages in the 
 Old Testament, on which the language of the Gospels may be founded. 
 
 4. Brief notes relating to matters of harmony have been placed at the bottom of the page. 
 
 6. Special care has been devoted to the chronological order of the Gospel narratirea. 
 
 6. The columns are so arranged on the page as to combine the greatest clearness con- 
 sistent with the least cost. The columns are never interwoven on the page. 
 
 7. A Synoptical Table is.given of the arrangement adopted by several harmonists, show- 
 ing at a glance the general agreement on the main points of chronology, and the points of 
 difference where difference occurs. This is a new feature in this work, and will .be. found 
 very useful to the student. 
 
 8. The Appendix, which is more fiiUy described in the title below. 
 
 Prom the Bibliotheca Sacra. — "A very important matter in the prepara- 
 tion of a Harmony is, of course, the choice of a text. The one chosen by Pro- 
 fessor Gardiner is that of Tischendorf's eighth edition of the New Testament. 
 This text was chosen because ' it embodied the latest results of criticism, having 
 had the advantage throughout of the Codex Sinaiticus and of a more close col- 
 lation of the Codex Vaticanus.' It is another excellence of the work that the 
 Greek text is so accurate, evincing the most scrupulous care and thorough schol- 
 arship on the part of the editor." 
 
 Prom the Princeton Review. — " The notes of the author are marked by 
 scholarship and good sense. The student will find it a convenient manual for the 
 study of the Gospels, because he sees upon one and the same page the readings of 
 the principal editions and manuscripts, together with the quotations made by the 
 evangelists from the Old Testament. 
 
 Prom the Quarterly Review of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. — 
 " Dr. Gardiner's work has been well done, and he has given us a Harmony of 
 great value." 
 
 Prom the Reformed Church Monthly. — " The book furnishes the best 
 results of the ablest and most laborious investigation of all known sources oi 
 knowledge regarding the original sacred text." 
 
 "This book, the result of great research and utmost painstaking, is well worthy 
 the consideration of all Bible scholars." — Watchman and Reflector. 
 
 The Principles of Textual Criticism ; with a List of all the known 
 Greek Uncials, and a Table representing graphically the Parts of the 
 Text of the New Testament contained in each. [A New Edition, care- 
 fully revised, and the Oanons of Eusebins added.] 8to. pp. 64. Paper 
 covers, 50 cents. Oloth, flexible, 75 centi 
 
 Prom the Baptist Quarterly. — "A trustwortl y and nseful help." 
 
 8-78