EXPRESSING TIME IN THE GOSPELS
by
Gordon Henry Lovik
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of Doctor of Theology in
Grace Theological Seminary
May 1973
Please report any errors to
Ted Hildebrand at:
ted.hildebrandt@gordon.edu
Accepted
by the Faculty of the Grace Theological Seminary
in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree
Doctor of Theology
Grade
A
Examining Committee
Homer A.
Kent, Jr.
James L. Boyer
Charles R. Smith
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. COMMON WORDS
FOR TIME IN THE JEWISH YEAR 10
Year
Month
Week
Day
Hour
Feasts
III. WORDS
INDICATING TIME UNSPECIFIED 34
ai]w<n
kairo<j
xro<noj
IV. WORDS INDICATING
TIME IN A YEAR 69
Year
Month
Week
Tomorrow
Yesterday
V.
WORDS FOR DAY AND ITS PARTS 99
Day
Division
of the Day
Night
Divisions
of the Night
Other
Indications of Time
PART II. GRAMATICAL STUDY
VI. INFINITIVAL EXPRESSIONS OFTIME
157
Background
of Temporal Infinitives
Tenses
of Temporal Infinitives
Identification
of Temporal Infinitives
Occurrences
of Temporal Infinitives
VII. PARTICIPIAL EXPRESSIONS OF TIME 171
Possibility
of Temporal Participles
Background
of Temporal Participles
Tenses
of Temporal Participles
VIII. CONJUNCTIVE AND ADVERBIAL
WORDS FOR TIME 182
Conjunctions
Adverbs
and Improper Prepositions
IX. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 235
BIBLIOGRAPHY
239
SCRIPTURE
INDEX 257
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
With
the advent of Gerhard Kittel's multivolume
work, Theological Dictionary
of the New Testament,1 there
has been great interest in the
meaning of the vocabulary of
the New Testament. Most of the
resulting study has been
devoted to words having only a
theological significance.
However, other important areas
for word studies remain, such
as, words pertaining to the
local church, Christian conduct
and discipleship. With this
type of study in mind this
writer has chosen to
investigate the area of "time," in
order to evaluate its meaning
and significance in the
Gospels.
Statement of the Problem
Little
study has been made of temporal expressions
in the Gospels. This is true in
grammars, books on syntax,
as well as commentaries and
special studies in periodicals.
However, because the Gospels
are history, an accurate
understanding of the methods
for expressing time in the
1
Gerhard Kittel, gen. ed., Theological Dictionary
of
the New Testament
(8 vols.; trans. by G. Bromiley; Grand
Rapids:
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1964-).
Gerhard
Friedrich is the general editor of volumes VII and
VIII.
"(Hereinafter referred to as TDNT.)"
1
2
Gospels is important. To
correctly interpret the Gospels
it is necessary to make a
thorough study of all the
temporal expressions in the
Gospels.
Though
a few writers have expressed interest in a
philosophical approach to the
problem of time,1 they draw
conclusions that are often far
from being Biblically
acceptable.
Consequently,
there are several reasons why this
investigation is a contribution
to New Testament studies.
(1) This study sets forth a
collection and analysis of all
the time expressions found in
the Gospels. (2) These
expressions of time have an
important bearing on the exege-
sis of many passages. (3) An
objective analysis can thus
be made of those writers of the
past and present who have
built their exegesis and
theology on misunderstandings of
time words and grammar.2 (4) The life of Christ can
be
understood more clearly by
knowing the meaning of these
1
Cf. Thorlief Bowman, Hebrew Thought Compared with
Greek, trans. by J. Noreau (
1960);
Oscar Cullman, Christ and Time, trans. by F. B.
Filson
(Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1950), "(Here-
inafter
referred to as Time.)"; J. A. T. Robinson, In the
End,
God
(New York: Harper and Row, 1968), "(Hereinafter
referred
to as In The End.)."
2
For example, a recent article citing many men who
have
erred in their interpretation of the aorist tense and
consequently
their interpretation of Scripture was written
by
Frank Stagg, "The Abused Aorist, Journal of Biblical
Literature, LCI (June, 1972),
222-31. "(Hereinafter
referred
to as Aorist.)"
3
expressions of time. (5) Any
writer, who asserts that
"errors" exist in
matters of time in the Gospels, can be
answered with confidence.
Background for This Study
Any
serious word study in the Greek of the New
Testament requires a consideration
of both Hebrew and
Aramaic. At least three of the
Gospel writers were Jewish
and their expression of thought
though written in Greek
would be Hebrew in concept.
Since the language of the
Jewish part of
marily Aramaicl at
least three different languages must be
considered. (1) The thought
concepts had their basis in
the Hebrew mind and language.
(2) These thoughts were
spoken for the most part in the
Aramaic language. (3) God
chose to record this revelation
in the universal language
of the
It
must further be seen that any examination of
Greek words in the New
Testament must include some study of
the Old Testament Hebrew and
the Septuagint. These same
Greek words also have a history
which often can be traced
from the Classical Greek down
through non-biblical Koine
Greek. Any study in the New
Testament must include a
1
However, this is not to argue against the findings
of
M. Mansoor, The Dead Sea Scrolls (
Eerdmans,
1964), pp. 177-81, that Greek and Hebrew were
also
used in this time. Yet, the prominence of Aramaic has
long
been an accepted fact.
4
consideration of these areas.
Unless
otherwise identified, the translations
appearing in this dissertation
are those of the author. The
Greek Testament used throughout
was The Greek New Testament
published by the United Bible
Societies. In addition the
nineteenth edition of D. Erwin
Nestle's Novum Testamentum
Graece was
also used to check for textual variants.
Limitations
of This Study
By
the title, "Expressing Time in the Gospels," the
dissertation is limited to
those temporal references in the
four Gospels. Yet there must be
further limitations to
treat the subject properly.
Three major limitations are
needed. First, this is not a
study of the chronological
indications found in the
Gospels. This has already been the
subject of much writing.1
Second, in Greek a temporal con-
cept can be expressed through
verb tenses, but since an
investigation of this would be
too extensive to treat here,
the time indication of verbs
will not be included. Third,
the significance of the case of
these time words will not
be studied separately. Such an
investigation would entail
a study of great length which
is not possible in this
1
This subject is adequately treated by Leslie P.
(unpublished
Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological
Seminary,
1963).
5
dissertation.1
A
few minor limitations are also necessary. Though
it would be desirable to
compare and contrast all the
parallel passages containing
temporal expressions, this
will not be attempted since
this could be a separate study.
Where it is important to the
purpose of the dissertation,
the unacceptable views of the
liberals will be cited and
discussed. There will not be an
extensive rebuttal given
to the liberal method of
interpretation. Because of the
subject matter there will not
be exegetical elaborations
but rather the conclusions from
the exegesis process.
Goals of This Study
There
are two primary goals of this work. The first
is to collect and to classify
every word, phrase and gram-
matical expression pertaining
to time in the Gospels. The
second is the establishing of
the precise meanings of these
references to time. Berkley
Nickelsen says that the basic
objective of every interpreter
of the Scriptures should be,
1
It is accepted that the comments found in Greek
grammars
concerning case significance of time words are
correct.
The following distinctions should be maintained
unless
there are strong contextual reasons not to do so:
(1)
the genitive case implies the time within which some-
thing
takes place but states nothing as to duration;
(2)
the dative case answers the question 'when?' and des-
ignates
a point of time; (3) the locative case (particu-
larly
when e]n
occurs) regards the period from the point
of
view of a point even if it is of some length; and (4)
the
accusative case when used of time expresses duration
over the whole period.
6
"to find out the meaning
of a statement (command, question)
for the author and for the
first hearers or readers, and
thereupon to transmit that
meaning to modern readers."1
This well states the second
goal of this study. The end
result hopefully will be a
wordbook of temporal expressions
in the Gospels that will
provide a basic tool in the inter-
preting and understanding of
historical and temporal
passages in the Gospels.
Method of This Study
The
major approach of this study will be a word
study. This necessitates, (1) a
knowledge of the possible
word meanings in the period in
which they occur, (2) an
examination of the context of
each writer to understand the
initial reception of the
message, and (3) a careful
avoidance of fine distinctions
of synonyms and etymological
determinations unless there is
strong contextual support.
It must be noted that
"linguistically, it is the syntactical
complexes, in which the lexical
items are used, and not the
lexical items themselves, which
constitute communication."2
Great care must be taken to
avoid a lexical structure for
1
A.
Rapids:
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1963), p. 5.
2
James Barr, Biblical Words for Time (
Press
Ltd., 1961), p. 155. "(Hereinafter referred to as
Time.)"
7
the Gospels that sets forth the
outlines of Biblical
thought about this subject
since there can be variations
between languages and thought
patterns of the writers
themselves.
More
specifically the expressions for time will
each be explored in three
areas. The use of a word in non-
biblical Greek includes several
considerations. The
etymology of a word is
important if it can be ascertained.
Then the use of each word has
to be examined in Classical,
other Koine literature and the
papyri. A second area to
explore is the use of each word
in the Old Testament. This
often can be studied from the
Greek word through its Hebrew
counterpart, as well as the
uses of the word in the
Septuagint. After this the
final area of study can begin.
Each use of the word in the
four gospels is syntactically
and contextually considered.
For greater ease of compre-
hension, the Gospels are
discussed separately, Matthew
through John, with appropriate
conclusions placed in the
final paragraph of each
discussion.
The
last major area of the dissertation consists of
a grammatical investigation of
the temporal infinitives,
participles, adverbs and
conjunctions. This second area of
study completes the examination
of all the expressions for
time in the Gospels with the
exception of time as is indi-
cated by the verb tenses. This,
however, is not a
consideration of the
dissertation.
Preview of This Study
Following
this introductory chapter the first major
part of the dissertation,
"Word Study," begins. The initial
major chapter contains a
discussion of the temporal words
that were common and popularly
used by all Jews. This
chapter is not an extensive lexical
study but rather the
citing of the various meanings
for the most frequently used
words, such as,
"year," "day" and "hour." These common
words provide a basis for later
discussion. Their variety
of meanings establishes early
that linguistic dogmatism
solely on the basis of a word
unscientific.
The
next three chapters contain words expressing
time. They are divided into
"Words Indicating Time
Unspecified," "Words
Time in a Year," and "Words for Day
and its Parts." In each
chapter the words will be examined
alphabetically as to their use
in (1) non-biblical Greek,
(2) the Old Testament, and (3)
the Gospels.
The
second major part of the dissertation, "A
Grammatical Study," begins
with chapter six. It is a study
of "Infinitival
Expressions of Time." These are clearly
identified in the Gospels and
are examined both grammati-
cally and contextually. Chapter
seven is an investigation
of "Participial
Expressions of Time." Primarily this is a
study of the grammar because it
is too difficult to deter-
mine this function of the
participle. Only illustrations
8
9
of this are cited. The last
chapter of this second part is
a discussion of the "Conjunctive
and Adverbial Words for
Time." These are cited
alphabetically and in accordance
with their recognized major
function, adverbial or
conjunctive.
A
summary and conclusion completes the dissertation
setting forth the findings of
the investigation.
PART
I. WORD STUDY
CHAPTER II
COMMON WORDS FOR TIME
IN THE JEWISH YEAR
Expressions
of time in the Gospels are subject to
misunderstandings for at least
three reasons: (1) the
large number of Gospel passages
indicating time which often
differ in parallel passages,
(2) the lack of specific
knowledge about certain first
century dating practices, and
(3) the errant equating of
contemporary concepts of time
with those of the Gospel era.
Much of the confusion can be
alleviated by a general
understanding of the time expres-
sions commonly used within the
Jewish year. The indications
of time considered in this
chapter are: year, month, week,
day, hour and feasts.
Year
The
year, hnAwA in Hebrew, has been
reckoned by
many methods at different
points in Biblical history. This
practice provides a variety of
calendars for the New Testa-
ment era. Both the length of
year and the nature of the
calendar year create problems
for determining the correct
method of Biblical calendation.
The
primary system the Hebrews used for indicating
chronology was by the year. But
even among the Jewish
people the principles of
chronology varied sufficiently to
11
12
give Old Testament scholars
great difficulty. Within the
past few decades significant
efforts have been made toward
understanding the chronological
reckoning of the Jews both
during the period of the Kings1
and the restoration of
conclusions have not been met
with universal acceptance
they provide the basis for Old
Testament time reckoning.
In
the Old Testament both a solar, a luni-solar
year3 and a lunar
year4 have been suggested as being
followed. Morgenstern writes in
support of the luni-solar
year, that is, a calendar year
based on lunar months with
a system of intercalation to
harmonize with the sun:
Now it is of
utmost significance that, working on
altogether
independent, astronomical grounds, Charlier
reached
exactly the same conclusion, that the temple
must
have been so built that on the two annual equi-
noctial
days the first rays of the rising sun shone
directly
in through the eastern gate. He has shown
further
that these two equinoctial days were the 1st
of
the first month and the 10th of the seventh month,
1
Edwin R. Thiele, The Mysterious Numbers of the.
Hebrew
Kings (
Company,
1965).
2
Richard A. Parker and Waldo H. Dubberstein,
Babylonian
Chronology, 626 B.C.-A.D. 75 (
3
Julian Morgenstern, "Supplementary Studies in the
Calendars
of Ancient
X
(1935), 3-5.
4
Henri Daniel-Rops, Daily Life in the Time of Jesus,
trans.
by P. O'Brian (New York: Mentor-Omega Books, 1962),
p.
179. "(Hereinafter referred to as Daily Life.)"
13
the
latter the late Biblical Yom Kippur. . . .1
Those
who accept a lunar or embolistic year actually
assert the same basic reckoning
of time since an embolistic
month, a second Adar, was added
about every third year to
bring the lunar year into
agreement with the solar year.
The
beginning of the Jewish year could begin either
in Nisan (March-April) or
Tishri (September-October)
depending on the system followed
at a particular time. The
first month of the year varied
during Jewish history after
the division of the kingdom.
Later in 1 Maccabees the
method of designating the
months by name and number indi-
cates that the first month of
the Jewish year about 165 B.C.
was Nisan. This probably was
the case in
the first century A.D., since
it was just before Nisan that
any type of correction for the
length of the year had to be
made in order to make the
ripening of the barley correspond
to the celebration of the
Passover in Nisan. Further, no
political events had occurred
to force the Jews to change
from the practice of the
Maccabbean times.
Shortly
after the time of the Maccabean revolt the
all others. Found in the Book
of Jubilee 6:23-32, this
system of dating reckons a year
as 364 days. Thus each
1
Julian Morgenstern, "The Gates of Righteousness,"
14
year was errant one and
one-half days with the cycle of the
sun unless some method of
intercalation was practiced. The
year itself is divided into
four quarters of ninety-one days
with two months being thirty
days and one being thirty-one
days in each quarter. The
advantage of this system is that
every feast day was on the same
day of the week each year.
Feast days came regularly on
Wednesday, Friday and Sunday.1
Since the Passover, Nisan 15,
according to this system falls
on a Wednesday, some scholars
have taken liberty to recon-
struct the entire passion
accounts.2 Though
this view has
created much interest and
speculation that Jesus and his
disciples may have used this
calendar, most scholars do not
consider this likely. Perhaps
the greatest weakness of
this Jaubertian calendar system
is the lack of knowledge
about the yearly intercalations
which must have been made
in both the solar and
traditional calendars at the time of
Christ. An acceptance of this
system adds many more
problems to the passion week
chronology than it solves.3
1
Jack Finegan, Handbook of Biblical Chronology
(Princeton,
N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1964),
pp.
54-55. "(Hereinafter referred to as HBC.)"
2
This is especially true of Annie Jaubert, The
Date
of the Last Supper,
trans. by Isaac Rafferty (Staten
3
For an excellent analysis and refutation of Annie
Jaubert's
chronology see Clifford Wood Hardin, "An Exami-
nation
of Jaubert's Chronology of the Passion Week,"
(unpublished
Th. M. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary,
1969).
15
There is no evidence that this
calendar was used outside of
the
followed there.
By
the time of Christ several calendars were in use
in
asserting dates.
Matters
were much complicated, however, by the fact
that
by no means all the inhabitants of
the
official calendar of the Jewish community. . . .
And
in a Greek city of the
perfectly
well be three concurrent calendars, the
Jewish,
the Syrian and the Egyptian, quite apart from
the
Roman.
And
lastly it now seems quite certain, since the
discovery
of the
groups
who were faithful to the tradition of the Book
of
Jubilees still used the ancient calendar of 364
days,
which had four terms of ninety-one days each, and
which
were each made up of thirteen weeks. This had
the
advantage of making the great feasts, such as the
Passover,
fall on a given date.1
The
reckoning of time by the aforementioned calen-
dars could produce different
times for both the length of
the year and the beginning of
the year. For example, the
Egyptian calendar after 22 B.C.
consisted of twelve months
of thirty days or three hundred
sixty days with five
epagomenal days added after the
twelfth month. Every year
preceding the leap year of the Julian
calendar was an
intercalary year and six
epagomenal days were added so that
the Egyptian yearly calendar
averaged 365 1/2 days. The
1
Daniel-Rops, Daily Life, p. 183.
16
beginning of the year fell on
August twenty-ninth or
thirtieth.1
The
Syrian calendar followed the Macedonian which
began in October and followed a
lunar calendar-system with
the probable insertion of
intercalary months. Though this
dating system seems to be
followed in 1 Maccabees2 it
appears to be of no consequence
in the New Testament.
Whether the Jewish year began
in the fall adopting the
Syrian system or in the spring
following the Babylonian
calendar is not known. However,
"at the time of Christ it
is quite certain that the lunar
year of 364 days was in
use."3 That is
to say, the lunar year with an intercalated
lunar month which permitted the
lunar year to coincide with
the solar year.
Of
course there were other problems of Jewish time
reckoning:
There
are some interesting facts to learn, as that
the
Hebrews, in counting an interval of days (or weeks,
or
months, or years) between two events would probably
(though
not necessarily) include in the interval both
the
day (or week, or month, or year) of the first event
as
well as the second.4
1
Finegan, HBC, pp. 28-29.
2
Ibid., p. 121.
3
Daniel-Rops, Daily Life, p. 180.
4
John Marsh, The Fulness of. Time (
&
Brothers Publishers, 1962), p. 20. "(Hereinafter
referred
to as Time.)"
17
This
is known as inclusive reckoning and must be
considered in matters of
chronology (particularly in
connection with the use of h[me<ra). Fortunately, most
other words for time are not
affected by this principle of
chronology. In a subsequent
chapter, the two Greek words
for year, e]niauto<j and e@toj which translate hnAwA will
be examined in detail.
Month
Twelve
months, written mh<n in
both the Septuagint
and the New Testament, made up
the Jewish year. Each month
had twenty-nine days and began
"when the thin sliver of the
new moon appeared in the
sky: if it did not appear, then
necessarily the month had
thirty days."1 It must be under-
stood that the Jewish month was
based totally on visible
lunar calculation, as is
attested by the two Hebrew words
for month, wdH , meaning "glittering new moon" and Hry
meaning "moon" or
"month."
The
decision for determining the new month was the
work of the Sanhedrin.
If
the members of the court found that the new
moon
might be visible, they were obliged to be in
attendance
at the courthouse for the whole thirtieth
day
and be on the watch for the arrival of witnesses.
If
witnesses did arrive, they were duly examined and
tested,
and if their testimony appeared trustworthy,
this
day was sanctified as New Moon Day. If the new
1
Daniel-Rops, Daily Life, p. 181.
18
crescent
did not appear and no witnesses arrived, this
day
was counted as the thirtieth day of the old month,
which
thus became an embolistic month.1
This
shifting of the month from twenty-nine to
thirty days based on the visual
sighting of the new moon
and the decision of the
Sanhedrin to begin a new month
makes the certain determination
of a new month or a parti-
cular day in the month during
the first century an
impossible task.
There
was even a greater difficulty in reckoning
time by months. Since a solar
year is eleven days longer
than a lunar year, every third
year an extra month had to
be added to the calendar in
order to celebrate the feasts
at the correct time each year.
This
was done by adding a second Adar (the Baby-
lonian
name for the twelfth month), February-March, so
contrived
that the Passover, celebrated on the 14th
Nisan
(the first month), should always fall after the
spring
equinox.2
In
this way the spring season of the year coincided
with the month Nisan and the
first sheaf of barley would be
fully ripened, ready to be
offered on the sixteenth of
Nisan. To correlate the
beginning of the Jewish year with
the Julian calendar would
demand knowledge of every inter-
calation and the decision of
the Sanhedrin for all these
1
Jack Finegan, Light From the Ancient Past (New
2
G. Gordon Stott, "Month," HDCG, II (
Charles Scribner's Sons, 1912),
731.
19
years.
Perhaps
the aforementioned difficulties explain why
the words for month and year
occur only a few times in the
Gospels. The names for the
months are not used at all.
There is actually no evidence
that the object now called a
calendar and which shows the
months, weeks and days at a
single glance was known to the
average Jew.
Week
The
modern method of determining time by weeks was
not followed by the Gospel
writers. The Hebrew fbw from
the numeral seven was
translated by the Greek sa<bbaton,
This seventh day of the Jewish
week began Friday at sunset
and extended through the
daylight of Saturday. This was
the Jewish sabbath and was
known by that name. On several
occasions in the Old Testament
various feast days are also
called sabbaths.1
Consequently, the word "sabbath" could
refer to a feast no matter
which day of the week it was
observed or to the seventh day
of the Jewish week.
The
day prior to the weekly sabbath was the day of
preparation for the sabbath and
seems to be designated as
the paraskeuh<, the preparation day.2 Once in Mark 15:42
1
An excellent discussion of the meaning of Sabbath
in
the context of feast days can be found in an unpublished
monograph
by Homer A. Kent Jr., "The Day of that Sabbath
was
a High Day," pp. 25-31.
2
Josephus Antiquities 16. 6.2. (Perhaps this is
also
intended in Mt. 27:62; Lk. 23:54; Jn. 19:31, 42).
20
it is called prosa<bbaton and was also known as
"the eve
of the sabbath."1
Six times in the Passion week account
paraskeuh< occurs
and may have the function of indicating
"Friday," the day
before the Sabbath. That paraskeuh< can
refer to Friday of any week is
indicated by the Didache,
“. . . but do ye fast on the fourth day and the
Preparation
(Friday)."2 Josephus writes, ". . . and that
they need not
give bond (to appear in court)
on the Sabbath or on the day
of preparation for it (Sabbath
Eve) after the ninth hour."3
The meaning of paraskeuh<, Friday,
became so fixed in
However,
paraskeuh< can
also refer to "the day
before any feast which required
special preparation that
could not be made on the feast day
itself."4 That this can
be applied for example to Nisan
14, the day before the
eating of the Passover, is
illustrated by many passages in
Rabbinic literature.5
The Septuagint never uses paraskeuh<
in connection with any type of
a feast or Sabbath day.
1
Daniel-Rops, Daily Life, p. 184.
2
Didache 8.
3
Josephus Antiquities 16. 6.2.
4
Solon Hoyt, "Did Christ Eat the Passover?"
(unpublished
monograph, Grace Theological Seminary, 1945),
P.
34.
5
Babylonian Talmud Pesachim 4:1, 5, 6; 5:1; 10:1.
21
Thus,
two uses of paraskeuh< in the
New Testament
times are possible. It may mean
Friday, including the
evening of Thursday, which is
the day before a weekly
Sabbath. Or, it could mean any
day before a feast day such
as the Passover, Nisan 15. This
distinction must be con-
sidered in matters of
chronology. The other days in the
week were named simply by their
numerical order, so that
"the first of the week (mi%> sababa<twn) in Matthew 28:1 is
Saturday evening and Sunday
until sunset. The word for
week, sa<bbaton, occurs often since every Jew was oriented
to the sabbath observance on
the seventh day of the week.
Day
The
most frequently used word expressing time in
the Gospels is h[me<ra, day. The Hebrew MOy
and
its
translation h[me>ra were popularly used to indicate both a
twenty-four hour solar day and
the daylight period. The
Greek language also had nuxqhme<ron to indicate the
complete cycle of light and
darkness but this is used only
once in the New Testament, 2
Corinthians 11:25. "Usually,
however, the 'day' which
includes the nightime and the day-
time is simply designated with
the word h[me<ra, and
the
context makes plain what is
meant. . ."1
The
sequence of time in a day was measured by one
1
Finegan, HBC, p. 8.
22
of four methods: (1) a
sunclock, po<loj, (2) a
sundial,
gnw<mwn, (3) a
water-clock, kleyu<da (for
the night
especially),1 and
(4) estimation. It is quite certain that
the common people would use the
last method.
In
the ancient world the day began at dawn in
Old Testament; whereas the
Roman day began at midnight.2
Bickerman
writes concerning the Jewish reckoning:
On
the other hand, the complete day, for the purpose
of
the calendar, is generally reckoned in conformity
with
the respective calendar systems. The peoples who
use
lunations as the basic time-measurement (Athenians,
Gauls,
Germans and Hebrews) counted the twenty-four
hour
day from evening to evening.3
Though
it is not universally accepted, most New
Testament scholars accept that
the beginning of the day
among Jews in
the appearance of the stars was
the sign that the day had
ended4 and a new day
begun.
The
darkness part of the day is called night, nu<c,
and can be broken down into
several divisions of time. The
early evening was designated e]spe<ra.
The entire night,
1
Finegan, HBO, p. 12.
2
Ibid., pp. 8-9.
3
Elias J. Bickerman, Chronology of the Ancient
World
(Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University :Press, 1968),
p. 13. "(Hereinafter referred
to as Chronology.)"
4
Babylonian Talmud Berakoth 1:2.
23
nu<c
contained
four watches according to both the New
Testament and Josephusl
with each watch representing one-
fourth part of the night. This
differed from the Old Testa-
ment practice of having only
three watches. The watches
came in the following order:
(1) o[ye<, (2) mesonu<ktion,
(3) a]lektorofwni<a
and
(4) prwi~.2 In fact, in Talmudic
literature the word
"evening" at times also included the
entire afternoon. The afternoon
was divided into two
periods, 12 to 2:30 and 3:30 to
6:00, called evenings.3
The time for the slaying of the
Passover lamb according to
Josephus4 was
between the two evenings.
As
light began to dawn in
began. "This was true in
and
accurate way of speaking even
though the twenty-four hour
day began at sunset in some
countries and mid-night in
According to the
was divided into four parts:
(1) the gazelle of the
morning (a[me<raj ble<faron), (2) when one can distinguish
1
Josephus Antiquities 18. 9.6.
2
F. R.
(Edinburgh:
T. & T. Clark, 1906), p. 417.
3
Finegan, HBC, p. 14.
4
Josephus Wars 6. 9.3.
5
Bickerman, Chronology, p. 13.
24
blue from white (prwi~, skoti<aj
e@ti ou@shj), (3) when east
began to grow light (o@rqroj baqu<j), and (4) twilight
(li<an
prwi~, a]natei<lantoj tou? h[liou<).1 Consequently,
prwi~ and o@rqroj and their cognates are used of this time
period in the Gospels. Rather
than reckon time hour by
hour the daylight part of the
day was often divided into
three-periods, the middle of
the morning, noon and the
middle of the afternoon. These
correspond to 9 a.m., noon
and 3 p.m.
It
seems to me more likely that in spite of the
opportunity
offered by an hourly nomenclature the
ancients
found that for many purposes the simpler
three-hour
interval was sufficiently definite. For
the
culture represented by the evangelists and in a
society
without clocks or watches one could often be
satisfied
with phrases no more specific than our mid-
morning,
midday (or noon), mid-afternoon together
with
dawn or sunset.2
Thus
it is seen that within a solar day there can
be many expressions of time and
most are inadequate in
indicating a precise moment of
time. The more easily fixed
points of time during the day
would be daybreak, nightfall
and midday.
1
John M'Clintock and James Strong, eds., "Day,"
CBTEL, II (New York: Harper
and Brothers Publishers, 1882),
pp.
702-703.
2
Henry J. Cadbury, "Some Lukan Expressions of
Time,"
JBL, LXXXII (September, 1963), 278. "(Hereinafter
referred to as "Time.")"
25
Hour
Another
popular way to speak of time is by the hour,
w!ra. The
earliest known use of hours by the Jews came
during the Intertestament
Period and is recorded in the
apocryphal book 3 Maccabees
5:14. This hour had little
similarity to modern reckoning.
Any hour identification
could only be relative since
its length depended on the
time of the year and the
geographical latitude.
The
twelve hour system then in use throughout the
hours
are each the twenty-fourth part of a legal day
calculated
mathematically; the Roman system was
based
upon the durations of the sun's presence in the
sky:
on December 25th, therefore, the winter sol-
stice,
when there were but eight hours and fifty-four
minutes
of possible sunlight in the day, the day-time
hour
shrank to less than forty-five of our minutes,
while
each of the night-hours draw out to an hour and
a
quarter of our time.1
It
is important to notice that every day had twelve
hours of relatively equal
length and these hours were
numbered from daybreak to
nightfall (Mt. 20:3-12). Of the
method by which time was
actually determined in the
Biblical period, we know
little. The division of time into
sixty minute hours was a late
refinement, which must have
become generally used only when
some sort of a sundial or
hourglass became readily
available.2
1
Daniel-Rops, Daily Life, p. 186.
2
Roger T. Beckwith, "The Day, Its Divisions and Its
Limits,
In Biblical Thought," The Evangelical Quarterly,
XLIII,
(October, 1971), 220. "(Hereinafter referred to as
The
Day.)"
26
The
night likewise was divided into twelve equal
parts from sundown to sunrise.
Ramsay states:
Though
the Roman legal Day began at midnight, yet
the
hours of the day were counted only as beginning from
sunrise;
and the hours of the night (in rare cases in
which
the hours of the night were spoken of) only from
sunset.
In popular usage probably no night hours were
spoken
of except the third, sixth and perhaps the ninth,
as
the beginnings of the second, third and fourth
watches;
and those expressions were used, not because
there
was any device in ordinary use for dividing the
night
into twelve hours, but simply by analogy from
the
three main customary divisions of the day.1
From
the earliest times the daylight period had to
be divided by visual
observation rather than any other
means, at least by the common
people. In the Talmud there
is a discussion of the extent
of reasonable error about a
man's estimate of a given hour
appealing to the fact that
"in the sixth hour the sun
stands in the meridian."2
It
can be expected that many
references to a particular hour
in the Gospels would also be
based on estimation rather
than on mechanical means. The
most frequently used hours
were the third hour (9 a.m.),
the sixth hour (noon) and the
ninth hour (3 p.m.).
The
Hebrew word for hour hbw,
translated by w!ra,
can also mean an inexactly
defined period of time so that
in Daniel 3:6 it is best
translated "immediately." The
1
William Ramsay, "Numbers, Hours, Years and Dates,"
HDB, V. (New York: C.
Scribner's Sons, 1904), 477.
2
Babylonian Talmud Pesahim, 11b-12b.
27
Greek word could be used to
refer to time in general, "the
time is coming."1 These various meanings of w!ra necessi-
tate careful study of this
often used word in a later
chapter.
Feasts
During
the Jewish year several feasts are observed
and these are identified in the
Gospels by name or by the
word "feast," e[orth<.
By itself e[orth< cannot
give a
clear meaning and in a given
context scholars can disagree
as to the identity of the
feast.2 Although the time of the
year for the feasts varies
slightly because of the inter-
calation practice of the Jews,
some chronological identifi-
cations can be made
particularly in John by understanding
the time of the feasts. Of the
six major feasts--Passover,
Unleavened Bread, Weeks,
Tabernacles, Trumpets and Day of
Atonement--mentioned in the Old
Testament only three are
found in the Gospels by name.
The Passover, Unleavened
Bread and Tabernacles together
with the later Maccabean
festival, Dedication, provide
feast time indications.
1
James Barr, Time (London: SON Press Ltd., 1961),
p.
121.
2
The feast of John 5:1 for example has been identi-
fied
with the Passover by Lightfoot and Greswell, with
Pentecost
by Bengel and Browns, with Tabernacles by
Cocceius,
Ewald and Zahn, with the Day of Atonement by
Caspari,
with Trumpets by Westcott, and with Wood-gathering
by Edersheim.
28
The
Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread occur
during the same month, Nisan,
and seem at times to be almost
interchangeable. Both feasts
are found several times in the
accounts of the crucifixion.
The month Nisan is the time
when the first barley was
ripening. On the tenth of this
month the head of each home set
aside a lamb for the paschal
offering and groups were formed
for the proper celebration.
These lambs would be selected
from the flocks outside
necessary for the eating of the
lamb. On the fourteenth
the women removed all leaven
from the home and in the after-
noon the lamb was slain in the
temple by the priests then
taken to a home and cooked.
That evening, which began the
fifteenth, all the lamb would
be eaten. If they needed
additional meat because of the
large number of guests a
Chagigah could
be offered.1 It is uncertain
how many Old
Testament practices were
retained at the time of Christ
and there are almost as many
differing opinions about the
first century practice as there
are writers on the subject.
It
is unfortunate that the word for the Passover
feast, pa<sxa, which is found a total of twenty-five
times
within the four Gospels, can be
used at least five
1
Alfred Edersheim, The
Services (
1958),
pp. 218-19. (Also see his discussion of the
Passover
on pp. 208-48). "(Hereinafter referred to as
29
different ways because it
greatly complicates chronologi-
cal reckoning. Theodor Zahn
gives four different senses
of pa<sxa. (1) It can refer to the Passover lamb as
the
object of qu<ein or fagei?n. (2) The observance of Nisan
14 with the slaying of the lamb
and the feast of the
Passover, as distinguished from
the Feast of the Unleavened
Bread which began on the
fifteenth, is called the Passover.
(3) The name a@zuma, Unleavened Bread, refers not only to
the seven days following the
slaying of the Passover but
it is also applied many times
in the Old Testament to the
fourteenth day which precedes
it. (4) Likewise, pa<sxa
can be applied to cover all the
days of a@zuma so that the
terms a@zuma and pa<sxa are
used quite synonymously.1
Further, it would seem possible
that the Passover could
refer to the Paschal meal alone
on Nisan 15 or to Nisan 14
excluding the feast which began
after sunset. Edersheim
further maintains that pa<sxa can mean the Chagigah sacri-
fice offered on the fifteenth.2
Four
references to pa<sxa occur
before the Passion
Week account.3 Each
of these references appear to be
general indications of the
Passover season without reference
1
Theodor Zahn, Introduction to the New Testament,
trans.,
M.W. Jacobus, III (
1953),
296-98. "(Hereinafter referred to as Introduction.)"
2
Edersheim,
3
Luke 2:41; John 2:13, 23; 6:4.
30
to a more specific time
intended. Attempts to be dogmatic
concerning the days and nights
at the time of the Passover
meet with frustration because
of the probable existence of
more than one way of expressing
days.
Consequently,
when a day and night or a definite
number
of days and nights are being set apart from
manual
labor for religious purposes, it is necessary
to
decide which nights are being set apart in this
way
as well as which days. This was especially true
of
the passover, when the main celebration took place
by
night, but even in this case the special circum-
stances
made it as natural for Josephus to think of
the
new day as beginning after the night was over as
before
it began, since he cannot have failed to see
that
the lamb connected the night as intimately with
the
day preceding as the unleavened bread did with
the
day following.1
The
festival of Unleavened Bread follows immediately
after the Passover and lasts
seven days, Nisan fifteenth to
the twenty-first. It is called
by Josephus e[orth> tw?n
a]zu<mwn and ai[ h[me<rai tw?n a]zu<mwn.2 Apparently in popular
speech the fourteenth of Nisan
was also included in the
feast of Unleavened Bread in
Mark 14:12. However, the
second day of Unleavened Bread
was considered to be the
sixteenth of Nisan and the time
when the first sheaf of
barley was offered in the
began the counting for the seven
weeks to Shabuot or
1
Beckwith, "The Day," p. 226.
2
Josephus, Antiquities 3.10.5. and 18.2.2.
31
Tabernacles.1 The unleavened bread eaten during this
time
was a remembrance of the
deliverance from
sequence of these two feasts
and the events which accompany
them further complicate the
reckoning of time during the
Passover season.
The
Mishnah tractate Pesahim brings the entire
ritual
to a complexity widely removed from the his-
toric
night of the Exodus. The dating of the
recurrent,
commemorative festival is important for
Gospel
exegesis. The night of the Passover proper
(14-15
Nisan) and the feast of Unleavened Bread (15-
21
Nisan) are distinguished in Leviticus 23:5f and
Numbers
28:16f., but telescoped in Luke 22:1. Doubt-
less
they had long become telescoped in popular
thought
and practice, as Josephus and the Mishnah bear
out.
The first day of Unleavened Bread was strictly
15th
Nisan, though the 14th was often loosely so
called,
as in Matthew 26:17; Mark 14:12. The prepara-
tion
of the Passover began at 6 p.m. on 13th Nisan,
ending
at the same hour on the 14th. This is an
analogical
extension of the normal weekly Friday or
prosa<bbaton (Mark 15:42), when cooking
and all
laborious
preparations for the sabbath had to be
performed.2
This complexity is not found in
the other feasts.
Tabernacles
was celebrated in Tishri (the early
fall) fifteenth to the
twenty-first. Also known as Sukkot,
Succoth or skhnophgi<a, it commemorated the period of
wilderness wanderings after the
Exodus which was during the
formative period of the Jewish
nation. During these years
1
Louis Finkelstein, The Pharisees, I (
Jewish
Publication Society of
2
gelical Quarterly, XLIII
(July, 1971), 153-54.
32
the Jews lived like nomads in
temporary dwellings.1 At
this festival temporary
dwellings of palm branches and wood
sticks, not tents, were made to
dwell in. This feast was
held in high regard in
Josephus' time as is seen by his
description of Tabernacles; e[orth> sfo<dra a[giwta<th kai>
megi<sth2 and ei]j ta> me<lista throume<nh.3
Though
mentioned often by Josephus and
in the Septuagint, it is
found only in John 7:2 in the
Gospels. Most scholars
place this event about six
months prior to the crucifixion.
Following Jesus' teaching at
this feast He remained in
The
festival of Dedication (Hanukkah) or e]gkai<nia
is mentioned only in John 10:22
about three months before
the crucifixion. John
identifies this as being winter
which corresponds with the
festival date of Kislev or
December. The celebration is
actually a memorial to the
Maccabean wars of freedom over
the Syrians and Antiochus
Epiphanes who had desecrated
the
Antiochus defiled the temple on
Kislev twenty-fifth, B.C.
167, the Jews led by Judas Maccabaeus
regained the temple
cleansed t and restored its
worship. The whole festival
1
Julius H. Greenstone, Jewish Feasts and Fasts
(New
York Bloch Publishing Company, 1946), p. 60. "(Here-
inafter
referred to as Feasts.)"
2
Josephus Antiquities 8.4.1. VIII, iv, 1.
3
Ibid., 15.3.3.
33
has particular reference to
"the rededication of the
and the altar after these had
been in the hands of the
heathens for two years and were
polluted by them with
heathen worship and
sacrifice."1 The festival was similar
to Tabernacles:
And
they kept eight days with gladness in the
manner
of the Feast of Tabernacles. . . they bare
branches
and fair boughs, and palms also, and sang
psalms
unto Him that had given them good success in
cleaning
His place. They ordained also by a common
statute
and decree, that every year those days should
be
kept of the whole nation of the Jews.2
The
Festival of Dedication was a national holiday
rather than a religious festival.
While
the New Testament also uses many words and
grammatical expressions for
time, the purpose of this
chapter was to present the
commonly known designations for
time and to show that those in
the New Testament era could
use many expressions of time.
These popular methods of
reckoning time--by year, month,
week, day, hour, and
feasts--often had many
interpretations which is true of
these words in current speech.
This diversity of meanings
has produced problems in
understanding these time designa-
tions. For this reason, many
occurrences of these time
words must be studied at
greater length in the following
chapters.
1
Greenstone, Feasts, p. 115.
2
II Maccabees 10:6-8.
CHAPTER III
WORDS INDICATING TIME UNSPECIFIED
In
the Gospels three words expressing time need
special consideration in that
the words by themselves
specify a concept of time more
than an exact expression of
time. These words, ai]w<n, kairo<j and xro<noj, are the
subject of much discussion
especially by current
theologians. Since these words
occur often in the Gospels
this chapter will examine each
word in the above mentioned
order considering (1) their use
in non-biblical Greek,
(2) their use in the Old Testament
and (3) their use in
the Gospels. This last area of
examination will also
include the substance of the
contemporary discussion of the
three words.
Ai]w<n
As
a general indication of time, ai]w<n is used
in a
number of places and
expressions which, when examined,
provide the necessary insight
as to the correct meanings
of this word.
In
non-biblical Greek
Regarding
etymology Richard C. Trench connects ai]w<n
with a]w<, and a]h<mi meaning
to breathe. He further comments,
34
35
Like
ko<smoj it has a primary and physical and then
superinduced
on this, a secondary and ethical sense.
In
its primary, it signifies time short or long, in
its
unbroken duration, often times in classical Greek
the
duration of a human life.1
Curtius argues that ai]w<n is from the Sanskrit e?naj
meaning "course or
walk" and in the plural, "habit or
custom."2 Others connect ai]w<n,
with the Sanskrit ayu which
conveys the idea of life and
especially long life. Moulton
and Milligan comment more
cautiously concerning the
etymology and the meaning of ai]w<n:
The
word, whose root is of course futile to dig
for,
is a primitive inheritance from Indo-Germanic
days,
when it may have meant 'long life' or 'old age'
--perhaps
the least abstract idea we can find for it
in
the prehistoric period. . . . In general the word
depicts
that of which the horizon is not in view,
whether
the horizon be an indefinite distance. . . or
whether
it lies no farther than the span of Caesar's
life.3
Thus,
the basic idea of ai]w<n
relates to time
especially as it pertains to
human life whether it be that
of an individual or that of the
human race.
1
Richard C. Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament
(Grand
Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1953),
p.
217. "(Hereinafter referred to as Synonyms.)"
2
Georg Curtius, Principles of Greek Etymology,
trans.
by A.S. Wilkins and E.B. England, I (
3
James Hope Moulton and George Milligan, The
Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament
From the Papyri and
Other
Non-literary Sources
(
Publishing
Company, 1963), p. 16. "(Hereinafter referred
to
as Vocabulary.)"
36
The
earliest meanings of ai]w<n
include "lifetime,
life, long time, an age and
eternity."1 Consequently, in
early times ai]w<n could signify the duration of human life
as being limited to a specific
space of time or to denote
an age or generation as the
space of human life. The
expansion from these meanings
to the conception of time
unlimited was easy.2 Some of the Greek philosophers
frequently made use of ai]w<n to indicate the concept of
time unlimited. Plato has ai]w<n as "timeless, ideal
eternity" in which there
are no specific designations of
time such as days, months or
years. Plutarch and others
have ai]w<n in the sense of eternity or unending time.3
When
the preposition ei]j was linked to ai]w<n the concept of pro-
longed time and even the sense
of "forever" developed.
Prior to he time of the New
Testament era ai]w<n
acquired a
religious significance inasmuch
as Ai]w<n became
the name of
the God of eternity.4 Interesting examples of these uses
1 Ernest DeWitt
(Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1927), p. 76.
“(Hereinafter
referred to as Word Studies.)"
2 Hermann Cremer, Biblico-Theological
Lexicon of
the
New Testament Greek,
trans. by W. Urwick (
T.
& T. C ark, 1954), pp. 74, 75. "(Hereinafter referred
to
as Lexicon.)"
3 For a more detailed
study of the philosopher's use
of
ai]w<n examine TDNT, I,
pp. 197-78.
4
Hermann Sasse, ai]w<n, TDNT, trans. and ed. by
Geoffrey
W. Bromiley, I (
Publishing Company, 1964), 198.
37
can be cited in the early
centuries A.D. An athlete
claiming to have established a
new Olympic record exclaimed
mo<noj
tw?n a]p ] ai]w?noj neikh<saj
]Olu<mpia. Another time
one who was led off to death is
led "from life" a]p ] ai]w?noj.
Also the cry to the emperor was
heard "the emperors for-
ever," ei]j to<n ai]w?na.1
From
the instances cited above it is clear that
ai]w<n had a
varied number of meanings in the Greek language
ranging from life to eternity.
Because of the wide-range
of uses only the context itself
can determine the best
translation.
In the
Old Testament
The
meaning of ai]w<n in the
Old Testament can be seen
by two basic means: (1) the
meaning of the Hebrew words
translated by ai]w<n in the Septuagint and (2) the meaning of
ai]w<n in its
contextual environment in the Septuagint. These
will be considered in the
aforementioned order.
There
are nine Hebrew words translated by
ai]w<n.
However, the word MlAOf almost always the word with its
several variations which is
translated by ai]w<n,
although
occurs about sixty times. The
seven other words occur from
one to five times each and have
no real significance on the
1 Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary,
p. 16.
38
understanding of ai]w<n.1 Both dfa and MlAOf have
the same
basic meanings of
"eternity, forever, and eternal." In
fact, the word ai]w<n may derive its meaning from the
Assyrian ullu(m) meaning
"yonder, remote."2
William Rice
Hall indicates both words can
signify "perpetuity with a
distinctive emphasis upon concealment."3 This perpetuity
will be indefinite or concealed
as to limits in definition
though not necessarily in the
context. Some of the
references to MlAOf aid in illustrating Hall's comment.
In Deuteronomy 15:17 there is
mention of a perpetual slave
and in Genesis 9:16 a perpetual
covenant. Each of these
indicate a perpetuity only
after a time of inauguration.
In fact even the permanence of
their perpetuity may be
limited. Girdlestone writes:
Eternity
is endless; and this idea is only qualified
by
the nature of the object to which it is applied, or
by
the word of God. When applied to things physical,
it
is used in accordance with the revealed truth that
the
heaven and earth shall pass away, and it is limited
by
this truth. When applied to God, it is used in
harmony
with the truth that He is essentially and
absolutely
existant and that as He is the causa causarum
1 Edwin Hatch and Henry
A. Redpath, A Concordance to
the
Septuagint and the Other Greek Versions of the Old
Testament, I (Gratz, Austria:
Akademische Druk, 1954), 39-
41.
"(hereinafter referred to as Concordance.)"
2 Frank Herbert
Christian
Thought
(
1937),
p. 238. "(Hereinafter referred to as Time.)"
3 William Rice Hall,
"The Concept of Time and
Eternity
in the Old Testament" (unpublished Th.M. thesis,
39
and
without beginning, so in the very nature of things
it
must be held that no cause can ever put an end to
His
existence.1
The
extent of the perpetuity therefore can be
limited depending upon the
object and its relation to ai]w<n.
In those cases where God is so
related, nothing less than
the totality of eternity would
be meant.
There
may also be MlAOf,
perpetuity, in two direc-
tions, namely, the past2 as well as the future. "These
observations are equally true
whether the definite article
is used with the Hebrew or
not."3
Obviously care must be
taken to let the context
indicate the extent of time
intended.
In
the Septuagint ai]w<n
translates MlAOf with
two
meanings: (1) a duration of a
definite space of time, and
(2) an unending duration of
time which could be either past
or future depending on the context.4 Past time stretching
indefinitely backward is seen
in Genesis 6:4 "the mighty
men that were of old."
More frequently the time intended
is future and can be limited
only by the context as in
1 Robert Baker
Girdlestone, Synonyms of the Old
Testament, 2nd ed. (
1953),
P. 317.
2 Cf. Joshua 24:2 and
Jeremiah 28:8 as good illus-
trations
of perpetuity in the past.
3 James Barr, Time
(London: SCM Press Ltd., 1961),
p.
70.
4 Cremer, Lexicon, p. 75.
40
II Samuel 12:10, "the
sword shall not depart out of your
house forever (e!wj ai]w?noj). Initially ai]w<n had the idea
of hidden or distant time
belonging to the remote past or
future from the standpoint of
the present. Only later did
ai]w<n in
translating MlAOf
develop the meaning of endless
time or eternity. Cremer
substantiates this by saying:
MlAOf
the Hebrew
word meant primarily a remote,
veiled,
undefined, and therefore unlimited time, past
or
future, and only secondarily, a definite (especially
a
future) period whose limits must be ascertained from
the
context, it was the natural choice to have ai]w<n
translate
this word.1
While
ai]w<n has several lexical
meanings ranging from
life, lifetime, an age, a space
of time and eternity it is
certain that ai]w<n may signify an indefinite period of time
either past or future
(including the present) whose extent
is limited by the context more
than by word meaning and
may designate only a brief
period in one's life or extend
as far as eternity (or any
point in between). In that ai]w<n
was used to translate the
Hebrew MlAOf primarily it must be
understood that the New
Testament use ai]w<n has the Old
Testament world of thought
behind it.2
1 Cremer, Lexicon,
p. 75.
2Alan
Bible (New York: NacMillan,
1956), p. 266. "(Hereinafter
referred to as Word Book.)"
41
In the
Gospels
Some
fourteen different expressions occur in the
Gospels where the word ai]w<n is included. In general two
basic ideas seem to be present
among these uses: (1) an
indefinitely long period, that
is a period without assign-
able limits, and (2) one of the
two great periods of the
world's history.1
Regarding
the first idea it should be noted that
"only in the light of the
context can it be said whether
ai]w<n means
'eternity' in the strict sense of simply
'remote' or 'extended' or
'uninterrupted time."2 Sasse
further suggests that the use
of the plural "presupposes
knowledge of a plurality of ai]w?nej, of ages and periods
of time whose infinite series
constitutes eternity."3
The
two great periods of the world's history are
the present time which began
with creation and culminates
with judgment and the Messianic
or Kingdom age.
remarks,
In
the NT Aion is used of this life in opposition
to
the Age of the Kingdom which is called o[ me<llwn or
e]kei?noj
o[ ai]w<n:
from this it comes to mean this World
Order
under the rule of an evil angel.4
1
2 Sasse, ai]w<n, I, 198-99.
3 Ibid., p. 199.
4
42
The
many variations of expression using ai]w<n are
thought to be only an
"intensification of the tendency
already displayed in the LXX to
replace the simple formulae
by more complicated."1
In
recent years considerable discussion of ai]w<n,
kairo<j an xro<noj has taken place.2 These divergent views
have developed into two general
ideas about these words.
The two basic positions
concerning ai]w<n are set forth by
Oscar Cullmann and James Barr.
Cullmann
argues that ai]w<n in the
New Testament
designates a duration of time
which may be a limited or
unlimited extent of time.
Actually his scheme allows for
four elements: (1) the entirety
of time, (2) the period
before creation, (3) the period
between creation and the
final events, and (4) the
period from the final events to
infinity.3 When
ai]w<n is used to show a limited duration
of time it, should be
translated "age." If unlimited
duration is indicated the
translation "eternity" is pre-
ferred. The plural ai]w?nej is preferred when the sense
1 Sasse, ai]w<n, I, 200.
2 Some of those who reflect
this recent discussion
are:
J. Marsh, The Fulness of Time; A. Richardson, A
Theological
Word Book of the Bible; J.A.T. Robinson, In
the
End, God; C. Cullmann, Christ and Time; and J. Barr,
Biblical Words for Time.
3 James Barr, Time
(London: SCM Press Otd., 1962),
p. 74.
43
"eternity" is
intended. However, this "eternity" is not
something different than time
but the whole of time.1 To
Cullmann "eternity"
is, "the linking of an unlimited series
of limited world periods, whose
succession only God is
able to survey."2
In
his reply to Cullmann's position James Barr
argues against Cullmann's
methodology and conclusion that
eternity (ai]w<n) is synonymous with the entirety of
earth's
limited times. He maintains for
example, that ai]w<n in its
popular phrase ei]j to>n ai]w?na may be used "firstly for
the
totality of time and secondly
for a perpetuity in some
state for the whole of a
limited period, and negatively for
the continual avoidance of a
particular action"3 either
for
the whole or a limited period.
In other words ai]w<n may
have several meanings which are
not necessarily parts of
the same whole. He further
suggests that the use of the
plural of ai]w<n probably can be traced to or influenced by
the Hebrew olamim (or
similarly the Aramaic),4 and
not to
the combining of time periods.
restrict this meaning of ai]w<n too severely when he
comments:
1 Oscar Cullmann, Time,
trans. by F. Filson (Phila-
delphia:
he Westminster Press, 1950), pp. 45-46.
2 Barr, Time, p.
64.
3 Ibid., p. 77. 4 Ibid., p. 65.
44
In
this connexion it is important to observe that
neither
there, nor in any Jewish literature current at
the
time, was the word aion used to express the view
that
the history of the world is made up of a number
of
aions or 'ages', nor even the notion of two aions
or
ages -- the present and the one to come.1
Such a conclusion can hardly be
supported by the context
of many New Testament passages.
In
summary, Barr appeals to the syntactic contexts
to determine whether ai]w<n should
be translated "forever"
(which he believes is true in
most contexts) with "never"
in negative contexts and for
the past "from all time" or
eternity.2
The consideration of the context and the
historic uses of ai]w<n to determine the correct meaning of
ai]w<n is a
much better approach than Cullmann's self-
designed system of limited time
periods which when compiled
extend from the beginning to
the end of eternity. With
this background in mind an
examination of the use of ai]w<n
in the Gospels is now possible.
The
several uses of ai]w<n, are
translated most
often by "age,"
"forever," and in the negative by "never."
The time indicated may extend
from the time of creation to
the eternal state.
Matthew
uses ai]w<n with tou<t& in a general way to
speak of this present age or
time of history in contrast
1
2 Barr, Time, p.
69.
45
with the coming age which is
climaxed by the eternal state
(12:32). Similarly ai]w<n is found in "the worry of the
age"
(13:22; Mk. 4:19). Perhaps it is best to understand this
as the present evil time1 or world system which culminates
in judgment.
The
expression sunte<leia ai]w?noj,
"end of the age"
is found in five places and
always with ai]w<n in the
geni-
tive singular.2
Although it is found nowhere else in the
Gospels, this expression is frequently
found in Jewish
apocalyptic literature
especially in the Book of Baruch.
Each reference indicates a
future time period of limited
duration. It may be the time of
spiritual harvest (Mt. 13),
the time just prior to the
Messianic kingdom (24:3) and the
end of this dispensation at the
Rapture (28:20). At least
two differing points in time
are indicated therefore, the
expression does not seem to
refer to a particular point
but a period of time. To the
dispensationalist the promise
of Matthew 28:20 extends only
to the Rapture since there
will be no need for the promise
after the Rapture. The
other occurrences will be
fulfilled in conjunction with
the Second Coming, with the
events of the Tribulation and
1 Ezra P. Gould, A Critical
and Exegetical Commen-
tary
on the Gospel According to St. Mark (
&
T. Clark, 1961), p. 76. "(Hereinafter referred to as
Mark.)"
2 Mt. 13:39, 40, 49; 24:3; 28:30.
46
the judgment of all living (Mt.
13). Thus the same expres-
sion refers to differing
periods of limited duration.
Following
the end of this age time continues.
While Matthew does not use ai]w<n to describe the eternal
state he may suggest it in
recording the cursing of the fig
tree "there shall no
longer be fruit from these forever"
(21:19). The expression used is
the familiar Old Testament
phrase ei]j to>n ai]w?na or "into perpetuity."
Concerning this
phrase Lenski writes: "The
belief that whatsoever is
allowed to see that age will
continue to exist, in that age,
makes ei]j to>n ai]w?na equivalent to forever."1 And yet in a
sense even this use of ai]w<n may extend only so far as the
life of the fig tree. If this
is true, the most Jewish of
the Gospels has ai]w<n primarily to indicate time within the
existing period which is prior
to the eternal state.
Of
Mark's four references,2 two
are parallel to
accounts in Matthew. However,
Mark 10:30 introduces the
coming age (e]rxomen<& ai]w<n) which has as its
character-
istic life eternal. It is clear
that this coming age is
a distinct future period
following "this age" which is
qualified as to its nature only
by the phrase "eternal
life." Its extent of time
is unspecified.
1 Richard C. H. Lenski, The
Interpretation of St.
Luke's
Gospel (
1964),
p. 34. "(Hereinafter referred to as Luke.)"
2 Mark 3:29; 4:19; 10:30; 11:14.
47
In
the phrase ei]j to>n ai]w?na which
occurs in Mark
3:29, "hath not
forgiveness forever," it must have the
meaning of eternal duration
rather than "age." The "for-
ever" indicates the
duration of the not being forgiven
which must last as long as the
individual exists. It is
later referred to as an eternal
(ai]w<nioj) sin.
Here only
in Mark does ai]w<n indicate a long period of time including
both the present and future
ages.
The
third Gospel, Luke, incorporates all of the
previous uses of ai]w<n though sometimes with differing ex-
pressions. He writes of the
sons of the present period of
time in 16:8, tou? ai]w?noj tou<to. The terminus of the
present age will not be reached
until the coming age (18:
30). "This age" (tou<tou) in Luke 20:34 is not to be con-
fused with "that (e]kei<nou) age" (20:35). Perhaps more
pointedly here than any other
place Jesus shows there is a
distinction between the present
age, a time for marrying,
and the future age, a time of
resurrection. The periods
are distinct and do not
overlap. The ei]j to>n ai]w?na is
found in both the singular
(1:55) and the plural (1:33).
This is the only plural use of ai]w<n in the Gospels. The use
of ai]w<n in the singular "toward Abraham and
his seed for-
ever" may be indicating
that up to the time of Luke's
inscripturation only a single ai]w<n had transpired whereas
the plural "reign over the
house of Jacob forever" would
cite that a multiplication of
eons in an indefinite
48
succession portray the
magnitude of eternity.1
However, it
is best to understand the
singular or plural uses as
optional ways of saying the
same thing, "forever," unless
there is contextual evidence
which would indicate otherwise.
Luke
1:70, "from of old" introduces a use of ai]w<n
which looks backward into time.
It is not from an eternal
past but a time period being
reckoned from the time when
the holy prophets began to
emerge. Here ai]w<n
indicates a
past time within this age but
removed from eternity or
forever.
In
John only two types of ai]w<n
expressions are
found. The first expression in
9:32 is e]k tou? ai]w?noj
"since the world
began" and suggests the time as being since
the beginning of this age
commencing with creation. This
is the only such use in the New
Testament though it is
used freely by non-biblical
authors.2
The
most popular phrase ei]j to>n
ai]w?na
is found in
the singular all eleven times.
In John 8:35 Jesus uses an
illustration concerning the
tenure of a servant and a son
in a household. The servant is
not remaining "forever" but
the son remains
"forever." That is, his tenure is not lost
1 Lenski, Luke, p.
68.
2 J H. Bernard, A
Critical and Exegetical Commen-
tary
on the Gospel According to St. John, II (
T.
& T. Clark, 1962), 336. "(Hereinafter referred to as
John.)”
49
as long as he lives. Obviously
the time of this illustra-
tion extends only as far as the
life of the servant and the
son. Though "forever"
may be considered the best transla-
tion it can be misleading since
the "forever" is limited
to a lifetime. The other uses
of this phrase in John are
translated "forever"1 or its negative "never"2 which is an
unending avoidance. Among these
are the popular Johannine
phrases "never die,"
"live forever," and "never taste death."
In some of these cases the
"forever" had a beginning though
no end. Yet the same expression
is used in referring to
the abiding of the Son (12:34)
which has no beginning or
ending. Correct theology
demands that ai]w<n in
these places
be understood as an unending
period of time. In all these
passages ai]w<n cannot specify the period of time. Only
the
context can determine this. The
comment of A. H. Strong
concerning the meaning of ai]w<n and ai]w<nioj is
most fitting:
"They do, however, express
the longest possible duration of
which the subject to that which
they are attributed is
capable."3
By
way of summary, ai]w<n is
found in several phrases
and designates time that has
varying lengths. It may refer
to time past, from creation, Abraham
or the prophets. In
1 Jn. 6:51, 58; 12:34;
14:16.
2 Jn. 414; 8:51, 52;
10:28; 11:26; 13:8.
3 Augustus H. Strong, Systematic
Theology (Philadel-
phia: The Judson Press, 1907),
p. 1044.
50
other places it indicates the
existing world system, this
age, or the coming age. The
expression, sunte<leia ai]w?na,
used only by Matthew, signifies
the consummation of the age
either at the Rapture or the
Second Coming. The most
popular expression is ei]j to>n ai]w?na which is translated
"forever."1 Yet even the "forever" often had
a beginning
unless it was ascribed to
Jesus. It can have an ending at
the end of one's life as well.
To suggest a common trans-
lation for these multiple uses
would be impossible. Each
context must determine the time
and duration signified by
ai]w<n.
kairo<j
A
second important time word is kairo<j which
is
often translated
"time." However, there are several other
translations and uses of this
word.
1 Since ai]w<nioj is an adjective it was
not considered
separately.
The assertion by Strong, Systematic Theology,
p.
1044 that both ai]w<n and ai]w<nioj have the same basic
meaning
makes an in depth study unnecessary. Only the
nature
of its uses need be cited. In the Gospels the ad-
jective
ai]w<nioj has the meaning "eternal." This is also the
nuance
of ai]w<n.
Of
the twenty-nine uses of ai]w<nioj all but
five
occur with zwh< in the expression "eternal" life. The
other
uses are: (1) "eternal" fire (Mt. 18:8; 25:41);
(2) "eternal" punishment (Mt. 25:46);
(3) "eternal"
dwellings (Lk. 16:9); and (4)
"eternal" sin (Mk. 3:29).
51
In non-biblical Greek
While
the etymology of kairo<j,
"time," is uncertain
and gives place to several
differing conclusions, the early
temporal uses of this word
suggest two basic meanings: (1)
exact or critical time, season
or opportunity and (2) time,
period or season of the year.1 Typical of the first meaning
is the sentence "the time
(kairo<j) for
the delivery of the
corn had passed."2
In other words kairo<j refers
to a
specific point of time. James
Barr similarly states,
"where kairo<j has a reference to time in a classical
author
like Aeschylus the sense is
roughly that of opportune
time."3 In its second sense it may mean a short
space of
time, a stretch of time, time
of the year or an age.4
Generally,
kairo<j is in
some way limited or defined
by the use, of other words,
such as prepositions or words
following in the genitive case
to indicate the reason why
the time is set apart. Delling
shows strong preference for
the first meaning when he
writes "the linguistic development
1 George Henry Liddell
and Robert Scott, A Greek-
English Lexicon, I (London: At the
Clarendon Press, 1940),
859.
"(Hereinafter referred to as Lexicon.)"
2 Moulton and Milligan, Ibid.,
p. 315.
3 Barr, Ibid., p.
32.
4 Gerhard Delling, kairo<j, TDNT, trans. and
ed.,by
Geoffrey
W. Bromiley, III (
Publishing Co., 1965), 457-58.
52
of the term clearly suggests
that the basic sense is that
of the decisive or crucial
place or point, whether
spatially, materially or
temporally."1
In the Old Testament
From
the Hebrew several observations can be made.
Most often kairo<j translates tfe which
"in reference to
determining the nature of the
concept of time in the Old
Testament,
it is basic that it refers primarily to the
juncture of circumstances, the
specific occasion."2 Conse-
quently, it can be said that tfe refers directly to the
occasion itself. It must be
stated further that tfe is
translated by many other Greek
words including w!ra, h[me<ra,
and xro<noj. However, kairo<j also
occurs for dfeOm,
"appointment" which
is used to indicate natural periods
such as feasts and MlAOf which refers to remotest time or
perpetuity.
The
use of kairo<j in the
Septuagint continues the
earlier meanings of kairo<j, namely: (1) a decisive point
in time, as in Genesis 17:21
"at this set time in the next
year" and (2) a more
general indication of time. As a
general rule, kairo<j in the Septuagint signifies a point of
time at which something happens
though on some occasions it
1 Delling, Ibid.,
p. 455.
2 John H. Wilch, Time
and Event (
Brill, 1969), p. 167.
53
seems to suggest the meaning of
xro<noj, a
"period of time."1
This period of time can be
shorter or longer, a regular
fixed time or a general
statement of time.2
In the
Gospels
The
use of kairo<j in the
Gospels is limited to
thirty places, three of which
occur in the plural. It is
generally accepted that kairo<j has two or more senses.
Often it means a fixed time or decisive
point. For this
reason it can be thought of as
"the right time." A second
meaning is more general and is
limited or defined by the use
of other words or prepositional
phrases. This seems to be
the general use.3 It is also possible that a third use,
that of the plural, occurs to
denote periods4 of
time.
Several translations conveying
the idea of time, "right,
proper time, opportunity"5 may result depending on the use
involved. However, these
several meanings are not accepted
1 However, Barr, Time,
pp. 35-37 lists many illus-
trations
which seem to have just the opposite of their
normally
accepted meanings.
2 E. Jenni,
"Time," Interpreter's Dictionary of the
Bible, IV (New York: Abingdon
Press, 1962), 645.
3 Cremer, Lexicon,
p. 324. 4
Ibid.
5
William
P. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek
English
Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early
Christian
Literature
(
Press, 1957), p. 395. "(Hereinafter
referred to as
Lexicon.)"
54
by all the scholars.
Among
the recent theologians commenting on the
significance of kairo<j several maintain that it stands for
"realistic time,"
that is, time of opportunity and fulfill-
ment1 which is in contrast with xro<noj meaning "a period
of time." More pointedly,
Robinson comments " kairo<j is
time considered in relation to
personal action, in
reference to ends to be
achieved in it."2 Thus,
it always
must be thought of as a
"point of time defined by its
content."3 It becomes a critical or decisive moment.
For
this reason it is argued that
times are "known and dis-
tinguished not so much by their
place in some temporal
sequence as by their content:
i.e. they are known
realistically, rather than
chronologically."4 Therefore,
it is the sum total of these kairoi< that provide a line of
realistic time. This is of
theological importance to
Oscar Cullmann for it is his
"working out of the series of
decisive moments or kairoi
chosen by God, the joining
together of which furnishes
Cullmann with his line, so
important for his understanding
of time."5
1 John Marsh, Time
(
Publishers,
1952), p. 20.
2
John Arthur Thomas Robinson, In the End (
Harper
and Row, 1968), p. 258.
3 Cullmann, Time,
p. 39.
4 Marsh, Time, p. 21. 5 Barr, Time,
p. 63.
55
That
Barr does not accept this limited definition
of kairo<j is clear when he says, "If there is a
difference
between xro<noj and kairo<j in the
New Testament usage it is
clear that it cannot correspond
to the distinction between
chronological and realistic
time."1
Actually, in some of
the passages of theological
significance "there may be good
reason to suppose that there is
no real difference between
the words."2 In
many places xro<noj and kairo<j appear to
exchange the meanings usually
given to them.3 Barr
concludes his argument:
But
the main point has been abundantly established
namely
that the correlation of two great conceptions
of
time with the two Greek words is thoroughly erro-
neous
and that all arguments about time in biblical
thought
are misleading in such proportion as they
depend
upon this correlation.4
It
must be noted that two differing views con-
cerning the meaning of kairo<j prevail: (1) it points only
[emphasis mine] to a specific
point in time, or (2) it has
in addition to the first
meaning the meaning of xro<noj
which is normally understood to
be its opposite. With this
in mind the meaning of kairo<j in the Gospels can better be
1 Barr, Time, p.
22.
2 Ibid., p. 31;
see also Caird, The Apostolic Age,
p.
694.
3 Barr, Time,
cites many illustrations of this from
both
the Septuagint and the New Testament beginning on
p.
35.
4 Ibid., p. 44.
56
explored.
In
Matthew on some occasions kairo<j must
indicate
a specific point in time. For
example, he writes of the
demons not wanting to be
tormented pro< kairou?
"before the
time" (8:29). The omission
of the article is not to
generalize the statement but it
occurs because it is a
time designation after a
preposition.1 The
time indicated
is the appointed time of
judgment. Similarly in 24:45 a
faithful steward puts food
before the household e]n kair&?
"at the right time."
This use of e]n kair&?
without further
qualification seems to be an
idiom and can be found with
this meaning outside of
Biblical Greek.2 The
sense remains
that of a specific point of
time though the exact time is
unspecified. Jesus indicates
this idea also when He
remarks near His crucifixion
"my time is near" (26:18).
Also
in Matthew kairo<j has
the meaning of "season"
when connected with the grain
(13:30) and fruit (21:34)
coming ripe for harvesting.
While this is not a single
point of time it does convey a
very limited expanse of time
at the harvest season. It is
not so much an exact chrono-
logical reference as it is a
time to do something. A more
1 Nigel Turner, Syntax,
Vol. III., A Grammar of New
Testament
Greek,
ed. by J.H. Moulton (3 vols;
T.
& T. Clark, 1919-63), p. 179. "(Hereinafter referred to
as
Syntax.)"
2 Xenophon Anabasis 3.1.39.
57
general expression, e]n e]kei<n& t&? kair&?,
"at that time" is
found in 11:25, 12:1 and 14:1.
The context of each usage
clearly indicates that this is
not a specific time indica-
tion. George Ogg remarks
concerning this expression, "It
may be a mere transition or
introductory formula; it may
refer to some definite season
about the limits of which,
however, nothing is known. In
neither case can a scienti-
fic chronology obtain any help
from it."1 Mark
12:23
which is parallel to Matthew
12:1 has "and it came to pass"
which is a general indication
of sequence more than time.
On two occasions, 16:3
"signs of the times" and 21:41
"proceeds in their
seasons," the plural of kairo<j is
used.
In these places kairo<j seems more like the chronological
reckoning indicated by xro<noj. Time here is presented as
periods of eschatological and
agricultural reckoning.
Therefore, Matthew uses kairo<j with three basic ideas:
(1) a specific point of time,
(2) a limited expanse of
time, and (3) a period of time.
Mark's
account has kairo<j five
times always in the
singular. Like Matthew it is
used to indicate a specific
event in time, such as, the
coming of the kingdom, "the
time is fulfilled" (1:15)
and the time of the second coming
(13:33). Yet, in each instance
the time of the event does
1 George Ogg, Chronology
of the public Ministry of
Jesus (Cambridge: At the
University Press, 1940), p. 17.
“(Hereinafter referred to
as Chronology.)"
58
not appear important, rather
the event. In Mark 11:13
kairo<j
denotes that it was not the "season" of figs, but in
12:2 it was the
"season" for receiving the produce of the
vineyard. The use in Mark 10:30
"he shall receive one
hundred fold now in this
time" is a general reference to
one's lifetime as contrasted
with the coming age which is
mentioned later in the verse.
Here, as in Matthew, kairo<j
has in some of its uses an
appeal to a non-specific period
of time which is also true of xro<noj and ai]w<n.
Luke
has kairo<j
thirteen times. In addition to the
parallels in the other Gospels,
Luke uses kairo<j to
indicate
a specific time in 1:20 where
Gabriel tells Zacharias that
his words concerning the birth
of John "shall be fulfilled
in their time," the time
of John's birth. If, however, the
whole prophecy is being indicated
here then kairo<j would
be
better translated
"season" and would include the ministry
of John thus becoming a general
time indication. Jesus
indicates that false prophets
will declare themselves to be
the Christ and will say,
"the time is at hand" (21:8). That
is, from time to time the false
prophets will declare it is
the appropriate time to follow
them. The Devil leaves
Jesus at the end of the
temptation, a@xri kairou?,
"until a
right or favorable time"
(4:13). The word is believed
until the "time of
temptation" (8:13). Luke seems to stress
not the "when" of the
event but that it does take place at
some point in time.
59
At
times Luke's use of kairo<j
indicates a period of
time. It may be the "time
of your visitation" (19:44), that
is, the "time" of the
ministry of Christ to
addition kairo<j can indicate a period when, "for a
time,"
there are those who believe the
word (8:13). Also found is
e]n
au]t&? kair&? (13:1) as a general indication of time
which places Luke twelve and
thirteen in the same time
period though not necessarily
indicating immediacy of time
sequence. These passages do not
suggest an event taking
place at a single point in time
as do the earlier references
in Luke. However, the event
seems more important than the
time.
In
Luke 21:24 the plural occurs, "until the times
of the Gentiles be
fulfilled." Theologically it is
generally accepted that these
times began in Daniel's day
and extend until the Second Coming.
Here then is a clear
passage where kairo<j must mean what xro<noj seems usually to
signify, a chronological time
indicator.
John
adds nothing to what is already stated. His
two uses, 7:16 and 7:8,
indicate the exact or precise moment
for Jesus to manifest His glory
in the crucifixion and
exaltation.
By
way of summary, in the Gospels kairo<j refers
to
time that may be (1) a specific
moment, (2) a more general
span of time, and (3) a period
of time which can extend
even over two thousand years.
For this reason a variety of
60
translations including
"moment, season, time, opportunity
and right time" are
possible. It is the context rather
than the word which conveys the
various meanings of the
word. It must be remembered
that kairo<j is not
normally
used to indicate time in its
chronological sequences but
rather events which occur at
some time. In other words,
with kairo<j the event is emphasized as occurring
without a
specific emphasis as to its time
relationships to other
events. Therefore, it could be
said that kairo<j
indicates
time as conceptualized rather
than time realized.
xro<noj
The
final word considered in this chapter is
xro<noj. Like ai]w<n and kairo<j it occurs in a variety of
contexts but it has only the
one translation, "time."
In
non-biblical Greek
The
use of xro<noj in
expressing time is most often
contemplated simply as the
succession of moments. That is
xro<noj
"embraces all possible kairoi<, and,
being the larger
more inclusive term, may be
often used where kairo<j would
have been equally suitable,
though not the converse."1 In
earliest Greek it expressed
time both specific, such as,
lifetime, season of the year or
some definite time period
1 Trench, Synonyms, p. 210.
61
as well as abstract time.1 These same meanings can also
be found in the New Testament
era among the papyri litera-
ture. Sometimes xro<noj is found with kairo<j as in "to say
nothing of so long time (xro<non) having passed and such
times (kairw?n)."2 This illustrates well the often
suggested difference between
these two words, that of a
period and an event.
Expressions
which include xro<noj, such
as, polu>j
xro<noj, a long time, i!kanoj xro<noj, considerable or long
time,3 and dialipw>n
xro<non, after a while, or dialeipw>n
xro<non at
intervals,4 suggest a rather long period of
time especially when they occur
in the plural.5
In the Old Testament
Thirteen
differing Hebrew words and expressions
are translated by xro<noj,6 The most frequent Hebrew word
is MOy which normally is translated "day." In
places
where xro<noj is used for MOY,
whether in the singular or
1
Liddell and Scott, Lexicon, II, 2008.
2
Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary, p. 694.
3
Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon, p. 896.
4
Herbert Weir Smyth, Greek Grammar (
after
referred to as Grammar.)"
5
Jenni, xro<noj, TDNT, IV, 645.
6
Hatch and Redpath, Concordance, II, 1476.
62
plural, it indicates a general
or prolonged period of
time as in Genesis 26:1,
"in the days (time) of Abraham"
and Joshua 4:14, "all the
days (time) of his life." The
other two frequently translated
Hebrew words, tfe and MlAOf,
are translated by both kairo<j or xro<noj.
However, these
Hebrew words are not often
translated by xro<noj. The
five
times MlAOf is found it is in an ei]j to>n ai]w?na xro<non
expression. A perusal of the
context of these Hebrew words
that are translated by xro<noj indicates usually an extended
period of time. The time may
apply to the time of one's
life (Deut. 12:19) or eternity
(Isa. 14:20) or any similar
period of time.
On
some occasions xro<noj
appears definitely to
refer to a specific time as in
Jeremiah 49:8, "the time that
I shall visit him," though
sometimes the time is a more
extended period as in the
"time (xro<noj) of Jacob's
trouble" (Jer. 30:8). In
Daniel 2:16, "appoint him a time,"
xro<noj also
must be interpreted as a specific point in time
and seems to convey the idea
normally associated with
kairo<j. Yet, later in Daniel 2:21, xro<noj appears to refer
to a larger period of time. In
both places xro<noj trans-
lates the same Aramaic word, rmAz;. These considerations
certainly suggest that xro<noj refers generally to a period
of time though it may at times
point to a specific time.
In such places its meaning
seems to overlap that of kairo<j.
63
In the Gospels
The
translation of xro<noj is
"time" which is often
qualified by a supporting word,
phrase or clause.1 In
each
Gospel xro<noj occurs with several expressions. One of
the
problems with xro<noj is that some see no difference between
xro<noj and kairo<j.
Frame
comments, "in Jewish usage the
terms are
interchangeable."2 However,
some more contempo-
rary writers believe that xro<noj in the New Testament is
the word [emphasis
mine] for chronological time,3 that is,
measured time or duration.4 Robinson elaborates that
xro<noj
is
time
abstracted from such a relation, time, as it
were,
that ticks on objectively and impersonally,
whether
anything is happening or not; it is time
measured
by the chronometer, not by purpose, momentary
rather
than momentous.5
In
other words Robinson believes that xro<noj
"time," is to be
regarded as self-determining. Further,
it is held that time expressed xro<noj is not of
importance.
1
Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon, p. 896.
2
James Everett Frame, A Critical and Exegetical
Commentary
on the Epistles of
(New
York: Charles Scribner's sons, 1912), p. 180.
3
Marsh, Time, p. 20.
4
Alan Richardson, Word Book, p. 258.
5
Robinson, In the End, God, p. 45.
64
We
usually think of time as something which can be
counted
in hours. The New Testament designates this sort of time by the
word
chronos. Every event has its place
in the sequence of time. We then
have
the tendency to depict time on a straight line with different events as
points
along this line. We usually ask when this or that event occurred and
how
long it lasted. . . . Differing from us, however, the Biblical
authors
concentrated far more on the content of a certain event than on its
place
in the sequence of time. They did not ask first of all when an event
took
place, but what happened, what content the event had.1
While
credence can be generally given to this line
of thinking, a further
observation is necessary. To Barr,
xro<noj time
most often has reference to some kind of real
time "in which something
was happening, or some time the
elapse of which was important
for the understanding of the
description of some
event."2 Yet
in some locations xro<noj
and kairo<j have no significant differences.
In
the LXX and NT kairo<j keeps the special
meaning,
in
which it shows opposition to xro<noj, of 'right
time,'
only in certain contexts; and that over a large
area
of the usage, much larger than the number of the
examples
we have already cited, the two words mean the
same
thing; . . . In
particular in those theologi-
cally
important cases which speak of the 'time' or
'times'
which God has appointed or promised the two
words
are most probably of like meaning.3
As
in the case of ai]w<n and kairo<j the major views
concerning xro<noj are two. The first maintains that xro<noj
indicates measured or chronological
time. The second view,
1
Jindrick Nanek, "The Biblical Concept of Time and
Our
Gospels," New Testament Studies, VI (October, 1959),
pp.
46-47.
2
Barr, Time, D. 79.
3
Ibid., p. 42.
65
upheld by Barr, allows for a
wider scope of meaning so that
it can also have the same
meaning as kairo<j. Thus, only
the context can determine
whether the word meaning is the
same as kairo<j or refers to an extended period of time.
Of
the three references to xro<noj in
Matthew, two
occur in connection with the
birth of Christ. Herod
inquired exactly of the wisemen
"the time" of the appearing
star (2:7) that marked the
birth of Christ. Later in 2:16
Herod slew the infants two
years and under "according to
the time which he accurately
ascertained from the magi."
In both uses a precise
reckoning of calendar time was
calculated and this became the
time basis for Herod's
actions. This specific period
of time was not over two
years. The third reference to xro<noj is in Matthew 25:19,
"now after much time"
in the parable of the talents. The
parable itself indicates a
lengthy undesignated period of
time passed so that xro<noj must be used here to indicate a
period of time.
Mark
2:19 has o!son xro<non,
"so long a time (as)"
and 9:21 po<soj xro<noj, "how long a time."
Again the time
is unspecified but real
calendar time. An undesignated
period of time passes between
the events described.
Luke,
however, has several interesting and varied
uses of xro<noj.
In 1:57 it may have a part of the meaning
of kairo<j when "the time of her (
spoken of. While this is an event in chronological
time
66
it culminated at a
"specific moment" rather than over a
period. It seems little
different from Luke's expression
"the time (kairo<j) of temptation" (8:13). If, however,
the
nine months of
chronological indication, the
concept of chronological time
rather than a specific moment
is intended.
Satan
in Luke 4:5 shows to Christ all the kingdoms
of the world "in a moment
of time" e]n stigm^? xro<nou.
That is, all the kingdoms were
shown to Christ not in a
chronological series but
simultaneously.1 Here,
xro<noj is
qualified by a prepositional
phrase to refer to a single
moment of time. Normally it is kairo<j that expresses this
concept. Luke 18:4 "for a
time," and 20:9 "for a long
time" all indicate periods
of time which may even extend
into years.
Herod
is also said to be desirous of seeing Christ
"of (for) a long
time" e]c i[kanw?n xro<nwn
(23:8). This use
of xro<noj with i!
"enough and to spare,
much." This combination of words is
quite frequent in the writings of
Luke.2 In Luke 8:27 the
man possessed with demons
"for much (i[
no clothes. "For many
times" (8:29) the demon had seized
1
Alfred Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary
on
the Gospel According to St. Luke (
2
Ibid., p. 199.
67
him. Here the change to the
plural form of xro<noj would
show either the demon had been
troubling him for a long
period of time or it had often
times seized him. The dif-
ference is between one long
seizure and a series of many
seizures on different
occasions.
John's
use of xro<noj adds
nothing new. In 5:6
Jesus saw the sick man by the
pool and knew he had been
there "a long time" polu>n xro<non.
Later
Jesus uses
tosou<t&
xro<n& "so
long a time" (14:9) to speak of His
being with Philip. On two
occasions (7:33; 12:35) mi<kroj
and xro<noj are used to show that Jesus would be with
them
a "little time." The
first use is six months before the
crucifixion and the last a few
hours. Both are periods of
time with undesignated lengths.
Thus, in John xro<noj always
means extent and never point of
time.
In
conclusion it can be stated that xro<noj
usually
expresses time in its duration.
Thus there are the expres-
sions "much time, so long
a time" etc. Yet, there are a few
instances which may indicate an
event taking place at a
point in time. In such
instances xro<noj seems
to parallel
the idea of kairo<j. One further observation is in order.
All the instances of xro<noj in the Gospels occur in con-
texts that are a matter of
history. They are not time con-
ceptualized. These events may
have taken place (1) in a
moment of time, (2) a period of
time, or (3) on several
occasions. At least the first
two uses are also true of
68
kairo<j. For this reason the differences between xro<noj
and kairo<j cannot be sought in the duration of time.
Rather xro<noj emphasizes more the time of the event
whereas
kairo<j seems
to stress the event which takes place in time.
However, there are some places
the words seem to share the
same meaning.
CHAPTER IV
WORDS INDICATING TIME IN A YEAR
Assertions
have already been made about the
meanings of the words for time
which were most often used
by the common people of
A.D.1 During the
passing of a year some of these words and
other words were used in a
variety of ways to indicate time.
This chapter is not a
duplication of the earlier chapter
but an examination of all the
appearances of the words in
the Gospels. It is necessary to
understand the use of each
word in the non-biblical Greek,
the Old Testament and then
the New Testament in order to
assert conclusions about
their temporal meaning. The
words studied in this chapter
include expressions for time in
a year except for the word
"day" and its parts.
The order of the words considered in
this chapter are: year, month,
week, tomorrow and yesterday.
Year (dieth<j,
e]niauto<j, e@toj )
Years
were cited by one of three Greek words—dieth<j,
e]niauto<j and e@toj. These words are found in differing con-
texts and must be examined
separately to show the
distinctions and similarities
of meaning.
1
See Supra, chapter II for these comments.
69
70
dieth<j
Actually,
dieth<j is an
infrequent combination of
two words di<j meaning two and e@toj which is the usual word
for year.
In
non-biblical Greek.--Only a few uses of this
word can be cited and all of
these must be translated "two
years." This is true
whether the word is used by
Herodotus1 or
Josephus.2 Often dieth<j is accompanied by
xro<noj as in
the rental agreement "I will guarantee your
tenancy for the period of two
years."3
In
the Old Testament.--This word is not found in
the Old Testament probably because
of the Hebrew custom of
expressing more than one year
with two or more separate
words. However, dieth<j is found once in II Maccabees 10:3,
"They brought a sacrifice
after two years time" (meta<
dieth?
xro<nou). This verse follows the pattern of the non-
biblical Greek.
1
George Henry Liddell and Robert Scott, Lexicon,
I
(London: At the Clarendon Press, 1940), 351.
2
Josephus Antiquities 2.5.4. This is the only
place
it occurs in Josephus according to Henry St. John
Thackeray,
A Lexicon to Josephus, III (
Orientaliste
Paul Geuthner, 1945), 174. "(Hereinafter
referred
to as Lexicon.)"
3
Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary (
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 1963), p. 160.
71
In
the Gospels.--The sole use of dieth<j
in
the
Gospels occurs with the
preposition a]po<,
"from two years
old and under" (Mt. 2:16).
Luke also uses dieth<j in
Acts
24:27 and 28:30 where full two
year periods are acknowledged
by virtually all commentators.
As far as being helpful in
establishing an approximate
date for the birth of Christ,
this expression suggests that
Jesus was born at least two
years before the death of
Herod. This assumption seems
reasonable for the following
reasons. Herod's decree to
slay the infants was based on
the time he exactly learned
from the wisemen. Further, in
Classical Greek the genitive
may denote the time
"since" an action has happened.1 Here,
the a]po> dietou?j kai> katwte<rw indicates
the starting point
in time for those infants who
fell under the decree of Herod.
If Herod extended the time
beyond the time learned from
the wisemen, the two year time
indication is less meaningful.
However, by assuming that the
two years indicates the approx-
imate age of Jesus at the time
of Herod's decree and since
Herod died shortly after an
eclipse of the moon and before
the Passover of 4 B.C. as
history seems to indicate,2 and
since Christ was born before
the death of Herod, it can be
asserted that the birth of
Christ could hardly occur after
1
Herbert Weir Smyth, Grammar (
2
Jack Finegan, HBC (Princeton:
Press, 1964), pp. 231-33.
72
6 B.C. unless dieth<j indicates something less than two
years. It should be noted that
these are possible variables
which could alter the
conclusions often stated about the
birth date of Christ. The most
important reason why it is
impossible to be specific as to
which year Christ was born
from this Scripture reference
is that the date of this
decree by Herod is not known.
It may have been close to
his death in 4 B.C. but there
is no reason why it could not
have been earlier in 5 B.C.
etc. Consequently a conclusion
as to the date of Christ's
birth cannot be dogmatically
asserted on the basis of this
passage. However, the meaning
of dieth<j must indicate two years since it is not
qualified.
e]niauto<j
This
seldom used word denoting a year occurs only
four times in the Gospels
though more often in other
literature.
In
non-biblical Greek.--Throughout all the Greek
writings e]niauto<j is found with the translation
and meaning
of a "whole year."1
For example, in the papyri e]niauto<j
is found, "for the first
year prwtou? e]niautou? she
received her wages for
nursing."2 However,
on a few
1
Liddell and Scott, Lexicon, I, 567.
2
Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary, p. 215.
74
occasions e]niauto<j is used more generally of a
period of
time. Once Josephus indicates a
period that is actually
six hundred years by the
expression o[ me<gaj e]niauto<j.1
In
the Old Testament.--Occurring about one hundred
times, e]niauto<j is found mostly in the
historical sections.
In nearly every instance it
translates hnAwA which
usually
means a literal year. Very
seldom does e]niauto<j occur
with
a number. For this reason there
are only a few times where
e]niauto<j indicates
the length of a king's reign (I Kg. 14:
21). In recording the time of
the building of Solomon's
temple both e@toj and e]niauto<j are
used apparently as
synonyms (I Kgs. 6:1), because
the four hundred and
eightieth year (e@toj) since the Exodus from
fourth year (e]niato<j) of Solomon's reign are the same year.
Several
other passages have e]niauto<j and e@toj in
the same context. In II Kings
24:18 "Zedekiah was twenty
and one years" (e]niauto<j ) and "he reigned eleven
years"
(e@toj). This
example could be repeated many times and it
suggests that e]niauto<j and e@toj are often identical in
meaning.
In
some places e]niauto<j is a
"year" conceptualized
rather than historic. Genesis
1:14 says the lights in the
1
Josephus Antiquities 1.3.9. For other instances
where
e]niauto<j signifies a period see Arndt and Gingrich,
Lexicon (Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press, 1957),
p. 266.
75
heaven are "for days and
for years." Once in the year
(e]niauto<j) the
high priest made atonement (Lev. 16:34) for
sins. Also, the children of
a feast unto Jehovah
"seven days in the year" (Lev. 23:41).
In
the Old Testament e]niauto<j occurs
with these two
nuances. In a minority of
places e]niauto<j when
used with
numbers becomes a chronological
indication. However,
e]niauto<j
usually conveys the concept of a year such as the
"year of Jubilee"
(Lev. 25:13) and "all the months of the
year" (I Chr. 27:1). In
both senses, the meaning indicated
is a literal year.
In
the Gospels.--The four references to e]niauto<j
in the Gospels are without the
use of numbers just as it
often occurs in the Septuagint.
Three of the passages state
that Caiaphas was the
highpriest "that year," tou?
e]niatou?
e]kei<nou (Jn.
11:49, 51; 18:13). The expression "that year"
should probably be understood
as "that fatal year" when
Christ was crucified rather
than the thought that Caiaphas
held office for only one year.1
Since the dates for
Caiaphas being the high priest
extend from A.D. 18 to 36, he
was the high priest both before
and after this year but
1
Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer, Critical and Exe-
getical
Hand-book to the Gospel of John, trans. by
Frederick
Crombie (
1884), p. 357.
"(Hereinafter referred to as John.)"
76
only "that year" is
brought into consideration by John.
The
other use of e]niauto<j occurs
in the quotation
"the acceptable year of
the Lord" (Lk. 4:19) which is taken
from Isaiah 61:2. Some early
commentators such as Clement
of Alexandria1 took this as a literal statement and
limited Christ's earthly
ministry to twelve months. How-
ever, according to the three
Passovers mentioned in John
2:13, 6:4 and 11:55 the view of
Clement cannot be correct.
The only possible solution to
this use of e]niauto<j is to
understand it as figurative of
the new era that the Messiah
will usher in.2
Perhaps, the question should be asked, "Why
is e]niauto<j used when a literal year is
not meant?" This
passage is an accurate
quotation from the Septuagint and
would be inaccurate if altered.
The other Gospel passages
demand that this be understood
as figurative though it is
translated "year."
e@toj
The
most frequent word expressing a year is e@toj
in every period of Greek
studied.
In
non-biblical Greek.--The use of e@toj,
"year," is
attested throughout all stages
of Greek. It is used to
1
Clement Homilies 17.9.
2
R.C.H. Lenski Luke (
Publishing House, 1961), p.
252.
77
cite both the year of a king's
reign, "to> [p]empton
e@t[o]j
Domitianou?,"1
as well as the age of an individual, "h#n e@twn,
w[j
tria<konta."2 These would be natural and frequent
reasons for a common person to
reckon anything by years.
They usually are written with
an accompanying number.
In
the Old Testament.--The Greek of the Septuagint
uses e@toj over five hundred times and on almost every
occasion it translates hnAwA meaning "year." It is found
in geneologies (Gen. 5, 11) and
in stating the years of a
king's reign (I Kg. 15:25;
16:23). The years of reign are
helpful in determining the time
of prophecies (Hag. 1:1)
and important historical events
such as the invasion of
foreign armies (Dan. 1:1). Some
events are dated by the
age of people, such as, the
time of the flood (Gen. 7:6)
and the defeat of
in the ninety-eighth year of
Eli. Even the time of dura-
tion of certain events is given
in years. Two years pass
while Joseph is in prison (Gen.
41:1) and
in
few times e@toj designates an unspecified number of years,
though this is usually reserved
for e]niauto<j. One such
use is found in Proverbs 3:2
"years of life."
1
Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary, D. 258.
2
Xenophon Anabasis 2.6.20.
78
The
important aspect to keep in mind is that e@toj
normally is used to indicate a
particular number of years.
In
the Gospels.--Most uses of e@toj do not
indicate
important chronological events.
At times e@toj is
used to
indicate the number of years a
person has been ill.1 Also,
the age of a person may be
given for a particular event.
Jesus was twelve years when He
went to the temple (Lk. 2:
42). A damsel that Jesus raised
from the dead was twelve
years of age (Lk. 8:43). Once
Luke uses e@toj to
indicate
the duration of the drought in
Elijah's day (4:25).
On
two occasions e@toj is
used not as a reference to
a specific number of years but
it indicates an undesignated
lengthy period longer than a
year. The rich farmer laid up
goods "for many years"
(Lk. 12:19), just as the elder son
served his father "these
many years" (Lk. 15:29).
In
Luke 2:41 it is reported, "Jesus' parents went
to
a distributive genitive which indicates
that this was the
habitual annual practice of
Joseph and Mary. This is the
only New Testament location of
this expression though it
can be found in the Septuagint.
1
Mt. 9:20 (Mk. 5:25; Lk. 8:43); Jn. 5:5; Lk. 13:
11,
16.
2
Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary, p. 258.
79
There
are four places where e@toj
expresses time
that is important to the
chronology of Christ. The first
relates that John the Baptist
began his ministry in the
"fifteenth year of
Tiberius" (Lk. 3:1). It is generally
agreed that Jesus began His
ministry about six months after
John so that if the beginning
of John's ministry can be
established, the time of Jesus'
ministry can also be
ascertained. The determining of
the fifteenth year of
Tiberius is a Problem because
Tiberius began a co-reign
with his step-father on October
23, A.D. 12, from which
time he governed the Roman
provinces jointly and held the
census with Augustus. About two
years later, August 19,
A.D. 14, Augustus died and
Tiberius assumed control of the
empire and later was confirmed
by the vote of the Senate
on September 17, A.D. 14.
Adding to the complexity of
establishing the beginning year
of Tiberius' reign is the
uncertainty about whether the
accession or nonaccession
year method was followed.1
The monarchs of the Seleucid
dynasty in
October and it is assumed that
this is the pattern followed
by Luke.2 With these
areas of possible interpretation "the
1
For a full discussion of this problem see Finegan,
HBC, pp. 259ff.
2
Norval Geldenhuys, Commentary on the Gospel of
Luke
(
1954), p. 134.
80
fifteenth year of Tiberius"
could be A.D. 26, 27, 28 or 29
depending on the year used in
beginning his reign, 12 or
14 A.D., and the method of
reckoning the regnal year,
accession or nonaccession.
Because the "fifteenth year"
has several possible
interpretations, it cannot be used by
itself to determine a certain
calendar date for the
beginning of John's ministry.
Luke
2:23 states that Jesus was "about thirty
years," w[si> e@twn tria<konta, when He was baptized
and
began His ministry. Few, other
than Irenaeus, interpret
this to mean that Jesus had
begun but not completed His
thirtieth year.1 The
use of w!sei would suggest several
years leeway is possible.
Cadbury writes:
Having
for many years read the volumes of Greek
papyri
as they were published, I formed the impression
that
the ages of adults which were given in them tended
to
occur for the multiples of five far out of propor-
tion
to the other numbers.2
If
this conclusion is correct and is applied to
Luke's statement, one thing is clear.
Thirty was not
necessarily Jesus' nearest
birthday. This assertion is
also suggested by Luke's use of
w[sei<. Since the exact
year of Jesus' birth is as
unspecific as the statement of
1
Irenaeus Irenaeus Against Heresies 2.22.5.
2
Henry J. Cadbury, "Time," Journal of Biblical
Literature,
LXXXII (September, 1963), 275-76.
81
this verse, it can only be
concluded that the birth of
Jesus was approximately thirty
years prior to the fifteenth
year of Tiberius.
A
third expression, "forty and six years was this
temple built" (Jn. 2:20)
is an equally difficult chronolog-
ical problem for several
reasons. First, the word trans-
lated temple is nao<j and this usually but not always means
the inner sanctuary. However,
the nao<j could refer to the
major temple rebuilding project
which began two years later
than the construction of the
inner area of the temple where
the sacrifices were offered.
Second, the beginning point
for the reckoning of the years
could be 19 A.D. when Herod
began the sanctuary rebuilding
or 17 A.D. when the work on
the larger area commenced.
Therefore, a two year variation
in determining the forty-sixth
year results. A third
problem is the use of the
aorist passive verb oi]kodomh<qh.
It may indicate that the length
of time since the nao<j was
completed was forty-six years,
that the nao<j was in
the
process of being built for
forty-six years and was still
incomplete, or that it had just
been completed in its forty-
sixth year of building.1
Depending on the beginning date
1
An excellent explanation of this expression of time
is
found in Frank Stagg, "The Abused Aorist," Journal of
Biblical
Literature,
XCI (June, 1972), 228. He states: "The
temple
had been under construction for forty-six years,
there
had been interruptions and resumptions of work, and
the temple was not yet
completed. The aorist indicative
82
chosen and the interpretation
of the nao<j the forty-sixth
year would be either A.D. 27 or
29. The date of A.D. 27 is
accepted by most contemporary
scholars1 as the date of the
first Passover in Jesus' public
ministry, in the "forty
and six years" of John
2:20.
The
last date is found in John 8:57 where Jesus is
said not yet to be "fifty
years" old. Irenaeus in taking
this literally remarks:
Now,
such language is fittingly applied to one who
has
already passed the age of forty, without having as
yet
reached His fiftieth year, yet is not far from this
latter
period. But to one who is only thirty years old
it
would unquestionably be said, 'Thou art not yet
forty
years old.'2
For
this reason Irenaeus demands a public ministry
of more than ten years and a
date of birth much earlier
than commonly accepted. An
incidental remark found in
Josephus may better explain why
Jesus was categorized as
being under fifty. Josephus
states that it was the men
aged twenty to fifty who had to
contribute the half-shekel
temple tax.3 The sarcasm
of the Jews may have been that
since Jesus was still young
enough to pay this tax, being
does
not here designate a single action of the past. . . .
This
is a normal aoristic usage, a simple allusion to an
action
without description, i.e., a-oristic or undefined."
1
For a more complete discussion of this date see
Finegan,
HBC, pp. 276-80.
2
Irenaeus Irenaeus Against Heresies 2.22.6.
3
Josephus Antiquities 3.8.1.
83
under fifty, He could hardly
have seen Abraham. No one
seriously accepts the view of
Irenaeus that Jesus minis-
tered until He was nearly
fifty.
In
summary, e@toj
translated "year" usually is
found with a numeral giving the
years of events, age of a
person or the duration of an
event. It also may record an
unspecified time of years or a
yearly custom by using the
distributive genative kat ] e@toj. Four times e@toj
is
used
in connection with Christ's
ministry but none of the
references are exact enough to
give by themselves a certain
date on the Julian calendar.
All the accompanying informa-
tion is sufficiently imprecise
to make uncertain the exact
time intended. Consequently no
little discussion could
accompany the possible
interpretation of these temporal
expressions.1
Month
(mh<n)
Another
familiar indication of time is mh<n,
"month."
Though not occurring too often
in the Gospels it is none-
theless a major time indicator.
In non-biblical Greek
It
appears that mh<n was
first used in the sense of
a measure and then later
referred to the period of time
1
In Finegan's discussion in HBC he has twenty-three
pages
devoted to these four expressions regarding the time
of Jesus' public ministry.
84
marked off by the moon,
therefore a month.1
This indication
of a period of time being
determined by the moon is as
natural a consideration as
reckoning time by the sun. The
cycle of the moon from month to
month is calculated as a
period of twenty-nine or thirty
days. So handy was this
for noting the passing of time
that the Greeks established
contractural agreements by the
month and interest rates of
two drachma were charged each
month (to<n mh?na e!kaston).2
In the Old Testament
About
two hundred times mh<n is
used as a translation
of wd,Ho and a few times for hray,.
Both of these words can
be translated moon although wd,Ho is used to indicate the
"new moon," the day
on which the crescent reappears.3 For
the most part mh<n is
used temporally in three similar ways.
It is used to indicate the time
of certain historic events
such as the beginning of the
Noahic deluge (Gen. 7:11) and
the entrance into
length of time between two events.
For example, the ark was
in Philistine hands seven
months (I Sam. 6:1) and David
reigned in
1
Gerhard Delling, mh<n, TDNT, trans. and ed. by
Geoffrey
W. Bromiley, IV (
Publishing
Co., 1967), 638.
2 Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary,
p. 410.
3 Ludwig Koehler and
Walter Baumgartner, eds.,
Lexicon
in Veteris Testamenti Libros (
1958), p. 279.
"(Hereinafter referred to as Lexicon.)"
85
Most
frequently mh<n is
used to establish the time
of an event during a king's
reign (Hag. 1:1) or a prophet's
message (Hag. 2:1). This
practice greatly aided the
reckoning of Old Testament
chronology. In each case mh<n
signified that period of time
commonly called a month and
most likely included any part
of a month as a whole month
unless the number of days were
also given.
In the Gospels
Three
separate incidents in the Gospels have a
reference to months. The first
occasion has four uses of
mh<n and they
occur in connection with the birth account of
John the Baptist.
following conception (Lk. 1:24)
and in her sixth month
(Lk. 1:26) Gabriel appeared to
Mary to announce the concep-
tion of Jesus. This last
reference indicates that John was
six months older than Jesus.
This is confirmed by Gabriel's
comment that
Following this, Mary abode with
(w[j
mh?naj trei?j). This would be approximately until the
time of John's birth.
In
a second incident Jesus indicates that the length
of the drought in the time of
Elijah was three years and
six months (Lk. 4:25). Thus,
every reference to mh<n in
Luke does no doubt refer to
calendar lunar months.
86
Jesus
remarks in John 4:35, "say not ye, there are
yet four months and the harvest
is coming." Here the
number four and mh<n are
combined in the single word
tetra<mhno<j. There has been much
discussion whether this
passage is a chronological time
indication or only an agri-
cultural proverb.1 From this statement the time when Jesus
passed through
can be calculated as being in
December or January since the
harvest time in
late March. If this is correct
then Jesus' early Judean
ministry would extend from the
previous April through
December. Some insist that this
statement of time should
be taken as a proverb.2 Thus, the reference to four
months
would not indicate a point in
time four months prior to the
harvest of the fields of
Sychar.3 If this is the correct
view then no chronology can be
established or confirmed by
it. Regardless of which view is
taken, the use of mh<n
conveys a concept of four
months which are literal cycles
established by the rising of
the new moon. There is no
1
For representatives of this view see R.C.H.
Lenski,
The interpretation of
The
Meyer,
John, trans. by Frederick Crombie (
Wagnalls
Publishers, 1884), p. 161. "(Hereinafter referred
to
as John.)"
2
This view is clearly presented by George Ogg,
Chronology (
3
J. H. Bernard, John, I (
1962), 155-56.
87
lexical or contextual reason to
take them otherwise..
Week (sa<bbaton)
A
week is comprised of a sequence of seven days.
The New Testament indicates
this by sa<bbaton.
In non-biblical Greek
From
the earliest periods of the Greek language
nothing has been preserved
concerning the formation of days
into a "week."1
By the first century B.C. there is suffi-
cient evidence that there was a
seven day week. The days
of the week were given the
names of gods and perhaps earlier
the Egyptians named the seven
days after the heavenly
planets.2 It is also
asserted that in the post-exilian
period the reckoning by weeks
became more frequent so that
the week days were often
enumerated.3
In the Old Testament
At
the time of Creation God established for mankind
a six day work week and a
seventh day for rest. Later when
God instructed
seventh day, fbAwe, as a sa<bbaton. The concept of rest is
1
References to "week" in Greek lexicons are all
directed
to references to the Hebrew sabbath in the Septua-
gint
and the New Testament.
2
Finegan, HBC, pp. 15-16.
3
"Time," CBTEL, X, 412.
88
inherent in the word sa<bbaton. On this one day in seven
the Jews were told to abstain
from work (Ex. 16:26) as a
reminder of their covenant with
Jehovah (Ex. 31:16). An
examination of the uses of sa<bbaton in the Septuagint
reveals that it usually refers
to the seventh day rather
than the whole period of seven
days which is a week.
Occasionally certain feasts,
such as the Day of Atonement,
were called a sa<bbaton (Lev. 17:31) even though they did
not necessarily fall on the
seventh day. The seventh or
sabbatical year of rest is
likewise called a sa<bbaton
(Lev. 25:2). The mention of
offering a burnt-offering on
the sabbaths, new moons and set
feasts (I Chron. 23:31) may
be an indication of the
practical ways that the passing of
days was calculated in the Old
Testament. The counting of
days in groups of sevens would
be easy by the keeping of
the sa<bbaton. The
months were calculated by the new moon.
The division of the year by
feasts would be larger
divisions than months. A better
system could hardly be
designed for common people.
There
is only one use of sa<bbaton which
can legiti-
mately be translated
"week" (II Chr. 8:13). Here it is the
feast of weeks which was one of
the special observances of
the year. The other English
translation "week" in Genesis
29:27, "fulfil the week of
this one," is the number seven,
e!bdoma and
may just as easily be translated "fulfill the
seven (days) of this one."
89
The majority of Old Testament
locations of sa<bbaton
refer to the seventh day of the
week in the Jewish
calendar,1 whether
the word is singular or plural. When
plural it can signify one or
more sabbaths.2 Yet implicit
in the use of this word when
referring to the Jewish sabbath
is the concept that time was
reckoned by a period of seven
days which climaxed on the
seventh day.
In the Gospels
The
only word for week in the Gospels is sa<bbaton.
As is true in the Old
Testament, sa<bbaton does
have other
meanings in addition to
"week." Used most often in the
singular, sa<bbaton often refers simply to the sabbath, the
seventh day of the week.3 At other times sa<bbaton is
combined with h[me<ra, to indicate that the particular day was
a sabbath day.4 Many passages refer to Jesus teaching on
the sabbath day (Mk. 6:2) and
the sabbath day controver-
sies5 of Jesus with
the Jews. On two occasions Jesus iden-
tifies Himself as "Lord of
the Sabbath" (Mt. 12:8; Mk. 2:28).
1
William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, Lexicon
(Chicago:
The University of Chicago Press, 1957), p. 74
2
Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary, p. 567.
3
Mt. 24:20; Mk. 2:27 (2).
4
Lk. 4:16; 13:14, 16; 14:5; Jn. 5:9; 9:14.
5
Lk. 6:1, 5, 6, 7, 9; 13:14, 15; 14:1, 3; Jn. 5:10,
16, 18; 7:22, 239(2); 9:16.
90
In
each of these places sa<bbaton
obviously refers to the
seventh day of the Jewish week
and not to the whole week.
There
are several instances where sa<bbaton occurs
without a numeral in the plural
but the context suggests
that it refers to a single
sabbath day.1 At other times
the plural probably refers to
several sabbath days2 as is
found in the question, "Is
it lawful on the sabbath [days]
to do good or harm"? The
occasional use of the plural
rather than the singular may
have arisen from the Aramaic
sabbetha which
at an early date also gave its name to the
entire week.3 Both
the plural and singular forms can be
found in the same contexts
often with no difference in
meaning or translation.
There
are ten places where sa<bbaton occurs
in the
passion week description. Four4
of these instances have
only sa<bbaton and may refer either to the weekly sabbath
day or the Passover which,
being a feast, is also a sabbath.
These two days could be either
simultaneous, consecutive
or even separated by one day.5
1
Mt. 12:1, 10, 11, 12; Mk. 1:21; 2:23, 24; 3:2.
2
Mk. 3:4; 6:2; 13:10.
3
G. Gordon Stott, "Time," HDLG, II, 731.
4
Mk. 16:1; Lk. 23:54, 56; Jn. 19:31.
5
For this reason various books and articles have
been
written debating whether the crucifixion took place
on
Wednesday, Thursday or Friday and the resurrection on
Saturday or Sunday.
91
Several
times mi%? tw?n sabba<twn, or
its equivalent1
is used to speak of the morning
of the resurrection day.
It was the usual custom to
number the days of the week
rather than to name them. The
first of the sabba<tw
would be the first day after
the sabbath, "the first of
the week." It literally
means the first day reckoned from
the weekly sabbath day.2
In Mark 16:9 prw<th is used
with
the singular sabba<tou instead of mi%? but
the meaning
remains the same even though
the expression is altered.
Whether the translation of sabba<ton should actually be
"week" perhaps is
questionable. Yet regardless of the
translation the meaning is
obvious. It must be remembered
that each day of the week began
at sunset and ended on the
following day at sunset.
The
sixth day of the Jewish week was the day of
preparation for the sabbath.
Because of all the necessary
preparations for the next day,
"preparation day" or
paraskeuh< became
the name for Friday. On six occasions
paraskeuh< is
used in the Gospels.3 Unfortunately this was
also the term applicable to the
day of preparation
1
Mt. 28:1; Mk. 16:2; 1k. 24:1; Jn. 20:1, 19.
2
Friedrich Blass and Albert Debrunner, A Grammar
of
the New Testament and
Other Early Christian Literature, ed.
and
rev, by Robert Funk
(
Press,
1967), p. 129. "(Hereinafter referred to as
Grammar.)"
3
Mt. 27:62; Mk. 15:42; Lk. 23:54; Jn. 19:14, 31, 42.
92
preceding any of the sacred
feasts, including the Passover.
This was true no matter what
day of the week it was.1
One
other name, prosa<bbaton, was given to this day
preceding a
sabbath (Mk. 15:42). Because of
the, uncertainty as to
whether paraskeuh< and prosa<bbaton refer to the weekly
sabbath, the Passover sabbath
or both, much question
remains concerning the
chronology of the passion week.
Only
one use of sabba<ton
remains for examination.
In Luke 18:12 the Pharisee
claimed to fast "twice during
the week." Here sabba<ton must mean a week, the period of
seven days that is bounded on
each side by the sabbaths.
Any other meaning of sabba<ton would be unintelligible.2
This is the only place in the
Gospels where the meaning of
sabba<ton is a
whole week.
In
conclusion, a few times when sabba<tou is
found
with a numeral it identifies a
day within the week.
Usually sabba<ton refers to the seventh day of the week
which more than anything else reminded
the Jews of the
passing of time. There is also
the possibility that
sabba<ton
sometimes may refer to a feast day regardless of
the day of the week when the
feast was observed. Only once
does sabba<ton mean a "week." These multiple
meanings of
1
David Smith, "Preparation," HDCG, II, 409.
2
Alfred Plummer, Luke (
1964), p. 417.
93
sabba<ton and
words used with it make exactness in
reckoning time during the
passion week difficult.
Tomorrow (au@rion )
In
contemporary language the day which follows an
existing day is most often
designated "tomorrow." This
practice, was followed in the
Greek language which expressed
this by the word au@rion.
In non-biblical Greek
From
earliest times au@rion meant
"tomorrow," and is
equivalent to the phrase
"on the morrow." It is used this
way several times in Josephus.1
It is to be distinguished
from today (sh<meron). On one occasion it is used con-
cerning a boy who each day goes
to a seller of barley beer.
The seller says "today,
tomorrow [aur[e]in] (you
shall get
it), but he never gives
it."2 At first glance the thought
might be to understand this as
the next day. However,
au@rion also
came to mean "soon, in a short time, now."3
Consequently two different
senses developed, (1) the next
day and (2) shortly or soon.
When found in the time of
Homer with the sense of the
next day, au@rion is
never used
after sunset to refer to the next
day. From these it is
1
Henry
2
Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary, p. 92.
3
Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon, p. 121.
94
concluded that the Greek day
began at sunset. Consequently,
after sunset the Greek always
says "in the morning" appar-
ently because au@rion would have meant a different thing.
In the Old Testament
The
Hebrew rHAmA and its variations are
translated
by au@rion over fifty times in the Old Testament, usually
in
the historical sections. Many
times the expression is the
same as Exodus 9:5,
"tomorrow, Jehovah shall do this
thing." It is clear in
many places by the context that
au@rion must
mean the next day following. In Exodus 32:5,
Aaron declares, "Tomorrow
(au@rion) shall be a feast to
Jehovah." The next verse
says, "And they rose up early on
the morrow." This meaning
is also indicated in Exodus 16:
23 where the Jews are exhorted
to prepare extra food for
"tomorrow is a solemn
rest,"
On
several occasions au@rion must
mean a future time
that is not necessarily the
next day. The children of
when a son will ask "in
time to come" (au@rion) why
the
fathers keep the laws, they can
give an answer to their
sons. Obviously au@rion does not refer to the next day but
rather refers to a future time.
1
George Melville Bolling, "Beginning of the Greek
Day," The American
Journal of Philology, XXIII (1902), 434.
95
In the Gospels
Only
once does au@rion occur
in an historical
setting meaning the next day.
In the parable of the good
Samaritan "on the
morrow" (au@rion) the
Samaritan gave the
innkeeper two denarii (Lk.
10:35). This came after one
night at the inn.
In
Matthew 6:30 and Luke 12:28 Jesus refers to a
grasslike foliage which exists
on one day and au@rion
(tomorrow) is thrown into an
oven. Most likely the next
day is not meant here since the
foliage would not become
a burnable fuel in a single
night. It must refer to any
morrow, an indefinite future
day. The same sense is found
in "do not worry unto the
morrow for the morrow shall worry
for itself" (Mt. 6:34).
Both verses could translate au@rion
with the sense of "the
future or soon."
Two
other times au@rion is
found, Luke 13:32, 33,
. . . Behold I cast out demons
and I perform healings
today and tomorrow, and on the
third I am being finished.
Nevertheless it is necessary
for me today and tomorrow and
the one coming to go." In
these verses au@rion may
mean
either (1) tomorrow, (2) a
short time, or (3) a long time.
Exodus 19:10, 11 has this same
expression where it must
refer to three literal days. It
is probable that au@rion
also should be taken as
"tomorrow" here.
Thus,
au@rion follows the pattern of
earlier Greek
and may mean both (1)
"tomorrow," the next day and (2) a
96
time in the future.
Yesterday (e]xqe<j)
A day
prior to an existing day is understood as
"yesterday." In Greek
this is expressed by e]xqej which
had
both this and other meanings.
In non-biblical Greek
The
adverb e]xqe<j,
"yesterday," is found in many of
the periods of Greek history
and is especially frequent in
the papyri.1 It can
also be found in the writings of
Josephus where e]xqe<j has an additional meaning of "the
past
as a whole."2
In the Old Testament
The
Hebrew wm,x,, and lOmt;x, sometimes occurring with
a m; prefix and lOmT; an are
translated by e]xqe<j. Though the
most frequent English
translation is "yesterday," lOmT;,
which is the most frequently
used word, can be translated
by "heretofore, in times
past."3 This has the sense of
before the present time without
a specific past time in
view. All these varied meanings
can be illustrated from
the Septuagint.
1
Liddell and Robert Scott, Lexicon, I, 748.
2
Josephus Against Apion 2.154.
3
Koehler and Baumgartner, Lexicon, p. 1031.
97
Three
times in Genesis1 e]xqe<j refers
to an event
taking place on the previous
evening and is best translated
"yesternight." On
most occasions e]xqe<j refers
to a past
time event rather than simply
the previous day. For
example, the Philistines feared
the shout of the Hebrews
and replied "for there
hath not been such a thing hereto-
fore" (I Sam. 4:7). During
the early reign of David the
tribes of
was king" (II Sam. 5:2).
They did not mean the previous
day but past time. Consequently
the sense of e]xqe<j can
vary depending on the context.
In the Gospels
Only
once, in John 4:52, does e]xqe<j occur.
A
nobleman sought Jesus to heal
his son. When the man
returned home he was told his
son began to be healthy
"yesterday at the seventh
hour." Obviously, the previous
day is intended since not only
is there the use of e]xqe<j
but also the citation of the
hour. This is in agreement
with the meaning of e]xqe<j.
Each
of the words when used in the Gospels express
a time which in the majority of
cases reflects a single
obvious meaning. Though some
words are capable of several
meanings, it is the contexts
that specify the meaning. In
1
Genesis 19:34; 31:29, 42.
98
a few instances words appear in
accounts where some uncer-
tainty of meaning remains. This
is due to the fact that
words by themselves do not
always carry a single exact
meaning. They can only be
understood by the words used
with them. It is the lack of a
more complete context that
creates the problem of
determining exact time. It appears
that the Gospel writers did not
intend to give a time-
centered message but rather a
message that took place in
time.
CHAPTER
V
WORDS FOR DAY AND ITS PARTS
The
most frequent reminder of the passing of time
to the majority of people in
the ancient world was the day.
Quite naturally a day was an
easy method of relating events
to history. Within the period
of the day many specific and
some general points of time
could be indicated. The con-
tent of this chapter consists
of the words for a day and
its parts. The material is
considered in the following
order: (1) the day, (2) the
division of the day, (3) the
night, (4) the division of the
night, and (5) other indi-
cations of time.
Day
The
alteration of light and darkness brought about
by the apparent rising and
setting of the sun marked out
the day in every ancient
civilization. The day, h[me<ra had
several meanings which varied
greatly as to the length of
time it indicated. These
meanings become very important in
interpreting the Gospels
because h[me<ra occurs
more often
than any other word which
expresses time.
In non-biblical Greek
In
Greek the "day" was named h[me<ra.
However, h[me<ra
as it then was used developed
several meanings: (1) a civil
99
100
day of twenty-four hours, (2) a
state or time of life, "life
of misery," (3) time, (4)
in the plural, an "age,"1 which
consists of a number of literal
days. To these can be
added (5) daytime (the period
of daylight).2 The length of
time indicated by h[me<ra depends on the context rather than
the meaning of the word. For
example, in the papyri litera-
ture a woman who has been
ordered to vacate her house asks
for "time," h[me<ra. The time requested is longer than a
single day.3
Many
references can be cited to illustrate the use
of h[me<ra when it means a day, whether a civil day
of twenty-
four hours or daylight. Both
Xenophon, "you shall see as
soon as day has come,"4
and Josephus, "and when day came he
went,"5 have h[me<ra, meaning the daylight part of the day.
Josephus joins nu<c with h[me<ra
stating that the "high
priests pass their nights and
days performing certain rites
1
George Henry Liddell and Robert Scott, Lexicon, I
(Oxford:
At the Clarendon Press, 1940), 770.
2
William F. Arndt and Wilbur F. Gingrich, Lexicon
(Chicago:
The University of Chicago Press, 1957), p. 340.
3
James Hope Moulton and George Milligan, Vocabulary
(Grand
Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1903),
p.
280.
4
Xenophon Anabasis 7. 2.34.
5
Josephus Antiquities 10. 10. 3.
101
of purification."1
At times ka<q ] h[me<ra is used with the
translation "daily"
or "every day" as in "and every day saw
this war being fanned into
fiercer flame."2 Numerals are
used with h[me<ra by Josephus in the expression, kia> pro> mia?j
h[me<raj
th?j e[orth?j which is translated, "And one day before
a festival the treasurers would
go to the commander of the
Roman garrison and . . . ,
would take the robe."3 These
illustrations show both variety
in meaning and expression
and indicate that caution must
be observed in translating
h[me<ra.
Because
a civil day, which is indicated by h[me<ra,
began at different times in
different countries,4 any
chronological reckoning could
easily be in error even when
the translation is accurate.
Only the context can deter-
mine which of several possible
translations is the correct
one.
An
important note concerning the beginning of the
Jewish day is provided by
Josephus. It is commonly agreed
that the Jewish day in the
first century began at sunset.
This is illustrated by the
eating of the Passover which was
1
Josephus Against Apion 1. 199.
2
Josephus Wars 2. 13. 1.
3
Josephus Antiquities 15. 11. 4.
4
Finegan, HBC (Princeton:
Press, 1964), p. 8.
102
slain on Nisan 14 in the late
afternoon and was eaten that
night, on Nisan 15. All the
lamb was to be consumed that
night and none could be left
until the morning of the
fifteenth day. However, in one
instance Josephus states
that the morning of the
"next day" is the fifteenth day.1
From this comment Beckwith
asserts, "This shows that
Josephus is equally happy with
a second way of reckoning
the days of these festivals,
according to which they begin
and end at daybreak."2 In other words at least two
systems of reckoning the
beginning of the day by the Jews
may have existed. One would
begin at sunset and the other
at sunrise.
In the Old Testament
Over
two thousand times h[me<ra is
found in the
Septuagint. Of these less than
ninety are found as a
translation of words other than
MOy.3 This Hebrew word
has the same variety of
meanings that Ilgepc/ does in Greek.4
In Genesis 1:5 h[me<ra refers both to the period of daylight,
1
Josephus Antiquities 3. 10. 5.
2
Roger T. Beckwith, "The Day, Its Divisions and its
Limits,
In Biblical Thought," The Evangelical Quarterly,
XLIII
(October, 1971), 225.
3
Edwin Hatch and Henry A. Redpath, Concordance, I
(Gratz,
Austria: Akademische Druck, 1954), 607.
4
Koehler and Baumgartner, Lexicon (
Brill, 1958), pp. 372-73.
103
"and God called the light
day," and to the civil day of
twenty-four hours, the evening
and morning were "one day."
The greatest number of uses of h[me<ra fall into one of these
two meanings and they occur in
a variety of expressions.
Yet, other meanings are also
found. According to the
geneology in Genesis 5:5,
"all the days Adam lived were
nine hundred and twelve
years." Though h[me<ra is
translated
"days," here it can
have the meanings, "time," "lifetime,"
or "age." The
children of
at "the time (h[me<ra) of harvest" (Jo. 3:15). Often days
and nights are joined by kai< in describing the length of
an event (Gen. 7:12) but it
appears to have no more signi-
ficance than the mention of
days without the nights (Gen.
7:17). The insertion of o!lhn, "all" with day and night
(Ex. 10:13) shows the extent of
time the locusts plagued
would indicate a lesser period
of time.
One
important study of h[me<ra, is
its use with
numbers. This, more than any
other use of h[me<ra,
affects
precise chronological reckoning.
Sometimes the reference
to days is done simply by
mentioning the time in the nomi-
native or accusative case, such
as, "I was there three
days" (Neh. 2:11), and
water prevailed "a hundred and fifty
days" (Gen. 7:24). On other
occasions the dative case is
used apparently to show an
event that happened during the
days specified. For example,
Abraham circumcized Isaac "on
104
the eighth day," t^? o]gdo<^ h[me<r% (Gen. 21:4).
Sometimes
there is a clarification of the length
of time given in the same
passage. David, following the
death of Saul (II Sam. 1:1, 2),
abode "two days," h[me<raj
duo<, in
Ziklag. And it came to pass "on the third day,"
t^?
h[me<r% t^? tri<t^, suggests that the "two days" of
verse
one are civil days for it was
during the third day that the
next recorded event took place.
A similar circumstance is
recorded in Genesis 40:13, 20.
Joseph tells Pharoah's
butler, "yet three
days," e]ti< trei?j h[me<rai, and
he would be
restored. This came to pass
"on the third day," e]n t^?
h[me<r%
t^? tri<t^. The three days before the restoration do
not mean three complete days
but two days with the restora-
tion on the third day. Esther
commands all the Jews in
Shushan to fast "for three
days," e]pi> h[me<raj trei?j, night
and day and "then I will
enter before the king" (Est. 4:16).
However, she went before the
king (Est. 5:1) "on the third
day,"
e]n t^? h[me<r%
t^? tri<t^. From these passages it would
appear that a numerical
reference to days could include any
part of a day as well as the
complete twenty-four hour
period. Great care must be
taken when determining the
length of days that are
qualified by numbers.
The
Old Testament also reveals that the civil day
was begun at sunset. This is
proven by several Scriptures.
The feast days were observed
beginning at the evening (Lev.
23:32). The Sabbath began at
sunset (Neh. 13:19). For
105
anyone who was unclean
ceremonially, his uncleanness ended
at evening (Lev. 11:24). In I
Samuel 11:9-11 both the
morning watch of the night and
the morning of the day are
both "on the morrow."
These passages prove that the day
began at sunset. Yet, there is
at least one occasion where
a night is reckoned with the
previous day. Michal told
David, "If you save not
your life tonight, tomorrow, you
will be slain" (I Sam.
19:11). This seems to indicate that
in popular speech the days were
sometimes reckoned from day-
light. This appears to be the
same method as was used in
Josephus.1 If two
systems of reckoning the beginning of a
day did exist, the reckoning of
time by days is made much
more difficult.
In the Gospels
There
are at least four basic ideas for h[me<ra
found in the Gospels: (1) a day
appointed for special
purposes, (2) a civil day, (3)
daylight and (4) a longer
period of time.2
Unfortunately the translation for each is
most often "day."
Of
the days appointed for special purposes Matthew's
"day of judgment,"3 e]n h[me<ra kri<sewj is a phrase with
1
Josephus Antiquities 3. 10. 5.
2
Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon, pp. 346-48.
3
Mt. 10:15; 11:22, 24; 12:36.
106
particular temporal meaning.
The context of each passage
indicates that it refers to the
final judgment of the
unsaved. Because of the masses
of people involved and the
nature of the judgment (Rev.
20:12-15), more than one
literal day is involved. For
this reason a better under-
standing of e]n h[me<r% kri<sewj would be "in a
time of judg-
ment." The length of time
indicated by this expression is
unspecified but would seem to
be longer than a literal day
since Scripture suggests there
is an individual judgment of
all individuals born into this
world (Rev. 20:13).
Another
use of day that has a special purpose is
John's "in the last
day," t^? e]sxa<t^ h[me<r%.1 Five times
this day is identified with the
resurrection of the
righteous and once with the
future judgment. Since all the
righteous will not be resurrected
on the same day and since
all believers will not be
judged on the same day, t^? e]sxa<t^
h[me<ra could
be translated "in the last time." Such a
translation best preserves the
meaning of h[me<ra when
used
figuratively of a day which is
appointed for special
purposes.
When
h[me<ra occurs
without any qualifying words it
can be used figuratively of an
unspecified day (Jn. 8:56;
9:4), of a lifetime (Lk. 1:75),
of old age (Lk. 2:36) and
1
Jn. 6:39, 40, 44, 54; 11:24; 12:48. Though 7:37
has
this expression it is clear by the context that an
historical day is in view.
107
even of years. In this last
instance, in Luke 1:7
Zacharias and Elizabeth are
advanced in "days," actually
meaning "years," just
as,
(Lk. 1:18).
Quite
often h[me<ra is
translated "day" with the
sense of an unspecified length
and point of time. In these
instances it could be
translated "time" when singular1 and
"time" or
"times" when plural.2
Among the times indicated
is the day (time) of Elijah, of
the Lord.
Several
times when h[me<ra occurs
in the singular it
refers to the daylight part of
the day.3 From this it is
learned that there are twelve
hours in this daylight period
(Jn. 11:9). Men could be hired
to work by the hour (Mt. 20).
This daylight period is the
time for activity.
Most
references to h[me<ra, refer
to a civil twenty—
four hour day. The day can be
in the singular4 and the
1
Mt. 24:42, 50; 25:13; Lk. 9:51; 17:24, 26(2).
2
Mt. 2:1; 9:15 (Mk. 2:20; Lk. 5:35); 23:30; 24:37
(Lk.
17:26), 38 (Lk. 17:27); 28:20; Lk. 1:5; 4:25; 17:22,
28;
19:43; 21:6, 22; 23:29.
3
Mt. 20:2, 6, 12; Lk. 4:42; 6:13; 9:12; 22:16;
Jn.
11:9(2).
4
Mt.28:15; Mk. 6:21; Lk. 1:20; 80; 4:16; 13:14,
16;
14:15; 17:4, 27, 29, 30; 22:7; 23:54; Jn. 7:37; 9:14;
12:7; 19:31.
108
plural.1 The day may be a single unspecified day
such as
the day when John was beheaded,
"a convenient day" (Mk. 6:
21) or a single specific day
such as a sabbath day (Lk. 4:
16). Several times feast days
are indicated by h[me<ra
(Lk. 22:7; 23:54; Jn. 7:37;
19:31).2 The plural form
indicates a sequence of
continuous days as in "they abode
not many days" (Jn. 2:12).
The
civil day is qualified on certain occasions by
the demonstrative pronoun ou$toj, "this" and in the plural
"these." In each
instance where it is found whether singu-
lar or plural it refers to an
historical calendar day3 or
days.4 Similar to this is the use of e]kei?noj with h[me<ra.
It occurs in the singular to
point out a specific day on
1
Mk. 13:20(2); Lk. 1:23, 25; 2:6, 22, 43; 9:51;
15:13;
Jn. 2:12.
2
Three of these references are important for con-
structing
a chronology of the passion week. Luke 22:7
indicates
"the day of unleavened bread came in which it is
necessary
to slay the passover." This must be construed as
Nisan
14 unless the Jews also sacrificed the passover lamb
on
the thirteenth. The body of Jesus was placed in a tomb
on
the day of Preparation (Lk. 23:54). Though Friday was
the
weekly day known as preparation, this could refer to
any
day of the week preceding a feast such as, the Passover.
According
to John 19:31, "the day of that sabbath was a
great
(high) day," when Jesus was crucified. These days
were
specific civil days but because the customs and termi-
nology
of this period are uncertain, the identity of these
days
is unclear. Thus, three views of the day for the
crucifixion--Wednesday,
Thursday and Friday--have scholarly
proponents.
3
Lk. 19:42; 23:12; 24:13.
4
Lk. 1:24, 39; 6:12; 23:7; 24:8.
109
which something took place.1
The plural is used to indicate
a period of days during which
time an event happened.2
On
several occasions e]kei?noj and h[me<ra are
used together in
both the singular3
and the plural4 to refer to the future
eschatological day. This day
may refer to the time of
tribulation, the second coming,
the judgments or the saved
being with Christ. Though
"day" is the usual translation
of h[me<ra, the context sometimes reveals that
"time" is a
better translation, especially
when the time indicated is
clearly longer than a day.
The
idiom ka<q ] h[me<ran is
found seven times5 and is
translated "daily" or
"every day." In this construction
kaq
] h[me<ran is used distributively6 indicating that the
activity occurs day by day.
On
seven occasions h[me<ra and nu<c are joined
together by kai<.7 Of these seven passages three have nu<c
1
Mt. 13:1; 22:23, 46; Mk. 4:35; Jn. 1:39; 5:9; 11:
53;
20:19.
2
Mt. 3:1; 24:38; Mk. 8:1; Lk. 2:1; 4:2; 9:36.
3
Mt. 7:22; 24:36 (Mk. 13:32); 26:29 (Mk. 14:25);
Mk.
2:20; Lk. 6:23; 10:12; 17:13; 21:34; Jn. 14:20; 16:23,
26.
4
Mt. 24:19 (Mk. 13:17; Lk. 21:23), 22(2), 29 (Mk.
13:24);
Mk. 1:9; 13:29; Lk. 5:35.
5
Mt. 26:55 (Mk. 14:49; Lk. 22:53); Lk. 9:23; 11:3;
16:19;
19:47.
6
Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon, p. 407.
7
Mt. 4:2; 12:40(2); Mk. 4:27; 5:5; Lk. 2:37; 18:7.
110
first and four have h[me<ra. It does not appear that this
expression, "night and
day" is always the equivalent of a
twenty-four hour period. For
example, Anna worshipped in
the temple "night and
day." She did not reside in the
temple but rather was present
in the temple whenever it
was open (Lk. 2:37).1 In a similar passage, the demoniac
was crying always "night
and day" (Mk. 4:27) in the tombs.
This cannot mean that he cried
twenty-four hours each day.
In these places nu<c and h[me<ra seem
to express the idea of
"daily" or at night
and at day unless numerals are used to
indicate a specific number of
days. It was "forty days and
forty nights" that Jesus
fasted (Mt. 4:2). Jonah was in
the fish "three days and three
nights" and Jesus said that
he also would be the same
length of time in the heart of
the earth (Mt. 12:40). While it
may seem natural to equate
each of the days as twenty-four
hours, it must be remem-
bered that the Jews used
inclusive reckoning so that any
part of a day was counted as a
whole day. It is clear
that the use of nu<c and h[me<ra
together do not necessarily
indicate a twenty-four hour
period. This meaning is
possible but it must be proven
not by any expression but
by the contextual evidence in
the passage.
A
number of passages have numerals with h[me<ra.
1
Plummer, Luke (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1964),
p. 72
111
Yet when the number of days is
given it is difficult to
determine how much time is
indicated. For example, a great
multitude followed Jesus
"three days" and had nothing to
eat (Mt. 15:32; Mk. 8:2). This
may indicate a period from
seventy-two hours to one full
day plus a part of the pre-
ceding and the following days.
This latter method of
figuring time is called
inclusive reckoning.
This
method included in the reckoning of a time
interval
both the day (or year) in which any period of
time
began and also that on which it ended, no matter
how
small a fraction of the beginning and the ending
day
(or year) was involved.1
In
many passages2 it is difficult to ascertain
whether inclusive reckoning was
followed because so little
information is given.
Occasionally the length of time is
clear. Luke singles out a day
in the expression "one of
the days."3 Six
days were set aside for work each week
(Lk. 13;14). However, on the
eighth day of a boy's life he
was circumcized (Lk. 1:59;
2:11). This could be six full
days plus the day of birth and the
day of circumcision.
It appears that the passing of
a full week was indicated
by "after eight days"
(Jn. 20:26) and "about eight days"
1
Francis D. Nichol (ed.), Seventh Day Adventist
Commentary, V (
Publishing
Association, 1956), 249..
2
Mt. 15:32 (Mk. 8:2); 17:1 (Mk. 9:2); Mk. 1:13
(Lk.
4:2); Lk. 2:46; Jn. 2:1.
3
Lk. 5:17; 8:22; 17:22; 20:1.
112
(Lk. 9:28). That is, seven days
have passed and it is now
the eighth day, or a week
later.
Even
when additional information is given, there
is difficulty in interpreting
the number of days. John
says that Jesus abode in
after two days He went into
arrived about noon, His stay
could have been a period of
less than twenty-four hours or
up to forty-eight hours
depending on whether the day of
His arrival is considered
as the first day.1
A
greater problem exists in the expressions of
time in the Passion Week chronology.
Jesus arrived in
tou?
pa<sxa (Jn. 12:1). The Passover would be either Nisan
14 or 15 depending on whether
the slaying of the lamb or
the Passover meal is in view.
Six days before the Passover
could include (1) both days at
each extreme or (2) only one
of the days at the extreme.
Hence the day specified could
be Nisan 8, 9 or possibly 10.2
The difficulty of deter-
mining these more precise
expressions is the uncertainty
1
A similar problem exists in connection with the
raising
of Lazarus who was in the tomb four days (Jn. 11:6,
17).
This time could be a full four days or parts of four
days
reckoned as whole days.
2
The same reasoning may be followed in the expres-
sion
"after two days the Passover cometh" (Mt. 26:2;
Mk.
14:1). The two days mean either (1) the next day or
(2) the day after tomorrow.
113
about what these words meant
then and the method or methods
of reckoning time.
In
the Gospels there are eighteen statements
recorded about the length of
time between the death and
resurrection of Jesus. Eleven
of these statements are
recorded as being from Jesus.
Of these, Matthew has a
reference to Jonah with an
application to Jesus (12:40).
His three other references to
the three days are in the
dative case without
accompanying prepositions.1 Mark, in
referring to the three days in
accounts parallel to Matthew
has meta> trei?j h[me<raj (Mk. 8:31; 9:31;
10:34). Luke
follows Matthew (Lk. 9:22;
18:33; 24:46). John 2:19 states
that the resurrection would be e]n trisi>n h[me<raij. All of
these passages must refer to
the same length of time. The
preference for the dative and e]n indicates that the resur-
rection took place not after
the three days but that the
resurrection "is to take
place within that space of time,
consequently before its
expiration.2 The Jewish leaders
in referring to this time
period prefix the three days with
several different prepositions
which also must have the
1 kai>
t^? tri<t^ h[me<r% Mt. 16:21; 17:23; 20:19.
2 George B. Winer, A
Grammar of the Idiom of the New
Testament
(7th
ed.;
p. 386. "(Hereinafter
referred to as Grammar.)"
114
same temporal meaning.1
They express belief that a guard
is necessary e!wj "until the third day" (Mt. 27:63).
This
"third day" seems to
be the terminus ad quem. After the
third day the guard is
unnecessary. Later the disciples
spoke to Jesus late on the
first day of the week and they
remark, "It is now the
third day since all these things
came to pass" (Lk. 24:21).
It would appear that the three
days from the death to the
resurrection no matter how they
are expressed extend back to
Friday if inclusive reckoning
is followed or Thursday if a
full seventy-two hour period
is intended.
In
spite of the use of numerals with
h[me<ra to
indicate the passing of
chronological time, the uncertainty
about the manner of counting
days makes exactness of inter-
pretation difficult. In
addition to indicating chronology
h[me<ra can
also be used: (1) figuratively, (2) of daylight,
(3) of an extended period of
time having a translation
"time" or
"days," and (4) of a civil day whether a whole
or a part.
In
the Gospels a "day" can also be expressed by
1 dia< is used in Mt. 26:61;
Mk. 14:58; e]n
in Mt. 27:
40;
Mk. 15:29; and meta< in Mt. 27:63. However,
1960),
261-62, argues that the expression in Mt. 27:63
means
the "fourth day." He also postulates that the three
day
time reckoning should begin with the rejection of Jesus
on
Thursday (basing this on a supposed two day trial) rather
than
the crucifixion which he maintains came on Friday. He
lists
no evidence for this view other than the supposed two
day trial.
115
sh<meron which
appears to be a varient of h[me<ra. In the
Old Testament MOy, "day," appears about eighteen
hundred
times and is translated by sh<meron 286 times in the
Septuagint.1 Most often sh<meron translates MOy.ha or MOy.ha
hz.,ha
"this
day." In the Gospels it is found twenty times
conveying the meaning
"this day" or "today." It is the
opposite of au@rion, "tomorrow" (Mt. 6:30). The
daylight
and what belongs to it,2
the entire civil day,3
and the
night which belongs to the day4
are all a part of sh<meron.
From these uses it appears that
sh<meron is
more restrictive
than h[me<ra and indicates the present literal day or
its
parts.
Division of the Day
One
of the frequently occurring words to record
the passing of time is w!ra, "hour." It is this word that
was chosen to divide the daylight
or the solar day into
its parts.
1
Ernest Fuchs, sh<meron, TDNT, trans. and ed. by
Geoffrey
W. Bromiley, VII (
Publishing
Co., 1971), 270.
2
Mt..6:11; 21:28; Lk. 5:26; 12:28.
3
Mt. 6:30; 11:23; 16:3; 27:8, 19; 28:15; Lk. 2:11;
4:21;
13:32, 3; 19:5, 9; 23:43; 24:21.
4
Mk. 14:30; Lk. 22:34.
116
In non-biblical Greek
The
early meanings of w!ra,
include (1) a "fitting
time," (2) a
"season," and (3) "any period fixed by
natural laws and revolutions
whether of the year, month,
or day."1 This last concept can be understood as
including
translations such as,
"right time," "time,"2 as well as
"hour." Other
meanings include "in one second," "in a
moment" and
"instantly."3 The use of w!ra to
denote any
short span of time seems to
have been the earliest meaning
and only later, when time was
determined by the "hour," did
the meaning "hour"
develop.4
At
a time contemporary with the writing of the New
Testament, the Jewish historian
Josephus uses w!ra to
speak
of a specific hour in the day.5
On one occasion he writes
concerning the Roman war with
the Jews:
The
ten assenting to these proposals, early next
morning
he dispatched the rest of the men under his
command
in the various directions, to prevent any
discovery
of the plot, and about the third hour called
to
the Romans from the tower.6
1
Liddell and Scott, Lexicon, II, 2035.
2
Cremer, Lexicon (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1954),
p.
589.
3
Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary, ID. 702.
4
Cadbury, "Time," Journal of Biblical Literature,
LXXXII
(September, 1963), 276.
5
Josephus Wars 6. 1. 7. and Antiquities 6. 14. 6.
6
Josephus Wars 5. 13. 2.
117
From
this it can be concluded that to Josephus the
third hour was early in the
day. This corresponds to
9 a.m. according to the Jewish
reckoning of the third hour.
A second quotation from
Josephus indicates that Josephus
reckoned hours from sunrise.
The
majority, however were not convinced by these
speeches,
and a riot would inevitably have ensued, had
not
arrival of the sixth hour, at which it is our
custom
on the Sabbath to take our midday meal, broken
off
the meeting.1
Josephus
clearly indicates that the customary
Jewish midday meal on a Sabbath
day came at the sixth hour.
Being the midday meal, the
sixth hour was reckoned from
sunrise. Josephus was writing
primarily to Romans from the
city of
reckoning hours from sunrise.
The importance of this will
be realized later in the
section dealing with w!ra in the
Gospels. It is clear that w!ra early had a variety of
meanings.
In the Old Testament
Although
found less than forty times in the Septu-
agint, the use of w!ra occurs primarily as a translation for
tfe which
is usually translated "time." In a few places
w!ra
translates hfAwA.2 In no place does w!ra occur with a
1
Josephus Life 54.
2
Dan. 3:6; 4:16; 5:5.
118
numeral to indicate a specific
hour in the day. The only
places where w!ra appears to give the sense of "hour"
is in
the often repeated phrase
"tomorrow about this time" and
its equivalents. Even here the
sense is more of general
period of time than a literal
hour. Sometimes w!ra is
translated "time"
with the idea of eschatological time
(Dan. 11:40), of time for the
evening oblation (Dan. 9:21)
and time to eat (Ru. 2:14). The
sense of "season" is clear
in the account of Abraham's promise
of a son (Gen. 18:14).
The Lord promises to return to
Abraham and Sarah "when the
season (w!ra) cometh around." The "season"
was the time
when Sarah could conceive. Also
w!ra has the translation
"season" when referring
to the time when rain comes (Deut.
11:14). In Daniel 3:6, "in
the same hour cast in the
burning fiery furnace,"
and 5:5, "the same hour came forth
the fingers of a man's
hand," w!ra is
usually translated
"hour." However, the
context does not demand a literal
"hour." The
translation "at the same time," is equally
suitable if not superior. These
examples show that the
variety of meanings found in
the non-biblical Greek were
for the most part found in the
Septuagint.
In the Gospels
Nearly
seventy-five times w!ra is
found in the
Gospels. At times the
translation "hour" is not the best
119
rendering. Luke uses w!ra with au]th< six
times.1 Most
English versions translate this
"the same hour" or "that
very hour." Matthew Black
asserts that this is actually
a translation equivalent of two
closely related Aramaic
temporal conjunctions which
convey the meaning "at the same
time,"
"immediately," "forthwith," and sometimes "then,"
or
"thereupon."2
All these translations reflect the meaning
"time" and
contextually are more meaningful translations
than "hour." Even if
Black's assertion is incorrect, the
first three suggested meanings
are the same as the earlier
historical uses of w!ra.
Many
times w!ra appears to express
"time" in the
sense of an "instant of
time." This is clear in the healing
miracles of Jesus.3
For example, "the servant was healed
in that hour" (Mt. 8:13).
"The woman was made whole from
that hour" (Mt. 9:22).
Both of these verses express the
same result, an instantaneous
cure.
Other
places must also have the same sense of
"time," rather than
"hour." Mark 11:11 has, "the hour
(time) already being
evening" Jesus went out. At the
feeding of the five thousand the
disciples announced that
1
Lk. 2:38; 10:21; 12:12; 13:31; 20:19; 24:33.
2
Matthew Black, An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels
and
Acts (Oxford:
At the Clarendon Press, 1967), p. 79.
3
Mt. 8:13; 9:22; 15:28; 17:18; Lk. 7:21; Jn. 4:53.
120
"the hour (time) is
already past" (Mt. 14:15). Jesus tells
the Samaritan woman, "the
hour is coming and now is" (Jn.
4:23). There was also the
promise of a "coming hour (time)
of resurrection (Jn. 5:28).
There is no reason to believe
that a specific hour was in
view in these passages. Rather,
w!ra
indicates specific "time" without a specified time des-
ignation. In Hebrew this is
expressed by tfe but in
the
Greek by w!ra.
The
same idea is present in the eschatological pas-
sages which teach of the Second
Coming being at an unknown
"hour" (time).1 Likewise, on a few occasions w!ra refers to
a specific time which recurred
every day and is similar to
the popular expression
"dinner time." Luke also speaks of
the "hour of incense"
(1:10) and the "hour of supper" (14:
17; 22:14).
Throughout
the Gospels Jesus speaks of "the hour,"
"my hour" and
"this hour."2 The meaning of w!ra in these
places cannot be a literal
"hour" but rather "time." A
survey of the passages indicates
that the hour relates to
the events of His passion.
Since more than an hour trans-
pired during this time, or less
if only His death is in
1
Mt. 10:19 (Mk. 13:11; Lk. 12:12); 14:15; 18:1;
26:55;
Mk. 6:35(2); 11:11; Lk. 22:53; Jn. 4:21; 23; 5:25,
28;
16:2, 4, 21, 25, 32; 19:27.
2
Mt. 26:45; Mk. 14:35, 41; Jn. 2:4; 7:30; 8:20;
12:23, 27; 13:1; 17:1.
121
view, w!ra could best be translated "time."
In
one instance, "Ye were willing to rejoice for
a season in his light"
(Jn. 5:35), w!ra is
translated
"season." The
reference is to John the Baptist. The light
which he cast was not for a
literal hour or for a brief
time but for an extended
period. While this is the only
place this translation is found
in the Gospels, it is
historically permissible and
contextually necessary.
The
remaining twenty-one uses of w!ra occur
with
numerals. From these passages
it is known that there are
twelve hours in a day (Jn.
11:9). The w!ra would
vary in
length in accordance with the
season of the year since
every day was divided into
twelve equal parts. The first
hour of the day began at
sunrise and the twelfth hour con-
cluded at sunset. In the
parable of the vineyard the
third, sixth, ninth and eleventh
hours of the day are
mentioned (Mt. 20:3, 5, 9, 12).
At each of these hours
workers were hired to work in
the vineyard. The hours
mentioned correspond to
mid-morning, noon, mid-afternoon
and two hours before dark. This
was the usual method of
reckoning time during the day
time and it was done by
estimation. In the Garden Jesus
reproved the disciples
because they could not watch
one hour while He prayed (Mt.
26:40; Mk. 14:37). There is
also an indication of time in
connection with the denials of
Christ by Peter. Matthew
and Mark indicate that
"after a little while" (meta<
mikro<n)
122
Peter denied the Lord a third
time but Luke relates that
it was "after the space of
about one hour" (Lk. 22:59).
Concerning
the crucifixion the Synoptists agree that
from (a]po<) or about (w!sei) the
sixth hour there was dark-
ness.1 The darkness lasted until (e!wj) the ninth hour
(Mt. 27:45; Mk. 15:33). About (peri<) the ninth hour Jesus
cried out with a loud voice
(Mt. 27:46; Mk. 15:34).
Shortly after this He died. The
time when darkness covered
the earth would be from noon to
3 p.m. To this, Mark 15:25
adds, "now it was the
third hour and they crucified Him."
This would be 9 a.m. reckoning
from sunrise.
Before
examining John's use of "hour" it must be
noted that there is
disagreement about the method which
John used in reckoning time.
Much can be said in favor of
adopting the "Roman
method" of reckoning time. Finegan
writes: "when various
hourly notations are considered in
the Gospel according to John it
is found that they do in
fact work out well in terms of
Roman reckoning."2 David
Smith expand; this thought:
The
Romans reckoned their sacerdotal and their
civil
day from midnight to noon and again from noon to
midnight.
So also the Egyptians counted their hours.
Nor
is evidence lacking that a like system obtained in
1 Mt. 27:45; Mk. 15:33;
Lk. 23:44.
2 Finegan, HBC, p. 12.
123
public
spectacles began at an early hour. The Synop-
tists
follow the ordinary Jewish method, but it was
natural
that John, writing at
the
method in vogue in
actually
to have done.1
Perhaps
the most convincing evidence that such a
method of reckoning hours did
exist is from Pliny, who
wrote saying:
The
actual period of a day has been differently kept
by
different people: the Babylonians count the period
between
the two sunrises, the Athenians that between
two
sunsets, the Umbrians from midday to midday, the
common
people everywhere from dawn to dark, the Roman
priests
and the authorities who fixed the official day,
and
also the Egyptians and Hipparchus the period from
midnight
to midnight. [emphasis mine]2
Therefore,
according to this system, the sixth hour
would be either 6 a.m. or 6 p.m.
rather than noon, which it
would be if the Jewish method
were followed.
However,
many do not believe that such a system ever
existed. William Ramsay points
out several important
reasons against reckoning a day
beginning at midnight. He
relates that there is no
certain historical instance when
Roman hours are reckoned from
midnight. Further, even when
the Romans described the civil
day they began counting the
hours from sunrise. They called
midnight (the beginning of
their twenty four hour day) the
sixth hour of the night.
1 David Smith, The
Days of His Flesh (
Hodder
and Stoughton, 1910), pp. 529-30.
2 Pliny, Natural History 2. 79. 188.
124
And finally, the Greek civil
day began at sunset. With his
investigation finished, Ramsay
firmly asserts that hours
were reckoned in only one way.1 An additional consideration
comes from Josephus, the Jewish
historian, who wrote to
first century Romans. He
remarks that on the sabbath the
midday meal was "the sixth
hour."2 This
has to be noon.
This testimony is from a first
century Jew writing to
Gentiles in a Gentile country
about Jewish customs. These
seem to be similar to the
circumstances of John who wrote
the Fourth Gospel.
The
first mention of w!ra with a
numeral occurs at
the conversion of John who
remained that day with Jesus.
John writes, "It was about
the tenth hour" (Jn. 1:39), which
is about 4 p.m. according to
Jewish reckoning or 10 a.m.
according to Roman reckoning.
A reference
to the "sixth hour" (Jn. 4:6) takes
place at Jacob's well near
Sychar. This would be noon
according to the Jews or 6 p.m.
according to the Romans. If
this is 6 p.m. as some believe,
many events had to take
place in a very short period of
time in order for this to
be completed before dark. This
incident probably occurs in
winter (4:35) and darkness
would come early, perhaps even
1
William N. Ramsay, "The Sixth Hour," The Expositor,
XVIII (June, 1896), 458.
"(Hereinafter referred to as "The
Sixth Hour.")"
2
Josephus, Life, 54.
125
before the 6 p.m. of Roman
reckoning. After meeting the
woman the following events took
place: (1) the lengthy
discourse, (2) the return of
the woman to the city, (3) the
return to Jesus by the woman
and the townspeople at a time
of sufficient light for the
people to see their way and be
seen by the disciples, and (4)
the return to the city for
all involved. It is possible
for these events to take
place in this period of time
only if some were concluded
after dark. Although 6 p.m. is
the normal time for drawing
water, Josephus indicates that
water was also drawn at mid-
day.1
If
the sixth hour is noon, all the events of John
four have sufficient time to
occur. To interpret the sixth
hour as being 6 p.m. in this
passage appears to have greater
difficulties than the noon
interpretation.2
The
nobleman's son was healed (4:52, 3) at the
seventh hour. This is 2 p.m. by
the Jewish system and
7 a.m. or 7 p.m. by the Roman
system. It could be argued
that each of these hours gives
plenty of time for the noble-
man to return home to
mile journey by the next day.
This journey would necessi-
tate an overnight rest during
the lengthy trip home. Since
a twenty mile journey is longer
than an average day's
1 Josephus Antiquities
2.11.1. and 2.11.2.
2 George Ogg, Chronology
(
sity Press, 1940), p. 32.
126
journey the seventh hour may
better indicate 7 a.m. or
2 p.m., following the Jewish
reckoning. Especially is this
true since it appears that the
man departed immediately
after hearing Jesus' words. If
this miracle took place at
7 p.m. he could not travel far
before dark. However, it
was still possible for him to
arrive home the next day.
The conclusions drawn from
either system of reckoning are
equally plausible in light of
the evidence which John
records. Therefore, on the
basis of this testimony alone
the seventh hour could be 7
a.m. or 2 p.m. but probably not
7 p.m.
The
last reference to w!ra in
John is most difficult
to explain. John writes that
Jesus was delivered up to be
crucified "about the sixth
hour" (Jn. 19:14). The other
gospel writers indicate that
Jesus was already on the cross
before the sixth hour. Many
attempts have been made to
harmonize the accounts. Some
claim that the Roman method
of reckoning hours from
midnight was followed by John.1
Thus, John's sixth hour would
be 6 a.m. Others believe
there was a manuscript error
through the misreading of the
copyists.2
However Ramsay, who accepts the Jewish method
1 Archibald T. Robertson,
A Harmony of the Gospels
(New
York; Harper and Brothers, 1922), pp. 284-87.
2 Eugen Ruckstuhl, Chronology
of the Last Days of
Jesus, trans. by V. Drapela (
Inc., 1965), pp. 47-48.
127
of reckoning time, acknowledges
the differences in the
Gospel records but he believes
that the times given in the
Gospels are reasonable
estimates and he "cannot feel any-
thing serious in such
difference of estimate between
witnesses who naturally would
be thinking little about the
hour."1 Thus, according to Ramsay it is possible
that the
sixth-hour of John is reckoned
from sunrise and would
correspon to the period of
midday.
If
the Jewish system is followed, that the sixth
hour of John is noon, the
following reconstruction appears
necessary.
The
Synoptists agree that darkness covered the land
from the sixth hour to the
ninth. The mention of the sixth
hour must refer not to the
period of time when Jesus was on
the cross but the time when
darkness began. Each account
mentions the sixth hour and immediately
after this relates
an event about the ninth hour.
It is possible that the
Synoptists wrote giving the
total time of darkness, the
sixth to the ninth hour,
whereas John wrote setting the
time that Jesus was delivered
up for crucifixion as about
midday. Mark's third hour (Mk.
15:25) or mid-morning would
have to be an estimation of the
time when it was clear from
the proceedings that Jesus
would be crucified. John, who
wrote his Gospel after the
Synoptists, clarifies the time
1 William M. Ramsay, "The Sixth
Hour," 457-58.
128
by stating that Jesus was not
crucified until about midday,
the sixth hour. He was an
eyewitness (Jn. 19:26, 27) and
his testimony concerning the
time of crucifixion must be
the more exact indication of
time.
However,
if the Jewish reckoning of the sixth hour
is accepted, a careful
examination of the four Gospels
reveals a hopeless
contradiction between the Synoptics and
John. Only one point needs
mentioning to illustrate this
irreconcilable position. In the
Synoptic Gospels it is
recorded that Jesus was
crucified the "third hour" (Mk. 15:
25) and that He had been on the
cross and had already
uttered several of His sayings
by the sixth hour (Mt. 27:
45; Lk. 23:44). However, John
places the sentencing in
Pilate's Hall at about (w[j) the "sixth hour." After this
Jesus was led away to
place. Either John or the other
Gospels are in error if
the Jewish method of reckoning
hours was used.
However,
if the Roman reckoning of hours from mid-
night was used by John, his
sixth hour would be 6 a.m.
This would allow for a
harmonization of all the accounts.
John presents the time, 6 a.m.,
when Jesus was in Pilate's
Hall for judgment, the mockings
and scourgings. Mark indi-
cates the exact time of the
crucifixion, 9 a.m. Matthew and
Luke indicate that from noon
until 3 p.m. darkness covered
the earth
The
question may legitimately be asked, "Why did
129
John adopt Roman reckoning of
hours?" Norman Walker states
that
the
use of 'modern' or Egyptian hour-reckoning by
the
author suggests either
cise
time-reckoning and knowledge of the stars was all
important
for navigation, and time-reckoning from mid-
night
was in use among Egyptians, and two and a half
centuries
before the Fourth Gospel was written, the
great
astronomer Hipparchus had resided both at
and
at
the
hours from midnight, as did the Egyptians. There
is
also evidence from the recorded martyrdoms of
Polycarp
and Pionius that the manner of reckoning
obtained
in Asia Minor.1
Therefore,
if John was influenced by the reckoning
of time in
comments about the Roman
authorities reckoning the day from
midnight are correct, it is
both probable and logical that,
at least in this passage, John
followed the Roman reckoning
of hours from midnight. The events
which he records were
acts of a Roman official and
these may have been set forth
in official Roman records as
taking place at the "sixth
hour," 6 a.m. It does not
necessarily follow that all
other references to w!ra by John must be reckoned by the
Roman method.
In
reviewing the uses of w!ra, it
can be seen that
most often w!ra should be understood as "time" not in
the
sense of a literal
"hour" but with the idea of "a moment
of time." Only once (Jn.
5:35) does it appear that w!ra,
1 Norman Walker,
"The Reckoning of Hours in the
Fourth Gospel," Novum
Testamentum, IV (January, 1960), 72.
130
must be translated
"season," which is a lengthy period.
When w!ra occurs with numerals it refers to a particular
twelfth part of the daytime if
the time is being reckoned
by the Jewish method. The first
hour commenced at sunrise
and the twelfth concluded at
sunset. In at least one
instance, John 19:14, the hour
must be reckoned from mid-
night to harmonize with the Synoptic
Gospels. This Roman
time reckoning was practiced
then although this was not the
common Jewish method of
indicating hours. Whether any
other hour references in John
are also reckoned from mid-
night is not certain. Either
method of reckoning, Roman or
Jewish, is possible though the
Jewish system appears to be
better.
Night
From
the beginning of creation the darkness which
followed the day provided an
easy method of reckoning time.
This period of darkness which
encompassed half of the civil
day was called nu<c.
In non-biblical Greek
The
period of time that is opposite to the daylight
is the "night," nu<c. When used literally nu<c could occur
with prepositional phrases
which sometimes qualify the part
of the night intended. For
example, u[po> nu<ktan means
"at
131
dusk," and dia> nukto<j "under the cover of
night."1
Occasionally nu<c
is
figurative of "blindness," "derelection"
and "harm."2 word
used by Josephus to indicate the
passing of a whole night is dianuktereu<ein.3
In the Old Testament
The
period of darkness, commonly called nu<c
for
the Hebrew hlAy;la
had many divisions within it. The
earliest part of the darkness,
the evening twilight, is
called o]ye< (Job 24:15). The time when the stars occur
is
designated by e[spe<ra or e[spe<rinoj (Gen.
49:27). The lengthy
period of darkness is nu<c (Gen. 1:5) and the time of the
morning twilight just prior to
the sunrise is prwi~ (I
Sam.
31:12).4 The night could also be divided into three
watches. The first is called
the "beginning of the watches"
(Lam. 2:19), the second is the
"middle watch" (Jd. 7:19)
and the third is the
"morning watch" (Ex. 12:4). This
system of watches was in use also
during the intertestament
period according to Jubilees
49:10, 12.
The
word nu<c itself occurs more than
two hundred
times in the Old Testament.
From these references the
1 Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary,
p. 432.
2Gerhard Delling, nu<c,
TDNT, IV, 1123.
3Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon,
p. 186.
4 "Night," A
Dictionary of the Bible Comprising Its
Antiquities;
Biography, Geography and Natural History,
p. 626.
132
Jewish meaning given to nu<c can best be understood. The
time of darkness is called nu<c (Gen. 1:5). It was a time
of supernatural revelation for
Samuel (I Sa. 15:16) and a
time of military maneuvers for
Joshua (Jo. 8:3). Some
references to the night appear
to refer only to a part of
the night since the whole night
was indicated by the use
of o!lhn with nu<c (I Sa.
28:20; 31:12). Many times h[me<ra
and nu<c were joined in the same sentence with h[me<ra usually
first. This may suggest in
popular speech the Jews could
reckon their day as beginning
in the morning as well as
the evening.1
When
"day and night" are combined in a single
expression such as forty days
and forty nights, it is
difficult to determine if this
must mean solar days. Some
times it could (Gen. 7:4). At
other times it appears to
mean "daily" or
"perpetually." The Levites were employed
in their work "day and
night" (I Chron. 9:33). The Jews
were exhorted by Solomon to
keep their eyes open to the
temple of God "day and
night" (II Chron. 6:20). Joshua
challenge
(Jo. 1:8). Nehemiah prayed for
1 It is generally
accepted that the Hebrews
officially
reckoned their day from sunset to sunset from
the
time they became a nation. However, if this were the
only
system which they used why does the expression "day
and
night" sometimes place h[me<ra before nu<c? It is very
possible
that this was the result of a popular custom or
manner of speaking.
133
(Neh. 1:6). These references do
not indicate a single
twenty-four hour period but
rather they suggest an activity
which should take place during
any day, hence the meaning
"daily."
It
appears to be impossible to prove that an entire
twenty-four hour period is meant
by a "day and night." For
example, Jonah was in the
fish's belly "three days and
three nights" (Jon. 2:1).
A literal interpretation demands
one of two interpretations: (1)
three twenty-four hour
solar days or (2) three days in
which one or two may be
less than twenty-four hours in
length. While Scripture
does not indicate which is
correct, Esther 4:16 and 5:1 may
shed light on the expression.
Esther tells Mordecai to
gather the Jews of Shushan and
command them to fast for
"three days, night or day."
Then she promises to go in to
the king which she does
"on the third day." In other words,
she does not wait for three
solar days to pass but on the
third day she enters before the
king. Later that same day
she broke the fast (Est. 5:4-6).
Esther does not appear to
have broken her word and gone
before the king prior to the
right time. This passage
suggests that the day in Jewish
time reckoning, even if
qualified by "night or day," at
times can refer not just to the
entire twenty-four hour
period but any part of a day.
Therefore nu<c though
it
refers to the darkness part of
the solar day, may refer to
the entire period of darkness,
only part of the period, or,
134
when combined with h[me<ra, it may indicate either an entire
solar day or only a part of the
day.
In the Gospels
This
discussion of nu<c in the
Gospels is limited to
those passages where nu<c is not combined with h[me<ra.1 In
most places nu<c refers to the period of darkness that is a
time for sleeping or fishing.2 It is
also the time of
Jesus' betrayal and arrest.3 That the night was divided
into four watches is made clear
because Jesus walked on the
water in the fourth watch of
the night.4 This
is the last
fourth of the night immediately
preceding the sunrise.
On
five occasions5 is in the genitive case
and
must be translated "at
night" or "by night."6 It was
"by
night," that is, under the
cover of darkness that Nicodemus
came to Jesus. Jesus was taken
to
the expression dia> o!lhj nukto<j occurs in Luke 5:5 it is
clear that the disciples had
fished "through the whole
night."
1 These have already been
considered under h[me<ra.
Supra.
2 Mt. 25:6; Lk. 21:37;
Jn. 21:3.
3 Mt. 26:31, 34 (Mk.
14:30); Jn. 13:30.
4 Mt. 14:25 (Mk. 6:48).
5 Mt. 2:14; 28:13; Lk.
2:8; Jn. 3:2; 19:39.
6 Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary,
p. 431.
135
The
figure of the night being a time for stumbling
because of the absence of light
is applied by Jesus to the
spiritual realm. Those without
Jesus when He, the
spiritual light, would be
removed, will be in danger of
stumbling in spiritual darkness
(Jn. 11:10).1
On
a few occasions nu<c is
used metaphorically of
the time of judgment for the
rich farmer (Lk. 12:20) and of
the time of Christ's coming
(Lk. 17:34). This last passage
does not mean that Christ's
coming will be at night for
there is always night somewhere
on earth. In John 9:4
speaks of the time when work is
over and the time for rest
begins. Here, nu<c appears to refer to the "night"
of
physical death.2
These
uses of nu<c in the Gospels are
quite clear.
Most often nu<c refers to a part or the whole of the
period
of darkness when the sun is not
shining. On a few occasions
it has a figurative or
metaphorical sense of "spiritual
darkness," though its
translation is "night."
Divisions of the Night
The
earliest portion of the night was identified as
the "evening," e[spe<ra. As darkness settled, the military
watches (fulakh<) became the method of noting time during
1 J. H. Bernard, John,
II (
1962),
377.
2 Delling, nu<c, IV,
1125.
136
the absence of the sun. The
four watches in order of
occurrence were: (1) o]ye<,
(2) mesonu<ktion,
(3) a]lektorofwni<a and (4) prwi~. In
the latter part of the
fourth watch came the
"early morning,” o@rqroj.
e[spe<ra.
A
most important part of the night was the "evening,"
e[spe<ra. It
was especially significant to the Jews for the
night marked the beginning of a
new day.
In
non-biblical Greek.--Only two meanings are
listed for e[spe<ra in classical Greek: (1)
"evening" and
(2) the "west."1 The second meaning no doubt developed from
the fact that the sun set in
the west. The first meaning
is illustrated by Josephus who
states of David's victory
over the Amalekites,
"David's companions too continued the
slaughter from the first hour
until evening" (e[spe<ra)2
Here, e[spe<ra must mean the initial period of dark at
the
time of sunset. The adjective
form, e[sperino<j, also
is
translated "evening."
In
the Old Testament.--Both of these words are used
for the Hebrew word br,f,. Much
importance given to e[spe<ra
resulted from its designation
as the period of time for the
1 Liddell and Scott, Lexicon,
I, 697.
2 Josephus Antiquities 6.14.6.
137
sacrifices. Each day a burnt offering
of one lamb was
sacrificed in the
"evening," e[spe<ra. The Hebrew, NyBi
MyiBar;fahA should
be more literally translated "between the
evenings" instead of the
Septuagint pro>j e[spe<ran. If the
interpretation of the Mishnah
and the accompanying Gemara
is accepted, the phrase
"between the evenings" refers to
three periods of time. The
first evening was from noon to
two-thirty) and the second
evening from three-thirty until
6 p.m. Between these two
periods from two-thirty to three-
thirty the evening burnt
offering was sacrificed.1 This
could make e[spe<ra, "evening" in some passages
equivalent
to the entire afternoon and in
others only a part of the
afternoon. For example, when
the children of
quail "in the
evening" (Ex. 16:12), it appears that e[spe<ra
meant the close of the day as
darkness set in.
The
adjective form, e[sperino<j, three
times indi-
cates the evening sacrifices
which take place in mid-
afternoon.2
It also is the time when Jehovah's Passover
began (Lev. 23:5). It is not
clear whether darkness or the
time for the slaying of the
lamb is meant. In Proverbs 7:9
e[sperino<j
occurs
in a series of statements about the night,
"in the twilight, in the
evening ( e[sperin&?) of the day, in
1 Finegan, HBC, pp. 13-14 has an extensive
discus-
sion
of this.
2 II Kg. 16:15; Dan. 9:21; Ps. 141:2.
138
the middle of the night and in
the darkness. Here,
e[sperino<j seems to be equated with the early
evening before
deep darkness.
It
can be concluded about e[spe<ra, and e[sperino<j
that they pertain to the
closing part of the daylight hours
from Jewish reckoning. This
period could include the time
of the evening sacrifices which
began about noon until the
early evening when the stars
began to appear.
In
the Gospels.--The only use of e[spe<ra occurs
in
Luke 24:29. Jesus had been
walking with two of the
disciples toward Emmaus and it
was "toward evening," pro>j
e[spe<ran. It is also stated that the day
was far spent and
it was before the evening meal
(v. 30). Consequently, pro>j
e[spe<ran
appeals to be late afternoon in this passage. It
was early enough for the
disciples to leave Emmaus and
return to
fulakh<
While
fulakh< does
not indicate a specific time
reference, it does occur with
numerals to indicate specific
watches of the night. For this
reason it is important.
139
In
non-biblical Greek.--How early in history the
night was divided into watches
is not known. It is
commonly accepted that the
Romans had four watches in the
night.1 However, Josephus in mentioning the siege
of
Having
enclosed the city within this wall and posted
garrisons
in the forts. Titus went round himself during
the
first watch of the night and inspected everything;
the
second watch he entrusted to Alexander, for the
third
the commanders of the legions drew lots.2
No
mention is made at this time of a fourth watch.
In
the Old Testament.--The Jews had at least three
watches: (1) the beginning of
the watches (Lam. 2:19),
(2) the middle watch (Jd. 7:19)
and (3) the morning watch
(I Sa. 11:11). If there was not
a fourth it means that the
Jews divided the night into
three periods of four hours
each. The length of each watch
varied with the time of the
year. The watches were
designated by these names and not
numbers.
In
the Gospels.--Most comments about the watches are
predicated on the Roman custom
of dividing the night into
four watches. In Matthew 14:25
and Mark 6:48 the fourth
watch is mentioned. However, in
two instances there is an
1 Liddell and Scott, Lexicon,
II, 1960.
2 Joselphus Wars 5.5.10.
140
allowance that perhaps only
three watches are in view.
Matthew 24:4 does not enumerate
the number of the watches
but says, "I the master of
the house had known what watch
the thief was coming." In
Luke 12:38 the master returning
late from the marriage feast is
said to return perhaps in
the "second watch and if
in the third." Why is not the
fourth mentioned? It is
probable that only the three Jewish
watches are in view.1 If this
is correct there would be at
least two systems of dividing
the night that were practiced
concurrently in New Testament
times.
o]ye< (o]yi<oj )
The
first watch of the night according to the
Romans was identified as o]ye< . However, o]ye<
usually func-
tioned as an adverb meaning
"late" indicating a time late
in the day. It also may
function as an improper preposition
meaning "after" in
one passage (Mt. 28:1).2
In
non-biblical Greek.--Two basic meanings of this
word are found in the Greek.
Both the general meaning of
"after a long time,"
"at length," "late" and the more
specific "late in the
day," "at even"3 are
found.
1 Alfred Plummer, Luke
(
1964),
p. 33,
2 Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon,
p. 606.
3 Liddell and Scott, Lexicon, II,
1282.
141
In
the Old Testament.--The adverb o]ye<
translates
br,f,
meaning
"evening" and Jw,n
meaning "late." In one
instance, Exodus 30:8, 6; o]ye< used for the Hebrew phrase
"between the
evenings." No clear indication exists that
this refers to anything other
than the late part of the
daylight or early evening.
In
the Gospels.--Jesus in Mark 11:11 and 11:19 left
e]ge<neto.
Either of two interpretations is possible. He
may have left when it was late (in
the afternoon) or his
departure may have corresponded
with the coming of the
first watch, o]ye<. Both views place the departure late in
the day just before or after
sunset.
The
remaining usage of o]ye< is a
particular problem
because it occurs in a sentence
with several words for
time. Matthew 28:1 reads, o]ye< de> sabba<twn, t^? e]pifwskou<s^
ei]j
mi<an sabba<twn. Several
interpretations are possible:
(1) o]ye< could mean "late on the Sabbath
day," Saturday
afternoon; (2) o]ye<
could
mean after the Sabbath day or
early Saturday evening;1
or (3) it may mean, after the
Sabbath at the dawning of the
first day of the week, "about
1
Ezra P. Gould, Mark (
1961),
p. 300. This view assumes that the "dawning toward
the
first day of the week" (Mt. 28:1) means the beginning
of the new day at sunset.
142
dawn on Sunday." The third
possibility which corresponds
closely to Mark's account of
the resurrection is inconsis-
tent with the other uses of o]ye< in the Gospels which
always designate o]ye< as a time either late in the day or
the first watch of the night.
A
related study is in order at this point. The
adjective form, o]yi<oj, which is not used in the Septuagint,
is found fourteen times in the
Gospels. It occurs in the
expression "when evening
was come" and equivalent phrases
most often.2 The "evening" appears always
to have the
meaning of the time just before
darkness sets in. This idea
is found in several passages.
Though "evening" was come,
Jesus took time for the feeding
of the five thousand before
He sent the people away (Mt.
14:15). Sufficient daylight
must have been available in
order for the miracle to take
place. The "evening"
came at the end of the work day at a
time after the eleventh hour
since the laborer who went out
at that hour did enough work to
get paid (Mt. 20:8). It
was the time when the sun set
in Mark 1:32. When "even"
was come, Joseph of Arimathea
sought the body of Jesus from
Pilate (Mt. 27:57; Mk. 15:42).
This was after 3 p.m. when
Jesus died but before the
beginning of the next day which
1
This view harmonizes Matthew 28:1 with the resur-
rection
accounts of the other Gospels.
2
Mt. 8:16; 16:2; 26:20; Mk. 4:35; 6:47; 14:17;
Jn. 6:16.
143
was a sabbath (Mk. 5:42). In no
instance, unless it would
be John 20:19, "evening on
that day, the first of the week,"
does o]yi<oj signify a period after dark. However, this
passage does not demand that it
was dark. Rather, all the
evidence suggests a time in the
late afternoon prior to the
time of the setting of the sun.
This
single meaning of o]yi<oj
suggests that the o]ye<
of Matthew 28:1 would most
naturally be translated "late"
on the Sabbath day. However,
scholars are divided about
the meaning of o]ye< in this passage.
Those
who harmonize Matthew 28:1 with the other
accounts of the Resurrection
translate o]ye< "after." This
allows them to equate Matthew's
time reference "after the
Sabbath" to "dawn on
Sunday." Moulton writes: "This use of
o]ye< =after
involves an ablative gen., 'late from.' . . .
this seems a natural
development, but the question is not
easy to decide."1 The basis for o]ye< being translated
"after" comes from
Philostratus, a second to third century
A.D. writer who uses o]ye< tou<twn which is translated "last
of all." The entire
quotation is as follows:
Now
those who come to the Pythian festival are,
they
say, escorted with sound of pipe and song and lyre
and
are honored with shows of comedies and tragedies;
and
then last of all [emphasis mine] they are presented
1
James Hope Moulton, Prolegomena Vol. I of A Grammar
of
New Testament Greek
(3 vols.;
1919), 72-73. "(Hereinafter
referred to as Prolegomena.)"
144
with
an exhibition of games and races run by naked
athletes.1
The
use of o]ye< musthri<wn in
Philostratus is also
cited as evidence for o]ye< meaning "after."
It
was the day of the Epidaurian festival at which
it
is still customary for the Athenians to celebrate
the
mystery at a second sacrifice after both proclama-
tion
and victims have been offered; and this custom was
instituted
in honour of Aesclepius, because they still
initiated
him when on one occasion he arrived from
Whether
these two quotations adequately prove that
o]ye< can at
times be translated "after" remains a problem.
H. A. W. Meyer says o]ye< "always denotes the lateness of the
period thus specified and still
current.3 However, Meyer
contradicts this conclusion in
order to avoid an alleged
discrepancy between Matthew and
the other Gospels.
We
are not to suppose Saturday evening to be
intended,
. . . but far on in the Saturday night, after
midnight,
toward daybreak on Sunday, in conformity with
the
civil mode of reckoning, according to which the
ordinary
day was understood to extend from sunrise till
sunrise
again.4
In
support of this view the last portion of Matthew
28:1, "at the dawning unto
the first of the week," is
1
Philostratus Life of Apollonius 6. 10.
2
Ibid. 4. 18.
3
Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer, Critical and Exe-
getical
Handbook to the Gospel of Matthew, trans. by F.
Crombie
(New York: Funk & Wagnalls, Publishers, 1884), p. 519.
4
Ibid.
145
brought into consideration.
Goodspeed argues against "late"
saying,
But
this sense is precluded by the very next phrase,
which
the King James translates 'as it began to dawn
toward
the first day of the week,' or, as we would say,
'as
the first day of the week was dawning,' for the
Sabbath
did not last until the dawn of Sunday but ended
with
sunset or dark Saturday night.l
By
this Goodspeed means, as the daylight of Sunday
was about to dawn. Thus it has
been concluded: "When both
language and context permit
interpreting ch. 28:1 in harmony
with the unanimous statements
of the other Gospel writers,
there is no valid reason for
doing otherwise."2
Perhaps
this is sufficient evidence to translate
o]ye<,
"after." However, there is an alternate view that
should be considered. In
keeping with the other uses of
o]ye< in the
Gospels, Matthew 28:1 could read, "late on the
Sabbath, as it began to dawn
toward the first day of the
week" (NASV). The
assumption that "at the dawning" (Mt. 28:
1) is the equivalent of sunrise
is not borne out in the use
of this word in Luke 23:54,
"It was the Preparation Day,
and the Sabbath was about to
dawn" [emphasis mine]. This
can only mean the beginning of
a new day (at dusk) was at
hand.
1
Edgar J. Goodspeed, Problems of New Testament
Translation (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1945),
p.
43.
2
Francis Nichol ed. The Seventh Day Adventist Bible
Commentary, I (
Publishing Association, 1956),
554.
146
It
is not at all certain that the evidences cited
for o]ye< being translated "after" prove
anything. Thayer
writes: "An examination of
the instances just cited (and
others) will show that they
fail to sustain the rendering
"after."1 Rather, o]ye< when
followed by the genitive always
appears to be a partitive,
signifying "late" in the period
specified by the word in the
genitive.2 For this reason
Allen writes, "It is
however, very difficult to believe that
o]ye<
sabba<twn can mean anything else than either 'as the
Sabbath ended,' or 'when it had
ended'."3 The implications
of this views are indicated by
A. T. Robertson:
This
careful chronological statement according to
Jewish
days clearly means that before the sabbath was
over,
that is before six P.M. this visit by the women
was
mad 'to see the sepulchre.'4
This
view would necessitate at least three visits
to the tomb by the women. The
first came on the day of the
crucifixion (Lk. 23:55). A
second appears to occur at the
conclusion of the weekly
Sabbath, Saturday afternoon (Mt.
28:1). At this time the women
came "to look at the grave."
1
Joseph Henry Thayer, Lexicon (
Zondervan
Publishing House, 1962), p. 471.
2
Ibid.
3
Commentary
of the Gospel According to St. Matthew (Edin-
burgh:
T. & T. Clark, 1965), p. 301.
4
Archibald Thomas Robertson, Word Pictures in the
New Testament, I
(Nashville: Broadman Press, 1950), 240.
147
The final visit to the tomb is
recorded by the other Gospel
writers. This time the stone
had been rolled away revealing
the empty tomb. The major
criticism of this view is that
it produces an unnatural break
between Matthew 28:1 and
28:2-15 in that Matthew does
not relate how the women
arrived at the tomb on the
"third" visit. Both views have
merit.
If
o]ye< is translated
"late" in every instance except
when it refers to the first
watch of the night, Matthew 28:1
must refer to the end of the
Sabbath. However if o]ye< can
be translated "after"
in this passage then it no doubt
refers to the dawn of Sunday.
Word meaning and grammar are
indecisive.1
mesonu<ktion
The
second watch for the Romans was called
mesonu<ktion.
Though this is not necessarily an exact hour
indication, it serves as an approximate
time indicator in
the night.
In
non-biblical Greek.--Because of its obvious
meaning of "midst of the
night," mesonu<ktion often
had the
translation "at
midnight." There is no evidence from Greek
literature that it indicated a
watch of the night.
1
Archibald Thomas Robertson, Grammar (
Broadman Press, 1934), p. 644.
148
In
the Old Testament.--The five uses of mesonu<ktion
in the Septuagint are
translated "midnight." This is the
literal meaning and a suitable
translation for hlAy;l.Aha tOchE,
its Hebrew counterpart.
In
the Gospels.--There is one occasion where
mesonu<ktion can be
translated "midnight," with the meaning
of "the midst of the
night." In the parable of the impor-
tunate friend, the neighbor was
awakened at "midnight"
(Lk. 11:5). The translation
"midnight" is not to be under-
stood as an exact hour and
"the midst of the night" is an
equally good translation.
prwi~,
prwi~aj
While
prwi~ is the title given to
the fourth watch
of the night (Mk. 13:35), it
more often has the translation
"early," or
"morning." The adjective form is prwi~aj.
In
non-biblical Greek.--The most frequent use of
the adverb prwi~ is to indicate the time "early" in the
day,
"morning." It appears
to be the opposite of o]ye<.1 The
adjective prwi~aj has the same meaning except that it can
also indicate "early in
the year."2
1
Liddell and Scott, Lexicon, II, 1543-44.
2
Ibid.
149
In
the Old Testament.--The Septuagint has prwi~
usually as the translation of rq,Bo, "morning." It is found
in the phrase "and there
was morning" in Genesis one. In
Genesis 22:3 Abraham rose up
"early in the morning," prwi~.
Joseph went in to his fellow
prisoners (prwi~ ),
"in the
morning" after they had
their visions (Gen. 40:6). Samuel
slept until morning (prwi~) and he arose early (I Sam. 3:15).
From these uses it is clear
that prwi~ as a translation of
had at least two translations:
(1) the specific time
of early morning when the sun
came up and (2) the general
time of morning (Gen. 1).
In
the Gospels.--The reason for the fourth watch of
the night being called prwi~
(Mk. 13:35) probably occurred
because the early morning (prwi~) was the concluding time of
that watch. With the prwi~ came the light of day
and consequently the
translation "early," "early in the
morning."1
A
few passages indicate that prwi~ included the time
just before the dawn. In Mark
1:35 a literal translation
of kai> prwi~ e@nnuxa lia<n would be "and in
the morning, very
much at night."2
Yet, a similar phrase kai> lia<n
prwi~
(Mk. 16:2) is used though the
sun had already risen. Later
1
Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon, p. 732.
2
Gould, Mark, p. 28.
150
in Mark 16:9 the time indicated
is prwi~ "early." But John
records this same event saying
that the women were coming
early, "while it was
dark" (Jn. 20:1). Evidently, the
women left while it was yet
dark and arrived shortly after
daybreak. The meaning of prwi~ was
broad enough to include
not only the final hours of
darkness each night but also
the beginning of the daylight
period. This is suggested by
the following passages. It was
early, prwi~, when the San-
hedrin took council against
Jesus (Mt. 27:1; Mk. 15:1).
After the meeting it was still prwi~ when they led Jesus from
Caiaphas to the Praetorium (Jn.
18:28). This is the time
that John calls the sixth hour
which according to Roman
reckoning is 6 a.m. It is the
time when the fourth watch
of the night would end. In John
21:4 prwi~aj is used to
indicate that morning was
breaking.
At
other times prwi~ indicates the early hour of
travel (Mt. 21:18; Mk. 11:20),
the time to hire workers for
the first hour Mt. 20:1) and the
time for determining the
weather for the day (Mt. 16:3).
Though the time allotted
to prwi~
could extend backward into the fourth watch of the
night, it seems in the Gospels
to refer more often to the
period at dawn. At times it was
still dark or just the
beginning of the light. This is
the time expressed by prwi~.
.
151
o@rqroj (o]rqrino<j)
Another
division between the night and day is
expressed by o@rqroj and o]rqrino<j,
"dawn, early dawn." Each
word is used only once in the
resurrection account.
In
non-biblical Greek.--Both in early Greek litera-
ture and in Josephus o@rqroj refers to the time just before
or about daybreak.1
The same meaning is given to the
adjective form o]rqrino<j.
In
the Old Testament.--The Septuagint reveals that
o@rqroj refers
to the beginning of the daylight period.
Angels hastened to Lot
"when morning arose" (Gen. 19:15).
Jacob wrestled all night until
the angel of Jehovah
demanded release "for the
morning breaketh" (Gen. 32:26).
The citizens of
before they killed Samson (Ju.
16:2). In each of these
places the time described is
early morning and is connected
with the dawn of the day.
1
Liddell and Scott, Lexicon, II, 1250.
152
In
the Gospels.--Luke alone uses o@rqroj (24:1)
and
o]rqrino<j
(24:22) to describe the early morning visit1 of the
women to the tomb. This visit
came about daybreak on the
first day of the week, Sunday.
Instead of using prwi~ like
the other Gospel writers, Luke
uses two words that appear to
be synonyms of prwi~. Thus, he writes that it was "deep"
or
"early-morning"
(24:1). This is the first part of the
morning.
Other Indications of Time
There
are several words which by themselves or in
conjunction with other words
express time in the day. These
words are considered in the
following order: braxu<j,
eu]kairi<a,
(eu]kairo<j), i[
Because the words are used so
seldom, the uses of each word
will be discussed in a single
paragraph.
braxu<j
While
often used to indicate a short distance or
shortness of stature braxu<j also indicates "a short time."2
Josephus used it many times to
indicate a "brief" or "short
1
The first visit to the tomb appears to have taken
place
in the late afternoon of the crucifixion day. At
this
time the women visited the tomb (Lk. 23:54-55),
observed
His body and returned home to prepare spices for a
final
preparation of the body. The second recorded visit
by
Luke occurred on Sunday morning.
2
Liddell and Scott, Lexicon, I, 328.
153
time."1 In the
Septuagint braxu<j
translated NFomA which
does not have a temporal
meaning. Only in Luke 22:58,
"after a short time"
does braxu<j occur.
This use is found
in the midst of Peter's denial
of the Lord. Peter first
denies the Lord and "after
a short time" another person
approaches Peter which leads to
the second denial. This is
the only testimony that Peter's
second denial followed close
to the first.
eu]kairi<a
(eu]kairo<j)
Both
words are combinations of eu],
"good" and
kairo<j,
"time." The translations for eu]kairi<a
include
"favorable
opportunity," "the right moment" or "right
time."2 For the
adjective eu]kairo<j the
translations are
"well-timed,"
"suitable"3 and "seasonable time, well timed,
suitable to the time."4
Both words are translations of tfe
in the Septuagint and have
meanings related to time.5 The
two places where eu]kairi<a is found in the Gospels are
best
translated "right
time" (Mt. 26:16; Lk. 22:6). These
places are parallel and
indicate that Judas Iscariot sought
1
Josephus Antiquities 10.11.3. and 14.4.5. and
11.3.2.
2
Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon, p. 321.
3
Liddell and Scott, Lexicon, I, 717.
4
Cremer, Lexicon, p. 740.
5
Delling, eu]kairi<a, TDNT, III, 462.
154
for the right or good time to
turn Jesus in to the Jewish
leaders. The adjective, eu]kairo<j, found only in Mark 6:21
is used with h[me<ra, of the day when Herodias decided to have
John the Baptist killed. When
Herod planned a feast,
Herodias knew it was a
"right time" (day). This literal
translation gives the sense of
a convenient, favorable and
opportune time.
i[
Another
word, which can designate a portion of time,
is i[
"enough," and
"considerable."1 The word appears to come
from the verb i!kw, "to reach," "to attain."2
When desig-
nating time it refers to a long
or considerable length of
time.3 Though it is
not found in the Septuagint, Luke
expresses the sense "a
long time" with i[
It had been a long time since
the demoniac had worn clothes
(Lk. 8:27). In the parable of
the vineyard, the owner went
into another country "for
a long time" (Lk. 20:9). Herod
Antipas "for a long
time" was desirous of seeing Jesus
(Lk. 23:8). In answer to the
question, "How long a time
does i[
1
Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon, p. 375.
2
Rengstorf, i[
3
Liddell and Scott, Lexicon, I, 825.
155
basic meaning of the word,
"considerable."
o]li<goj
The
various translations of o]li<goj give
the idea of
"brevity" when it is
used temporally irregardless of the
prepositions or nouns used with
it. In the Septuagint it
is best translated
"few" (Gen. 29:20; Ex. 25:52) when it
modifies a noun. Used by itself
it expresses "a short
time," "a little
while."1 It is this last sense which
occurs in "come ye apart
into a desert place and rest ye a
little while" (Mk. 6:31).
proskairo<j
As
a member of the kairo<j family
this expresses a
"temporary,"
"transitory" time.2 It is not found in the
Septuagint except in IV
Maccabees 15:2, 8, and 23 where the
idea of "temporary"
is present even though it is translated
"present." Both uses
in the Gospels3 occur in the parable
of the seed which is planted but
it is not having root in
itself. It lasts only "for
a time." Barr remarks con-
cerning proskairo<j "all the cases in the
Bible (3 in 4
Macc. and 4 in NT) have the
meaning of 'temporary, lasting
only a short time,' which
depends on the sense of kairo<j
1
Thayer, Lexicon, D. 442.
2
Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon, p. 722.
3
Mt. 13:21; Mk. 4:17.
156
as 'time' or perhaps
'moment.'"1
These
words have temporal meanings that are clear
and easily identifiable by the
context and the basic
meaning of the word. The time
expressed is usually not too
specific.
1
Barr, Time (London: SCN Press Ltd., 1961), p. 43.
PART II. GRAMMATICAL STUDY
CHAPTER
VI
INFINITIVAL EXPRESSIONS OF TIME
In
addition to words for time the Greek language
had grammatical expressions
which indicated time relation-
ships. One such method of
expression is the temporal use
of the infinitive. This construction
occurs fifty-seven
times in the Gospels with
sufficient diversity of meaning
that it necessitates
examination. This chapter sets forth
(1) the background, (2) the
tenses, (3) the identification,
and (4) the occurrences of
temporal infinitives.
Background of Temporal Infinitives
While
extensive study of the temporal use for the
infinitive in the various areas
of Greek literature is not
available, it is possible to
set forth principles concerning
its use. The article and a
preposition always immediately
precede the temporal
infinitive.
The
infinitive preceded by the article is used,
like
a noun, as the object of a preposition. The
article
assumes the genitive, dative or accusative
form
according to the case required by the preposi-
tion,
but it is always of the neuter gender.1
1
Greek (Chicago: Published by
the author, 1896), p. 19.
"Hereinafter
referred to as The Infinitive.)" This study
by
Votaw is the authority on the use of the Infinitive in
(all)
Biblical Greek. The only place where copies of this
have been located is the
157
158
The
article must be preceded by either (1) meta<,
(2) pro<, (3) pri<n, or
(4) e]n. It is through the use of the
preposition with the infinitive
that temporal relations are
expressed. Antecedent action is
indicated by pri<n or pro<
tou? and
the infinitive.1 Contemporaneous action is
described by e]n t&? with the infinitive.2
Subsequent
action is set forth by meta> to< and the infinitive.3
The
use of the temporal infinitive is not confined
to Biblical Greek. It also is
found among Greek writers.
For example, in Polybius e]n, meta<, and pro< are found with
the infinitive in the same
approximate frequency and func-
tion as these same infinitives
in Genesis.4 However, this
is not necessarily true of
other Greek writers.
In
the entire Old Testament e]n is found
four hundred
fifty-five times, pro< forty-six times and meta< ninety-nine
times.5 Votaw concludes, "The Hebraistic
influence is
chiefly of two kinds: it
affects the frequency of occurrence
1
Archibald T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New
Testament
in the Light of Historical Research (
Broadman
Press, 1934), p. 1091. "Hereinafter referred to
as
Grammar.)"
2
Ibid., p. 1092. 3
Ibid.
4
Polybius
Compared With the Use of the Infinitive in Biblical
Greek
p.
49.
5
Votaw, The Infinitive, p. 20.
159
of the infinitive, and it
affects the uses which the infini-
tive is made to serve."1 The Hebrew language
also expressed
a temporal idea with a
preposition and the infinitive.
Contemporaneous action could be
indicated by with
the
infinitive.2
While
the temporal idea of the infinitive had early
roots in the Greek language,
the Hebraic manner of
expressing time with the
infinitive was a strong influence
when putting Hebrew thought
into the Greek language. For
example, A. T. Robertson writes
concerning e]n t&?:
Examples
of this idiom occur in the ancient Greek
(16
in Xenophon, 6 in Thucydides, 26 in Plato) and the
papyri
show it occasionally. But in the LXX it is a
constant
translation of B;a and is much more a undant
in
the N.T. as a result of the LXX profusion.3
It
may well be that e]n t&? and
the infinitive began
to replace the classical Greek
genitive absolute as a
temporal designation in the New
Testament.4
1
Votaw, The Infinitive, p. 55.
2
Bruce Waltke, "Advanced Hebrew" (unpublished class
notes
in Advanced Hebrew, Dallas Theological Seminary,
1963),
p. 25.
3
Robertson, Grammar, p. 587.
4
John Charles Doudna, The Greek of the Gospel of
Mark
(
Exegesis, 1961), p. 54.
160
Tenses
of Temporal Infinitives
Only
two tenses, the present and the aorist, occur
with the temporal infinitive in
the Gospels. The signifi-
cance of the tenses is
basically the same as is found in
the moods. Goodwin inaccurately
relates that
The
Aorist Infinitive here presents no peculiarity,
and
that it differs from the Present only in the ordi-
nary
way, by referring to a single or momentary act
rather
than to a repeated or continued act.1
Votaw
makes a very precise distinction between the
tenses saying:
The
common grammatical distinction between the
present
and the aorist tenses of the infinitive is here
also
observed, the present indicating that the action
or
state denoted by the infinitive is thought of as in
progress
the aorist indicating that the action or state
is
thought of indefinitely as regards progress.2
To
this Stagg adds concerning the aorist:
It
tells nothing about the nature of the action
under
consideration. It is 'punctiliar' only in the
sense
that the action is viewed without reference to
duration,
interruption, completion or anything else.3
He then comments,
The
aorist can properly be used to cover any kind
of
action: single or multiple, momentary or extended,
broken
or unbroken, completed or open-ended. The
1
William Watson Goodwin, Syntax of the Moods and
Tenses
of the Greek Verb
(
1965),
p. 240. "(Hereinafter referred to as Syntax.)"
2
Votaw, The Infinitive, p. 59.
3
Frank Stagg, "Aorist," Journal of Biblical Litera-
ture, XCI
(June, 1972), 223.
161
aorist simply refrains from
describing.1
From
this it is clear that the tense of the infini-
tive expresses action not time.
The present tense indicates
continuing action and the
aorist indefinite action. The
continuation of action will not
be indicated by the aorist
infinitive alone.
Identification of Temporal Infinitives
The
temporal infinitive is introduced in the Gospels
by one of four prepositions and
the article. The action of
the main verb is either
antecedent, contemporary or subse-
quent to the infinitive. It
must be considered that
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.2
Antecedent action
The
correct formula for showing that the action of
the main verb is antecedent to
the infinitive is pro> tou?
and the infinitive. There are
nine examples of this in the
New Testament and six of these
are in the Gospels.3 All
1
Stagg, "Aorist," p. 223.
2
Esrnest DeWitt
Tenses
in New Testament Greek (
Syntax.)"
3
Mt. 6:8; Lk. 2:21; 22:15; Jn. 1:48; 13:19; 17:5.
162
have the accusative with the
infinitive except John 13:19.
That this construction was not
too common is suggested by
the Septuagint which according
to A. T. Robertson has only
thirty-five uses.1
The
function of pro> tou? with
the infinitive is set
forth clearly by
By
pro< with the infinitive antecedence of the
action
of the principal 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.2
In
other words, both the time of the action in the
infinitive and the main verb
are in relation to each other
with the action of the main
verb always preceding the
action of the infinitive.
An
alternate construction to pro> tou? is pri<n or pri<n
h@. There
seems to be no reason for the presence or absence
of h@ after pri<n.
The
use of h@
after pri<n, which occurs twice in the
Iliad,
frequently 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.3
Whichever
form occurs with the infinitive the
1
Robertson, Grammar, p. 978. However, Nigel Turner,
Syntax, III (Edinburgh: T.
& T. Clark, 1963), p. 144 cites
nearly
fifty uses in the Old Testament.
2 Burton, Syntax, p. 49.
3
Ibid., p. 152.
163
result is the same. "The
infinitive, preceded by the
temporal adverb pri<n or
pri<n h@, is
used to indicate an
action or state antecedent in
time to that denoted by the
verb to which it stands
related."1 Thus, both pri<n
and pro<
used with the infinitive
indicate that the action of the
leading verb is antecedent in
time to the infinitival
action.
Contemporaneous action
It
is the primary function of e]n t&? with
the infin-
itive to indicate
contemporaneous action.
The
preposition e]n, which occurs in this construc-
tion
nearly as many times (through Hebraistic influence)
as
all others, indicates generally a relation of
contemporaniety
or attendant circumstance between the
act
or state denoted by its infinitive and that of the
verb
to which it stands related.2
That
the construction e]n t&? and
the infinitive is a
Hebraism can be seen from the high
frequency of uses of it
in the Septuagint. While it
occurs fifty-five times in the
New Testament, most of them
being in the Gospels, it is
found five hundred times in the
Septuagint but only twenty-
six in Plato, sixteen in
Xenophon and six in Thucydides.3
However,
of the thirty-nine uses of e]n t&? with
the
1
Votaw, The Infinitive, p. 16.
2
Ibid., p. 20.
3
Turner, Syntax (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1963),
pp. 144-45.
164
infinitive in the Gospels, many
times the aorist infinitive
is used by Luke instead of the
present infinitive. Zerwick
makes the following distinction
between the present and
aorist infinitive.
Where
e]n t&? with the infinitive is used temporally,
the
present infinitive naturally indicates, in general,
contemporary
action, and the aorist preceding action;
not
that the forms indicate of themselves any relation
of
time, but because the aspect which they indicate
normally
corresponds to these relationships. . . .
The
present represents action in progress, the aorist
represents
it simply as posited.1
Turner
says, when e]n t&? occurs
with the aorist
temporal infinitive it
indicates "anterior action."2 How-
ever,
"at which the action
expressed by the principal verb takes
place. The preposition does not
seem necessarily to denote
exact coincidence, but in no
case expresses antecedence."3
It
can be compared to o!te with
the aorist indica-
tive, "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."4
A distinction between the two
tenses used with e]n t&? must
1
Maximillian Zerwick, Biblical Greek Illustrated by
Examples, trans. by Joseph Smith
(
Instituti Biblici, 1963), pp. 134-35.
2
Turner, Syntax, p. 145.
3
4
Ibid.
165
be observed. The present tense
preceded by e]n t&?
indicates
action contemporaneous with
that of the main verb. The
significance of the aorist
infinitive, other than showing
indefinite action, must be
determined from the context.
Subsequent action
The
use of meta> to<, To
with the infinitive is found five
times in the Gospels, fifteen
times in the entire New Testa-
ment and one hundred eight
times in the Septuagint.1
meta>
to< always
has the resultant meaning of "after" and occurs
with the aorist tense in the
Gospels. Its function is well
expressed by
By
meta< with the infinitive antecedence of the
action
denoted by the Infinitive to that of the main
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 . . .
is
natural, since in dating one event by another the
latter
is usually, conceived as an event without
reference
to its progress.2
It
should be noted that the tense of the temporal
infinitive indicates continuing
action, if present tense,
or an event without reference
to its progress if aorist
tense. It is the addition of
the preposition or adverb
that projects the action of the
infinitive as being ante-
cedent, contemporary or
subsequent to the action and conse-
quently the time of the main
verb. Therefore the time
1
2
Ibid., p. 49.
166
indicated by the temporal
infinitive can only be vaguely
expressed.1
Occurrences of Temporal Infinitives
It
is important to remember that the time relation-
ship is between the main verb
and the infinitive. The main
verb may be (1) antecedent, (2)
contemporaneous, or (3) sub-
sequent to the action of the
infinitive.
Antecedent action
The
use of pro> tou?, or pri<n with the infinitive in-
dicates that the action of the
main verb precedes the action
of the infinitive. In the
Gospels on five occasions pro> tou?
is found with the aorist
infinitive. Three times the main
verb is also aorist.2 A good illustration of the time
sequence can be seen in Luke
2:21, "the name given by the
angel before he was
conceived." Clearly the action of the
main verb precedes in time the
action of the infinitive.
This is also true when the main
verb is present3 as in, "the
Father knows what you need
before you ask" (Mt. 6:8). The
tense of the main verb shows
the kind of action expressed
but the temporal infinitive
with pro> tou?
indicates that the
action of the main verb
precedes the action of the
1 Robertson, Grammar, p. 1091.
2
Lk. 2:21; 22:15; Jn. 1:48.
3
Mt. 6:8; Jn. 13:19.
167
infinitive.
This
is not only true with an aorist infinitive
but also a present infinitive
(Jn. 17:5).
The
nine times that pri<n or pro> tou? occur with an
infinitive it is always an
aorist infinitive which indicates
a specific action. In each
instance the action of the main
verb precedes the action of the
infinitive. This is true
whether the main verb is
present (Jn. 8:58), aorist (Mt. 1:
18), perfect (Jn. 14:20),
future,1 or an aorist imperative
(Jn. 4:49). A good illustration
of the sequence of action
between the infinitive and main
verb is in Matthew 26:34,
"before the cock crows,
you shall deny me thrice." While
both actions are future, the
use of pri<n indicates that the
denial preceded the crowing of
the cock.
There
seems to be no functional difference between
pro>
tou? and pri<n. In all instances the
translation "before"
precedes that of the infinitive
and clarifies that the
action of the main verb
precedes in time the action of the
infinitive regardless of the
tenses involved.
Contemporaneous action
By
far the most frequent use of the temporal infin-
itive is the use of e]n t&? with the infinitive. Both present
and aorist infinitives are
temporalized by e]n t&?.2
1
Mt. 26:34; 75; Mk. 14:30, 72; Lk. 22:61.
2
The number of occurrences of this temporal inf in-
itive varies with the Greek
text used. A. T. Robertson,
168
When
e]n t&? occurs
with the aorist, the main verb is
aorist except in Luke 10:35,
"I will repay you when I
return." In each context
as the following examples show,
it is clear that the action of
the main verb is contempo-
raneous with the action of the
aorist main verb. "When the
parents (Mary and Joseph)
brought in the child . . . he
(Zacharias) took Him in his
arms" (Lk. 2:27). "When Jesus
returned, the multitude
welcomed Him" (Lk, 8:40),1
Luke's
use of the aorist infinitive
appears to be for the purpose
of conceptualizing the action
expressed by the infinitive
into a single point of time.
Consequently, the translation
of e]n
t&? must
be "when" or possible "as soon as" rather
than "while."
The
majority of times e]n t&? occurs with the infini-
tive in the present tense. The
preposition and the article
are translated
"while" or "as" and the context clearly
demands that the action of the
infinitive and the main verb
are contemporaneous. The
present infinitive is durative
expressing action that
continues over a period of time.
Grammar, p. 1427, following
Westcott and Hort, lists thirty
one
uses with the present and eight with the aorist infini-
tive.
J. H. Moulton, Accidence and Word Formation, II, A
Grammar
of New Testament Greek accept Nestle's text and
lists
twenty-seven uses with the present and ten with the
aorist.
1
The other uses with the aorist infinitive are Lk.
3:21; 9:34, 36; 11:37; 14:1;
19:15; 24:30.
169
This durative action is
illustrated by, "while he sows"
(Mt. 13:4), "while men are
sleeping" (Mt. 13:25) and "while
performing priestly
duties" (Lk. 1:8). The translation
"while" has the sense
of "during the time that." In these
same passages the main verb
reflects the contemporaneous
action. "While he sows,
some seed fell beside the road."
While men are sleeping, the
enemy came." "While performing
priestly duties, he was chosen
by lot." The action of the
main verb is contemporaneous
with the infinitive whether
the verb is present,1
imperfect,2 aorist3 or a periphrastic
(Lk. 5:1). It is the function
of the e]n t&?
preceding the
infinitive which reveals that
the infinitive and the main
verb are contemporaneous.
Subsequent action
On
six occasions4 meta>
to<
is used with the infini-
tive to denote that the action
of the main verb follows in
time the action of the infinitive.
In each instance the
infinitives are in the aorist
tense. The main verbs may be
1
Mk. 6:48; Lk. 12:15.
2
Lk. 1:21; 5:12; 8:42; 18:35; 24:15.
3
Mt. 13:4 (Mk. 4:4; Lk. 8:5); 13:25; 27:12; Lk. 1:8;
2:6,
43; 8:5; 9:18, 29, 33, 51; 10:38; 11:1, 27; 17:11, 14;
24:4,
51.
4
Mt. 26:32; Mk. 1:14; 14:28; 16:19; Lk. 12:5; 22:20.
170
present (Lk. 12:5), future,1
or aorist2 tenses but the
action always follows in time
the action of the infinitive.
This is the pattern whether the
time of the action is past,
"after John had been taken
into captivity, Jesus came" (Mk.
1:14) or future, "after I
have been raised, I will go
before you to
that conveys the temporal idea
and not the infinitive.
Perhaps
this chapter would more accurately be
titled the use of prepositions
with infinitives to indicate
the temporal relationships
between an infinitive and its
main verb. Only four prepositions
convey a temporal rela-
tionship. When pro> tou? or pri<n are
found with an infini-
tive they indicate that the
action of the main verb precedes
the action of the infinitive.
Contemporaneous action is
described by e]n t&?. The use of meta>
to<
reveals that the
main verb action follows the
action of the infinitive.
Though these uses are not
startling in their significance
they do have importance in
determining time relationship
between the infinitive and its
main verb.
1
Mt. 26:32 (Mk. 14:28).
2
Mk. 1:14; 16:19; Lk. 22:20.
CHAPTER VII
PARTICIPIAL EXPRESSIONS OF TIME
There
remains yet another grammatical method of
expressing time in the Gospels.
Like the temporal use of
the infinitive there is a
temporal use of the participle.
This construction is not easily
recognized nor is there
agreement about its frequency
in the New Testament. Since
it would be impossible to
locate and prove all the temporal
uses of the participle, this
chapter will cite only examples
of this use.1 The
content of the chapter consists of (1)
the possibility, (2) the
background and (3) the tenses of
temporal participles.
Possibility of Temporal Participles
The
attitude of grammarians toward the temporal
participle varies from
Moulton's minimizing of its exis-
tence,2 to Machen, who seems to indicate that all
parti-
ciples have a temporal idea. He
writes,
1
The frequency ratio of temporal participles to the
total
number of adverbial participles is impossible to
determine.
However, in the writings of the Apostolic
Fathers
according to H. B. Robison, Syntax of the Participle
in
the Apostolic Fathers,
p. 41 there are 1252 adverbial
uses
of the participle. Of these 271 are temporal and are
about
evenly divided between present and aorist. "(Herein-
after
referred to as Syntax.)"
2
James Hope Moulton, Prolegomena, Vol. I (3 vols.;
171
172
It
is necessary, therefore, to give up all attempts
at
translating the participle 'literally.' Instead we
must
express the idea which is expressed by the Greek
participle
in an entirely different way--by the use of
a
temporal clause.1
The
view of most grammarians is somewhere between
these two extremes. A. T.
Robertson, who reflects the
majority opinion of Greek
scholars, states that a parti-
ciple at times may have a
temporal function.
It
may be said at once that the participle has
tense
in the same sense that the subjunctive, optative
and
imperative have, giving the state of the action as
punctiliar,
linear, completed. In the beginning this
was
all that the tense meant in the participle. The
participle
was timeless. . . . But the tenses of the
participle
may be used for relative time. In relation
to
the principal verb there may be suggested time. .
.
. The relative time of the participle approximates
the
indicative mode and is able to suggest antecedent
(aorist,
present, perfect tenses), simultaneous
(aorist,
present tenses) and subsequent (present,
future
tenses) action.2
Whenever
a participle has a temporal function it is
anarthrous, adverbial and
circumstantial. That is, it does
not have an article and it
gives an additional statement
which is not an essential part
of the verbal notion of the
principal verb. One further
indication is needed to
determine whether or not it is
a temporal participle. "The
point more exactly is whether a
given circumstantial
1
J.
ners (New York: The
Macmillan Company, 1947), p. 105.
"Hereinafter
referred to as New Testament Greek.)"
2
A. T. Robertson, Grammar (
Press, 1934), p. 1111.
173
participle occurs in a context
where the temporal relation
is the main one rather than
that of cause, condition,
purpose, etc."1
An alternate form of the adverbial temporal
clause is the use of the
genitive absolute which is found
in each of the Gospels and is
fairly regular in Mark.2
There is no need to treat these
participles separately since
they are a type of regular
adverbial temporal participles.
Background of Temporal Participles
In
Classical Greek the tenses of the participle
express
.
. . only continuance, simple occurrence, and
completion
with permanent result. Whether the action
expressed
by the participle is antecedent, coincident,
or
subsequent to that of the leading verb (in any
tense)
depends on the context.3
The
writings of Hesiod provide fifty examples where
the participle seems to be used
to indicate the time of one
action with relation to
another. The consciousness of this
use of the participle is
greatest when temporal adverbs are
used with the participle.4
The aorist participle most often
1
Ibid., pp. 1125-26.
2
Nigel Turner, Syntax (
1963),
p. 322.
3
Herbert Weir Smyth, Grammar (
4
George Melville Bolling, "The Participle in
Hesiod,"
433.
174
denotes time prior to that of
the main verb and the present
participle reflects
contemporary time.1
Without
clear indication from the context and
temporal adverbs, such as, a!ma and nu?n it
would be difficult
to determine the temporal
participle in direct popular
speech. In fact, Jannaris
indicates that the indefinite-
ness of the temporal participle
would often be resolved into
a finite temporal clause or a
prepositional infinitive.2
During this time of Classical
Greek the present participle
set forth action that is
generally coincident (rarely
antecedent or subsequent) to
that of the leading verb. The
aorist participle reflects
action that is generally ante-
cedent to the leading verb. On
a few occasions it may be
coincident to the verb or
nearly so.3
During
the period of Koine Greek, the time aspect
of the adverbial participle was
not determined from the
participle. Rather the context
and at times added particles
indicated the time
relationship. In fact, the Koine "does
not on the whole favor this
method but prefers a preposi-
tional phrase, a true temporal
(etc.) clause, or a further
1
Ibid., 435.
2
A.
(London:
Macmillan and Co., Limited, 1897), p. 501. "(Here-
inafter
referred to as Grammar.)"
3
Smyth, Greek Grammar, pp. 419-20.
175
co-ordinate sentence.1
When
the Apostolic Fathers made use of the temporal
participle it is indicated
"by the facts revealed by the
context taken in association
with the indication of the
tense as respects progress."2
Some
general conclusions appear evident from this
brief historical summary. (1)
The temporal use of the
participle was never a very
clear method of indicating time
relationships. (2) The context
and temporal adverbs are
always needed to locate and interpret
temporal participles.
(3) Though many other ways of
expressing time always
existed in Greek, the temporal
participle continued in use
after the New Testament was
written. (4) From the histor-
ical evidence it is clear that
the aorist participle
preceded in time the leading
verb and the present parti-
ciple denoted action and
consequently time contemporaneous
with the main verb.
Tenses of Temporal Participles
The
participle occurs in four tenses in the New
Testament--the present, aorist,
future, and perfect--but
only the present and aorist
tense need close examination.3
1 Turner, Syntax, p. 153.
2
Robison, Syntax, p. 11.
3 The
future participle is rare and is always
176
The present participle
The
present participle is both timeless and dura-
tive. The time comes from the
principle verb and this may
be either a past, present, or
future tense of the verb in
any mood.
The
present participle, therefore, is used if the
action
denoted by the participle is represented as
taking
place at the same time as the action denoted by
the
leading verb, no matter whether the action denoted
by
the leading verb is past, present or future.1
This
is not to say that the present participle must
refer to present time. Rather,
"it usually refers to action
in progress at the
same time as the action of the main
verb"2
regardless of the tense of the main verb. For
example, "walking by the
sea of Galilee, He (Jesus) saw two
brothers" (Mt. 4:18). This
verse has an aorist main verb
with the present participle.
The participle and the context
indicate that the actions were
simultaneous, that is, "while
walking, Jesus saw." In
Luke 23:5, "He stirs up the people
. . . beginning from
ciple and verb are present and
indicate contemporaneous
subsequent
in time to the principal verb (i.e. Mt. 27:49)
according
to A.T. Robertson, Grammar, p. 1118. The action
of
the perfect participle will always be antecedent unless
the
tense has lost its true force. Ibid., p. 1117. There-
fore,
there is no need to examine participles in these two
seldom
used tenses.
1
Machen, New Testament Greek, p. 105.
2
Eugene Van Ness Goetchius, The Language of the New
Testament (
177
action.
Sometimes
the present participle denotes the same
action which is expressed by
the leading verb of the clause
in which it stands. In John 6:6
"He was saying this,
testing him," has an
imperfect verb and a present parti-
ciple. The participle is the
identical action of the verb
but it is described from a
different point of view.1
In
John 21:9, "they saw a charcoal
fire and fish and bread
placed on it," a present
verb is used with a present parti-
ciple indicating simultaneous
action. Therefore, it means
that the disciples saw the
fire, the fish and the bread at
the same time.
It
is also possible when a present participle is
used that only antecedent
action is indicated. In John 9:25
the man just healed of his
blindness says, "being (w@n) blind
now I am seeing."
On
other occasions the present participle shows a
continued action which is both
antecedent and simultaneous
to that of the main verb. In
Mark 5:25 a woman "being
(ou#sa) with
the issue of blood for twelve years .
. .
touched His garment." She
had been and still was afflicted
when she touched the garment.
While
there are other examples of the present
1
Ernest DeWitt
Press in
178
participle in the Gospels,
these illustrations suffice to
show the temporal uses of the
present participle. It is
clear that durative action is
expressed. It is also true
that simultaneous action is
usually shown whether the main
verb is past, present or
future. However, when the context
demands it, the participle can
express identical action or
antecedent action. Only the
context can determine whether
the participle should be
translated as an English parti-
ciple or should be supported by
the helping prepositions
or conjunctions,
"since," "as," "when," "after," and
"while."
The aorist participle
Like
the infinitive the participle originally had
no temporal function but rather
indicated "kind of action."
It
is very important . . . that it be borne in mind
that
the proper and the 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 parti-
ciple
properly denotes past time from the point of view
of
either speaker or of the principal verb, leads to
constant
misinterpretation of the form.1
In
the writings of the Apostolic Fathers the aorist
participle indicated action
thought of as a simple event.
"This is its constant and
only function. . . It
denotes
neither the time of the action,
nor its progress nor the
1
179
existence of a result."1
Consequently
the time of action in relation to the
action of the main verb can
only be inferred from the con-
text. Robertson asserts that
the original use of the
aorist participle was that of
simultaneous action. "From
this was developed quite
naturally, by the nature of the
various cases, the antecedent
notion."2 Often
only exegesis
can decide between antecedent and
simultaneous action. Sub-
sequent action is not expressed
by the aorist temporal
participle in the New
Testament.3
Machen
maintains that the aorist participle normally
denotes action prior to the
action denoted by the leading
verb regardless of the time of
the leading verb's action.
To this he adds that the
translation "when" or "after"
normally should be used in
translating the participle.4
This is correct when the aorist
participle shows antecedent
action. However, the aorist
participle does not of itself
mean antecedent action.
The
use of the aorist participle to indicate action
antecedent to the leading verb
is easily illustrated. In
1
Robison, Syntax, p. 16.
2
Robertson, Grammar, p. 1112.
3
Ibid., p. 860.
4
Machen, New Testament Greek, pp. 116-17.
180
Mark 1:31, "after coming
to her, He (Jesus) raised her up."
Of Judas Iscariot it is
written, "after going away, he hung
himself" (Mt. 27:5). The
leper "after stretching out his
hand, touched him" (Mt.
8:3). In each context it is clear
that the action of the
participle precedes the action of
the main verb consequently the
participle can be called a
temporal participle. This is
the most frequent use of the
aorist participle. Ballentine concludes,
"when a writer
wishes to assert by a
participle, in addition to the leading
action, another action which,
by even the shortest interval,
preceded it, he always uses the
aorist participle."1
The
most often occurring illustration of an aorist
participle citing simultaneous
or identical action with the
action of the leading verb is
"when answering, he said" or
its equivalent. Usually, the
verb and the participle
describe the same action from a
different point of view.2
It may be that Matthew 2:8,
"when seeing the star, they
rejoiced" is a good
illustration of two different but simul-
taneous actions. Many contexts,
and only the context can
decide if it is antecedent or
simultaneous action, are not
sufficiently clear to give
indisputable illustrations.
Consequently, the general idea
that the aorist participle
1
William G. Ballentine, "Predicate Participles with
Verbs
in the Aorist," Bibliotheca Sacra CLXIV (October,
1884),
787.
2
181
indicates action antecedent to
the action of the leading
verb is usually true. However,
the aorist participle can
also indicate simultaneous
action in some instances. For
example, Herod, "when
sending them unto
(Mt. 2:8). Obviously, Herod
spoke to them at the time that
he sent them. This simultaneous
action is also seen in the
common phrase a]pekri<qh ei]pw<n. It can occur also when the
main verb is future (Lk. 9:25),
or present (Mk. 8:29).
The
use of the participle to show time relation-
ships is no doubt often
misunderstood. The only time that
can be indicated is suggested
by the context and other
temporal words. The participle
itself indicates "kind of
action" which has a time
relationship to the action of the
main verb. The present
participle shows simultaneous action
unless the context may demand
that it be identical or even
antecedent action. The aorist
participle reflects antece-
dent action although
simultaneous or identical action may
at times be inferred from the
context. This temporal use of
the participle is a very
frequent use of the adverbial
participle. The choice of
"while," "since," "after," "when"
or "as" to aid in
translating the participle is determined
by the context and the
preference of the translator.
CHAPTER VIII
CONJUNCTIVE AND ADVERBIAL WORDS
FOR TIME
Another
method of expressing time is through the
use of conjunctions, adverbs
and improper prepositions
functioning as adverbs. Though
time thus specified is not
necessarily as specific as that
indicated by other temporal
words, conjunctions are
implemented to show the time rela-
tionship which exists between
clauses. Two methods of indi-
cating time within a clause are
by the use of adverbs or
improper prepositions. The
subject matter of this chapter
consists of (1) conjunctions
and (2) adverbs and improper
prepositions.
Conjunctions
In
expressing time, temporal conjunctions introduce
dependent temporal clauses.
These clauses may be either
definite or indefinite
depending on whether the indicative
or a non-indicative mood is
used. The time may be simul-
taneous, subsequent, or prior
to that of the main verb. It
may be that this preference for
temporal conjunctions, as
against the genitive absolute
is due "to the frequency with
which temporal clauses are
introduced by ydiK; or dKa in
182
183
Aramaic."1 For
ease in locating the conjunction, in this
chapter they are examined in
alphabetical order.
a]f
] h$j, a]f ] ou$
After
the manner of Classical Greek, Luke has a]f
] h$j
and a]f ] ou$, translated "from (the time)
when," or "since"
or "after."2
When used with the indicative mood these
expressions always convey a
definite or a fixed time.3 In
Luke 7:45 a]f ] h$j occurs, "but she since the
time I came in."
This is its only temporal use
in the Gospels. The same
preposition and pronoun are translated
"from which" in Luke
8:2 but the context
demonstrates that this is not a temporal
conjunction.
The
kindred expression a]f ] ou$ occurs
three times
temporally. In Luke 13:7 and
24:21 it occurs with the indi-
cative mood fixing a definite
time, "three years since," and
"the third since."
Archibald T. Robertson says it provides
the "terminus a quo."4 In both places "since" or
"after"
are good translations. The
passage in Luke 13:25 has a]f] ou$
a@n
e]gerq^?. This occurrence with the subjunctive
mood and
1
Nigel Turner, Syntax (
1919-63),
p. 321.
2
A. N. Jannaris, Grammar (
Co.,
Limited, 1897), p. 421.
3
Ibid., 465.
4
Archibald T. Robertson, Grammar (
Broadman Press, 1934), p. 977.
184
the particle a@n indicates an indefinite, potential or a
conditional futurity.1
The best translation would be
"anytime" or
"whenever." The other places in Luke where the
preposition and pronoun are
found together they do not have
a temporal function or
translation.
The
classical a]f ] o!tou
translated "since," "ever
since" and e]c ou$ or e]c
h$j
translated "after," "since," both
denoting time usually prior to
that of the principal verb,
do not occur in the Gospels in
a temporal sense.
a@xri
The
word a@xri (s) found six times in
the Gospels is
used in two ways and never is
found in the Gospels with the
final sigma. In Luke 4:13 and
Matthew 13:30 it is an
improper preposition meaning
"until." As Thayer states, it
is "a particle indicating
the terminus ad quem,"2 the point
of time up to which an event
will take place. This prepo-
sition appears with the
relative pronoun and is written
a@xri
h$j
Luke 1:20 and 17:27 (Mt. 24:38). In each instance
it has the same function and
translation of a@xri in the
previously cited uses.
On
one occasion, Luke 21:24, "until the times of the
1
Jannaris, Grammar, p. 466.
2
Joseph Henry Thayer, Lexicon (
Zondervan Publishing House,
1962), p. 91.
185
Gentiles would be
fulfilled," a@xri ou$ is a
subordinating
conjunction meaning
"until," "to the time that." Used with
the aorist subjunctive verb it
has the force of a future
perfect.1 The
Septuagint has few certain readings of a@xri
which cause difficulty in
citing historical illustrations
of its use and meaning. Perhaps
this is the reason why some
grammarians state that both a@xri and
me<xri have in general the
same construction and force as
clauses introduced by e!wj,
e!wj
ou$ and
e!wj o!tou.2
e]n
&$
The
preposition e]n is
combined with the relative
pronoun o!j in the dative case to function as a temporal
subordinating conjunction. It
is translated "as long as"
in Classical Greek3
and "while" or "during the time that"
in Koine.4 While the
function of the dative case is to
indicate a point of time, the
addition of e]n
demands dura-
tion of time.5
Translated "while" in English, the sense
1
Robertson, Grammar, p. 974.
2
Ernest DeWitt
Press
in
3
Jannaris, Grammar, p. 465.
4
George B. Winer, Grammar (7th ed.;
F.
Draper, 1877), pp. 385-86.
5
Friedrich Blass and Albert Debrunner, Grammar
(ed.
and rev. by Robert W. Funk;
186
includes a duration of time.
There are four uses of this
construction in the Gospels,
one of which is a parallel
passage. In each passage the
meaning is clear. Luke 5:34
(Mk. 2:19) reads, "while
(during the time that) the bride-
groom is with them." Luke
19:13 has, "trade ye while
(during the time that) I am
coming." "While (during the
time that) I am coming another
steps down before me," is
found in John 5:7.
e]pa<n
There
are three uses of e]pa<n in the
New Testament
and all are in the Gospels. The
only suggested citation in
the Old Testament occurs in
Esther 5:13, however, the
accepted text reads o!tan. In
other Greek literature three
translations are suggested: (1)
"when" he attains legal age,
(2) "as long as"
there is no higher offer, and (3) and "as
soon as" my orders have
been carried out.1 Lexicographers
cite as suitable translations
"after," "when"2 and "as soon
as.”3
This
conjunction is found once with the present
1
James Hope Moulton and Wilbert Francis Howard,
Accidence
and Word Formation,
Vol. II. A Grammar of New
Testament
Greek
(Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1929), p. 228.
"(Hereinafter
referred to as Grammar.)"
2
Thayer, Lexicon, p. 228.
3
William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, Lexicon
(Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press, 1957), p. 282.
187
subjunctive (Lk. 11:34) and
suggests an "iterative-action,
indefinite, in the past or
future."1 Matthew 6:22, 23 which
is parallel to Luke 11:34 uses e]a<n twice to introduce the
subordinate clauses. Luke here
uses first o!tan
"whenever"
and then e]pa<n, "The lamp of thy body is thine eye:
whenever
(o!tan) thine
eye is single, thy whole body also is full of
light; but when (e]pa<n) it is
evil, thy body also is full of
darkness." In the context
Jesus was exposing Pharisaism
using the illustration of a
lamp to emphasize the truth.
The present tense and
subjunctive mode suggest he was
referring to a possible
existing condition. His choice of
o!tan,
"when," is a frequently used word that would have
little significance. However,
the use of e]pa<n with
the
present subjunctive, which is a
rare construction, empha-
sizes both the existing
condition and the point of the
illustration. That is, "as
soon as" evil enters the body,
the entire body is full of
darkness.
The
use of e]pa<n with the aorist
subjunctive indi-
cates a definite action taking place
in the future which
precedes the action of the main
verb.2 The two uses in
Matthew 2:8 and Luke 11:22
clearly speak of a specific act
in the future both subordinate
and prior to the action of
1
Turner, Syntax, p. 112.
2
Ibid.
188
the main verb, "and after
you would find (him) you shall
bring," and "after a
stronger than he . . . he shall over-
come." This translation
"after" best expresses the gram-
matical purose of e]pa<n.
e]
There
are eight uses of e]
Gospels. Only in Luke 7:1,
"after He had ended all his
sayings," is the temporal
idea1 showing sequence. In the
oldest manuscripts and Nestle's
text e]peidh< is
found instead
of e]
temporal sense but this pattern
is not followed in the
Gospels unless it is possible
that e]
Mark 15:42, "Because it
was the Preparation." The e]
would be translated
"after" it was the Preparation. How-
ever, this reading and
translation is not adopted in any
version or commentary examined.
The
conjunction e]peidh<<,
"when now," "after that,"
is often interchanged with e]
but it has the temporal idea
only in Luke 7:1, "After that
He had ended all His
sayings." This subordinating conjunc-
tion with the temporal idea
"after that" can be found more
often in the Greek Old
Testament.
1
Thayer, Lexicon, p. 229.
2
Edwin A. Abbott, Johannine Vocabulary (
and Charles Black, 1905), pp.
111-12.
189
e!wj
A
frequent word in the Gospels is e!wj which
is used
as a temporal conjunction, an
improper preposition and an
adverb of time. Its
translations include "until," "till,"
"as long as,"
"while," "until now" and "how long."1
As
a conjunction e!wj
introduces a subordinate clause
functioning as a relative
clause which is subsequent in time
to that of the main clause.
The
idea of a clause with until is that the action
(or
negation) of the leading clause continues to a time
at
which that of the dependent clause takes place. That
the
former action then ceases is an inference generally
made,
but not positively implied in the language, and
not
necessary.2
clause
.
. . 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
occurrence of the action of the verb introduced
by
e!wj
is the limit of the action denoted by the prin-
cipal
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.3
The
subordinate clause introduced by e!wj has a
verb
either in the indicate or
subjunctive mode. When used with
1
Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon, pp. 334-35.
2
William Watson Goodwin, Syntax (
Martin's
Press, 1965), p. 234.
3
190
the present indicative1
the idea is "while," or "as long as,"
but not "until," and
"it is either a contemporaneous event
as in (Mk. 6:45) . . . , or a
lively proleptic future
expressed in terms of the
present (Jn. 21:22f)."2
The
use of e!wj with the future indicative3
occurs
most often with po<te and adverb of time, answering the
question "how long?"
It seems natural to use the future
tense since e!wj is used of a "punctiliarly conceived
future
event preceded in time by the
action of the main clause."4
Here e!wj indicates the end of a period of time, that is,
"where something is spoken
of which continued to a certain
time."5 The
correct translation is "till" or "until."
When
an actual past event is recorded, the aorist
indicative is used as in the
ordinary relative clause
referring to past time.6
As with the future indicative e!wj
and the aorist indicative
denotes the end of a period of
time. Most of the occurrences
are combined with adverbs or
pronouns and will be examined
later. However, Matthew 2:9
"till it came and
stood," "until the flood . .
took them
1
Mk. 6:45; Jn. 9:4; 21:22, 23 (and perhaps Mt. 1:17
with
an understood verb).
2
Robertson, Grammar, pp. 975-76.
3
Mt. 11:23(2); Lk. 10:14(2); Mt. 17:17(2); Lk. 9:19
(2);
Lk. 9:41; Jn. 10:24.
4 Turner, Syntax, p. 111. 5
Thayer, Lexicon, p. 268.
6
Burton, Syntax, p. 128.
191
all away" (Mt. 24:39) both
illustrate the end of a period of
time in the past and the
translation "until."
In
the subjunctive mood only the aorist tense is
used with e!wj in the Gospels. The action is conceived as a
simple event and e!wj is translated "until." The e!wj clause
further denotes that that
"commencement of an event is
dependent on
circumstances."1 The statement itself is only
a conception or representation.2 Whether the subjunctive
occurs with3 or without4 the particleocv , the clause refers
to "a punctiliarly
conceived future event preceded in time
by the action of the main
clause."5 There
appears to be no
real difference in the meaning
of the constructions. The
same author in passages which
are similar in meaning, such
as Matthew 10:23 "until
the Son of Man may come" and 16:28
"until they may see the
Son of Man," uses first one con-
struction and then the other.
Even in parallel passages
such as Matthew 5:26 and Luke
12:59 the a@n is
used in one
1 Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon,
p. 334.
2 Raphael Kuhner, Grammar
of the Greek Language,
trans.
by B. B. Edwards and S. H. Taylor (
D.
Appleton and Company, 1879), p. 539.
3 Mt. 2:13; 5:18(2); 26;
10:11 (Mk. 12:36); 12:20;
16:28;
22:44 (Lk. 20:43); 23:39; 24:34 (Lk. 21:325; Mk. 6:
10;
9:1 (Lk. 9:27).
4 Mt. 10:23; 18:30; Mk.
14:32; Lk. 12:59; 15:4;
17:8;
22:34.
5 Turner, Syntax, p. 111.
192
place but not the other.
Apparently, during the first
century, a transition was being
made from e!wj a@n to e!wj
as is suggested by Turner.1
In both cases the e!wj is
translated "until"
and the verb in the subordinate clause
is either conceived or
represented as having a future ful-
fillment which must be preceded
in time by the action
indicated in the main clause.
In
the New Testament e!wj is
occasionally combined
with ou$ or o!tou. Though e!wj is a preposition when used with
the genitive of the neuter
relative pronoun, the combined
phrases e!wj ou$ or e!wj
o!tou
function as conjunctions and have
the same use as the simple e!wj. They should be translated
"till" or
"until."2 They
are never followed by a@n. The
use of e!wj ou$ in this same way is frequent in the
Septua-
gint. In the Gospels the aorist
indicative is used in a
subordinate clause when the
event is seen as having already
taken place.3 The aorist subjunctive4 is found in a context
where the action in the
subordinate clause is viewed as a
future unrealized event as in
John 13:38, "The cock shall
not crow till thou has denied
me thrice." That e!wj ou$ is
1 Ibid.
2 Burton, Syntax, D.
128.
3 Thayer, Lexicon, p.
268.
4 Mt. 1:25; 13:33 (Lk. 13:21).
193
really not different in
function or translation than e!wj
with the aorist tense can be
seen by comparing Matthew 26:
36 e!wj ou$ with its parallel Mark 14:32 which uses
only e!wj.
In both places the verb tenses,
mode and context are the
same.
The
e!wj o!tou
conjunctions are six in number and
occur with the present
indicative (Mt. 5:25), the aorist
indicative (Jn. 9:18) and the
aorist subjunctive.1 There
is no functional distinction to
be made between e!wj ou$ and
e!wj
o!tou
or the simple e!wj. The
only time that a present
indicative occurs with e!wj o!tou it is translated "while"
indicating a contemporaneous
event as does the simple e!wj.
The uses of the aorist, whether
indicative or subjunctive,
are identical with e!wj ou$ and are translated "until" or
"till."
John2 combines e!wj with a@rti, which together are
translated "until
now," meaning "up to this time." This
construction remains a temporal
adverb indicating the
terminus ad quem.
Another
adverb construction e!wj po<te,3 "how
long?"
is used a few times in the
Gospels. This same construction
1 Lk. 12:50; 13:8; 22:16,
18.
2 Jn. 2:10; 5:17; 16:24.
3 Mt. 17:17(2); (Mk. 9:19(2); Lk. 9:41); Jn.
10:24.
194
is found often in the
Septuagint and needs no explanation.
The
large number of uses of e!wj that
do not occur
with a subordinating clause are
prepositional1
occurring
with the genitive of a noun or
its equivalent which usually
is a word for time. The proper
translation is "until" or
"unto" and in
function it also expresses the terminus ad
quem.
In
summary, e!wj and
the combinations e!wj ou$
and e!wj
o!tou, found
with several verb tenses and mood, serve as
temporal conjunctions to
denote, usually, the end of a
period of time or occasionally
contemporaneousness. A few
times e!wj is used as an adverb of time, and also as a
preposition.
kai<
On a
few occasions the co-ordinating conjunction
appears to have a subordinating
temporal use. Several
English versions translate kai< "when" rather than
"and."
A good illustration in the
Septuagint is found in Tobit 1:18
"Because my father left me
an orphan when (kai<) he
died."
The
times if any that kai< functions
in this manner
in the Gospels are difficult to
discern because the form is
the same and the translation
"and" also makes good sense.
Yet, there may be at least one
use of kai< in each Gospel
1 Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon, p.
334.
195
that possibly is a temporal
sense. Matthew 26:45 says
"Behold the hour is at
hand when (kai<) the
Son of Man is
being betrayed." Mark
15:25 states, "And it was the third
hour when (kai<) they crucified Him." Luke 19:43
reads, "For
the days shall come upon you
when (kai<) your enemies will
throw up a bank before
you." John says, "And it was near
the Passover of the Jews when (kai< ) Jesus went up to Jeru-
will suffice to show that kai< could have been and probably
was used with a temporal sense.
Though
this temporal use of kai< is
found in earlier
Greek,1 it seems likely that if it is actually
used in the
Gospels it is a Greek method of
expressing the Hebrew cir-
cumstantial waw which
can be used to indicate a temporal
idea. An examination of the
aforementioned passages shows
that the kai< could subordinate its clause to the main
clause
and thereby indicate the time
when the action happens.
me<xri
Usually
found as a preposition of time in the
Gospels, me<xri has the meaning, "up to the point
of."2
Thayer delineates the
distinction between a@xri and me<xri
when he comments, "by the
use of the former particle the
1 Moulton and Howard, Grammar,
II, 421-22.
2 Robertson, Grammar, p. 975.
196
reach to which a thing is said
to extend is likened to a
height, by the use of me<xri, to a length; a@xri, indicating
ascent signifies up to; me<xri, indicating extent, is unto,
as far as."1 Matthew has three uses, all of which are
translated "until"
(today, 11:23; 28:15; the harvest, 13:
30). Luke 16:16 uses me<xri
]Iwa<nou, until (the time of)
John. In the Septuagint the references to me<xri occur in
poetic passages and cannot be
used to substantiate an his-
torical usage. However, Moulton
cites a similar usage from
110 B.C. “me<xri
[to]u
a]po< pro[kei]menoj. . . I am free
from the labors above mentioned'."2 The translation "until"
with the sense "as far
as" fits with all the Gospel uses.
The
only other use of me<xri is with
the relative
pronoun ou$ in Mark 13:30. Here the translation is
"until"
and the construction is a
subordinating conjunction. "This
generation shall not pass away,
until all these things be
accomplished." A parallel
to this occurs in Joshua 4:23,
"until ye were passed
over."
From
these uses it can be seen that me<xri in the
Gospels is best translated
"until" and may occur as a prepo-
sition of time with the sense
of "as far as" and as a
temporal conjunction.
1 Thayer, Lexicon,
p. 91.
2 Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary
(
B. Eerdmans Publishing Company,
1963), p. 407.
197
o[po<te
In
the uncertain reading of Luke 6:3 the temporal
particle o[po<te is found in a few manuscripts. If this
reading is correct it is the
only attested usage in the New
Testament. In Classical Greek
this is translated "when-
ever" and in the papyri it
means "when."1 A
clear illustra-
tion of the use in the
Septuagint is seen in the title of
the five Psalms2 where o[po<te is
used to help identify the
time of the writing of the
Psalm. In each instance the
particle is used with the aorist
indicative mode referring
to a real past event. This is
the way it is used in Luke
6:3 "what David did when
he was hungry."
o!tan
The
conjunction o!tan occurs
extensively in the
Gospels with the aorist
subjunctive, less often with the
present subjunctive and once
each with the present, imper-
fect and aorist indicative.
There are only five o!tan con-
structions with the indicative
in the New Testament and
three occur in Mark, the only
uses in the Gospels. With the
indicative this temporal
particle is translated "at the time
that,"
"whenever," "when" and speaks of an action that is
1 Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary,
p. 453.
2 Psalm 3, 33 (34), 55 (56), 58 (59) and 59
(60).
198
"conditional, possible, and,
in many instances, repeated."1
In Mark 11:25 o!tan with the present indicative is trans-
lated, "whensoever ye
stand praying" obviously indicating
an indefinite number of
repetitions in the past, present
and possibly future time. Jesus
conceives that such
occasions happen from time to
time since the indicative
mode is used.
The
imperfect indicative is found in Mark 3:11,
"whensoever they were
beholding Him." Though the use of
o!tan with a
past tense in the indicative mood2 is a
rare
construction in the New
Testament, it is common in the
Septuagint.3 It is natural to use the indicative since
real
past events are referred to.
The imperfect shows that the
action was often repeated
rather than being a general con-
dition which belongs to any
time.
Also
o!tan is used with the aorist
indicative in
Mark 11:19 (AV) "and every
evening he went forth." However
a better translation would be,
"whenever evening came"
(NASV). The Koine and Byzantine
writers use this construc-
tion to indicate a definite occurrence.4 This verse presents
1 Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon,
p. 592.
2 Ezra P. Gould, Mark
(
1961),
p. 56.
3 Robertson, Grammar,
p. 973. For example in the
LXX
see Gen. 38:19; 1 Sam. 17:34.
4 Ibid.
199
the problem of determining
whether Mark is viewing the
practice of "every
evening" or "the evening of one single
day."1 Though it might be more natural to use the
conjunc-
tion o!te which only occurs with the indicative to
express a
single occurrence, o!tan with the aorist indicative in this
context argue that this unusual
construction is indicating
the practice of Jesus every
evening at the time evening
came. Such a translation is in
agreement with the Greek
text, the evening practice of
Jesus during this time and the
use of o!tan which normally reflects indefiniteness. This is
true whether the subjunctive or
the indicative mood is used.
To indicate a definite single
occurrence Mark would normally
use o!te.
Therefore, a good translation would be, "at the
time evening came (each day) He
would go outside the city."
These three uses of o!tan with the indicative record real
events. Although these three
references in Mark are insig-
nificant in number compared to
the uses of o!tan with
the
subjunctive they suggest a
popular rather than a technical
grammatical style.
The
present subjunctive with o!tan is
found in
twenty-one different accounts2 in the Gospels indicating
1 Gould, Mark, pp.
214-15.
2 Mt. 6:2, 5, 6, 16; 10:23;
15:2; 26:29 (Mk. 14:25);
Mk.
13:4 (Lk. 21:7), 11 (Lk. 12:11); 14:7; Lk. 11:21, 34,
36;
14:12, 13; Jn. 7:27, 8:44; 9:5; 16:21(2) and probably
Lk. 12:55.
200
iterative or repeated action usually
with the idea of future
uncertainty.1 In two passages the idea of repeated
action
is not present. In John 7:27
"when Christ cometh" and Mark
13:4 and Luke 21:7 "what
shall be the sign when these things
are about to be
accomplished" the action indicated is only
contemporaneous. To indicate
this it was necessary to use
the present tense. In all other
cases both contemporaneity
and repeated action is
permissable. The time indicated by
the construction is obviously
future as is expected with
the subjunctive mode.
Translated "when" in many English
texts, the sense of the present
subjunctive indicates
"during the time
when this or that is going on," or "at the
moment when this
is beginning."2 Consequently, the lexical
translations include "whenever,"
"as often as," and "every-
time that."3 With the exception of John 7:27 the action
of
a o!tan clause with a present subjunctive verb is
contempo-
raneous with the main clause
and suggests a regular repeated
action regardless of the tense
or mode of the verb in the
main clause. This is true
whether the main clause has a
1 Robertson, Grammar,
p. 971.
2 Edwin A. Abbott, Johannine
Grammar (
and
Charles Black, 1906), p. 385.
3 Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon, p.
592.
201
presentl or aorist2 imperative or a present3 or future4
indicative verb. A good
illustration of the contemporaneous
and regularly repeated action
can be seen in Matthew 6:2
"when therefore thou doest
alms, sound not a trumpet." A
good paraphrase would be
"during any time that you are
giving alms do not sound a
trumpet." Such a translation
demonstrates both the
contemporaneous and repeated action
usually in the future which is
found with o!tan in a
present
subjunctive construction.
The
aorist subjunctive occurs most often with o!tan
According to Nigel Turner o!tan is used "most commonly of a
definite action taking place in
the future but concluded
before the action of the main
verb. Thus the main verb is
usually future indicative but
it may be imperative."5 The
suggested lexical translation
of o!tan with the aorist sub-
junctive in all instances is
"when."6
However, Turner's
statement is somewhat
misleading. In the Gospels the main
1 Mt. 6:16; 10:23; Mk.
13:11 (Lk. 12:11); Lk. 14:12,
13.
2
Mt.
6:2, 6.
3 M1t. 15:2;
Jn.
8:44; 9:5; 16:21(2).
4 Mt. 6:5; 26:29 (Mk.
14:25); Mk. 13:4 (Lk. 21:7);
Lk.
11:36.
5 Turner, p. 112.
6 Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon, p.
592.
202
verb with the o!tan and aorist subjunctive construction is
most often present indicative,1 although it is also future
indicative,2 present subjunctive,3 aorist subjunctive,4
present imperative,5 and aorist imperative.6 The
conjunc-
tion o!tan is found six times in a i!na o!tan construction.7
o!te
The
use of o!te as a subordinating conjunction
occurs
fifty-four times in the
Gospels. It can be translated
"when,"
"while," and "as long as."8 Each time it is found
with the indicative mode it
denotes a definite event except
in Luke 13:35 where the reading
e!wj h!cei o!te ei@phte is
found. This is the only place
in the New Testament where
o!te is
found with the subjunctive mode. The parallel
1 Mt. 5:11 (Lk. 6:22);
9:15 (Mk. 2:20; Lk. 5:35); 12:
43
(Lk. 11:24); 13:32 (Mk. 4:32); 23:15; 24:32 (Mk, 13:28;
Lk.
21:30); 24:33 (Mk. 13:29; Lk. 21:31); Mk. 4:15, 16 (Lk.
8:13);
Mk. 4:29, 31; 12:25; Lk. 6:22, 26; 12:54; Jn. 2:10;
10:4;
16:21.
2
Mt.
19:28; 21:40; 25:31; Mk. 12:23; Lk. 13:28;
Jn.
4:25; 7:37; 8:28; 15:26; 16:13; 21:18.
3 Jn. 13:19.
4
Mk.
9:9; Lk. 14:8.
5 Mt. 24:15 (Mk. 13:14;
Lk. 21:20 has aorist); Mk.
13:7;
Lk. 17:10.
6 Mt. 10:19; Lk. 14:10;
23:42.
7 Lk. 14:10; Lk. 16:4, 9;
Jn. 5:7; 14:29; 16:4.
8 Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon, p.
592.
203
passage in Matthew 23:39 does
not retain the o!te so
that it
is questionable whether o!te, and the subjunctive is the
correct textual reading.
On
the two occasions where the present tense follows
o!te, the
main verb is also present and the translation
"while" or
"when" emphasizing an action taking place during
a designated period of time
seems most appropriate. This is
true whether the action introduced
is a general truth1 or a
definite event (Mk. 11:1). The
uses of o!te with the imper-
fect2 are like those of the present except that
the main
verb is most often an imperfect
tense.
The
future tense within a o!te clause
is found once
in Luke 17:22 where the main
verb is future and four times
in John3 where the main verb is present. This use
of o!te
introduces a clause suggesting
a future indefinite event.
However, in each instance the
speaker is Jesus Christ and
this makes the event spoken of
in the future tense a cer-
tainty. It is reasonable then
to find o!te which is
normally reserved for definite
past events, used to indi-
cate these future, events which
will take place at a definite
point in time.
1
George
B. Winer, Grammar, p. 297 (also see Jn. 9:4).
2
Mk.
14:12; 15:41; Jn. 17:12; 21:8.
3 Jn. 4:21, 23; 5:25; 16:25.
204
The
remaining forty-two uses o!te
introduce a
clause employing an aorist
verb. In each instance a
specific time of past action is
in view and the conjunction
must be translated
"when." Most of the places1 are in
a
narrative or historical
setting. Sometimes in the parallel
passages an aorist participle
is substituted for the o!te
conjunction.2 On five
occasions in Matthew the familiar
Septuagint narrative expression
kai> e]ge<neto3 translating
yhiy;va
"and it came to pass" introduces the o!te
clause. The
remaining eleven citations of o!te are found in quotations
and indicate specific
occurrences at a definite point in
time. That o!te when used with the indicative of past tenses
is to be understood "of a
thing actually gone before,"4 fits
the pattern found in the
Gospels. When used with the
present indicative it refers to
a thing "actually existing
at anytime" and when with
the future indicative a thing
"actually future."5 The
choice between using o!tan or o!te
1 Mt. 9:25; 21:1 (Mk.
11:1; Lk. 19:29); 27:31 (Mk.
15:20);
Mk. 1:32; 4:10; 6:21; 7:17; Lk. 2:21, 22, 42; 6:13;
22:14;
23:33; Jn. 1:19; 6:24; 12:16, 17; 13:12, 31; 19:6,
8,
23, 30; 20:24; 21:25.
2 Mt. 13:6; 26:20; Mk.
14:17; Mt. 27:35; Mk. 15:22.
3
Mt.
7:28; 11:1; 13:53; 19:1; 26:1.
4 George Henry Liddell
and Robert Scott, Lexicon, II
(Oxford: At the Clarendon
Press, 1940), 1265.
5 Ibid.
205
by the Gospel writers seems to
be determined primarily by
the mode of the verb in the
dependent clause. The subjunc-
tive mode normally demands the
more doubtful o!tan and
the
indicative
mode requires o!te.
w[j
The
conjunction w[j,
originally a relative adverb
from w[j is rather common in the New Testament as a
temporal
conjunction.1 The exact number of times the temporal w[j
occurs varies with each Greek
edition and with the interpre-
tation of the text since w[j can be used other than
temporally. Sir John Hawkins
gives nineteen uses of w[j in
Luke and sixteen in John. It is
found thirty-three other
times in the New Testament.2 A
better count in the Gospels
seems to be nineteen in Luke
and eighteen in John with the
greatest number of these
occurring with verbs in the aorist
tense. All the verbs are in the
indicative mode regardless
of the tense. Only in Mark 9:21
is w[j found with the perfect
tense and it is translated
"since."3
On
seven occasions w[j is
found in a clause with
1 Robertson, Grammar,
p. 974.
2 Matthew Black, An
Aramaic Approach to the Gospels
and
Acts
(Oxford: At the Clarendon cress, 1967), p. 89.
3 Robertson, Grammar, p. 974.
206
verbs either in the present1 or imperfect2 tense indicating
continuing action and
introducing action simultaneous to
the main verb. The translation
of w[j can be "while,"
"when," "as long
as."3
"While" is a suitable translation
of these passages as is
illustrated by John 20:11, "and so
while she was weeping, she
stooped and looked into the
tomb." Luke 24:32, "were not our hearts
burning within us
while He was speaking to us on
the road while He was opening
the Scriptures to us," is
a passage where w[j is
used twice
in the same verse. The two
actions introduced by w[j,
"while He was
speaking" and" while He was opening" signify
action that is simultaneous to
the main verb, "were
burning." The disciples'
"burning hearts" were directly
related to Christ's speaking
and explaining the Scriptures.
In as much as the main verb and
the w[j clause verbs indicate
progressive action, the
translation of w[j should
suggest
this.
Usually
when w[j introduces a temporal clause
an
aorist indicative verb is found
both in the subordinate
clause and in the main clause.
The proper translation is
"after," or
"when,"4 and is
consistently used in most
1 Lk. 12:58; 20:37; Jn.
12:35, 6.
2 Lk. 24:32; Jn. 2:23;
20:11.
3 Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon,
p. 907.
4 Ibid., p. 906.
207
English translations. These
uses are found in Luke or John1
and except for one instance the
passages in Luke are in non-
parallel material. In the one
parallel account, both
Matthew 21:1 and Mark 11:1 have
o!te instead of the w[j which
is found in Luke 19:29. In each
instance where w[j occurs
with an aorist verb, the clause
seems to indicate action
that is either simultaneous
with or prior to the main verb.
This is illustrated from
Genesis 30:25 "and it came to pass
after Rachel had born Joseph
that Jacob said to Laban." A
New Testament example is found
in Luke 19:5, "and when Jesus
came to the place, He looked
up." That is, Jesus came to
where Zaccheus was and then
looked up. In most passages
the action of the w[j clause is totally prior to the action
of the aorist verb. Both,
"after they saw that He was
already dead, they did not
break His legs" (Jn. 19:33) and
"when they got out upon
the land, they saw a fire" (Jn. 21:
9), illustrate that the action
of the w[j clause with an
aorist verb does precede in
time the action of the main verb.
The
translation "while" introduces a w[j clause
which
contains a verb indicating
progressive action. When the w[j
clause has an aorist verb,
"when" or "after" is a suitable
translation especially when the
w[j clause obviously precedes
1 Lk. 1:23, 41, 44; 2:15,
39; 4:25; 5:4; 7:12; 11:1;
15:25;
19:5, 29, 41; 22:66; 23:26; 24:32; Jn. 2:9; 4:1, 40;
6:12, 16; 7:10; 11:6, 20, 29;
11:32, 33; 18:6; 19:33; 21:9.
208
in time the main clause,
Adverbs and Improper Prepositions
The
temporal adverbs and prepositions used as
adverbs also aid in explaining
time relationships within a
clause. The time indicated can
vary considerably and only
after each use is considered
separately can the scope of its
meaning be understood. For
convenience the words studied
in this section are listed in
alphabetical order.
a!ma
This
preposition occurs in Matthew 13:19 as an ad-
verb and in 20:1 as an improper
preposition both expressing
time. In the parable of the
wheat and the tares a warning
is given lest the slaves in
pulling up the tares "at the
same time" root up the
wheat. The concern was that the time
of the two actions would be
coincident1 and
the wheat crop
would be ruined. Later in 20:1
the vineyard owner went out
early in the morning to hire
workers. The expression used
is a!ma prwi~, a classic idiom which can be literally
trans-
lated "at the same time
with early dawn."2 The break of day
is the time for starting work
in the country. These two
uses of a!ma to indicate time can also be found in the
1 Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon,
p. 41.
2 Archibald T. Robertson,
The Gospel of Matthew, Vol.
I. Word Pictures
(Nashville: Broadman Press, 1930), p. 159.
209
Epistles, the papyri and
Josephus.
a@rti
The
adverb a@rti, when used temporally,
refers to an
event of the immediate past,
"just now," of the immediate
present, "at once,"
"immediately," "now," and in general
"now," "at the
present time."1 This
adverb translates hTAfa
in the two Gospels, Matthew and
John where it is found.
The position of a@rti in the sentence does not follow any
certain pattern although
Matthew "habitually places adverbs
after imperatives but before
indicatives."2 All
the uses
note time closely connected
with the present. Once it refers
to an event that is just past,
"my daughter has just now
died" (Mt. 9:18). It can
also refer to a near future event
"He will at once put at My
disposal . . ." (Mt. 26:53). In
the Gospel of John it refers to
a present event, "I was
blind, now I see" (Jn.
9:19).3 It appears
that each time a
present event is in view an has
the sense "at this precise
time."
The
preposition a]po> is
joined with a@rti on
five
occasions4 and is translated "from now" or
"from
1 Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon,
p. 109..
2 Blass and DeBrunner, Grammar,
D. 250.
3 See also Jn. 9:25;
13:7, 33, 37; 16:12, 31.
4 Mt. 23:39; 26:29, 65; Jn. 13:19; 14:7.
210
henceforth." This meaning
is clear from the context and
the emphasis is "from the
present or precise time" into the
future. In each case or is
associated with the present
time.
e]ggu<j
Though
the adverb e]ggu<j often
is used of place it
is also found in seven
different accounts in the Gospels1
referring to time. In each case
the time spoken of is
future though it concerns
"things imminent and soon to come
to pass."2 Each of the four uses in John refers to a
feast
and speaks of the nearness of
the feast. However, the
closeness of time to the event
cannot be stated accurately.
For example, in John 2:13 Jesus
was in
Passover was at hand (e]ggu<j). Yet, Jesus had time to go to
Counting the elapsed time for
the journey and the arrival
in
exact time such as hours. The
translation "at hand" with
the general idea of something
soon to come to pass is a good
translation. In each instance
in the Gospels e]ggu<j occurs
with a form of ei]mi< expressed or understood so that the
adverb is used as a predicate
adjective.
1 Mt. 24:32 (1,1k. 13:28;
Lk. 21:30); 24:33 (Mk. 13:29);
26:18;
Jn. 2:13; 6:4; 7:2; 11:55.
2 Thayer, Lexicon, p. 164.
211
ei#ta
The
word, ei#ta, translated
"then," "next," "after
that"1 is found as an adverb of time six times in
the
Gospels. This represents
roughly one-half of the uses in
the New Testament. These
references in the Gospels all
appear temporal even though in
other places ei#ta can
func-
tion as a transition word.2
On
four occasions3 ei#ta a is the first word in the
sentence and each time it
indicates a brief intervening time
or sequence of events. A good
illustration of the brevity
in time that it indicates is
seen in the healing of the
blind man of
the blind mn reported that he
saw men like trees walking
about. "Then (ei#ta) again He laid His hands upon his eyes,"
undoubtedly after a very brief
period of time. In Luke 8:12
ei#ta,
occurs in the middle of the verse but it too indicates
that the action which it
introduced follows only a short
period of time.
In
one instance, Mark 4:17, "then, when affliction
or persecution arises because
of the word," a longer lapse
of time is demanded. After the
planting of the seed, which
1 Thayer, Lexicon,
p. 188.
2 Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon,
p. 233.
3 Mk.
8:25; Jn. 13:5; 19:27; 20:27.
212
is the Word of God, time passes
before persecution comes to
destroy the effect of the Word.
Consequently, for exegeti-
cal purposes ei#ta itself does not determine the length of
time between events but rather
it notes the sequence of
events in the narrative. For
this reason the translation
“then” is proper
for it denotes that there is a time
sequence but it does not
suggest the length of the time
e@peita
The
adverb e@peita translated
"then," "thereupon,"
"thereafter" or
"afterwards"1 occurs
twice in the Gospels
and each time with a verb of
saying. Though it can refer to
either a short or long period
of time, it is like ei#ta in
that it shows a sequence of
time or thought. In John 11:7
several days elapse between the
sequence of events in view.
And though the e@peita in this passage might be a substitute
for de< in the me<n
. . . de< relationship, as was often the
case in Classical Greek, it is
more likely that e@peita
occurs without the de< relation to indicate the temporal idea
of simple succession.2 In Luke
16:7 only a brief moment
occurs between the successive
statements. The e@peita
1 Thayer, Lexicon,
p. 230.
2 Heinrich August Wilhelm
Meyer, John, trans. by
Frederick
Crombie (
1884), pp. 337-38.
213
emphasizes the relationship of
congruity between the trans-
actions with the first and
second creditors.
In
Galatians 1:18 where e@peita is
found, a period
of fourteen years separates e@peita from the circumstances
introduced by e@peita. From these
illustrations it is
obvious that e@peita like ei@ta, as an
adverb denotes a time
sequence in events rather than
a specific time indication.
eu]qe<wj, eu]qu<j
The
synonyms eu]qe<wj and eu]qu<j translated "straight-
way,"
"immediately," "forthwith," or "at once" have
particu-
lar interest because of the use
of eu]qu<j in
Mark's Gospel.
That these two adverbs must
often be equal in meaning can
be demonstrated by seven
passagesl in
Matthew which use
eu]qe<wj when
Mark in his parallel accounts has eu]qu<j.
Matthew,
Luke and John use eu]qe<wj in
miracles, in
the calling of Peter and
Andrew, in the teaching of Jesus
and in the events of the
Passion to show the immediacy of
the action. One writer suggests that both eu]qe<wj and eu]qu<j
have the sense of immediate
consecutiveness.2
However, this
idea cannot be substantiated in
all passages as is illus-
trated by John 6:21 "and
immediately the boat was at the
land." Some time had to
elapse between the time when Jesus
1 Mt. 4:20; 8:3;13:5;
14:22; 20:34; 26:49, 74.
2 J. H. Bernard, John,
I (
1962), 232.
214
walked on the water (vv.
19-21a) and the boat arrived on
shore. This especially clear in
Matthew 14:28-34 where
a more detailed account of the
same event is given. Jesus
not only entered the boat but
the disciples worshipped Him
and some time later they landed
the boat (Mt. 14:34).
Therefore, in John's account
the use of eu]qe<wj
denotes the
next consecutive event in his
narrative but not immediacy
of time. In the parable of the
sower and the seed (Mt. 13:
5), the seed is scattered and
"immediately sprang up because
it had no depth of soil."
Obviously the seed did not grow
instantaneously though it would
spring up more quickly than
normal. In these three Gospels
both eu]qe<wj and eu]qu<j seem
to be used either with the
sense of immediacy or with the
idea of next in sequence of
events. The time indicated
between event is may vary in
length as is illustrated above.
The
Gospel of Mark provides an important area of
study because of its more than
forty uses of eu]qu<j and
the
absence of eu]qe<wj.
Nigel
Turner suggests some of the problems of this
study when he writes:
Nevertheless
Mark uses eu]qu<j only five times near
the
verb, i.e., as an adverb (viz. 128 513 vl. 36.
42
625 725 131 vl. 36 vl.); elsewhere it is
probably merely
a
connective conjunction, occurring at the beginning of
its,
clause. . . Some thirty of these
instances are kai>
eu]qu<j: and so
(consecutive, like the Heb.), like kai>
i]dou< in Matthew. But it must
be said that sometimes, as
at
625, eu]qu<j has rather stronger adverbial force: she
215
went in immediately.1
It
can be seen in the passages where Turner cites
eu]qu<j as an
adverb that it shows immediacy. For example,
during Jesus' early ministry it
is stated, "and immediately
the news about Him went out
everywhere" (Mk. 1:28). How-
ever, Turner does not cite Mark
1:43 "and sternly warning
Him immediately He sent him
out" as being adverbial even
though it appears to be used
this way. Other passages in
Mark follow this pattern of kai> separated from eu]qu<j where
the eu]qu<j ought to be considered as an adverb of
time
denoting immediacy. Still other passages have eu]qu<j alone
as an adverb where immediacy is
understood.3
The
use of kai> eu]qu<j which
often occurs in Mark may
be like John's ou#n both of which are similar to the Hebrew
waw consecutive which often
shows historical sequence or
transition.4
If
this is true, the proper translation in
Mark would be "and
then," or "then." Yet, most of the
eu]qu<j
passages imply by the context not only historical
sequence but immediacy as in
the various healing miracles
of Christ. An example of this
is found in Mark 1:42, "and
1
Turner, Syntax, III, 229.
2
Mk. 3:6; 5:42; 6:25, 54; 9:20.
3
Mk. 4:15, 16, 17; 4:29; 5:2; 9:24.
4
Bernard, John, I, 38.
216
immediately the leprosy left him." Both the sequence and
immediacy seem obvious. It may
be true that in some
passages there is a primary
emphasis on the sequence rather
than the immediacy of the
event. In Mark 1:29 it is stated,
"and immediately after
they had come out of the synagogue,
they came into the house of
Simon and Andrew." Here it can
be argued that a small period
of time elapsed between the
leaving of the synagogue and
the entering of Simon's house.
Obviously kai> eu]qu<j is sometimes used as a
conjunction. But
does this rule out the idea of
immediacy from Mark's narra-
tive? If the trip from the
synagogue to the home was short
and the only action, the
concept of immediacy of time and
action can be maintained within
the rules of language. A
complete examination of the
uses of kai> eu]qu<j
suggest that
Mark combined the idea of the
Hebrew waw consecutive with
the immediacy of eu]qu<j to join two closely related events
in their proper sequence and
show the immediacy of the time
relationship of the second to
the first. A good illustration
of this is found when Herodias
told Salome to ask for the
head of John the Baptist.
Following this it is written,
"and immediately she came
in haste before the king and
asked" (Mk. 5:25).
In
summarizing the use of eu]qe<wj and eu]qu<j it can
be stated that immediacy or
near immediacy of time is
indicated between two actions
when they are used as adverbs.
For this reason two basic ideas
are conveyed in the possible
217
translations. If the context
demands immediacy, "at once"
or "immediately" are
good translations. But if the verbal
action follows and is not
necessarily instantaneous, per-
haps "forthwith" or
"then" would convey better this idea.
These translations are accurate
whether eu]qu<j is
used as an
adverb or with a conjunction.
h@dh
The
adverb h@dh usually translated
"now," "already"
occurs in each of the Gospels
and with the indicative mode
expressed or understood except
in Luke 21:30 where it is
found in a o!tan clause with the subjunctive mode. Each of
the major tenses except the
future are used with the adverb.
This word always indicates time
in the thirty-six distinct
uses in the Gospels.1
When
used with the present tense h@dh can
signify
action that has already taken
place and is also true at the
present time as in Matthew
15:32, "they have remained with
Me now three days." At
times it suggests what is true of
the present and perhaps of the
immediate past, "Lord now (by
this time) the body is stinking"
(Jn. 11:39). Sometimes it
refers to what is only
currently present "Come, for every-
thing is read now" (Lk.
14:17).
The
imperfect tense is combined with h@dh in
"the
1
Thayer Lexicon, p. 276.
218
boat was already many stadia
away" (Mt. 14:24) showing a
condition that is true in the
present and the immediate past.
Also it may indicate something
only presently true, "it was
now about the sixth hour"
(Lk. 23:44).
However,
the aorist tense and h@dh can
look back to
the past referring to an event
already completed in the past
as in "Elijah already
came" (Mt. 17:12). Something that
happens in the near past and is
true in the present such as
"he was dead by this time
(already)" (Jn. 19:33) may also
use h@dh with the aorist. It can also express an event
just
happening "when the day
was now breaking" (Jn. 21:4).
The
perfect tense may refer to a past incident which
is true in the present
"the Jews had already agreed" (Jn. 9:
22) or event completed in the
immediate past, "all things
are now finished" (Jn.
19:28). At no time does the perfect
plus h@dh suggest an action taking place in the present
time.
The translations of h@dh when found with a perfect verb
include "by this
time" and "already."
The
construction of h@dh kai< is
found only in John
9:27 and is translated
"even now" signifying that which was
just done in the present.
In
summary, the uses of this adverb are confined to
three areas: (1) those contexts
which indicate an action
completed in the past and true
in the present; (2) the
passages which relate an action
just completed which
obviously is also true in the
present; (3) the constructions
219
expressing an event just
happening. The choice of transla-
tions between "now,"
"already," "by this time" is dependent
upon the context.
meta>
tau?ta
On
fifteen occasions the Greek expression meta>
tau?ta is
found in three Gospels signifying "in order of
time."1 It is translated "after these things,"
"afterward,"
"after that" and
"hereafter" in various versions. This
expression introduces action
that is subsequent to the
activity of the preceding main
clause. The time separating
the two actions may be only a
few minutes, as in John 19:38
where the Roman soldiers pierce
Jesus' side and "after this"
Joseph approaches Pilate for
the release of the body. On
other occasions2 the
span of time may include minutes or
hours. In John five, Jesus
healed a man on the Sabbath Day
and "afterward," apparently
on the same day, Jesus meets the
man in the temple (v. 12).
More
often there is a lapse of days3
between events.
For example, when Zacharias
received the revelation con-
cerning the birth of a son he
completed his ministry and
went home. Then Luke 1:24
states, "and after these days
1
Thayer, Lexicon, p. 404.
2
Cf. Mk. 16:2; Lk. 5:27.
3
Lk. 10:1; 17:8; 18:4; Jn. 3:22; 21:1.
220
Elizabeth his wife became
pregnant." Obviously several days
passed from his revelation in
the temple to the time of
priestly duties and arrive
home. In the Septuagint a
lengthy period also is seen in
Exodus 3:20 where the Lord
promises to smite
release
In
some passages the time between events may be a
matter of months or an
indefinite length of time as in John
7:1.1 The events of chapter six take place in
the spring
of the year near the Passover,
whereas the time of chapter
seven is the fall, the Feast of
Tabernacles. Verse one
provides a transition between
the six months and it uses
meta>
tau?ta.
The
neuter singular form meta> tou?to is
only in John.
Of the four uses these two,
John 11:11 and 19:38, indicate
a very brief interval of time.
However, a lapse of days
takes place in John 2:12 and
11:7.
In
comparing the singular and the plural forms
there is no obvious reason for
a preference in form. That
meta>
tau?ta
occurs more often follows the Greek pattern.
Both forms indicate events in
order of time and indicate a
consecutive sequence which may
be a short or large expanse
1
Cf. Lk. 12:4; Jn. 5:1; 6:1; 13:7.
221
of time separating the two actions.
The subsequent action
always follows the meta> tau?ta or meta> tou?to and the context
determines the best
translation.
nu?n
An
Often used word indicating present time is nu?n
which is translated
"now" in most Bibles. Though generally
speaking it is used to show
present time as opposed to the
past, it does occur with
differing senses in several expres-
sions and verb tenses. The
adverb nu?n is found with the
present tense1 and
is used of that which will occur soon,
"now Lord you are letting
thy bondservant depart in peace"
(Lk. 2:29), or what is present
time, "Blessed are you who
hunger now" (Lk. 6:21) or
a contemporary custom, "Now you
Pharisees clean the outside of
the cup" (Lk. 11:39). When
nu?n is
used with the aorist tense2 it may refer to something
just completed, "you have
now heard the blasphemy" (Mt. 26:
65) or which took place in the
recent past, "Bring some of
the fish you have now
caught" (Jn. 21:10).
If
the future tense is used, the nu?n
indicates
things which are thought of as
already begun to be done,
"Now the ruler of this
world shall be cast down" (Jn. 12:31).
This is also suggested by the
subjunctive mode in a third
1
Lk. 2:29; 6:21, 25; 11:39; Jn. 12:31; 16:29.
2
Mt. 26:65; Jn. 13:31; 21:10.
222
class conditional sentence (Mk.
10:30). The imperfect
tense and nu?n show an event just recently completed as in
"Rabbi, the Jews were just
now seeking to stone you" (Jn.
11:8). John uses the perfect tense
four times1 with nu?n
demonstrating an immediate
present based on past activity.
The imperative mode,2
on the other hand, marks the present
as the proper time to do
something, "let Him now come down
from the cross" (Mt.
27:42).
There
are several instances where nu?n is
combined
with another word usually
indicating immediate present.
When the expression is nu?n de< "but now" there is a contrast
between the past and the
immediate present, whether real or
unreal circumstances exist.3
However, on two occasions it
contrasts a past with a near
future event (Jn. 16:5; 17:3).
Five times John4
uses kai> nu?n ”and
now" to indicate the
immediate present as in,
"for you have had five husbands;
and the one whom you now have.
. . . "Two other expres-
sions likewise indicate the
immediate present. In John 9:
21 there is pw?j de< nu?n "but how he now
sees." Later John
16:22 has ou#n nu?n me<n "therefore you too now
have sorrow."
The
expression e!wj tou? nu?n in
Matthew 24:21, "since
1
Jn. 8:52; 12:27; 16:30; 17:7.
2
Mt. 27:42, 43; Lk. 22:36.
3
Lk. 16:25; 19:42; Jn. 8:40; 9:41; 15:22, 24; 18:36.
4
Jn. 4:18, 23; 5:25; 14:29; 17:5.
223
the beginning of the world
until now," relates time up to
the present. Luke uses the phrase a]po< tou? nu?n1
indicating
time from the present into the
future. In each instance it
is used with a future tense or
a futuristic present. An
appropriate translation would
be "from this time on," or
"from now on."
In
all passages where nu?n is
found the present time
is in view and a contrast with
some other time, whether past
or future, is implied.
o]pi<sw
Three
times during the testimony of John the Baptist
concerning Jesus he employs the
preposition o]pi<sw,
"after,"
in a temporal sense. One
comment is recorded in three
Gospels, "one mightier
than I after me" (Mt. 3:11; Mk. 1:7;
Jn. 1:15). John also uses this
word with the temporal idea
in 1:27 and 1:30. Most often in
the Gospels o]pi<sw includes
a spatial concept which seems
to be the most common under-
standing of the word. Only
contextual evidence can decide
whether time or place is
referred to. In these aforemen-
tioned verses the testimony
given to Zacharias taught that
John was to be the temporal
antecedent of Jesus to prepare
the people for the coming of
the Lord (Lk. 1:17). Histori-
cally, Jesus came to be
baptized after these statements of
1
Lk. 1:48; 5:10; 12:52; 22:69.
224
John but he never came to take
a place behind John.
Kendrick
Grobel tries to show that Jesus assumed the
position of a disciple of John
by asserting that Jesus
followed John in place rather
than time.1 He follows the
other usage of o]pi<sw which is spatial. He further maintains
that time would be indicated by
meta< with the accusative.2
However, it must be recognized
that John was a Jew who would
use o]pi<sw with its Septuagintal background. The Old
Testa-
ment antecedent of o]pi<sw is
rHx and its derivatives. The
o]pi<sw in
Ecclesiastes 10:14, "a man cannot tell what shall
be; and what shall be after
him, who can tell him?", must
be temporal. Other passages
also allow for the temporal
idea as in Genesis 17:8,
"I will give to thee and to thy
seed after thee." It must
be admitted that the temporal
use of o]pi<sw can be substantiated prior to John and al-
though some passages in the
Gospels may have a spatial or
spatial-temporal idea, these
uses of John can be and con-
textually must be temporal
only.
pa<ntote
The
adverb pa<ntote,
occurs temporally nine times in
eight different locations, one
of which has two parallel
readings. Thayer cites "at
all times," "always," and
1
Kendrick Grobel, "He That Cometh After Me,"
Journal
of Biblical Literature, LX (1941), 397-401.
2
Ibid., 398.
225
ever"1 as the best translations. The problem
arises as to
whether the time is limitless,
or is limited to this life
or to a given activity of this
life.
In
most instances in the Gospels, pa<ntote does
not
mean eternal. It refers to the
length of time there will
be poor among the human race on
the earth (Mt. 26:11).
Found twice in Luke's parables,
it indicates the length of
time the elder son is with the
father (15:31) and the amount
of time the disciples ought to
pray (18:1). Both passages
in Luke teach that the time is
no longer than a life time.
John 6:34 indicates that the
people wanted bread from God
as long as (pa<ntote) they lived but this does not mean
eternally since the same ones
rejected the Lord later in
the chapter. However, twice, in
John 8:29 and 11:42, Jesus
speaks of "always"
pleasing the Father and the Father
"always" hearing the
Son. If these refer only to the time
when Jesus was on earth, they
could not express limitless
time. However, since these
statements about Jesus are
eternally true they appear to
indicate limitless time. They
are the only two uses of pa<ntote that do.
The
final two instances are limited to smaller
periods of time as in John 7:6.
Here, the brothers of Jesus
desire Him to go to
1
Thayer, Lexicon, p. 476.
226
time but "your time is
always ready." The context indicates
there was "always"
opportunity to go to the feast at Jeru-
be over. Thus, pa<ntote though meaning "always" can be
greatly limited by its context.
In John 18:20 Jesus replies
to the high priest's question,
"I always taught in syna-
gogues and in the temple."
This statement taken in context
limits the application of pa<ntote to the
time of Jesus
teaching, roughly three years.
That is, when Jesus taught
in the synagogue or the
and the high priest should know
what Jesus said. However,
it does not say that Jesus
"always" taught in these places
and that He never gave any
private teaching.
Therefore,
pa<ntote should not be understood as "al-
ways" in the limitless
sense of "eternal" or "forever." The
context in each instance
indicates the extent of the always
to (1) a brief period of days
(Jn. 1:6); (2) a period of
years (Jn. 8:29); (3) a
lifetime (Lk. 15:31); and (4)
possibly the length of human
history (Mt. 26:11 et passim
pote<
The
word pote< occurs only twice in the
Gospels,
Luke 22:32 and John 9:13, but
about twenty-five times in
the Epistles. As an enclitic
particle of time it has an
indefinite meaning of "at
anytime," "at some time," "once,"
227
and "formerly."1
In the Septuagint it is used most often
in the construction mh<pote . When used of time that is past
it is translated
"once," "formerly" (at some time or
another) but when used of a
time that is future it should
be translated
"when.”2 The healing of the man born blind
is found in John nine. In this
context the Pharisees bring
the healed man to the temple
and he is referred to as to>n
pote<
tuflo<n. Since the time of his blindness is past, the
correct translation must be
"the one formerly blind." How-
ever, in Luke 22:32, Jesus
refers to a future repentance of
Peter and the best translation
of pote< is "when."
Both
translations are imprecise as
to a specific time but one is
found in a past context and one
is future. A parallel
illustration to Luke 22:32 can
be found in Joshua 22:28,
"It shall be, when they
say so to us," speaking of a future
time.
pri<n
The
adverb pri<n occurs seven times in
the Gospels
and is translated
"before" each time. In Classical Greek
"in Homer pri<n appears as an adverb, as a conjunction, as
a
quasi conjunction."3
Most frequently it occurs with an
1
Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary, p. 530.
2
Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon, p. 701.
3
Basil Lanneau Gildersleeve, "On PRIN in the Attic
Orators," American
Journal of Philology, II (1881), 469.
228
aorist infinitive if the notion
is only and necessarily
"before" and not
"until."1 "Homer has it 81 times with the
infinitive, six with
subjunctive, once with the opt. and not
at all with the
indicative."2 It is not surprising then
that pri<n occurs six of the seven times with the
aorist
infinitive. Although pri<n is an adverb it carries the force
of a conjunction when used with
the infinitive and indicates
things past (it. 1:18; Jn.
8:58) or things future (Mt. 26:
34, 75; Jn. 4:49; 14:29). Only
in Luke 2:26 are pri<n a@n
and the subjunctive found
together and they express what was
from the point of view of the
original statement a future or
unrealized contingency. In this
use pri<n really carries the
same translation and idea of pro<teron before, which indi-
cates antecedent time.
pro<
The preposition pro< occurs by itself eleven times
in the Gospels and, always
being translated "before," it
shows time that is antecedent.
On several occasions pro< is
used to indicate a distinction
of time between two or more
individuals (Mt. 5:12; Jn. 5:7;
10:8). It is used by the
Pharisees who accused the
disciples of not washing cere-
monially "before the
meal" (Lk. 11:38). It also shows the
1
Ibid., 476.
2
Robertson, Grammar, p. 977.
229
sequence of two events that
were yet future (Lk. 21:12).
Most often pro< can be found with words indicating a
partic-
ular time such as "before
the time" (Mt. 8:29), "before the
flood" (Mt. 24:38),
"before the Passover" (Jn. 11:55; 12:1;
13:1) and "before the
foundation of the world." It is
clear from these uses that no
length of time is indicated
by the pro< but rather antecedent time. This use of pro<
should not be confused with the
Hebraism pro< prosw<pou
which is also translated
"before" but indicates place.
The
unusual construction in John 12:1, pro<
e!c
h[merw?n tou? pa<sxa. It is "six days before the
Passover," needs
further examination. It is the
only use of pro< with a
numeral in the Gospels. Though
grammarians attribute this
to a Latin idiom, Moulton
demonstrates that similar idioms
did appear in Doric and Ionic
prior to the time of the New
Testament.1 It is
more likely that this is a coincidence
with the Latin. It may be that
this construction is "a
natural devielopment from the
ablative case with 'starting
from'."2
There
is one good illustration of this construction
in Josephus, “pro> mia?j h[me<raj th?j e[orth?j." The entire
passage is translated as
follows: "and one day before a
1
James Hope Moulton, Prolegomena 3rd ed. (
T.
& T. Clark, 1919), pp. 100-01.
2 Robertson, Grammar, p. 622.
230
festival the treasurers would
go to the commander of the
Roman garrison and, after
inspecting their own seal, would
take the robe."1 This seems to indicate that the first day
prior to the festival is the
day indicated. If this is true
in John 12:1, the reckoning of
the six days begins with the
first day preceding tou? pasxa. Since pa<sxa can refer to
the day the lamb was slain,
Nisan fourteenth, and also the
day it was eaten, Nisan
fifteenth, the sixth day prior to
this would be either Nisan
eighth or ninth. Without further
clarification in the text it is
impossible to determine which
day is meant or which day of
the week is meant. Only the
coming of Jesus to
certain.
pro<teron
The
neuter comparative form of the preposition
is pro<teron which is found only in John and occurs as
an
adverb indicating
"earlier," "formerly," "in former times."2
There seem to be two basic
uses: (1) to indicate something
prior to something else that is
done (Jn. 7:50), and (2) to
contrast the past with the
present (Jn. 6:62; 9:8). In none
of these uses does pro<teron have an expressed object. It
merely indicates a time earlier
than the present moment.
1
Josephus Antiquities 15. 408.
2
Arndt and Gingrich, Lexicon, p. 729.
231
to<te
The
temporal adverb to<te
translated "then," "at that
time" occurs well over one
hundred times not including the
parallel passages. It is used
extensively in Matthew as a
connective particle to indicate
the chronological sequence
of events. Theodor Zahn
summarizes the use of to<te:
The
commonest formula for the continuation of the
narrative
is to<te, which is used in Matt. some ninety
times
in all. This usage is quite unknown in Mark,
nor
is it exactly parallel in Luke and John, for in
Luke
. . . to<te signifies 'at that moment,' immedi-
ately
after the occurrence of what has just been re-
lated, in reality; 'thereupon'; so also to<te
ou#n
.
. . , uses the word sometimes to denote immediate
sequence
. . . , but very often, also, as an indefinite
term
for approximate correspondence in time, where
there
is no single preceding incident which leads up to
the
account that follows . . . , so that the phrase
does
not differ appreciably from e]n e]kei<n& t&?
kair&?
.
. . 1
However, it does not of itself specify a
definite point in
time.
As
stated above the most frequent use of to<te is to
denote the chronological
sequence of events. This may indi-
cate which are removed from
each other by an extended
period of time. For example,
Jesus ate in the house of
Matthew with sinners and on
this occasion gave a discourse.
Immediately following this
discourse Matthew 9:14 has to<te
introducing the statement that
the disciples of John came
1
Theodor Zahn, Introduction, trans. by M. W.
Jacobus,
II (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1953), 591-
92.
232
to Jesus who was not in
Matthew's house. How long a period
of time elapsed is unspecified.
Another example showing a
period of time between events
coupled by to<te is
found in
Matthew 27:58. Here, Joseph
asks for the body of Jesus and
then (to<te) Pilate ordered it given to Joseph. The
other
Gospels prove that many events,
taking perhaps nearly an
hour, occurred between these
events.
Sometimes
to<te is used to introduce
new subject
matter as in Matthew 15:1,
"Then some Pharisees and scribes
came to Jesus." It is
clear that to<te does
introduce a
subsequent event but that event
does not immediately follow
in time the event which
precedes.
Quite
often to<te does introduce an event
that
follows a preceding event
immediately as to time. This may
occur at the beginning of a
verse as in Matthew 26:65 or
within the verse as in
"And He said to them, . . then
He arose" (Mt. 8:26). The
use of to<te to show consecutive
sequence, whether immediate or
non-immediate, occurs most
often with the aorist tense.
The translation "then" is
suitable providing it is understood
that the context alone
indicates the time rather than to<te. It is
important to
observe that the parallel
accounts often do not use to<te
but de< and kai<. This further suggests that to<te is not
as much an indicator of time as
it is of sequence.
A
further use of to<te occurs
with the future tense.
In this instance the to<te introduces a future action when
233
the thing under discussion will
take place. The eschata-
logical passages in Matthew
twenty-four and twenty-five
have many uses of this
construction. The translation of
to<te could
better be "at that time." Again the to<te sepa-
rates the two future events as
to sequence and time.1
Another
use of to<te is found with events
that are
taking place at the same time
and are concomitant events.
For example, when Herod slew
the infants in
Matthew records, "then (to<te) that which was spoken through
Jeremiah the prophet was
fulfilled" (Mt. 2:17). Obviously
there was no time lapse between
the slaying and the fulfill-
ment of Jeremiah's prophecy.
The slaying and the fulfilling
were at the same time. Perhaps
it would be best to under-
stand this use of to<te as indicating logical sequence in a
manner similar to the Hebrew
waw consecutive.
The
adverb to<te on a few occasions
combines with
to form a]po> to<te which is translated "from
that time on."2
The use of a]po< showing source together with to<te showing
point in time following the
preceding action contrasts that
which precedes the a]po> to<te to that which follows.
In
summary, to<te,
"then," is a connective particle
used to introduce a subsequent
event. It is often used in
1
Cf. for frequent use of this,
21,
23, 30, 40 and Mt. 25 passim.
2
Mt. 4:17; 16:21; 26:16; Lk. 16:16.
234
a narrative to show sequence
that may or may not immediately
follow the preceding
event. While most of the events are
past, it is sometimes used to
show the sequence of future
events and thus it has the
translation "at that time." It
is the context, not to<te that indicates the time of the
subsequent event. In parallel
accounts kai> and de< are often
used instead of to<te. This
further suggests that to<te has
the sequential function of the
Hebrew waw conversive. The
a]po>
to<te introduces subsequent time and is translated "from
that time on."
CHAPTER IX
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The
events during the ministry of the Lord took
place in time and it is only
natural that many expressions
of time occur throughout the
Gospels. These temporal
expressions are conveyed either
by word meaning or grammar.
While the expressions were
familiar to those in the first
century, they may be misinterpreted.
Most temporal expres-
sions are not explicit. In
addition, there is a definite
lack of knowledge about the
first century dating concepts.
To apply contemporary methods
and expressions of reckoning
time to the Gospel era adds
further confusion. The time
related in the Gospels must be
interpreted through its own
history and contextual setting.
The
clearest way of communicating time is by the
use of time words. To the
people of
were commonly used day after
day to record the passing of
time. These words include year,
month, week, day, hour and
feast (Chapter II). The meaning
and use of these words are
obvious most of the time.
However, these words have other
meanings which on some
occasions produce problems in under-
standing the specific meaning
in a particular passage.
Three
words—ai]w<n, kairo<j and xro<noj--are used to
indicate time unspecified
(Chapter III). That is, these
235
236
words express extra-calendar
time even though they may refer
to an historical event. Each
word occurs with several
phrases or expressions. A
single common translation is
consequently not possible. Each
context must determine the
time and duration intended in
order to set forth the proper
translation.
There
are a number of words which express time
during a year--year, month,
week, tomorrow and yesterday--
(Chapter IV). Though the words
often have more than one
meaning, the context usually indicates
the correct meaning.
The meanings are basically the
same as those in the Septua-
gint and early Greek.
The
day was the most natural way to relate events
to history. It is not
surprising that the day and its many
subdivisions are used most often
for this purpose (Chapter
V). There is a diversity of
meanings for these words but
the contextual evidence makes
these meanings clear. Most
often the time indicated is not
a specific point in time
during a day but is an
approximation of time.
In
addition to words for time there are also gram-
matical means to indicate time.
These ideas are not only
conveyed by the words
themselves but by the construction of
the grammar. One such
grammatical method of expressing time
is through the temporal infinitive
(Chapter VI). The time
expressed is relative since the
purpose of tense with the
infinitive is to relate kind of
action. The present tense
237
indicates continuing action and
the aorist indefinite action.
The action off the infinitive
can be antecedent, simultaneous
or subsequent in time to the
action of the leading verb.
It is the use of the
preposition with the infinitive that
signifies the temporal
relationship between the infinitive
and the main verb.
The
Greek adverbial participle (Chapter VII)
especially in the present and
aorist tenses can be used to
express a time relationship
with the leading verb. This is
also true of the genitive
absolute. When a participle is
used temporally, can only be determined
from the context.
Usually the present participle
shows simultaneous action
and the aorist participle
antecedent action. In some
instances the context suggests
other action.
Many
conjunctions and adverbs also were employed to
express time with the clauses
(Chapter VIII). The temporal
conjunctions introduce
dependent temporal clauses which may
be simultaneous, subsequent or
antecedent to the main verb.
The adverbs some of which are
actually improper preposi-
tions, indicate time
relationships within a clause. These
conjunctions and adverbs
express many time relationships in
the Gospels but they have no
importance for historical
calendar dating.
Several
conclusions are evident. The meanings and
uses of time words in the
Gospels follow the earlier Greek
and the Septuagint. There can
be no doubt that Hebrew
238
thinking and linguistic
patterns had some influence upon
the Gospel writers. For
example, the use of B; with
the
Hebrew infinitive is translated
into Greek by e]n t&? and
the
Greek infinitive. Also, the
Hebrew Sabbath gave form and
meaning to the Greek sa<bbaton. How
extensive this Hebrew
influence was cannot be
ascertained.
It
also appears that the Jewish system of reckoning
time used the same basic terms
that were found throughout
the
system as there is of the Roman
method and both systems were
adequate for the common people.
In
considering all the expressions of time it
appears that the time
indications were a complementary part
rather than a major portion of
the message. The inability
to develop a specific
chronological diary of the events in
the Gospels should not be taken
as a shortcoming of the
writers. It is more an
indication that the purpose of the
Gospels was centered in the
message. Though the events took
place in time, the Gospels are
not time-centered. Instead
of being concerned when the
events happened, it is important
to recognize that they
happened. Anyone writing of these
same events today would no
doubt interweave expressions of
time which would result in
similar problems of chronological
interpretation.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
Abbott,
Edwin A. Johannine Grammar.
Charles
Black, 1906.
_______.
Johannine Vocabulary.
Black,
1905.
Aland,
Kurt; Black, Matthew; Metzger, Bruce; and Wikgren,
Alan.
The Greek New Testament.
Alford,
Henry. The Greek New Testament. 4 vols.
Rivingtons,
1874.
Allen,
Compared
with the Use of the Infinitive in Biblical
Greek.
Allen,
Willeughby C. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary
of
the Gospel According to St. Matthew.
T.
& T. Clark, 1965.
American
Standard Version of the Holy Bible.
Thomas
Nelson and Sons, 1901.
Andrews,
Samuel James. The Life of Our Lord Upon the Earth.
Arndt,
William F. and Gingrich, F. Wilbur. A Greek English
Lexicon
of the New Testament and Other Early Christian
Literature.
1957.
Bailey,
John Amedee. The Traditions Common to the Gospels
of
Luke and John.
Barr,
James. Biblical Words for Time.
Ltd.,
1961.
_______.
The Semantics of Biblical Language.
240
241
Barrett,
C. K. The Gospel According to
MacMillan
and Company, 1955.
Bernard,
J. H. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the
Gospel
according to St. John. 2 vols.
T.
& T. Clark, 1962.
Bickerman,
Elias J. Chronology of the Ancient World.
Black,
Matthew. An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and
Acts.
_______.
The Scrolls and Christian Origins.
Scribner's
Sons, 1961.
Blass,
Friedrich and Debrunner, Albert. A Grammar of the
New
Testament and Other Early Christian Literature.
Edited
and Revised by Robert J. Funk.
sity
of Chicago Press, 1967,
Boman,
Thorlief. Hebrew Thought Compared With Greek. Trans-
lated
by J. Moreau.
1960.
Thought.
Barnes
and Noble, 1965.
_________.
Time and Mankind.
1951.
_________.
Syntax of the Moods and Tenses in New Testament
Greek.
Harmony
of the Synoptic Gospels in Greek.
Buttmann,
Alexander. A Grammar of the New Testament Greek.
Cadbury,
H. J. The Style and Literary Method of Luke.
242
Caird,
George B. The Apostolic Age.
1955.
Caspari,
Christian Edward. A Chronological and Geographical
Introduction
to the Life of Christ.
Clement
of
The
Ante-Nicene Fathers. Vol. II.
B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1951.
Colwell,
Ernest Cadman. The Greek of the Fourth Gospel.
Cremer,
Herrhann. Biblico-Theological Lexicon of New Testa-
ment
Greek.
Cullmann,
0scar. Christ and Time. Translated by F. B.
Filson.
Curtius,
Georg. Principles of Greek Etymology. Translated
by
A. S. Wilkins and E. E. England. 2 vols.
John
Murray, 1886.
Dalman,
Gustaf Hermann. Jesus-Jeshua, Studies in the
Gospels.
Translated by F. P. Levertoff.
Macmillan
Company, 1929.
Dana,
H. E. and Mantey, Julius R. A Manual Grammar of the
Greek
New Testament.
1927.
Daniel-Rope,
Henri. Daily Life in the Time of Jesus.
Translated
by Patrick O'Brian.
Books,
1962.
Deismann,
Adolf. Light From the Ancient East. Grand
Rapids:
Baker Book House, 1965.
Denniston,
J. D. The Greek Particles.
Clarendon
Press, 1954.
Doudna,
John Charles. The Greek of the Gospel of Mark.
Exegess,
1961.
243
Edersheim,
Alfred. The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah.
2
vols.
Company,
1959.
________. The
Rapids:
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1958.
Epstein,
Isidore, ed. The Babylonian Talmud. Vol. X.
Farmer,
William H. Synopticon.
sity
Press, 1969.
Farrar,
Fredick W. The Life of Christ.
and
Co. Ltd., 1963.
Finegan,
Jack. Handbook of Biblical Chronology.
_________. Light From the Ancient Past.
University
Press, 1946.
Finkelstein,
Louis. The Pharisees. 2 vols.
Jewish
Publication Society of
Frame,
James Everett. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary
on
the Epistles of
Geldenhuys,
Norval. Commentary on the Gospel of Luke.
Gildersleeve,
Basil Lanneau. Syntax of Classical Greek From
Homer
to Demosthenes. 2 vols.
Company,
1900.
Girdlestone,
Robert Baker. Synonyms of the Old Testament.
2nd
ed.
Company,
1953.
Goetchius,
Eugene Van Ness. The Language of the New Testa-
ment.
Goguel,
Naurice. The Life of Jesus. Translated by O. .Wyon.
Goodspeed,
Edgar J. Problems of New Testament Translation.
244
Goodwin,
Wiliam Watson. Syntax of the Moods and Tenses of
the
Greek Verb.
Gould,
Exra.P. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the
Gospel
According; to St. Mark.
Green,
Samuel G. Handbook to the Grammar of the Greek
Testament.
Greenstone
Julius H. Jewish Feasts and Fasts.
Bloch
Publishing Company, 1946.
Guthrie,
Donald. New Testament Introduction, The Gospels
and
Acts.
Hatch,
Edwin and Redpath, Henry A. A Concordance to the
Septuagint
and the Other Greek Versions of the Old
Testament.
2 vols.
1954.
Hendriksen,
William. New Testament Commentary, Exposition
of
the Gospel According to John. 2 vols. Grand
Rapids:
Baker Book house, 1953.
Herodotus. Translated by A. D.
Godley. 4 vols.
William
Heinemann, 1920-26.
Higgins,
A.J.E. The Lord's Supper in the New Testament.
At
the University Press, 1967.
Huck,
Albert. Synopsis of the First Three Gospels.
Blackwell,
1908.
Irenaeus.
"Irenaeus Against Heresies," The Ante-Nicene
Fathers.
Vol. I. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing
Company, 1950.
Jannaris,
A. N. An Historical Greek Grammar.
Macmillan
and Company, Limited, 1897.
Jaubert,
Annie. The Date of the Last Supper. Translated
by
Isaac Rafferty.
1965.
245
Jelf,
William Edward. A Grammar of the Greek Language.
2
vols.
Jeremias,
Joachim. The Eucharistic Words of Jesus. Trans-
lated
by A. Ehrhardt.
Josephus. Translated by H.
8
vols.
Keil,
Carl Fredrich. The Twelve Minor Prophets. 2 vols.
Kennedy,
Harry A. A. Sources of N.T. Greek.
T.
& C. Clark, 1895.
Kittel,
Gerhard and Friedrich, Gerhard, eds. Theological
Dictionary
of the New Testament. Translated by G. W.
Bromiley.18
vols.
Publishing
Company, 1964-72.
Kittle,
Rudolph, ed. Biblia Hebraica.
Bibelanstalt,
1937.
Klijn,
A.F.J. An Introduction to the New Testament.
Koehler,
Ludwig and Baumgartner, Walter, eds. Lexicon in
Veteris
Testamenti Libros.
Kuhner,
Raphael. Grammar of the Greek Language. Translated
by
B. B. Edwards and S. H. Taylor.
Appleton
and Company, 1879.
Lenski,
R.C.J. The Interpretation of
________.
The Interpretation of St. Luke's Gospel.
________
The Interpretation of St. Mark's Gospel.
_________.
The Interpretation of St. Matthew's Gospel.
Liddell,
George Henry and Scott, Robert. A Greek-English
Lexicons.
Lightfoot, H. St. John's Gospel.
246
Press,
1956.
Machen,
J. Gresham. New Testament Greek For Beginners.
Mansoor,
Menahem. The
B.
Eerdmans, 1964.
Marsh,
John. The Fulness of Time.
Brothers
Publishers, 1952.
________.
The Gospel of
Books,
1968.
Mavdig,
J. N. Syntax of the Greek Language Especially of
the
Attic Dialect. Translated by H. Browne.
Rivingtons,
1873.
Meyer,
Heinrich August Wilhelm. Critical and Exegetical
Handbook,
to the Gospel of John. Translated by F.
Crombie.
_________.
Critical and Exegetical Hand-book to the Gospel
of
Matthew. Translated by 2. Crombie.
Wagnalls,
Publishers, 1884.
Mickelsen,
A,
Rapids:
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1963.
Momigliano,
Arnaldo. "Time in Ancient Historiography,"
History
and the Concept of Time. Edited by George H.
Nadel.
1966.
Morgenstern
Irvin. The Dimensional Structure of Time.
New
Yor : Philosophical Library, 1960.
Morgenthale,
Robert. Statistik des neutestamentlichen
Wortschties.
Moule,
C.F.. An Idiom Book of New Testament Greek.
Moulton,
James Hope. Prolegomena. Vol. I of A Grammar of
New
Testament Greek. 3rd ed.
1919.
Moulton,
James Hope and Howard, Wilbert Francis. Accidence
247
and
Word Formation. Vol. II of A Grammar of New Testa-
ment
Greek.
Moulton,
James Hope and Milligan, George. The Vocabulary
of
the Greek Testament Illustrated From the Papyri and
Other
Non-Literary Sources.
Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1963.
Moulton,
F. and Geden, A. S. A Concordance to the Greek
Testament.
4th ed.
Nestle,
D.Eberhard, ed. Novum Testamentum Graece.
New American Standard Bible New Testament.
Press,
1960.
Nichol,
Francis D., ed. Seventh Day Adventist Commentary.
8
vols.
Association,
1956.
Ogg,
George. Chronology of the Public Ministry of Jesus.
Parker,
Richard A. and Dubberstein, Waldo H. Babylonian
Chronology, 626 B.C. - A.D. 75.
Brown
university Press, 1956.
Philostratus.
Life of Apollonius. Translated by F. C.
Conybeare. 2 vols.
1960.
Pieritz,
G. Wildon. The Gospels From a Rabbinical Point
of
View.
Pliny.
Natural History. Translated by H. Rackham. 10
vols.
Plummer,
Alfred. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on
the
Gospel According to S. Luke.
Rahlfs,
Alfred, ed. Septuaginta. 2 vols.
Wurttembergische
Bibelanstalt, 1962.
Richardson,
Alan. A Theological Word Book of the Bible.
248
Robertson,
Archibald Thomas. A Grammar of the Greek New
Testament
in the Light of Historical Research.
________.
A Harmony of the Gospels.
Brothers,
1922.
__________.
Word Pictures in the New Testament. Vol. I.
Robinson,
Joan Arthur Thomas. In the End, God.
Harper
and Row, 1968.
Robison,
Henry Barton. Syntax of the Participle in the
Apostolic
Fathers.
Press,
1913.
Ruckstuhl,
Eugen. Chronology of the Last Days of Jesus.
Translated
by V. Drapela.
Inc.,
1965.
Scroggie,
W. Graham. A Guide to the Gospels.
Pickerin
and Inglis Ltd., 1940.
Sharp,
Douglas S. Epictetus and the New Testament.
Charles
H. Kelly, 1914.
Smith,
David. The Days of His Flesh.
Smyth,
Herbert Weir. Greek Grammar.
Sophocles,
A. Greek Lexicon of the Roman and Bysantine
Periods (from B.C. 146 to A:D. 1100). 2
vols. New
Stegenga,
J. The Greek-English Analytical
Concordance of
the
Greek-English New Testament.
Zondervan
Publishing House, 1963.
Strong,
Augustus H. Systematic Theology.
The
Judson Press, 1907.
Stuart,
Moses. Grammar of the New Testament Dialect.
Swete,
Henry Barclay. An Introduction to the Old Testament
249
in
Greek.
Taylor,
Vinbent. The Gospel According to St. Mark. 2nd ed.
Thackeray,
Henry
in
Greek According to the Septuagint. Vol. I.
_________. Lexicon to Josephus.
ists
Paul Geuthner, 1930.
Thayer,
Joseph Henry. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New
Testament.
1962.
Thiele,
Edwin H. The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings.
1965.
Thrall,
Margaret E. Greek Particles in the New Testament.
Trench,
Richard Chenevix. Synonyms of the New Testament.
Turner,
Nigel, Syntax. Vol. III of A Grammar of New Testa-
ment
Greek_I. Edited by James Hope Moulton. 3 vols.
T.
& T. C ark, 1919-63.
Votaw,
Greek.
Westcott,
Brooke Foss. An Introduction to the Study of the
Gospels.
________.
The Gospel According to John.
Murray,
1892.
Wilch, John Time and Event.
Winer,
George B. A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Testa-
ment.
7th ed.
Xenophon.
Anabasis. Translated by Carleton L. Brownson.
2
vols.
Zahn,
Theodor. Introduction to the New Testament. 3 vols.
Translated by M. W. Jacobus.
250
Publications,
1953.
Zerwick,
Maximillian. Biblical Greek Illustrated by
Example.
Translated by Joseph Smith.
Pontificii
Instituti Biblici, 1963.
Periodicals and Articles
Aldrich,
J. K. "The Crucifixion on Thursday Not Friday."
Bibliotheca
Sacra, XXVII (July, 1870), 401-29.
Amadon,
Grace. "Ancient Jewish Calendation." Journal of
Biblical
Literature, LXI (1942), 227-79.
________.
"The Crucifixion Calendar." Journal of Biblical
Literature,
LXIII (1944), 177-90.
Bainton,
R. H. "Basilidian Chronology and New Testament
Interpretation."
Journal of Biblical Literature, XLII
(1923);
81-134.
Ballentine
William G. "Predicate Participles With Verbs
in
the Aorist." Bibliotheca Sacra, CLXIV (October,
1884),
787-99.
Barnes,
Timothy D. "Date of Herod's Death." Journal of
Theological
Studies, XIX (April, 1968), 204-09.
Barton,
George A. "The Exegesis of e]niauto<j in Galatians
4:10
and its Bearing on the Date of the Epistles."
Journal
of Biblical Literature, XXXIII (1914), 118-26.
________.
"Origin of Discrepancy Between the Synoptists
and
the Fourth Gospel as to the Date and Character of
Christ's
Last Supper With His Disciples." Journal of
Biblical
Literature, XLIII (January, 1924), 28-31.
Beckwith,
Roger T. "The Day, Its Divisions and Its Limits,
In
Biblical Thought." The Evangelical Quarterly, XLIII
(October
1971), 218-27.
Bolling,
George Melville. "Beginning of the Greek Day."
The
American Journal of Philology, XXIII (1902), 428-35.
_______.
"The Participle in Hesiod."
Bulletin
III (October, 1897), 421-71.
250b
Brown,
Raymond E. "Problem of Historicity in John."
Catholic
Bible Quarterly, XXIV (January, 1962), 1-14.
Cadbury,
Henry J. "Some Lukan Expressions of Time."
Journal
of Biblical Literature, LXXXII (September,
1963),
72-78.
Caspari,
Charles. "The Date of the Passion of Our Lord."
Bibliotheca
Sacra, XXVIII (July, 1871), 469-84.
Chavel,
Charles B. "Releasing a Prisoner on the Eve of the
Passover."
Journal of Biblical Literature, LX (1941),
273-78.
Christie,
W. M. "Did Christ Eat the Passover with His
Disciples?
Or, The Synoptics Versus John's Gospel."
Expository
Times, XLIII (August, 1932), 515-19.
Coleman,
L. "Christian Sabbath." Bibliotheca Sacra, I
(1844)1;
526-52.
Cox,
Samuel, ed. "Before the Feast of the Passover." The
Expositor,
XI (1880), 475-80.
Danby,
Herbert. "The Bearing of the Rabbinical Code on
the
Jewish Trial Narratives in the Gospels." The
Journal
of Theological Studies, XXI (October, 1919),
51-76.
"Day."
Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesias-
tical
Literature. 1894, II.
251
Delling, Gerhard. "kairo<j." Theological Dictionary of
the
New Testament. Vol. III.
________.
"mh<n." Theological Dictionary of the New Testa-
ment.
Vol. IV.
Doyle,
A. D. "Pilate's Career and Date of the Crucifixion."
Journal
of Theological Studies, XLII (1942), 190-93.
Feinberg,
Charles Lee. "Sabbath and the Lord's Day."
Bibliotheca
Sacra, LXXLXV (April, 1938), 172-94.
Filmer,
W. E. "Chronology of the Reign of Herod the Great."
Journal
of Theological Studies, XVII (October, 1966),
283-98.
Fotheringham,
J. K. "Astronomical Evidence for the Date of
the
Crucifixion." The Journal of Theological Studies,
XII
(October, 1910), 120-27.
________
"The Evidence of Astronomy and Technical Chron-
ology
for the Date of the Crucifixion." The Journal of
Theological
Studies, XXXV (April, 1934), 146-62.
Fuchs,
Ernst. "sh<meron." Theological
Dictionary of the
New
Testament. Vol. VII. 26-9-75.
Geraty,
Lawrence T. "The Pascha and the Origin of Sunday
Observance."
(July,
1965), 85-96.
Gildersleeve,
Basil Lanneau. "On PRIN in the Attic
Orators."
American Journal of Philology, II (1881),
465-83.
Gilmore,
A. "Date and Significance of the Last Supper."
Scottish
Journal of Theology, XIV (September, 1961),
256-69.
Gray,
E. P. "Last Passover and Harmonies." Bibliotheca
Sacra,
LI (April, 1894), 339-46.
Grobel,
Kendrick. "He That Cometh After Me." Journal of
Biblical
Literature, LX (1941), 397-401.
Hitchcock,
F. R. Montgomery. "Dates." A Dictionary of
Christ
and the Gospels. Vol. I.
252
Hughes,
Philip E. "Time, Progress and Eternity." Evangel-
ical
Quarterly, XIX (January, 1947), 21-41.
Jenni,
E. "Time." The Interpreter's Dictionary of the
Bible.
IV.
Jeremias,
Joachim. "The Last Supper." The Journal of
Theological
Studies, L (January, 1949), 1-10.
Jones,
R. G. "The Time of the Death and Resurrection of
Jesus
Christ." Bibliotheca Sacra, LI (July, 1894),
505-11.
Kraft,
Robert A. "Some Notes on Sabbath Observance in Early
Christianity."
III
(January, 1965), 18-33.
Landes,
George. "Three Days and Three Nights Motif in
Jonah
2:1." Journal of Biblical Literature, LXXXVI
(December,
1967), 446-50.
Lewis,
Richard B. "Ignatius and the Lord's Day." Andrews
University
Seminary Studies, VI (January, 1968), 46-59.
Lohse,
Eduard. "sa<bbaton.” Theological
Dictionary of the
New
Testament. Vol. VII.
Lowe,
Raphael. "Jerome's Rendering of MlAOf." Hebrew
Mahoney,
Aidan. "A New Look at the Third Hour of Mark 15:
25."
Catholic Bible Quarterly, XXVIII (July, 1966),
292-99.
Manek,
Jindrick. "The Biblical Concept of Time and Our
Gospels."
New Testament Studies, VI (October, 1959),
45-51.
Mann,
C. S. "Chronology of the Passion and the
Calendar."
Church Quarterly Review, CLX (October,
1959),
446-56.
Montefiore,
Hugh. "When Did Jesus Die?" Expository Times,
CXXII
(November, 1960), 53-54.
Morgenstern,
Julian. "Additional Notes on Three Calendars
of
Ancient
(1926),
77-107.
253
_________.
"The Gates of Righteousness." Hebrew
College
Annual, VI (1929), 1-37.
_________.
"Supplementary Studies in the Calendars of
Ancient
(1935),
1-148.
Morgenstern,
M. "The Calendar of the Book of Jubilees,
Its
Origin and Its Character." Vetus Testamentum, V
(January,
1955), 37-63.
Muilenburg,
James. "The Biblical View of Time." Harvard
Theological
Review, LIV (October, 1961), 225-52.
Murphy,
J. C. "The Weekly Sabbath." Bibliotheca Sacra,
XXIX
(January, 1872), 74-113.
"Night."
A Dictionary of the Bible Comprising. Its Antiqui-
ties,
Biography, Geography, and Natural History, 1906.
Ogg,
George. "Chronology of the New Testament." The New
Bible
Dictionary.
________.
“A Note on Stromateis 144.1-146.4." Journal of
Theological
Studies, XLVI (January, 1945), 59-63.
O'Herlihy,
Donald J. "The Year of the Crucifixion."
Catholic
Bible Quarterly, VIII (July, 1946), 198-305.
Parker,
Richard A. "Ancient Jewish Calendation: A Criti-
cism."
Journal of Biblical Literature, LXIII (1944),
173-76.
Perry,
A. N. "Jesus in
ogy."
Journal of Biblical Literature, XLIII (January,
1924),
15-21.
Power,
E. "John 2, 20 and the Date of the Crucifixion."
Biblica,
IX (July, 1928), 257-88.
Power,
Matthew A. "Nisan Fourteenth and Fifteenth in Gospel
and
Talmud." The American Journal of Theology, XXIV
(April,
1920), 252-76.
Ramsay,
William H. "Numbers, Hours, Years and Dates." A
Dictionary
of the Bible. Vol. V.
________.
"The Sixth Hour." The Expositor, XVIII (June,
254
1896),
457-59.
Robinson,
D.W.E. "The Date and Significance of the Last
Supper."
Evangelical Quarterly, XXIII (January, 1951),
126-33.
Robinson,
Edward. "The Alleged Discrepancy Between John
and
the Other Evangelists Respecting Our Lord's Last
Passover."
Bibliotheca Sacra, II (August, 1845), 405-
46.
Sasse,
Hermann. "ai]w<n." Theological Dictionary of the
New
Testament. Vol. I.
Shea,
William H. "The Sabbath in the Epistle of Barnabas."
149-75.
Shepherd,
Massey H. "Are Both the Synoptics and John
Correct
About the Date of Jesus' Death?" Journal of
Biblical
Literature, LXXX (June, 1961), 123-32.
Skehan,
Patrick W. "The Date of the Last Supper." Catholic
Biblical
Quarterly, XX (April, 1958), 192-99.
Smith,
David. "Preparation." A Dictionary of Christ and
the
Gospels. Vol. II.
Springer,
J. F. "Is Matthew a Chronological Narrative?"
Bibliotheca
Sacra, LXXX (January, 1923), 115-31.
Stagg,
Frank. "The Abused Aorist." Journal of Biblical
Literature,
XCI (June, 1972), 222-231.
Stewart,
Roy A. "The Jewish Festivals." The Evangelical
Quarterly,
XLIII (July, 1971), 149-61.
Story,
Cullen. "The Chronology of the Holy Week." Biblio-
theca
Sacra, LXXXVII (January, 1940), 63-80.
Stott,
G. Gordon. "Month." A Dictionary of Christ and the
Gospel
S. Vol. II.
________. "Time." A
Dictionary of the Bible. Vol. II.
_________.
"Time." Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesi-
astical
Literature. 1894. Vol. X.
Torrey,
Charles C. "The Date of the Crucifixion According
255
to
the Fourth Gospel." Journal of Biblical Literature,
L
(October, 1931), 227-41.
Turner,
C. H. "Adversaria Chronologica." Journal of Theo-
logical
Studies, III (October, 1901), 110-23.
_________.
"Chronology of the New Testament." A Dictionary
of
the Bible. Vol. I.
Tyson,
Joseph B. "Lukan Version of the Trial of Jesus."
Novum
Testamentum, III (July, 1959), 249-58.
Vedder,
Henry C. "Trial of Christ." Bibliotheca Sacra,
XXXIX
(October, 1882), 648-673.
Walker,
IV
(December, 1960), 261-62.
________.
"Concerning the Jaubertian Chronology of the
Passion."
Novum Testamentum, III (December,.1959),
317-20.
________.
"Pauses in the Passion Story and Their Signifi-
cance
for Chronology." Novum Testamentum, VI (January,
1963),
16-19.
________.
"The Reckoning of Hours in the Fourth Gospel."
Novum
Testamentum, IV (January, 1960), 69-73.
Walter,
James. "The Chronology of the Passion Week."
Journal
of Biblical Literature, LXXVII (June, 1958),
116-22.
Woolsey,
Theodore D. "Year of Christ's Birth." Bibliotheca
Sacra,
XXVII (April, 1970), 190-336.
Zeitlin,
Solomon. "Date of the Crucifixion According to
the
Fourth Gospel." Journal of Biblical Literature,
LI
(July, 1932), pp. 73-71.
Unpublished Materials
Hall,
William Rice. "The Concept of Time and Eternity in
the
Old Testament." Unpublished Th. M. thesis,
Theological
Seminary, 1960.
Hardin,
Clifford Wood. "An Examination of Jaubert's Chron-
256
ology
of the Passion Week." Unpublished Th. M. thesis,
Hoyt,
Herman A. "Events of the Passion Week." Printed
class
notes for the Life of Christ, Grace Theological
Seminary,
[n. d.] .
Hoyt,
Solon. "Did Christ Eat the Passover?" Unpublished
monograph,
Grace Theological Seminary, 1945.
Kent,
Homer A. Jr. "The Day of that Sabbath was a High
Day."
Unpublished monograph, Grace Theological
Seminary,
1950.
Madison,
Leslie P. "Problems of Chronology in the Life of
Christ."
Unpublished Th. D. dissertation,
Theological
Seminary, 1963.
Vennum,
Edward Sherwood. "The Exegetical Force of ]EITA."
Unpublished
Th. M. thesis, Dallas Theological Seminary,
1950.
Waltke,
Bruce. "Advanced Hebrew." Unpublished class
notes,
Dallas Theological Seminary, 1963.