SYNTAX
OF THE
MOODS and
TENSES
IN NEW TESTAMENT GREEK
By
ERNEST DE
WITT
President of the
1923-25
THE
COPYRIGHT
1900
By ERNEST D. BURTON
All
Rights Reserved
Published in pamphlet form 1888
Second Edition September 1898
Third Edition June 1898
Second
Impression September 1900
Third Impression April 1903
Fourth Impression October 1906
Fifth Impression November 1909
Sixth Impression October 1912
Seventh Impression October 1916
Eighth Impression November 1923
Digitally prepared by Ted Hildebrandt 2004
Gordon College, 255 Grapevine Rd., Wenham, MA 01984
For any errors please
contact: thildebrandt@gordon.edu
Composed and Printed By
The
PREFACE TO THE SECOND
EDITION.
THE first edition of this work
appeared as a pamphlet in
1888.
In issuing this revised and enlarged edition, it seems
desirable
to state somewhat more fully than was done in the
former
preface the purpose which it is hoped the book will
serve.
Classified according to its intent, it belongs among the
aids
to the interpretation of the New Testament. It is de-
signed
to assist English-speaking students in the task of
translating
the Greek New Testament into English forms of
hought
and expression. The work has not been undertaken
under
the impression that grammar is an end in itself, or that
a
knowledge of it is the sole qualification for successful in-
terpretation,
but in the conviction that grammar is one of
the
indispensable auxiliaries of interpretation. The book is
written,
therefore, in the interest not of historical but of
exegetical
grammar, not of philology as such, but of philology
as
an auxiliary of interpretation. If it has any value for
historical
grammar, this is incidental. Its main purpose is
to
contribute to the interpretation of the New Testament by
the
exposition of the functions of the verb in New Testament
Greek,
so far as those functions are expressed by the dis-
tinctions
of mood and tense.
The student of the New Testament who
would interpret it
with
accuracy and clearness must possess--along with other
qualifications
for his work--a knowledge of the distinctions
of
thought which are marked by the different moods and
tenses
of the Greek verb. If he would acquire facility in the
work
of interpretation, he must have an easy familiarity with
the
leading uses of each mood and tense. It is not enough
vi PREFACE.
that
he have at hand for reference an encyclopedic treatise on
the
subject. He must acquire, as a personal mental posses-
sion,
a knowledge of the leading functions of the several
forms
of the Greek verb, and of the forms which express
those
functions in English. For this purpose he needs a book
which,
availing itself of the assured results of comparative
and
historical grammar, and applying to the interpretation of
the
Greek verb the principles of grammar and logic, the laws
both
of Greek and of English speech, shall enumerate the
various
functions of each mood and tense, exhibit in some
degree
their relative importance, and define each clearly.
The
definitions should be scientifically accurate, but they
should
at the same time be constructed with reference to the
point
of view of the interpreter. For the English-speaking
student
English usage must be constantly considered and
must
frequently be defined and compared with Greek usage.
If
such a book does not solve all the problems of New
Testament
grammar, it should, by its treatment of those which
it
discusses, illustrate to the student the right method of
investigation
and so suggest the course which he must pursue
in
solving for himself those problems which the book leaves
unsolved.
My aim has been to provide a book fulfilling these
conditions.
The aim of the book has determined
the method of its con-
struction.
The usages which are of most frequent occurrence,
or
otherwise of especial importance, have been emphasized by
being
set in the largest type, with a title in bold-faced type.
The
table of contents also has been so constructed as to make
prominent
a conspectus of the leading uses. It may be well to
require
of students who use the book as a text-book that they
be
able to name and define these leading usages of each mood
and
tense; if they also commit to memory one of the Greek
examples
under each of these prominent usages, they will do
still
better.
The matter printed in smaller type
consists partly of fuller
exposition
of the usages defined in the more prominently
PREFACE. vii
printed
sections, partly of enumeration and definition of the
less
frequent usages. The portions in smallest type are
chiefly
discussions of the rarer or more difficult usages. They
are
an addition to the text-book proper, and are intended to
give
the work, to a limited extent, the character of a book of
reference.
The occasional discussions of English usage would
of
course have no place in a work on Greek grammar pure
and
simple, but to the end which this book is intended to
serve
they are as really germane as any discussions of the
force
of a Greek tense. One often fails to apprehend accu-
rately
a thought expressed in Greek quite as much through
inexact
knowledge of one's own language as through ignorance
of
Greek usage.
As concerns the extent to which I
have used the work of
others,
little need be added to the testimony which the pages
of
the book themselves bear. While gathering information
or
suggestion from all accessible sources, I have aimed to
make
no statement concerning New Testament usage which I
have
not myself proved by personal examination of the pas-
sages.
Respecting classical usage and pre-classical origins, I
have
relied upon those authorities which are recognized as
most
trustworthy.
On a subsequent page is added a list
of books and authors
referred
to by abbreviations in the body of the book. To all
of
the works there enumerated, as well as to those mentioned
by
full title in the body of the book, I am under obligation for
assistance
or suggestion. It is a pleasure also to acknowledge
the
valuable assistance privately given by various friends.
Prominent
among these, though not completing the list, are
Professor
W. G. Hale of the
sors
M. L. D'Ooge and W. W. Beman of the University of
of
William
Arnold Stevens of the
nary,
under whose instructions I first became interested in the
viii
PREFACE.
subject
of this book, and to whom my obligations in many
directions
are larger than can be acknowledged here.
In quoting examples from the New
Testament I have fol-
lowed
the Greek text of Westcott and Hort as that which
perhaps
most nearly represents the original text, but have
intended
to note any important variations of Tischendorf's
eighth
edition or of Tregelles in a matter affecting the point
under
discussion. The word text designates
the preferred
reading
of the editor referred to, as distinguished from the
marginal
reading. In the English translation of the examples
I
have preferred to follow the Revised Version of 1881 rather
than
to construct entirely independent translations. Yet in
not
a few passages it has seemed necessary to depart from
this
standard either because the revisers followed a Greek text
different
from that of Westcott and Hort, or because their
translation
obscured the value of the passage as an illustration
of
the grammatical principle under discussion, or occasionally
because
I was unwilling even to seem to approve what I
regarded
as unquestionably an error of translation.
While I have given all diligence to
make the book correct
in
statement and in type, I dare not hope that it has altogether
escaped
either typographical errors or those of a more serious
character.
I shall welcome most cordially criticisms, sugges-
tions,
or corrections from any teacher or student into whose
hands
the book may fall.
ERNEST
D. BURTON
NOTE
TO THE THIRD EDITION.--It having become necessary to send the
plates
of this book to the press again, I have availed myself of the opportunity
to
correct such errors, typographical and other, as "have come to my
attention,
and
to make a few alterations of statement which use of the book has convinced
me
are desirable. The chief changes are in §§ 67 Rem. 1, 98, 120, 137, 142-145,
153, 189, 195, 198, 200 Rem., 202, 225, 235, 236, 318, 325-328, 344 Rem. 2, 352
Rem.,
406, 407, 485.
CONTENTS.
INTRODUCTORY.
SECTION
PAGE
1. Form and Function. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2. The Interpreter's Relation to
Grammar. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-5
3, 4. The four Moods and the seven Tenses .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
THE TENSES.
5.
Two-fold Function of the Tenses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
TENSES OF THE INDICATIVE MOOD.
6, 7. General Definition of the Tenses of
the Indicative . . . . . . . . . 6, 7
The Present Indicative.
8-10. PROGRESSIVE PRESENT. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,
8
11. Conative
Present. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
12. GENERAL OR GNOMIC PRESENT . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
13. AORISTIC PRESENT . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
14. HISTORICAL PRESENT. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
15. PRESENT FOR THE FUTURE . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9, 10
16. Present
of h!kw, pa<reimi, etc. .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
17. PRESENT OF PAST ACTION STILL IN
PROGRESS. . . . . . . 10
18. Similar
use of the Aorist. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
19. Present
in Indirect Discourse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
20. Periphrastic
Form of the Present. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
The Imperfect Indicative.
21,
22. PROGRESSIVE IMPERFECT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
23. Conative
Imperfect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
24. IMPERFECT OF REPEATED ACTION . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
25-27.
Minor uses of Secondary Tenses
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13
28,
29. Imperfect translated by
English Perfect and Pluperfect . .
. 13,
14
30-32. Imperfect of Verbs denoting
obligation, etc. . . . . . . . . . . . .
14, 15
33. Imperfect
of Verbs of wishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15, 16
34. Periphrastic
Form of the Imperfect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
ix
x
CONTENTS.
The Aorist Indicative.
SECTION
PAGE
35. Fundamental.
Idea of the Aorist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 16, 17
36. Additional
uses of the Aorist Indicative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17, 18
37. Functions
of the Aorist distinguished . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18, 19
38-40. HISTORICAL AORIST. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 19, 20
41. INCEPTIVE AORIST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . 20, 21
42. RESULTATIVE AORIST . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
43. GNOMIC AORIST. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21
44. EPISTOLARY AORIST. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21
45. DRAMATIC AORIST . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
46. Aorist
for the (English) Perfect. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
47. Use
of the Aorists a]pe<qanon, e]ce<sth, e@gnwn . . . . . . . . 22
48. Aorist
for the (English) Pluperfect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22, 23
49. Aorist
Indicative in Indirect Discourse . . . . . . . . . . 23
50. Aorist
used proleptically . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
51. Minor
uses of the Aorist. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
52-55. English
Equivalents of the Greek Aorist Indica-
tive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23-30
56, 57. Distinction
between the Aorist and the Imperfect. . . . 30, 31
The Future Indicative.
58-66. PREDICTIVE FUTURE. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31-35
59. Aoristic
Future. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
60. Progressive
Future. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
61, 62. Relation
of Aoristic and Progressive Future. . . . . . . 32, 38
63, 64. Types
of Aoristic Future. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33, 34
65. Predictive
Future as assertive or promissory. . . . . . 34,
35
66. Predictive
Future with ou] mh<. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 35
67, 68. IMPERATIVE FUTURE . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
69. GNOMIC FUTURE . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
35
70. DELIBERATIVE FUTURE. . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
71. Periphrastic Form of the Future .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
72, 73. Me<llw with the Infinitive. .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36, 37
The Perfect Indicative.
74. PERFECT OF COMPLETED ACTION. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
75, 76. PERFECT OF EXISTING STATE. . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,38
77. Intensive
Perfect. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
78. Historical
Perfect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38, 39
79. Gnomic
Perfect. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
CONTENTS.
xi
SECTION
PAGE
80. Aoristic
Perfect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
81. Perfect
Indicative in Indirect Discourse. . . . . . 39
82. Perfect
Indicative translated by English Past. . .. 39,
40
83. Perfect
used proleptically . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . 40
84. Periphrastic
Form of the Perfect. . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
85. Definition
of the term "complete” . . . . . .
. . . . . 40, 41
86-88. Aorist
and Perfect compared. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41-44
The Pluperfect.
89. PLUPERFECT OF COMPLETED ACTION.
. . . . . . . . . . 44
90. PLUPERFECT OF EXISTING STATE . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 44, 45
91. Periphrastic
Form of the Pluperfect. ...45
92. Pluperfect
and Aorist siInilarly translated. . . . . .
45
The Future Perfect.
93. Simple Future Perfect. . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
94. Periphrastic Future Perfect. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
TENSES OF THE DEPENDENT
MOODS.
95. General Principles . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
96, 97. PRESENT OF THE DEPENDENT MOODS. .
. . . . . . . . . 46
98. AORIST OF THE DEPENDENT MOODS. .
. . . . . . . . . . . 46, 47
99,100. FUTURE OF THE DEPENDENT MOODS . . .
. . . . . . . . . 47,48
101-103. PERFECT OF THE DEPENDENT MOODS. . . .
. . . . . . . . 48,49
104-109. Tenses
of the Infinitive after Prepositions. . . . . . . . . . . . 49-51
110-114. Tenses
of the Dependent Moods in Indirect
Discourse. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51-53
TENSES OF THE PARTICIPLE.
115-118. General Principles. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53,
54
The Present Participle.
119. PRESENT PARTICIPLE OF SIMULTANEOUS
ACTION. 54,55
120-122.
PRESENT PARTICIPLE OF IDENTICAL ACTION. . . . . .
. 55,56
123-126.
GENERAL PRESENT PARTICIPLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56-58
127. PRESENT PARTICIPLE FOR THE IMPERFECT
. . . . . . . . . 58
128-131.
Minor uses of the Present
Participle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58,
59
xii
CONTENTS.
The Aorist Participle.
SECTION
PAGE
132,
133. General Force of
the Aorist Participle. . . . . . . . . . . 59-63
134-138.
AORIST PARTICIPLE OF ANTECEDENT ACTION. . . . . . 63,64
139-141.
AORIST P.ARTICIPLE OF IDENTICAL ACTION. . . . . . . . 64,65
142-145.
AORIST PARTICIPLE OF SUBSEQUENT ACTION. . . . . . 65-67
146. AORIST PARTICIPLE WITH THE OBJECT
OF A VERB OF
PERCEPTION. . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
147. Aorist
Participle with lanqa<nw. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . 67
148,
149. Exceptional uses of the Aorist
Participle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67,
68
150,
151. Equivalence of the
Aorist Participle . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68-70
The Future Participle.
152. GENERAL FORCE OF THE FUTURE
PARTICIPLE. . . . . 70, 71
153. Me<llwn with the Infinitive,
denoting inten-
tion, etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 71
The Perfect Participle.
154,
155. GENERAL FORCE OF THE PERFECT PARTICIPLE . . . . . 71, 72
156. Perfect
Participle used as a Pluperfect. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
THE
MOODS.
MOODS IN
PRINCIPAL CLAUSES.
The Indicative Mood.
157. GENERAL FORCE OF THE INDICATIVE .
. . . . . . . . . . . . 73
158,
169. INDICATIVE IN QUALIFIED ASSERTIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . 73, 74
The Subjunctive Mood.
160,
161. HORTATORY SUBJUNCTIVE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74, 75
162-167. PROHIBITORY SUBJUNCTIVE. . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75, 76
168-171. DELIBERATIVE SUBJUNCTIVE. . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76-78
172,
173. SUBJUNCTIVE IN NEGATIVE ASSERTIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . 78
The Optative Mood.
174. Infrequency
of the Optative in later Greek.. . . . . . . . 79
175-177.
OPTATIVE OF WISHING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
178,
179. POTENTIAL OPTATIVE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79, 80
CONTENTS.
xiii
The Imperative Mood
SECTION
PAGE
180. IMPERATIVE IN COMMANDS AND
EXHORTATIONS. 80
181. IMPERATIVE IN ENTREATIES AND
PETITIONS. . . . . 80
182,183.
IMPERATIVE TO EXPRESS CONSENT OR AN HYPOTHESIS 80, 81
184. Tenses
of the Imperative in Commands and Pro-
hibitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 81
FINITE MOODS IN SUBORDINATE CLAUSES.
185-187.
Subordinate Clauses Classified. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
81-83
Moods in Clauses Introduced by Final
Particles.
188,189.
Classification and General Usage. .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83, 84
190-196.
New Testament Use of Final
Particles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84,
85
197-199.
PURE FINAL CLAUSES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85, 86
200-204.
OBJECT CLAUSES AFTER VERBS OF EXHORTING, etc. . 87, 88
205-210.
OBJECT CLAUSES AFTER VERBS OF STRIVING, etc. 88-90
211-214.
SUBJECT, PREDICATE, AND APPOSITIVE CLAUSES INTRO-
DUCED
BY i!na. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90,
91
215-217.
COMPLEMENTARY AND EPEXEGETIC CLAUSES INTRO-
DUCED
BY i!na.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91, 92
218-223.
CLAUSES OF CONCEIVED RESULT INTRODUCED BY i!na 92-95
224-227.
OBJECT CLAUSES AFTER VERBS OF FEAR AND DANGER 95,96
Moods in Clauses of Cause.
228. Definition. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
229,
230. Moods and Tenses in Causal Clauses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 97
231,
232. Independent Causal Sentences. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 98
233. Other Methods of Expressing Cause
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
234. Definition . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
235. Distinction between Indicative
and Infinitive in Con-
secutive Clauses. . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
236. Indicative with w!ste. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
99, 100
237. Independent Consecutive
Sentences. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Moods in Conditional Sentences.
238-241.
Definition and Classification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 100, 101
242-247.
SIMPLE PRESENT OR PAST PARTICULAR SUPPOSITION 102, 103
xiv
CONTENTS.
SECTION
PAGE
248,
249. SUPPOSITION CONTRARY TO FACT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103,
104
250. FUTURE SUPPOSITION WITH MORE
PROBABILITY . . . 104
251-256.
Variant Forms. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104, 105
257. Particular
and General Suppositions referring
to the Future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 106
258. Present
and Future Suppositions in Indirect
Discourse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . 106
259. FUTURE SUPPOSITION WITH LESS
PROBABILITY . . . 106, 107
260,
261. PRESENT GENERAL SUPPOSITION. 107 108
262,
263. Third and Fifth
Classes compared. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
108
264. First
and Fifth Classes compared. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
265. [PAST GENERAL SUP:POSITION]. . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
266-277.
Peculiarities of
Conditional Sentences. . . . . . . . . . .
109-112
Moods in Concessive Sentences.
278. Definition
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112,
113
279-282.
Ei] kai< and kai> ei] in Concessive Clauses.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113, 114
283. General Usage of Moods and
Tenses in Con-
cessive Clauses. . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
284. CONCESSIVE CLAUSES OF THE FIRST
CLASS. . . . . . . 114
285. CONCESSIVE CLAUSES REFERRING TO
THE FUTURE.114, 115
286. Concessive Clauses of the
Fourth Class. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
287. Concessive Clauses of the Fifth
Class . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
115
288. Concessive Particles in English.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115, 116
Moods in Relative Clauses.
289-291. Definition and Classification.. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
116, 117
I. DEFINITE RELATIVE CLAUSES.
292. Definition . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117, 118
293. Moods in Definite Relative Clauses
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
294. Definite Relative Clauses implying
cause, result,
or concession. . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
295. Restrictive and Explanatory
Relative Clauses. . . . . . . . . . . . .
119
II.
CONDITIONAL RELATIVE SENTENCES.
296-300.
Definition and
Classification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119-121
301. SIMPLE PRESENT OR PAST PARTICULAR
SUPPOSITION . 121
302. [SUPPOSITION CONTRARY TO FACT] . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
CONTENTS. xv
SECTION
PAGE
303-305.
FUTURE SUPPOSITION WITH MORE PROBABILITY.
121, 122
306-309.
Variant Forms. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122,
123
310. Particular
and General Suppositions referring
to the future. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
311. [FUTURE SUPPOSITION WITH LESS
PROBABILITY]. . . 123
312-314.
PRESENT GENERAL SUPPOSITION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123,
124
315. PAST GENERAL SUPPOSITION. . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124, 125
316. Clauses conditional in form, but
definite in sense . . . . . . . . . . 125
III. RELATIVE CLAUSES EXPRESSING PURPOSE.
317. RELATIVE CLAUSES OF PURE PURPOSE. .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
318-320.
Complementary Relative Clauses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125, 126
IV. RELATIVE CLAUSES
INTRODUCED BY WORDS MEANING
UNTIL, WHILE, AND BEFORE.
321. Definition
of e!wj . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126, 127
322,
323. CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY e!wj AND REFERRING TO THE
FUTURE. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
324-326.
CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY e!wj AND REFERRING TO
WHAT WAS IN PAST TIME A FUTURE
CONTINGENCY . . 127, 128
327.
CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY e!wj (UNTIL), AND REFER-
RING TO A PAST FACT. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
128
328,
329. CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY e!wj (WHILE), AND REFER-
RING TO A CONTEMPORANEOUS EVENT. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . 128
330. !Ewj followed by ou# or o!tou
. . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128, 129
331,
332. Clauses introduced by a@xri,
a@xri ou$
etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
333.
Clauses introduced by pri<n
. . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
Moods in Indirect Discourse.
334-340.
Definition and Classification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . 130-132
341,
342. Classical Usage in Indirect Discourse. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 132
343-346.
New Testament Usage in Indirect Discourse. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132-134
347. Single
dependent Clauses in Indirect Discourse . . . . 134
348. Imperfect
for Present, and Pluperfect for Per-
fect in Indirect Discourse. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 134, 135
349,
350. Relative Pronouns
in Indirect Discourse. . . . . . . . . .
135
351-356.
Indirect Discourse in
English and in Greek
Construction after Kai> e]ge<neto
357-360.
Three Forms of the Idiom. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 142, 143
xvi
CONTENTS.
THE
INFINITIVE.
SECTION
PAGE
361-363.
Origin, and Classification of Uses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143-145
The Infinitive without the
Article.
364,
365. IMPERATIVE INFINITIVE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
366,
367. INFINITIVE OF PURPOSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
368. INFINITIVE AS AN INDIRECT OBJECT. .
. . . . . . . . . . 147
369-371.
INFINITIVE OF RESULT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147-150
372-374.
Exceptional usages. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
150
375.
INFINITIVE DEFINING CONTENT OF A PREVIOUS VERB
OR NOUN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150, 151
376,
377. INFINITIVE LIMITING ADJECTIVES AND ADVERBS. 151
378,
379. INFINITIVE LIMITING NOUNS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151, 152
380-382.
INFINITIVE AFTER pri<n or pri>n h@ . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . 152
383. INFINITIVE USED ABSOLUTELY. . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
384,
385. INFINITIVE AS SUBJECT. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 153
386. INFINITIVE AS APPOSITIVE . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
387-389.
INFINITIVE AS OBJECT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153, 154
390. Infinitive
in Indirect Discourse. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154, 155
391. Infinitive
after verbs of hoping, promising, swear-
ing, commanding, etc. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
The Infinitive with the Article.
392.
General Use of Infinitive with the
Article. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
155, 156
393.
INFINITIVE WITH to< AS SUBJECT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 156
394.
INFINITIVE WITH to< AS OBJECT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 156
395.
INFINITIVE WITH THE ARTICLE, IN APPOSITION. . . . . . . 156, 157
396.
INFINITIVE WITH t&? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . 157
397.
INFINITIVE OF PURPOSE WITH tou? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
398.
INFINITIVE OF RESULT WITH tou? . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 157, 158
399.
INFINITIVE WITH tou? AFTER ADJECTIVES. . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
400.
INFINITIVE WITH tou? AFTER NOUNS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. 158
401.
INFINITIVE WITH tou? AFTER VERBS THAT TAKE THE
GENITIVE . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158, 159
402,
403. Various constructions after
Verbs of hindering . . . . . . . . 159
404,
405. INFINITIVE WITH tou? AS SUBJECT OR OBJECT. . . . . 159, 160
406-417.
INFINITIVE WITH THE ARTICLE GOVERNED BY PREPO-
SITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160-163
CONTENTS. xvii
THE
PARTICIPLE.
SECTION
PAGE
418. General Nature of the Participle. .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
419. Classification respecting logical
force . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163, 164
The Adjective
Participle.
420,
421. Definition and
Classification. . . . . . . . . . . . 164
422. RESTRICTIVE ATTRIBUTIVE PARTICIPLE.
. . . . . . 164, 165
423. Restrictive
Attributive Participle with Subject
omitted. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
424. Noun
without the article limited by a Participle
with the article. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
425. Neuter
Participle with the article equivalent to an
abstract Noun. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
426. EXPLANATORY ATTRIBUTIVE PARTICIPLE .
. . . . . . 166
427. Order
of words with Attributive Participle
limiting a Noun with the article. . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . 166, 167
428. Attributive
Participle conveying a subsidiary idea
of cause, purpose, etc. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
429,
430. PREDICATIVE ADJECTIVE PARTICIPLE. . . . . . . . . 167
431. Predicative
Participle used to form periphrastic
tenses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
432,
433. Participles in Predicate in
various construc-
tions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168, 169
The Adverbial Participle.
434. Definition. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . 169
435. ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF TIME. . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . 169
436. ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF CONDITION. . . . . . . . . 169
437,
438. ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF CONCESSION. .
. . . . 170
439. ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF CAUSE. . .
. . . . . . . . . . 170
440,
441. Participle of Cause with w[j
. . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170,
171
442. ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF PURPOSE . .
. . . . . . . . 171
443.
ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF MEANS. . . . . . . . . . . . 171
444. ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE OF MANNER. . .
. . . . . . . . 171
445,
446. [Wj with the Participle
denoting Manner . . . . . . . . . 172
447. Participle
of Manner or Means denoting same
action as that of the principal Verb. . . .
. . . . . . . . . 172, 173
448. I ntensive
Participle-Hebraistic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
xviii
CONTENTS.
SECTION
PAGE
449,
450. ADVERBUL PARTICIPLE OF ATTENDANT CIRCUM.
STANCE. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173,174
451. More
than one adverbial relation implied by
the same Participle. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . 174
452-454.
Genitive Absolute. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174,
175
455. Position
of Adverbial Participle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
The Substantive Participle.
456. Definition.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
457. SUBSTANTIVE PARTICIPLE AS SUBJECT. .
. . . . . . 175
458,
459. SUBSTANTIVE PARTICIPLE AS OBJECT. . . . . . . . . 176
460. Substantive
Participle in Indirect Discourse. . 176
461. SUBSTANTIVE PARTICIPLE AS A
LIMITING GENITIVE 176
462. Position
of Substantive Participle. . . . . . . . . . . . 177
463. Substantive
Participle distinguished from Ad.
jective Participle used substantively. . .
. . . . . . . . . . 177
THE USE OF NEGATIVES WITH VERBS.
464. General Usage. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
NEGATIVES WITH THE INDICATIVE.
465. Negatives in Independent declaratory
Sentences. . . . . . . . . . 178
466. Negatives with a Prohibitory Future.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
467. Negatives in Questions. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
468. Mh> ou] in Rhetorical Questions. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
469,
470. Negatives in Conditional and Conditional Relative
Clauses.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179, 180
471. Ei] mh< in the sense of except.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
472. Ou] after mh< as a conjunction. . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
473. Negatives in Indirect Discourse. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
474. Negatives in Causal Clauses and in
simple Relative
Clauses
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
NEGATIVES WITH THE SUBJUNCTIVE, OPTATIVE,
AND IMPERATIVE.
475. Negatives with the Subjunctive. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181, 182
476,
477. Negatives with the Optative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
182
479. Negatives with the Imperative. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
182, 183
CONTENTS.
xix
NEGATIVES WITH THE INFINITIVE AND PARTICIPLE.
SECTION PAGE
480. General Usage of Negatives with the
Infinitive. . . . . . . . . . 183
481. Negatives with a limitation of an
Infinitive or of its
subject.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183,184
482. Compound of ou] with an Infinitive
dependent on a
principal
verb limited by ou] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
483. Redundant mh< with Infinitive after
verbs of hinder-
ing,
denying, etc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
484. Negative with Infinitive dependent
on a verb itself
egatived
by ou] .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
485. General Usage of Negatives with the
Participle. . . . . . . . . . 184, 185
SUCCESSIVE AND DOUBLE NEGATIVES.
486. Two simple Negatives, or a compound
Negative fol-
lowed
by a simple Negative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
487,
488. Double Negative ou] mh<. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 185, 186
489. Negative followed by similar
compound Negative or
double
Negative. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
LIST OF WORKS AND AUTHORS
REFERRED TO
BY ABBREVIATION.
A.J.P. . . . . . American Journal of Philology.
Alf. . . . . . .
Henry Alford, The Greek New Testament. 4 vols. Lon-
don.
A.
V. . . . . . Authorized Version of the New Testament.
B. . . . . . . . . Alexander
Buttmann, A Grammar of the New Testament
Greek.
Translated by J. H. Thayer.
Bib. Sac. . . . Bibliotheca Sacra.
Br. . . . . . . . . Karl
Brugmann, Griechische Grammatik, in Iwan Mul-
ler's
Handbuch der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft,
vol. II.
Second Edition. Munchen, 1890.
Cl. Rev. . . . . Classical Review.
1888.
Ev. Pet.. . . . Apocryphal Gospel of Peter. (Verses according
to the
edition of
Harnack,
G. . . . . . . . . W. W.
Goodwin, A Greek Grammar. Revised Edition.
Gild. . . . . . . Basil
L. Gildersleeve, various papers in A.J.P.
and
T.A.P.A.
G.MT.
. . . . . W. W. Goodwin, Syntax of the Moods and Tenses of the
Greek Verb.
Revised and enlarged.
Gr. . . . . . . . . Thomas
Sheldon Green, A Treatise on the Grammar of
the New
Testament. New Edition.
HA. . . . . . . . James
Hadley, A Greek Grammar for Schools and
leges.
Revised by F. D. Allen.
Hr. . . . . . . . . W. R.
Harper, Elements of Hebrew Syntax.
1888.
J. . . . . . . . . J. W.
E. Jelf, A Grammar of the Greek Language. Third
Edition. 2
vols.
J.B.L. . . . . . . Journal of the Society of Biblical Literature
and Exegesis.
K. . . . . . . . . . Raphael
Kuhner, Grammatik der Griechischen Sprache.
Ka. . . . . . . . . E.
Kautzsch, Grammatik des Biblisch-Aramaischen.
xxi
xxii
LIST OF WORKS AND
AUTHORS.
L.
and S. . . . Liddell and Scott, Greek-English Lexicon, etc. Seventh
Edition.
Ltft. . . . . . . . J. B.
Lightfoot, Commentaries on Galatians, on Philip-
pians, and
on Colossians and Philemon.
Mart.
Polyc. . Martyrium Polycarpi. (See any edition
of the Apostolic
Fathers. )
Meist. . . . . . K. Meisterhans,
Grammatik der Attischen Inschriften.
Mey. . . . . . . H. A.
W. Meyer, Kommentar iiber das Neue Testament.
1873-1880.
Ps.
Sol. . . . . The Psalms of Solomon.
(Recent edition by Ryle and
James,
R.
V. . . . . . . The New Testament in the
Revised Version of 1881.
S. . . . . . . . . . W. H. Simcox,
The Language of the New Testament.
Th.
. . . . . . . . J. H. Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New
Testament:
Being Grimm's Wilke's Clavis Novi Testa-
menti,
translated, revised, and enlarged.
1886.
Tisch.
. . . . . Constantinus Tischendorf, Novum Testamentum Graece.
Eighth
Edition. 2 vols.
Treg.
. . . . . . S. P. Tregelles, The Greek New Testament.
1857-79.
T.A.P.A. . . . Transactions
of the American Philological Association.
W. . . . . . . . . G. B.
Winer. See WE and WT.
WH. . . . . . . . Westcott
and Hort, The New Testament in the Original
Greek, the
text revised by B. F. Westcott and F. J. A.
Hort. 2
vols.
WT . . . . . . . G. B.
Winer, A Treatise on the Grammar of New Testa-
ment Greek.
Translated by W. F. Moulton. Third
Edition.
WM. . . . . . . . G. B.
Winer, A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Tes-
tament.
Seventh Edition, enlarged and improved by
Gottlieb Lunemann.
Revised and authorized Trans-
lation by J.
H. Thayer.
WS. . . . . . . . G. B.
Winer's Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Sprach-
idioms,
Achte Auflage, neu bearbeitet von D. Paul Wilh.
Schmiedel,
For classical and Scripture writers the ordinary
abbreviations are used.
References
to the Old Testament are to the Septuagint Version, unless
otherwise
indicated.
SYNTAX
OF THE
MOODS AND TENSES IN NEW TESTAMENT
GREEK.
INTRODUCTORY
1. FORM AND FUNCTION. The following
pages deal with
the
various functions of the various verb-forms of the Greek
of
the New Testament, so far as respects their mood and
tense.
It is important that the nature of the relation between
form
and function be clearly held in mind. It is by no means
the
case that each form has but one function, and that each
function
can be discharged by but one form. Forms of various
origin
may be associated together under one name and perform
the
same function, or group of functions. Compare, e.g., the
Aorist
Active Infinitives, lu?sai and ei]
quite
diverse origin; in function they have become entirely
assimilated.
The same is true of the Aorist Active Indicatives,
e@deica and e@sthn. Forms also which still
have different names,
and
usually perform different functions, may have certain
functions
in common. Compare the Aorist Subjunctive and
the
Future Indicative in clauses of purpose (197, 198). On
the
other hand, and to an even greater extent, we find that a
given
form, or a given group of forms bearing a common name,
performs
various distinct functions. Observe, e.g., the various
functions
of the Aorist Indicative (38-48).
1
2
INTRODUCTORY.
The name of a given form, or group
of forms, is usually
derived
from some prominent function of the form or group.
Thus
the term Aorist reflects the fact that the forms thus
designated
most frequently represent an action indefinitely
without
reference to its progress. The name Present suggests
that
the forms thus designated denote present time, which is
true,
however, of the smaller part only of those that bear the
name,
and of none of them invariably. The name Optative
again
reminds us that one function of the forms so named is
to
express a wish. While, therefore, the names of the forms
were
originally intended to designate their respective func-
tions,
they cannot now be regarded as descriptive of the actual
functions,
but must be taken as conventional, and to a con-
siderable
extent arbitrary, names of the forms. The functions
must
be learned, not from the names, but from observation of
the
actual usage.
2.
THE INTERPRETER'S RELATION TO GRAMMAR. Both the
grammarian
as such and the interpreter deal with grammar, but
from
very different points of view. The distinction between
these
points of view should be clearly recognized by the in-
terpreter.
It may be conveniently represented by the terms
historical
grammar and exegetical grammar. Historical gram-
mar
deals with the development of both form and function
through
the various periods of the history of the language,
and
does this in purely objective fashion. Exegetical grammar,
on
the other hand, takes the forms as it finds them, and defines
the
functions which at a given period each form discharged,
and
does this from the point of view of the interpreter, for
the
purpose of enabling him to reproduce the thought con-
veyed
by the form. To investigate the process by which the
several
forms were built up, to determine the earliest function
of
each such form, to show how out of this earliest function
INTRODUCTORY. 3
others
were developed, and how forms of different origin, and
presumably
at first of different function, became associated,
discharging
the same function and eventually coming to bear
the
same name--all this belongs to historical grammar. To
reproduce
in the mind of the interpreter, and to express as
nearly
as may be in his own tongue, the exact thought
which
a given form was in the period in question capable of
expressing--this
is the task of exegetical grammar. Histori-
cal
grammar views its problem wholly from the point of view
of
the language under investigation, without reference to the
language
of the grammarian. Exegetical grammar is neces-
sarily
concerned both with the language under investigation
and
with that in which the interpreter thinks and speaks,
since
its problem is to aid in reproducing in the latter tongue
thought
expressed in the former.
The results of historical grammar
are of the greatest interest
and
value to exegetical grammar. Our interpretation of the
phenomena
of language in its later periods can hardly fail to
be
affected by a knowledge of the earlier history. Strictly
speaking,
however, it is with the results only of the processes
of
historical grammar that the interpreter is concerned. If
the
paradigm has been rightly constructed, so that forms of
diverse
origin perhaps, but completely assimilated in function,
bear
a common name, exegetical grammar is concerned only to
know
what are the functions which each group of forms bear-
ing
a common name is capable of discharging. Thus, the
diversity
of origin of the two Aorists, e@lusa and e@lipon, does
not
immediately concern the interpreter, if it is an assured
result
of historical grammar that these two forms are com-
pletely
assimilated in function. Nor does it concern him that
the
ai
at the end of the Infinitives, dei?cai and i]e<nai, is the mark
of
the Dative case, and that the earliest use of such infinitives
was
as a verbal noun in the Dative case, except as this fact
4
INTRODUCTORY.
of
historical grammar aids him in the interpretation of the
phenomena
of that period of the language with which he is
dealing.
The one question of exegetical grammar to which
all
other questions are subsidiary is, What function did this
form,
or group of forms, discharge at the period with which
we
are dealing? What, e.g., in the New Testament, are the
functions
of the Present Indicative? What are the uses of
the
Aorist Subjunctive?
For practical convenience forms are
grouped together, and
the
significance of each of the distinctions made by inflection
discussed
by itself. The present work confines itself to the
discussion
of mood and tense, and discusses these as far as
possible
separately. Its question therefore is, What in the
New
Testament are the functions of each tense and of each
mood?
These various functions must be defined first of all
from
the point of view of the Greek language itself. Since,
however,
the interpreter whom in the present instance it is
sought
to serve thinks in English, and seeks to express in
English
the thought of the Greek, reference must be had
also
to the functions of the English forms as related to
those
of the Greek forms. Since, moreover, distinctions of
function
in the two languages do not always correspond,
that
is, since what in Greek is one function of a given form
may
be in English subdivided into several functions per-
formed
by several forms, it becomes necessary not only to
enumerate
and define the functions of a given form purely
from
the point of view of Greek, but to subdivide the one
Greek
function into those several functions which in English
are
recognized and marked by the employment of different
forms.
An enumeration of the uses of a given Greek tense
made
for the use of an English interpreter may therefore
properly
include certain titles which would not occur in a
list
made for one to whom Greek was the language of
INTRODUCTORY. 5
ordinary
speech and thought. The Aorist for the English
Perfect,
and the Aorist for the English Pluperfect (46, 48)
furnish
a pertinent illustration. The interests of the English
interpreter
require that they be clearly recognized. Fidelity
to
Greek usage requires that they be recognized as, strictly
speaking,
true Historical Aorists.
3. The Greek verb has four moods,--the
Indicative, the
Subjunctive,
the Optative, and the Imperative. With these
are
associated in the study of Syntax the Infinitive, which is,
strictly
speaking, a verbal noun, and the Participle, which is
a
verbal adjective.
The Subjunctive, Optative, Imperative,
and Infinitive are
often
called dependent moods.
REM. The term dependent is not
strictly applicable to these moods,
and least of all to the Imperative, which
almost always stands as a prin-
cipal verb. It has, however, become an
established term, and is retained
as a matter of convenience.
4. There are seven tenses
in the Greek,--the Present,
Imperfect,
Aorist, Future, Perfect, Pluperfect, and Future
Perfect.
Those
tenses which denote present or future time are called
Primary
tenses. Those tenses which denote past time are
called
Secondary tenses. Since the time denoted by a tense
varies
with the particular use of the tense, no fixed line of
division
can be drawn between the two classes of tenses. In
the
Indicative the Present and Perfect are usually, and the
Future
and Future Perfect are always, Primary tenses; the
Imperfect,
Aorist, and Pluperfect are usually Secondary
tenses.
THE TENSES.
5. The action denoted by
a verb may be defined by the tense
of
the verb
(a)
As respects its progress. Thus it may
be represented
as
in progress, or as completed, or indefinitely, i.e. as a
simple
event without reference to
progress or completion.
(b)
As respects its time, as past, present, or future.
The
tenses of the Indicative mood in general define the
action
of the verb in both these respects.
The tenses of the other moods in
general define the action
of
the verb only as respects its progress. HA.
821; G. 1249.
REM. The chief function of a Greek tense is thus not to denote time,
but
progress. This latter function belongs to the tense-forms of all the
moods,
the former to those of the Indicative only.
TENSES OF THE INDICATIVE MOOD.
6. The significance of the tenses of
the Indicative mood
may
be stated in general as follows: --
As respects progress: The Present
and Imperfect denote
action
in progress; the Perfect, Pluperfect, and Future Perfect
denote
completed action; the Aorist represents the action
indefinitely
as an event or single fact; the Future is used
either
of action in progress like the Present, or indefinitely
like
the Aorist.
As respects time: The Present and
Perfect denote present
time;
the Imperfect, Aorist, and Pluperfect denote past time;
the
Future and Future Perfect denote future time.
6
THE PRESENT INDICATIVE 7
7.
The tenses of the Indicative in general denote time rela-
tive
to that of speaking. Most exceptions to this rule are
apparent
or rhetorical rather than real and grammatical. In
indirect
discourse the point of view, as respects time, of the
original
speaking or thinking is retained. Cf. 351. Of two
verbs
of past time, one may refer to an action antecedent to
the
other, but this fact of antecedence is implied in the con-
text,
not expressed in the tense. Cf. 29 and 48. By prolepsis
also
a verb of past time may refer to or include events to take
place
after the time of speaking, but before a point of future
time
spoken of in the context. Cf. 50. In conditional sen-
tences
of the second form, the tenses are properly timeless.
Cf.
248. See
THE PRESENT INDICATIVE.
8.
The Progressive Present. The Present Indicative
is
used of action in progress in present time. HA.
824;
G. 1250, 1.
Matt.
25:8; ai[ lampa<dej h[mw?n sbe<nnuntai, our lamps are going out
Gal.
1:6; qauma<zw o!ti
ou!twj taxe<wj metati<qesqe a]po> tou? kale<san-
toj u[ma?j, I marvel that ye are so quickly removing from him that called
you.
9. The most constant characteristic
of the Present Indica-
tive
is that it denotes action in progress. It probably had
originally
no reference to present time (see
since,
in the" historical periods of the language, action in
progress
in past time is expressed by the Imperfect, and the
Future
is used both as a progressive and as an aoristic tense
for
future time, it results that the Present Indicative is chiefly
used
to express action in progress in present time. Hence
in
deciding upon the significance of any given instance of the
Present
Indicative in the New Testament as well as in classi-
8
THE
TENSES.
cal
Greek, the interpreter may consider that there is, at least
in
the majority of words, a certain presumption in favor of
the
Progressive Present rather than any of the other uses
mentioned
below.
10.
The Progressive Present in Greek is not always best
translated
by what is commonly called in English the "Pro-
gressive
Form." Some English verbs themselves suggest
action
in progress, and do not, except when there is strong
emphasis
on the progressive idea, use the progressive form.
Thus
the verb (qauma<zw), in Gal. 1:6, is a Progressive Present,
but
is best translated I marvel, the verb itself sufficiently sug-
gesting
the idea of action in progress.
11.
THE CONATIVE PRESENT. The Present Indicative is
occasionally
used of action attempted, but not accomplished.
H.A. 825; G. 1255. This use is, however, not to be
re-
garded
as a distinct function of the tense. The Conative
Present
is merely a species of the Progressive Present. A
verb
which of itself suggests effort, when used in a tense
which
implies action in progress, and hence incomplete, natu-
rally
suggests the idea of attempt. All the verb-forms of the
Present
system are equally, with the Present, capable of
expressing
attempted action, since they all denote action in
progress.
John
trate
this usage in the Present. Similar is the use of the
Present
in
For examples of the Imperfect see
23. Respecting the
resultative
force of such verbs in the Aorist see 42.
12.
The General or Gnomic Present. The Present
Indicative
is used to express customary actions and general
truths.
HA. 824, a; G. 1253, 1291.
Matt.
bringeth forth good fruit.
THE PRESENT INDICATIVE. 9
2
Cor. 9:7; i[laro>n ga>r do<thn a]gap%? o[ qeo<j, for God
loveth a cheerful
giver.
13. The Aoristic Present. The Present Indicative is
sometimes
used of an action or event coincident in time
with
the act of speaking, and conceived of as a simple
event.
Most frequently the action denoted by the verb
is
identical with the act of speaking itself, or takes place
in
that act.
Acts
thee in the name of Jesus Christ. See also Mark 2:5, a]fi<entai; Acts
ous instances of le<gw in the gospels.
REM. This usage is a distinct
departure from the prevailing use of
the
Present tense to denote action in progress (cf. 9). There being in the
Indicative
no tense which represents an event as a simple fact without at
the
same time assigning it either to the past or the future, the Present is
used
for those instances (rare as compared with the cases of the Pro-
gressive
Present), in which an action of present time is conceived of
without
reference to its progress.
14.
The Historical Present. The Present
Indicative
is
used to describe vividly a past event in the presence of
which
the speaker conceives himself to be. HA.
828;
G. 1252.
Mark
to
This use is very frequent in the
gospels.
15.
The Present for the Future. In a
similar way
the
Present Indicative may be used to describe vividly a
future
event.
Mark
Son of man is delivered into the hands of men. See also Matt. 26:18,
poiw?; 27:63, e]gei<romai; Luke 3:9, e]kko<ptetai.
10
THE
TENSES.
REM. The term "Present for Future" is
sometimes objected to, but
without
good reason. The arguments of Buttmann, pp. 203 f., and Winer,
WT. pp. 265 ff.; WM. pp. 331 ff., are valid only against
the theory of an
arbitrary
interchange of tenses. It is indeed not to be supposed that
Greek
writers confused the Present and the Future tenses, or used them
indiscriminately.
But that the form which customarily denoted an act
in
progress at the time of speaking was sometimes, for the sake of vivid-
ness,
used with reference to a fact still in the future, is recognized by all
grammarians.
See; e.g., J. 397; K. 382, 5; G.MT. 32. The whole force
of
the idiom is derived from the unusualness of the tense employed.
16. The Present form h!kw
means I have come ( John 2:4;
I have arrived (Acts 17:6; etc.).
This, however, is not a
Present
for the Perfect of the same verb, but a Present
equivalent
to the Perfect of another verb. The use of a]kou<w
meaning
I am informed (cf. similar use of
English hear, see,
learn) is more nearly a
proper Present for Perfect (1 Cor.
a
very few verbs. HA. 827; G. 1256.
17. The Present of past Action still in Progress.
The
Present Indicative, accompanied by an adverbial
expression
denoting duration and referring to past time,
is
sometimes used in Greek, as in German, to describe
an
action which, beginning in past time, is still in prog-
ress
at the time of speaking. English idiom requires
the
use of the Perfect in such cases. HA.
826; G. 1258.
Acts
sontaj au]to>n
e@xei, for Moses from generations of old has had in
every
city them
that preached him.
See also Luke 13:7, e@rxomai 15:29,
douleu<w; John 5:6, e@xei; 2 Tim.
almost always incorrectly rendered in R. V.
REM. Cf. Br.
156, "Das Prasens in Verbindung mit pa<roj,
pa<lai,
pote< wurde seit Homer gebraucht, um eine
Handlung auszudrucken, die
sich
durch die Vergangenheit bis zur Zeit des Sprechens hinzieht." In
the
New Testament examples definite expressions of past time occur in
place
of the adverbs pa<roj, etc.
THE PRESENT INDICATIVE. 11
18. The Aorist Indicative,
limited by an expression mean-
ing
up to this time, may also be used of
acts. beginning in past
time
and continuing to the time of speaking. Matt. 27:8;
28:15.
Cf. 46, and 52.
19. Verbs in indirect
discourse retain the point of view, as
respects
time, of the original statement; a Progressive Present
in
indirect discourse accordingly denotes action going on at
the
time, not of the quotation of the words, but of the original
utterance
of them. English usage in indirect discourse is
different,
and from this difference it results that a Greek
Present
Indicative standing in indirect discourse after a verb
of
past time must often be rendered by a verb of past time.
These
cases, however, involve no special use of the Greek
tense,
and should not be confused with those of the Historical
Present.
Cf. 351-356.
20. PERIPHRASTIC FORM OF THE PRESENT. One of the
clearly
marked peculiarities of the Greek of the New Testa-
ment
is the frequency with which periphrastic forms composed
of
a Present or Perfect Participle (Luke
tional
in its use of the Aorist Participle;
cf. Ev. Pet. 23),
and
the Present, Imperfect, or Future Indicative, or the
Present
Subjunctive, Imperative, Infinitive, and even parti-
ciple,
of the verb ei]mi< (rarely also u[pa<rxw), are used instead
of
the usual simple forms. Cf. 431, and see the full dis-
cussion
with examples in B. pp. 308-313, and
the list (not
quite
complete) in S. pp. 131ff.
Instances of the periphrastic Present Indicative
are, how-
ever,
few. The clear instances belong under the head of the
General
Present.
Matt.
27:33; ei]j to<pon lego<menon Golgoqa<, o! e]stin
Krani<ou To<poj
lego<menoj, unto a place called
Skull. See also Matt. l:23;
Mark 5:41; 2 Cor.
12
THE
TENSES.
THE IMPERFECT INDICATIVE.
21. The Progressive Imperfect. The Imperfect is
used
of action in progress in past time. HA.
829;
G. 1250, 2.
Mark
rich were
casting in much.
Luke
1:66; kai> ge>r xei>r kuri<ou h#n met ] au]tou?, for the hand of the Lord
was with
him.
John
22. The statement respecting
the translation of the Pro-
gressive
Present (cf. 10), applies to the Imperfect also.
Notice
the third example above, and see also Luke 2:51,
his mother kept [dieth<rei] all these things in her heart; in Luke
24:32,
A. V., did not our heart burn within us,
is better than
R.
V., was not our heart burning within us.
Though the verb
is
a periphrastic Imperfect, kaiome<nh h#n, the English form
did burn sufficiently suggests
action in progress to render it
adequately.
23. THE CONATIVE
IMPERFECT. The Progressive Imperfect
is
sometimes used of action attempted, but not accomplished.
Cf.
11. HA. 832; G.1255.
Matt.
See
also Luke
lassen; 26:11, h]na<gkazon.
24. The Imperfect of Repeated Action. The Imper-
fect
is used of customary or repeated action in past time.
HA. 830; G. 1253, 2
Acts
3:2; o!n e]ti<qoun
kaq ] h[me<ran pro>j th>n
qu<ran tou? i[erou? , whom they
used to
lay daily at the gate of the temple.
THE IMPERFECT INDICATIVE 13
25. For the use of the
Imperfect, Aorist, or Pluperfect in
a
condition contrary to fact, or its apodosis, see 248, 249.
26. The Imperfect and
Aorist with a@n are used in classical
Greek
to denote a customary past action taking place under
certain
circumstances. In the New Testament this usage
never
occurs in principal clauses. The use of the Imperfect
and
Aorist with a@n in conditional relative clauses is possibly
a
remnant of the usage. Cf. 315.
27. The Imperfect and
Aorist are used in a clause express-
ing
an unattained wish having reference to the present or past.
The
Imperfect denotes action in progress. The Aorist repre-
sents
the action indefinitely as a simple event. Either tense
may
refer to either present or past time. All the New Testa-
ment
instances seem to refer to present time.
Rev.
3:15; o@felon yuxro>j h#j h} zesto<j, I would that thou wert cold
or hot. See also 1 Cor. 4:8
(Aor.); 2 Cor. 11:1 (Imperf.).
REM. 1. In classical Greek unattainable wishes
are expressed by ei@qe
or
ei] ga<r with the Indicative (HA.
871; G. 1511) or w@felon with the
Infinitive.
In Callimachus, 260 B.C., w@felon is found with the
Indicative
(L.
& S., o]fei<lw II. 3. fin.). In
the New Testament ei] ga<r (in this
sense)
and ei@qe
do not occur, but o@felon, shortened form of w@felon, is
used
(as an uninflected particle) with the Imperfect and Aorist Indica-
tive.
WM. p. 377; WT. p. 301, N. 2.
REM. 2. In Gal.
is
probably not conceived of as unattainable.
28. When an Imperfect
refers to an action not separated
from the time of speaking by a recognized
interval, it is
best
translated into English by the Perfect, using preferably
the
progressive form, unless the verb itself suggests action
in
progress.
14
THE TENSES.
I
John 2:7; h{n ei@xete a]p ] a]rxh?j, which ye
have had from the beginning.
See also Luke
in Theological Monthly, IV. 42, who also quotes
examples from clas-
sical authors). Cf. 52.
29. When an action denoted
by an Imperfect evidently pre-
ceded
an event already mentioned, such Imperfect is sometimes
best
translated into English by the Pluperfect. From the
point
of view of Greek, however, this, like the preceding
usage,
is an ordinary Progressive Imperfect or Imperfect of
Repeated
Action. Cf. 52.
Matt.
for John
had been saying to him, It is not lawful for you to have her.
See also Luke 8:27; Acts 9:39.
30. The Imperfect of verbs
denoting obligation or possi-
bility,
when used to affirm that a certain thing should or
could
have been done, i.e. was required or possible under the
circumstances
related, is a true affirmative Imperfect. It is
incorrect
in this case to speak of an omitted a@n, since though
it
is frequently the case that the necessary or possible deed
did
not take place, the past necessity or possibility was actual,
not
hypothetical or "contrary to fact." Here belong Matt.
2:3,
etc.
The Imperfect is also used of a past necessity
or obligation
when
the necessary deed did take place. Here also, of course,
the
Imperfect has its usual force. Luke
John
4:4; Acts 1:16; 17:3.
31. Buttmann, pp. 216 f.,
225 f., describes correctly the class of cases
in
which the past obligation or possibility was actual, but in which the
required
or possible deed did not take place, but wrongly includes in
his
list several passages in which not only the fact but the obligation
or
ability is hypothetical. Such are John 9:33; 1 Cor. 5:10; Heb. 9:26,
which
are to be explained in accordance with 249. The distinction
THE IMPERFECT INDICATIVE. 15
between
these two classes of cases is not always easily marked in English
translation,
since the English forms could, should,
etc., are used both
for
actual and for hypothetical obligation or ability. Cf. He could have
gone, if he had been
well,
and He could have gone, but did not wish
to go.
32. Through a dimming of
the distinction between the
ideas
of present and past obligation (which has occurred also
in
English in the case of the word ought),
the Imperfect with-
out
a@n
is sometimes used to express a present obligation. The
Infinitive
after such an Imperfect is always in the Present
tense.
In accordance with this usage we are probably to ex-
plain
Acts 22:22; Eph. 5:4; Col. 3:18; cf. Ltft.
on
loc. cit. and G.MT. 416.
On these several uses of the Imperfect of verbs
of obliga-
tion,
etc., see G.MT. 413-423.
33. The Imperfect of verbs
of wishing, without a@n, is best
explained
as a true Progressive Imperfect, describing a desire
which
the speaker for a time felt, without affirming that he
actually
cherishes it at the time of his present utterance.
This
is especially clear in Philem. 13, 14, where the apostle
states
in one clause what his desire--his personal prefer-
ence--was
(e]boulo<mhn), and in the next his actual decision
(h]qe<lhsa), as over against his
preference. The reason for
describing
the desire as past is not always, however, that
it
has been put aside. Failure to realize the desire, or the
perception
that it cannot be realized, or reluctance to express
a
positive and deliberate choice may lead the speaker to use
the
Imperfect rather than the Present. Similarly we some-
times
say in colloquial English, I was wishing
that such a
thing might happen, or even more commonly,
I have sometimes
wished. Nearly the same
meaning may be conveyed in Eng-
lish
by the more usual potential form, I
should like, I would
16
THE
TENSES.
that, or I could wish. In Acts 25:22 the use of
the Imperfect
e]boulo<mhn rather than a Present
softens the request for polite-
ness'
sake, and may well be rendered I should
like. In Gal.
that
leads to the use of the Imperfect, and h@qelon parei?nai
may
be rendered, I would that I were present.
In Rom. 9:3
hu]xo<mhn may have been chosen
because the apostle shrank
from
expressing a deliberate choice in regard to so solemn
a
matter, or because he thought of it as beyond the control
or
influence of his wish. I could pray
expresses the meaning
with
approximate accuracy. In all these cases, however, what
is
strictly stated in the Greek is merely the past existence of a
state
of desire; the context alone implies what the present
state
of mind is. Cf. G.MT. 425.
34. PERIPHRASTIC FORM OF
THE IMPERFECT. Periphras-
tic
Imperfects, formed by adding a Present Participle to the
Imperfect
of the verb ei]mi<, are frequent in the New Testament,
especially
in the historical books. The large majority of
these
forms denote continued action.
Mark
before
them.
So also Luke
Mark
Luke
THE AORIST
INDICATIVE.
35. The constant
characteristic of the Aorist tense in all
of
its moods, including the participle, is that it represents the
action
denoted by it indefinitely; i.e.
simply as an event,
neither
on the one hand picturing it in progress, nor on the
other
affirming the existence of its result. The name indefi-
nite as thus understood is
therefore applicable to the tense in
all
of its uses.
THE AORIST INDICATIVE 17
As respects the point of view from which the
action is
looked
at, however, we may distinguish three functions of the
tense
common to all of its moods.
First, it may be used to describe an action or
event in its
entirety.
This use of the tense, since it is by far the most
frequent,
may be called by pre-eminence the Indefinite Aorist.
In
the Indicative it may be called the Historical Aorist. The
Aorist
of any verb may be used in this sense; thus ei]
to say; diakonh?sai, to serve.
Secondly, it may be used to denote the inception
of a
state.
The Aorist thus used may be called the Inceptive
Aorist.
It belongs to verbs which in the Present and Imper-
fect
denote the continuance of a state; thus sig%?n, to be silent;
sigh?sai, to
become silent.
Thirdly, it may be used to denote the success of
an effort.
The
Aorist thus used may be called the Resultative Aorist.
It
belongs to verbs which in the Present and Imperfect denote
effort
or attempt; thus kwlu<ein, to hinder, obstruct; kwlu?sai, to
prevent.
The genetic relation of these three functions of
the Aorist
tense
has not been satisfactorily defined. In the Greek, both of
the
classical and the New Testament periods, however, they ap-
pear
side by side as co-ordinate uses. Br.159;
REM. Respecting the force of the Indefinite
Aorist, compare Brug-
mann's
statement concerning the Aorist forms: "Am haufigsten wurden
diese
Formen so gebraucht, dass man sich die Handlung in einen unge-
teilten
Denkakt ganz und vollstandig, in sich abgeschlossen, absolut vor-
stellen
sollte. Das Factum wurde einfach constatiert ohne Rucksicht
auf
Zeitdauer."
36. In addition to these
uses which belong to the Aorist in
all
its moods, the Aorist Indicative has three uses, instances
of
which are comparatively infrequent. These are the Gnomic
Aorist,
the Epistolary Aorist, and the Dramatic Aorist.
18
THE
TENSES.
The Aorist for the Perfect and the Aorist for
the Pluper-
fect
are, as explained below (52), not distinct functions of the
Aorist,
but merely special cases of the Historical, Inceptive,
or
Resultative Aorist.
37. The distinction between
the Indefinite, the Inceptive,
and
the Resultative functions of the Aorist is often ignored,
or
its legitimacy denied. It is true that there are cases in
which
it is not possible to decide certainly whether a given
verb
refers to the inception of an action only, or to its entire
extent,
and others in which there is a similar difficulty in
deciding
whether the reference is to the action as a whole or
to
its result only. It is true also that the genetic relation of
these
three uses of the tense is not a matter of entire cer-
tainty,
and that it is possible that, historically speaking, they
are
but varying types of one usage. Especially must it be
regarded
as doubtful whether the Resultative Aorist is any-
thing
else than the Indefinite Aorist of verbs denoting effort.
The
matter of importance to the interpreter, however, is
that,
whatever the genesis of the fact, of the Aorists of the
New
Testament some denote a past act in its undivided
entirety,
others denote merely or chiefly the inception of an
action,
and others still affirm as a past fact the accomplish-
ment
of an act attempted. These distinctions,
which from the
exegetical
point of view it is often Important to mark, are
conveniently
indicated by the terms indefinite,
inceptive, and
resultative. With reference to the
validity of this distinction,
see
Br. 159.
The Inceptive Aorist is illustrated in Acts
they had become silent [meta>
to> sigh?sai]
James answered. It
is
evident that the Infinitive must refer to the becoming
silent,
not to the whole period of silence, since in the latter
case
James must have been silent while the others were silent,
THE AORIST INDICATIVE. 19
and
have begun to speak when their silence had ended. In
2
Cor. 8:9, we must read not being rich he
was poor, but being
rich he became poor; e]ptw<xeusen is manifestly
inceptive. So
also
in Luke
went a day's journey, it was not the holding
of the opinion that
he
was in the company that preceded the day's journey, but
the
forming of it, and the participle nomi<santej is inceptive.
Contrast
Acts
Illustrations of the resultative sense are less
numerous and
less
clear. In Acts 7:36, however, this man
led them forth,
having wrought wonders
and signs in
and in the wilderness
forty years,
the verb e]ch<gagen seems to
refer
only to the result, since the signs wrought in the Red
Sea
and the wilderness would otherwise have been represented
as
accompanying the bringing out, and instead of poih<saj we
should
have had poiw?n.
See also 42.1
38. The Historical Aorist. The Aorist Indicative is
most
frequently used to express a past event viewed in its
entirety,
simply as an event or a single fact. It has no
reference
to the progress of the event, or to any existing
result
of it. HA. 836; G. 1250, 5.
John
unto his
own and they that were his own received him not.
39. Since any past event
without reference to its duration
or
complexity may be conceived of as a single fact, the His-
torical
Aorist may be used to describe
(a) A momentary action.
Acts
5:5; e]ce<yucen, he gave
up the ghost.
Matt.
8:3; kai> e]ktei<naj th>n xei?ra h!yato au]tou?, and having stretched
forth his
hand he touched him.
1 Cf. Mart. Polyc. 8 : 2, 3, where both e@peiqon, were persuading, and
a]potuxo<ntej tou?
20
THE
TENSES.
(b) An extended act or state, however prolonged
in time, if
viewed
as constituting a single fact without reference to its
progress.
Acts
28:30; e]ne<meinen de> dieti<an o!lhn e]n i]di<&
misqw<mati,
and he abode
two whole
years in his own hired dwelling.
Eph.
2:4; dia> th>n pollh>n a]ga<phn au]tou? h{n h]ga<phsen h[ma?j, because
of his
great love wherewith he loved us.
(c) A series or aggregate of acts viewed as
constituting a
single
fact.
Matt.
2
Cor.
40. These three uses of the Historical Aorist
may for con-
venience
be designated as the Momentary Aorist, the Compre-
hensive
Aorist, and the Collective Aorist. But it should be
clearly
observed that these terms do not mark distinctions in
the
functions of the tense. An Historical Aorist, whatever the
nature
of the fact affirmed, affirms it simply as a past fact.
The
writer may or may not have in mind that the act was
single
and momentary, or extended, or a series of acts, but the
tense
does not express or suggest the distinction. The pur-
pose
of the subdivision into momentary, comprehensive, and
collective
is not to define the force of the tense-form, but to
discriminate
more precisely the nature of the facts to which
it
is applied as shown by the context or the circumstances.
Cf.
G.MT. 56.
REM. The term Historical Aorist is applied to the use of the Aorist
here
described only by pre-eminence. In strictness the Inceptive and
Resultative
Aorists are also Historical. Compare what is said concerning
the
term Indefinite under 35.
41. The Inceptive Aorist. The Aorist of a verb whose
Present
denotes a state or condition, commonly denotes
the
beginning of that state. HA. 841; G. 1260.
THE AORIST INDICATIVE. 21
2
Cor. 8:9; di ] u[ma?j
e]ptw<xeusen plou<sioj w@n, though
he was rich, for
your sakes
he became poor.
See also Luke 15:32; John 4:52;
Acts 7:60;
REM. The Aorist of such verbs is not, however,
necessarily inceptive.
The
same form may be in one sentence inceptive and in another historical
Cf.
Luke
historical,
in the latter probably inceptive.
42. The Resultative Aorist. The Aorist of a verb
whose
Present implies effort or intention, commonly de-
notes
the success of the effort. Cf. 11, 23.
Acts
27:43; o[ de> e[katonta<rxhj . . .
e]kw<lusen au]tou>j tou? boulh<matoj,
but the
centurion. . . prevented them from their purpose. See also
Matt. 27:20; Acts 7:36.
43. The
Gnomic Aorist.
The Aorist is used in prov-
erbs
and comparisons where the English commonly uses a
General
Present. HA. 840; G. 1292; G. MT. 154-161;
B. pp. 201 ff.; WM. pp. 346 f.; WT. p. 277; Br. 160.
1
Pet.
eth and
the flower falleth.
See also Luke 7:35; John 15:6; Jas.
1:11, 24.
REM. Winer's contention (WT. p. 277; WM. p. 346)
that the
Gnomic
Aorist does not occur in the New Testament does not seem
defensible.
The passages cited above are entirely similar to the classical
examples
of this ancient and well-established idiom.
44. The Epistolary Aorist. The writer of a letter
sometimes
puts himself in the place of his reader and de-
scribes
as past that which is to himself present, but which
will
be past to his reader. HA. 838.
Eph.
this very
purpose.
See also Acts 23:30; 1 Cor. 5:11; Phil. 2:28;
Col. 4:8; Philem. 11.
22
THE
TENSES.
45. The
Dramatic Aorist.
The Aorist Indicative is
sometimes
used of a state of mind just reached, or of an
act
expressive of it. The effect is to give to the statement
greater
vividness than is given by the more usual Present.
HA. 842; G.MT. 60; K. 386, 9;
Luke
16:4; e@gnwn ti< poih<sw, I know
[lit. I knew, or I perceived] what
I shall do.
REM. This usage is in classical Greek mainly
poetical and is found
chiefly
in dialogue. It is sometimes called "Aoristus tragicus." Brug-
mann
thus describes it: "Nicht selten wurde der Aorist von dem
gebraucht,
was soeben eingetreten ist, besonders von einer Stimmung,
die
soeben uber einen gekommen ist, oder von einem Urteil, das man
sich
soeben gebildet hat." See numerous examples in K. 386, 9.
46. THE AORIST FOR THE
(English) PERFECT. The Aorist
is
frequently used in Greek where the English idiom requires
a
Perfect. G.MT. 58; H.A. 837; B. pp. 197, 198.
Lk19:9;
sh<meron swthri<a t&, oi@k& tou<t&
e]ge<neto,
to-day is salvation
come to
this house.
Matt.
said to
them of old time.
Ph.
in
whatsoever state I am therein to be content. See also under 52.
47. The Aorist Indicative
of a few verbs is used in the New
Testament
to denote a present state, the result of a past act,
hence
with the proper force of a Greek Perfect. Cf. 75, 86.
So
the Aorists a]pe<qanon (cf. Mark
see
John
possibly
e@gnwn
(John
Aorists
may also be used as simple historical Aorists.
48. THE AORIST FOR THE (English) PLUPERFECT. The
Aorist
Indicative is frequently used in narrative passages of
a
past event which precedes another past event mentioned
THE AORIST INDICATIVE. 23
or
implied in the context. In English it is common in such
a
case to indicate the real. order of the events by the use
of
a Pluperfect for the earlier event. Cf. 52, 53. H.A. 4. 837;
G.MT. 58; B. pp. 199 f.
John
therefore
Jesus had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished.
Matt.
14:3; o[ ga>r
[Hr&<dhj krath<saj to>n
]Iwa<nhn e@dhsen, for Herod
having laid hold on John had bound him. See also
Matt. 27:31;
Mark
8:14; Luke 8:27; John
REM. It has been much disputed whether a]pe<steilen in John
is
to be assigned to this head. The valid objection to this is not in any
inappropriateness
of the Aorist tense to express an event antecedent to
one
already mentioned)--the Aorist is the only form that can be used if
the
event is thought of simply as an event (cf. Mey.
ad loc., contra)--
but
in the presence of ou#n, which is, in John especially, so constantly
continuative,
and in the absence of any intimation in the context that
the
events are related out of their chronological order.
49. From the general
principles of indirect discourse in
English
and in Greek it results that an Aorist Indicative in
indirect
discourse after a verb of past time must usually be
rendered
into English by a Pluperfect. Cf. 353. These cases
form
a class entirely distinct from those that are included
above
under the term Aorist for the English Pluperfect.
50. Both the Aorist and the
Perfect are sometimes used
proleptically,
but this is rather a rhetorical figure than a gram-
matical
idiom. WM. pp. 341, 345, 347; WT. pp. 273, 277, 278.
1
Cor.
marry,
thou hast not sinned.
See also John 15:8; Jas. 2:10.
51. For the Aorist in a
condition contrary to fact, see 248.
For
the Aorist expressing an unattained wish, see 27.
52. ENGLISH EQUIVALENTS OF
THE GREEK AORIST INDIC-
ATIVE.
It should be observed that the Aorist for the Perfect
and
the Aorist for the Pluperfect are not variations from the
24
THE
TENSES.
normal
use of the Greek Aorist. Viewed strictly from the
point
of view of Greek Grammar, these Aorists are simply
Historical,
Inceptive, or Resultative Aorists. The necessity for
mentioning
them arises merely from the difference between
the
English and the Greek idiom.
The Greek Aorist corresponds to the English
simple Past
(or
Imperfect or Preterite, loved, heard,
etc.) more nearly than
to
any other English tense. But it is not the precise equiva-
lent
of the English Past; nor is the Greek Perfect the precise
equivalent
of the English Perfect; nor the Greek Pluperfect
of
the English Pluperfect. This will appear distinctly if we
place
side by side the definitions of the tenses which in gen-
eral
correspond in the two languages.
The English Perfect is used The
Greek Perfect is used
of
any past action between to
represent an action as
which
and the time of speak- standing
complete, i.e. as hav-
ing
the speaker does not in- ing
an existing result, at the
tend
distinctly to interpose an time
of speaking.
interval.1
The English Pluperfect is The Greek Pluperfect is
used
to mark the fact that the used
to represent an action as
event
expressed by it preceded standing
complete, i.e. as hav-
another
past event indicated by ing
an existing result, at a
the
context, and this whether point
of past time indicated
the
earlier event is thought of by
the context.
as
completed at the time of
the
later event, or only indefi-
nitely
as a simple occurrence
preceding
the later event!
1 The English Perfect and Pluperfect by
their auxiliaries have and had
distinctly
suggest completed action in the proper sense, viz. the posses-
sion
of a thing in the condition indicated by the participle, and substan-
THE AORIST INDICATIVE. 25
The
English Past is used of The Greek Aorist is used of
any
past action between which any
past event which is con-
and
the moment of speaking ceived
of simply as an event
an
interval is thought of as (or
as entered upon, or as ac-
existing.
It affirms nothing complished),
regardless alike
respecting
existing result. of
the existence or non-exist-
ence of an interval
between
itself and the moment of
speaking, and of the
question
whether it precedes or
not
some other past action.
It
affirms nothing
respecting ex-
isting result.
It
is evident from this comparison that the English Perfect
has
a larger range of use than the Greek Perfect.
tially
this is the meaning often conveyed by these tenses. Thus, I have
learned my lesson, differs but little in
meaning from I have my lesson
learned. But this is by no means
the only use which may be made of
these
tenses in modern English. They have, in fact, ceased to be Perfect
tenses
in any proper sense of that word. Compare, e.g., the Pasts and
Perfects
in the following examples: The army
arrived. The army has
arrived. Many men fought
for their country. Many men have fought
for their country. He
often visited
Only
in the first example is existing result suggested by the Perfect tense.
In
each pair the distinguishing mark between the two sentences is that
while
the Perfect tense places the event in the past time without defining
whether
or not an interval has elapsed since the event, the Past tense
places
it in the past time and suggests an interval.
Similarly, the English Pluperfect affirms only
the antecedence of its
event
to the other past event, leaving it to the context or the nature of
the
fact to show whether at the past time referred to there were existing
results
or not. Thus in the sentence, I showed
him the work which I had
done, it is implied that the
results of the doing remained at the time of
the
showing. But in the sentence, He did not
recognize the persons whom
he had previously seen, it is not implied that
any result of the seeing
remained
at the time of the non-recognition.
26
THE
TENSES.
Thus a past event between which and the time of
speaking
no
interval is distinctly thought of may be expressed by the
English
Perfect, whether the result of the event is thought of
as
existing or not; but it can be expressed by the Greek Per-
fect
only in case such result is thought of. So also the Eng-
lish
Pluperfect has a wider range than the Greek Pluperfect.
For
while the Greek can use its Pluperfect for an event
which
preceded another past event only in case the result
of
the earlier event is thought of as existing at the time
of
the later event, the English freely uses its Pluperfect
for
all such doubly past events, without reference to the
existence
of the result of the earlier event at the time of
the
later one.
On the other hand, the Greek Aorist has a wider
range
than
the English Past, since it performs precisely those func-
tions
which the Greek Perfect and Pluperfect refuse, but
which
in modern English are performed not by the Past but
by
the Perfect and Pluperfect. The Greek Aorist, therefore,
in
its ordinary use not only covers the ground of the English
Past,
but overlaps in part upon that of the English Perfect
and
Pluperfect. Hence arise the so-called Aorist for Perfect
and
Aorist for Pluperfect.
If the attempt be made to define more exactly
the extent
of
this overlapping, it will appear that a simple past event
which
is conceived of without reference to an existing result,
and
between which and the time of speaking the speaker does
not
wish distinctly to suggest an interval,--the interval may
be
ever so long, in fact,--will be expressed in Greek by
the
Aorist, because the result is not thought of, and in Eng-
lish
by the Perfect, because the interval is not thought of.
Cases
of this kind arise, e.g., when the
event is said to con-
tinue
up to the time of speaking, so that there is actually no
interval
[Matt. 27:8; dio> e]klh<qh o[ a]gro>j
e]kei?noj ]Agro>j Ai!matoj
THE AORIST INDICATIVE. 27
e!wj th?j sh<meron, therefore that field has been called Field of Blood
until this day. See also Matt. 28:15;
John
event
is so recent as to make the thought of an interval seem
unnatural
[Luke
strange things to-day. See also Mark
. . . e]ge<nesqe]; or when the time of
the event is entirely
indefinite
[Matt. 19:4; ou]k a]ne<gnwte, have ye not read? See
also
Rev. 11:12; exx. are frequent in the New Testament];
or
when the verb refers to a series of events which extends
approximately
or quite to the time of speaking [Matt.
h]kou<sate o!ti e]rre<qh toi?j
a]rxai<oij,
ye have heard that it was said
to the ancients; the reference is
doubtless to the frequent
occasions
on which they had heard such teachings in the
synagogue.
See also 1 Esdr. 4 : 26, 27].
Instances of the Greek Aorist for the English
Pluperfect
arise
when a past event which is conceived of simply as an
event
without reference to existing result is mentioned out
of
its chronological order, or is expressed in a subordinate
clause.
The Greek employs the Aorist, leaving the context
to
suggest the order; the English usually suggests the order
by
the use of a Pluperfect. See exx. under 48. Of. Beet, The
Greek
Aorist as used in the New Testament, in Expositor,
XI.
191-201,
296-308, 312-385;
English
of the Greek Aorist and Perfect, in Theological
Monthly, IV. 33-41,162-180.
53. In many cases in which
the Greek Aorist is used of
an
event antecedent to another past event already referred to,
English
idiom permits a simple Past. A Pluperfect is strictly
required
only when the precedence in time is somewhat promi-
nent.
The Revisers of 1881 have used the Pluperfect spar-
ingly
in such cases. It might better have been used also in
Matt.
9:25; Mark 8:14; John 12:18 (had heard).
28
THE TESES.
54. An Aorist which is
equivalent to an English Perfect
or
Pluperfect may be either an historical,
or an inceptive, or
a
Resultative Aorist. If historical, it
may be either momentary,
comprehensive, or collective.
In Luke
Aorists
which may be properly rendered by the English Perfect; probably
also
e]basi<leusaj, in Rev. 11:17, should be rendered, thou hast become
king.
In Rom.
of
the evil deeds of men, of which the apostle has been speaking in the
preceding
paragraphs (
Aorist.
But since that series of evil deeds extends even to the moment
of
speaking, as is indeed directly affirmed in the pa<ntej, it is impos-
sible
to think of an interval between the fact stated and this statement
of
it. It must therefore be expressed in English by the Perfect tense, and
be
classed with Matt. 5:21 as a collective Aorist for (English) Perfect.
Of
similar force is the same form in Rom. 2:12. From the point of view
from
which the apostle is speaking, the sin of each offender is simply a
past
fact, and the sin of all a series or aggregate of facts together consti-
tuting
a past fact. But inasmuch as this series is not separated from the
time
of speaking, we must, as in
translation.
This is upon the supposition that the verb h!marton takes its
point
of view from the time of speaking, and the apostle accordingly
speaks
here only of sin then past, leaving it to be inferred that the same
principle
would apply to subsequent sin. It is possible, however, that
by
a sort of prolepsis h!marton is uttered from the point of view of the
future
judgment [kriqh<sontai], and refers to all sin that will then be past.
In
this case the Future Perfect, shall have sinned, may be used in trans-
lation,
or again the Perfect, common in subordinate clauses in English as
an
abbreviation of the Future Perfect. Whether the same form in
upon
whether it is, like the other cases, a collective Aorist, representing
a
series of acts between which and the time of speaking no interval is
interposed,
or refers to a deed or deeds in the remote past in which the
"all"
in some way participated. So far as the tense-form is concerned
there
is no presumption in favor of one or the other of these inter-
pretations,
both uses of the tense being equally legitimate. The nature
of
the argument or the author's thought, as learned from sources
outside
the sentence itself, must furnish the main evidence by which
to
decide.
THE AORIST INDICATIVE. 29
55. The Aorist eu]do<khsa in Matt.
reference
to a specific event as its basis. I was well pleased with thee,
e.g. for receiving baptism.
If all the instances were in connection with the
baptism,
this would be the most natural explanation. But for those that
occur
in connection with the account of the transfiguration this explana-
tion
fails, and is probably therefore not the true explanation of any of the
instances.
(b) as a comprehensive Historical Aorist covering the period
of
Christ's preincarnate existence. Cf. John 17:5, 24; see W. N. Clarke,
Com.
on Mark 1:11. If the passages were in the fourth gospel, and
especially
if they contained some such phrase as pro> katabolh?j
ko<smou,
this
explanation would have much in its favor. The absence of such
limiting
phrase, and the fact that the passages are in the synoptic gospels
are
opposed to this explanation. (c) as a comprehensive Historical Aorist,
having
the force of an English Perfect, and referring to the period of
Christ's
earthly existence up to the time of speaking. But against this
is
the absence of any adverbial phrase meaning up
to this time, which
usually
accompanies an Aorist verb used in this sense. Cf. 18 and 52.
(d)
as an Aorist which has by usage come to have the meaning which is
strictly
appropriate to the Perfect, I became well
pleased with thee, and
I am [accordingly] well
pleased with thee.
Cf. 47. There are a few pas-
sages
of the Septuagint that seem at first sight to favor this explanation.
See
Ps. 101:15; Jer. 2:19; Mal. 2:17. Cf. also Matt. 12:18; Luke 12:32.
The
force of this evidence is, however, greatly diminished by the fact
that
all these instances are capable of being explained without resort to so
unusual
a use of the Aorist, that both in the Septuagint and in the New
Testament
there is in use a regular Present form of this verb, and that
the
Aorist in the majority of cases clearly denotes past time. (e) as an
Inceptive
Aorist referring to some indefinite, imagined point of past time
at
which God is represented as becoming well pleased with Jesus. But
since
this point is not thought of as definitely fixed, English idiom requires
a
Perfect tense. Cf. 52 (p. 27), 54. It may be described, therefore, as an
Inceptive
Aorist equivalent to an English Perfect, and may be rendered,
I have become well
pleased.
This, however, can only be a vivid way of
saying,
I am well pleased. If then this view
is correct, the rendering
of
the English versions is a free but substantially correct paraphrase.
A
true Perfect would affirm the present state of pleasure and imply the
past
becoming pleased. The Aorist affirms the becoming pleased and
leaves
the present pleasure to be suggested. This explanation, therefore,
differs
from the preceding (d) in that it does not suppose the Aorist
of
this verb to have acquired the power of expressing an existing result,
but
judges the existing result to be only suggested by the affirmation
30
THE
TENSES.
of
the past fact. This is rhetorical figure, on the way to become gram-
matical
idiom, but not yet become such. Manifestly similar is the use
of
prosede<cato in Isa. 42:1, and of eu]do<khsen in Matt. 12:18. Indeed,
if
Matt.
passages
were probably affected in form by this current rendering of the
Isaiah
passage. Similar also are e]ka<qisan in Matt. 23:2, and e@maqon in
Phil.
4:11. In neither case is there any clearly established usage of the
Aorist
for Greek perfect; in neither is there apparent any reference
to
a definite point of past time; in both the real fact intended to be
suggested
is the present state.
56. THE DISTINCTION
BETWEEN THE AORIST AND THE
IMPERFECT.
The difference between an Historical Aorist
and
an Imperfect of action in progress or repeated being one
not
of the nature of the fact but of the speaker's conception
of
the fact, it is evident that the same fact may be expressed
by
either tense or by both. This is illustrated in Mark 12:41
and
44, where, with strict appropriateness in both cases, Mark
writes
in v. 41, polloi> plou<sioi e@ballon polla<, and in v. 44
records
Jesus as stating the same fact in the words pa<ntej . . .
e@balon. The former describes the scene in
progress, the latter
merely
states the fact.
57. From the nature of the
distinction between the Imper-
fect
and Aorist, it also results that the difference in thought
represented
by the choice of one form rather than the other
is
sometimes almost imperceptible. Cf., e.g.,
Mark 3:7 and
tenses
almost or quite to the exclusion of the other. The
form
e@legon is used in classical Greek without emphasis on
the
thought of the saying as in progress or repeated, and in the
New
Testament the Aorist of this verb does not occur. A dis-
tinction
between the Imperfect e@legon and the Aorist ei#pon is
scarcely
to be drawn in the New Testament. Cf. G.MT.
56,
57,
especially the following: "In all these cases the funda-
mental
distinction of the tenses, which was inherent in the
THE FUTURE INDICATIVE. 31
form,
remained; only it happened that either of the two dis-
tinct
forms expressed the meaning which was here needed
equally
well. It must not be thought, from these occasional
examples,
that the Greeks of any period were not fully alive
to
the distinction of the two tenses and could not use it with
skill
and nicety."
This approximation of the Aorist and Imperfect,
it should
be
noted, occurs only in the case of the Historical Aorist (38).
The
Inceptive and Resultative Aorists are clearly distinguished
in
force from the Imperfect.
THE FUTURE INDICATIVE.
58. The
Predictive Future.
The Future Indicative is
most
frequently used to affirm that an action is to take
place
in future time. Since it does not mark the distinc-
tion
between action in progress and action conceived of
indefinitely
without reference to its progress, it may be
either
aoristic or progressive. HA. 843; G. 1250, 6;
G.MT. 63, 65;
59. THE AORISTIC FUTURE
conceives of an action simply
as
an event, and affirms that it will take place in future time.
It
may be indefinite, inceptive, or resultative. As indefinite
it
may be momentary, comprehensive, or collective. Of. 35, 39.
1
Cor.
e]n a]to<m&,
e]n r[ip^? o]fqalmou?,
we shall not all sleep [indefinite com-
prehensive]; or; we shall not all fall asleep [inceptive], but we shall
all be
changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye [indefinite
momentary].
John
ei#pon
u[mi?n e]gw<,
he will teach you all things and bring to
your remem-
brance all
things that I said unto you [indefinite collective].
Luke
shall
reign over the house of Jacob forever [indefinite comprehensive].
Luke
16:31; ou]d ] e]a<n tij
e]k nekrw?n a]nast^? peisqh<sontai, neither
will
they be
persuaded if one rise from the dead [resultative].
32
THE
TENSES.
60. THE PROGRESSIVE FUTURE
affirms that an action will
be
in progress in future time. HA. 843; G. 1250, 6.
Phil.
rejoice,
yea, and will
[continue to] rejoice. See also Rom. 6:2;
Phil. 1:6; Rev. 9:6.
61. It may be doubted
whether any of the distinctions indi-
cated
by the subdivisions of the Predictive Future are justi-
fied
from the point of view of pure grammar. It is probable,
rather,
that the tense in all these cases makes precisely the
same
affirmation respecting the event, viz.
that it will take
place; and that it is the
context only that conveys the dis-
tinctions
referred to. These distinctions, however, are real
distinctions
either of fact or of thought, and such, moreover,
that
the writer must in most cases have had them in mind
when
speaking of the facts. From the exegetical point of
view,
therefore, the distinctions are both justified and neces-
sary,
since they represent differences of thought in the mind
of
the writer to be interpreted. The terms employed above
are
convenient terms to represent these distinctions of thought,
and
it is to the interpreter a matter of secondary importance
whether
the distinction in question is by his writer immedi-
ately
connected with the tense of the verb.
62. Since the Aoristic
Future is less definite respecting
progress
than the Progressive Future, the latter predicting
the
act as continuing, the former making no assertion, it is
evident
that any instance of the Predictive Future not clearly
progressive
must be accounted as aoristic. If the writer did
not
conceive the act or event as continuing, he left it in his
own
mind and for the reader undefined as respects progress,
hence
aoristic. Whether he left it thus undefined in his mind
must
of course be determined, if at all, from the context, there
being
no difference of form between a Progressive and an
THE FUTURE INDICATIVE. 33
Aoristic
Future. It should be noticed that it is not enough
to
show that an act will be in fact continued, in order to count
the
verb which predicts it a Progressive Future; it must ap-
pear
that the writer thought of it as continuing. Every
Future
form is therefore by presumption aoristic. It can
be
accounted progressive only on evidence that the writer
thought
of the act as continued.
REM. There is one exception to this principle.
In verbs of effort a
Progressive
Future is naturally like other Progressive forms, a conative
tense.
An Aoristic Future of such a verb is like the Aorist, a resultative
tense.
Since the latter is the larger meaning, the context must give the
evidence
of this larger meaning, and such evidence failing, it cannot be
considered
established that the verb is resultative. The verb in John 12:
32
furnishes an interesting and important illustration. Since the verb
denotes
effort, the Future will naturally be accounted conative if it is
judged
to be progressive, and resultative if it is taken as aoristic. In the
latter
case the meaning will be, I will by my
attraction bring all men to
me. In the former case the
words will mean, I will exert on all men
an
attractive influence.
63. To decide whether a
given Aoristic Future merely pre-
dicts
the fact, or refers to the inception of the action, or has
reference
to it as a thing accomplished, must again be deter-
mined
by the context or the meaning of the word. The dis-
tinction
between the indefinite and the resultative senses will
often
be very difficult to make, and indeed the difference
of
thought will be but slight. Here also it results from the
nature
of the distinction between the indefinite use and the
other
two, inceptive and resultative, that any instance of
the
Aoristic Future not clearly inceptive or resultative must
be
accounted indefinite. In other words, if the writer did not
define
the action to his own mind as inceptive or resultative,
he
left it indefinite, a mere fact.
64. The distinction between
momentary, comprehensive,
and
collective is in respect to the Future tense, as in respect
34
THE
TENSES.
to
the Aorist, a distinction which primarily has reference to
the
facts referred to and only secondarily to the writer's con-
ception
of the facts. There may easily occur instances which
will
defy classification at this point. A writer may predict
an
event not only without at the moment thinking whether
it
is to be a single deed or a series of deeds, a momentary or
an
extended action, but even without knowing. Thus the
sentence,
He will destroy his enemies, may be
uttered by one
who
has confidence that the person referred to will in some
way
destroy his enemies, without at all knowing whether he
will
destroy them one by one, or all at once, and whether by
some
long-continued process, or by one exterminating blow.
In
such cases the verb can only be accounted as an Aoristic
Future,
incapable of further classification.
65. From a different point
of view from that of the above
classification,
the instances of the Predictive Future might be
classified
as (a) assertive, and (b) promissory. The distinc-
tion
between the assertion that an event will take place and
the
promise that it shall take place is difficult to make,
requiring
delicate discrimination, but is often important for
purposes
of interpretation. It is in general not indicated in
Greek,
and its representation in English is complicated by the
varied
uses of the auxiliary verbs shall and
will. In general
it
may be said that in principal clauses shall
is in the first
person
simply assertive, will is promissory;
in the second and
third
person will is assertive, shall is promissory, imperative,
or
solemnly predictive.
R. V. employs shall almost constantly in the second and
third
person, in most cases probably intending it as solemnly
predictive.
Matt.
I say unto
you, he shall by no means lose his reward.
THE FUTURE INDICATIVE. 35
Mark
will say.
Luke
22:61; Pri>n a]le<ktora fwnh?sai sh<meron a]parnh<s^ me
tri<j, before
the cock
crow this day, thou shalt deny me thrice. See also Matt. 11:
28, 29;
66. A Predictive Future is
sometimes made emphatically
negative
by the use of the negative ou] mh>, Matt.
35;
Mark
67. The
Imperative Future.
The second person of the
Future
Indicative is often used as an Imperative. HA.
844;
G. 1265.
Jas.
2:8; a]gaph<seij to>n plhsi<on sou w[j seauto<n, thou shalt love thy
neighbor
as thyself.
REM. 1: This idiom as it occurs in the New
Testament shows clearly
the
influence of the Septuagint. It occurs most frequently in prohibi-
tions,
its negative being, as also commonly in classical Greek, not mh< but
ou]. G.MT.
69, 70; B. p. 267; WM. pp.. 396 f.; WT. pp. 315 f.
REM. 2. In Matt. 15:6 the verb timh<sei has the negative ou]
mh<.
Some
interpreters
take this as a Predictive Future, but the thought requires the
Imperative
sense, and in view of the frequent use of ou] mh< with the Future
in
an imperative sense in the Septuagint, and its occasional use in classi-
cal
Greek, the possibility of it can hardly be denied. WM. p. 636 f., n. 4;
G.MT.297.
68. One or two probable
instances of the Imperative Future
in
the third person occur, though perhaps no entirely certain
case.
Matt. 4:4, ou]k
e]p ] a@rt& mo<n& zh<setai o[ a@nqrwpoj
ably
to be so regarded, though the Hebrew of the passage
quoted
(Deut. 8:3) is apparently Gnomic rather than Imper-
ative.
On Matt. 15:6, see 67, Rem. 2. See also Matt. 20:
26,
27.
36
THE
TENSES.
69. The
Gnomic Future.
The Future Indicative may
be
used to state what will customarily happen when occa-
sion
offers.
Rom.
5:7; mo<lij ga>r u[pe>r dikai<ou tij a]poqanei?tai, for scarcely for a
righteous
man will one die.
See also Gen. 44:15;
ti<sei. Observe the Gnomic
Presents both before and after.
70. The
Deliberative Future.
The Future Indicative
is
sometimes used in questions of deliberation, asking not
what
will happen, but what can or ought to be done.
Such
questions may be real questions asking information,
or
rhetorical questions taking the place of a direct asser-
tion.
Cf. 169.
Luke
John
6:68; ku<rie, pro>j ti<na a]peleuso<meqa, Lord, to whom shall we go?
71. PERIPHRASTIC FORM: OF
THE FUTURE. A Future tense
composed
of a Present Participle and the Future of the verb
ei]mi< is found occasionally in the New
Testament. The force
is
that of a Progressive Future, with the thought of continu-
ance
or customariness somewhat emphasized.
Luke
catcher of
men.
Luke
to] be
trodden under foot.
72. Me<llw with the Infinitive is
also used with a force
akin
to that of the Future Indicative. It is usually employed
of
an action which one intends to do, or of that which is
certain,
destined to take place.
Matt.
2:13; me<llei
ga>r [Hr&<dhj zhtei?n to>
paidi<on tou? a]pole<sai au]to<,
for Herod will seek the young child to destroy it.
Luke
for the
Son of man is to be delivered up into the hands of
men. See also Matt.
THE PERFECT INDICATIVE. 37
73. By the use of the
Imperfect of me<llw with the Infinitive
it
is affirmed that at a past point of time an action was about
to
take place or was intended or destined to occur.
John
pisteu<santej
ei]j au]to<n,
but this spake he of the Spirit which
they
that believed
on him were to receive. See also Luke 7:2; John 6:71.
THE PERFECT INDICATIVE.
74. The Perfect of
Completed Action. In its most
frequent
use the Perfect Indicative represents an action as
standing
at the time of speaking complete. The reference
of
the tense is thus double; it implies a past action and
affirms
an existing result. HA. 847; G. 1250, 3.
Acts
filled
Romans
5:5; o!ti h[ a]ga<ph
tou? qeou? e]kke<xutai e]n tai?j kardi<aij h[mw?n,
because
the love of God has been poured forth in our hearts.
2
Tim. 4:7; to>n kalo>n a]gw?na h]gw<nismai, to>n dro<mon
tete<leka, th>n
pi<stin
teth<rhka, I have fought the good fight, I have finished
the
course, I
have kept the faith.
REM. On the use of the term complete as a
grammatical term, see
85.
On the distinction between the Perfect and the Aorist, see 86.
75. The
Perfect of Existing State. The Perfect is
sometimes
used when the attention is directed wholly to
the
present resulting state, the past action of which it is
the
result being left out of thought. This usage occurs
most
frequently in a few verbs which use the Perfect in
this
sense only. HA. 849; G.1263.
Matt.
27:43; pe<poiqen e]pi> to>n qeo<n, he trusteth on God.
1
Cor. 11:2; e]painw? de> u[ma?j, o!ti pa<nta mou? me<mnhsqe, now praise you
that ye
remember me in all things.
Luke
24:46; ou!twj ge<graptai, thus it
is written, i.e. stands written.
See also Rev. 19:13.
38
THE TENSES.
76. There is no sharp line
of distinction between the Perfect
of
Completed Action and the Perfect of Existing State. To
the
latter head are to be assigned those instances in which the
past
act is practically dropped from thought, and the attention
turned
wholly to the existing result; while under the former
head
are to be placed those instances in which it is evident
that
the writer had in mind both the past act and the present
result.
77. THE INTENSIVE PERFECT.
The Perfect is sometimes
used
in classical Greek as an emphatic or intensive Present.
It
is possible that under this head should be placed certain
Perfects
of the New Testament more commonly assigned to
one
of the preceding uses. Thus pe<poiqa a practically expresses
the
thought of
a
stronger way of saying pisteu<w. John 6:69; pepisteu<kamen
kai> e]gnw<kamen o!ti su> ei#
o[ a!gioj tou? qeou?,
we have believed and know
that thou art the Holy
One of God.
See also 2 Cor. 1:10.
Whether
this usage is in the New Testament a survival of the
ancient
intensive use of the Perfect, regarded by some gram-
marians
as an original function of the tense (Del.
IV. 94 ff.,
Br. 162), or a later development
from the Perfect of com-
pleted
action, affirming the present existence of the result of
a
past act, need not, for the purpose of the interpreter, be
decided.
78. Of the Historical
Perfect in the sense of a Perfect
which
expresses a past completed action, the result of which
the
speaker conceives himself to be witnessing (as in the case
of
the Historical Present he conceives himself to be witness-
ing
the action itself), there is no certain New Testament
instance.
Possible instances are Matt. 13: 46; Luke 9:36;
2
Cor. 12:17; Jas. l:24. Cf. Br. 162.
This idiom is perhaps
rather
rhetorical than strictly grammatical.
THE PERFECT INDICATIVE 39
Ke<kragen in John
vividly
conceived of as if present to the speaker. But since
the
Perfect of the verb had already in classical Greek come to
be
recognized as functionally a Present, it is from the point
of
view of the current usage a Historical Present rather than
a
Historical Perfect. Cf. L. and S. s.v.
79. The Perfect in 1 Cor.
tai, is probably Gnomic, referring to a state that
is wont to exist. If
a]pelh<luqen in Jas.
Present
or Aorist. G.MT. 154, 155.
80. THE AORISTIC PERFECT.
The Perfect Indicative is
sometimes
used in the New Testament of a simple past fact
where
it is scarcely possible to suppose that the thought of
existing
result was in the writer's mind. See more fully
under
88.
2Cor.
I had no
relief for my spirit because I found not Titus.
Rev
8:5; kai> ei@lhfen o[
a@ggeloj to>n libanwto<n, kai> e]ge<misen au]to<n, and
the angel
took the censer, and filled it. See also Matt. 25:6; 2 Cor.
1:9; 7:5;
81. The Perfect Indicative
in indirect discourse after a
verb
of past time is regularly rendered into English by a
Pluperfect.
This involves, however, no special use of the
tense,
but results from the regular difference between English
and
Greek in the matter of indirect discourse. Cf. 353.
82. When the Perfect
Indicative is used of a past event
which
is by reason of the context necessarily thought of as
separated
from the moment of speaking by an interval, it is
impossible
to render it into English adequately. English
idiom
forbids the use of the Perfect because of the interval
(present
in thought as well as existing in fact) between the
act
and the time of speaking, while the English Past tense
40
THE
TENSES.
fails
to express the idea of existing result which the Greek
Perfect
conveys. In most of these cases R.V. has attempted
to
preserve the sense of the Greek at the expense of the Eng-
lish
idiom.
Acts
xeiri>
a]gge<lou tou? o]fqe<ntoj au]t&? e]n t^? ba<t&, him did God send
[R. V.
hath God sent] to be both a ruler and a deliverer with the hand
of the
angel which appeared to him in the bush. See also instances
cited by
who also were [ge<geonan, R. V. have been] in
Christ before me; John
6, 9; 8:5.
These cases should not be confused with those
treated under
80.
Here the Greek tense has its normal force, though it can-
not
be well rendered by its usual English equivalent. There
the
use of the Greek tense is somewhat abnormal.
83. For the Perfect used
proleptically, see 50.
84. PERIPHRASTIC FORM OF
THE PERFECT. Periphrastic
Perfects,
formed by adding a Perfect Participle to the
Present
of the verb ei]mi< are frequent in the New
Testament,
about
forty instances occurring. In function these forms
more
frequently denote existing state, though clear instances
of
the Perfect denoting completed action occur. The former
use
is illustrated in Luke 20:6; John 2:17; Acts 2:13;
25:10;
2 Cor. 4:3, etc.; the latter in Luke 23:15; Acts
26:26;
Heb. 4:2, etc. Cf. 431.
85. It is important to
observe that the term "complete"
or
"completed" as a grammatical term does not mean ended,
but
accomplished, i.e. brought to its appropriate
result, which
result remains at the
time denoted by the verb. "The Perfect,
although
it implies the performance of the action in past time.
yet
states only that it stands completed at the present time."
THE PERFECT INDICATIVE 41
G. MT. 44. "Das
Perf. hatte zwei altuberkommene Funktio-
nen.
Einerseits hatte es intensiven, beziehentlich iterativen
Sinn.
. . . Anderseits bezeichnete es die Handlung im Zustand
des
Vollendet- und Fertigseins." Br.
162.
An action which has ceased may be expressed in
Greek by
the
Aorist or the Imperfect quite as well as by the Perfect,
provided
only the action is thought of apart from any existing
result
of it. These tenses are indeed more frequently used
of
actions which are complete in the sense of having come to
an
end than is the Perfect. See, e.g., Gal. 4:8; to<te
me>n . .
.
e]douleu<sate toi?j fu<sei mh>
ou#si qeoi?j,
at that time. . . ye were in
bondage to them which by
nature are no gods;
and 2 Cor. 7, 8;
ou] metame<lomai: ei] kai>
metemelo<mhn,
I do not regret it, although
I did regret [was regretting] it. The
Perfect, on the other
hand,
affirms the existence of the normal result of the action,
and
this even though the action itself is still in progress.
See,
e.g., the Perfect teth<rhka, in 2 Tim. 4:7, quoted
under 74.
86. Since the Aorist and
the Perfect both involve reference
to
a past event, the Perfect affirming the existence of the
result
of the event, and the Aorist affirming the event itself,
without
either affirming or denying the existence of the result,
it
is evident that whenever the result of the past action does
still
exist, either tense may be used, according as the writer
wishes
either to affirm the result or merely the event. In
many
cases the reason of the choice of one tense rather than
the
other is very evident and the distinction clearly marked,
even
when in accordance with the principle of 82 both tenses
must
be translated by an English Past. See, e.g., 1 Cor. 15:4;
o!ti e]ta<fh, kai> o!ti
e]gh<gertai t^? h[me<r% t^? tri<t^, that he
was buried,
and that he was raised
on the third day.
The burial is simply
a
past event. Of the resurrection there is an existing result,
prominently
before the mind.
42
THE TENSES.
But there are naturally other cases in which,
though each
tense
retains its own proper force, the two approximate very
closely,
and are used side by side of what seem to be quite
coordinate
facts. Instances of this approximation of the two
tenses
are especially frequent in the writings of John. See
John
and
87. It might be supposed
that the Resultative Aorist would
be
especially near in force to the Perfect. The distinction is,
however,
clearly marked. The Resultative Aorist affirms that
an
action attempted in past time was accomplished, saying
nothing
about the present result. The Perfect, on the other
hand,
belongs to all classes of verbs, not merely to those that
imply
attempt, and affirms the existence of the result of the
past
action, the occurrence of which it implies.
88. It should be observed
that the aoristic use of the Per-
fect
(80) is a distinct departure from the strict and proper
sense
of the tense in Greek. The beginnings of this departure
are
to be seen in classical Greek (G.MT.
46), and in Greek
writers
of a time later than the New Testament the tendency
was
still further developed, until the sense of difference between
the
tenses was lost.
Meantime there grew up a new form of the
Perfect, made
as
is the English Perfect, of an auxiliary denoting possession
(in
Greek e@xw,
as in English have) and a participle.
This
periphrastic
Perfect, traces of which appear even in classical
times
(G.MT. 47), at length entirely
displaced the simple
Perfect
for the expression of completed action, and the process
by
which the Perfect had become an Aorist in meaning and
been
succeeded in office as a Perfect tense by another form
was
complete. See Jebb in Vincent and Dickson, Modern Greek,
pp.
326-330. In the New Testament we see the earlier stages
THE PERFECT INDICATIVE. 43
of
this process. The Perfect is still, with very few exceptions,
a
true Perfect, but it has begun to be an Aorist. In Latin this
process
was already complete so far as the assimilation of the
Perfect
and the Aorist was concerned; the new Perfect had
not
yet appeared. In modern English we see the process at a
point
midway between that represented by the Greek of the
New
Testament and that which appears in the Latin of about
the
same time. Modern German represents about the same
stage
as modern English, but a little further advanced.
It should be borne in mind that in determining
whether a
given
Perfect form is a true Perfect in sense or not, the
proper
English translation is no certain criterion, since the
functions
of the Perfect tense in the two languages differ so
widely.
Cf. 52. The Perfect pepoi<hka in 2 Cor.
evidently
aoristic; that it "goes quite naturally into Eng-
lish"
(S. p. 104) does not at all show that
it has the usual
force
of a Greek Perfect. Many Aorists even go quite natu-
rally
and correctly into English Perfects. Cf. 46. The Per-
fects
in Luke 9:36; 2 Cor.
Perfects,
though it is possible that in all these cases the
thought
of an existing result is more or less clearly in mind
and
gives occasion to the use of the Perfect tense. The
Perfect
pe<praken in Matt.
historical,
probably the former (see Sophocles,
Glossary, etc.,
82,
4). The evidence seems to show clearly that Matthew
regularly
used ge<gona in the sense of an Aorist; some of the
instances
cannot, without violence, be otherwise explained, and
all
are naturally so explained. Mark's use of the word is pos-
sibly
the same, but the evidence is not decisive. All other
writers
of the New Testament use the form as a true Perfect.
Still other cases should perhaps be explained as
Aoristic
Perfects,
but for the reasons mentioned in 86 it is impossible
44
THE TENSES.
to
decide with certainty. While there is clear evidence that
the
Perfect tense was in the New Testament sometimes an
Aorist
in force, yet it is to be observed that the New Testa-
ment
writers had perfect command of the distinction between
the
Aorist and the Perfect. The instances of the Perfect in
the
sense of the Aorist are confined almost entirely to a few
forms,
e@sxhka, ei@lhfa, e[w<raka, ei@rhka, and ge<gona, and the use of
each
of these forms in the sense of an Aorist mainly to one
or
more writers whose use of it is apparently almost a per-
sonal
idiosyncrasy. Thus the aoristic use of ge<gona belongs
to
Matt; of ei@lhfa to John in Rev.; of e@sxhka to Paul; but
see
also Heb. 7:13. The idiom is therefore confined within
narrow
limits in the New Testament. Cf. Ev. Pet. 23, 31.
2 Cor. 12:9 and 1 John 1:10 are probably true
Perfects of
Completed
Action, the latter case being explained by v. 8.
John
1:18;
vey
the thought of existing result, though the use of an adverb
of
past time serves to give more prominence to the past action
than
is usually given by a Perfect tense.
THE
PLUPERFECT.
89. The
Pluperfect of Completed Action. The Plu-
perfect
is used of an action which was complete at a point
of
past time implied in the context. HA.
847; G. 1250, 4.
Acts
9:21; kai> w$de ei]j tou?to e]lhlu<qei, and he had come hither for this
intent.
John
9:22; h@dh ga>r
sunete<qeinto oi[ ]Ioudai?oi, for the Jews had agreed
already. See also Luke 8: 2;
Acts
90. The
Pluperfect of Existing State. Verbs which
in
the Perfect denote a present state, in the Pluperfect
denote
a past state. HA. 849, c; G. 1263.
THE PLUPERFECT. 45
Luke
Christ. See also John 18:16,
18; Acts 1:10.
91. PERIPHRASTIC FORM OF
THE PLUPERFECT. A peri-
phrastic
Pluperfect formed by adding the Perfect Participle
to
the Imperfect of the verb ei]mi< is somewhat frequent in
the
New
Testament. In classical Greek this was already the only
form
in the third person plural of liquid and mute verbs, and
an
occasional form elsewhere. In the New Testament these
periphrastic
forms are frequently, but not at all uniformly,
Pluperfects
of existing state; about one-third of the whole
number
of instances belong to the class of Pluperfects denot-
ing
completed action, referring to the past act as well as the
existing
result. Cf. G.MT. 45.
Matt.
26:43; h#san
ga>r au]tw?n oi[ o]fqalmoi> bebarhme<noi, for
their eyes
were
heavy, lit. weighed down.
Luke
and it had
been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit.
92. The ambiguity of the
English sometimes renders it
impossible
to distinguish in translation between a Pluperfect
of
Existing State and an Historical Aorist. Thus in Acts
and
31 we must, in both cases read were
gathered, though the
verb
in the former case is an Aorist and refers to an act, and
in
the latter a Perfect and refers to a state. Cf. also the two
verbs
in Luke 15:24.
93. The simple Future
Perfect does not occur in the New
Testament.
Respecting Luke
lexicons
s.v.
94. A periphrastic Future
Perfect, expressing a future
state,
occurs in Matt. 16:19;
46
THE TENSES.
TENSES OF THE DEPENDENT MOODS.
95. The tenses of the
dependent moods have in general no
reference
to time, but characterize the action of the verb in
respect
to its progress only, representing it as in progress,
or
completed, or indefinitely, simply as an event. H.A. 851;
G. 1212, 1213; G.MT.85.
96. The
Present of the Dependent Moods is used to
represent
an action as in progress or as repeated. It may
be
altogether timeless, the action being thought of without
reference
to the time of its occurrence; or its time, as
past,
present, or future, may be involved in the function
of
the mood, or may be indicated by the context.
Phil.
3:1; ta> au]ta> gra<fein u[mi?n e]moi> me>n ou]k
o]knhro<n,
to be writing the
same
things to you, to me indeed is not irksome.
Matt.
therefore thou shalt be offering thy gift at the altar.
Mk.
12:33 kai>
to> a]gap%?n au]to>n e]c o!lhj kardi<aj . . . perisso<tero<n
e]stin pa<ntwn
tw?n o[lokautwma<twn kai> qusiw?n, and to
love him with
all the
heart. . . is much more than all whole burnt offerings and
sacrifices.
97. PERIPHRASTIC FORM OF
THE PRESENT. A periphras-
tic
Present Infinitive, formed by adding a Present Participle
to
the Present Infinitive of ei]mi<, and a periphrastic
Present
Imperative,
formed by adding a Present Participle to the
Present
Imperative of ei]mi<, occur rarely in the New Testament.
Luke
9:18; 11:1; Matt. 5:25; Luke 19:11. Cf. 20, and
431.
98. The Aorist of the
Dependent Moods represents
the
action expressed by the verb as a simple event or fact,
OF THE DEPENDENT MOODS. 47
without
reference either to its progress or to the existence
of
its result. As in the Indicative the verb may be indefi-
nite,
inceptive or resultative (cf. 35), and when indefinite
may
refer to a momentary or extended action or to a
series
of events (cf. 39).
The time of the action, if indicated at all, is
shown, not
by
the tense, but by some fact outside of it.
An Aorist Subjunctive after e]a<n,
o!tan, e!wj
etc. is sometimes properly
translated
by a Perfect or Future Perfect, but only because the context
shows
that the action is to precede that of the principal verb. In the
great
majority of cases a Present Subjunctive or a Future is the best
translation.
See examples under 250, 285, 303, 322.
Luke
9:54; ei@pwmen pu?r katabh?nai, shall we
bid fire to come down?
John
15:9; mei<nate
e]n t^? a]ga<p^ t^? e]m^?, abide ye in my love.
Luke
17:4; kai> e]a>n e[pta<kij th?j h[me<raj
a[marth<s^? ei]j se> . . . a]fh<seij
au]t&?, and if
he sin against thee seven times in the day. . . thou shalt
forgive
him.
Acts
they had
become silent, James answered.
Acts
11:17; e]gw> ti<j h@mhn dunato>j kwlu?sai to>n qeo>n, who was I that I
could
withstand God?
REM. Compare the Presents and Aorists in the
following examples:
Matt.
this day
our daily bread.
Luke
11:3; to>n
a@rton h[mw?n to>n e]piou<sion di<dou h[mi?n to> kaq ] h[me<ran,
give us
day by day our daily bread.
Acts
18:9; mh>
fofou?, a]lla> la<lei kai> mh> siwph<s^j, be not in fear, but
[continue
to] speak and hold not thy peace.
Matt.
5:17; ou]k h#lqon katalu?sai a]lla> plhrw?sai, I came not to destroy,
but to
fulfil.
John
9:4; h[ma?j dei?
e]rga<zesqai ta> e@rga tou? me<myanto<j me e!wj h[me<ra
e]sti<n, we must work [be doing] the works of him that sent me while
it is day.
99. The Future Optative does
not occur in the New Tes-
tament.
48
THE
TENSES.
The Future Infinitive denotes time relatively to
the time of
the
principal verb. It is thus an exception to the general prin-
ciple
of the timelessness of the dependent moods.
Acts
23:30; mhnuqei<shj de< moi e]piboulh?j ei]j to>n a@ndra
e@sesqai, and
when it
was shown to me that there would be a plot against the man.
100. The Infinitive me<llein with the Infinitive of
another
verb
dependent on it has the force of a Future Infinitive of the
latter
verb. The dependent Infinitive is usually a Present,
sometimes
a Future. It is regularly a Future in the New
Testament
in the case of the verb ei]mi<.
Acts
28.6; oi[ de> prosedo<kwn au]to>n me<llein
pi<mprasqai h} katapi<ptein
a@fnw nekro<n, but they expected that he would swell or fall down sud-
denly. See also Acts 19:27;
27:10, etc.
101. The
Perfect of the Dependent Moods is used of
completed
action. As in the Indicative, the thought may
be
directed both to the action and its result, or only to the
result.
The time of the action is indicated, as in the
Present
and Aorist, not by the tense but by the context or
by
the function of the mood.
Acts
25:25; e]gw> de> katelabo<mhn mhde>n a@cion au]to>n
qana<tou pepraxe<nai,
but I
found that he had committed nothing worthy of death.
Acts
26:32; a]polelu<sqai e]du<nato o[ a@nqrwpoj ou$toj, this man might have
been set at liberty.
Mark
102. AN INTENSIVE PERFECT
may occur in the dependent
moods
as in the Indicative.
1
Tim.
u[yhlogronei?n
mhde> h]lpike<nai e]pi> plou<tou a]dhlo<thti,
charge
them that are rich in this present world, that they be not high
minded,
nor have their hope set on the uncertainty of riches.
OF THE DEPENDENTT MOODS. 49
103. PERIPHRASTIC FORM OF
THE PERFECT. In the New
Testament
as in classical Greek, the Perfect Subjunctive Pas-
sive
is formed by adding a Perfect Participle to the Present
Subjunctive
of the verb ei]mi<. These forms are in the New
Testament
most commonly Perfects of Existing State. John
which
furnishes an instance of a periphrastic Perfect Impera-
tive,
enjoining the maintenance of the state denoted by the
Perfect
Participle. Cf. 20 and 431.
104. TENSES OF THE INFINITIVE
AFTER PREPOSITIONS.
The
general principle that the tenses of the dependent moods
characterize
the action of the verb only as respects progress
and
are properly timeless holds also respecting the Infinitive
after
prepositions. The Infinitive itself is properly timeless,
though
the time-relation is usually suggested by the meaning
of
the preposition or by this combined with that which the
tense
implies respecting the progress of the action.
105. By meta< with the Infinitive
antecedence of the action denoted by
the
Infinitive to that denoted by the principal verb is expressed, but this
meaning
manifestly lies in the preposition, not in the tense of the verb.
That
the Aorist Infinitive is almost constantly used (the Perfect occurs
once,
Heb.
latter
is usually conceived of simply as an event without reference to its
progress,
See Matt. 26:32; Luke 12:5; Acts 1:3; 1 Cor. 11:25, etc.
106. By pro< with the Infinitive
antecedence of the action of the prin-
cipal
verb to that of the Infinitive is expressed, and the action of the
Infinitive
is accordingly relatively future. But here also the time relation
is
expressed wholly by the preposition. The reason for the almost uniform
use
of the Aorist (the Present ei#nai occurs John 17:5) is
the same as in
the
case of meta<. See Luke
107. After ei]j and pro<j
the
Infinitive usually refers to an action which
is
future with respect to the principal verb. This also results from the
meaning
of the prepositions, which, expressing purpose or tendency,
necessarily
point to an action subsequent to that of the verb which the
50
THE
TENSES.
prepositional
phrase limits. When pro<j means with reference to, the time-
relation
is indicated only by the necessary relation of the things spoken
of.
See Luke 18:1. All three tenses of the Infinitive occur after ei]j
and
both Present and Aorist after pro<j, the difference marked
by the tense
being
not of time but of progress. See
11:3;
Matt. 6:1; Mark 13:22. Cf. 409-414.
108. After dia< the three Infinitives
distinguish the action as respects
the
writer's conception of its progress, as continued, completed, or indefi-
nite.
Time relations are secondary and suggested. The Aorist Infinitive
occurs
only in Matt. 24:12, where to> plhqunqh?nai th<n
a]nomi<an
apparently
refers
to the multiplication of iniquity as a fact of that time without
exclusive
reference to its preceding the action of the principal verb. The
Present
Infinitive refers to action in progress usually shown by the con-
text
to be contemporaneous with the action of the principal verb. See
Matt.
13:5, 6; Acts 12:20; Heb. 10:2; Jas. 4:2. The Perfect Infini-
tive
has its usual force, denoting an action standing complete. The time
of
the state of completeness appears from the context; it is usually that
of
the principal verb. See Acts
where
dede<sqai denotes an action whose result was existing, not at the
time
of speaking, but at an earlier time. Cf. 408.
109. After e]n we naturally expect to
find only the Present Infinitive,
the
preposition by its meaning suggesting an action thought of as in
progress;
and this is indeed the more common usage. Luke, however,
who
uses e]n
with the Infinitive far more frequently than all the other New
Testament
writers, has e]n with the Aorist Infinitive nine times, and the
same
construction occurs in Hebrews twice, and in 1 Corinthians once.
Since
the Aorist Infinitive conceives of an action simply as an event with-
out
thought of its continuance, it is natural to take e]n with it in the same
sense
which the preposition bears with nouns which denote an event rather
than
a continued action or state (cf. 98), viz. as marking the time at which
the
action expressed by the principal verb takes place. The preposition
in
this sense does not seem necessarily to denote exact coincidence, but
in
no case expresses antecedence. In 1 Cor.
action
of the Infinitive cannot be antecedent to that of the principal verb;
see
also Gen. 19:16. In Luke
and
in Luke 14:1 improbable in view of the Imperfect tense following.
In
Luke
by
the Infinitive, strictly speaking, precedes the action of the principal
verb,
yet may be thought of by the writer as marking more or less exactly
the
time at which the action of the verb takes place. As respects the
OF THE DEPENDENT MOODS. 51
relation
of the action to that of the principal verb, the Aorist Infinitive
after
e]n
may be compared to the Aorist Indicative after o!te, which simply
marks
in general the time of the event denoted by the principal verb,
leaving
it to the context to indicate the precise nature of the chronological
relation.
See Matt. 12:3;
indefinite
is the use of the English preposition on with verbal nouns, as,
e.g., On the completion
of his twenty-first year he becomes of legal age;
On the arrival of the
train the procession will be formed. Luke 3:21
cannot
in view of the Aorist tense be rendered, while
all the people were
being baptized, nor in view of the
preposition e]n, after
all the people had
been baptized, but must be understood
as affirming that the baptism of
Jesus
occurred at the time (in general) of the baptism of all the people.
Luke
appropriate
to the context. Cf. 415.
110. THE TENSES OF THE
DEPENDENT MOODS IN INDI-
RECT
DISCOURSE. The Optative and Infinitive in indirect
discourse
preserve the conception of the action as respects
progress
which belonged to the direct discourse. The Present
Optative
and Infinitive represent tense forms which in the
direct
discourse denoted action in progress. Similarly the
Aorist
of these moods represents forms which expressed action
indefinitely,
and the Perfect stands for forms denoting com-
pleted
action. The Future represents a Future Indicative of
the
direct discourse. In the majority of cases each tense of
the
Optative or Infinitive in indirect discourse stands for the
same
tense of the Indicative or Subjunctive of the direct form.
Yet
it is doubtful whether, strictly speaking, the dependent
moods
in indirect discourse express time-relations. The cor-
respondence
of tenses probably rather results from the neces-
sity
of preserving the original conception of the action as
respects
its progress, and the time-relation is conveyed by the
context
rather than by the tense of the verb.
REM. Cf. Br. 161. "Der opt. und inf. aor.
von vergangenen Hand-
lungen
als Vertreter des ind. aor. in der or. obl. entbehrten ebenso wie opt.
und
inf. praes. (§ 158) des Ausdrucks der Zeitbeziehung, die nur aus der
52
THE
TENSES.
Natur
der in der Rede in Verbindung gebrachten Verbalbegriffe oder aus
der
ganzen in Rede stehenden Situation erkannt wurde." Cf. G.MT.
85,
contra.
111. The Present Optative
in indirect discourse in the New
Testament
usually represents the Present Indicative of the
direct
form. Luke
25:16,
it stands for a Present Subjunctive of the direct form.
The
Optative with a@n is taken unchanged from the direct dis-
course.
Luke 1:62;
in
indirect discourse only in Acts 25:16, where it represents
a
Subjunctive of the direct form referring to the future.
Neither
the Perfect Optative nor the Future Optative occurs in
the
New Testament.
112. The Present Infinitive
in indirect discourse in the
New
Testament stands for the Present Indicative of the direct
form.
Matt. 22:23; Luke
resents
the Perfect Indicative of the direct discourse. Luke
ent
Infinitive as the representative of the Imperfect, and the
Perfect
Infinitive as the representative of the Pluperfect
(G. MT. 119, 123) apparently do not occur
in the New Testa-
ment.
The Future Infinitive is, as stated above (99), an
exception
to the general rule of the timelessness of the de-
pendent
moods. It represents a Future Indicative of the
direct
form. John 21:25; Acts 23:30; Heb. 3:18.
113. The Aorist Infinitive
occurs in the New Testament,
as
in classical Greek, as a regular construction after verbs
signifying
to hope, to promise, to swear, to command,
etc. In
this
case the action denoted by the Aorist Infinitive is, by the
nature
of the case, future with reference to that of the princi-
OF THE PARTICIPLE 53
pal
verb, but this time-relation is not expressed by the tense.
The
Aorist Infinitive is here as elsewhere timeless. These
instances,
though closely akin in force to those of indirect
discourse,
are not usually included under that head. Cf.
G.MT.684.
114. The Aorist Infinitive
referring to what is future with
t
reference to the principal verb also occurs in a few instances
after
verbs of assertion. These must be accounted cases in
which
the Aorist Infinitive in indirect discourse is timeless.
Luke
24:46; o!ti ou!twj ge<graptai paqei?n to>n xristo>n
kai> a]nasth?nai e]k
nekrw?n t^? tri<t^
h[me<r%,
thus it is written, that the Christ
should suffer,
and rise
again from the dead the third day. See also Luke 2:26;
Acts
accomplishment being still future (Carter in Cl. Rev. Feb. 1891,
p. 5). Plat. Euthyd. 278, C. e]fa<thn
e]pidei<casqai th>n protreptikh>n
sofi<an, they said that they would give a sample of the hortatory
wisdom.
Protag. 316 C. tou?to
de> oi@etai< oi[ ma<lista gene<sqai, ei] soi>
cugge<noito, and he supposes that he would be most likely to attain this
if he should associate with you; and other examples in Riddell, Digest of Platonic Idioms, § 81; also in G.MT. 127.
There is apparently no instance in the New
Testament of
the
Aorist Infinitive in indirect discourse representing the
Aorist
Indicative of the direct form. Cf. 390.
TENSES OF THE PARTICIPLE.
115. The participle is a
verbal adjective, sharing in part
the
characteristics of both the verb and the adjective; it de-
scribes
its subject as a doer of the action denoted by the verb.
For
the proper understanding of a participle three things must
be
observed:
(a) The grammatical agreement.
(b) The use of the tense.
(c) The modal significance, or logical force.
54 THE TENSES.
116. In grammatical
agreement, a participle follows the
rule
for adjectives, agreeing with its noun or pronoun in gen-
der,
number, and case.
117. The logical force of
the participle, usually the most
important
consideration from the point of view of interpreta-
tion,
will be treated at a later point. See 419 ff. The matter
now
under consideration is the significance of the tense of a
participle.
118. The tenses of the participle,
like those of the other
dependent
moods, do not, in general, in themselves denote time.
To
this general rule the Future Participle is the leading ex-
ception,
its functions being such as necessarily to express time-
relations.
The fundamental distinguishing mark of each of
the
other tenses is the same for the participle as for the
dependent
moods in general. The Present denotes action in
progress;
the Aorist, action conceived of indefinitely; the
Perfect,
completed action. These distinctions, however, im-
pose
certain limitations upon the classes of events which may
be
expressed by the participle of each tense, and thus indirectly
and
to a limited extent, the tense of the participle is an indica-
tion
of the time-relation of the event denoted by it. Since for
purposes
of interpretation it is often needful to define the
time-relation
of an event expressed by the participle, it becomes
expedient
to treat the tenses of the participle apart from
those
of the dependent moods in general.
THE PRESENT PARTICIPLE.
119. The
Present Participle of Simultaneous Action.
The
Present Participle most frequently denotes an action
in
progress, simultaneous with the action of the principal
verb.
HA. 856; G. 1288.
THE PRESENT PARTICIPLE. 55
Mark
16:20; e]kei?noi de> e]celqo<ntej e]kh<rucan pantaxou?,
tou? kuri<ou
sunergou?ntoj, and they went forth and preached everywhere, the Lord
working
with them.
Acts
10:44; e@ti
lalou?ntoj tou? Pe<trou ta> r[h<mata tau?ta e]pe<pese to>
pneu?ma to>
a!gion e]pi> pa<ntaj tou>j a]kou<ontaj to>n lo<gon, while Peter
was yet
speaking these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which
heard the
word.
REM. The action of the verb and that of the
participle may be of the
same
extent (Mark
action
of the verb falls within the period covered by the participle (Acts
10:44).
Even a subsequent action is occasionally
expressed by a Present
Participle,
which in this case stands after the verb. Cf. 145.
Acts
19:9; a]fw<risen tou>j maqhta>j, kaq ] h[me<ran
dialego<menoj e]n t^?
sxol^?
Tura<nnou, he separated the
disciples, reasoning daily in the
school of
Tyrannus.
See also Acts
120. The
Present Participle of Identical Action.
The
Present Participle not infrequently denotes the same
action
which is expressed by the verb of the clause in
which
it stands.
John
6:6; tou?to de> e@legen peira<zwn au]to<n, and this he said
trying him.
See also Matt. 27:41; John 21:19; Acts 9:22;
Gal. 3:23.
121. The verb and the
participle of identical action, though
denoting
the same action, usually describe it from a different
point
of view. The relation between the different points of
view
varies greatly. It may be the relation of fact to method,
as
in Acts
nificance
or quality, as in Luke 22:65; or of act to purpose
or
result, as in Matt. 16:1; John 6:6.
122. A Present Participle
of Identical Action, since it de-
notes
action in progress, most naturally accompanies a verb
denoting
action in progress. Sometimes, however, a Pres-
ent
Participle accompanies an Aorist verb denoting the same
56
THE TENSES.
action;
regularly so in the phrase a]pekri<nato (a]pekri<qh) le<gwn;
see
Mark 15:9; Luke 3:16; John 1:26; etc.
Acts
15:24; e]ta<racan u[ma?j lo<goij a]naskeua<zontej ta>j
yuxa>j u[mw?n,
they have
troubled you with words, subverting your souls. See also
Acts 1:3; 22:4; Gen. 43:6.
Similarly a Present Participle representing the
action as in
progress,
may accompany an Aoristic Future, which conceives
of
it simply as an event. Acts 15:29; 1 Macc. 12:22.
123. The
General Present Participle. The Present
Participle
is also used without reference to time or prog-
ress,
simply defining its subject as belonging to a certain
class,
i.e. the class of those who do the action denoted
by
the verb. The participle in this case becomes a simple
adjective
or noun and is, like any other adjective or noun,
timeless
and indefinite. B. pp. 296 f.; WM. p. 444; WT.
p.
353.
Acts
to>n qeo<n, Cornelius a centurion, a righteous and God-fearing man.
Mark
demoniac.
Ga1.
6:6; koiwnei<tw
de> o[ kathxou<menoj to>n lo<gon t&? kathxou?nti e]n
pa?sin a]gaqoi?j, but let him that is taught in the word communicate to
him that
teacheth in all good things.
124. A class may consist of
those who habitually or con-
stantly
do a given act, or of those who once do the act the
single
doing of which is the mark of the class. The former
case
is illustrated in Matt. 5:6; the latter in Rev. 14:13.
Matt.
5:6; maka<rioi oi[ peinw?ntej kai> diyw?ntej th>n
dikaiosu<nhn,
blessed
are they that hunger and thirst after righteousness.
Rev.
14:13; maka<rioi
oi[ nekroi> oi[ e]n kuri<& a]poqnh<skontej, blessed are
the dead
which die in the Lord. See also Matt. 7:13.
THE PRESENT PARTICIPLE. 57
In the first class of cases the Present
Participle only can be
used;
in the second class either an Aorist (as in Matt.
26:52;
John 16:2, et al.) or a Present may occur, and that,
either
in the plural designating the class as such, or in the
singular
designating an individual of the class.
Thus panti>
a]nqrw<p& peritemnome<n& (Gal. 5:3; cf.
circumcised, i.e. that receives circumcision (R. V., correctly though not
literally).
So also in Heb. 5:1 lambano<menoj does not mean, one that is
wont to be taken, but, that is taken. Being once taken is the
mark of the
class
here referred to, as being once
circumcised is the mark of the class
referred
to in Gal. 5:3. The customariness applies not to the action of
the
individual member of the class, but to that of the class as a whole; as
in
Heb. 5:1, the Present Indicative kaqi<statai may be rendered, is wont
to be appointed, not in the sense, each one is wont to be [repeatedly]
appointed, but, it is wont to happen to each that he is
appointed. Cf. 125.
In
Luke
divorce, still less, every one that has divorced, but, every one that divorces.
125. Through the ambiguity
of the English Passive form,
such
Present Participles as those just referred to (124) are
easily
taken by the English interpreter as equivalent to Per-
fect
Participles, but always to the greater or less distortion of,
the
meaning of the passage.1
Thus in Gal. 5:3 (see 124) peritemnome<n& not equivalent to a
Perfect.
every circumcised man. The apostle is not
speaking of circumcision as
an
accomplished fact, but of becoming circumcised. Similarly Heb. 5:1
refers
not to one that has been taken
(German: ist genommen worden),
but
that is taken (German: wird genommen). In Heb. 5:4 kalou<menoj
is
one that is (not, has been) called. In
Luke
1 This ambiguity of the English may be
illustrated by the form is
written. In the sentence, It is written in your law, etc., is written is a
Perfect
of
The
German would be ist geschrieben. In
the sentence, The name of each
scholar is written in the register as he
enters the school,
the same form
is
a Present of customary action, and would be expressed in Greek by
gra<fetai, and in German by wird geschrieben.
58
THE
TENSES.
swzo<menoi, the participle is
undoubtedly a General Present, the inquiry
being
neither on the one hand as to the number of those
that are already
saved (Perfect of
pleted
Action) nor, on the other, with reference to those that are being
saved (Progressive Present of
Simultaneous Action), but with reference
to
those that are [i.e. become] saved. Cf. Luther's version, meinst
du,
dass wenige selig
werden?
and Weizsacker's, sind es wenige, die
gerettet
werden?
The same participle in Acts 2:47; 1 Cor. 1:18; 2
Cor. 2:15, may
be
understood in the same way, and be rendered, we that are (in the sense
we
that become) saved, or may be taken as in R. V. as a Progressive
Present
of Simultaneous Action. It cannot mean the saved in the sense
of
those that have been saved. The statement of Dr. T. W. Chambers in
J.B.L. June 1886, p. 40, that
"the passive participle of the present tense
in
Greek is often, if not generally, used to express a completed action,"
is
wholly incorrect, and derives all its verisimilitude from the ambiguity
of
the English Passive forms.
126. A General Present
Participle sometimes occurs in the singular
when
the person to whom it refers constitutes the class designated. This
limitation
of the phrase to an individual is accomplished, however, not by
the
participle, but by its limitations. John
probably
means simply his betrayer. The
participle paradidou<j alone
designates
anyone belonging to the class of betrayers. It is the addition
of
the article and an object that restrict the participle to one person.
127. The Present Participle for the Imperfect. The
Present Participle is also sometimes used as an
Imperfect
to
denote a continued action antecedent to that of the
principal
verb. H.A. 856, a; G.1289; G.MT.140.
Matt.
they are
dead that were seeking the young child's life. See also
John
128. The following uses of
the Present Participle are
closely
analogous to the uses of the Present Indicative already
described
under similar names. They are of somewhat infre-
quent
occurrence in the New Testament.
THE AORIST P ARTIOIPLE. 59
129. (a) THE CONATIVE
PRESENT.
Matt.
neither
suffer ye them that are entering in to enter. See also Acts
28:23.
130. (b) THE PRESENT FOR
THE FUTURE, the action de-
noted
being thought of as future with reference to the time of
the
principal verb.
Acts
21:3; e]kei?se ga>r
to> ploi?on h#n a]pofortizo<menon to>n go<mon, for
there the
ship was to unlade her burden.
131. (c) THE PRESENT OF PAST ACTION STILL IN
PROGRESS,
the
action denoted beginning before the action of the principal
verb
and continuing in progress at the time denoted by the
latter.
Act
9:33; eu$ren de> e]kei? a@nqrwpo<n tina o]no<mati Ai]ne<an e]c e]tw?n o]ktw>
katakei<menon
e]pi> kraba<ttou,
and there he found a certain man named
AEneas,
who had been lying on a bed eight years. See also Matt.
THE AORIST PARTICIPLE.
132. The general statement
made under 118, that the
tenses
of the participle do not in general in themselves denote
time,
applies also to the Aorist Participle. It is very impor-
tant
for the right interpretation of the Aorist Participle that
it
be borne in mind that the proper and leading function of the
tense
is not to express time, but to mark the fact that the
action
of the verb .is conceived of indefinitely, as a simple
event.
The assumption that the Aorist Participle properly
denotes
past time, from the point of view either of the speaker
or
of the principal verb, leads to constant misinterpretation of
the
form. The action denoted by the Aorist Participle may
be
past, present, or future with reference to the speaker, and
60 THE TENSES.
antecedent
to, coincident with, or subsequent to, the action of
the
principal verb. The Aorist Participle, like the participles
of
the other tenses, may be most simply thought of as a noun
or
adjective, the designation of one who performs the action
denoted
by the verb, and like any other noun or adjective
timeless.
The distinction of the Aorist Participle is not that
it
expresses a different time-relation from that expressed by
the
Present or Perfect, but that it conceives of the action de-
noted
by it, not as in progress (Present), nor as an existing
result
(Perfect), but as a simple fact. Such an adjective or
noun
will not ordinarily be used if contemporaneousness
with
the action of the principal verb is distinctly in mind,
since
contemporaneousness suggests action in progress, and
action
in progress is expressed, not by the Aorist, but by
the
Present tense. Nor will it be used when the mind
distinctly
contemplates the existence of the result of the
action,
it being the function, not of the Aorist, but of
the
Perfect, to express existing result. Nor, again, will
the
Aorist noun be used if the writer desires distinctly
to
indicate that the doer of the action will perform it in
time
subsequent to that of the principal verb, the Aorist be-
ing
incapable in itself of suggesting subsequence or futurity.
But,
when these cases have been excluded, there remains a
considerable
variety of relations to which the Aorist is appli-
cable,
the common mark of them all being that the action
denoted
by the participle is thought of simply as an event.
Among
these various relations the case of action antecedent
to
that of the principal verb furnishes the largest number
of
instances. It is thus, numerically considered, the leading
use
of the Aorist Participle, and this fact has even to some
extent
reacted on the meaning of the tense, so that there is
associated
with the tense as a secondary, acquired, and wholly
subordinate
characteristic a certain suggestion of antecedence.
THE AORIST PARTICIPLE. 61
Yet
this use is no more than the other uses a primary function
of
the tense, nor did it ever displace the others, or force them
into
a position of subordination or abnormality. The instances
in
which the action denoted by the participle is not antecedent
to
the action of the principal verb are as normal as that in
which
it is so, and were evidently so recognized alike in clas-
sical
and in New Testament Greek. The Aorist Participle of
Antecedent
Action does not denote antecedence; it is used of
antecedent
action, where antecedence is implied, not by the
Aorist
tense as a tense of past time, but in some other way.
The
same principle holds respecting all the uses of this tense.
The
following section (133) is accordingly a definition of the
constant
function of the Aorist Participle, while 134, 139, and
142
enumerate the classes of events with reference to which it
may
be used.
REM.
Compare the following statements of modern grammarians:
“Since
the participle, like the other non-augmented forms of the
aorist,
has nothing whatever to do with the denotation of past time, and
since
time previous to a point in past time is not the less a kind of past
time,
we do not here understand at once how the participle became used
in
this sense. But the enigma is solved when we examine the nature of
the
aorist and participle. The latter, an adjective in origin, fixes one
action
in relation to another. The action which is denoted by the finite
verb
is the principal one. When the secondary action continues side by
side
with the principal action, it must stand [paratatikw?j] in the participle
of
the present; if, again, referred to the future, the proper sign of the
future
is needed; and similarly, the perfect participle serves to express
an
action regarded as complete in reference to the principal action. If,
however,
it is intended to denote the secondary action without any
reference
to continuousness and completion and futurity, but merely
as
a point or moment, the aorist participle alone remains for this
purpose.
We indeed, by a sort of necessity, regard a point which
is
fixed in reference to another action as prior to it, but, strictly
speaking,
this notion of priority in past time is not signified by the
aorist
participle."--Curtius,
Elucidations of the Student's Greek Gram-
mar,
pp. 216 f.
62 THE TENSES.
"An und fur sich bezeichnet das aoristische
Particip ebenso wenig als
irgend
eine andere aoristische Form ausser dem Indicativ, der in seinem
Augment
ein deutliches Merkmal der Vergangenheit hat, etwas Vergan-
genes.
Das Particip des kurzesten und von uns genauer betrachteten
Aorists,
dessen Stamm eben nur die Verbalgrundiorm selbst ist, ist also
nur
Particip an und fur sich, das heisst es bezeichnet eine Handlung, mit
der
noch kein Satz als abgeschlossen gedacht werden soll; im Uebrigen
liegt
sein Characteristisches fur uns nur darin, dass es als aoristisches
Particip
nicht wie das prasentische Particip auch die Bedeutung der
Dauer
in sich enthalt, sondern etwas bezeichnet, bei dell die Zeitdauer,
die
es in Anspruch genommen, nicht weiter in Frage kommen, oder das
uberhaupt
nur als ganz kurze Zeit dauernd bezeichnet werden soll."
--Leo Meyer, Griechische Aoriste, pp.
124,125.
"In satzen wie e]peidh>
ei#pen, a]p^<ei;
ei]pw>n tau?ta a]p^?ei; e]a<n ti fa<gwsin,
a]nasth<sonati (Xen.
An. IV. 5, 8) erschien die syntaktisch untergeordnete aoristische Handlung
gegenuber dem anderen Vorgang darum als verganngen, weil die beiden Handlungen
sachlich verschieden waren. Das Bedeu-
tungsmoment
der ungeteilten Vollstandigkeit und Abgeschlossenheit der
Handlung
liess die Vorstellung, dass die Haupthandlung in den Verlauf
der
Nebenhandlung hineinfalle und neben ihr hergehe (Gleichzeitigkeit),
nicht
zu. Die Vorstellung der Vergangenheit in Bezug auf das Haupt-
verbum
war also nicht durch die Aoristform an sich, sondern durch die
besondere
Natur der beiden Verbalbegriffe, die zu einander in Beziehung
gesetzt
wurden, gegeben. Man erkennt diesen Sachverhalt am besten
durch
Vergleichung mit Satzen wie E 98, kai> ba<l ]
e]
decio>n w#mon, Herod. 5, 24, eu#
e]poi<hsaj a]piko<menoj, Xen. An. I. 3, 17, bou-
loi<mhn d ] a}n a@kontoj a]piw>n
Ku<rou laqei?n au]to>n a]pelqw<n, Thuk. 6, 4,
e@tesi de> e]ggu<tata o]ktw>
kai> e[kato>n meta> th>n sfete<ran oi@kisin Gel&?oi ]Akra<ganta &@kisan, th>n me>n
po<lin a]po> tou? ]Akra<gontoj
potamou? o]noma<santej, oi]kista>j de> poih<santej ]Aristo<noun kai> Pusti<lon,
no<mima de> ta> Gel&<wn do<ntej, wo die Vorstellung
einer Zeitverschiedenheit darum nicht entstehen konnte, weil es sich um ein und
denselben Vorgang handelte und das Partizip oder die Partizipien nur eine, beziehungsweise
mehrere besondere Seiten der Handlung des regierenden Verbums zum Ausdruck
brachten."
133. The
Aorist Participle
is used of an action con-
ceived
of as a simple event.
It may be used with reference to an action or
event in
its
entirety (indefinite), or with reference to the inception
THE AORIST PARTICIPLE. 63
of
a state (inceptive), or with reference to the accomplish-
ment
of an attempt (resultative). When indefinite it may
be
used of momentary or extended actions or of a series of
events.
Cf. 35, and 39, and see examples below.
134. The
Aorist Participle of Antecedent Action.
The
Aorist Participle is most frequently used of an action
antecedent
in time to the action of the principal verb.
Matt.
4:2; kai> nhsteu<saj h[me<raj tessera<konta kai>
nu<ktaj tessera<-
konta u!steron e]
nights, he
afterward hungered.
Mark
hand he raised her up.
John
wist not who it was.
Acts
e@suron e@cw th?j
po<lewj,
and having persuaded the multitudes they
stoned
Paul, and dragged him out of the city.
Acts
27:13; do<cantej th?j proqe<sewj kekrathke<nai a@rantej
a#sson
parele<gonto
th>n Krh<thn, supposing that they had
obtained their pur-
pose, they
weighed anchor, and sailed along
Rom.
5:1; dikaiwqe<ntej ou#n e]k pi<stewj ei]rh<nhn e@xwmen
pro>j to>n qeo<n,
having
therefore been justified by faith, let us have peace with God.
1
Cor. 1:4; eu]xaristw? t&? qe&? . . . e]pi> t^? xa<riti
tou? qeou? t^? doqei<s^
u[mi?n, I thank God. . . for the grace of God which was given you.
we give
thanks to God. . . having heard of your faith.
2
Tim.
bring him with thee.
135. The Aorist Participle
of Antecedent Action is fre-
quently
used attributively as the equivalent of a relative
clause;
in this case it usually has the article, and its position
is
determined by the same considerations which govern the
position
of any other noun or adjective in similar construction.
See
John 5:13; 1 Cor. 1:4, above.
64
THE TENSES.
136. It is still more
frequently used adverbially and is
equivalent
to an adverbial clause or coordinate verb with and;
in
this case the article does not occur, and the participle
usually
precedes the verb, but sometimes follows it. See
Rom.
5:1; and Col. 1:3, 4 (134).
137. In some instances of
the Aorist Participle of Ante-
cedent
Action, it is the inception of the action only which pre-
cedes
the action of the principal verb. And this occurs not
only
in verbs of state (cf. 35, and see Mark 5:33; Acts 23:1),
but
also in verbs of action; which in the Indicative are not
inceptive.
Acts 27:13 (134);
138. The Aorist Participle
of Antecedent Action is by no
means
always best translated into English by the so-called
Perfect
Participle. The English Present Participle is very
frequently
placed before a verb to express an antecedent ac-
tion,
and that, too, without implying that the action is thought
of
as in progress. It is accordingly in many cases the best
translation
of an Aorist Participle. See Mark
also
Mark
Aorist
Participle of the Greek is best reproduced in English
by
a finite verb with and. See Acts 14:19; 27:13; 2 Tim.
139. The Aorist Participle of Identical Action. The
Aorist
Participle agreeing with the subject of a verb not
infrequently
denotes the same action that is expressed
by
the verb. HA. 856, b; G. 1290; G .MT. 150.
Matt.
27:4; h!marton paradou>j ai$ma di<kaion, I sinned in that I betrayed
innocent
blood.
Acts
done that
thou hast come.
See also Matt.
instances of the phrase a]pokriqei>j
ei#pen);
Acts 27:3; 1 Cor.
Eph. 1:9; Heb. 7:27; Gen. 43:5.
THE AORIST PARTICIPLE. 65
140. The verb and the
participle of identical action, though
denoting
the same action, usually describe it from a different
point
of view. Respecting this difference in
point of view,
see
121.
141. An Aorist Participle
of Identical Action most fre-
quently
accompanies an Aorist verb, both verb and participle
thus
describing the action indefinitely as a simple event. It
occurs
also with the Future, with which as an aoristic tense
it
is entirely appropriate (Luke 9:25; 3 John 6), with the
Present
and Imperfect (Mark 8:29; Acts 7:26), and with the
Perfect
(Acts 13:33; 1 Sam. 12:19).
142. The Aorist Participle
used attributively as the equiva-
lent
of a relative clause sometimes refers to an action subse-
quent
to that of the principal verb, though antecedent to the
time
of the speaker. Instances occur both in classical Greek
(see
G.MT. 152; Carter and Humphreys in Cl. Rev. Feb. 1891)
and
in the New Testament.
Acts
]Iou<da
tou? genome<nou o[dhgou? toi?j sullabou?sin
]Ihsou?n,
which the Holy Spirit spake before by the
mouth of David concerning Judas who be-
came guide
to them that took Jesus. See also Matt. 10:4;
John 11:2; Col. 1:8.
143. It should be clearly
observed that the participle in
these
cases does not by its tense denote either antecedence to
the
time of speaking or subsequence to that of the principal
verb.
The participle is properly timeless, and the time-rela-
tions
are learned from the context or outside sources.
144. Whether the Aorist
Participle used adverbially, as the
equivalent
of an adverbial or coordinate clause, ever refers to
an
action subsequent to that of the principal verb is more
difficult
to determine. No certain instance has been observed
in
classical Greek, though several possible ones occur. See
66 THE TENSES.
Dem.
XIX. (F.L.) 255 (423) cited by Carter,
and Thuc. II.
49.
2, cited by Humphreys, in Cl. Rev. Feb. 1891. See also
145. The New Testament
furnishes one almost indubitable
instance
of an Aorist Participle so used if we accept the best
attested
text.
Acts
25:13, ]Agri<ppaj o[
basileu>j kai> Berni<kh kath<nthsan ei]j Kaisa-
ri<an
a]spasa<menoi to>n Fh?ston, Agrippa
the King and Bernice arrived
at
Cresarea and saluted Festus.
The
doubt concerning the text rests not on the insufficiency
of
the documentary evidence, but on the rarity of this use of
the
participle. Cf. Hort in WH II. App. p. 100. "The
authority
for –a<menoi is absolutely overwhelming, and as a
matter
of transmission –o<menoi can only be a
correction. Yet
it
is difficult to remain satisfied that there is no prior corrup-
tion
of some kind." With this case should also be compared
Acts
which
is without the article and follows the verb, is most
naturally
interpreted as referring to an action subsequent in
thought
and fact to that of the verb which it follows, and
equivalent
to kai< with a coordinate verb. These instances are
perhaps
due to Aramaic influence. See Ka. §
76. d; and cf.
Dan.
In Rom.
denoted
by kateno<hsen. It is in that case an inceptive Aorist
Participle
denoting
a subsequent action. Its position is doubtless due to the
emphasis
laid upon it. In Heb.
preserved
if eu[ra<menoj is thought of as referring to an action
subsequent to
that
of ei]sh?lqen. But it is possible that ei]sh?lqen is used to describe the
whole
highpriestly act, including both the entrance into the holy place and
the
subsequent offering of the blood, and that eu[ra<menoj is thus a participle
of
identical action. In either case it should be translated not having
PARTICIPLE. 67
obtained as in R. V., but obtaining or and obtained. In Phil. 2:7 geno<menoj
is
related to labw<n as a participle of identical action; the relation of labw<n
to
e]ke<nwsen is less certain. It may denote the same action
as e]ke<nwsen
viewed
from the opposite point of view (identical action), or may be
thought
of as an additional fact (subsequent action) to e]ke<nwsen. In
defining
e]nedunamw<qh t^? pi<stei, though dou<j is strictly subsequent
to e]nedunamw<qh. Somewhat
similar is 1 Pet. 3:18, where zwopoihqei<j is clearly
subsequent
to a]pe<qanen [or e@paqen], but is probably to be
taken together with
qanatwqei<j as defining the whole
of the preceding clause Xristo>j a!pac peri>
a[martiw?n a]pe<qanen, di<kaioj
u[pe>r a]di<kwn, i!na u[ma?j prosaga<g^ t&? qe&?.
146. The Aorist Participle used as an integral part of the
object
of a verb of perception represents the action which it
denotes
as a simple event without defining its time. The ac-
tion
may be one which is directly perceived and hence coinci-
dent
in time with that of the principal verb, or it may be one
which
is ascertained or learned, and hence antecedent to the
action
of the principal verb. In the latter case it takes the
place
of a clause of indirect discourse having its verb in
the
Aorist Indicative.
Acts
qe<nta
au]t&? xei?raj,
and he has seen a man named Ananias come
in
and lay
hands upon him.
See also Luke 10:18; Acts 10:3; 11:3;
26:13; 2 Pet. 1:18.
Luke
to have been done.
147. The Aorist Participle
with lanqa<nw denotes the same
time
as the principal verb. It occurs but once in the New
Testament
(Heb. 13:2), the similar construction with fqa<nw
and
tugxa<nw, not at all. HA.
856, b; G. 1290.
148. The categories named
above, Aorist Participle of An-
tecedent
Action, of Identical Action, etc., which, it must be
remembered,
represent, not diverse functions of the tense, but
only
classes of cases for which the Aorist Participle may be
68
THE TENSES.
used,
do not include absolutely all the instances. There are,
for
example, cases in which the time-relation of the action of
the
participle to that of the verb is left undefined. John
16:2,
o[ a]poktei<naj [u[ma?j] do<c^
latrei<an prosfe<rein t&? qe&?, means,
every slayer of you will
think,
etc. Whether he will have such
thought
before he shall slay, when he slays, or after he shall
have
slain, is not at all defined. Cf. Gen. 4:15.
149. Very rarely also the
Aorist Participle used adverbially
refers
to an action evidently in a general way coincident in
time
with the action of the verb, yet not identical with it.
Heb.
pollou>j
ui[o>j ei]j do<can a]gago<nta to>n a]rxhgo>n th?j swthri<aj
au]tw?n dia>
paqhma<twn teleiw?sai,
for it became him, for whom are all
things, and
through whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory,
to make
the author of their salvation perfect through sufferings. The
participle a]gago<nta is neither antecedent
nor subsequent to teleiw?-
sai, nor yet strictly
identical with it. Nearly the same thought
might be expressed in English by when he brought or in bringing,
and in Greek by o!te h@gagen
or e]n
t&? a]gagei?n
(cf. 109).
The choice of the Aorist Participle rather than
the Present
in
such cases is due to the fact that the action is thought of,
not
as in progress, but as a simple event or fact. Concerning
a
similar use of the Aorist Participle in Homer, see Leo Meyer,
Griechische
Aoriste, p. 125; T. D. Seymour in T.A.P.A., 1881,
pp.
89, 94. The rarity of these instances is due not to any
abnormality
in such a use of the tense, but to the fact that
an
action, temporally coincident with another and subordinate
to
it (and not simply the same action viewed from a different
point
of view), is naturally thought of as in progress, and
hence
is expressed by a Present Participle. Cf. exx. under 119.
150. As an aid to
interpretation it may be observed that the Aorist
Participle
with the article may sometimes be used instead of a relative
THE AORIST PARTICIPLE. 69
clause
with the Aorist Indicative, sometimes instead of such a clause with
the
verb in the Aorist Subjunctive.1 But it should not be supposed that
from
the point of view of the Greek language these were two distinct
functions
of the Aorist Participle. The phrase o{j e@labe referred in Greek
to
past time, o
in
the mind of a Greek o[ labw<n was the precise
equivalent of both of
these,
standing alternately for the one or the other, so that when he wrote
o[ labw<n he sometimes thought o
doubtless
rather that the Aorist Participle was always, strictly speaking,
timeless,
and that o[ labw<n meant simply the
receiver, the act of receiving
being
thought of as a simple fact without reference to progress. Thus for
o[ labw<n in Matt. 25:16 o{j
e@labe
might have stood, and it may be trans-
lated,
he that received; while for o[
o]mo<saj
in Matt.
might
have stood, and it may be translated, whoever
sweareth; and for
o[ u[pomei<naj in Matt. 24:13 o
be
translated, whoever shall endure. Cf.
Luke 12:8-10. But these
differences
are due not to a difference in the force of the tense in the
three
cases. In each case a translation by a timeless verbal noun-
receiver, swearer,
endurer--would
correctly (though from the point
of
view of English rather awkwardly) represent the thought of the
Greek.
As respects the time-relation of the action of the participle
to
that of the principal verb o[ labw<n and o[
u[pomei<naj
are participles
of
antecedent action, o[ o]mo<saj is a participle of
identical action. But
these
distinctions, again, as stated above, are made, not to mark different
functions
of the Greek tense, but to aid in a fuller interpretation of the
facts
of the case.
151. Some scholars have
endeavored to explain all participles with
the
article as equivalent to the relative pronoun with the corresponding
tense
of the Indicative. It is true that such participial phrases may often
be
resolved in this way and the sense essentially preserved. But that
this
is not a general principle will be evident from a comparison of the
function
of the tense in the Indicative and in the participle.
(a) All the tenses of the Indicative express
time-relations from the
point
of view, not of the principal verb, but of the speaker. This principle
holds
in a relative clause as well as in a principal sentence. An Aorist
verb
standing in a relative clause may indeed refer to an action antece-
dent
to the time of the principal verb, but this antecedence is not expressed
by
the tense of the verb. All that the Aorist tense does in respect to
1 W. G.
Ballantine,
Attributive Aorist Participles in Protasis, in Bio.
Sac. Apr. 1889.
70
THE TENSES.
time
is to place the action in past time; its relation in that past time to
the
action of the principal verb must be learned from some other source.
The
corresponding thing is true of the Present tense, which in a relative
clause
denotes time not contemporaneous with the action of the principal
verb,
but present from the point of view of the speaker. See, e.g., Matt.
11:4;
(b) The participle, on the other hand, is in
itself timeless, and gains
whatever
suggestion of time-relation it conveys from its relation to the
rest
of the sentence. It is not affirmed that the Aorist Participle denotes
time
relative to that of the principal verb, but that its time-relations are
not
independent, like those of the Indicative, but dependent.
It
is thus apparent that the whole attitude, so to speak, of the parti-
ciple
toward time-relations is different from that of the Indicative, and no
formula
of equivalence between them can be constructed. A timeless
noun or adjective cannot
by any fixed rule be translated into a time-
expressing verb.
Somewhat less of error is introduced if the rule
is made to read that
the
participle may be trauslated into English by a relative clause using
that
tense of the English Indicative which
corresponds to the tense
of
the Greek participle. Relative clauses in English frequently use the
tenses
apparently to denote time relative to that of the principal verb.
Thus
in the sentence, When I am in
present
tense, am, really denotes time future
with reference to the speaker,
time
present relative to that of the principal verb. Similarly in the
sentence,
They that have done good shall come forth
to the resurrection of
life --have done is past, not with reference to the time of speaking, but
to
that of the principal verb. But such uses of tenses in English are
merely
permissible, not uniform. Shall have done
would be more exact
in
the last sentence. Moreover, the rule as thus stated is false in principle,
and
not uniformly applicable in fact. It would require, e.g., that a
Present
Participle, standing in connection with an Aorist verb, should be
rendered
by an English Present, instead of by an English Past as it
should
usually be. See John 2:16; Acts 10:35.
THE FUTURE PARTICIPLE.
152. The Future Participle represents an action as
future
from the point of view of the principal verb. HA.
856;
G. 1288.
THE PERFECT PARTICIPLE. 71
Acts.
24:11; ou] plei<ouj ei]si<n moi h[me<rai dw<deka a]f ]
h$j a]ne<bhn prosku-
nh<swn ei]j ]Ierousalh<m, it
is not more than twelve days since I went
up to
worship at
1
Cor.
body that
shall be.
REM. The Future Participle is of later origin
than the participles of
the
other tenses, and is a clearly marked exception to the general time-
lessness
of the participle. While its function was probably not primarily
temporal,
the relations which it expressed necessarily suggested subse-
quence
to the action of the principal verb, and hence gave to the tense a
temporal
force.
153. The Present Participle
me<llwn followed by an Infini-
tive
of another verb is used as a periphrasis for a Future
Participle
of the latter verb, but with a somewhat different
range
of use. To express that which is to take place, either
form
may be used. But me<llwn is not used to express
the
purpose
of an action, and is used, as the Future Participle is
not,
to express intention without designating the intended
action
as the purpose of another act. See John 12:4 (cf. John
6:64);
Acts 18:14; 20:3, 7.
THE PERFECT PARTICIPLE.
154. The Perfect Participle
is used of completed ac-
tion.
Like the Perfect Indicative it may have reference
to
the past action and the resulting state or only to the
resulting
state. The time of the resulting state is usually
that
of the principal verb. HA. 856;
G.1288.
Acts
the men
who had been sent. . . stood before the gate.
Rom.
Luke
had gone forth from me.
72
THE TENSES.
155. The Perfect Participle
stands in two passages of the New Testa-
ment
as the predicate of the participle w@n. The effect is of a
Perfect
Participle
clearly marked as one of existing state. See Eph. 4:18;
Col.
1:21.
156. The Perfect Participle
is occasionally used as a Plu-
perfect
to denote a state existing antecedent to the time of the
principal
verb. The action of which it is the result is, of
course,
still earlier.
John
11:44; e]ch?lqen o[
teqnhkw>j dedeme<noj tou>j po<daj kai> ta>j xei?raj
keiri<aij, he that was [or had been] dead came forth bound hand and
foot with
grave-clothes.
See also Mark
Present Participle in the same verse and the
Aorist Participle
in v. 18; also 1 Cor. 2:7, a]pokekrumme<nhn, comparing v. 10.
THE MOODS.
MOODS IN PRINCIPAL CLAUSES.
THE
INDICATIVE MOOD.
157. The Indicative is primarily the mood of the un-
qualified
assertion or simple question of fact. HA.
865;
G.1317.
John
1:1; e]n a]rx^? h#n o[ lo<goj, in
the beginning was the Word.
Mark
4:7; kai> karpo>n ou]k e@dwken, and it yielded no fruit.
Matt.
2:2; pou? e]sti>n o[ texqei>j basileu>j tw?n ]Ioudai<wn, where
is he
that is
born King of the Jews?
John
158. The Indicative has
substantially the same assertive
force
in many principal clauses containing qualified assertions.
The
action is conceived of as a fact, though the assertion of
the
fact is qualified.
John
13:8; e]a>n
mh> ni<yw se, ou]k e@xeij me<roj met ] e]mou?, if I wash thee not,
thou hast
no part with me.
159. (a) When qualified by
particles such as a@n, ei@qe, etc.,
the
Indicative expresses various shades of desirability, improb-
ability,
etc. Respecting these secondary uses of the Indicative
in
principal clauses, see 26, 27, 248.
(b) Respecting the uses of the Future Indicative
in other
than
a purely assertive sense, see 67, 69, 70.
73
74
THE MOODS.
(c) Respecting the uses of the Indicative in
subordinate
clauses,
see 185-360, passim.
REM. The uses of the Indicative described in 157
and 158 are substan-
tially
the same in English and in Greek and occasion no special difficulty
to
the English interpreter of Greek. The uses referred to in 159 exhibit
more
difference between Greek and English, and each particular usage
requires
separate consideration.
THE SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD.
The uses of the Subjunctive in principal clauses
are as
follows:
160. The
Hortatory Subjunctive. The Subjunctive
is
used in the first person plural in exhortations, the
speaker
thus exhorting others to join him in the doing of
an
action. HA. 866, 1; G. 1344; B. p. 209; WM. p. 355;
G.MT. 255, 256.
Heb.
12:1; di ]
u[pomonh?j tre<xwmen to>n prokei<menon h[mi?n a]gw?na, let us
run with patience the race that is set before us.
1
John 4:7; a]gaphtoi<, a]gapw?men a]llh<louj, beloved, let us love one
another.
161. Occasionally the first
person singular is used with
a@fej or deu?ro prefixed, the
exhortation in that case becoming a
request
of the speaker to the person addressed to permit him
to
do something.
Matt.
7:4; a@fej e]kba<lw to> ka<rfoj e]k tou? o]fqalmou? sou, let me cast
out the mote out of thine eye. See also Luke 6:42;
Acts 7:34.
The sense of a@fej in Matt. 27:49 and of a@fete
in Mark
15:36 is doubt-
ful
(see R.V. ad loc. and Th., a]fi<hmi, 2, E.).
In Matt. 21:38 (Mark 12:7) deu?te is prefixed to a
hortatory first per-
son
plural without affecting the meaning of the Subjunctive.
THE SUBJUNCTIVE. 75
In none of these cases is a conjunction to be
supplied before the Sub-
junctive. Cf. the use of a@ge, fe<re, etc., in classical
Greek. G.MT. 257;
B. p. 210; WM. p. 356.
162. The
Prohibitory Subjunctive. The Aorist Sub-
junctive
is used in the second person with mh< to express a
prohibition
or a negative entreaty. H.A. 866, 2; G. 1346;
G.MT. 259.
Matt.
for the morrow.
Heb.
3:8; mh> sklhru<nhte ta>j kardi<aj u[mw?n, harden not your hearts.
Matt.
6:13; kai> mh> ei]sene<gk^j h[ma?j ei]j, and bring us not into
temptation.
163. Prohibitions are
expressed either by the Aorist Sub-
junctive
or by the Present Imperative, the only exceptions
being
a few instances of the third person Aorist Imperative
with
mh<.
The difference between an Aorist Subjunctive with
mh< and a Present Imperative with mh<
is in the
conception of
the
action as respects its progress. H.A.
874. Thus
164. (a) The Aorist
Subjunctive forbids the action as a
simple
event with reference to the action as a whole or to its
inception,
and is most frequently used when the action has
not
been begun.
Acts
18:9; la<lei kai> mh> siwph<s^j, speak and hold not thy peace.
Rev.
7:3; mh> a]dikh<shte th>n gh?n, hurt not the earth.
165. (b) The Present
Imperative (180-184) forbids the
continuance
of the action, most frequently when it is already
in
progress; in this case, it is a demand to desist from the
action.
Mark
John
76
THE MOODS.
When the action is not yet begun, it enjoins
continued
abstinence
from it.
Mark
e]kei?, mh>
pisteu<ete,
and then if any man shall say unto you,
Lo, here
is the
Christ; or, Lo, there; believe it not. Cf. Matt. 24:23.
166. The Prohibitory
Subjunctive occurs rarely in the third
person.
1 Cor. 16:11; 2 Thess. 2:3.
167. The strong negative, ou]
mh<,
occurs rarely in prohibi-
tions
with the Aorist Subjunctive.
Matt.
to
be understood as prohibitory (as in the Hebrew of the passage in Isa.),
rather
than emphatically predictive, as in R. V. Cf. Gen. 3:1, ou]
mh> fa<ghte
which
is clearly prohibitory. G.MT. 297.
Cf. 162.
In Matt. 21:19, on the other hand, the emphatic
predictive sense, there
shall be no fruit from
thee henceforward forever, is more probable, being
more
consistent with general usage and entirely appropriate to the con-
text.
The imperative rendering of the R.V. makes the passage doubly
exceptional,
the Imperative Subjunctive being rare in the third person,
and
ou] mh< being unusual in prohibitions.
168. The Deliberative Subjunctive. The Subjunctive
is
used in deliberative questions and in rhetorical questions
having
reference to the future. HA. 866, 3; G. 1358.
Luke
Luke
11:5; ti<j e]c u[mw?n e!cei fi<lon . . . kai> ei@p^
au]t&?,
which of you
shall have a friend. . . and shall say to him?
169. Questions may be
classified as questions of fact and
questions
of deliberation. In the question of fact the speaker
asks
what is (or was or will be). In the question of delibera-
tion,
the speaker asks what he is to do, or what is to be done;
it
concerns not fact but possibility, desirability, or necessity.
But
questions may be classified also as interrogative or real
questions,
and rhetorical questions. The former makes a real
THE SUBJUNCTIVE. 77
inquiry
(for information or advice); the latter is a rhetorical
substitute
for an assertion, often equivalent to a negative
answer
to itself, or, if the question is negative, to a positive
answer.
Since both questions of fact and questions of
deliberation
may
be either interrogative or rhetorical, it results that there
are
four classes of questions that require to be distinguished
for
purposes of interpretation.
(a) The
interrogative question of fact.
Matt.
who do men
say that the Son of man is? See also Mark 16:3;
John
7:45; Acts 17:18.
(b) The
rhetorical question of fact.
1
Cor. 9:1; ou]k ei]mi> a]po<stoloj, am I not an apostle'
Luke
for if
they do these things in a green tree, what will be done in the dry?
See also Luke 11: 5;
(c)
The interrogative deliberative question.
Mark
also Matt. 6:31; 18:21; Luke 22:49.
(d)
The rhetorical deliberative question.
Rom.
pisteu<swsin ou$
ou]k h@kousan;
. . . pw?j de> khru<cwsin e]a>n mh>
a]postalw?sin, how then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? how
shall they believe in him whom they have not heard? . . . how shall they preach
except they be sent? See also Matt. 26:54; Luke
Interrogative questions of fact, and rhetorical
questions of
fact
having reference to the present or past, employ the tenses
and
moods as they are used in simple declarative sentences.
Rhetorical
questions of fact having reference to the future,
and
all deliberative questions, use either the Subjunctive or
the
Future Indicative.
78
THE MOODS.
170. The verb of a
deliberative question is most frequently
in
the first person; but occasionally in the second or third.
Matt.
may
be of any person.
171. The Deliberative
Subjunctive is sometimes preceded
by
qe<leij, qe<lete, or bou<lesqe. No conjunction is to be supplied
in
these cases. The verb qe<lein is sometimes followed
by a
clause
introduced by i!na, but i!na never occurs when the
verb
qe<lein is in the second
person, and the following verb in the
first
person, i.e. when the relations of the verbs are such as to
make
a Deliberative Subjunctive probable.
Luke
22:9; pou? qe<leij e[toima<swmen, where wilt thou that we make ready?
See also Matt. 26:17; 27:17, 21; Mark 10:36, 51;
14:12; 15:9;
Luke 9:54; 18:41; 1 Cor. 4:21 (N.B.), and cf. (i!na) Matt. 7:12;
Mark 6:25; Luke 6:31; 1 Cor. 14:5.
172. The Subjunctive in Negative Assertions. The
Aorist
Subjunctive is used with ou] mh< in the sense of an
emphatic
Future Indicative. HA. 1032; G. 1360.
Heb
13:5; ou] mh<
se a]nw? ou]d ] ou] mh< se e]gkatali<pw, I will in no wise
fail thee,
neither will I in any wise forsake thee. See also Matt. 5:18;
Mark 13:30; Luke 9:27, et freq. Cf. Gild. in A.J.P. III. 202 f.
REM. In Luke 18:7 and Rev. 15:4 the Subjunctive
with ou] mh< is used
in
a rhetorical question. The Subjunctive may be explained as occasioned
by
the emphatic negative or by the rhetorical nature of the question.
173. This emphatically
predictive Subjunctive is of frequent occurrence
in
Hellenistic Greek. The Present Subjunctive is sometimes used with
ou] mh< in classical Greek, but
no instance occurs in the New Testament.
Concerning
the rare use of the Future with ou] mh< see 66; cf. Gild. u.s.
THE OPTATIVE. 79
THE OPTATIVE MOOD.
174. The Optative Mood is
much less frequent in the New
Testament,
and in Hellenistic writers generally, than in clas-
sical
Greek. Cf. Harmon, The Optative Mood
in Hellenistic
Greek,
in J.B.L. Dec. 1886. .
It is mainly confined to four uses, two of which
are in prin-
cipal
clauses.
175. The Optative of Wishing. The
Optative is used
without
a@n
to express a wish. HA. 870; G. 1507.
1
Pet. 1:2; xa<rij u[mi?n kai> ei]rh<nh plhqunqei<h, grace
to you and peace
be multiplied.
2
Thess. 3:16; au]to>j de> o[ ku<rioj th?j
ei]rh<nhj d&<h u[mi?n th>n ei]rh<nhn,
now the
Lord of peace himself give you peace.
176. The Optative of
Wishing occurs thirty-five times in the New
Testament:
Mark 11:14; Luke 1:38; 20:16 ; Acts 8:20; Rom. 3:4;
3:6;
3:31; 6:2, 15; 7:7, 13; 9:14; 11:1, 11; 15:5, 13; 1 Cor.6:15;
Gal.
2:17; 3:21; 6:14; 1 Thess. 3:11, 12; 5:23; 2 Thess. 2:17; 3:5,
16;
2 Tim. 1:16, 18; Philem. 20; Heb. 13:21; 1 Pet. 1:2; 2 Pet. 1:2;
always,
except Philem. 20, in the third person singular. It most frequently
expresses
a prayer. Mark 11:14 and Acts 8:20 are peculiar in being im-
precations
of evil.
177. The phrase mh>
ge<noito
is an Optative of Wishing which strongly
deprecates
something suggested by a previous question or assertion.
Fourteen
of the fifteen New Testament instances are in Paul's writings,
and
in twelve of these it expresses the apostle's abhorrence of an inference
which
he fears may be (falsely) drawn from his argument. Cf. Mey.
on
Rom. 3:4, and Ltft. on Gal. 2:17. On
Gal. 6:14 cf. 1 Macc. 9:10.
178. The Potential Optative. The Optative with a@n
is
used to express what would happen on the fulfilment of
some
supposed condition. It is thus an apodosis correla-
80
THE MOODS.
tive
to a protasis expressed or implied. It is usually to be
translated
by the English Potential. HA. 872; G. 1327 ff.
Acts
8:31; pw?j ga>r a}n dunai<mhn e]a>n mh< tij
o[dhgh<sei me,
how should I be
able unless some one shall guide me?
Acts
17:18; ti< a}n qe<loi o[ spermolo<goj ou$toj le<gein, what would this
babbler
wish to say?
179. The Optative with a}n occurs in the New
Testament only in Luke's
writings:
Luke *1:62; *6:11; *9:46; [*15:26; 18:36] ; Acts *5:24;
†8:
31; *10:17; †17:18; [26:29]. Of these instances the six marked
with
* are in indirect questions; the two marked with † are in direct
questions;
those in brackets are of doubtful text; others still more
doubtful
might be added. In only one instance (Acts 8:31) is the con-
dition
expressed.
THE IMPERATIVE MOOD.
180. The Imperative Mood is
used in commands and
exhortations.
HA. 873; G. 1342.
Matt.
5:42; t&? ai]tou?nti< se do<j, give to him that asketh thee.
1
Thess. 5:19; to> pneu?ma mh> sbe<nnute, quench not the spirit.
REM. Respecting other methods of expressing a
command, see 67,
160-167,364.
181. THE IMPERATIVE MOOD is
also used in entreaties and
petitions.
Mark
9:22; a]ll ] ei@ ti du<n^ boh<qhson h[mi?n splagxnisqei>j
e]f ] h[ma?j,
but if
thou canst do anything, have compassion on us and help us.
Luke
17:5; kai>
ei#pan oi[ a]po<stoloi t&? kuri<& Pro<sqej h[mi?n pi<stin,
and the
apostles said to the Lord, Increase our faith.
John
17:11; pa<ter
a!gie, th<rhson au]tou>j e]n t&? o]no<mati< sou, holy
Father,
keep them in thy name.
182. THE IMPERATIVE MOOD is
also used to express con-
sent,
or merely to propose an hypothesis.
FINITE MOODS IN SUBORDINATE CLAUSES. 81
Matt.
8:31, 32; oi[ de> dai<monej pareka<loun au]to<n le<gontej
Ei] e]kba<l-
leij h[ma?j,
a]po<steilon h[ma?j ei]j th>n a]ge<lhn tw?n xoi<rwn. kai> ei#pen au]toi?j [Upa<gete, and
the demons besought him saying, If thou cast
us out,
send us away into the herd of swine. And he said unto
them, Go.
John
2:19; a]pekri<qh
]Ihsou?j kai> ei#pen au]toi?j
Lu<sate to>n nao>n tou?ton
kai> [ e]n ] trisi>n
h[me<raij e]gerw? au]to<n, Jesus answered and
said unto
them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise
it up.
1
Cor. 7:36; kai> (ei]) ou!twj o]fei<lei gi<nesqai, o[ qe<lei
poiei<tw: ou]x
a[marta<nei:
gamei<twsan,
and if need so require, let him do what
he
will; he
sinneth not; let them marry.
183. An Imperative
suggesting a hypothesis mayor may
not
retain its imperative or hortatory force.
Luke
6:37; mh> kri<nete, kai> ou] mh> kriqh?te, judge not, and ye shall not
be judged. Cf. John 2:19, above.
184. Any tense of the
Imperative may be used in positive
commands,
the distinction of force being that of the tenses of
the
dependent moods in general. Cf. 95 ff. In prohibitions,
on
the other hand, the use of the Imperative is confined almost
entirely
to the Present tense. A few instances only of the
Aorist
occur. Cf. 163.
FINITE MOODS IN SUBORDINATE CLAUSES.
185. Many subordinate
clauses employ the moods and
tenses
with the same force that they have in principal
clauses.
Others, however, give to the mood or tense a force
different
from that which they usually have in principal
clauses.
Hence arises the necessity for special treatment of
the
moods and tenses in subordinate clauses. Principal clauses
also
require discussion in so far as their mood or tense affects
or
is affected by the subordinate clauses which limit them.
82 THE MOODS.
186. Clauses considered as elements of the
sentence may be classified
as
follows:
I. SUBSTANTIVE.
(1) As subject or predicate nominative (211-214,
357-360).
(2) As object in indirect discourse (334-356).
(3) As object after verbs of exhorting, etc. (200-204).
(4) As object after verbs of striving, etc; (205-210).
(5) As object after verbs of fear and danger
(224-227).
II. ADJECTIVE.
(1) Appositive (211, 213).
(2) Relative (289-333, in part).
(3) Definitive (215, 216, in part).
III. ADVERBIAL, denoting
(1) Time (289-316, in part; 321-333).
(2) Place (289-316, in part).
(3) Condition (238-277, 296-315).
(4) Concession (278-288).
(5) Cause (228-233, 294).
(6) Purpose ([188-196], 197-199, 317).
(7) Indirect object, etc. (215, 217, in part;
318, 319).
(8) Result (218, 219, 234-237).
(9) Manner (217, 289-316, in part).
(10) Comparison, expressing equality or
inequality (289-316,
in part).
REM. Conditional relative clauses introduced by
relative pronouns,
and
relative clauses denoting cause and purpose introduced in the same
way,
partake at the same time of the nature of adjective and of adverbial
clauses.
187. The arrangement of the
matter in the following sections (188-
347)
is not based upon a logical classification of clauses, such as is indi-
cated
in the preceding section, but in part on genetic relationships, and
In
part on considerations of practical convenience. The following is the
general
order of treatment:
Moods in clauses introduced by final particles.
. . . . . . 188-227.
Moods in clauses of cause . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228-233.
Moods in clauses of result. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . 234-237.
CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY FINAL PARTICLES. 83
Moods in conditional sentences. . . . . . . . .
. . . . 238-277.
Moods in concessive sentences . . . . . . . . . .
. . . 278-288.
Moods in relative clauses. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 289-333.
Definite relative
clauses . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292-295.
Conditional relative
clauses . . . . . . . . . . 296-316.
Relative clauses expressing
purpose. . . . 317-320.
RelatIve clauses
mtroduced by e!wj, etc. 321-333.
Indirect Discourse. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . 334-356.
Construction after kai>
e]ge<neto,
etc. . . . . . . . . . 357-360.
MOODS IN CLAUSES
INTRODUCED BY PINAL PARTICLES.
188. CLASSIFICATION. Under
the general head of clauses
introduced
by final particles are included in New Testament
Greek:
(1) Pure final clauses.
(2) Object clauses after verbs of exhorting, etc.
(3) Object clauses after verbs of striving, etc.
(4) Object clauses after verbs of fearing.
(5) Subject, predicate, and appositive clauses.
(6) Complementary and epexegetic clauses.
(7) Clauses of conceived result.
189. General Usage. The relations expressed by the
clauses
enumerated in 188 are in classical Greek expressed
in
various ways, but, in the New Testament, these differ-
ences
have, by a process of assimilation, to a considerable
extent
disappeared. Clauses modeled after final clauses
take
the place of Infinitives in various relations; the Opta-
tive
disappears from this class of clauses; the distinction be-
tween
the Subjunctive and the Future Indicative is par-
tially
ignored. It results that the seven classes of clauses
named
above conform in general to one rule, viz.:
84
THE
MOODS.
Clauses introduced by a final particle usually
employ the
Subjunctive
after both primary and secondary tenses, less
frequently
the Future Indicative.
REM. Concerning the Present Indicative after i!na, see 198, Rem.
190. Final Particles. The
New Testament employs as
final
particles i!na, o!pwj, and mh<.
REM. The usage of the final particles in
classical Greek is elaborately
discussed
by Weber in Schanz, Beitrage zur historischen Syntax der
griechischen
Sprache, Hefte IV., V., and by Gild.
(on the basis of Weber's
work)
in A.J.P. IV. 416 ff., VI. 53 ff.
191. NEW TESTAMENT USE OF i!na. !Ina occurs very fre-
quently
in the New Testament, and with a greater variety of
usage
than in classical Greek. Not only does it assume in
part
the functions which in classical Greek belonged to the
other
final particles, but clauses introduced by it encroach
largely
upon the function of the Infinitive. This extension
of
the use of i!na is one of the notable
characteristics of the
Greek
of the New Testament and of all later Greek. !Ina oc-
curs
in the New Testament in
(1) Pure final clauses.
(2) Object clauses after verbs of exhorting, etc.
(3) Object clauses after verbs of striving, etc.
(4) Subject, predicate, and appositive clauses.
(5) Complementary and epexegetic clauses.
(6) Clauses of conceived result.
Of these clauses, the first class is the only
one that regularly
employs
i!na
in classical Greek. Cf. G.MT. 311.
192. NEW TESTAMENT USE OF o!pwj. !Opwj occurs in the
New
Testament, as in classical Greek, in
CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY FINAL PARTICLES. 85
(1) Pure final clauses.
(2) Object clauses after verbs of exhorting, etc.
(3) Object clauses after verbs of striving, etc. Cf. G.MT.
313.
193. NEW TESTAMENT USE OF mh<. Mh< is used in the New
Testament,
as in classical Greek, in
(1) Pure final clauses.
(2) Object clauses after verbs of striving, etc.
(3) Object clauses after verbs of fearing. Cf. G.MT.
807-310,339,
352.
194. [Wj, which occurs as a final particle in classical
prose,
appears
in a final clause in the New Testament in only one
passage
and that of doubtful text, Acts 20:24. @Ofra, which
was
used as a final particle in epic and lyric poetry, does not
occur
in the New Testament. Cf. G.MT. 312, 314.
195. In classical Greek,
final clauses and object clauses after verbs
of
striving, etc., frequently have o!pwj a@n or w[j
a@n. G.MT. 328; Meist.
p.
212. According to Gild. a@n gives to the clause,
except in the formal
language
of inscriptions, a relative or conditional force, o!pwj
a@n being
equivalent
to h@n pwj. A.J.P. IV. pp.
422, 425; VI. pp. 53-73; L. and S.
o!pwj. In the New Testament o!pwj
a@n occurs
four times (o!pwj alone forty-
nine
times), always in a final clause proper. In Luke 2:35; Acts 3:19
15:17
the contingent color may perhaps be detected; but in Rom. 3:4,
quoted
from the Septuagint, it is impossible to discover it.
196. !Opwj after verbs of fearing, which is found occasionally in
classical
Greek, does not occur in the New Testament.
197. Pure Final Clauses. A
pure final clause is one
whose
office is to express the purpose of the action stated
in
the predicate which it limits.
In classical Greek, final clauses take the
Subjunctive
86
THE MOODS.
after
primary tenses; after secondary tenses either the
Optative
or the Subjunctive. HA. 881; G.1365.
In the New Testament, the Optative does not
occur.
The
Subjunctive is regularly used after primary and sec-
ondary
tenses alike.
Matt.
7:1; mh< kri<nete, i!na mh> kriqh?te, judge not, that ye be
not judged.
Rom.
1:11; e]pipoqw? ga>r i]dei?n u[ma?j, i!na ti metadw? xa<risma
u[mi?n pneu-
matiko<n, for I
long to see you, that I may impart unto you some spiritual
gift.
Rom.
9:17; ei]j
au[to> tou?to e]ch<geira< se o!pwj e]ndei<cwmai e]n soi> th>n
du<nami<n
mou, for this very purpose did I raise thee up
that I might
show in
thee my power.
Acts
28:27; kai>
tou>j o]fqalmou>j au]tw?n e]kka<mmusan: mh< pote i@dwsin
toi?j o]fqalmoi?j, and their eyes they have closed; lest haply they should
perceive
with their eyes.
198. Pure final clauses
occasionally take the Future Indica-
tive
in the New Testament as in classical Greek. HA.
881, c;
G.1366; B. pp. 234 f.; WM. pp. 360f.; WT. pp.
289f.
Luke
20:10; a]pe<steilen pro>j tou>j gewrgou>j dou?lon, i!na
. . . dw<sousin,
he sent to the husbandmen a servant, that they
might give. See also 199.
REM. Some MSS. give a Present Indicative after i!na in John 5:20;
Gal.
6:12; Tit. 2:4; Rev. 12:6; 13:17. In 1 John 5:20 ginw<skomen is
probably
pregnant in force, "that we may know, and whereby we do
know."
Zhlou?te in Gal. 4: 17, and fusiou?sqe in 1 Cor. 4:6 are
regarded
by
Hort (WH. II. App. p. 167), Schmiedel (WS. p. 52), and Blass
(Grammatik,
p. 207), as Subjunctives. On John 17:3 see 213, Rem.
199. The Future Indicative
occurs in pure final clauses in classical
Greek
chiefly after o!pwj, rarely after mh<,
w[j, and o@fra, never after i!na.
G.MT. 324; Weber, u.s.; Gild. u.s. The New Testament instances are
chiefly
after i!na;
a few instances occur after mh< (mh<pote) and one after o!pwj.
The
manuscripts show not a few variations between Subjunctive and Future
Indicative,
and both forms are sometimes found together, after the same
conjunction.
The following passages contain the Future, or both Future
and
Subjunctive: Matt. 7:6; 13:15; Mark 14:2; Luke 14:10; 20:10;
John
7:3; 17:2 ; Acts 21:24; 28:27 ; Rom. 3:4; Gal. 2:4; 1 Pet. 3:1.
CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY FINAL PARTICLES. 87
200. Object Clauses after Verbs of Exhorting, etc.
In
classical Greek, verbs of exhorting, commanding, entreat-
ing,
and persuading are sometimes followed by an object
clause
instead of the more usual Infinitive. Such a clause
usually
employs o!pwj
and the Future Indicative, sometimes
the
Subjunctive. G. 1373; G.MT.355;
In the New Testament, object clauses after such
verbs
are
frequent; they use both i!na and o!pwj; and employ
the
Subjunctive to the exclusion of the Future Indicative.
Mark
5:18; pareka<lei
au]to>n o[ daimonisqei>j i!na met ] autou? ^# he who
had been
possessed with a demon besought him that he might be with him.
Luke
10:2; deh<qhte
ou#n tou? kuri<ou tou? qerismou? o!pwj e]rga<taj e]kba<l^
ei]j to>n
qerismo>n au]tou?,
pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest
that
he send
forth laborers into his harvest. See also Matt. 4:3; 14:36;
16:20; Acts 23:15; 1 Cor. 1:10; 2 Cor. 8:6; Mark
13:18
(cf. Matt. 24 :20); Luke 22:46 (cf. v. 40).
REM. In Eph. 1:17 dw<^ (Subjunctive) should be
read rather than d&<h
(Optative).
Cf. 225, Rem. 2.
201. The use of i!na, in an object clause
after a verb of exhorting is
almost
unknown in classical Greek. G.MT.
357. In the New Testament
i!na, occurs much more frequently than o!pwj
in such
clauses.
202. The regular
construction in classical Greek after verbs
of
exhorting, etc., is the Infinitive. This is also in the New
Testament
the most frequent construction, occurring nearly
twice
as often as the i!na and o!pwj clauses. Keleu<w and the
compounds
of ta<ssw take only the Infinitive. ]Ente<llomai
employs
both constructions.
203. Under the head of
verbs of exhorting, etc., is to be in-
cluded
the verb qe<lw when used with reference to a command
or
request addressed to another. It is frequently followed by
an
object clause introduced by i!na. Here also belongs the
verb
88
THE MOODS.
ei#pon, used in the sense of command; also such phrases as
ka<mptw ta> go<nata (Eph. 3: 14), and mnei<an
poiou?mai e]pi> tw?n
proseuxw?n (Eph. 1:16; Philem. 4;
cf. Col. 4:12), which are
paraphrases
for proseu<xomai.
204. In many cases a clause
or Infinitive after a verb of commanding
or
entreating may be regarded as a
command indirectly quoted. It is
then
a species of indirect discourse, though not usually included under
that
head. Cf. 337, and G.MT. 684. Matt.
16:20; Mark 9:9; 13:34.
205. Object Clauses after
Verbs of Striving, etc. In
classical
Greek, verbs signifying to strive for, to
take care,
to plan, to effect, are followed by o!pwj with the Future
Indicative,
less frequently the Subjunctive, after both pri-
mary
and secondary tenses. HA. 885; G.1372.
In the New Testament, the Subjunctive occurs
more
frequently
than the Future Indicative, and i!na more fre-
quently
than o!pwj.
John
12:10; e]bouleu<santo de> oi[ a]rxierei?j i!na kai>
to>n La<zaron
ktei<nwsin, but the chief priests took counsel to put Lazarus also to death.
Rev.
3:9; i]dou> poih<sw au]tou>j i!na h!cousin kai>
proskunh<sousin e]nw<pion
tw?n podw?n sou,
kai> gnw?sin o!ti e]gw>
h]ga<phsa< se, behold, I will make them
to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have
loved thee. See also 1 Cor. 16:10;
Col. 4:16, 17; Rev. 13:12, 16.
206. When the object clause
after a verb meaning to care
for, to take heed, is negative, classical
Greek sometimes uses
mh< (instead of o!pwj
mh<)
with the Subjunctive, "or less fre-
quently
with the Future Indicative. G. 1375; G.MT. 354.
This
is the common New Testament usage. See Matt. 24:4;
Acts
13:40; 1 Cor. 8:9; 10:12; Gal. 6:1; Col. 2:8; 1 Thess.
5:15;
Heb. 3:12.
!Opwj mh< with the Future in classical Greek, and i!na
mh< with
the
Subjunctive in New Testament Greek, also occur. John
11:37;
2 John 8.
CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY FINAL PARTICLES 89
207. !Opwj occurs in the New Testament in such clauses
(205) only
in
Matt. 12:14; 22:15; Mark 3:6, and in all these cases after a phrase
meaning
to plan. The clause thus closely approximates an indirect de-
liberative
question. Cf. Mark 11:18. See Th. o!pwj, II. 2.
208. The Optative sometimes
occurs in classical Greek after a
secondary
tense of verbs of striving, etc., but is not found in the New
Testament.
209. It is sometimes
difficult to say with certainty whether mh< with
the
Subjunctive after o!ra or o[ra?te is an objective clause
or an independent
Prohibitory
Subjunctive. In classical Greek the dependent construction
was
already fully developed (cf. G.MT.
354, 307); and though in the
New
Testament o!ra
is sometimes prefixed to the Imperative (Matt. 9:30;
24:6),
showing that the paratactic construction is still possible, mh< with
the
Subjunctive in such passages as Matt. 18:10; 1 Thess. 5:15 is best
regarded
as constituting an object clause.
Mh< with the Subjunctive
after ble<pw is also probably to be regarded as
dependent.
It is true that ble<pw does not take an objective clause in
classical
Greek, that in the New Testament only the Imperative of this
verb
is followed by a clause defining the action to be done or avoided, and
that
in a few illstances the second verb is an Aorist Subjunctive in the
second
person with mh<, and might therefore be regarded as a
Prohib-
itory
Subjunctive (Luke 21:8; Gal. 5:15; Heb. 12:25). Yet in a
larger
number of cases the verb is in the third person (Matt. 24:4; Mark
13:5;
Acts 13:40; 1 Cor. 8:9, etc.), and in at least one instance is in-
troduced
by i!na
(1 Cor. 16:10). This indicates that we have not a coor-
dinate
imperative expression, but a dependent clause. In Col. 4:17
ble<pe, and in 2 John 8 ble<pete, is followed by i!na with the Subjunctive;
the
clause in such case being probably objective, but possibly pure final.
In
Heb. 3:12 the Future Indicative with mh< is evidently an
objective
clause.
REM. Concerning Luke 11:35, see B. p. 243; WM. p. 374, foot-note,
and
p. 631; WT. p. 503; Th. mh<, III. 2; R. V. ad loc.
210. Verbs of striving, etc., may also take the
Infinitive as
object. With Matt. 26:4, and John 11:53, cf.
Acts 9:23;
with
Rev. 13:12 cf. 13:13.
The verbs zhte<w and a]fi<hmi, which are usually followed
by
90
THE MOODS.
an
Infinitive, are each followed in one instance by i!na with the
Subjunctive.
See Mark 11:16; 1 Cor. 14:12; cf. also 1 Cor.
4:2.
211. Subject, Predicate, and Appositive Clauses intro-
duced by i!na. Clauses introduced by i!na are frequently
used
in the New Testament as subject, predicate, or appos-
itive,
with a force closely akin to that of an Infinitive.
The
verb is usually in the Subjunctive, less frequently in
the
Future Indicative.
These clauses may be further classified as
follows:
212. (a) SUBJECT of the passive
of verbs of exhorting,
striving, etc., which in the
active take such a clause as object,
and
of other verbs of somewhat similar force. Cf. 200, 205.
1
Cor. 4:2.; zhtei?tai e]n toi?j oi]kono<moij i!na pisto<j tij
eu[req^?, it is
required
in stewards that a man be found faithful.
Rev.
9:4; kai> e]rre<qh au]tai?j i!na mh> a]dikh<sousin
to>n xo<rton th?j gh?j,
and it was
said unto them that they should not hurt the grass of the
earth. See also Mark 9:12 (ge<graptai implies command or
will);
Rev. 9:5.
213. (b) SUBJECT, PREDICATE,
OR APPOSITIVE with nouns
of
various significance, especially such as are cognate with the
verbs
which take such a clause as object, and with pronouns,
the
clause constituting a definition of the content of the noun
or
pronoun.
John
4:34; e]mo>n brw?ma< e]stin i!na poih<sw to> qe<lhma
tou? pe<myanto<j
me kai>
teleiw<sw to> e@rgon au]tou?, my meat
is to do the will of him
that sent
me and to accomplish his work.
John
15:12; au!th e]sti>n h[ e]ntolh> h[ e]mh<, i!na a]gapa?te
a]llh<louj,
this
is my
commandment, that ye love one another. See also Luke 1:43;
John 6:29, 39, 40; 15:8, 13; 18:39; 1 Cor. 9:18;
1 John 3:1;
2 John 6; 3 John 4.
CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY FINAL PARTICLES. 91
REM. The Present Indicative occurs in MSS. of
John 17: 3 and is
adopted
by Tisch. and Treg. (text).
214. (c) SUBJECT of phrases
signifying it is profitable, it is
sufficient, etc.
Matt.
10:25; a]rketo>n t&? maqht^>? i!na ge<nhtai w[j o[ dida<skaloj
au]tou?,
it is
enough for the disciple that he be as his master. See also Matt.
5:29, 30; 18:6; Luke 17:2; John 11:50; 16:7; 1
Cor. 4:3.
215. Complementary and Epexegetic Clauses intro-
duced by i!na. Clauses introduced by i!na are used in the
New
Testament to express a complementary or epexegetic
limitation,
with a force closely akin to that of an Infinitive.
The
verb of the clause is usually in the Subjunctive, some-
times
in the Future Indicative.
These clauses may be classified as follows:
216. (a) Complementary limitation of nouns and
adjec-
tives
signifying authority, power, fitness,
need, set time, etc.
Mark
11:28; h} ti<j
soi e@dwken th>n e]cousi<an tau<thn i!na tau?ta poi^?j
or who
gave thee this authority to do these things?
John
12:23; e]lh<luqen h] w!ra o!ma docasq^? o[ ui[o>j tou?
a]nqrw<pou,
the
hour is
come that the Son of man should be glorified. See also Matt.
8:8; Luke 7:6; John 1:27; 2:25; 16:2, 32; 1 John
2:27;
Rev. 21:23.
217. (b) Complementary or
epexegetic limitation of verbs
of
various significance; the clause defines the content, ground,
or
method of the action denoted by the verb, or constitutes an
indirect
object of the verb.
John
8:56; ]Abraa>m o[
path>r u[mw?n h]gallia<sato i!na i@d^ th>n h[me<ran
th>n e]mh<n, your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day.
92
THE
MOODS.
Phil.
2:2; plhrw<sate< mou th>n xara>n i!na to>
au]to> fronh?te,
fulfil ye
my joy,
that ye be of the same mind. (See an Infinitive similarly
used in Acts 15:10.) See also John 9:22; Gal.
2:9; in both
these latter passages the i!na
clause
defines the content of the agree-
ment mentioned in the preceding portion of the
sentence. See also
John 5:7. Cf. Martyr. Polyc. 10. 1.
218.
Clauses of Conceived Result introduced by i!na.
Clauses
introduced by i!na are used in the New Testament
to
express the conceived result of an action.
John
9:2; ti< h!marten,
ou$toj h} oi[ gonei?j au]tou?, i!na tuflo>j gennhq^?,
who did
sin, this man or his parents, that he should be born blind?
1
Thess. 5:4; u[mei?j
de>, a]delfoi<, ou]k e]ste> e]n sko<tei, i!na h[ h[me<ra
u[ma?j w[j
kle<ptaj katala<b^,
but ye, brethren, are not in darkness,
that
that day
should overtake you as thieves. See also 1 John 1:9 (cf.
Heb. 6:10--Infinitive in similar construction);
2 Cor. 1:17; Rev.
9:20 (cf. Matt. 21:32); 14:13; 22:14.
219. The relation of
thought between the fact expressed in
the
principal clause and that expressed in the clause of con-
ceived
result introduced by i!na is that of cause and effect, but
it
is recognized by the speaker that this relation is one of
theory
or inference rather than of observed fact. In some
cases
the effect is actual and observed, the cause is inferred.
So,
e.g., John 9:2. In other cases the
cause is observed, the
effect
is inferred. So, e.g., 1 Thess. 5:4.
In all the cases the
action
of the principal clause is regarded as the necessary con-
dition
of that of the subordinate clause, the action of the sub-
ordinate
clause as the result which is to be expected to follow
from
that of the principal clause.
It is worthy of notice that in English the form
of expres-
sion
which ordinarily expresses pure purpose most distinctly
may
also be used to express this relation of conceived result.
We
say, He must have suffered very severe
losses in order to be
so reduced in
circumstances.
Such forms of expression are
CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY FINAL PARTICLES. 93
probably
the product of false analogy, arising from imitation
of
a construction which really expresses purpose. Thus in the
sentence,
He labored diligently in order to
accumulate property,
the
subordinate clause expresses pure purpose. In the sen-
tence,
He must have labored diligently in order
to accumulate
such a property, the sentence may be so
conceived that the sub-
ordinate
clause would express purpose, but it would usually
mean
rather that if he accumulated such a property he must
have
labored diligently; that is, the property is conceived of
as
a result the existence of which proves diligent labor. This
becomes
still more evident if we say, He must
have labored
diligently to have
accumulated such a property. But when we
say,
He must have suffered severe losses to
have become so re-
duced in circumstances, it is evident that the
idea of purpose
has
entirely disappeared, and only that of inferred result
remains.
Actual result observed to be the effect of observed
causes
is not, however, thus expressed except by a rhetorical
figure.
With these illustrations from the English, compare
the
following from the Greek. Jas. 1:4; h[ de>
u[pomonh> e@rgon
te<leion e]xe<tw, i!na h#te te<leioi
kai> o[lo<klhroi,
and let patience have
its perfect work, that
ye may be perfect and entire. Heb. 10:36;
u[pomonh?j ga>r e@xete xrei<an
i!na to> qe<lhma tou? qeou? poih<santej komi<shsqe th>n
e]paggeli<an,
for ye have need of patience, that,
having
done the will of God, ye
may receive the promise. In the first sentence
the
i!na
clause expresses the purpose of e]xe<tw. In the second,
though
the purpose of u[pomonh< is contained in the
clause i!na
.
. . e]paggeli<an, yet the function of this clause in the
sentence
is
not telic. Its office is not to express the purpose of the
principal
clause, but to set forth a result (conceived, not act-
ual)
of which the possession of u[pomonh< is the necessary condi-
tion.
In John 9:2 the idiom is developed a step further, for
in
this case the i!na clause in no sense expresses the purpose of
the
action of the principal clause, but a fact conceived to be
94 THE MOODS.
the
result of a cause concerning which the principal clause
makes
inquiry.
This use of i!na with the Subjunctive is
closely akin in force
to
the normal force of w!ste with the Infinitive. Cf. 370, c, and
especially
G.MT. 582~84.
220. Some of the instances
under 215-217 might be considered as ex-
pressing
conceived result, but the idiom has developed beyond the point
of
conceived result, the clause becoming a mere complementary limita-
tion.
The possible course of development may perhaps be suggested by
examining
the following illustrations: John 17:2; Mark 11:28 ; Luke
7:6;
1 John 2:27. In the first case the clause probably expresses pure
purpose.
In the last the idea of purpose has altogether disappeared.
221. In all these
constructions, 211-218, which are distinct
departures
from classical usage, being later invasions of the
i!na clause upon the domain occupied in classical
Greek by
the
Infinitive, the Infinitive remains also in use in the New
Testament,
being indeed in most of these constructions more
frequent
than the i!na
clause.
222. There is no certain,
scarcely a probable, instance in
the
New Testament of a clause introduced by i!na denoting
actual
result conceived, of as such.
Luke 9:45 probably expresses pure purpose (cf.
Matt. 11:25; WK.
p.
574; WT. p. 459). Gal. 5:17 is also
best explained as expressing the
purpose
of the hostility of the flesh and the Spirit, viewed, so far as the
i!na clause is concerned, as a hostility of the
flesh to the Spirit. So, ap-
parently,
R.V. Rev. 13:13 is the most probable instance of i!na denoting-
actual
result; i!na . . . poi^? is probably equivalent to w!ste
poiei?n,
and is
epexegetic
of mega<la. It would be best translated, so as even to make.
Respecting i!na plhrwq^?, Matt. 1:22 and
frequently in the first
gospel,
there is no room for doubt. The writer of the first gospel never uses
i!na to express result, either actual or conceived;
and that he by this
phrase
at least intends to express purpose is made especially clear by his
employment
of o!pwj
(which is never ecbatic) interchangeably with i!na.
With
1:22; 2:15; 4:14; 12:17; 21:4; 26:66, cf. 2:23; 8:17; 13:35.
CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY FINAL PARTICLES. 95
223. Concerning the
post-classical usage of i!na in general see Jebb in
Vincent and Dickson, Modern Greek, pp.
319-821. Concerning whether
i!na in the New Testament is always in the strict
sense telic, and whether
it
is ever ecbatic (two distinct questions not always clearly distinguished),
see
Meyer on Matt. 1:22: “ !Ina ist niemals e]kbatiko<n, so dass, sondern
immer
teliko<n, damit,"--the
first half of which is true, the second half
far
from true. Fritzsche on Matt. pp. 836
ft.; WT. pp. 457-462; WM.
pp.
573-578; B. pp. 235-240: "And
although it [i!na] never stands in
the
strict ecbatic sense (for w!ste with the finite verb),
it has nevertheless
here
reached the very boundary line where the difference between the
two
relations (the telic and the ecbatic) disappears, and it is nearer to the
ecbatic
sense than to its original final sense. Necessary as the demand is,
that
in a systematic inquiry into the use of the particle, even within a
comparatively
restricted field, we should always make its original telic
force,
which is the only force it has in earlier Greek writers, our point
of
departure, and trace out thence the transitions to its diverse shades of
meaning;
the interests of exegesis would gain very little, if in every in-
dividual
passage of the N.T. even (the language of which has already
departed
so far from original classic Greek usage) we should still take
pains,
at the cost of the simple and natural sense, and by a recourse to
artificial
means, always to introduce the telic force," p. 239. Hunzinger,
"Die
in der klassischen Gracitat nicht gebrauchliche finale Bedeutung
der
Partikel i!na
im neutestamentlichen Sprachgebrauch," in Zeitschrift
fur Kirchliche
Wissenschaft,
1883, pp. 632-643--a valuable article which
elaborately
disproves its own conclusion--"dass i!na im N. T. in allen
Fallen
final verstanden werden kann," unless a very broad and loose
sense
be given to the term final.
224. Object Clauses after Verbs of Fear and Danger.
In
classical Greek, clauses after verbs of fear
and danger
employ
mh<
with the Subjunctive after primary tenses; the
Optative,
more rarely the Subjunctive, after secondary
tenses.
HA. 887; G. 1378.
In the New Testament the Subjunctive only is
used.
2
Cor. 12:20; fobou?mai ga>r mh< pwj e]lqw>n
ou]x oi!ouj qe<lw eu!rw u[ma?j, for
I fear,
lest by any means, when I come, I shall find you not such as I
would. See also Acts 23:10;
27:29; 2 Cor. 11:3; Heb. 4:1.
REM. 1. Acts 5:26 may be understood as in R.V., to>n
lao<n denoting
the
persons feared, and mh> liqasqw?sin the thing feared (cf.
the familiar
idiom with oi#da illustrated in Mark 1:24; see also Gal. 4:11), so that the
meaning would be expressed in English by translating, for they were
afraid that they should be stoned by the people; or e]fobou?nto . . . lao<n may
be taken as parenthetical, and mh> liqasqw?sin made to limit h#gen au]tou<j,
ou] meta> bi<aj; so Tisch. and WH.
REM. 2. Some MSS. and editors read a Future Indicative in 2 Cor.
12:21.
225. The verb of fearing is sometimes unexpressed, the idea
of fear being suggested by the context; so, it may be, in Acts
5:39, and Matt. 25:9.
REM. 1. 2 Tim. 2:25, mh< pote dw<^ au]toi?j o[ qeo>j meta<noian is
probably best explained in the same way. For the gentleness and meekness in
dealing with those that oppose themselves, which he has enjoined, the
apostle adds the argument, [fearing] lest God may perchance grant them
repentance, i.e. lest on the assumption that they are past repentance you
be found dealing in harshness with those to whom God will yet grant
repentance.
REM. 2. Dw<^ (Subjunctive) is to be preferred to d&<h (Optative) in
this passage as in Eph. 1:17. See the evidence in WS. p. 120 that this
form occurs as a Subjunctive not only in tbe Old Ionic language, but in
inscriptions of the second century B.C. Cf. WH. II. App. p. 168.
226. It is evident that object clauses after verbs of fear are closely
akin to negative object clauses after verbs signifying to care for. G.MT.
354. Some of the instances cited under 206 might not inappropriately
placed under 224. On the probable common origin of both, and their
development from the original parataxis, see G.MT. 307, 352.
227. When the object of apprehension is conceived of as
already present or past, i.e. as a thing already decided, al-
though the issue is at the time of speaking unknown, the In-
dicative is used both in classical and New Testament Greek.
HA. 888; G. 1380.
Gal. 4:11; fobou?mai u[ma?j mh< pwj ei]k^? kekopi<aka ei]j u[ma?j, I am afraid
I have perhaps bestowed labor upon you in vain. See also Gal. 2:2;
1 Thess. 3:5; Gen. 43:11.
MOODS IN CLAUSES OF CAUSE. 97
MOODS IN CLAUSES OF CAUSE.
228. A causal clause is one which gives either the cause or
the reason of the fact stated in the principal clause. Causal
causes are introduced by o!ti, dio<ti, e]
etc. HA. 925; G. 1505.
229. Moods and Tenses in Causal Clauses. The
moods and tenses are used in causal clauses with the same
force as in principal clauses.
John 14:19; o!ti e]gw> zw? kai> u[mei?j zh<sete, because I live, ye shall live also.
1 Cor. 14:12; e]
e]kklhsi<aj zhtei?te i!na perisseu<hte, since ye are zealous of spiritual
gifts, seek that ye may abound unto the edifying of the church. See
also Luke 1:1; Acts 15:24; Rom. 5:12.
230. From the significance of a causal clause it naturally
results that its verb is usually an Indicative affirming a fact.
Any form, however, which expresses or implies either qualified
or unqualified assertion may stand after a causal conjunction.
Thus we find, e.g., a rhetorical question, or an apodosis of a
conditional sentence. In the latter case the protasis may be
omitted. In the following instances all three of these phe-
nomena coincide; the causal clause is an apodosis, its protasis
is omitted, it is expressed in the form of a rhetorical
question.
1 Cor. 15:29; e]
what shall they do which are baptized for the dead? i.e., since [if the
dead are notraisedJ they that are baptized for the dead are baptized
to no purpose.
Heb. 10:2; e]
have ceased to be offered? i.e., since [if what was said above were not
true] they would have ceased to be offered. Cf. also Acts 5:38.
98 THE MOODS.
231. From the nature of the causal clause as making an
assertion, it results that it is easily disjoined from the clause
which states the fact of which it gives the cause or reason,
and becomes an independent sentence.
Matt. 6:5; kai> o!tan proseu<xhsqe, ou]k e@sesqe w[j oi[ u[pokritai<: o!ti
filou?sin e]n tai?j sunagwgai?j kai> e]n tai?j gwni<aij tw?n plateiw?n
e[stw?tej proseu<xesqai, and when ye pray, ye shall not be as the
hypocrites: because they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and
in the corners of the streets (cf. 6: 16, where in a closely similar
sentence, ga<r is used instead of o!ti). See also Luke 11:32;
1 Cor. 1:22, and cf. v. 21, where the same conjunction e]peidh< intro-
duces a subordinate clause.
232. The distinction between a subordinate causal clause and an
independent sentence affirming a cause or reason is usually one of the
degree or emphasis on the causal relation between the two facts. When
the chief thing asserted is the existence of the causal relation, as happens,
e.g., when one fact or the other is already present as a fact before the
mind, the causal clause is manifestly subordinate. When the emphasis
is upon the separate assertions as assertions, rather than on the relation
of the facts asserted, the causal clause easily becomes an independent
sentence. Thus in Rev. 3:16, because thou art lukewarm, and neither
hot nor cold, I well spew thee out of my mouth, the causal clause is subor-
dinate. So also in John 16:3, and these things they will do, because they
have not known the Father nor me, where the words these things refer
to an assertion already made, and the intent of the sentence is to state
why they will do these things. See also John 20:29. On the other hand,
in Matt. 6:5; Luke 11:32; 1 Cor. 1:22 (see 231); and in 1 Cor. 15:29;
Heb. 10:2 (see 230), the casual clause is evidently independent, and the
particles o!ti, e]
233. Causal relations may also be expressed by a relative
clause (294), by an Infinitive with the article governed by dia<
(408), and by a participle (439).
MOODS IN CLAUSES OF RESULT. 99
MOODS IN CLAUSES or RESULT.
234. A consecutive clause is one which expresses the result,
actual or potential, of the action stated in the principal clause
or a preceding sentence.
In the New Testament consecutive clauses are introduced
by w!ste. HA.927; G. 1449.
235. A consecutive clause commonly takes either the Indic-
ative or the Infinitive. The Indicative properly expresses the
actual result produced by the action previously mentioned, the
Infinitive the result which the action of the principal verb
tends or is calculated to produce. Since, however, an actual
result may always be conceived of as that which the cause in
question is calculated or adapted to produce, the Infinitive
may be used when the result is obviously actual. Thus
if senselessness tends to credulity, one may say ou!twj a]no<htoi<
e]ste w!ste to> a]du<naton pisteu<ete or ou!twj a]no<htoi< e]ste w!ste to> a]du<-
naton pisteu<ein, with little difference of meaning, though strictly
the latter represents believing the impossible simply as the
measure of the folly, while the former represents it as the act-
ual result of such folly. G.MT.582, 583; HA. 927; G.1450,
1451.
The use of the Infinitive is the older idiom. Attic writers show on
the whole a tendency to an increased use of the Indicative, Aristophanes
and Xenophon, e.g., using it more frequently than the Infinitive. See
Gild. A.J.P. VII. 161-175; XIV. 240-242. But in the New Testament the
Infinitive greatly predominates, occurring fifty times as against twenty-
one instances of the Indicative, but one of which is in a clause clearly
subordinate.
On w!ste introducing a principal clause see 237. On different concep-
tions of result, and the use of the Infinitive to express result, see 369-371.
236. The Indicative with w!ste expresses actual result.
John 3:16; ou!twj ga>r h]ga<phsen o[ qeo>j to>n ko<smon w!ste to>n ui[o>n to>n
monogenh? e@dwken, for God so loved the world that he gave his only
begotten Son.
100 THE MOODS.
REM. With John 3:16, which is the only clear instance in the New
Testament of w!ste with the Indicative so closely joined to what precedes
as to constitute a subordinate clause, is usually reckoned also Gal. 2:13.
237. The clause introduced by w!ste is sometimes so dis-
joined from the antecedent sentence expressing the causal fact
that it becomes an independent sentence. In such cases w!ste
has the meaning therefore, or accordingly, and the verb intro-
duced by it may be in any form capable of standing in a prin-
cipal clause. HA. 927, a; G. 1454.
Mark 2:28; w!ste ku<rio<j e]stin o[ ui[o>j tou? a]nqrw<pou kai> tou? sabba<tou, so
that the Son of man is lord even of the sabbath.
1 Cor. 5:8; w!ste e[orta<zwmen, wherefore let us keep the feast.
1 Thess. 4:18; w!ste parakalei?te a]llh<louj e]n toi?j lo<goij tou<toij,
wherefore comfort one another with these words.
MOODS IN CONDITIONAL SENTENCES.
238. A. conditional sentence consists of a subordinate clause
which states a supposition, and a principal clause which states
a conclusion conditioned on the fulfilment of the supposition
stated in the subordinate clause. The conditional clause is
called the protasis. The principal clause is called the apodosis.
239. Suppositions are either particular or general. When
the protasis supposes a certain definite event and the apodosis
conditions its assertion on the occurrence of this event, the
supposition is particular. When the protasis supposes any
occurrence of an act of a certain class, and the apodosis states
what is or, was wont to take place in any instance of an act of
the class supposed in the protasis, the supposition is general.
Thus in the sentence, If he believes this act to be wrong, he will not
do it, the supposition is particular. But in the sentence, If [in any in-
stance] he believes an act to be wrong, he does not [is not wont to] do it,
MOODS IN CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. 101
the supposition is general. In the sentence, If he has read this book, he
will be able to tell what it contains, the supposition is particular. But
in the sentence, If he read a book, he could always tell what it contained,
the supposition is general.
240. It should be noted that the occurrence of an indefinite pronoun
in the protasis does not necessarily make the supposition general. If the
writer, though using an indefinite term, refers to a particular instance,
and in the apodosis states what happened, is happening, or will happen
in this case, the supposition is particular. If, on the other hand, the
supposition refers to any instance of the class of cases described, and
the apodosis states what is or was wont to happen in any such instance,
the supposition is general. Thus, in the sentence, If anyone has eaten
any of the food, he is by this time dead, the supposition is particular.
In the sentence, If anyone [in any instance] ate any of the food, [it was
wont to happen that] he died, the supposition is general. In 2 Cor. 2:5,
but if anyone hath caused sorrow, he hath caused sorrow not to me, but
. . . to you all, the supposition refers to a specific case, and is particular.
Even the mental selection of one of many possible instances suffices to
make a supposition particular. So in 1 Cor. 3:12, it is probable that we
ought to read, if any man is building, and in 3:17, if any man is destroy-
ing, and take the clauses as referring to what was then, hypothetically,
going on rather than to what might at any time occur. On the other
hand, in John 11:9, if a man walk in the day, he stumbleth not, the sup-
position refers to any instance of walking in the day, and is general.
Concerning a protasis which refers to the truth of a general principle as
such, see 243.
241. Of the six classes of conditional sentences which are
found in classical Greek, five occur in the New Testament, not
however without occasional variations of form.
REM. 1. The classification of conditional sentences here followed is
substantially that of Professor Goodwin. The numbering of the Present
General Suppositions and Past General Suppositions as fifth and sixth
classes respectively, instead of including them as subdivisions under the
first class, is adopted to facilitate reference.
REM. 2. It should be observed that the titles of the several classes of
conditional sentences describe the suppositions not from the point of view
of fact, but from that of the representation of the case to the speaker's
own mind or to that of his hearer. Cf., e.g., Luke 7:39; John 18:30.
102 THE MOODS.
242. A. Simple Present or Past Particular Supposi-
tion. The protasis simply states a supposition which refers
to a particular case in the present or past, implying
nothing as to its fulfilment.
The protasis is expressed by ei] with a present or past
tense of the Indicative; any form of the finite verb may
stand in the apodosis. HA. 893; G.1390.
John 15:20; ei] e]me> e]di<wcan, kai> u[ma?j diw<cousin, if they have persecuted
me, they will also persecute you.
Gal. 5:18; ei] de> pneu<mati a@gesqe, ou]k e]ste> u[po> no<mon, but if ye are led
by the Spirit, ye are not under the law. See also Matt. 4:3; Luke
16:11; Acts 5:39; Rom.4:2; 8:10; Gal. 2:17; Rev. 20:15.
REM. Concerning the use of the negatives mh< and ou] in the protasis of
conditional sentences of this class, see 469, 470.
243. When a supposition refers to the truth of a general-
principle as such, and the apodosis conditions its assertion
on the truth of this principle, not on the occurrence of any
instance of a supposed class of events, the supposition is
particular. It is expressed in Greek by ei] with the Indica-
tive, and the sentence belongs to the first class.
Matt. 19:10; ei] ou!twj e]sti>n h[ ai]ti<a tou? a]nqrw<pou meta> th?j gunaiko<j, ou]
sumfe<rei gamh?sai, if the case of the man is so with his wife, it is not
expedient to marry. See also Matt. 6:30; Gal. 2:21; cf. Plat. Prot.
340, C. In
use of ei] and the nature of the sentence, however, easily suggest
what form of the verb would be required if it were expressed.
244. Conditional clauses of the first class are frequently
used when the condition is fulfilled, and the use of the hypo-
thetical form suggests no doubt of the fact. This fact of ful-
filment lies, however, not in the conditional sentence, but in the
context. John 3:12; 7:23; Rom. 5:10.
MOODS SENTENCES. 103
245. On the other hand, conditional clauses of the first class
may be used of what is regarded by the speaker as an unful-
filled condition. But this also is not expressed or implied by
the form of the sentence, which is in itself wholly colorless,
suggesting nothing as to the fulfilment of the condition.
Luke 23:35, 37; John 18:23;
246. Even a Future Indicative may stand in the protasis of
a conditional sentence of the first class when reference is had
to a present necessity or intention, or when the writer desires
to state not what will take place on the fulfilment of a future
possibility, but merely to affirm a necessary logical consequence
of a future event. 1 Cor. 9:11. Cf. G.MT. 407.
247. In a few instances e]a<n is used with the Present Indicative in the
protasis of a conditional sentence, apparently to express a simple present
supposition. 1 Thess. 3:8; 1 John 5:15.
248. B. Supposition contrary to Fact. The protasis
states a supposition which refers to the present or past,
implying that it is not or was not fulfilled.
The protasis is expressed by ei] with a past tense of the
Indicative; the apodosis by a past tense of the Indicative
with a@n. HA. 895; G. 1397.
The Imperfect denotes continued action; the Aorist
a simple fact; the Pluperfect completed action. The
time is implied in the context, not expressed by the
verb.
John 11:21; Ku<rie, ei] h#j w$de ou]k a}n a]pe<qanen o[ a]delfo<j mou, Lord, if
thou hadst been here, my brother would not have died.
Gal. 1:10; ei] e@ti a]nqrw<poij h@reskon, Xristou? dou?loj ou]k a}n h@mhn, if I
were still pleasing men, I should not be a servant of Christ. See also
John 14:28; Acts 18:14; Heb. 4:8; 11:15.
104 THE MOODS.
249. @An is sometimes omitted from the apodosis. Cf. 30.
B. pp. 216 f., 225 f.; WM. pp. 382 f.; WT. pp. 305 f.; cf. G.MT.
pp. 415 ff., esp. 422, 423.
John 9:33; ei] mh> h#n ou$toj para> qeou?, ou]k h]du<nato poiei?n ou]de<n, if this
man were not from God, he could do nothing. See also Matt. 26:24;
John 15:22; 19:11; 1 Cor. 5:10; Gal. 4:15; Heb. 9:26.
250. C. Future Supposition with More Probability.
The protasis states a supposition which refers to the
future, suggesting some probability of its fulfilment.
The protasis is usually expressed by e]a<n (or a@n) with
the Subjunctive; the apodosis by the Future Indicative or
by some other form referring to future time. HA. 898;
G. 1403.
Matt. 9:21; e]a>n mo<non a!ywmai tou? i[mati<ou au]tou? swqh<somai, if I shall
but touch his garments, I shall be made whole.
John 12:26; e]a<n tij e]moi> diakon^? timh<sei au]to>n o[ path<r, if any man
serve me, him will the Father honor.
John 14:15; e]a>n a]gapa?te< me, ta>j e]ntola>j ta>j e]ma>j thrh<sete, if ye love
me, ye will keep my commandments. See also Matt. 5:20; 1 Cor.
4:19; Gal. 5:2; Jas. 2:15, 16.
251. In addition to e]a<n with the Subjunctive, which is the
usual form both in classical and New Testament Greek, the
following forms of protasis also occur occasionally in the New
Testament to express a future supposition with more proba-
bility:
252. (a) Ei] with the Subjunctive.
Luke 9:13; ou]k ei]si>n h[mi?n plei?on h} a@rtoi pe<nte kai> i]xqu<ej du<o, ei] mh<ti
poreuqe<ntej h[mei?j a]gora<swmen ei]j pa<nta to>n lao>n tou?ton
brw<mata, we have no more than five loaves and two fishes; unless we are
to go and buy food for all this people. See also 1 Cor. 14:5; 1 Thess.
5:10; Judg. 11:9.
MOODS IN CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. 105
253. This usage also occurs in Homer and the tragic poets, but is very
rare in Attic prose. It is found in the Septuagint and becomes very com-
mon in later Hellenistic and Byzantine writers. G. MT. 453, 454; Clapp in
T.A.P.A.1887, p. 49; 1891, pp. 88 f.; WT. pp. 294 f.; WM. pp. 368, 374, f.n.
For the few New Testament instances there is possibly in each case a
special reason. Thus in Luke 9:13 there is probably a mixture of a con-
ditional clause and a deliberativequestion: unless indeed--are we to go?
i.e., unless indeed we are to go. In 1 Cor. 14:5 and 1 Thess. 5:10 a
preference for the more common ei] mh< and ei@te . . . ei@te over the somewhat
unusual e]a>n mh< and e]a<nte . . . e]a<nte may have led to the use of the former
in spite of the fact that the meaning called for a Subjunctive. 1 Thess.
5:10 can hardly be explained as attraction (B. and W.), since the nature
of the thought itself calls for a Subjunctive. On Phil. 3:11, 12, cf. 276.
It is doubtful, however, whether the discovery of any difference in force
between ei] with the Subjunctive and e]a<n with the Subjunctive in these
latter passages is not an over-refinement.
254. (b) Ei] or e]a<n with the Future Indicative.
2 Tim. 2:12; ei] a]rnhso<meqa, ka]kei?noj a]rnh<setai h[ma?j, if we shall deny
him, he also will deny us.
Acts 8:31; e]a>n mh< tij o[dhgh<sei me, unless some one shall guide me.
See also Luke 19:40.
255. Ei] with the Future Indicative occurs as a protasis of a condition
of the third form not infrequently in classical writers, especially in
tragedy. G.MT. 447. Of the New Testament instances of ei] followed
by a Future (about twenty in number), one, 2 Tim. 2:12, illustrates the
minatory or monitory force attributed to such clauses by Gild., T.A.P.A.
1876, pp. 9 ff.; A.J.P. XIII. pp. 123 ff. Concerning the other instances,
see 246, 254, 272, 276, 340.
256. (c) Ei] with the Present Indicative. The protasis is
then apparently of the first class (242). The instances which
belong here are distinguished by evident reference of the prot-
asis to the future.
Matt. 8:31; ei] e]kba<lleij h[ma?j, a]po<steilon h[ma?j ei]j th>n a]ge<lhn tw?n
xoi<rwn, if thou cast us out send us away into the herd of swine. See
also 1 Cor. 10:27 (cf. v. 28); 2 John 10; Gen. 4:14; 20:7;
44:26; and as possible instances Matt. 5: 29, 30; 18: 8, 9;
Luke 14:26; 2 TIm. 2:12.
106 THE MOODS.
257. There is no distinction in form either in Greek or in English
between a particular and a general supposition referring to the future.
The distinction in thought is of course the same as in the case of present
or past suppositions (239). Thus in Matt. 9:21, if I shall but touch his
garment, I shall be made whole, the supposition evidently refers to a spe-
cific case, and is particular. But in John 16:23, if ye shall ask anything
of the Father, he will give it you in my name, the supposition is evidently
general. A large number of the future suppositions in the New Testa-
ment are apparently general. It is almost always possible, however, to
suppose that a particular imagined instance is mentally selected as the
illustration of the class. Cf. 240, 261.
258. When a conditional clause which as originally uttered
or thought was of the first or third class and expressed by
ei] with the Indicative or e]a<n with the Subjunctive is so
incorporated into a sentence as to be made dependent on a
verb of past time, it may be changed to ei] with the Optative.
This principle applies even when the apodosis on which the
protasis depends is not itself strictly in indirect discourse.
Cf. 334-347, esp. 342, 347. See G.MT. 457, 694 ff.
Acts. 20:16; e@speuden ga>r ei] dunato>n ei@h au]t&? th>n h[me<ran th?j penth-
kosth?j gene<sqai ei]j ]Ieroso<luma, for he was hastening, if it were pos-
sible for him, to be at
sentence ei] dunato>n ei@h represents the protasis of the sentence e]a>n
dunato>n ^# genhso<meqa which expressed the original thought of Paul,
to which the writer here refers. The same explanation applies to
Acts 24:19, and to 27:39 (unless ei] du<nainto is an indirect ques-
tion); also to Acts 17:27 and 27:12, but on these cases see
also 276.
259. D. Future Supposition with Less Probability.
The protasis states a supposition which refers to the future,
suggesting less probability of its fulfilment than is sug-
gested by e]a<n with the Subjunctive.
The protasis is expressed by ei] with the Optative; the
apodosis by the Optative with a@n. H.A. 900; G. 1408.
MOODS IN CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. 107
There is no perfect example of this form in the New Testa-
ment. Protases occur in 1 Cor. and 1 Pet., but never with a
regular and fully expressed apodosis. Apodoses occur in Luke
and Acts, but never with a regular protasis.
1 Pet. 3:17; krei?tton ga>r a]gaqopoiou?ntaj, ei] qe<loi to> qe<lhma tou? qeou?,
pa<sxein h} kakopoiou?ntaj, for it is better, if the will of God should so
will, that ye suffer for well doing than for evil doing. See also 1 Cor.
14:10; 15:37; 1 Pet. 3:14.
260. E. Present General Supposition. The supposi-
tion refers to any occurrence of an act of a certain class in
the (general) present, and the apodosis states what is wont
to take place in any instance of an act of the class referred
to in the protasis.
The protasis is expressed by e]a<n with the Subjunctive,
the apodosis by the Present Indicative. HA. 894, 1; G.
1393, 1.
John 11:9; e]a<n tij pepripat^? e]n t^? h[me<r%, ou] prosko<ptei, if a man
walk in the day, he stumbleth not.
2 Tim 2:5; e]a>n de> kai> a]ql^? tij, ou] stefanou?tai e]a>n mh> nomi<mwj
a]qlh<s^, and if also a man contend in the games, he is not crowned,
unless he contend lawfully. See also Mark 3:24; John 7:51;
12:24; 1 Cor. 7:39, 40.
261. Ei] with the Present Indicative not infrequently
occurs in clauses which apparently express a present general
supposition. G.MT. 467. Yet in most New Testament pas-
sages of this kind, it is possible that a particular imagined
instance in the present or future is before the mind as an illus-
tration of the general class of cases. Cf. 242, 256. It is
scarcely possible to decide in each case whether the supposi-
tion was conceived of as general or particular.
108 THE MOODS.
Luke 14:26; ei@ tij e@rxetai pro<j me kai> ou] misei? . . . th>n yuxh>n
e[autou?, ou] du<natai ei#nai< mou maqhth<j, if any man cometh unto me,
and hateth not. . . his own life, he cannot be my disciple. Cf. John 8:51;
12:26; where in protases of apparently similar force e]a<n with the
Subjunctive occurs, and the apodosis refers to the future.
Rom. 8:25; ei] de> o{ ou] ble<pomen e]lpi<zomen, di ] u[pomonh?j a]pekdexo<meqa,
but if we hope for that which we see not, then do we with patience wait
for it. See also Jas. 1:26.
262. The third and fifth classes of conditional sentences are very
similar not only in form, but also in meaning. When the subject or other
leading term of the protasis is an indefinite or generic word, the third
class differs from the fifth only in that a sentence of the third class tells
what will happen in a particular instance or in any instance of the fulfil-
ment of the supposition, while a sentence of the fifth class tells what
is wont to happen in any such case. Cf., e.g., Mark 3:24 with 25; also
the two sentences of Rom. 7:3.
263. It should be observed that a Present Indicative in the principal
clause after a protasis consisting of e]a<n with the Subjunctive does not
always indicate that the sentence is of the fifth class. If the fact stated
in the apodosis is already true at the time of speaking, or if the issue
involved has already been determined, though not necessarily known, the
Present Indicative is frequently used after a protasis referring to future
time. The thought would be expressed more fully but less forcibly by
supplying some such phrase as it will appear that or it will still be true
that. In other instances the true apodosis is omitted, that which stands
in its place being a reason for the unexpressed apodosis. In still other
cases the Present is merely the familiar Present for Future (15).
John 8:31; e]a>n u[mei?j mei<nhte e]n t&? lo<g& t&? e]m&?, a]lhqw?j maqhtai< mou<
e]ste, if ye shall abide in my word, [ye will show that] ye are truly
my disciples. Observe the Future in the next clause.
1 John 1:9; e]a>n o[mologw?men ta>j a[marti<aj h[mw?n, pisto<j e]stin kai>
di<kaioj i!na a]f^? h[mi?n ta>j a[marti<aj, if we confess our sins, [he
will forgive us, for] he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins.
See also Mark 1:40; John 19:12; Acts 26:5.
264. The difference in force between the fifth class of suppositions and
the class described under 243 should be clearly marked. There the issue
raised by the protasis is as to the truth or falsity of the principle as a gen-
MOODS IN CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. 109
eral principle, while the apodosis affirms some other general or particular
statement to be true if the general principle is true. Here the protasis
raises no question of the truth or falsity of the general principle, but
suggests as an hypothesis, that a general statement is in any single case
realized, and the apodosis states what is wont to take place when the
supposition of the protasis is thus realized. Thus in Matt. 19:10 (243)
the disciples say that if the principle stated by Jesus is true, it follows as
a general principle that it is not expedient to marry. On the other hand,
e]a>n ou!twj e@x^, ou] sumfe<rei gamh?sai would mean, If in any instance the
case supposed is realized, then it is wont to happen that it is not expedient to
marry. Cf. examples under 260.
265. F. Past General Supposition. The supposition
refers to any past occurrence of an act of a certain class,
and the apodosis states what was wont to take place in any
instance of an act of the class referred to in the protasis.
The protasis is expressed by ei] with the Optative, the,
apodosis by the Imperfect Indicative. HA. 894, 2; G.
1393, 2.
There is apparently no instance of this form in the New
Testament.
266. Peculiarities of Conditional Sentences. Nearly
all the peculiar variations of conditional sentences men-
tioned in the classical grammars are illustrated in the New
Testament. See HA. 901-907; G. 1413-1424.
267. (a) A protasis of one form is sometimes joined with
an apodosis of another form.
Acts 8:31; pw?j ga>r a}n dunai<mhn e]a>n mh< tij o[dhgh<sei me, how can I,
unless some one shall guide me?
268. (b) An apodosis may be accompanied by more than
one protasis; these protases may be of different form, each
retaining its own proper force.
110 THE MOODS.
John 13:17; ei] tau?ta oi@date, maka<rioi< e]ste e]a>n poih?te au]ta<, if ye know
these things, blessed are ye if ye do them. See also 1 Cor. 9:11.
269. (c) The place of the protasis with ei] or e]a<n is some-
times supplied by a participle, an Imperative, or other form of
expression suggesting a supposition.
Matt. 26:15; Ti< qe<lete< moi dou?nai ka]gw> u[mi?n paradw<sw au]to<n, what are
ye willing to give me, and I will deliver him unto you.
Mark 11:24; pa<nta o!sa proseu<xesqe kai> ai]tei?sqe, pisteu<ete o!ti e]la<-
bete, kai> e@stai u[mi?n, all things whatsoever ye pray and ask for, believe
that ye have received them, and ye shall have them. See also Matt.
7:10; Mark 1:17; and exx. under 436.
REM. In Jas. 1:5, ai]tei<tw is the apodosis of ei] de< tij u[mw?n lei<petai
sofi<aj, and at the same time fills the place of protasis to doqh<setai.
See also Matt. 19:21.
270. (d) The protasis is sometimes omitted. Luke 1:62;
Acts 17:18.
271. (e) The apodosis is sometimes omitted.
Luke 13:9; ka}n me>n poih<s^ karpo>n ei]j to> me<llon—ei] de> mh<ge, e]kko<yeij
au]th<n, and if it bear fruit thenceforth, --but if not, thou shalt cut it
down. See also Luke 19:42; Acts 23:9.
272. Ei] with the Future Indicative is used by Hebraism
without an apodosis, with the force of an. emphatic negative
assertion or oath. Cf. Hr. 48, 9, a.
Mark 8:12; a]mh>n le<gw, ei] doqh<setai t^? gene%? tau<t^ shmei?on, verily I
say unto you, there shall no sign be given unto this generation. See
also Heb. 3:11; 4:3, 5. On Heb. 6:14 see Th. ei], III. 11.
273. (f) The verb of the protasis or apodosis may be
omitted.
Rom. 4:14; ei] ga>r oi[ e]k no<mou klhrono<moi, keke<nwtai h[ pi<stij kai>
kath<rghtai h[ e]paggeli<a, for if they which are of the law are heirs,
MOODS IN CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. 111
faith is made void, and the promise is made of none effect. See also
Rom. 8:17; 11:16; 1 Cor.7:5, 8; 12:19; 1 Pet. 3:14. In 2 Cor.
11:16 ka@n stands for kai> e]a>n de<chsqe.
274. (g) Ei] mh> without a dependent verb occurs very fre-
quently in the sense of except. It may be followed by any
form of expression which could have stood as subject or as
limitation of the principal predicate. The origin of this usage
was of course in a conditional clause the verb of which was
omitted because it was identical with the verb of the apodosis.
Both in classical and New Testament Greek the ellipsis is un-
conscious, and the limitation is not strictly conditional, but ex-
ceptive. Like the English except it states not a condition on
fulfilment of which the apodosis is true or its action takes
place, but a limitation of the principal statement. It is, how-
ever, never in the New Testament purely adversative. Cf.
Lift. on Gal. 1:7, 19.
275. (h) Ei] de> mh< and ei] de> mh<ge are used elliptically in the
sense of otherwise, i.e. if so, or if not, to introduce an alterna-
tive statement or command. Having become fixed phrases,
they are used even when the preceding sentence is negative;
also when the nature of the condition would naturally call for
e]a<n rather than ei]. Matt. 9:17; Luke 10:6; 13:9; Rev. 2:5.
G.MT. 478; B. p. 393.
276. (i) An omitted apodosis is sometimes virtually con-
tained in the protasis, and the latter expresses a possibility
which is an object of hope or desire, and hence has nearly the
force of a final clause. In some instances it approaches the
force of an indirect question. G.MT.486-493. In classical
Greek such protases are introduced by ei] or e]a<n. In the New
Testament they occur with ei] only, and take the Subjunctive,
Optative, or Future Indicative.
112 THE MOODS.
Phil. 3:12; diw<kw de> ei] kai> katala<bw, but I press on, if so be that I
may apprehend.
Acts 27:12; oi[ plei<onej e@qento boulh>n a]naxqh?nai e]kei?qen, ei@ pwj
du<nainto katanth<santej ei]j Foi<nika paraxeima<sai, the more part
advised to put to sea from thence, if by any means they could reach
Rom. 1:10; 11:14; Phil. 3:11.
277. (j) After expressions of wonder, etc., a clause intro-
duced by ei] has nearly the force of a clause introduced by o!ti.
Mark 15:44; Acts 26:8; cf. 1 John 3:13.
MOODS IN CONCESSIVE SENTENCES.
278. A concessive clause is a protasis that states a sup-
position the fulfilment of which is thought of or represented
as unfavorable to the fulfilment of the apodosis.
The force of a concessive sentence is thus very different
from that of a conditional sentence. The latter represents
the fulfilment of the apodosis as conditioned on the fulfilment
of the protasis; the former represents the apodosis as fulfilled
in spite of the fulfilment of the protasis. Yet there are cases
in which by the weakening of the characteristic force of each
construction, or by the complexity of the elements expressed
by the protasis, the two usages approach so near to each other
as to make distinction between them difficult.
In Gal. 1:8, e.g., the fulfilment of the element of the
protasis expressed in par ] o{ eu]hggelisa<meqa a is favorable to the
fulfilment of the apodosis a]na<qema e@stw, and the clause is so
far forth conditional. But the element expressed in h[mei?j h}
a@ggeloj e]c ou]ranou?, which is emphasized by the kai<, is unfavor-
able to the fulfilment of the apodosis, and the clause is so far
forth concessive. It might be resolved into two clauses, thus,
MOODS IN CONCESSIVE SENTENCES. 113
If anyone shall preach unto you any gospel other than that we
preached unto you [let him be anathema]; yea, though we or an
angel from heaven so preach, let him be anathema.
279. A concessive clause is commonly introduced by ei] (e]a<n)
kai< or kai> ei] (e]a<n). But a clause introduced by ei] or e]a<n alone
may also be in thought concessive, though the concessive
element is not emphasized in the form. Matt. 26:33 (cf. Mark
14:29); Mark 14:31 (cf. Matt. 26:35).
280. Ei] (e]a<n) kai< concessive in the New Testament generally
introduces a supposition conceived of as actually fulfilled or
likely to be fulfilled. See examples under 284, 285. Yet,
in concessive as well as in conditional clauses (cf. 282),
kai< may belong not to the whole clause but to the word next
after it, having an intensive force, and suggesting that the
supposition is in some sense or respect an extreme one, e.g.,
especially improbable or especially unfavorable to the fulfil-
ment of the apodosis. So probably Mark 14:29.
281. Kai> ei] (e]a<n) concessive occurs somewhat rarely in the
New Testament. See Matt. 26:35; John 8:16; 1 Cor. 8:5;
Gal. 1:8; 1 Pet. 3:1 (but cf. WH). The force of the kai< is
apparently intensive, representing the supposition as actually
or from a rhetorical point of view an extreme case, improbable
in itself, or specially unfavorable to the fulfilment of the
apodosis.
REM. Paley, Greek Particles, p. 31, thus distinguishes the force of ei]
kai> and kai> ei], "generally with this difference, that ei] kai< implies an ad-
mitted fact ‘even though,' kai> ei] a somewhat improbable supposition;
'even if.'" See other statements and references in Th. ei] III.7; and
especially J. 861. It should be observed that a concessive supposition
may be probable or improbable; it is not this or that that makes it con-
cessive, but the fact that its fulfilment is unf.avorable to the fulfilment of
the apodosis.
114 THE MOODS.
282. Carefully to be distinguished from the cases of kai> ei] (e]a<n) and ei]
(e]a<n) kai< concessive are those in which ei] (e]a<n) is conditional and kai< means
and (Matt. 11:14; Luke 6:32, 33, 34; John 8:55, etc.), or also (Luke
11:18; 2 Cor. 11:15), or is simply intensive, emphasizing the following
word and suggesting a supposition in some sense extreme (1 Cor. 4:7; 7:
11). Such a supposition is not necessarily unfavorable to the fulfilment of
the apodosis, and hence may be conditional however extreme. Cf. 280.
283. Moods and Tenses in Concessive Clauses. In
their use of moods and tenses concessive clauses follow in
general the rules for conditional clauses. The variety of
usage is in the New Testament, however, much less in the
case of concessive clauses than of conditional clauses.
284. Concessive clauses of the class corresponding to the
first class of conditional sentences are most frequent in the
New Testament. The event referred to in the concessive
clause is in general not contingent, but conceived of as actual.
2 Cor. 7:8; o!ti ei] kai> e]lu?phsa u[ma?j e]n t^? e]pistol^?, ou] metame<lomai,
for, though [made you sorry with my epistle, I do not regret it. See
also Luke 18:4; 2 Cor. 4:16; 7:12; 11:6; 12:11; Phil. 2:17;
Col. 2:5; Heb. 6:9.
285. Concessive clauses referring to the future occur in
two forms.
(a) They take ei] kai< or ei], and a Future Indicative referring
to what is regarded as certain or likely to occur. In logical
force this construction is closely akin to that discussed
under 246.
Luke 11:8; ei] kai> ou] dw<sei au]t&? a]nasta>j dia> to> ei#nai fi<lon au]tou?, dia<
ge th>n a]naidi<an au]tou? e]gerqei>j dw<sei au]t&? o!swn xr^<zei, though
he will not rise and give him because he is his friend, yet because of his
importunity he will arise and give him as many as he needeth. See
also Matt. 26:33; Mark 14:29.
MOODS IN CONCESSIVE SENTENCES. 115
(b) They take e]a>n kai<, kai> e]a<n, or e]a<n with the Subjunctive
referring to a future possibility, or what is rhetorically con-
ceived to be possible. Kai> e]a<n introduces an extreme case,
usually one which is represented as highly improbable.
Gal. 6:1; e]a>n kai> prolhmfq^? a@nqrwpoj e@n tini paraptw<mati, u[mei?j oi[
pneumatikoi> katarti<zete to>n toiou?ton e]n pneu<mati prau~thtoj,
even if a man be overtaken in any trespass, ye which are spiritual, restore
such a one in a spirit of meekness.
Gal. 1:8; a]lla> kai> e]a>n h[mei?j h} a@ggeloj e]c ou]ranou? eu]aggeli<shtai
[ u[mi?n ] par ] o{ eu]hggelisa<meqa u[mi?n, a]na<qema e@stw, but even if we,
or an angel from heaven, preach unto you any gospel other than that
which we preached unto you, let him be anathema. See also Luke
22:67, 68; John 8:16; 10:38; Rom. 9:27.
REM. The apodosis after a concessive protasis referring to the future,
sometimes has a Present Indicative, affirming what is true and will still
be true though the supposition of the protasis be fulfilled. See John
8:14; 1 Cor. 9:16. Cf. 263.
286. The New Testament furnishes no clear instance of a concessive
clause corresponding to the fourth class of conditional clauses. In 1 Pet.
3:14, ei] kai> pa<sxoite dia> dikaiosu<nhn, maka<rioi, the use of kai< before
pa<sxoite suggests that the writer has in mind that suffering is apparently
opposed to blessedness. Yet it is probable that he intends to affirm that blessed-
ness comes, not in spite of, but through, suffering for righteousness' sake.
(On the thought cf. Matt. 5:10 f.) Thus the protasis suggests, even
intentionally, a concession, but is, strictly speaking, a true causal con-
ditional clause. Cf. 282.
287. The New Testament instances of concessive clauses correspond-
ing to the fifth class of conditional clauses are few, and the concessive
force is not strongly marked. See 2 Tim. 2:5 (first clause) under 260;
2 Tim. 2:13.
288. Concessive clauses in English are introduced by
though, although, and even if, occasionally by if alone. Even
if introduces an improbable supposition or one especially
unfavorable to the fulfilment of the apodosis. Though and
116 THE MOODS.
although with the Indicative usually imply an admitted fact.
With the Subjunctive and Potential, with the Present Indica-
tive in the sense of a Future, and with a Past tense of the
Indicative in conditions contrary to fact, though and although
have substantially the same force as even if. Even if thus
corresponds in force very nearly to kai> ei]; though and although
to ei] kai<.
MOODS IN RELATIVE CLAUSES.
289. Relative Clauses are introduced by relative pronouns
and by relative adverbs of time, place, and manner.
They may be divided into two classes:
I. Definite Relative Clauses, i.e. clauses which refer to a
definite and actual event or fact. The antecedent may be ex-
pressed or understood. If not in itself definite, it is made so
by the definiteness of the relative clause.
II. Indefinite or Conditional Relative Clauses, i.e. clauses
which refer not to a definite and actual event, but to a sup-
posed event or instance, and hence imply a condition. The
antecedent may be expressed or understood; if expressed, it is
usually some indefinite or generic word.
290. It should be observed that the distinction between the definite
and the indefinite relative clause cannot be drawn simply by reference
to the relative pronoun employed, or to the word which stands as the
antecedent of the relative. A definite relative clause may be introduced
by an indefinite relative pronoun or may have an indefinite pronoun as
its antecedent. On the other hand, an indefinite relative clause may
have as its antecedent a definite term, e.g., a demonstrative pronoun, and
may be introduced by the simple relative. A clause and its antecedent
are made definite by the reference of the clause to a definite and actual
event; they are made indefinite by the reference of the clause to a sup-
posed event or instance. Thus if one say, He received whatever profit
was made, meaning, In a certain transaction, or in certain transactions,
profit was made, and he received it, the relative clause is definite, because
MOODS IN RELATIVE CLAUSES 117
it refers to an actual event or series of events. But if one use the same
words meaning, If any profit was made, he received it, the relative clause
is indefinite, because it implies a condition, referring to an event--the
making of profit-which is only supposed. In John 1: 12, but as many
as received him, to them gave he the right to become children of God, we
are doubtless to understand the relative clause as definite, not because
of the expressed antecedent, them, but because the clause refers to a
certain class who actually received him. In Rom. 8:24, on the other
hand, who hopeth for that which he seeth? the relative clause apparently
does not refer to a definite thing seen and an actual act of seeing, but
is equivalent to a conditional clause, if he seeth anything. In Mark 3:11,
whensoever they beheld him, they fell down before him, the form of the
Greek sentence shows that the meaning is, If at any time they saw him,
they were wont to fall down before him. That is, while the class of events
is actual, the relative clause presents the successive instances distribu-
tively as suppositions. These examples serve to show how slight may
be the difference at times between a definite and an indefinite relative
clause, and that it must often be a matter of choice for the writer whether
he will refer to an event as actual, or present it as a supposition.
291. Relative clauses denoting purpose, and relative clauses
introduced by e!wj and other words meaning until, show special
peculiarities of usage and require separate discussion. For
purposes of treatment therefore we must recognize four classes
of relative clauses.
I. Definite relative clauses, excluding those which express
purpose, and those introduced by words meaning until.
II. Indefinite or Conditional relative clauses, excluding
those which express purpose, and those introduced by words
meaning until.
III. Relative clauses expressing purpose.
IV. Relative clauses introduced by words meaning until.
I. DEFINITE RELATIVE CLAUSES.
292. Under the head of definite relative clauses are included
not only adjective clauses introduced by relative pronouns, o!j,
118 THE MOODS.
o!stij, oi$oj, o!soj, but all clauses of time, place, manner, and com-
parison, such clauses being introduced by relative words, either
pronouns, or adverbs, o!te, w[j (expressing either time or man-
ner), o!pou, w!sper, etc.
293. Moods in Definite Relative Clauses. Definite
relative clauses in general (excluding III. and IV. above)
show no special uses of mood and tense, but employ the
verb as it is used in principal cIa uses. HA. 909; G. 1427.
John 6:63; ta> r[h<mata a{ e]gw> lela<lhka u[mi?n pneu?ma< e]stin kai> zwh<
e]stin, the words that I have spoken unto you are spirit, and are life.
John 12:36; w[j to> fw?j e@xete, pisteu<ete ei]j to> fw?j, while ye have the
light, believe on the light.
Gal. 4.4; o!te de> h#lqen to> plh<rwma tou? xro<nou, e]cape<steilen o[ qeo>j
to>n ui[o>n au]tou?, but when the fulness of the time came, God sent forth
his son.
Jas. 2:26; w!sper to> sw?ma xwri>j pneu<matoj nekro<n e]stin, ou!twj kai>
h[ pi<stij xwri>j e@rgwn nekra< e]stin, as the body apart from the spirit
is dead, even so faith apart from works is dead.
Rev. 3:11; kra<tei o{ e@xeij, hold fast that which thou hast.
Rev. 21:16; kai> to> mh?koj au]th?j o!son to> pla<toj, and the length thereof
is as great as the breadth. Cf. Heb. 10:25. See also Matt. 26:19;
Col. 2:6.
294. A definite relative clause may imply a relation of
cause, result, or concession, without affecting the mood or tense
of the verb. HA. 910; G. 1445.
Rom. 6:2. oi!tinej a]peqa<nomen t^? a[marti<%, pw?j e@ti zh<somen e]n au]t^?,
we who died to sin, how shall we any longer live therein?
Jas. 4:13, 14; a@ge nu?n oi[ le<gontej Sh<meron h} au@rion poreuso<meqa
ei]j th>nde th>n po<lin kai> poih<somen e]kei? e]niauto>n kai>
e]mporeuso<meqa kai> kerdh<somen: oi!tinej ou]k e]pi<stasqe th?j au@rion
poi<a h[ zwh> u[mw?n,
go to now, ye that say, To-day or to-morrow we will go into this city,
and spend a year there and trade and get gain “ whereas [i.e.
although] ye know not of what sort your life will be on the morrow.
MOODS IN RELATIVE CLAUSES. 119
295. All relative clauses whether adjective or adverbial may
be distinguished as either restrictive or explanatory. A re-
strictive clause defines its antecedent, indicating what person,
thing, place, or manner is signified. An explanatory clause
adds a description to what is already known or sufficiently
defined. The former identifies, the latter describes.
Restrictive clauses: John 15:20; mnhmoneu<ete tou? lo<gou ou$ e]gw> ei#pon
u[mi?n, remember the word that I said unto you.
Matt. 28:6; deu?te i@dete to>n to<pon o!pou e@keito, come, see the place where
he lay.
Mark 2:20; e]leu<sontai de> h[me<rai o!tan a]parq^? a]p ] au]tw?n o[ numfi<oj
but days will come when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them.
Explanatory clauses: Luke 4:16; kai> h#lqen ei]j Nazara<, ou$ h$n teqram-
me<noj, and he came to
Eph. 6:17; th>n ma<xairan tou? pneu<matoj, o! e]stin r[h?ma qeou?, the sword
of the Spirit, which is the word of God.
II. CONDITIONAL RELATIVE SENTENCES.
296. An indefinite relative clause, since it refers to a sup-
posed event or instance, implies a condition, and is therefore
called a conditional relative clause. HA. 912; G. 1428.
Mark 10: 43; o
whosoever would become great among you, shall be your minister. Cf.
Mark 9:35; ei@ tij qe<lei prw?toj ei#nai e@stai pa<ntwn e@sxatoj kai>
pa<ntwn dia<konoj. It is evident that the relative clause in the former
passage is as really conditional as the conditional clause in the
latter.
297. Since a conditional relative clause implies a supposi-
tion, conditional relative sentences may be classified according
to the nature of the implied supposition, as other conditional
sentences are classified according to the expressed sup-
position.
120 THE MOODS.
298. The implied supposition may be particular or general.
When the relative clause refers to a particular supposed event
or instance, and the principal clause conditions its assertion on
the occurrence of this event, the implied supposition is partic-
ular. When the relative clause refers to any occurrence of an
act of a certain class, and the principal clause states what is
or was wont to take place in any instance of an act of the
class supposed, the implied supposition is general.
Thus in the sentence, The act which he believes to be wrong he will not
do, if reference is had to a particular occasion, or to one made particular
in thought, so that the sentence means, If on that occasion, or a certain
occasion, he believes an act to be wrong, he will not do it, the implied
supposition is particular. But in the sentence, Whatever act he [in any
instance] believes to be wrong, he does not [is not wont to] do, the implied
supposition is general. Cf. 239.
299. The distinction between the relative clause implying a particular
supposition and the relative clause implying a general supposition is not
marked either in Greek or in English by any uniform difference in the
pronouns employed either in the relative clause or in the antecedent
clause. The terms particular and general apply not to the relative or its
antecedent, but to the implied supposition. Thus if one say, He received
whatever profit was made, meaning, If [in a certain transaction] any
profit was made, he received it, the relative clause implies a particular
coudition. But if one use the same words, meaning, If [in any transac-
tion] any profit was made, [it was wont to happen that] he received it, the
implied condition is general. So also in John 1:33, upon whomsoever
thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and abiding upon him, the same is
he that baptizeth with the Holy Spirit, we have not a general principle
applying to anyone of many cases, but a supposition and an assertion
referring to a particular case. But in 1 John 3:22, whatsoever we ask, we
receive of him, the supposition refers to any instance of asking, and is
general.
Whether the implied supposition is particular or general can usually
be most clearly discerned from the nature of the principal clause. If
this states what is true in a particular case, or expresses a command with
reference to a particular case, the implied supposition is particular. If
it states a general principle, or expresses a general injunction which
MOODS IN RELATIVE CLAUSES. 121
applies in any instance of the event described in the relative clause, the
implied supposition is usually general. Cf. 240.
300. Of the six classes of conditional relative sentences
found in classical Greek, but four occur in the New Testament,
and these with considerable deviation from classical usage.
They are designated here according to the kind of condition
implied in the relative clause.
301. A. Simple Present or Past Particular suppo-
sition. The relative clause states a particular supposition
which refers to the present or past. It has a present or past
tense of the Indicative. The principal clause may have
any form of the verb. HA. 914, A; G. 1430.
Rom. 2:12; o!soi ga>r a]no<mwj h!marton, a]no<mwj kai> a]polou?ntai: kai>
o!soi e]n no<m& h!marton, dia> no<mou kriqh<sontai, for as many as have
sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have
sinned under law shall be judged by law.
Phil 4:8; to> loipo<n, a]delfoi<, o!sa e]sti>n a]lhqh?, o!sa semna<, o!sa di<kaia,
o!sa a[gna<, o!sa prosfilh?, o!sa eu@fhma, ei@ tij a]reth> kai> ei@ tij
e@painoj, tau?ta logi<zesqe. See also 2 Cor. 2:10.
REM. Respecting the use of the negatives mh< and ou] in relative clauses
of this class, see 469, 470.
302. B. Supposition contrary to Fact. The rela-
tive clause states a supposition which refers to the present
or past implying that it is not, or was not, fulfilled. It
has a past tense of the IndicatIve. The principal clause has
a past tense of the Indicative with a@n HA. 915; G. 1433.
No instance occurs in the New Testament.
303. C. Future Supposition with More Probability.
The relative clause states a supposition which refers to the
122 THE MOODS.
future, suggesting some probability of its fulfilment. It
has the Subjunctive with a@n. The principal clause may
have any form referring to future time. H.A. 916; G.1434.
Matt. 5:19; o
basilei<% tw?n ou]ranw?n, but whosoever shall do and teach them, he shall
be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
Mark 13:11; kai> o!tan a@gwsin u[ma?j paradido<ntej, mh> promerimna?te ti<
lalh<shte, a]ll ] o{ e]a>n doq^? u[mi?n e]n e]kei<n^ t^? w!ra tou?to lalei?te,
ou] ga<r e]ste u[mei?j oi[ lalou?ntej a]lla> to> pneu?ma to> a!gion, and when
they lead you to judgment, and deliver you up, be not anxious before-
hand what ye shall speak: but whatsoever shall be given you in that
hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost.
See also Luke 13:25; Rev. 11:7; instances are very frequent in
the New Testament.
304. In the New Testament a@n not infrequently stands in a condi-
tional relative clause instead of the simple a@n. Matt. 7:12; Mark 3:28;
Luke 9:57; Acts 2:21, et al. See WH: II. App. p. 173.
305. The Subjunctive with a@n in a relative clause is in the
New Testament usually retained in indirect discourse, or in a
sentence having the effect of indirect discourse, even after a
past tense. Matt. 14:7; Rev. 12:4. Cf. 251. On Acts 25:16
see 333, 344, Rem. 1.
306. In addition to the relative clause having the Subjunc-
tive with a@n (303), which is the regular form both in classical
and New Testament Greek, the following forms of the relative
clause also require mention as occurring in the New Testa-
ment to express a future supposition with more probability:
307. (a) The Subjunctive without a@n. This is very unusual
in classical Greek in relative clauses referring to the future.
In the New Testament also it is rare. Jas. 2:10 probably
belongs here; Matt. 10:33 also, if (with Treg. and WH. text)
we read o!stij de> a]rnh<shtai< me . . . a]rnh<somai.
MOODS IN RELATIVE CLAUSES. 123
308. (b) The Future Indicative with or without a@n.
Matt. 5:41; o!stij se a]ggareu<sei mi<lion e{n, u!page met ] au]tou? du<o, who
soever shall compel thee to go one mile, go with him two. See also
Matt. 10:32 (cf. v. 33); 18:4 (cf. v. 5); 23:12; Mark 8:35;
Luke 12:8, 10; 17:31; Acts 7:7; Rev. 4:9. Cf. WH. II. App.
p. 172.
309. (c) The Present Indicative with or without a@n.
Mark 11:25; o!tan sth<kete proseuxo<menoi, a]fi<ete, whensoever ye stand
praying, forgive. See also Matt. 5:39; Luke 12:34; John 12:26;
14:3.
310. There is no distinction in form either in Greek or in English
between a relative clause implying a particular supposition, and a relative
clause implying a general supposition, when the supposition refers to the
future. The difference in thought is the same as that which distinguishes
particular and general suppositions referring to the present or past. Cf.
298, 299. In Matt. 26:48, whomsoever I shall kiss, that is he, the sup-
position is particular, referring to a specific occasion and event. So also
in 1 Cor. 16:3. But in Luke 9:4, into whatsoever house ye enter, there
abide, and thence depart, the supposition is general, referring to anyone
of a class of acts. A large part of the conditional relative clauses referring
to the future found in the New Testament are apparently general. See,
e.g., Matt. 5:19; 10:14; 16:25; Mark 11:23; Luke 8:18, etc. Yet
in many cases it is possible to suppose that a particular imagined instance
was before the mind of the writer as an illustration of the general class
of cases.
311. D. Future Supposition with Less Probability.
The relative clause states a supposition which refers to the
future, suggesting less probability of its fulfilment than is
implied by the Subjunctive with a@n. It has the Optative
without a@n. The principal clause has the Optative with
a@n. HA. 917; G. 1436.
No instance occurs in the New Testament.
312. E. Present General Supposition. The relative
clause refers to any occurrence of a class of acts in the
124 THE MOODS.
general present, and the principal clause states what is
wont to take place in any instance of the act referred to
in the relative clause. The relative clause has the Sub-
junctive with a@n, the principal clause the Present In-
dicative. HA. 914, B. (1); G. 1431, 1.
1Cor. 11:26; o[sa<kij ga>r e]a>n e]sqi<hte to>n a@rton tou?ton kai> to> poth<rion
pi<nhte, to>n qa<naton tou? kuri<ou katagge<llete, a@xri ou$ e@lq^,
for as often as ye eat this bread, and drink the cup, ye proclaim the Lord's
death, till he come. See also Matt. 15:2; Mark 10:11; Rev. 9:5.
REM. Concerning the use of e]a<n for a@n, see 304.
313. The Present Indicative not infrequently occurs in con-
ditional relative clauses which apparently imply a present
general supposition. G.MT. 534. Yet in most such passages
in the New Testament, it is possible that a particular imagined
instance in the present or future is before the mind as an
illustration of the general class of cases. Cf. 301, 309. It is
scarcely possible to decide in each case whether the supposi-
tion is particular or general. The difference of meaning is in
any case slight.
Luke 14:27; o!stij ou] basta<zei to>n stauro>n e[autou? kai> e@rxetai o]pi<sw
mou, ou] du<natai ei#nai< mou maqhth<j, whosoever doth not bear his own
cross and come after me, cannot be my disciple. See also Matt. 10:38
13:12 (cf. Luke 8:18); Luke 7:47; John 3:8; Rom. 6:16; 9:18;
1 Cor. 15:36, 37; Heb. 12:6.
314. Concerning the similarity of the third and fifth classes of condi-
tional relative clauses, cf. 262. The statements there made respecting
ordinary conditional sentences are applicable also to conditional relative
sentences. See Mark 8:28, 29; Luke 9:24, 48; 1 John 8:22.
315. F. Past General Supposition. The relative clause
refers to any occurrence of a certain act or class of acts,
and the principal clause states what was wont to take
MOODS IN RELATIVE CLAUSES. 125
place in any instance of the act referred to in the relative
clause. In classical Greek, the relative clause has the Op-
tative without a@n, the principal clause the Imperfect Indic-
ative. HA. 914, B. (2); G. 1431, 2.
In the New Testament, the Optative does not occur
in such clauses, the Imperfect or Aorist Indicative with
a@n being used instead. Cf. 26.
Mark 3:11; kai> ta> pneu<mata ta> a]ka<qarta, o!tan au]to>n e]qew<roun, pros-
e<pipton au]t&? kai> e@krazon, and the unclean spirits, whensoever they
beheld him, were wont to fall down before him and cry out. See also
Mark 6:56; 11:19; Acts 2:45; 4:35; 1 Cor. 12:2; cf. Gen.
2:19; 1 Sam. 2:13, 14.
316. In the New Testament, relative clauses conditional in
form are sometimes definite in force.
Mark 2:20; e]leu<sontai de> h[me<rai o!tan a]parq^? a]p au]tw?n o[
numfi<oj, but days will come when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them. See also Luke 5:35; 13:28; Rev. 8:1.
III. RELATIVE CLAUSES EXPRESSING PURPOSE.
317. Relative Clauses of Pure Purpose. Relative
clauses expressing purpose take the Future Indicative
both in classical and New Testament Greek. HA. 911
G. 1442; B. p. 229; WM. p. 386, f. n.
Matt. 21:41; to>n a]mpelw?na e]kdw<setai a@lloij gewrgoi?j, oi!tinej a]po-
dw<sousin au]t&? tou>j karpou<j, he will let out the vineyard unto other
husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits. See also Acts 6:3.
318. Complementary relative clauses expressing that for
which a person or thing is fitted, or other similar relation, take
the Subjunctive or the Future Indicative both in classical and
New Testament Greek. G.MT. 572; Hale in T.A.P.A. 1893,
pp. 156 ff.
126 THE MOODS.
Heb. 8:3; o!qen a]nagkai?on e@xein ti kai> tou?ton o{ prosene<gk^, wherefore
it is necessary that this high priest also have somewhat to offer. See also
Mark 14:14; Luke 11:6; 22:11. In Luke 7:4 a complementary
relative clause limiting the adjective a@cioj has the Future Indicative.
319. The clauses referred to in 318 are to be distinguished from true
relative clauses of purpose in that they do not express the purpose with
which the action denoted by the principal clause is done, but constitute a
complementary limitation of the principal clause. Cf. the clause with
i!na (215-217) and the Infinitive (368) expressing a similar relation.
The Subjunctive in such clauses is probably in origin a Deliberative
Subjunctive. Thus in Mark 14:14, pou? e]sti>n to> kata<luma< mou o!pou to>
pa<sxa meta> tw?n maqhtw?n mou fa<gw, the relative clause o!pou . . . fa<gw reproduces in dependent construction the thought of the deliberative
question pou?. . . fa<gw. The same explanation doubtless applies, though
less obviously, to the Subjunctive in Acts 21:16, and to the Future in
Luke 7:4. In both instances the thought of a deliberative question is
reproduced in the relative clause. Cf. the clauses similar in force, but
employing an interrogative pronoun, 346. See Tarbell in Cl. Rev. July
1891, p. 302 (contra, Earle in Cl. Rev.). March 1892, pp. 93-95); Hale
in T.A.P.A., 1893.
320. The Optative sometimes occurs after a past tense in these delib-
erative relative clauses in classical Greek. There are, however, no New
Testament instances of the Optative so used.
IV. RELATIVE CLAUSES INTRODUCED BY WORDS MEANING
UNTIL, W RILE, AND BEFORE.
321. !Ewj is properly a relative adverb which marks one
action as the temporal limit of another action. It does this
in two ways, either (a) so that the beginning or simple occur-
rence of the action of the verb introduced by e!wj; is the limit
of the action denoted by the principal verb, .or (b) so that the
continuance of the former is the limit of the latter. In the
former case e!wj; means until, in the latter, while, as long as.
On the classical use of e!wj; and similar words, see HA. 920-
924; G. 1463-1474; G.MT. 611-661; Gild. in A..J.P. IV.
MOODS IN RELATIVE CLAUSES. 127
416-418. On e!wj in Hellenistic Greek see G. W. Gilmore in
J.B.L., 1890, pp. 153-160.
322. Clauses Introduced by e!wj and referring to the
Future. When the clause introduced by e!wj depends on
a verb of future time, and refers to a future contingency, it
takes the Subjunctive with a@n both in classical and New
Testament Greek.
Mark 6:10; e]kei? me<nete e!wj a}n e]ce<lqhte e]kei?qen, there abide till ye
depart thence. See also Matt. 5:18; 12:20; Luke 9:27; 1 Cor. 4:5.
323. In classical Greek, especially in tragic poetry, the
Subjunctive without a@n sometimes occurs with e!wj; after a
verb of present or future time. G.MT. 620. In the New
Testament this construction is frequent.
Luke 15:4; kai> poreu<etai e]pi> to> a]polwlo>j e!wj eu!r^ au]to<, after that which
is lost, until he find it. See also Matt. 10 : 23; Luke
12:59; 22:34.
324. Clauses Introduced by e!wj and referring to
what was in Past Time a Future Contingency. When
the clause introduced by e!wj depends on a verb of past
time and refers to what was at the time of the principal
verb conceived of as a future contingency, it takes the
Optative without a@n in classical Greek. In the New Tes-
tament it takes the Subjunctive without a@n.
Matt. 18:30; e@balen au]to>n ei]j fulakh>n e!wj a]pod&? to> o]feilo<menon,
he cast him into prison till he should pay that which was due.
325. The Subjunctive after e!wj in the New Testament is always an
Aorist, the action denoted being conceived of as a simple event, and e!wj
meaning properly until. Thus the accurate translation of Mark 14:32
(Matt. 26:36 is similar), kaqi<sate w$de e!wj proseu<cwmai, is, Sit ye here till
128 THE MOODS.
I pray, or have prayed (cf. 98). While I pray (CR. V.) is slightly para-
phrastic. Cf. Luke 17:8.
326. Clauses Introduced by e!wj (until) and referring
to a Past Fact. When e!wj means until and the clause
introduced by it refers to an actual past occurrence, the
verb of this clause is in a past tense of the Indicative, as in
an ordinary relative clause referring to past time.
Matt. 2:9; o[ a]sth<r . . . proh?gen au]tou<j, e!wj e]lqw>n e]sta<qh e]pa<nw ou$
h#n to> paidi<on, star. . . went before them, till it came and stood
over where the young child was.
327. Clauses Introduced by e!wj (while) and referring
to a Contemporaneous Event. When e!wj means while
and the clause introduced by it refers to an event contem-
poraneous with that of the principal verb, it has the con-
struction of an ordinary relative clause. Cf. 293.
John 9:4; h[ma?j dei? e]rga<zesqai ta> e@rga tou? pe<myantoj me e!wj h[me<ra
e]sti<n, we must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day.
328. In John 21:22, 23; 1 Tim. 4:13, the exact meaning of e!wj
e@rxomai at is probably while I am coming, the coming being conceived of as
in progress from the time of speaking. Cf. Luke 9:13. In 1 Cor. 4:5
on the other hand it is thought of as a future event. In Mark 6:45 e!wj
a]polu<ei represents e!wj a]polu<w of the direct form (cf. 347), the original
sentence meaning, go before me while I am sending away, etc.
329. When the e!wj clause refers to the future or to what was at the
time of the principal verb the future (322-326), it frequently has the
force of a conditional relative clause. See Matt. 18:30; Luke 15:4.
When it refers to an actual event (327, 328), it is an ordinary temporal
clause (293), requiring special mention here only to distinguish these
usages from those described above.
330. In the New Testament e!wj is sometimes followed by ou$ or o!tou.
! Ewj is then a preposition governing the genitive of the relative pronoun,
MOODS IN RELATIVE CLAUSES. 129
but the phrase e!wj ou$ or e!wj o!tou is in effect a compound conjunction hav-
ing the same force as the simple e!wj. The construction following it is
also the same, except that a@n never occurs after e!wj ou$ or e!wj o!tou. See
Matt. 5:25; 13:33; John 9:18; Acts 23:12.
331. Clauses introduced by a@xri, a@xri ou$, a@xri h$j h[me<raj, me<xri
and me<xrij ou$ have in general the same construction and force
as clauses introduced by e!wj, e!wj ou$, and e!wj o!tou.
Mark 13:30 ou] mh> pare<lq^ h[ genea> au!th me<xrij ou$ tau?ta pa<nta
ge<nhtai.
Acts 7:18; hu@chsen o[ lao>j kai> e]plhqu<nqh e]n Ai]gu<pt&, a@xri ou$
a]ne<sth baskileu>j e!teroj e]p ] Ai@gupton. See also Rev. 15:8; 20:3;
Luke 17:27; Acts 27:33.
Rev. 7:3; mh> a]dikh<shte th>n gh?n . . . a@xri sfragi<swmen tou>j dou<louj
tou? qeou?.
332. Gal. 3:19 [WH. text] furnishes one instance of a@xrij a@n with a
word meaning until after a verb of past time [WH. Margin, Tisch., and
Treg. read a@xrij ou$]; cf. 324. Rev. 2:25 contains the combination a@xri
ou$ a@n with the Future Indicative; cf. 330. Rev. 17:17 contains a Future
Indicative with a@xri after a past tense.
333. Clauses introduced by pri<n and employing a finite
mood have in general the same construction as clauses intro-
duced by e!wj.
The New Testament, however, contains but two instances of a finite
verb after pri<n, Luke 2:26; Acts 25:16. In both cases the clause is in
indirect discourse, and expresses what was from the point of view of the
original statement a future contingency. In Luke 2:26 the Subjunctive
with a@n is retained from the direct discourse. In Acts 25:16 the Optative
represents a Subjunctive with or without a@n of the direct discourse.
Cf. 341-344.
REM. 1. The employment of a finite mood rather than an Infinitive
in these instances is in accordance with classical usage. Cf. 382, and
G. 1470.
REM. 2. In Acts 25:16 h@ occurs after pri<n, and in Luke 2:26 it
appears as a strongly attested variant reading. Attic writers used the
simple pri<n with the finite moods. Cf. 381.
130 THE MOODS.
MOODS IN INDIRECT DISCOURSE.
334. When words once uttered or thought are afterward
quoted, the quotation may be either direct or indirect. In a
direct quotation the original statement is repeated without
incorporation into the structure of the sentence in the midst of
which it now stands. In an indirect quotation the original
sentence is incorporated into a new sentence as a subordinate
element dependent upon a verb of saying, thinking, or the like,
if and suffers such modification as this incorporation requires.
The following example will illustrate:
Original sentence (direct discourse), I will come.
Direct quotation, He said, "I will come."
Indirect quotation, He said that he would come.
REM. The distinction between direct discourse and indirect is not one
of the exactness of the quotation. Direct quotation may be inexact. In-
direct quotation may be exact. Suppose, for example, that the original
statement was, There are good reasons why I should act thus. If one say,
He said, "I have good reasons for acting thus," the quotation is direct
but inexact. If one say, He said that there were good reasons why he
should act thus, the quotation is exact though indirect.
335. Direct quotation manifestly requires no special discus-
sion, since the original statement is simply transferred to the
new sentence without incorporation into its structure.
336. Indirect quotation, on the other hand, involving a re-
adjustment of the original sentence to a new point of view,
calls for a determination of the principles on which this re-
adjustment is made. Its problem is most simply stated in
the form of the question, What change does the original form
of a sentence undergo when incorporated into a new sentence
as an indirect quotation? All consideration of the principles
MOODS IN INDIRECT DISCOURSE. 131
of indirect discourse must take as its starting point the origi-
nal form of the words quoted.
For the student of Greek that expresses his own thought in
another language, it will also be necessary to compare the
idiom of the two languages. See 351 ff.
337. The term indirect discourse is commonly applied only
to indirect assertions and indirect questions. Commands,
promises, and hopes indirectly quoted might without impro-
priety be included under the term, but are, in general, ex-
cluded because of the difficulty of drawing the line between
them and certain similar usages, in which, however, no direct
form can be thought of. Thus the Infinitive after a verb of
commanding might be considered the representative in indi-
rect discourse of an Imperative in the direct discourse; some-
what less probably the Infinitive after a verb of wishing might
be supposed to represent an Optative of the direct; while for
the Infinitive after verbs of striving, which in itself can
scarcely be regarded as of different force from those after
verbs of commanding and wishing, no direct form can be
thought of.
338. Concerning commands indirectly quoted, see 204. Con-
cerning the Infinitive after verbs of promising, see 391.
339. Indirect assertions in Greek take three forms:
(a) A clause introduced by o!ti or w[j. In the New Testa-
ment, however, w[j not so used.
(b) An Infinitive with its subject expressed or understood.
See 390.
(c) A Participle agreeing with the object of a verb of per-
ceiving, and the like. See 4.60.
132 THE MOODS.
340. Indirect Questions are introduced by ei] or other inter-
rogative word; the verb is in a finite mood. HA. 930; G.
1605.
341. Classical Usage in Indirect Discourse. In indi-
rect assertions after o!ti and in indirect questions, classical
usage is as follows:
(a) When the leading verb on which the quotation de-
pends denotes present or future time, the mood and tense
of the direct discourse are retained in the indirect.
(b) When the leading verb on which the quotation de-
pends denotes past time, the mood and tense of the direct
discourse may be retained in the indirect, or the tense may
be retained and an Indicative or Subjunctive of the direct
discourse may be changed to an Optative. HA. 932; G.
1497.
342. The above rule applies to all indirect quotations in
which the quotation is expressed by a finite verb, and includes
indirect quotations of simple sentences and both principal and
subordinate clauses of complex sentences indirectly quoted.
The classical grammars enumerate certain constructions in which an
Indicative of the original sentence is uniformly retained in the indirect
discourse. These cases do not, however, require treatment here, the gen-
eral rule being sufficient as a basis for the consideration of New Testament
usage.
343. New Testament Usage in Indirect Discourse. In
indirect assertions after o!ti and in indirect questions, New
Testament usage is in general the same as classical usage.
Such peculiarities as exist pertain chiefly to the relative
frequency of different usages. See 344-349.
MOODS IN INDIRECT DISCOURSE. 133
John 11:27; e]gw> pepi<steuka o!ti su> ei# o[ xristo>j o[ ui[o>j tou? qeou?
I have believed that thou art the Christ, the Son of God.
Gal. 2:14; ei#don o!ti ou]k o]rqopodou?sin, I saw that they were not walking
uprightly.
Matt. 20:10; e]lqo<ntej oi[ prw?toi e]no<misan o!ti plei?on lh<myontai,
when the first came, they supposed that they would receive more.
Mark 9:6; ou] ga>r ^@dei ti< a]pokriq^?, for he wist not what to answer.
Luke 8:9; e]phrw<twn de> au]to>n oi[ maqhtai> au]tou? ti<j au!th ei@h h[
parabolh< and his disciples asked him what this parable was.
Luke 24:23; h#lqan le<gousai kai> o]ptasi<an a]gge<lwn e[wrake<nai, oi{
le<gousin au]to>n z^?n, they came saying that they had also seen a vision
of angels, which said that he was alive. In this example the principal
clause of the direct discourse is expressed in the indirect discourse
after a verb of past time by an Infinitive, while the subordinate
clause retains the tense and mood of the original.
Acts 5:24; dihpo<roun peri> au]tw?n ti< a}n ge<noito tou?to, they were per-
plexed concerning them whereunto this would grow. But for a@n in
this sentence, it might be thought that the direct form was a
deliberative question having the Subjunctive or Future Indicative.
But in the absence of evidence that a@n was ever added to an
Optative arising under the law of indirect discourse, it must be
supposed that the indirect discourse has preserved the form of
the direct unchanged, and that this was therefore a Potential
Optative with protasis omitted. See also Luke 6:11; 15:26;
Acts 10:17.
344. The Optative occurs in indirect discourse much less
frequently in the New Testament than in classical Greek.
It is found only in Luke's writings, and there almost exclusive-
ly in indirect questions.
REM: 1. Acts 25:16 contains the only New Testament instance of an
Optative in the indirect quotation of a declarative sentence. (But cf.
347 and 258. ) It here stands in a subordinate clause which in the direct
discourse would have had a Subjunctive with or without a@n. If the a@n, be
supposed to have been in the original sentence (cf. Luke 2:26), it has
been dropped in accordance with regular usage in such cases. HA. 934;
G. 1497, 2.
134 THE MOODS.
REM. 2. The clause mh<pote d&<h [or dw<^] au]toi?j o[ qeo>j meta<noian
in 2 Tim. 2:25 is regarded by B. p. 256, Moulton, WM. pp. 374, 631, foot
notes, as an indirect question. But concerning the text and the
interpretation, see 225.
345. In quoting declarative sentences the indirect form is
comparatively infrequent in the New Testament, the direct
form either with or without o!ti being much more frequent.
The presence of o!ti before a quotation is in the New Testament
therefore not even presumptive evidence that the quotation is
indirect. The o!ti is of course redundant.
Luke 7:48; ei#pen de> au]t^? ]Afe<wntai< sou ai[ a[marti<ai, and he said
unto her, Thy sins are forgiven.
John 9:9; e]kei?noj e@legen o!ti ]Egw< ei]mi, he said I am he.
REM. The redundant o!ti sometimes occurs even before a direct ques-
tion. Mark 4:21, et al.
346. Indirect deliberative questions are sometimes found
after e@xw and other similar verbs which do not properly take a
question as object. The interrogative clause in this case serves
the purpose of a relative clause and its antecedent, while retain-
ing the form which shows its origin in a deliberative question.
Mark 6:36; i!na . . . a]gora<swsin e[autoi?j ti< fa<gwsin, that . . . they
may buy themselves somewhat to eat.
Luke 9:58; o[ de> ui[o>j tou? a]nqrw<pou ou]k e@xei pou? th>n kefalh>n kli<n^,
but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head. See also Matt.
8:20; Mark 8:1, 2; Luke 12:17.
347. The principles of indirect discourse apply to all sub-
ordinate clauses which express indirectly the thoughts of
another or of the speaker himself, even when the construc-
tion is not strictly that of indirect discourse. HA. 937; G.
1502. See New Testament examples under 258.
348. Both in classical and New Testament Greek, the Im-
perfect occasionally stands in indirect discourse after a verb of
MOODS IN INDIRECT DISCOURSE. 135
past time as the representative of a Present of the direct dis-
course, and a Pluperfect as the representative of the Perfect.
Thus exceptional Greek usage coincides with regular English
usage. HA. 936; G. 1489.
John 2:25; au]to>j ga>r e]gi<nwsken ti< h#n e]n t&? a]nqrw<p&, for he himself
knew what was in man. See also Acts 19:32.
349. In classical Greek, o!stij is used in introducing indirect
questions. HA. 1011; G. 1600. In the New Testament it is
not so employed, but there are a few passages in which it is
apparently used as an interrogative pronoun in a direct ques-
tion.
It is so taken by Mey., B., WH., et al, in Mark 9:11, 28, and by WH.
in Mark 2:16. See B. pp. 252 f.; Th., o!stij, 4; also (contra) WM. p.
208, f.n.; WT. p. 167.
350. The simple relative pronouns and adverbs are some-
times used in indirect questions in the New Testament as in
classical Greek. HA. 1011, a; G. 1600; J. 877, Obs. 3; B.
pp. 250 f.
Luke 8: 47; di ] h
what cause she had touched him. See also Mark 5:19, 20; Acts
14:27; 15:14.
351. INDIRECT DISCOURSE IN ENGLISH AND IN GREEK.
From what has been said above, it appears that the tense of a
verb standing in a clause of indirect discourse in Greek does
not express the same relation between the action denoted and
the time of speaking as is expressed by a verb of the same
tense standing in a principal clause; or, to speak more exactly,
does not describe it from the same point of view. A verb in
a principal clause views its action from the point of view of
the speaker. A verb in an indirect quotation, on the other
hand, views its action from the point of view of another person,
viz. the original author of the words quoted. It has also
136 THE MOODS.
appeared that in certain cases the mood of the Greek verb is
changed when it is indirectly quoted. Now it is evident that
in order to translate the Greek sentence containing a clause of
indirect discourse into English correctly and intelligently, we
must ascertain what English usage is in respect to the tenses
and moods of the verbs of indirect discourse; otherwise we
have no principle by which to determine what English tense
and mood properly represent a given Greek tense and mood
in indirect discourse. Furthermore, since Greek usage has
been expressed in terms of the relation between the original
utterance and the quotation, it will be expedient to state Eng-
lish usage in the same way. An example will illustrate at the
same time the necessity of formulating the law and of formu-
lating it in terms of relation to the direct form.
(1) He has seen a vision. (2) o]ptasi<an e[w<raken
(3) They said that he had seen a vision. (4) ei#pon o!ti o]ptasi<an e[w<raken.
The sentences marked (1) and (2) express the same idea
and employ corresponding tenses. The sentences marked (3)
and (4) represent respectively the indirect quotation of (1)
and (2) after a verb of past time, and express therefore the
same meaning. They do not, however, employ corresponding
tenses, the Greek using a Perfect, the English a Pluperfect.
It is evident therefore that the principle of indirect discourse
is not the same in English as in Greek, and that we cannot
translate (4) into (3) by the same principle of equivalence of
tenses which we employ in direct assertions. To translate
(4) we must first restore (2) by the Greek law of indirect dis-
course, then translate (2) into (1), and finally by the English
law of indirect discourse construct (3) from (1) and the trans-
lation of the Greek ei#pon. This process requires the formula-
tion of the law of indirect discourse for English as well as for
Greek.
MOODS IN INDIRECT DISCOURSE. 137
352. English usage in indirect discourse is illustrated in the
following examples:
Direct form. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I see the city.
Indirect, after present tense. . . . He says that he sees the city.
" " future " . . . . He will say that he sees the city.
" " past " . . . . He said that he saw the city.
Direct form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I saw the city.
Indirect, after present tense. . . . He says that he saw the city.
" " future " . . . . He will say that he saw the city.
" " past " . . . . He said that he had seen the city.
Direct form. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I shall see the city.
Indirect, after present tense . . . . He says that he shall see the city.
" " future " . . . . . . He will say that he shall see the city.
" " past " . . . . . . He said that he should see the city.
Direct form. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I may see the city.
Indirect, after present tense . . . . He says that he may see the city.
" " future ". . . . . . . He will say that he may see the city.
" " past ". . . . . . . He said that he might see the city.
From these examples we may deduce the following rule for
indirect discourse in English:
(a) After verbs of present or future time, the mood and tense
of the direct discourse are retained in the indirect discourse.
(b) After verbs of past time, the mood of the direct dis-
course is retained, but the tense is changed to that tense which
is past relatively to the time of the direct discourse.
Thus, see becomes saw; saw becomes had seen; shall see becomes
should see (the change of mood here is only apparent); may see
becomes might see, etc.
REM. In questions and in conditional clauses a Present Indicative of
the direct form may become a Past Subjunctive in indirect quotation after
a verb of past time. See Luke 3:15; Acts 10:18; 20:17, E.V.
353. Comparing this with the Greek rule, we may deduce
the following principles for the translation into English of
clauses of indirect discourse in Greek:
138 THE MOODS.
(a) When the quotation is introduced by a verb of present
it or future time, translate the verbs of the indirect discourse
by the same forms which would be used in ordinary direct
discourse.
(b) When the quotation is introduced by a verb of past
time, if there are Optatives which represent Indicatives or
Subjunctives of the direct discourse, first restore in thought
these Indicatives or Subjunctives, then translate each Greek
verb by that English verb which is relatively past to that
which would correctly translate the same verb standing in
direct discourse.
354. The statement of English usage in indirect discourse
is presented in the form adopted above for the sake of brevity
and convenience of application. It is, however, rather a for-
mula than a statement which represents the process of thought.
In order to apprehend clearly the difference between English
and Greek usage it must be recognized that certain English
tenses have, not like the Greek tenses a two-fold function, but
a three-fold. They mark (1) the temporal relation of the point
of view from which the action is described to the time of
speaking; (2) the temporal relation of the action described to
this point of view; (3) the conception of the action as re-
spects its progress. Thus in the sentence, I had been read-
ing, (1) the point of view from which the act of reading is
viewed is past, (2) the action itself is previous to that point of
view, and (3) it is viewed as in progress. He will not go is a
Future from a present point of view presenting the action as a
simple event. In the sentence, When he came, I was reading,
I was reading would be more accurately described as a Present
progressive from a past point of view, than as a Past progres-
sive from a present point of view. In other instances the same
form might be a Past from a present point of view. These
MOODS IN INDffiECT DISCOURSE. 139
triple-function tenses have perhaps their chief use in English
in indirect discourse, but are used also in direct discourse.
Many of them are derived by the process of composition, out
of which so many English tenses have arisen, from verb-forms
which originally had only the two-fold function, but their
existence in modern English is none the less clearly estab-
lished. Professor W. G. Hale1 in A.J.P., vol. VIII. pp. 66 ff.,
has set forth the similar three-fold function of the Latin tenses
in the Indicative Mood. But it should be noticed that the
English has developed this three-fold function more clearly
even than the Latin. For example, the antecedence of an
action to a past point of view is in Latin only implied in the
assertion of its completeness at that past point of time. But
in English this antecedence may be affirmed without affirming
the completeness of the act.
Bearing in mind this three-fold function of certain English
tenses, the difference between Greek and English usage in in-
direct discourse may be stated comprehensively as follows:
The Greek, while adopting in indirect discourse the point of
view of the person quoting as respects the person of verbs and
pronouns, and while sometimes after a verb of past time mark-
ing the dependent character of the statement by the use of the
Optative in place of an Indicative or Subjunctive of the origi-
nal statement, yet as respects tense, regularly carries over into
the indirect discourse the point of view of the original state-
ment, treating it as if it were still present. What was present
to the original speaker is still treated from his point of view,
as present; what was past, as past; what was future, as future.
In English, on the other hand, in quoting a past utterance,
1 Professor Hale's article furnished the suggestion for the view of the
English tenses presented here.
140 THE MOODS.
the fact that it is past is not only indicated by the past tense
of the verb which introduces the quotation, but still further
by the employment of a tense in the quotation which marks the
point of view from which the act is looked at as past. Thus
in Greek a prediction expressed originally by a Future tense,
when afterward quoted after a verb of past time, is still ex-
pressed by a Future, the act being viewed as future from the
assumed point of view, and this point of view being treated as
present or its character as past being ignored. But in English
such a prediction is expressed by a Past-future, i.e. by the
English tense which describes an action as future from a past
point of view. Thus in quoting o@yomai, I shall see, in indirect
discourse, one says in Greek, ei#pen o!ti o@yetai; but in English, he
said that he should see. Similarly, a statement made originally
by the Perfect tense, when quoted after a verb of past time,
is still expressed by a Perfect tense in Greek, but in English
by a Pluperfect. Thus h[ma<rthka, I have sinned; ei#pen o!ti
h[ma<rthken, he said that he had sinned.
When we pass to quotations after verbs of present time, the
usages of the two languages naturally coincide, since the differ-
ence between the point of view of the original utterance and
the quotation, which in English gave rise to a change of tense
not however made in Greek, disappears. The point of view of
the original statement is in both languages retained and
treated as present, because it is present. Thus e]leu<somai, I shall
come, requires only a change of person in quotation after a verb
of present time, le<gei o!ti e]leu<setai, he says that he shall come.
It might naturally be anticipated that in quotations after
verbs of future time, where again the time of the original
statement differs from that of the quotation, there would arise
a difference of usage between English and Greek. Such how-
ever is not the case. What the Greek does after a verb of
MOODS IN INDIRECT DISCOURSE. 141
past time, the English as well as the Greek does after a verb
of future time, viz. treats the point of view of the original
utterance as present. Thus let us suppose the case of one
predicting what a person just now departing will say when he
returns. He has not yet seen anything, but it is imagined that
when he returns he will say, I have seen all things. The asser-
tion of this by he will say, takes the form he will say that he
has seen all things; just as in Greek one quoting e[w<raka pa<nta
after e]rei? says e]rei? o!ti e[w<raken pa<nta. Thus the person quoting
does not describe the event from his own point of view--this
would require he will see, nor does he mark the fact that the
point of view of the utterance is different from his own--this
would require he will have seen; but treats the point of view
of the person whose expected language he quotes in advance,
as if it were present. Thus while the Greek is consistent in
simply adopting the conceived point of view of the future
statement, the English departs from the principle which it fol-
lows after past tenses, and follows here the same method as
the Greek.
355. These facts enable us to see that it would be incorrect to say
that the tense of the direct discourse is in Greek determined from the
point of view of the original speaker, in English from the point of view of
the person who makes the quotation. The correct statement is that in
both languages the act is looked at from the point of view of the original
speaker, but that the two languages differ somewhat in their method of
indicating the relation of this point of view to the time of the quotation.
This difference, however, pertains only to quotations whose point of view
is past. Its precise nature has already been stated (354). When the
point of view is present or future the usage of the two languages is
identical.
356. The comparison of English and Greek usage may
be reduced to articulated statement as follows: English usage
is like Greek usage in three respects, and different in two
respects.
142 THE MOODS.
I. It is like Greek in that,
(a) It adapts the person of the.pronouns and verbs of the
original utterance to the point of view of the quoter.
(b) It looks at the act described in the quotation from the
point of view of the original statement.
(c) After a verb of present or future time this point of view
of the original utterance is treated in the quotation as present,
as after verbs of present time it is in fact.
II. It differs from Greek in that,
(a) While it looks at the act from the point of view of the
original statement, if that point of view is past it designates
it as past, using a tense which describes the action from a past
point of view. A Past of the original utterance becomes in
the quotation a Past-past; a Future becomes a Past-future,
etc. This the Greek does not do, having in general no tense
which has this double temporal power.
(b) It does not as a rule change the original mood of the
verb in quotation. Most apparent changes of mood, such as
will to would, are changes of tense. But cf. 352, Rem.
CONSTRUCTION AFTER Kai> e]ge<neto.
357. Clause or Infinitive as the Subject of e]ge>neto.
By a Hebraism kai> e]ge<neto and e]ge<neto, Septuagint ren-
derings of yhiy;va, are used in the New Testament (Matt.,
Mark, Luke, Acts) to introduce a clause or an Infinitive
which is logically the subject of the e]ge<neto. The e]ge<neto
is usually followed by a phrase or clause of time; the event
to be narrated is then expressed by kai< with an Indicative,
or by an Indicative without kai<, or by an Infinitive. It
thus results that the construction takes three forms:
THE INFINITIVE. 143
358. (a) Kai> e]ge<neto, or e]ge<neto de<, and the phrase of time are
followed by kai< with an Indicative.
Luke 5:1; e]ge<neto de> e]n t&? to>n o@xlon e]pikei?sqai au]t&? kai> a]kou<ein
to>n lo<gon tou? qeou? kai> au]to>j h#n e[stw>j para> th>n li<mnhn
Gennhsare<t, now it came to pass, while the multitude pressed upon him
and heard the word of God, that he was standing by the
359. (b) Kai> e]ge<neto, or e]ge<neto de<, and the phrase of time are
followed by an Indicative without kai<.
Mark 1:9 Kai> e]ge<neto e]n e]kei<naij tai?j h[me<raij h#lqen ]Ihsou?j a]po>
Nazare>t th?j Galilai<aj, and it came to pass in those days, that Jesus
came from
360. (c) kai> e]ge<neto, or e]ge<neto de<, and the phrase of time are
followed by an Infinitive, the narrative being continued either
by an Infinitive or an Indicative.
Acts 9:32; e]ge<neto de> Pe<tron dierxo<menon dia> pa<ntwn katelqei?n, and
it came to pass, as Peter went throughout all parts, he came down.
See also Mark 2:23; Luke 6:12. B. pp. 276-278.
THE INFINITIVE.
361. That the Infinitive in Greek had its origin as respects
both form and function in a verbal noun, and chiefly at least in
the dative case of such a noun, is now regarded as an assured
result of comparative grammar. At the time of the earliest
Greek literature, however, the other cases of this verbal noun
had passed out of use, and the dative function of the form that
remained had become so far obscured that, while it still re-
tained the functions appropriate to the dative, it was also used
as an accusative and as a nominative. Beginning with Pindar
it appears with the article, at first as a subject-nominative.
Later it developed also the other cases, accusative, genitive,
and dative. By this process its distinctively dative force was
obscured while the scope of its use was enlarged. In Post-
144 THE MOODS.
Aristotelian Greek, notably in the Septuagint and the New
Testament, another step was taken. The Infinitive with the
article in the genitive began to assume some such prominence
as at a much earlier time the dative had acquired, and as
before, the sense of its case being in some degree lost, this
genitive Infinitive came to be used as a nominative or accusa-
tive. We mark therefore four stages of development. First,
that for which we must go back of the historic period of the
Greek language itself, when the Infinitive was distinctly a
dative case. Second, that which is found in Homer: the Infin-
itive begins to be used as subject or object, though the strictly
dative functions still have a certain prominence, and the arti-
cle is not yet used. Third, that of which the beginnings are
seen in Pindar and which is more fully developed in classical
authors of a later time: the Infinitive without the article,
sometimes with dative functions, sometimes with the force of
other cases, is used side by side with the articular Infinitive
in the nominative, genitive, dative, and accusative singular.
Fourth, that which appears in the Septuagint and the New
Testament: all the usages found in the third stage still con-
tinuing, the Infinitive with the article in the genitive begins
to lose the sense of its genitive function and to be employed
as a nominative or accusative.
From the earliest historic period of the Greek language the
Infinitive partakes of the characteristics both of the verb and
the noun. As a verb it has a subject more or less definite, and
expressed or implied, and takes the adverbial and objective
limitations appropriate to a verb. As a noun it fills the office
in the sentence appropriate to its case. Many of these case-
functions are identical with those which belong to other sub-
stantives; some are peculiar to the Infinitive.
REM. Concerning the history of the Infinitive, see G.MT. 742, 788;
Gild. in T.A.P.A. 1878, and in A.J.P. III. pp. 193 ff.; IV. pp. 241 ff.,
THE INFINITIVE. 145
pp. 418 fl.; VIII. p. 329; Birklein, Entwickelungsgeschichte des sub-
stantivierten Infinitivs, in Schanz, Beitrage zur historischen Syntax der
griechischen Sprache, Heft 7.
362. In the Greek of the classical and later periods, the functions of
the Infinitive as an element of the sentence are very various. They may
be classified logically as follows:
II. As A SUBSTANTIVE ELEMENT.
(1) As subject (384, 385, 390, 393, 404).
(2) As object in indirect discourse (390).
(3) As object after verbs of exhorting, striving, promising,
hoping, etc. (387-389, 391, 394, 404).
(4) As object after verbs that take a genitive (401-403).
III. As AN ADJECTIVE ELEMENT.
(1) As appositive (386, 395).
(2) Expressing other adnominal limitations (378, 379, 400).
IV. As AN ADVERBIAL ELEMENT, denoting,
(1) Purpose (366, 367, 370 (d), 371 (d), 372, 397).
(2) Indirect object (368).
(3) Result (369-371, 398).
(4) Measure or degree (after adjectives and adverbs) (376,399).
(5) Manner, means, cause, or respect (375, 377,396).
(6) A modal modification of an assertion (383).
The articular Infinitive governed by a preposition (406-417) expresses
various adverbial relations, the precise nature of which is determined by
the meaning of the preposition employed. Similarly pri<n or pri>n h@ with
the Infinitive (380-382) constitutes an adverbial phrase of time, the
temporal idea lying in pri<n rather than in the Infinitive.
363. To arrange the treatment of the Infinitive on the basis of such a
logical classification as that given above (362) would, however, disregard
the historical order of development and to some extent obscure the point
of view from which the Greek language looked at the Infinitive. It seems
better, therefore, to begin with those uses of the Infinitive which are most
evidently connected with the original dative function, and proceed to
those in which the dative force is vanishing or lost. This is the general
plan pursued in the following sections, though it is by no means affirmed
that in details the precise order of historical development has been
followed.
146 THE MOODS.
THE INFINITIVE WITHOUT THE ARTICLE.
364. The Imperative Infinitive. The Infinitive with-
out the article is occasionally used to express a command
or exhortation. This is the only use of the Infinitive as a
principal verb. It is of ancient origin, being especially
frequent in Homer. HA. 957; G. 1536.
The New Testament furnishes but one certain instance
of this usage.
Phil. 3:16; plh>n ei]j o
we have attained, by the same rule walk.
365. Rom. 12:15 affords another probable instance of the imperative
use of the Infinitive. Buttmann supposes an ellipsis of le<gw, and Winer
a change of construction by which the writer returns from the independ-
ent Imperatives used in v.14 to the construction of an Infinitive dependent
on le<gw employed in v. 3. This explanation of change of construction
probably applies in Mark 6:9 (cf. the even more abrupt change in
Mark 5:23); but in Rom. ch. 12 the remoteness of the verb le<gw (in v.
3) from the Infinitive (in v. 15) makes the dependence of the latter upon
the former improbable. B. pp. 271 f.; WM. pp. 397 f.; WT. 316.
366. The Infinitive of Purpose. The Infinitive is used
to express the purpose of the action or state denoted by
the principal verb. HA. 951; G. 1532.
Matt. 5:17; mh> nomi<shte o!ti h#lqon katalu?sai to>n no<mon h} tou>j pro-
fh<taj: ou]k h@lqon katalu?sai a]lla> plhrw?sai, think not that I came
to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil.
Luke 18:10; a@nqrwpoi du<o a]ne<bhsan ei]j to> i[ero>n proseu<casqai, two
men went up into the temple to pray.
Acts 10:33; nu?n ou#n pa<ntej h[mei?j e]nw<pion tou? qeou? pa<resmen a]kou?sai
pa<nta ta> prostetagme<na soi u[po> tou? kuri<ou, now therefore we are
all here present in the sight of God, to hear all things that have been
commanded thee of the Lord.
367. The Infinitive expressing purpose is sometimes intro-
duced by w!ste or w[j. See 370 (d), 371 (d), 372.
THE INFINITIVE WITHOUT THE ARTICLE. 147
368. THE INFINITIVE AS AN INDIRECT OBJECT. Closely
akin to the Infinitive of Purpose is the Infinitive of the indi-
rect object. The former is a supplementary addition to a
statement in itself complete, and expresses the purpose had in
view in the doing of the action or the maintenance of the state.
The Infinitive of the indirect object on the other hand is a
complementary limitation of a verb, expressing the direct ten-
dency of the action denoted by the principal verb, or other
similar dative relation. Some of the instances of this usage
are scarcely to be distinguished from the Infinitive of Purpose,
while in others the distinction is clearly marked.
Luke 10:40; Ku<rie, ou] me<lei soi o!ti h[ a]delfh< mou mo<nhn me kate<leipen
diakonei?n, Lord, dost thou not care that my sister has left me to serve
alone?
Acts 17:21; ]Aqhnai?oi de> pa<ntej kai> oi[ e]pidhmou?ntej ce<noi ei]j ou]de>n
e!teron hu]kai<roun h} a]kou<ein ti kaino<teron, now all the
Athenians and the strangers sojourning there spent their time in nothing
else than either to tell or to hear some new thing. See also Mark 4:23;
6:31; 10:40; Luke 7:40; 12:4; Acts 4:14; 7:42; 23:17, 18, 19;
25:26; Tit. 2:8.
369. The Infinitive of Result. The Infinitive may be
used to denote the result of the action expressed by the
principal verb. When so used it is usually introduced by
w!ste. HA. 953; G. 1449.
Mark 4:37; kai> ta> ku<mata e]pe<ballen ei]j to> ploi?on, w!ste h@dh gemi<-
zesqai to> ploi?on, and the waves beat into the boat, insomuch that the
boat was now filling.
1 Thess. 1:8; e]n panti> to<p& h[ pi<stij u[mw?n h[ pro>j to>n qeo>n e]celh<-
luqen, w!ste mh> xrei<an e@xein h[ma?j lalei?n ti, in every place your
faith to God-ward is gone forth, so that we need not to speak anything.
370. Under the general head of expressions of result it is
necessary to distinguish three different conceptions:
(a) Actual result, conceived of and affirmed as actual; in this
case classical Greek uses w!ste with the Indicative. See 236.
148 THE MOODS.
(b) Tendency or conceived result which it is implied is an
actual result. In this case the result is thought of as that
which the action of the principal verb is adapted or sufficient
to produce, and it is the context or the nature of the case only
which shows that this result is actually produced. In this
case classical Greek uses w!ste with the Infinitive.
(c) Tendency or conceived result thought of and affirmed
simply as such. In this case the result is one which the
action of the principal verb is adapted or sufficient to
produce, though the actual production is either left in doubt,
or is indicated by the context not to have taken place. Clas-
sical Greek employs w!ste with the Infinitive (in Homer the
Infinitive without w!ste).
To these three may be added as a closely related conception
which the Greek also expressed by w!ste with the Infinitive:
(d) Purpose, i.e. intended result.
The constructions by which these several shades of meaning
are expressed are substantially the same in the New Testament
as in classical Greek, except that the construction appropriate
to the second meaning has apparently encroached upon the
realm of the first meaning, and the line of distinction between
them has become correspondingly indistinct. !Wste with the
Indicative occurs very rarely except with the meaning there-
fore, introducing a principal clause; and this fact, together
with the large number of instances in which w!ste with the
Infinitive is used of a result evidently actual, makes it probable
that the use of w!ste with the Infinitive is no longer restricted,
as in classical Greek, to instances in which the result is thought
of as theoretical, but is used also of result in fact and in
thought actual. Cf. G.MT. 582-584. There remain, however,
instances entirely similar to those found in classical Greek, in
which a result shown by the context to be actual is apparently
THE INFINITIVE WITHOUT THE ARTICLE. 149
presented simply as one which the event previously expressed
tends to produce. Between these two classes it is evidently
impossible to draw a sharp line of distinction. Oases of the
third class are expressed in the New Testament by the Infini-
tive with or without w!ste. Cf. also 218 and 398.
371. The following examples illustrate New Testament
usage:
(a). Actual result conceived and affirmed as such.
Indicative after w!ste.
John 3:16; ou!twj ga>r h]ga<phsen o[ qeo>j to>n ko<smon w!ste to>n ui[o>n
to>n monogenh? e@dwken, for God so loved the world that he gave his only
begotten Son.
Infinitive after w!ste.
Mark 9:26; e]ge<neto w[sei> nekro>j w!ste tou>j pollou>j le<gein o!ti a]pe<-
qanen, he became as one dead; insomuch that the more part said that
he was dead.
(b) Tendency, by implication realized in actual result. In-
finitive, usually after w!ste.
Luke 12:1; e]n oi$j e]pisunaxqeisw?n tw?n muria<dwn tou? o@xlou, w!ste
katapatei?n a]llh<louj, in the meantime, when the many thousands of the
multitude were gathered together, so as to tread one upon another.
Rev. 5:5; i]dou> e]ni<khsen o[ le<wn o[ e]k th?j fulh?j ]Iou<da, h[ r[i<za Dauei<d,
a]noi?cai to> bibli<on, behold the lion that is of the tribe of
Root of David, hath overcome, to open the book. See also Acts 1:25;
2 Cor. 1:8; 2 Thess. 2:4.
(c) Tendency or conceived result thought of as such. In-
finitive, usually after w!ste.
1 Cor. 13:2; ka}n e@xw pa?san th>n pi<stin w!ste o@rh meqista<nein, and if
I have all faith, so as to remove mountains.
Matt. 10:1; e@dwken au]toi?j e]cousi<an pneuma<twn a]kaqa<rtwn w!ste e]k-
ba<llein au]ta<, he gave them authority over unclean spirits to cast them
out. Here probably belongs also Rom. 1:10. See also 2 Cor. 2:7;
Rev. 16:9.
150 THE MOODS.
REM. The Infinitive in Heb. 6:10, ou] ga>r a@dikoj o[ qeo>j e]pilaqe<sqai,
must also be accounted an Infinitive of conceived result. The origin of
this idiom may be an impersonal construction (cf. G.MT. 762), but it
has departed in meaning as well as in form from its original. The mean-
ing of this sentence is not, It would not be unjust for God to forget, but,
God is not unjust so as to forget.
(d) Purpose, i.e. intended result.
Luke
krhmni<sai au]to<n, and they led him unto the brow of the hill that
they might throw him down headlong. See also Luke 20:20.
REM. In Matt. 27:1, w!ste with the Infinitive stands in definitive appo-
sition with sumbou<lion, defining the content of the plan, rather than ex-
pressing the purpose of making it.
372. The Infinitive is used with w[j in Luke 9:52 according to the
reading adopted by WH. (most editors read w!ste) and in Acts 20:24
according to,the generally adopted reading (WH. read a Subjunctive).
In both cases the phrase denotes purpose. No instance of w[j with the
Infinitive denoting result occurs in the New Testament. See Th. w[j, III.,
and references cited there, and cf. G. 1456. In 2 Cor. 10:9 w[j a@n is used
with the Infinitive. This usage also occurs rarely in classical and later
Greek. See Alf. ad loc. and Gr. p. 230. The phrase is elliptical, the In-
finitive most probably expressing purpose and w[j a!n modifying it in the
sense of quasi. WM. p. 390; WT. p. 310.
373. In the New Testament the Infinitive is not used either with w!ste
or e]f ] &$ or e]f ] &$te in the sense on condition that. HA. 953, b; G.
1453, 1460.
374. The classical usage of an Infinitive (of conceived result) with h@,
or h} w!ste, or h} w[j, after a comparative, does not occur in the New Testa-
ment. The Infinitive after h@ in the New Testament is used as the correla-
tive of some preceding word or phrase, and usually as a nominative. See
Luke 18:25; Acts 20:35. On Acts
375. Somewhat akin in force to the Infinitive of (conceived)
result, but probably of Hebraistic origin, is the Infinitive used
to define more closely the content of the action denoted by a
previous verb or noun. Cf. Hr. 29, 3, e.
THE INFINITIVE WITHOUT THE ARTICLE. 151
Acts
tra<xhlon tw?n maqhtw?n, now therefore why tempt ye God, that ye
should put (i.e. by putting, or in that ye put) a yoke upon the neck
of the disciples? Cf. Ps. 78:18 (Hebrew).
Heb. 5:5; ou!twj kai> o[ xristo>j ou]x e[auto>n e]do<casen genhqh?nai
a]rxiere<a, so Christ also glorified not himself to be made a high priest.
See also Luke
39, 40. See Ryle and James, Ps. Sol. p. lxxxiii.
376. The Infinitive limiting Adjectives and Adverbs.
The Infinitive is used with adjectives and adverbs of abil-
ity, fitness, readiness, etc., to denote that which one is or is
not able, fit, or ready to do. HA. 952; G. 1526.
Mark 1:7; ou$ ou]k ei]mi> i[kano>j ku<yaj lu?sai to>n i[ma<nta tw?n u[podhma<twn
au]tou?, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and
unloose.
2 Tim. 2:2; oi!tinej i[kanoi> e@sontai kai> e[te<rouj dida<cai, who shall be able
to teach others also.
Rev. 4:11; a@cioj ei#, o[ ku<rioj kai> o[ qeo>j h[mw?n, labei?n th>n do<can kai>
th>n timh>n kai> th>n du<namin, worthy art thou, our Lord and our God, to
receive the glory and the honor and the power. See also Luke 14: 31
2 Cor. 12:14.
377. The Infinitive may be used after any adjective to limit
its application to a particular action. HA. 952; G. 1528.
Heb.
of whom we have many things to say, and hard of interpretation--a
felicitous free translation. More literally it would read, concerning
whom our discourse is much, and hard of interpretation to state, i.e.
hard to state intelligibly.
378. The Infinitive limiting Nouns. The Infinitive is
used with abstract nouns of ability, authority, need, hope,
etc., to denote that which one has, or has not, ability,
authority, need, etc., to do. Here may also be included
152 THE MOODS.
the Infinitive after w!ra, which implies a necessity. HA.
952; G. 1521.
Matt.
baptized of thee.
John
he the right to become children of God.
Rom.
e]gerqh?nai, and this, knowing the season, that now it is high time for you
to awake out of sleep. See also 2 Cor. 10:15; Rev. 9:10.
379. The Infinitive is also occasionally used after con-
crete nouns cognate with verbs which take an object In-
finitive.
Gal. 5:3; o]feile<thj e]sti>n o!lon to>n no<mon poih?sai, he is a debtor to
do the whole law.
380. The Infinitive is used after pri<n or pri>n h@. HA.
955; G. 1469-1474.
Mark
the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice.
John
down ere my child die.
381. The use of h@ after pri<n, which occurs twice in the Iliad, fre-
quently in Herodotus, and rarely in Attic writers, is well attested in three
of the thirteen instances in the New Testament in which pri<n is used
with the Infinitive, and occurs as a variant in other passages. G.1474.
382. As respects the mood which follows pri<n or pri>n h@, New Testa-
ment usage is the same as that of Post-Homeric Greek in general, in that
the Infinitive is generally (in the New Testament invariably) used when
the leading clause is affirmative; the Subjunctive and Optative occur only
after a negative leading clause. The Indicative after pri<n which some-
times occurs in classical Greek, chiefly after a negative leading clause, is
not found in the New Testament. HA. 924, a; G. 1470.
THE INFINITIVE WITHOUT THE ARTICLE. 153
383. The Infinitjve used absolutely in a parenthetic clause
occurs but once in the New Testament. HA. 956; G. 1534.
Heb. 7:9 w[j e@poj ei]
384. The Infinitive as Subject. The Infinitive may
be used as the subject of a finite verb. HA. 949, 959;
G.1517.
Matt.
for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness.
Luke
ei]selqei?n, for it is easier for a camel to enter in through a needle's eye.
See also Mark 3:4; Luke
385. The Infinitive with subject accusative sometimes
stands as the subject of an impersonal verb (dokei?, etc.). Fre-
quently, however, the personal construction is employed, that
which is properly the subject of the Infinitive being put in the
nominative as the subject of the principal verb. But the logi-
cal relation is the same in either case. HA. 944.
In the New Testament the personal construction is regularly
employed with dokei?.
Acts
a setter forth of strange gods. See also Gal. 2:9; Jas. 1:26, etc.
REM. Concerning the Infinitive as subject of e]ge<neto, see 357, 360.
386. The Infinitive as Appositive. The Infinitive may
stand in apposition with a noun or pronoun. HA. 950;
G.1517.
Jas.
ske<ptesqai o]rfanou>j kai> xh<raj e]n t^? qli<yei au]tw?n, pure religion
and undefiled. . . is this, to visit orphans and widows in their afflic-
tion. See also Acts 15:28; 1 Thess. 4:3.
387. The Infinitive as Object. The Infinitive may be
used as the object of a verb. The verbs which are thus
154 THE MOODS.
limited by an Infinitive are in part such as take a noun or
pronoun in the accusative as object, in part such as take a
noun or pronoun in the genitive as object, in part verbs
which cannot take a noun or pronoun as object but require
an Infinitive to complete their meaning. HA. 948; G.
1518, 1519.
Matt.
suffer the little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me.
Mark
on him.
Luke 16:3; ska<ptein ou]k i]sxu<w, e]paitei?n ai]sxu<nomai, I have not strength
to dig; to beg I am ashamed.
Heb.7:25; o!qen kai> sw<zein ei]j to> pantele>j du<natai, wherefore also he
is able to save to the uttermost. See also Matt. 1:19; John 5:18;
Rom. 14:2; Gal. 3:2, et freq.
388. The Infinitive xai<rein in salutations is to be regarded
as the object of an unexpressed verb of bidding.
Acts
Claudius Lysias unto the most excellent governor Felix, greeting.
Jas. 1:1; ]Ia<kwboj . . .tai?j dw<deka fulai?j tai?j e]n t^? diaspor%?
xai<rein, James. . . to the twelve tribes which are of the Dispersion,
greeting.
389. The verbal idea governing the Infinitive is sometimes implied
rather than expressed. The Infinitive tekei?n in Rev. 12:2 is doubtless an
object Infinitive governed by the idea of desire implied in the preceding
participles. The Infinitive yeu<sasqai in Acts 5:3 may be regarded as an
object Infinitive governed by the idea of persuading implied in e]plh<rwsen
th>n kardi<an, or as an Infinitive of conceived result. Cf. 370 (c).
390. The Infinitive in Indirect Discourse. The Infini-
tive is frequently used in the indirect quotation of asser-
tions. It is usually the object of a verb of saying or of
thinking, or the subject of such a verb in the passive
voice. HA. 946; G. 1522.
THE INFINITIVE WITH THE ARTICLE. 155
Mark
no resurrection.
John
bibli<a, I suppose that even the world itself will not contain the books
that will be written.
Heb. 11:5; pro> ga>r th?j metaqe<sewj memartu<rhtai eu]aresthke<nai t&?
qe&?, for before his translation he had witness borne to him that he
had been well-pleasing unto God. See also Luke
24:46 (?); John
1 John 2:9.
REM. 1. Respecting the force of the tenses of the Infinitive in indirect
discourse, see 110-114.
REM. 2. Respecting the use of negatives with the Infinitive in indirect
discourse, see 480-482.
391. The Infinitive occurs frequently as object after verbs
of hoping, promising, swearing, and commanding, with a force
closely akin to that of the Infinitive in indirect discourse.
Such instances are not, however, usually included under that
head. Cf. 337, and G.MT. 684.
THE INFINITIVE WITH THE ARTICLE.
392. The prefixing of the article to the Infinitive tends to
the obscuring of its original dative force, while it emphasizes
its new substantive character as a noun which can be used in
any case. Some of the uses of the Infinitive with the article
differ from those without the article only by the greater em-
phasis on the substantive character of the form. This is the
case with its use as subject and object. Others express nearly
the same relations which were expressed by the Infinitive
without the article, but with a different thought of the case-
relation involved. Thus the use of the Infinitive without the
article after adjectives of fitness, worthiness, etc., doubtless
156 THE MOODS.
sprang originally from the thought of the Infinitive as a dative.
The Infinitive with the article after such adjectives is thought
of as a genitive, as is evident from the use of the article tou?.
The difference in meaning is, however, very slight. Compare
the English worthy to receive and worthy of receiving. Still
other uses of the Infinitive with the article are wholly new,
being developed only after the Infinitive had begun to be used
with the article. To this class belongs the use of the Infini-
tive after prepositions.
REM. The Infinitive with the article being by means of that article
practically a declinable noun, the various uses are grouped in the follow-
ing sections according to cases.
393. The Infinitive with to< as Subject. The Infinitive
with the article to< is used as the subject of a finite verb.
HA. 959; G.1542.
Matt.
but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not the man. See also Matt.
394. The Infinitive with to< as Object. The Infinitive
with the article to< is used as the object of a transitive
verb. This usage is far less common than the object
Infinitive without the article. HA. 959; G.1543.
Acts 25:11; ou] paraitou?mai to> a]poqanei?n, I refuse not to die. See
also 2 Cor. 8:11; Phil. 2:6.
395. The Infinitive with the Article, in Apposition.
The Infinitive with the article may stand in apposition with
a preceding noun or pronoun.
Rom.
mati au]tou? to> klhrono<mon au]to>n ei#nai ko<smou, for not through the
law was the promise to Abraham or to his seed, that he should be heir
of the world.
THE INFINITIVE WITH THE ARTICLE. 157
2 Cor. 2:1; e@krina ga>r e]maut&? tou?to, to> mh> pa<lin e]n lu<p^ pro>j u[ma?j
e]lqei?n, for I determined this for myself that I would not come again to
you with sorrow. See also Rom.
396. The Infinitive with t&?. The Infinitive with the
article t&? is used in classical Greek to express cause, man-
ner, means. In the New Testament it is used to express
cause. Its only other use is after the preposition e]n. HA.
959; G. 1547.
2 Cor.
not Titus my brother.
397. The Infinitive of Purpose with tou?. The Infini-
tive with the article tou? is used to express the purpose of
the action or state denoted by the principal verb. HA.
960; G. 1548.
Matt.
for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him. See also Matt.
24: 45; Luke 2 : 24, 27; Acts 26 : 18; Phil. 3 : 10.
REM. That the Infinitive with tou? expresses purpose with substan-
tially the same force as the simple Infinitive appears from the joining of
the two together by kai<.
Luke
kuri<&, . . . kai> tou? dou?nai qusi<an, they brought him up to
present him to the Lord, and to offer a sacrifice. Cf. also Luke 1:76,
77; 1:79.
398. The Infinitive of Result with tou?. The Infinitive
with the article tou? is occasionally used in the New Tes-
tament to express conceived result. Cf. 218 and 369-371.
Matt.
sai au]t&?, and ye, when ye saw it, did not even repent afterward,
so as to believe him. See also Acts
Acts 18:10; cf. Gen. 3:22;
158 THE MOODS.
REM. Meyer takes the Infinitive phrase tou? mh> ei#nai in Rom. 7:3 as
expressing a divine purpose, and adds that tou? with the Infinitive never
expresses result, not even in Acts 7:19. But this is grammatical purism
not justified by the evidence. The uniformly telic force of tou? with the
Infinitive can be maintained only by evasive definition or forced inter-
pretation.
399. The Infinitive with tou? after Adjectives. The
Infinitive with the article tou? is used with such adjectives
as may be limited by a simple Infinitive. HA. 959; G.
1547. Cf. 376.
Acts
See also Luke 24:25.
400. The Infinitive with tou? after Nouns. The Infini-
tive with the article tou? is used to limit nouns. The rela-
tions thus expressed are very various and are not always
easy to define exactly. Instances occur not only, as in
classical Greek, of the objective genitive, but also of the
genitive of characteristic, the genitive of connection, and
the appositional genitive. HA. 959; G. 1547.
Heb.
that some one teach you.
Luke
and when eight days were fulfilled for circumcising him.
mh> ble<pein kai> w#ta tou? mh> a]kou<ein, God gave them a spirit of stupor,
eyes that see not, and ears that hear not. See also Luke
2:6;
l Cor.
401. The Infinitive with tou? after Verbs that take the
Genitive. The Infinitive with tou? is used as the object of
verbs which take a noun in the genitive as object, especially
of verbs of hindering, etc. HA. 959, 963; G. 1547, 1549.
THE INFINITIVE WITH THE ARTICLE. 159
Luke 1:9; e@laxe tou? qumia?sai, it was his lot (prop. he obtained by lot)
to burn incense.
2 Cor. 1:8; w!ste e]caporhqh?nai h[ma?j kai> tou? z^?n, insomuch that we de-
spaired even of life.
Rom.
wherefore also I was hindered these many times from coming to you.
Cf. Gen. 34:19; Ps. Sol. 2:28, 29.
402. In classical Greek, verbs of hindering are followed by
three constructions, (a) Infinitive without the article, (b) In-
finitive with tou?, (c) Infinitive with to<. Mh< may be used or
omitted with the Infinitive without difference of meaning.
HA. 963; G. 1549, 1551; G.MT. 791 (exx.). In the New
Testament, all these constructions occur except that with to> mh<.
See Matt.
Acts
403. The Infinitive with tou? mh< after verbs of hindering is closely akin
to the Infinitive of Result. Cf. Luke 24:16; Acts 14:18.
REM. Meyer's interpretation of tou? mh> e]pignw?nai au]to<n Luke 24:16
as expressing a divine purpose (the English translation does not correctly
represent the meaning of the German original), is not required by New
Testament usage. The Greek most naturally means, Their eyes were
held from knowing him. Cf. 398, Rem.
404. The Infinitive with tou? as Subject or Object.
The Infinitive with tou? is used even as the subject of a
finite verb or as the object of transitive verbs which regu-
larly take a direct object. This is a wide departure from
classical usage, and indicates that the sense of the genitive
character of the article tou? before the Infinitive was partly
lost in later Greek. B. p. 270; WM. pp. 411 f.; WT. pp. 327 f.
Acts 27:1; e]kri<qh tou? a]poplei?n h[ma?j ei]j th>n ]Itali<an, it was determined
that we should sail for
1 Macc. 3:15.
160 THE MOODS.
405. The origin of this use of the Infinitive with tou? is perhaps in such
usages as appear in Luke 17:1; 1 Cor. 16:4; and still more in such as
that in Luke 4:10. In Luke 17:1 the genitive is apparently suggested
by the idea of hindering or avoiding in the adjective a]ne<ndekton; in
1 Cor. 16:4 it is the adjective a@cion which gives occasion to the genitive;
but in both cases the Infinitive seems to be logically the subject of the
copulative verb, the adjective being the predicate. Whether this con-
struction represents the thought in the mind of the writer, or whether
the expression is rather to be regarded as an impersonal one, the Infini-
tive being dependent on the predicate adjective, cannot with confidence
be decided. Such usages as Luke
origin to the same mental process by which a clause introduced by i!na
came to stand as the object of a verb of exhorting. Ps. Sol.
pared with Luke 12:45 is also suggestive. It is doubtless the idea of
hindering in xroni<zw that gives rise to the genitive in the former passage;
in the latter the Infinitive is a direct object.
406. The Infinitive with the Article governed by
Prepositions. The Infinitive with the article to<, tou?, t&?
is governed by prepositions. HA. 959; G.1546.
The prepositions so used in the New Testament are:
with the accusative, dia<, ei]j, meta< pro<j; with the genitive,
a]nti<, dia<, e]k, e!neken, e!wj, pro<; with the dative, e]n.
Mark 4:6; kai> dia> to> mh> e@xein r[i<zan e]chra<nqh, and because it had no
root, it withered away.
1 Thess. 3:5; e@pemya ei]j to> gnw?nai th>n pi<stin u[mw?n, I sent that I might
know your faith.
Mark
lai<an, howbeit, after I am raised up, 1 will go before you into Galilee.
Matt. 6:1; prose<xete [de>] th>n dikaiosu<nhn u[mw?n mh> poiei?n e@mprosqen
tw?n a]nqrw<pwn pro>j to> qeaqh?nai au]toi?j, take heed that ye do not
your righteousness before men, to be seen of them.
Gal.
before faith came, we were kept in ward under the law.
Luke 24:51; kai> e]ge<neto e]n t&? eu]logei?n au]to>n au]tou>j die<sth a]p ]
au]tw?n, and it came to pass, while he blessed them, he parted from them.
407. These prepositions vary greatly in frequency in the
New Testament. Ei]j occurs with the Infinitive 63 times
THE INFINITIVE WITH THE ARTICLE. 161
(Infinitives 72); e]n 52 times (Infinitives 56); dia< with the
Accusative 27 times (Infinitives 31); meta< 15 times; pro<j 12
times; pro< 9 times; each of the others once (WH. text). See
Votaw, Infinitive in Biblical Greek, p. 20; cf. G.MT. 800-802.
408. Dia< governing the Infinitive with to< denotes cause, and is nearly
equivalent to o!ti or dio<ti with the Indicative, differing in that the Infini-
tive gives in itself no indication of the time of the action.
Jas. 4:2, 3; ou]k e@xete dia> to> mh> ai]tei?sqai u[ma?j: ai]tei?te kai> ou] lam-
ba<nete, dio<ti kakw?j ai]tei?sqe, ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye
ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss.
In Mark 5:4 dia< with the Infinitive expresses the evidence rather than
the cause strictly so called.
409. Ei]j governing the Infinitive with to< most commonly expresses
purpose. It is employed with special frequency by Paul, but occurs also
in Heb., 1 Pet., and Jas.
Rom.
tou? ui[ou? au]tou?, ei]j to> ei#nai au]to>n prwto<tokon e]n polloi?j
a]delfoi?j, for whom he foreknew, he also foreordained to be conformed to
the image of his Son, that he might be the first-born among many brethren.
See also Rom.
1 Pet. 3:7.
410. Ei]j with the Infinitive is also used, like the simple Infinitive, to
represent an indirect object. Cf. 368.
1 Cor.
have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? See also Matt. 20:19;
26:2.
411. Ei]j with the Infinitive also expresses tendency, measure of effect,
or result, conceived or actual.
Heb. 11:3; pi<stei noou?men kathrti<sqai tou>j ai]w?naj r[h<mati qeou?, ei]j
to> mh> e]k fainome<nwn to> blepo<menon gegone<nai, by faith we under-
stand that the worlds have been framed by the word of God, so that
what is seen hath not been made out of things which do appear. See
also Rom. 12:3; 2 Cor. 8:6; Gal. 3:17; 1 Thess. 2:16.
162 THE MOODS.
Ei]j to> e]sqi<ein in 1 Cor.8:10 either expresses measure of effect or is the
indirect object of oi]kodomhqh<setai. Ei]j to> ei#nai au]tou>j a]napologh<touj in
Rom.
for the causal clause which follows. This clause could be joined to an
expression of purpose only by supposing an ellipsis of some such expres-
sion as kai> ou!twj ei]si<n, and seems therefore to require that ei]j to> ei#nai be
interpreted as expressing result.
REM. Meyer's dictum (see on Rom.
Infinitive is always telic, is, like his similar dictum respecting tou? with
the Infinitive, a case of grammatical purism, not justified by the evidence.
412. Ei]j with the Infinitive is also used, like i!na with the Subjunctive,
or the simple Infinitive, as the direct object of verbs of exhorting, etc.
1 Thess. 2:12; 3:10; 2 Thess. 2:2.
413. Ei]j with the Infinitive is still further used, like the simple Infini-
tive, to limit an adjective, as in Jas.
414. Pro<j governing the Infinitive with to< usually expresses purpose;
it is occasionally used with the sense, with reference to.
Matt. 6:1; prose<xete [de>] th>n dikaiosu<nhn u[mw?n mh> poiei?n e@mprosqen
tw?n a]nqrw<pwn pro>j to> qeaqh?nai au]toi?j, but take heed that ye do not
your righteousness before men, to be seen of them.
Matt. 26:12; balou?sa ga>r au!th to> mu<ron tou?to e]pi> tou? sw<mato<j mou
pro>j to> e]ntafia<sai me e]poi<hsen, for in that she poured this ointment
upon my body, she did it to prepare me for burial. See also Matt.
(reference).
415. ]En governing the Infinitive with t&? is most commonly temporal,
but occasionally expresses other relations, such as manner, means, or
content. This construction is especially frequent in Luke and Acts.
Luke 8:5; kai> e]n t&? spei<rein au]to>n o{ me>n e@pesen para> th>n o[do<n, and
as he sowed, some fell by the way side.
Acts
au]to>n eu]logou?nta u[ma?j e]n t&? a]postre<fein e!kaston a]po> tw?n
ponhriw?n [u[mw?n], unto you first God, having raised up his Servant, sent
him to bless you, in turning away everyone of you from your iniquities.
See also Luke 1:8; Acts 9:3;
Luke 12:15; Acts 4:30; Heb. 2:8;
THE PARTICIPLE. 163
416. The force of the other prepositions used with the Infinitive
scarcely needs special definition, the meaning of each being in general
the same as that of the same preposition governing nouns. Respecting
the force of the tenses after prepositions, see 104-109.
417. Concerning the Infinitive without the article governed by prepo-
sitions, see G.MT. 803, and cf. Gen. 10:19. The Infinitive gi<nesqai in
Acts
governed by the preposition e]n. It is however not strictly without the
article, the t&?? which precedes e]ktei<nein belonging in effect also to gi<nesqai.
THE PARTICIPLE.
418. The Participle is a verbal adjective, sharing in part
the characteristics of both the verb and the adjective. As a
verb it has both tense functions and functions which may be
designated as modal functions, being analogous to those which
in the case of verbs in the Indicative, Subjunctive, or Optative
belong to the mood. For the proper understanding of a par-
ticiple, therefore, it is necessary to consider (a) The grammat-
ical agreement, (b) The use of the tense, and (c) The logical
force or modal function. The first and second of these have
already been treated, grammatical agreement in 116, the uses
of the tenses in 118-156. It remains to consider the logical
force or modal function of the participle. From the point of
view of the interpreter this is usually the matter of most
importance.
419. In respect to logical force, participles may be classified
as Adjective, Adverbial, and Substantive.
REM. 1. The terminology here employed for the classification of parti-
ciples differs somewhat from that commonly employed. It is adopted
substantially from the article of Professor Wm. Arnold Stevens, "On
the Substantive Use of the Greek Participle" in T.A.P.A. 1872. The
Adjective Participle corresponds nearly to the Attributive Participle
164 THE MOODS.
as treated in G. and HA., the Adverbial Participle to the Circum-
stantial Participle, and the Substantive Participle to the Supplementary
Participle.
REM. 2. Respecting the use of the negatives mh< and ou] with partici-
ples, see 485.
THE ADJECTIVE PARTICIPLE.
420. The Adjective Participle limits its subject directly
and exclusively. It attributes the action which it denotes
to the subject as a quality or characteristic, or assigns the
subject to the class marked by that action. HA. 965; G.
1559.
Acts 10:1, 2; a]nh>r de< tij e]n Kaisari<% o]no<mati Kornh<lioj, e[katonta<r-
xhj e]k spei<rhj th?j kaloume<nhj ]Italikh?j, eu]sebh>j kai>
fobou<menoj to>n qeo>n su>n panti> t&? oi@k& au]tou?, poiw?n
e]lehmosu<naj polla>j t&? la&? kai> deo<menoj tou? qeou? dia> panto<j, now there was a certain man in Cresarea, Cornelius by name, a centurion
of a band called the Italian band, a devout man and one that feared God with all his house, who gave much alms to the people and prayed to God alway. The four participles in this sentence are all Adjective Participles, de-
scribing their subject. This is especially clear in the case of fobou<-
menoj, which is joined by kai< to the adjective eu]sebh<j. For other
similar examples see
under the following sections.
421. The Adjective Participle may be used attributively or
predicatively. When used attributively it may be either re-
strictive or explanatory.
422. The Restrictive Attributive Participle. An at-
tributive Adjective Participle may be used to define or
identify its subject, pointing out what person or thing is
meant. It is then equivalent to a restrictive relative clause.
Cf. 295.
THE ADJECTIVE PARTICIPLE. 165
John
the bread which cometh down out of heaven.
Jude 17; mnh<sqhte tw?n r[hma<twn tw?n proerhme<nwn u[po> tw?n a]po-
sto<lwn tou? kuri<ou h[mw?n ]Ihsou? Xristou?, remember the words which
have been spoken before by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ.
423. The subject of the Restrictive Attributive Participle is
often omitted. The participle is then an Adjective Participle
used substantively. Such a participle usually has the article,
but not invariably. HA. 966; G. 1560.
Matt.
he that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me.
Acts
gunaikw?n, believers were added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and
women.
Acts
dikaiosu<nhn dekto>j au]t&? e]sti<n, but in every nation he that feareth
him, and worketh righteousness, is acceptable to him.
Rev. 1:3; maka<rioj o[ a]naginw<skwn kai> oi[ a]kou<ontej tou>j lo<gouj th?j
profhtei<aj kai> throu?ntej ta> e]n au]t^? gegramme<na, blessed is he
that readeth, and they that hear the words of the prophecy, and keep the
things which are written therein.
424. A noun without the article, or an indefinite pronoun, is
sometimes limited by a participle with the article. The article
in this case does not make the noun strictly definite. The
person or thing referred to is placed within the class charac-
terized bythe action denoted by the participle, and the atten-
tion is directed to some one or to certain ones of that class,
who are not, however, more specifically identified. Nearly the
same meaning is expressed by a participle without the article,
or on the other hand by a relative clause limiting an indefinite
substantive. For classical examples of this usage see WM. p.
136; WT. pp. 109 f.
Col. 2:8; ble<pete mh< tij u[ma?j e@stai o[ sulagagw?n dia> th?j filoso-
fi<aj, take heed lest there shall be anyone that maketh spoil of you
through his philosophy. See also Acts
166 THE MOODS.
425. A neuter participle with the article is sometimes
equivalent to an abstract noun. It is then limited by a geni-
tive like any other abstract noun. HA. 966, b.; G.1562.
Phil. 3:8; dia> to> u[pere<xon th?j gnw<sewj Xristou? ]Ihsou? tou? kuri<ou
mou, because of the excellency [superiority] of the knowledge of Christ
Jesus my Lord. See also the similar use of neuter adjectives in
Rom.2:4; 1 Cor. 1:25; Phil. 4:5; Heb.6:17. WM. pp. 294f.;
WT. pp. 234 f.
426. The Explanatory Attributive Participle. An
attributive Adjective Participle may be used to describe a
person or thing already known or identified. It is then
equivalent to an explanatory relative clause. Cf. 295.
2 Tim. 1:8, 9; kata> du<namin qeou?, tou? sw<santoj h[ma?j kai> kale<santoj
klh<sei a[gi<%, according to the power of God; who saved us, and called
us with a holy calling.
1 Thess.
Jesus, which delivereth us from the wrath to come. In this example
r[uo<menon is explanatory, e]rxome<nhj is restrictive. See also Acts
427. An Attributive Participle when used to limit a noun
which has the article, stands in the so-called attributive posi-
tion, i.e. between the article and the noun, or after an article
following the noun; but when the participle is limited by an
adverbial phrase, this phrase may stand between the article
and the noun, and the participle without the article follow the
noun. It thus results that all the following orders are possi-
ble:
(1) article, participle, modifier of the participle, noun;
(2) art., mod., part., noun;
(3) art., mod., noun, part. ;
(4) art., part., noun, mod.;
(5) art., noun, art., mod., part.;
THE ADJECTIVE PARTICIPLE. 167
(6) art., noun, art., part., mod. See Professor Charles Short's
essay on The Order of Words in Attic Greek Prose, in Yonge's
English-Greek Lexicon, pp. xlix. f.; K. 464, 8; HA. 667, a.
Acts
e]paggeli<an genome<nhn, and we bring you good tidings of the promise
made unto the fathers. See also Acts 12:10; 26:4, 6; Heb. 2:2;
and especially Rom.
telou?sa should doubtless be rendered, the uncircumcision which
by nature fulfils the law (cf. v. 14).
428. An Attributive Participle equivalent to a relative
clause, may like a relative clause convey a subsidiary idea of
cause, purpose, condition, or concession (cf. 294, 296 ff., 317
ff.). It then partakes of the nature of both the Adjective
Participle and the Adverbial Participle. Of. 434.
eous, who [because he] visiteth with wrath?
Matt.
saj th>n yuxh>n au]tou? e!neken e]mou? eu[rh<sei au]th<n, he that findeth his
life shall lose it, and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.
See also vss. 37,40,41; cf. vss. 38, 42, and Luke
429. The Predicative Adjective Participle. A parti-
ciple may be used as the predicate of the verb ei]mi< or other
copulative verb.
Matt.
for thus it is becoming for us to fulfil all righteousness.
Gal.
]Ioudai<aj, and I was unknown by face unto the churches of Judea.
Rev. 1:18; kai> e]geno<mhn nekro>j kai> i]dou> zw?n ei]mi> ei]j tou?j ai]w?naj tw?n
ai]w<nwn, and I became dead, and behold, I am alive for evermore.
430. The Predicative Participle always stands in the so-
called predicative position, i.e. not in attributive position,
which is between the article and its noun or after an article
following the noun. Cf. 427.
168 THE MOODS.
431. Under the head of the Predicative Participle belong
those Present and Perfect Participles which, with the Present,
Imperfect, and Future of the verb, form periphrastic Presents,
Imperfects, Perfects, Pluperfects, Futures, and Future Perfects.
Cf. 20, 34, 71,84, 91, 97; G.MT. 45, 830, 831; B. pp. 308-313;
S. pp. 131 ff. See Rev. 1:18; Matt. 27:33; Mark 2:18; Luke
1:21; 13:10; Jas. 5:15; 2 Cor. 9:3; Luke 2:26; John 13:5;
Matt. 18:18.
432. To the Greek mind there was doubtless a distinction
of thought between the participle which retained its adjective
force and its distinctness from the copula, and that which
was so joined with the copula as to be felt as an element
of a compound tense-form. This distinction can usually be
perceived by us; yet in the nature of the case there will
occur instances which it will be difficult to assign with cer-
tainty to one class or the other. Since, moreover, an Adjec-
tive Participle used substantively without the article may
stand in the predicate, this gives rise to a third possibility.
A participle without the article standing in the predicate is
therefore capable of three explanations:
(a) It may be an Attributive Participle used substantively.
So probably
Mark
great possessions. See also John 18:30.
(b) It may be a Predicative Participle retaining its adjec-
tive force. So probably the examples under 429, especially
Gal. 1:22.
(c) It may form with the copula a periphrastic verb-form.
Luke
and it came to pass on one of those days that he was teaching.
THE ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE. 169
433. An Adjective Participle used substantively with the
article may of course occur as a predicate with a copula. This,
however, is not properly a Predicative Participle. The presence
of the article makes its use as a noun easily evident. The
participle without the article may be as really substantive
(432, a), but is not so easily distinguished as such.
Luke
Luke 16:15; 22:28.
THE ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE.
434. The Adverbial Participle logically modifies some
other verb of the sentence in which it stands, being equiva-
lent to an adverbial phrase or clause denoting time, condi-
tion, concession, cause, purpose, means, manner, or attend-
ant circumstance. HA. 969; G. 1563. Thus we find:
435. The Adverbial Participle of Time, equivalent to
a temporal clause.
Luke 24:36; tau?ta de> au]tw?n lalou<ntwn au]to>j e@sth e]n me<s& au]tw?n,
and as they spake these things, he himself stood in the midst of them.
John 16:8; kai> e]lqw>n e]kei?noj e]le<gcei to>n ko<smon, and he, when he is
come, will convict the world.
436. The Adverbial Participle of Condition, equiva-
lent to a conditional clause.
Heb. 2:3; pw?j h[mei?j e]kfeuco<meqa thlikau<thj a]melh<santej swthri<aj,
how shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation?
1Tim. 4:4; o!ti pa?n kti<sma qeou? kalo<n, kai> ou]de>n a]po<blhton meta>
eu]xaristi<aj lambano<menon, for every creature of God is good, and
nothing is to be rejected, if it be received with thanksgiving. See also
1 Cor. 11:29; Gal. 6:9.
170 THE MOODS.
437. The Adverbial Participle of Concession, equiva-
lent to a concessive clause. The concessive force is some-
times emphasized by prefixing kai<per or kai< ge to the
participle.
Acts
a]naireqh?nai au]to<n, and though they found no cause of death in him,
yet asked they of Pilate that he should be slain.
Heb 5:8; kai<per w}n ui[o<j, e@maqen a]f ] w$n e@paqen th>n u[pakoh<n,
he was a Son, yet he learned obedience by the things which he suffered.
See also Matt. 14:9; Mark
438. A concessive participle refers to a fact which is
unfavorable to the occurrence of the event denoted by the
principal verb. Cf. 278. It should be distinguished from the
participle which is merely antithetical. A participle denoting
accompanying circumstance, or even condition or cause, may
be antithetical. See 1 Cor.
8:9; Gal. 2:3.
439. The Adverbial Participle of Cause, equivalent
to a causal clause.
Col. 1:3, 4; eu]xaristou?men t&? qe&? . . . a]kou<santej th>n pi<stin u[mw?n e]n
Xrist&? ]Ihsou?, we give thanks to God. . . having heard (because
we have heard) of your faith in Christ Jesus.
1 Tim. 4:8; h[ de> eu]se<beia pro>j pa<nta w]fe<limo<j e]stin, e]paggeli<an
e@xousa zwh?j th?j nu?n kai> th?j mellou<shj, but godliness is profitable
for all things, having promise of the life which now is, and of that which
is to come. See also Matt. 2:3, 10; Acts
440. [Wj prefixed to a Participle of Cause implies that the
action denoted by the participle is supposed; asserted, or pro-
fessed by some one, usually the subject of the principal verb,
to be the cause of the action of the principal verb. The
speaker does not say whether the supposed or alleged cause
actually exists. HA. 978; G. 1574.
THE ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE. 171
1 Cor.
but some are puffed up, as though I were not coming to you, i.e. be-
cause (as they suppose) I am not coming. See also Acts 23:15,
20; 27:30; 28:19; 1 Pet. 4:12.
441. The origin of this idiom is probably in a clause of manner con-
sisting of w[j and a finite verb, the latter modified by a Participle of Cause.
Thus kola<zeij me w[j kakopoih<santa, you punish me as having done evil, i.e.
you punish me because, as you allege, I have done evil, may have its
origin in such a sentence as kola<zeij me w[j kola<zeij tina> kakopoih<santa, you punish me, as you punish one who has (or because he has) done evil. Yet
it is not to be supposed that the Greek any more than the English required
the supplying of a finite verb after w[j. Such phrases in classical Greek
or in the New Testament are, as they stand and without the addition of
other words, expressions of cause, the use of w[j indicating that the phrase
describes the opinion or assertion of the subject of the sentence rather
than of the speaker.
442. The Adverbial Participle of Purpose, equivalent
to a final clause. This is usually, but not invariably, in
the Future tense.
Acts
to
Acts
443. The Adverbial Participle of Means. This can-
not usually be resolved into a clause.
Matt.
h[liki<an au]tou? ph?xun e!na, and which of you by being anxious can
add one cubit unto his stature? See also Acts 16:16; Heb. 2:18.
444. The Adverbial Participle of Manner, describing
the manner in which the action denoted by the verb is
done.
Acts
See also Luke 19:48.
172 THE MOODS.
445. The manner of an action is frequently expressed by
w[j with the participle.
Mark
grammatei?j, for he taught them as one having authority, and not as the
scribes.
1 Cor.
ing the air.
2 Cor.
toj di ] h[mw?n, we are ambassadors therefore on behalf of Christ, as
though God were intreating by us.
446. When w[j with the participle is used to express manner, the parti-
ciple itself may be either an Adjective Participle used substantively or an
Adverbial Participle of Manner. The origin of such expressions is doubt-
less, in either case, in a clause of manner consisting of w[j and a finite verb
similar to the principal verb, the participle being either the subject of
such a verb or an adverbial (or other) limitation of it. Thus dida<skei w[j
e@xwn e]cousi<an is equivalent to dida<skei w[j e@@xwn e]cousi<an dida<skei, he
teaches as one having authority teaches, or dida<skei w!j tij dida<skei e@xwn
e]cousi<an, he teaches as one teaches having authority. Yet in neither case is to be
supposed that the Greek, any more than the English, required the sup-
plying of a finite verb after w[j. The phrase as it stood was an expres-
sion of manner. That the participle, however, was in some cases still
felt as a substantive (Adjective Participle used substantively) seems
probable from its being used correlatively with an adjective or noun and
from the occasional use of the participle with the article. See Mark 1:22
above; also 1 Cor. 7:25; 2 Cor. 6:9, 10; 1 Pet. 2:16; and cf. Mark
participle itself is sometimes adverbial is evident from such cases as 2 Cor.
447. The participle expressing manner or means often
denotes the same action as that of the principal verb, describ-
ing it from a different point of view. In this case the participle
is as respects its tense a (Present or Aorist) Participle of
Identical Action (cf. 120, 139), while as respects its modal
function it is a participle of manner or means.
THE ADVERBIAL PARTICIPLE. 173
Acts
diexeiri<sasqe krema<santej e]pi> cu<lou, the God of our fathers raised
up Jesus, whom ye slew by hanging him on a tree. See also Acts
448. In quotations from the Old Testament a participle is
sometimes placed before a personal form of the same verb.
The idiom arises from an imitation of the Hebrew construction
with the Infinitive Absolute. The force of the participle is
in general intensive. Hr. 28, 3, a; B. pp. 313 f.; WM. pp.
445 f.; WT. pp. 354 f.
Heb.
I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee.
449. The Adverbial Participle of Attendant Circum-
stance.
Mark
sunergou?ntoj kai> to>n lo<gon bebaiou?ntoj, and they went forth and
preached everywhere, the Lord working with them and confirming the
word.
Luke
menoj u[po> pa<ntwn, and he taught in their synagogues, being glorified
of all.
Acts
e]klecame<nouj a@ndraj e]c au]tw?n pe<myai ei]j ]Antio<xeian, then it
seemed good to the apostles and the elders. ..to choose men out of their
company and send them to Antioch.
Acts
Pri<skilla kai> ]Aku<laj, keira<menoj e]n Kenxreai?j th>n kefalh>n
and Paul. . . sailed thence for Syria, and with him Priscilla and Aquila;
having shorn his head in Cenchrere.
2 Tim.
bring him with thee. See also Luke 5:7; 11:7.
450. The term "attendant" as used above does not define the tem-
poral relation of the participle to the verb, but the logical relation. The
action of a Participle of Attendant Circumstance may precede the action
174 THE MOODS.
of the principal verb, accompany it, or even follow it. But as respects
logical relation, it is presented merely as an accompaniment of the action
of the verb. It does not, e.g., define the time or the cause, or the means
of the action of the prinicipal verb, but simply prefixes or adds an asso-
ciated fact or conception. It is thus often equivalent to a coordinate verb
with kai<. Though grammatically not an independent element of the
sentence, the participle in such cases becomes in thought assertive,
hortatory, optative, imperative, etc., according to the function of the
principal verb.
The position of the Participle of Attendant Circumstance with refer-
ence to the verb is not determined by any fixed rules, but by the order
of the writer's thought, this being in turn governed of course to a certain
extent by the order of the events. If the action of the participle is ante-
cedent to that of the verb, the participle most commonly precedes the verb,
but not invariably. Such a participle is usually in the Aorist tense (134),
but occasionally in the Present (127). If the action of the participle is
simultaneous with that of the verb, it may either precede or follow the
verb, more frequently the latter. It is of course in the Present tense
(119). If the action of the participle is subsequent to that of the prinici-
pal verb, it almost invariably follows the verb, the tense of the participle
being detennined by the conception of the action as respects its progress.
The instances of this last-named class are not frequent in the New Testa-
ment and are perhaps due to Aramaic influence. Cf. 119, Rem.; 146.
451. The various relations of time, cause, manner, etc., being
not expressed, but implied by the participle, cases arise in
which it is impossible to assign the participle unquestionably
to anyone of the above heads. Indeed, more than one of these
relations may be implied by the same participle.
452. THE GENITIVE ABSOLUTE. An Adverbial Participle
may stand in agreement with a noun or pronoun in the geni-
tive without grammatical dependence upon any other part of
the sentence, the two constituting a genitive absolute phrase
and expressing any of the adverbial relations enumerated in
435-449. HA. 970, 971; G. 1568.
Rom. 9:1; a]lh<qeian le<gw e]n Xrist&?, ou] yeu<domai, sunmarturou<shj
moi th?j suneidh<sew<j mou e]n pneu<mati a[gi<&, I say the truth in Christ,
I lie not, my conscience bearing witness with me in the Holy Ghost.
See also John 8:30; Acts 12:18; 18:20.
THE SUBSTANTIVE PARTICIPLE. 175
453. The noun or pronoun of the genitive absolute phrase regularly
refers to a person or thing not otherwise mentioned in the sentence.
Occasionally, however, this principle is violated, and the genitive phrase
may even refer to the subject of the sentence. This irregularity is some-
what more frequent in the New Testament than in classical Greek. HA.
972, d.; G .MT. 850. See Matt. 1:18; Acts 22:17, and other examples in
B. pp. 315 f.
454. A participle in the genitive absolute occasionally stands alone
without an accompanying noun or pronoun, when the person or thing
referred to is easily perceived from the context. HA. 972, a.; G. 1568;
G.MT. 848. See Luke
455. The Adverbial Participle always stands in the so-called
predicative position, i.e. not in attributive position, which is
between the article and its noun or after an article following
the noun. Cf. 427.
THE SUBSTANTIVE PARTICIPLE.
456. The Substantive Participle is employed as itself
the name of an action. It thus performs a function which
is more commonly discharged by the Infinitive. HA. 980-
984; G.1578-1593.
457. The Substantive Participle as Subject. The
Substantive Participle may be used as an integral part of
the subject of a verb, the action which it denotes being
itself an essential part of that of which the predicate is
affirmed.
Matt.
be seen of men to fast. (Not only they, but their fasting, is to be seen.)
Acts 5:2; ou]k e]pau<onto dida<skontej kai> eu]aggelizo<menoi to>n xristo>n
]Ihsou?n, they ceased not teaching and preaching Jesus as the Christ.
See also Matt.
lalw?n.
176 THE MOODS.
458. The Substantive Participle as Object. The Sub-
stantive Participle may be used as an integral part of the
object of a transitive verb. This occurs especially after
verbs of perception, the action denoted by the participle
being itself that which one perceives.
Luke
ceived power to have gone out of me.
John
heard the multitude murmuring.
459. With verbs of finishing, ceasing, etc., the Substantive
Participle agrees grammatically with the subject of the verb.
Since, however, certain of these verbs are transitive, the
action denoted by the participle must in these cases be re-
garded as logically the object of the verb.
Matt. 11:1; o!te e]te<lesen o[ ]Ihsou?j diata<sswn toi?j dw<deka maqhtai?j
au]tou?, when Jesus had finished commanding his twelve disciples. Cf.
Matt. 13:53; see also Luke 7:45.
460. THE SUBSTANTIVE PARTICIPLE IN INDIRECT DISCOURSE.
A Substantive Participle forming a part of the object of a verb
is sometimes equivalent to a clause of inqirect discourse.
1 John 4:2; pa?n pneu?ma o
luqo<ta e]k tou? qeou? e]sti<n, every spirit which confesseth that Jesus
Christ has come in the flesh is of God. See also Luke 4:23;
Acts 7:12; 8:23; 3 John 4.
461. The Substantive Participle as a Limiting Gen-
itive. The Substantive Participle may be used as an
integral part of a genitive limiting phrase.
John 4:39; polloi> e]pi<steusan ei]j au]to>n tw?n Samareitw?n dia> to>n lo<gon
th?j gunaiko>j marturou<shj, many of the Samaritans believed on him
because of the word of the woman testifying, i.e. of the woman's testi-
mony. See also Heb. 8: 9; and cf. Jos. Ant. 10. 4. 2, where a Sub-
stantive Participle occurs after a preposition.
THE SUBSTANTIVE PARTICIPLE. 177
462. The Substantive Participle, like the Adverbial Parti-
ciple, always stands in the so-called predicative position. Cf.
455, and 427.
463. The Substantive Participle must be carefully distin-
guished from the Adjective Participle used substantively.
The latter designates the doer of an action, the former the
action itself. "In the one it is the adjective force of the word
which is substantivized, in the other, the verbal force." See
Stevens, u.s., 419, Rem. 1.
THE USE OF NEGATIVES WITH VERBS.
464. In the use of the simple negatives ou] and mh< and
their compounds, ou]de<, ou]dei<j, ou@te, ou]ke<ti, mhde<, mhdei<j, mh<te,
mhke<ti, etc., as also of the double negatives ou] mh< and mh> ou],
New Testament Greek conforms in the main to classical
usage, yet exhibits several important variations. The fol-
lowing sections exhibit the essential features of New Testa-
ment usage in comparison with that of classical writers;
rarer and more delicate classical usages which have no
analogies In New Testament usage are not mentioned; state-
ments which are not restricted to classical or New Testament
usage are to be understood as referring to both. What is
said respecting the simple negatives ou] and mh< applies in
general also to their respective compounds when standing
alone.
NEGATIVES WITH THE INDICATIVE.
465. The Indicative in an independent declaratory sentence
regularly takes ou as its negative. HA. 1020; G. 1608.
John 1:11; ei]j ta> i@dia h#lqen, kai> oi[ i@dioi au]to>n ou] pare<labon, he
came unto his own, and they that were his own received him not.
REM. On the use of negatives in later Greek, see Gild., Encroach-
ments of mh< on ou] in later Greek, in A.J. P. I. pp. 45ff.
178
NEGATIVES WITH THE INDICATIVE. 179
466. In classical Greek, the Future Indicative used to ex-
press a prohibition sometimes has ou], sometimes mh<. HA.
844; G.MT. 69, 70.
In the New Testament a Prohibitory Future takes ou].
Matt. 6:5; kai> o!tan proseu<xhsqe, ou]k e@sesqe w[j oi[ u[pokritai<, and
when ye pray, ye shall not be as the hypocrites.
467. In questions that can be answered affirmatively or
negatively, ou] is used with the Indicative to imply that an
affirmative answer is expected; mh< to imply that a negative
answer is expected. HA. 1015; G. 1603.
Matt. 13:55; ou]x ou$to<j e]stin o[ tou? te<ktonoj ui[o<j, is not this the car-
penter's son?
John 7:51; mh> o[ no<moj h[mw?n kri<nei to>n a@nqrwpon e]a>n mh> a]kou<s^
prw?ton par ] au]tou?, doth our law judge a man, except it first hear from
himself?
468. In Rom. 10:18, 19; 1 Cor. 9:4, 5; 11:22, mh> ou] is
used in rhetorical questions equivalent to affirmative state-
ments. Each negative has, however, its own proper force,
ou] making the verb negative, and mh< implying that a negative
answer is expected to the question thus made negative.
469. In classical Greek, the Indicative in conditional and
conditional relative clauses is regularly negatived by mh<. But
ov sometimes occurs in conditions of the first class. In this
case ou] negatives the verb of the clause or other single element
rather than the supposition as such. HA.1021; G.1610, 1383.
In the New Testament, conditional clauses of the second
class (248) are regularly negatived by mh<. In other conditional
clauses and in conditional relative clauses, the Indicative
usually takes ou] as its negative, occasionally mh<. In con-
cessive clauses the Indicative takes ou].
180 THE USE OF NEGATIVES WITH VERBS
John 9:33; ei] mh> h#n ou$toj para> qeou?, ou]k h]du<nato poiei?n ou]de<n, if this
man were not from God, he could do nothing. See also Matt. 24:22.
Rom. 8:9; ei] de> tij pneu?ma Xristou? ou]k e@xei, ou$toj ou]k e@stin au]tou?,
but if any man hath not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. See
also Luke 14:26.
Matt. 10:38; kai> o{j ou] lamba<nei to>n stauro>n au]tou? kai> a]kolouqei?
o]pi<sw mou, ou]k e@stin mou a@cioj, and he that does not take his cross
and follow after me, is not worthy of me. See also Luke 9:50;
14:33; cf. 2 Pet. 1:9; 1 John 4:3.
Luke 18:4, 5; ei] kai> to>n qeo>n ou] fobou?mai ou]de> a@nqrwpon e]ntre<pomai,
dia< ge to> pare<xein moi ko<pon th>n xh<ran tau<thn e]kdikh<sw au]th<n,
though I fear not God nor regard man, yet because this widow
troubleth me, I will avenge her.
2 Cor. 13:5; h@ ou]k e]piginw<skete e[autou>j o!ti ]Ihsou?j Xristo>j e]n
u[mi?n; ei] mh<ti a]do<kimoi< e]ste, or now ye not as to your own selves that
Jesus Christ is in you? unless indeed ye are reprobate. See also
1 Tim. 6:3; Tit. 1:6.
REM. In Matt. 26:24; Mark 14:21, ou] occurs in the protasis of a
conditional sentence of the second class.
470. It is possible that ou] in conditional and conditional relative
sentences in the New Testament is usually to be explained as negativing
the predicate directly (cf. G. 1383. 2; Th. ei], III. 11.), mh< on the other
hand as negativing the supposition as such. Yet the evidence does not
clearly establish this distinction; to press it in every case is certainly
an over-refinement. Cf., e,g., 1 John 4:3, pa?n pneu?ma o{ mh> o[mologei? to>n
]Ihsou?n e]k tou? qeou? ou]k e@stin, and 1 John 4:6, o{j ou]k e@stin e]k tou? qeou? ou]k a]kou<ei h[mw?n. See also 1 Tim. 6:3 and Tit. 1:6, where mh< is used after ei], yet
quite evidently belongs to the verb rather than to the supposition as such.
471. Ei] mh< in the sense of except is used as a fixed phrase,
without reference to the mood which would follow it if the
ellipsis were supplied. Cf. 274.
Matt. 17:8; ou]de<na ei#don ei] mh> au]to>n ]Ihsou?n mo<non, they saw no one
save Jesus only.
Mark 9:9; diestei<lato au]toi?j i!na mhdeni> a{ ei#don dihgh<swntai, ei] mh>
o!tan o[ ui[o>j tou? a]nqrw<pou e]k nekrwn a]nast^?, he charged them that
they should tell no man what things they had seen, save when the Son
of man should have arisen from the dead.
SUBJUNCTIVE, OPTATIVE, AND IMPERATIVE. 181
472. In clauses introduced by mh< as a conjunction, the
Indicative takes oil as its negative. After other final particles
its negative is mh<. HA. 1021, 1033; G. 1610.
Rev. 9:4; kai> e]rre<qh au]tai?j i!na mh> a]dikh<sousin to>n xo<rton th?j gh?j,
and it was said unto them that they should not hurt the grass of the
earth. The continuation of this sentence by ou]de< ... ou]de< is a
syntactical irregularity. Col. 2:8 illustrates the rule.
473. In indirect discourse the negative of the direct form
is retained. HA. 1022; G.1608.
Matt. 16:11; pw?j ou] noei?te o!ti ou] peri> a@rtwn ei#pon u[mi?n,
that ye do not perceive that I spake not to you concerning bread,
REM. In 1 John 2:22 a clause of indirect discourse depending on a
verb meaning to deny contains a redundant ou]. Cf. 482, and B. p. 355.
474. In causal clauses, and in simple relative clauses not
expressing purpose or condition, the Indicative is regularly
negatived by ou]. HA. 1021; G. 1608.
John 8:20; kai> ou]dei>j e]pi<asen au]to<n, o!ti ou@pw e]lhlu<qei h[ w!ra au]tou?,
and no man took him; because his hour was not yet come.
Mark 2:24; i@de ti< poiou?sin toi?j sa<bbasin o{ ou]k e@cestin, behold, why
do they on the sabbath day that which is not lawful?
REM. 1. In John 3:18 a causal clause has an Indicative with mh<. This
is quite exceptional in the New Testament, but similar instances occur in
later Greek. B. p. 349, Gild. u.s. p. 53.
REM. 2. Tit. 1:11, dida<skontej a{ mh> dei? is an exception to the general
rule for relative clauses, unless indeed the relative clause is to be taken
as conditional. Cf. 469.
NEGATIVES WITH THE SUBJUNCTIVE, OPTATIVE, AND
IMPERATIVE.
475. The negative of the Subjunctive both in principal and
in subordinate clauses is mh<, except in clauses introduced by
182 THE USE OF NEGATIVES WITH VERBS.
the conjunction mh<, lest. In these the negative is ou]. Con-
cerning ou] mh< with the Subjunctive see 487, 488. HA. 1019,
1033; G. 1610.
1 John 3:18; mh> a]gapw?men lo<g&, let us not love in word.
Heb. 4:7; mh> sklhru<nhte ta>j kardi<aj u[mw?n, harden not your hearts.
2 Cor. 12:20; fobou?mai ga>r mh< pw?j e]lqw>n ou]x oi!ouj qe<lw eu!rw
u[ma?j, for I fear, lest by any means, when I come, I should find you
not such as I would. See also Acts 20:16; Rom. 10:15; 1 Cor.
2:5.
REM. 1. In Matt. 25:9 a Subjunctive after the conjunction mh< is
negatived by ou] (WH. margin), or, according to other MSS., followed by
WH. (text) by the strong negative ou] mh<.
REM. 2. In Rom. 5:11 ou] mo<non limits a verb understood which is
probably to be taken as a Subjunctive. Of. 479, 481.
476. In classical Greek, ou] is used with the Potential
Optative; mh< with the Optative of Wishing. In the New
Testament, no instance of a negatived Potential Optative
occurs. With the Optative of Wishing mh< is used as in
classical Greek. HA. l020; G. 1608.
Gal. 6:14; e]moi> de> mh> ge<noito kauxa?sqai, but far be it from me to glory.
See also Mark 11:14; Rom. 3:4, 6, 31, etc.
477. In classical Greek, the Optative in subordinate clauses
takes mh< as its negative except in indirect discourse and after
mh<, lest. HA. 1021, 1022; G. 1610.
In the New Testament, no instance of a negatived Optative
in a subordinate clause occurs.
478. The negative of the Imperative is mh<. HA. 1019;
G. 1610.
This rule holds in the New Testament with very rare
exceptions.
Luke 12:11; mh> merimnh<shte pw?j [h} ti] a]pologh<shsqe, be not anxious
how or what ye shall answer. See also under 165.
INFINITIVE AND PARTICIPLE. 183
479. Of the apparent exceptions to the rule stated above (478), some
are to be explained as parenthetic non-imperative phrases in the midst of
imperative sentences. So, clearly, in 1 Cor. 5: 10, [I meant] not [that
you should have no company] at all, with the fornicators of this world, etc.
So also 2 Tim. 2: 14, that they strive not about words, [a thing which is]
profitable for nothing. The use of ou]x rather than mh< in 1 Pet. 3:3 seems
to indicate that the following words, o[ . . . ko<smoj, are excluded from the
injunction rather than included in a prohibition. In 1 Pet. 2:18 ou] mo<non
occurs, perhaps as a fixed phrase, after a participle with Imperative of the
verb ei#nai understood. On the other hand, it is noticeable that elsewhere
limitations of the Imperative when negatived regularly take mh<. Thus mh<
mo<non occurs in John 13:9; Phil. 2:12; Jas. 1:22. Cf. 481.
NEGATIVES WITH THE INFINITIVE AND PARTICIPLE.
480. In classical Greek, the Infinitive usually takes ou] as
its negative in indirect discourse; elsewhere mh<. HA. 1023,
1024; G. 1611; but see also Gild. u.s. (465, Rem.) pp. 48 ff.
on the use of mh< with the Infinitive in indirect discourse.
In the New Testament, the Infinitive regularly takes mh<
as its negative in all constructions.
Matt. 22:23; le<gontej mh> ei#nai a]na<stasin, saying that there is no
resurrection.
Luke 11:42; ta?ta de> e@dei poih?sai ka]kei?na mh> parei?nai, but these ought
ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
481. When a limitation of an Infinitive or of its subject
is to be negatived rather than the Infinitive itself, the negative
ou] is sometimes used instead of mh<. See Rom. 7:6; 1 Cor.
1:17; Heb. 7:11; 13:9. This principle applies especially
in the case of the adverb mo<non. In the New Testament at
least, ou] mo<non rather than mh> mo<non occurs regularly with the
Infinitive, and this both when the phrase as a whole belongs
to the Infinitive itself, and when it applies rather to some
limitation of the Infinitive. See John 11:52; Acts 21:13;
26:29; 27:10; Rom. 4:12, 16; 13:5; 2 Cor. 8:10; Phil.
184 THE USE OF NEGATIVES WITH VERBS.
1:29; 1 Thess. 2:8. Mh> mo<non is found with the Infinitive
only in Gal. 4:18. It is perhaps as a fixed phrase, unaffected
by the Infinitive, that ei]j ou]qe<n limits logisqh?nai in Acts 19:27.
482. A compound of ou] may occur with an Infinitive depend-
ent on a principal verb limited by ov, in accordance with the
principle of 488.
John 5:30; ou] du<namai e]gw> poiei?n a]p ] e]mautou? ou]de<n, I can of myself
do nothing. See also Mark 7:12; Luke 20:40; John 3:27, etc.
Probably Acts 26 : 26 should be translated, I am not persuaded (i.e.
I cannot believe) that any of these things was hidden from him. B. p.
350.
483. The Infinitive after verbs of hindering, denying, etc.,
may take mh< without change of meaning. Such a negative
cannot be translated into English. HA. 1029; G. 1615.
Acts 14:18; kai> tau?ta le<gontej mo<lij kate<pausan tou>j o@xlouj tou?
mh> qu<ein au]toi?j, and with these sayings scarce restrained they the
multitudes from doing sacrifice unto them. See also under 402.
484. In classical Greek, an Infinitive which would regularly
take mh<, usually takes mh> ou] when it depends on a verb which
is itself negatived by ou]. HA. 1034; G.1616.
In the New Testament, the simple negative mh< is retained
in such a case.
Acts 4:20; ou] duna<meqa ga>r h[mei?j a{ ei@damen kai> h]kou<samen mh> lalei?n,
for we cannot but speak the things which we saw and heard.
485. In classical Greek, the participle takes mh< if it is
equivalent to a conditional, or conditional relative clause;
otherwise it takes ou]. HA. 1025; G. 1612; Gild. u.s. (465,
Rem.) pp. 55 ff.
In the New Testament, participles in all. relations usually
take mh< as the negative. But participles not conditional in
SUCCESSIVE AND DOUBLE NEGATIVES. 185
force occasionally take ou], there being in all some seventeen
instances in the New Testament.
Acts 13:28; kai> mhdemi<an ai]ti<an qana<tou eu[ro<ntej ^]th<santo Peila?ton
a]naireqh?nai au]to<n, and though they found no cause of death in him,
yet asked they of Pilate that he should be slain.
Luke 12:33; poih<sate e[autoi?j balla<ntia mh> palaiou<mena, make for
yourself purses which wax not old.
John 5:23; o[ mh> timw?n to>n ui[o>n ou] tim%? to>n pate<ra, he that honoreth
not the Son honoreth not the Father.
Matt. 22:11; ei#den e]kei? a@nqrwpon ou]k e]ndedume<non e@nduma ga<mou, he
saw there a man which had not on a wedding-garment.
Acts 17:6; mh> eu[ro<ntej de> au]tou>j e@suron ]Ia<sona kai< tinaj a]delfou>j e]pi>
tou>j polita<rxaj, and not finding them they dragged Jason and certain
brethren before the rulers of the city. See also Matt. 22:29; Luke
6:42; 9:33; John 10:12; Acts 7:5; 13:28; 26:22; Gal. 4:8.
SUCCESSIVE AND DOUBLE NEGATIVES.
486. When two simple negatives not constituting a double
negative, or a compound negative followed by a simple nega-
tive, occur in the same clause, each has its own independent
force. The same is also true of course when the negatives
occur in successive clauses. HA. 1031; G. 1618.
1 Cor 12:15; ou] para> tou?to ou]k e@stin e]k tou? sw<matoj, it is not
therefore not of the body. See also 1 John 3: 10; 5: 12.
Matt. 10:26; ou]de>n ga<r e]stin kekalumme<non o{ ou]k a]pokalufqh<setai,
for there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed. See also
1 John 2:21.
REM. Concerning mh> ou] in questions, see 468.
487. The double negative ou] mh> is used with the Subjunc-
tive, and more rarely with the Future Indicative, in emphatic
negative assertions referring to the future. Cf. 172, 66. HA.
1032; G. 1360, 1361.
186 THE USE OF NEQATlVES WITH VERBS.
Mark 13:2; ou] mh> a]feq^? w$de li<qoj e]pi> li<qon o{j ou] mh> kataluq^?,
there shall not be left here one stone upon another, which shall not be
thrown down.
Rev. 2:11; o[ nikw?n ou] mh> a]dikhq^? e]k tou? qana<tou tou? deute<rou,
that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death.
Rev. 7:16; ou] peina<sousin e@ti ou]de> diyh<sousin e@ti, ou]de> mh> pe<s^ e]p ]
au]tou>j o[ h!lioj, they shall hunger no more, neither thirst any more,
neither shall the sun strike upon them at all. On Matt. 25:9 see
475, Rem. 1.
488. Ou] mh< is occasionally used with the Subjunctive or
Future Indicative expressing a prohibition. Cf. 167, 67,
Rem. 2.
489. When a negative is followed by one or more similar
compound negatives or by the double negative ou] mh< the effect
is a strengthened negation. HA. 1030; G. 1619.
Luke 23:53; ou$ ou]k h#n ou]dei>j ou@pw kei<menoj, where never man had yet
lain.
Heb. 13:5; ou] mh< se a]nw? ou]d ] ou] mh< se e]gkataki<pw, I will in no wise
fail thee, neither will I in any wise forsake thee.
Rom. 13:8; mhdeni> mhde>n o]fei<lete, owe no man anything.
INDEX OF SUBJECTS.
[The Numbers refer to Sections.]
Adjective Participle, 420-433, see 166, 167; Optative in indirect dis-
under Participle. course, 110, 111; Imperative in
Adjectives of ability, fitness, readi- commands and prohibitions, 163,
ness, etc., followed by clause with 184; Infinitive after prepositions,
i!na, 216; followed by Infinitive, 104-109; Infinitive after verbs
376; followed by elf with the ar- signifying to hope, etc., 113; In-
ticular In:finitive, 413. finitive in indirect discourse, 110,
Adverbial Participle, 434-455, see 114.
under Participle. Participle: properly expresses
Adverbs, limited by Infinitive, 3.76. not time but action conceived of
Aoristic Present, 13; Aoristic Fut- as a simple event, 132, 133; used
ure, 59, 62; Aoristic Perfect, 80. of antecedent action, 134-138; of
Aorist: constant characteristic, 35; identical action, 139-141; of sub-
Indefinite, Inceptive, Resultative, sequent action, 142-145; as inte-
35, 37. gral part of the object of a verb
Indicative: Historical, 38; mo- of perception, 146; with lanqa<nw,
mentary, comprehensive, collec- 147; leaving time-relation unde-
tive, 39, 40, 54; Inceptive, 41; fined, 148; denoting action in
Resultative, 42, 87; Gnomic, 43; general simultaneous with that
Epistolary, 44; Dramatic, 45; for of principal verb, 149; with the
English Perfect, 46, 52, 54; with article, equivalent to relative
force of Greek Perfect, 47; for clause with verb in Indicative or
English Pluperfect, 48, 52-54; in Subjunctive, 135, 144, 150, 151.
indirect discourse, 49; used pro- Apodosis: defined, 238; force and
leptically, 50; in condition con- form of, after simple present and
trary to fact, 248; in apodosis of past particular suppositions, 242,
such condition, 248, 249; with a@n 243; after supposition contrary to
in past general supposition, 26, fact, 248, 249; after future sup-
315; expressing an unattained position more probable, 250, 263 ;
wish, 27; English equivalents, 52, after (implied) future supposition
63; distinction between Aorist with less probability, 259; after
and Imperfect, 56, 57; between present general supposition, 260,
Aorist and Perfect, 86, 87. 263; after past general supposi-
Dependent Moods, 98; Sub- tion, 265 ; may have two protases,
junctive in prohibitions, 162-164, 268; may be omitted, 271; its
187
188 INDEX OF SUBJECTS.
verb may be omitted, 273; im- Deliberative Future, 70.
plied in the protasis, 276; after Deliberative Subjunctive, 168; in
concessive protasis, 278. relative clauses, 319.
Article with the participle, position Dependent moods, enumerated, 3;
of, 427. term not strictly applicable, 3,
Attendant circumstance expressed Rem.
by participle, 449, 119, 145. Direct Quotations, 334, 335; intro-
Attributive Participle, 421-428, see duced by o!te, 345; frequent in
under Participle; cf. 419, Rem. 1. New Testament, 345.
Causal clauses, 228-232; other Dramatic Aorist, 45.
methods of expressing causal re- English Equivalents of Greek Aorist
lations, 233; negatives in, 474. Indicative, 52, 53.
Circumstantial Participle, see 419, English tenses, three-fold function,
Rem. 1. 354.
Commands: expressed by Future Epistolary Aorist, 44.
Indicative, 67; by Subjunctive, Exhortations, expressed by the Sub-
162-164, 166, 167; by Imperative, junctive, 160-162; by the Impera-
180; by Infinitive, 364; negatived tive, 180.
by IJ.1l, 478; apparently negatived Exegetical grammar, scope and re-
by 00, 479; negatived by ou] mh<, lation to historical grammar, 2.
488 ; indirectly quoted, 204. Explanatory relative clauses, 295.
Complete and completed, sense of Final clauses (pure), 197-199. For
as grammatical terms, 85. relative clauses of purpose, see
Conative tenses: Present Indicative, Relative clauses.
11, Imperfect Indicative, 23; Final Particles, 190; clauses intro-
Present Participle, 129. duced by, 188; general usage of
Concessive clauses, 278-288: general such clauses, 189; usage of several
definition, 278; particles intro- particles in detail, 191-195.
ducing, 279-282; use of moods Form and function distinguished, 1.
and tenses, 283; various classes, Future:
284-287 ; English translation, 288; Indicative: Predictive, 58-66;
participle equivalent to, 437. Aoristic, 59;. Progressive, 60;
Conditional sentences, 238-277; value and significance of these
definition, 238; express particular distinctions, 61-64; assertive and
or general supposition, 239, 240; promissory force, 65; with 00 IJ.1l,
classification, 241; six classes, 66; Imperative Future, 67; in
242-265; peculiarities of, 266-277; third person, 68; Gnomic, 69;
negatives in conditional clauses, Deliberative, 70 ; periphrastic
469 475. See also Conditional forms, 71, 72 ; in final clauses and
Relative sentences, under Relative clauses introduced by final par-
clauses. ticles, 198, 199, 205, 211, 215,
Consecutive clauses, 234-236; see 218, 224, Rem. 2; in cor:ditional
also Result. clauses, 246, 254, 255; WIth El by
Definite Relative clauses, see under Hebraism with the force of an
Relative clauses. oath, 272; with El expressing an
INDEX OF SUBJECTS. 189
object of desire, 276; in con- Imperative: in commands and ex-
cessive clauses referring to the hortations, 180; in entreaties and
future, 285 (a); in conditional petitions, 181; expressing con-
relative clauses, 308; in rela- sent or hypothesis, 182, 183 ; force
tive clauses of purpose, 317; in of tenses, 184, 163, 165; intro-
complementary relative clauses, duced by wuTe, 237; negative of,
318; in relative clauses intro- 478, 479.
duced by a@xri, 332; negatives Imperative Future, 67.
with Future Indicative, 465, 466. Imperfect Indicative: Progressive,
Dependent moods, 99; peri- 21, 22; Conative, 23; of repeated
phrastic form made from me<llein, action, 24; expressing an unat.
100. tained wish, 27; translated by
Participle: represents action English Perfect, 28; translated by
relatively future, 152; of later English Pluperfect, 29; Imper-
origin than other participles, 152, fect of verbs of obligation, etc.,
Rem.; periphrastic form made 30-32; of verbs of wishing, 33;
from me<llwn and Infinitive, 153. in condition contrary to fact, 248;
Future Perfect Indicative, in New in apodosis of such condition, 248,
Testament only in periphrastic 249; with a@n in conditional rela-
form, 93, 94. tive clauses, past general suppo-
General and particular suppositions: sition, 315; in indirect discourse
expressed, 239, 240; implied in for Present Indicative, 348; peri-
relative clause, 298, 299. phrastic form, 34; distinction
General Present: Indicative, 12; between Imperfect and Aorist, 56,
Participle, 123-126. 67.
Genitive absolute, 452-454. Inceptive Aorist, 35, 37; Indicative,
Gnomic tenses: Present, 12; Aorist, 41; dependent moods, 98; parti~
43; Future, 69; Perfect, 79. ciple, 137.
Grammar, relation of, to interpreta- Indefinite Aorist, 35, 98.
tion, 2. Indicative:
Hebraisms in the New Testament: In principal clauses: in un-
Ei] with Future Indicative with qualified assertions, etc., 157; in
force of an emphatic assertion, qualified assertions, 158, 159.
272; clause or Infinitive as sub- In subordinate clauses: in final
ject of e]ge<neto, 357; Infinitive clauses and clauses introduced by
defining content of action of a final particles, 198, 199, 205, 211,
previous verb or noun, 375; in- 215,224, Rem. 2,227; in clauses
tensive participle, 448. of cause, 229, 230; in clauses of
Historical grammar, relation to result, 235, 236; in conditional
exegetical grammar, 2. clauses, 242, 248, 254-256, 261; in
Historical Present, 14; Historical concessive clauses, 284, 285 (a) ;
Aorist, 38; Historical Perfect, in definite relative clauses, 293,
78. 294 ; in conditional relative
Hortatory Subjunctive, 160, 161; clauses, 301, 308, 309, 313; with
introduced by w!ste, 237. a@n, 315; in relative clauses of pur-
190 INDEX OF SUBJECTS.
pose, 817-319; in relative clauses Constructions with the article:
introduced by e@wj, etc., 326-332; general effect of prefixing the
as logical subject of e]gene<to, 357- article, 392; as subject, 398; as
360. object, 394; in apposition, 395;
Negatives with Indicative, 465- with t&? expressing cause, 396;
474. with tou? expressing purpose, 397;
Indirect Discourse, 384-856; defini- with tou? expressing result, 398;
tion, 834, 837; various methods with tou? after adjectives, 399;
of expressing, 389, 840; classical with tou? after nouns, 400; with
usage, 341, 342, 847-350; New tou? after verbs that take the geni-
Testament usage, 343-850; Eng- tive, 401-408; with Toil as subject
lish usage compared with Greek, or object, 404, 405; governed by
351-356; Infinitive in, 390; par- prepositions, 406; various prepo-
ticiple in, 460; conditional clauses sitions used with it and their
in, 258; conditional relative clauses force, 407-416; force of tense,
in, 305; negatives in, 478. 104-109.
Indirect object, expressed by clause Intensive Perfect: Indicative, 77;
introduced by i!na, 217; by In- dependent moods, 102.
finitive, 368; by articular Infini- Interpretation, relation of, to gram-
tive after ei]j, 410. mar, 2.
Indirect Questions, how introduced Latin tenses, two-fold function, 354.
in Greek, 340; after e@xw, etc., Moods: enumeration of, 3; in prin-
346. introduced by o!stij, 349; cipal clauses, 157-184; finite
by simple relatives, 350. moods in Sllbordinate clauses, see
Infinitive: origin and stages of de- Indicative, Subjunctive, etc., or
velopment, 361; classification of Contents, §§ 185-360.
uses, 862, 363; negatives used Negatives, 464-489: classical and
with it, 480-484. New Testament use in general,
Constructions without the arti- 464; with the Indicative, 465-
cle: with imperative force, 364, 474; with the Subjunctive, 475;
365; expressing purpose, 366, with the Optative; 476,477; with
367; as indirect object, 868; ex- the Imperative, 478, 479; with
pressing result, 369-372; defining the Infinitive, 480-484; with
content of action of a previous participles, 485; successive and
verb or noun, 375; limiting ad- double negatives, 486-489, 468;
jectives and adverbs, 376, 377; compound negatives, 464, 486,
limiting nouns, 378, 379; after 489.
pri<n or pri>n h@, 380-382; used ab- Object clauses: classification, 186;
solutely, 383; as subject, 384, after verbs of exhorting, 200-204;
385, 390, 857, 360; as appositive, after verbs of striving, etc., 205-
386; as object, 387-391, 202, 210; 210; after verbs of fear and
in indirect discourse, 390; force of danger, 224-227; in indirect dis-
the tensee in indirect discourse, course, 334, 339-850.
110, 112-114; without article after Optative, infrequent in New Testa-
prepositions, 174. ment, 174.
INDEX OF SUBJECTS. 191
In principal clauses: of wishing, use of the participle with intensive
175-177; Potential, 178, 179. force, 448; participle of attendant
In subordinate clauses: in ob- circumstance, 449, 450; more than
ject clauses after verb of exhort- one relation expressed by one
ing, 200, Rem.; in conditional participle, 451; genitive absolute,
clauses, future supposition more 452-454; position of adverbial
probable, in indirect discourse, participle, 455.
258; in conditional clauses, future Substantive Participle: defined,
supposition less probable, 259; 456; as subject, 457; as object,
with ei] expressing an object of 458--460; in indirect discourse,
desire, 276. 460; as a limiting genitive, 461;
Negatives with Optative, 476, its position, 462; distinction from
477. adjective participle used substan-
Participle: general nature, 115, 418; tively, 463.
grammatical agreement, 116. Negatives with participle, 485.
Tenses: general significance, Particular and general conditions:
118; use of each tense in detail, expressed, 239, 240; implied in
see Present, Aorist, Future, Per- relative clause, 298, 299.
fect, or Contents, §§ 119-156. Perfect:
Classification respecting logical Indicative: of completed action,
force, 419. 74, 76, 85; of existing state, 75,
Adjective Participle: defined, 76; Intensive, 77; Historical, 78;
420; restrictive attributive parti- Gnomic, 79; Aoristic, 80, 88; in
ciple, 422; with subject omitted, indirect discourse, 81; of a past
423, 433; with the article after event thought of as separated
noun without the article, 424; from the moment of speaking
neuter participle for abstract (incapable of adequate English
noun, 425; explanatory attribu- translation), 82; used prolepti-
tive participle, 426; attributive cally, 50; periphrastic form, 84;
participle conveying subsidiary distinction between Perfect and
idea of cause, etc., 428; predicate Aorist, 86, 87.
adjective participle, 429; its posi- Dependent moods: denoting
tion, 430; forming periphrastic completed action, or existing re-
verbs, 431; possible explanations sult, 101; Intensive, 102; peri-
of participle in the predicate, 432. phrastic form, 103 ; Infinitive
Adverbial Participle: defined, after prepositions, 104, 105, 107,
434; temporal, 435; conditional, 108; Optative not found in New
436; concessive, 437,438; causal, Testament, 111; Infinitive in in.
439; causal with w[j, 440, 441; of direct discourse, 110, 112.
purpose, 442; of means, 443; Participle: of completed action
of manner, 444; manner ex- or existing state, 154 ; periphrastic
pressed by w[j with participle, 445, form, 155; for a Pluperfect, 156.
446; participle of manner or Periphrastic forms: in general, 20,
means denoting same action as 431; Present Indicative, 20; Im-
that of the verb, 447; Hebraistic perfect, 34; Future Indicative, 71,
192 INDEX OF SUBJECTS.
72; Perfect. Indicative, 84; Plu- 120-122; General, 123-126; for
perfect, 91; Future Perfect, 94; the Imperfect, 127; Conative, 129;
Present Infinitive and Imperative, for the Future, 130; of action
97; Perfect Subjunctive and Im- still in progress, 131.
perative, 103; Future Participle, Primary and Secondary tenses, 4.
153; Perfect Participle, 155. Progressive tenses:
Pluperfect Indicative: of completed Indicative: Present, 8-11; Im-
action, 89; of existing state, 90, perfect, 21-23; Futtlre, 60.
92; periphrastic form, 91; in in- Dependent moods: Present, 96.
direct discourse for Perfect, 348. Participle: Present, 119-122,
Potential Optative: force of, 178, 127-131.
179; negatives with, 476. Prohibitions, expressed by Aorist
Predicative Participle, 429-432, see Subjunctive or Present (rarely
under Participle. Aorist) Imperative, 163; by Aorist
Predictive Future, 58. Subjunctive, 162-164, 166, 167;
Present: by Present Imperative, 165,184.
Indicative: most constant char- Prohibitory Future Indicative, 67,
acteristic of, 9; Progressive, 8, Rem. 2.
10, 11; Conative, 11; General or Prohibitory Subjunctive, 162-164,
Gnomic, 12; Aoristic, 13; His- 166, 167; used only in Aorist,
torical, 14; used for Future, 15; 163; force of tense, 164.
h!kw, pa<reimi, etc., 16; of past Promissory Future, 65.
action still in progress, 17~; in in- Protasis: defined, 238; force and
direct discourse, 19; periphrastic form of, m sImple present and
forms, 20; in pure final clauses, past particular supposition, 242-
198; in an appositive clause, 213, 247; in supposition contrary to
Rem.; in conditional clauses, pres- fact, 248; in future supposition
ent particular supposition, 242, more probable, 250-258, 263; in fu-
future supposition, 256, present ture supposition less probable, 259;
general supposition, 261; in con- ill present general supposition,
cessive clauses, 284; in condi- 260-262, 264; in past general sup-
tional relative clauses, present position, 265; joined to an
particular supposition, 301, future apodosis of a different form, 267 ;
supposition, 309, present general two protases with one apodosis,
supposition, 313; after e!wj and 268; substitutes for, 269; omitted,
referring to the future, 326; after 270; equivalent to an oath, 272;
e!wj and referring to the present, its verb omitted, 273; containing
328. an apodosis, 276; after expressions
Dependent moods, 96; peri- of wonder has the force of o!ti,
phrastic form, 97; Infinitive after clause, 277.; concessive protases,
preposItIons, 104, 106-109; Opta- 278; participle equivalent to pro-
tive and Infinitive in indirect dis- tasis, 436, 437.
course, 110-112. Purpose, expressed by clause intro-
Participle: of simultaneous duced by i!na, 197-199; by rela-
action, 119; of identical action, tive clause, 317; by Infinitive
INDEX OF SUBJECTS. 193
without the article, 366; by In- Result: several conceptions of, 370 ;
finitive with w!ste, 370(d), 371(d); methods of expressing, 371 ; actual
by Infinitive with w[j, 372; by In- result expressed by w[ste with In-
finitive with tou?, 397; by articular finitive or Indicative, 235, 236,
Infinitive after ei]j, 409; after pro<j, 369, 370 (a) (b), 371 (a) (b); by
414. articular Infinitive with ei]j, 411;
Questions: various classes of, 169; conceived result expressed by
negatives with, 467, 468. See clause introduced by i!na, 218,219,
also Indirect Questions. cf. 222; by Infinitive usually with
Relative clauses: classification, 289- w!ste, 369, 370 ( c), 371 ( c); by
291; distinction between definite Infinitive with tou?, 398; by artic-
and indefinite relative clauses, ular Infinitive with ei]j, 411; in-
289, 290. tended result (purpose), 370 (d),
Definite Relative clauses: in- 371 (d).
troduced by relative pronouns and Resultative Aorist, 35, 37, 42, 87.
adverbs, 292; use of moods and Shall and will in translating the
tenses, 293; may imply relation Greek Future, 65.
of cause, result, or concession, Subjunctive:
294; classified as restrictive and In principal clauses: Hortatory,
explanatory, 295; conditional in 160, 161; with a@fej or deu?ro pre-
form, 316. fixed, 161; Prohibitory, 162-164,
Conditional Relative sentences: 166, 167; Deliberative, 168-171;
defined, 289, 290, 296; imply par- with qe<leij etc. prefixed, 171; in
ticular or general supposition, 298, negative assertions referring to
299; six: classes, 300-315; clauses the future, 172, 173.
conditional in form but definite In subordinate clauses: in pure
in thought, 316; introduced by final clauses, 197; in object
e!wj, 329. clauses after verbs of exhorting,
Relative clauses expressing pur- etc., 200; after qe<lw 203; in
pose, 317-319. clauses after verbs of striving,
Relative clauses introduced by etc., 205-207, 209; in subject,
words meaning until, etc., 321- predicate, and appositive clauses
333; introduced by e!wj, and re- introduced by i!na, 211-214; in
ferring to the future, 322, 323, complementary and epexegetic
325, 326; referring to what was in clauses introduced by i!na, 215-
past time a future contingency, 217; in clauses of conceived re-
324, 326; referring to a past fact, sult introduced by i!na, 218-220;
327; referring to a contemporane- in object clauses after verbs of
ous event, 328; introduced by e!wj fear and danger (expressed), 224;
ou$ or e!wj o!tou, 330; introduced by (implied), 225; after e]a<n in con-
a@xri., a@xri ou$, etc., 331, 332; intro- ditional clauses, future supposi-
duced by pri<n, 333. tion, 250; after ei] in conditional
Negatives in relative clauses, clauses, future supposition, 252,
469, 470, 474. 253; with ei], expressing an object
Restrictive Relative clauses, 295. of desire, 276; changed to Opta-
194 INDEX OF SUBJECTS.
tive in in.direct discourse, 258; Tenses: enumeration of, 4; primary
after e]a<n in condItional clauses, and secondary, 4; two-fold func-
present general supposition, 260; tion of, 5; chief function, 5, Rem. ;
in concessive clauses referring to interchange of, apparent, not real,
the future, 285 (b); in conditional 15, Rem.
relative clauses, future supposi- In Indicative Mood: general
tion (with a@n or e]a<n), 303, 304; significance, 6; two-fold function,
(without a!n), 307; retained in 5; denote time relative to that of
indirect discourse, 305; in condi- speaking,7; apparent exceptions,
tional relative clauses, present gen- 7; use of each tense in detail,"
eral supposition (with a@n), 312; 8-94 (see Present, Imperfect,
in complementary relative clauses, Aorist, etc.).
318, 319 after e!wj [a@n], 322-325; In Dependent Moods: general
after e!wj ou$a or e!wj o!tou, 330; after significance, 95; use of each tense
a@xri, me<xri, 331; after pri<n, in detail, 96-114; tenses of the
333. Infinitive after prepositions; 104-
Negatives with Subjmictive, 475. 109; of the Infinitive in indirect
Subordinate clauses classified, 186, discourse, 110-114.
187. Of the Participle: general sig-
Suppositions: distinction between nificance, 118; use of each tense
particular and general, 239, 240, in detail (see Present, Aorist,
257; implied in relative clause, Future, Perfect).
289, 290, 296, 297; particular and Will and shall in translating the
general, 298, 299; expressed by Greek Future, 65.
an Imperative, 182, 183; ex- Wishes: expressed by Optative, 175-
pressed by a participle, 428, 436. 177; by the Future Indicative, 27,
Substantive Participle, 456-463, see Rem. 2; unattainable, expressed
under Participle. by the Imperfect or Aorist In-
Supplementary Participle, see 419, dicative, 27.
Rem.
INDEX OF GREEK WORDS.
[The Numbers reler to Sections.]
]Akou<w, Present with force of Per- @Afej and a@fete prefixed to Horta-
fect, 16. tory Subjunctive, 161.
]An: @Axri, 331, 332.
With Indicative: with Imper- Bou<lesqe prefixed to Deliberative
fect and Aorist to denote a cus- Subjunctive, 171.
tomary past action, 26; in past Ge<gona, Aoristic Perfect in Matthew
general supposition, 315; in apodo- (Mark?) only, 88.
sis of condition contrary to fact, Deu?ro or deu?te prefixed to Hortatory
248; omitted in such apodosis, 31, Subjunctive, 161.
249; cases in which it is not to be Dia<. with to< and the Infinitive, 108,
regarded as having been omitted, 406-408.
30 (cf. 32, 33); with Future In- Dio<ti as a causal particle, 228.
dicative in future supposition, Dokei? with Infinitive as subject, 385.
308; with Present Indicative in ]Ea<n:
future supposition, 309. Conditional: with Present Indic-
With Subjunctive: in condi- ative in present particular sup-
tional relative clauses, implying position, 247; with Future In-
future supposition, 303; implying dicative in future supposition,
present general supposition, 312; 254; with Subjunctive in future
relative clauses introduced by supposition, 260; in present gen-
e!wj, 322; after a@xri, 332; after eral supposition, 260; in condi-
o!pwj in final clauses, 196; for e]a<n tional relative clauses for a@n, 304,
in conditional clauses, 250. 312, Rem.
With Potential Optative, 178, Concessive, 279-281,286 (b).
179. ]Ea>n kai<, concessive, 279, 280, 286 (b),
With Infinitive, 372. 287; conditional, 282.
In definite relative clauses con- ]Eboulo<mhn without a!n, 33.
ditional in form, 316; retained ]Ege<neto de<, construction after, 357-
in indirect discourse with Sub- 360.
junctive retained unchanged, 306; @Egnwn with force of Perfect, 47.
omitted when Subjunctive is @Edei with Infinitive denoting pres-
changed to Optative, 344, Rem. 1. ent obligation, 32.
]Anti< with tou? and the Infinitive, Ei]:
406, 407. Conditional: with present or
]Ape<qanon with force of Perfect, 47. past tense of the Indicative, in
195
196 INDEX OF GREEK WORDS.
simple present or past particular Ei]j with to< and the Infinitive, 107,
supposition, 242, 243; with Pres- 406, 407, 409-413.
ent Indicative in future supposi- @Emellon with the Infinitive, 73.
tion, 266; with Present Indicative ]En with t&? and the Infinitive, 109,
in present general supposition, 406, 40!, 415.
261; WIth a past tense of the !Eneken with tou? and the Infinitive,
Indicative in condition contrary 406, 407.
to fact, 248; with Future Indica- ]Ece<sthn with force of Perfect, 47.
tive in supposition referring to ]Epei<, e]peidh<, e]peidh<per as causal
present intention, etc., 246; with particles, 228.
Future Indicative in future sup- @Esxhka as Aoristic Perfect, 88.
position, 264, 256; with Future ]Ef ] &$ as a causal particle, 228.
Indicative with the force of an @Exw, followed by indirect delibera-
oath, 272; with the Subjunctive tive questions, 346; by relative
in future supposition, 252, 253; clause of similar force, 318.
with the Optative in indirect dis- [Ew<raka as Aoristic Perfect, 88.
course for e]a<n with Subjunctive !Ewj force as a relative adverb, 321,
or ei] with the Indicative of the introducing a clause referring to
direct discourse, 258; with the the future, 322, 323, 326, 329; in-
Optative in future supposition troducing a clause referring to
less probable, 259; with Sub- what was in past time a future con-
junctive, Optative, or Future In- tingency, 324, 326, 329 ; how trans-
dicative expressing an object of lated when followed by the Sub-
desire, 276; after expressions junctive, 325; introducing a clause
of wonder with nearly the force referring to a past fact, 327; in-
of o!ti, 277. troducing a clause referring to a
Concessive, 279-281; with a contemporaneous event, 328; fol-
present or past tense of the In- lowed by ou$ or o!tou, 330; with tou?
dicative, 284; with Future Indic- and the Infinitive, 406, 407.
ative, 285. @H, Infinitive after, 374; after pri<n,
Interrogative, in indirect ques- 333, Rem. 2, 381.
tions, 340. @Hqelon without a@n, 33.
Ei] de< and ei]de> mh<ge used elliptically, !Hkw, force of Present tense, 16.
275. Hu]xo<mhn without a@n, 33.
ei] kai< concessive, 279, 280, 281, Rem., qe<leij and qe<lete prefixed to De-
288; conditional, 282,286. liberative Subjunctive, 171.
Ei] mh< without dependent verb, mean- {Ina: New Testament usage, 191, 221,
ing except, 274,471. 223; in pure final clauses, 197-
Ei@qe in unattainable wishes, 27, 199; in object clauses after verbs
Rem. 1. of exhorting, etc., 200-203; in ob-
Ei@lhfa as Aoristic Perfect, 88. ject clauses after verbs of striving,
Ei]mi< used in the formation of peri- etc., 205, 206; in subject, predi-
phrastic verb-forms, 20, 34, 71, cate, and appositive clauses, 211-
84, 91, 97, 103, 155, 431. 214; in complementary and
Ei@rhka as Aoristic Perfect, 88. epexegetic clauses, 215-217; in
INDEX OF GREEK WORDS. 197
clauses of conceived result, 218, Mh> ge<noito, 177.
219; not used to express actual Mh> ou], in questions, 468; after verbs
result, 222; post-classical usage of hindering, etc., 484.
in general, 223. !Ostij as an interrogative, 349.
Kai< ge with concessive participle, !Opwj, New Testament usage,. 192,
437. 196; in pure final clauses, 197,
Kai> e]a<n, concessive, 279, 281, 285 199; in object clauses after verbs
(b); conditional, 282. of exhorting, 200-202; in object
Kai> e]ge<neto construction after, 357- clauses after verbs of striving, etc.,
360. 205, 207.
Kai> ei] concessive, 279, 281, 288; !Oti as a causal particle, 228.
conditional, 282. !Oti introducing indirect quotation,
Kai<per with concessive participle, 339 (a), 343; redundant before a
437. direct quotation, 345.
Ke<kragen, functionally a Present, 78. Ou] and its compounds: classical and
Lanqa<nw participle with, 147. New Testament usage in general,
Me<llw, me<llen, etc., with Infinitive, 464.
72, 73, 100, 153. With the Indicative: in inde-
406, 407. 465; with Imperative Future, 466;
Me<xri, 331. in questions expecting an affirma-
Mh< as a negative, and its compounds: tive answer, 467; in conditional,
classical and New Testament use conditional relative, and con-
in general, 464. cessive clauses, 469, 470; after mh<
With the. Indicative.: in ques- as a conjunction, 472; in indirect
tions expecting a negative answer, discourse, 473; in causal and
467,468; in conditional and con- simple relative clauses, 474.
ditional relative clauses, 469; in With the Subjunctive after mh<
causal and relative clauses, 474, as a conjunction, 475.
Rem. 1, 2. With limitations of the Im-
With the Subjunctive, 475, 162, perative, 479.
163. With limitations of the Infini-
With the Optative of Wishing, tive, 481; compounds of ou] with
476. an Infinitive depending on a verb
With the Imperative, 478, 163. limited by ou], 482.
With the Infinitive, 480; re- With participles, 485.
dundant after verbs of hindering, Ou] mh<, emphatic negative: with Pre-
denying, etc., 402, 483, 484. dictive Future, 66, 487; with the
With participles, 485. Imperative Future, 67, Rem. 2,
Mh< as a final particle: New Testa- 488; with the Prohibitory Sub-
ment uses, 193; in pure final junctive, 167, 488; with the Sub-
clauses, 199; in object clauses junctive in negative assertions,
after verbs of striving, 206, 209; 172, 173, 487; after another nega-
in object clauses after verbs of tive, 489.
fear and danger, 224-227.
198 INDEX OF GREEK WORDS.
@Ofelon in expression of wishes, 27, [Upa<rxw used in the formation of
Rem. 1, 2. periphrastic verb-forms, 20.
Pa<reimi, force of Present tense, [Wj: New Testament usage as a final
Pepi<steuka as Intensive Perfect, 77. particle, 194; with the Infinitive
Pepoi<hka as Aoristic Perfect, 88. denoting purpose, 372; with a
Pe<praken as Intensive Perfect, 77. causal participle, 440, 441; with
Pri<n as Aoristic Perfect, 88. the participle expressing manner,
Pri<n with a finite mood, 333; with 445, 446.
the Infinitive, 380-382. !Wste: denoting result with Indica-
Pro< with tou? and the Infinitive, 106, tive and Infinitive, 234, 235; with
406, 407. Indicative, 236, 370 (a), 371 (a);
Pro<j with to< and the Infinitive, 107, introducing principal verb, any
406, 407, 414. mood, 237; with Infinitive denot-
Swzo<menoi, force of tense, 125. ing result, 369-371; with the In-
To<, tou? t&>?, Infinitive with, 392-417. finitive denoting purpose, 367.
INDEX OF PASSAGES REFERRED TO.
[The numbers refer to sections. Passages referred to in Remarks are cited
by the number of the section to which the Remark is appended.]
I. NEW TESTAMENT PASSAGES.
SECTION SECTION
Matt.
Matt.l:19 387 Matt.5:42 180
Matt.
Matt.
Matt.2:2 157 Matt.6:11 98
Matt.2:3 439 Matt.
Matt. 2: 9 326 Matt.
Matt.
Matt.
Matt.
Matt.
Matt.
Matt.
Matt.
Matt.4:2 134 Matt.7:6 199
Matt. 4:3 200, 242 Matt.
Matt. 4:4 68 Matt.
Matt.
Matt.5:6 124 Matt.7:17 12
Matt.
Matt.5:17 98, 366 Matt.8:8 216
Matt. 5:18. 172, 322 Matt.
Matt.
Matt. 5:20. 250 Matt.
Matt.
Matt.
Matt.
Matt.
Matt.
Matt.
199
200 INDEX OF PASSAGES REFERRED TO.
SECTION SECTION
Matt. 10:1 371 Matt.
Matt.l0:4 142 Matt.16:1 121
Matt.10:14 310 Matt.16:11 473
Matt.
Matt.l0:25 214 Matt.16:19 94
Matt.
Matt.l0:32 308 Matt.16:22 66
Matt.
Matt.10:37 423, 428 Matt.16:26 66
Matt.10:38 313, 428, 469 Matt.16:27 72
Matt.l0.39 428 Matt.16.35 66
Matt.10:40, 41 428 Matt.17:5 55
Matt.10:42 65, 428 Matt.17:8 471
Matt.11:1 459 Matt.18:4, 5 308
Matt.11:4 151 Matt.18:6 214
Matt.11:14 282 Matt.18:8, 9 256
Matt.11:21 142 Matt.18:10 209
Matt.11:25 222 Matt.18:18 94, 431
Matt.11:28 65 Matt.18:21 169
Matt.11:29 65 Matt.18:30 324, 329
Matt.12:3 109 Matt.18:33 30
Matt.12:14 207 Matt.19:4 52
Matt.12:17 222 Matt.19:10 243, 264
Matt.12:18 55 Matt.19:14 387, 402
Matt.12:20 322 Matt.19:21 269
Matt.12:31 65 Matt.19:27 139
Matt.13:5, 6 108 Matt.20:10 343
Matt.13:12 313 Matt.20:19 410
Matt.13:14 167 Matt.20:22 72, 393
Matt.13:15 199 Matt.20:26, 27 68
Matt.13:17 151 Matt.21:4 222
Matt.13:30 414 Matt.21:19 167
Matt.13:33 330 Matt.21:32 218, 398
Matt.13.35 222 Matt.21:34 109
Matt.13:46 78, 88 Matt.21:38 161
Matt.13:53 459 Matt.21:41 317
Matt.13:55 467 Matt.22:11 485
Matt.14:3 48 Matt.22:14 218
Matt.14:4 29 Matt.22:15 207
Matt. 14:7 305 Matt.
Matt.14:9 437 Matt.
Matt.
Matt.
Matt. 15:2 312 Matt.
Matt. 15:6 67, 68 Matt.
200 INDEX OF PASSAGES REFERRED TO.
SECTION SECTION
Matt. 10:1 371 Matt.
Matt.l0:4 142 Matt.16:1 121
Matt.10:14 310 Matt.16:11 473
Matt.
Matt.l0:25 214 Matt.16:19 94
Matt.
Matt.l0:32 308 Matt.16:22 66
Matt.
Matt.10:37 423, 428 Matt.16:26 66
Matt.10:38 313, 428, 469 Matt.16:27 72
Matt.l0.39 428 Matt.16.35 66
Matt.10:40, 41 428 Matt.17:5 55
Matt.10:42 65, 428 Matt.17:8 471
Matt.11:1 459 Matt.18:4, 5 308
Matt.11:4 151 Matt.18:6 214
Matt.11:14 282 Matt.18:8, 9 256
Matt.11:21 142 Matt.18:10 209
Matt.11:25 222 Matt.18:18 94, 431
Matt.11:28 65 Matt.18:21 169
Matt.11:29 65 Matt.18:30 324, 329
Matt.12:3 109 Matt.18:33 30
Matt.12:14 207 Matt.19:4 52
Matt.12:17 222 Matt.19:10 243, 264
Matt.12:18 55 Matt.19:14 387, 402
Matt.12:20 322 Matt.19:21 269
Matt.12:31 65 Matt.19:27 139
Matt.13:5, 6 108 Matt.20:10 343
Matt.13:12 313 Matt.20:19 410
Matt.13:14 167 Matt.20:22 72, 393
Matt.13:15 199 Matt.20:26, 27 68
Matt.13:17 151 Matt.21:4 222
Matt.13:30 414 Matt.21:19 167
Matt.13:33 330 Matt.21:32 218, 398
Matt.13.35 222 Matt.21:34 109
Matt.13:46 78, 88 Matt.21:38 161
Matt.13:53 459 Matt.21:41 317
Matt.13:55 467 Matt.22:11 485
Matt.14:3 48 Matt.22:14 218
Matt.14:4 29 Matt.22:15 207
Matt. 14:7 305 Matt.
Matt.14:9 437 Matt.
Matt.
Matt.
Matt. 15:2 312 Matt.
Matt. 15:6 67, 68 Matt.
INDEX OF PASSAGES REFERRED TO. 201
SECTION SECTION
Matt.
Matt.
Matt.
Matt. 24:4 206, 209 Mark 1:7 376
Matt.24:6 209 Mark 1:9 359
Matt. 24:12 108 Mark
Matt.24:13 150 Mark1:17 269
Matt. 24:20 200 Mark
Matt. 24:22 469 Mark
Matt. 24:23 165 Mark
Matt. 24:45 397 Mark
Matt.25:6 80 Mark 2:5 13
Matt. 25:8 8 Mark
Matt. 25:9 225, 475, 487 Mark
Matt. 25:16 150 Mark
Matt. 25:27 30 Mark
Matt.26:2 410 Mark2:24 474
Matt. 26:4 210 Mark
Matt. 26:15 269 Mark 3:4 384
Matt. 26:17 171 Mark 3:6 207
Matt. 26:18 15 Mark 3:7 67
Matt. 26:19 293 Mark
Matt. 26:24 249, 469 Mark
Matt. 26:32 105 Mark
Matt. 26:33 279, 285 Mark
Matt. 26:35 66, 279, 281 Mark
Matt. 26:36 325 Mark
Matt. 26:43 91 Mark 4:6 406
Matt. 26:48 310 Mark 4:7 157
Matt. 26:52 124 Mark
Matt. 26:54 169 Mark
Matt. 26:56 222 Mark
Matt. 27:1 371 Mark
Matt. 27:4 139 Mark
Matt. 27:8 18, 52 Mark 6: 4 108, 408
Matt. 27:17 171 Mark
Matt. 27:20 42 Mark
Matt. 27:21 171 Mark
Matt. 27:31 48, 109 Mark
Matt. 27:33 20, 431 Mark
Matt. 27:41 120 Mark
Matt. 27:43 75 Mark
Matt. 27:49 161 Mark
Matt.27:63 15 Mark
Matt. 28:6 295 Mark
202 INDEX OF PASSAGES REFERRED TO.
SECTION SECTION
Mark 6:2 457 Mark
Mark 6:9 365 Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark 8:1, 2 346 Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark 9:6 343 Mark
Mark 9:9 204, 471 Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark
Mark 12: 7 161 Luke 1:72 375
INDEX OF PASSAGES REFERRED TO. 203
SECTION SECTION
Luke 1:74 400 Luke
Luke 1:76, 77, 79 397 Luke
Luke 2:6 400 Luke7:45 459
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
344, 390, 431 Luke 8:9 343
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke 3:9 15 Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke 5:1 358 Luke
Luke 5:4 457 Luke
Luke 5:7 404, 405, 449 Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke 7:2 13 Luke 11:5 168, 169
Luke 7:4 318, 319 Luke 11:6 318
Luke 7:6 216, 220 Luke 11:7 449
Luke
Luke
204 INDEX OF PASSAGES REFERRED TO.
SECTION SECTION
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke 12:1 371 Luke 17:2 214
Luke 12:4 368 Luke 17:4 98
Luke 12:5 105 Luke 17:5 181
Luke 12:8 308 Luke 17:8 325
Luke 12:8-10 150 Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke 13:7 17 Luke
Luke 13:9 271, 275 Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke 14:1 109 Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke 15:4 323, 329 Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke 16:3 387 Luke
Luke 16:4 45 Luke
Luke
Luke
INDEX OF PASSAGES REFERRED TO. 205
SECTION SECTION
Luke
Luke 22:61 66 John 5:5 131
Luke22:65 121 John 5:6 17
Luke 22: 67, 68 285 John 5:7 217
Luke
Luke
Luke
Luke23:35 246 John
Luke
Luke23:53 489 John
Luke24:16 403 John
Luke24:23 343 John
Luke 24:25 399 John 6:6 120, 121
Luke24:26 30 John
Luke24:30 109 John
Luke 24:32 22 John
Luke 24:36 435 John
Luke 24:46 75, 114, 390 John 6:63 293
Luke 24:51 406 John 6:64 153
John 6:68 70, 169
John 1:1 157 John 6:69 77
John
John
John
John
John
John
John
John
John
John 2:4 16 John
John
John
John
John
John 3:8 313 John
John
John
John
John
John 4:4 30 John 9:4 98, 327
John
John
John
John
206 INDEX OF PASSAGES REFERRED TO.
SECTION SECTION
John
John
John
John 11:2 142 John
John 11:9 240, 260 John
John
John
John
John
John
John
John
John
John 12:3 142 John18:23 245
John 12:4 153 John
John12:10 205 John
John
John
John
John
John
John
John
John
John 13:5 431 John
John 13:8 158 John
John 13:9 479
John
John
John
John
John 14:3 309 Acts
John
John
John14:26 59 Acts
John
John 15:6 43 Acts
John 15:8, 50, 213 Acts
John 15:9 98 Acts
John
John
John
John 16:2 124, 148, 216 Acts
John 16:3 232 Acts
John 16:7 65, 214 Acts
INDEX OF PASSAGES REFERRED TO. 207
SECTION SECTION
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts 5:3 389 Acts 10:7 127
Acts 5:5 39 Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts 6:3 317 Acts11:17 98
Acts
Acts 7:5 485 Acts12:18 452
Acts 7:7 308 Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts 7:60 41 Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts 9:3 415 Acts15:22 449
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
208 INDEX OF PASSAGES REFERRED TO.
SECTION SECTION
Acts
Acts 17:3 30 Acts
Acts 17:6 16, 485 Acts 24:10 131
Acts
Acts
Acts
270, 385 Acts 25:10 84
Acts
Acts
Acts 18:2 108 Acts 26:16 111, 333, 344
Acts 18:9 98, 164 Acts 25:22 33
Acts
Acts
ActS
Acts
Acts
Acts 19:9 119 Acts 26:6 427
Acts
Acts
Acts 20:3 163, 400 Acts 26:13 146
Acts 20:7 153 Acts 26:18 397
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts 21:1 138 Acts 27:3 139
Acts 21:3 130 Acts 27:9 108
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts 22:4 122 Acts 27:29 224
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts 23:1 137 Acts 27:43 42
Acts 23:9 271 Acts 28:6 100
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
Acts
INDEX OF PASSAGES REFERRED TO. 209
SECTION SECTION
Rom.
Rom.
Rom.
Rom.
Rom.
199, 476
Rom.
Rom.
Rom.
Rom. 4:2. 242, 245 Rom.12:3 411
Rom.
Rom.
Rom.
Rom.
Rom.
Rom.
Rom. 5:1 134,136 Rom.14:13 395
Rom.
Rom.
Rom.
Rom.
Rom.
Rom.
Rom.
Rom.
Rom.
Rom.
Rom.
Rom.
Rom.
Rom.
210 INDEX OF PASSAGES REFERRED TO.
SECTION SECTION
1 Cor. 4:7 282 1Cor.15:4 86
1 Cor. 4:8 27, 54 1Cor.15:18 139
1 Cor.
1 Cor.
1 Cor.
1Cor.
1 Cor. 5:8 237 1Cor.16:3 310
1 Cor.
1 Cor.
1 Cor.
1 Cor. 7:5 273
1 Cor. 7:8 273 2 Cor. 1:8 371, 401
1Cor.
1Cor.
1 Cor.
1Cor.
1 Cor.
1 Cor.
1 Cor. 8:5 281 2 Cor. 2:7 371
1 Cor. 8:9 206, 209 2 Cor.
1 Cor.
1 Cor. 9:1 169 2 Cor.
1 Cor. 9:4, 5 468 2 Cor.
1 Cor.
1 Cor.
1 Cor.
1 Cor.
1 Cor.
1 Cor.
1 Cor.
1 Cor.11:2 75 2 Cor. 7:8 85, 284
1 Cor.
1 Cor.
1 Cor.
1 Cor.11:25 105 2 Cor.
1 Cor.
1Cor.
1 Cor. 12:2 315 2 Cor. 9:7 12
1Cor.
1 Cor.
1 Cor.13:2 371 2 Cor.
1 Cor. 14:5 171, 252, 253 2 Cor. 11:1 27
1Cor.
1 Cor.
1 Cor.
INDEX OF PASSAGES REFERRED TO. 211
SECTION SECTION
2 Cor.
2 Cor.
2 Cor.12:9 88 Gal. 6:1 206, 285
2 Cor.
2 Cor.12:14 376 Gal.6:9 436
2 Cor.
2 Cor.
2 Cor.
2 Cor. 13:5 469 Eph.1:9 139
Eph.1:12 409
Gal. 1:6. 8, 10, 424 Eph.1:16 203
Gal 1.7 274 Eph.
Gal. 1:8 278, 281, 285 Eph. 2:4 39
Gal.1:10 248 Eph.
Gal.1:11 13 Eph.
Gal. 1.19 274 Eph. 5:4 32
Gal.
Gal.
Gal. 2:2 227 Eph.6:22 44
Gal. 2:3 438
Gal. 2:4 199 Phil. 1:6 60
Gal. 2:9 217, 385 Phil.
Gal.
Gal.
Gal.
Gal.
Gal. 3:2 387 Phil.2:6 394
Gal.
Gal.
Gal.
Gal.
Gal. 4:4 293 Phil. 3:1 96
Gal. 4:8 85, 485 Phil.3:8 425
Gal.
Gal.
Gal.
Gal.
Gal.
Gal. 5:2 250 Phil.
Gal. 5:3 124, 125, 379
Gal. 5:4 11
Gal. 5:7 402 Col. 1:8 142
Gal.
Gal.
Gal.
212 INDEX OF PASSAGES REFERRED TO.
SECTION SECTION
Col. 2:8 206, 424, 472 2 Tim.
Col. 3:18 32 2 Tim.
Col. 4:8 44 2 Tim.
Col. 4:12 203 2 Tim.
Col. 4:16 205 2 Tim.
Col. 4:17 205, 209 2 Tim. 4:7 74, 85
2 Tim.
1 Thess. 1: 8 369 2 Tim.
1 Thess.
1 Thess. 2:8 481 Tit. 1:6 469, 470
1 Thess.
1 Thess.
1 Thess. 3:5 227, 406
1 Thess. 3:8 247 Philem. 4 203
1 Thess.
1 Thess.
1 Thess. 4:3 386 Philem. 20 176
1 Thess.
1 Thess. 5:4 218, 219 Heb. 2:2 427
1 Thess.
1 Thess.
1 Thess.
1 Thess.
Heb.
2 Thess. 2:2 412 Heb.
2 Thess. 2:3 166 Heb. 3:8 162
2 Thess. 2:4 371 Heb.
2 Thess.
2 Thess. 3:5 176 Heb.3:15 415
2 Thess.
2 Thess.
Heb. 4:2 84
1 Tim. 4:4 436 Heb. 4:3 272
1 Tim. 4:8 439 Heb. 4:5 272
1 Tim.
1 Tim.
1 Tim. 6:3 469, 470 Heb. 5:1 124, 125
1 Tim.
Heb. 5:5 375
2 Tim. 1:8, 9 426 Heb. 5:8 437
2 Tim.
2 Tim.
2 Tim. 2:2 376 Heb.6:9 284
2 Tim. 2:5 260, 287 Heb.
2 Tim.
INDEX OF PASSAGES REFERRED TO. 213
SECTION SECTION
Heb.
Heb. 7:6 82 Jas. 4:3 408
Heb. 7:9 82, 383, 426 Jas.
Heb.
Heb.
Heb.
Heb.
Heb. 8:3 318 1 Pet.
Heb. 8:5 82 1 Pet.
Heb. 8:9 461 1 Pet. 3:1 199, 281
Heb.
Heb.
Heb.
Heb. 10: 2 108, 230, 232 1 Pet.
Heb.l0:9 88 1 Pet.
Heb.10:15 105 1 Pet.4:12 440
Heb.10:25 293 1 Pet.
Heb.
Heb. 11:3 107, 411 2 Pet. 1:2 176
Heb. 11:5 390 2 Pet. 1:9 469
Heb.
Heb.
Heb. 12:1 160
Heb. 12:6 313 1 John 1:1 86
Heb.
Heb. 13:2 147 1 John
Heb. 13:5 172, 489 1 John 2:5 79
Heb. 13:9 481 1 John 2:7 28
Heb.
1 John
Jas. 1:1 388 1 John
Jas. 1:4 219 1 John
Jas. 1:5 269 1 John 3:1 213
Jas.
Jas.
Jas.
Jas.
Jas.
Jas.
Jas.
Jas. 2:8 67 1 John 4:7 160
Jas.
Jas.
Jas.
Jas.
214 INDEX OF PASSAGES REFERRED TO.
SECTION SECTION
2 John 6 213 Rev. 8:1 316
2 John 8 206, 209 Rev.8:5 80
2 John 10 256 Rev. 9:4 212, 472
Rev. 9:5 212, 312
3 John 4 213, 460 Rev.9:6 60
3 John 6 141 Rev. 9:10 378
Rev. 9:20 218
Jude 17 422 Rev. 11:7 303
Rev. 11:17 54
Rev. 1:3 423 Rev. 12:2 389
Rev. 1:18 429, 431 Rev. 12:4 305
Rev. 2:5 275 Rev. 13:12 205, 210
Rev. 2:11 487 Rev. 13:13 210, 222
Rev. 2:25 332 Rev. 13:16 205
Rev. 3:2 28 Rev. 14:13 124, 218
Rev. 3:3 88 Rev. 15:4 172
Rev. 3:9 205 Rev. 15:8 331
Rev. 3:11 293 Rev.16:9 371
Rev. 3:15 27 Rev.17:12 52
Rev. 3:16 232 Rev.17:17 332
Rev. 4:9 308 Rev.19:3 80
Rev. 4:11 376 Rev. 19:13 75
Rev. 5:5 371 Rev. 20:3 331
Rev. 5:7 88 Rev. 20:15 242
Rev. 7:3 164, 331 Rev. 21:16 293
Rev. 7:14 80 Rev. 21:23 216
Rev. 7:16 487 Rev. 22:14 218
II. OLD TESTAMENT.
Gen. 2:19 315 Gen. 43:5 139
Gen.3:1 167 Gen. 43:6 122
Gen. 3:22 398 Gen. 43:11 227
Gen. 4:14 256 Gen. 44:15 69
Gen. 4:15 148 Gen. 44:26 256
Gen. 10:19 417
Gen. 16:3 400 Deut.8:3 68
Gen. 19:16 109, 415 Judg. 11:9 252
Gen. 19:21 398
Gen. 20:7 256 1 Sam.
Gen. 34:15 415 1 Sam.
Gen. 34:17 398 1 Sam.12:19 141
Gen. 34:19 401 1 Sam.
Gen. 34:22 398 1 Sam.
INDEX OF PASSAGES REFERRED TO. 215
SECTION SECTION
Ps. 78:18, Heb. (LXX. 77:18) 375 Jer.
Ps. 101:16, LXX. (Heb.102: 16) 65
Dan.
Eccl.
Dan.
Isa.
Isa. 6:9 167
Isa. 42:1 56 Mal.
III. ApOCRYPHA, PSEUDEPIGRAPHA, ETC.
1 Esdr.
Ps. Sol.
1 Macc.
1 Mace.
1 Macc.
1 Macc.
Mart. Polyc. 8: 2, 8 37 f.n.
Ps. Sol. 1:1 416 Mart. Polyc. 10:1 217
Ps.Sol. 1:8 416
Ps. Sol.
This material was digitally prepared and made available by Dr. Ted Hildebrandt
at
Please report any errors to: thildebrandt@gordon.edu