From this verb in its turn was formed a new verbal noun ypqyolpr ots Dan. O 511, 1'. Cp. also the proper name rp7'yopios.

So in N.T. - ypqyopL~p,Ev i Th. 58. . ypr'yopeire (imper.) i Cor. 1613: Mk. 13s'. ypfyop7j(TaTE i Yet. 58.

c. Of like origin is the aorist brcroLO'jo'a, which occurs in Job 312. From 7rE7roEBELv again we have the noun vorot67iais iv K. 1819.

d. The tendency to form new presents from perfects is already exhibited in Homer. Thus we have avwyet (Od. V 139 etc.) formed from avwya, and yeywvEiv (IL. XII 337) from yc'ywva; also the imperfect luE'A,1'Kov (Od. IX 439) from ufu7'Ka.

28. The Verb tcvbvaL and its Cognates. By the side of the forms in -/At there existed from Homer downwards alternative forms in -w. Some of these present themselves in the LXX. Thus we have the following parts of the transitive verb ioTaw.

Among its compounds we may notice the following - Ka0io-Twv Dt. 171': Dan. 0' 41. Cp. Aristeas § 228. Kaeio7a . . . M,EOio-T& Dan. O 221. p,E9co7wv . . . KaOivTwv Dan. 0' 2n. p,EOtaTC)m i Mac. 813. Mx&oTav ill Mac. 6'".

So in N.T. - iaTCUN,EV Rom. 331. naorcaBl0-Ta Mk: 912.

In Josh. 1019 there occurs the irregular perfect imperative &rjKarE with connecting vowel a instead of E. With this form may be compared rE7roEBa7E Ps. 1453: Is. 501°: Jer. 94.

29. The Verb rL01VQ1, and its Cognates. This verb does not offer much scope for remark. The imperfect is formed, so far as it occurs, from the alternative form 70,16.

This is in accordance with classical usage, which however has InBqv in the 1st person. 'ErAq is read by A in Esther 4'.

The strong and weak aorists active seem to be about equally frequent. The only person of the latter that is missing is the 2d person plural. 'E04jKa/LEv is found (ii Esd. 151° : Is. 281s) and E0qKav is common.

The 2d person singular of the strong aorist middle is always IBov, as in Attic.

30. The Verb 8L&dvaLL and its Cognates. The present tense runs thus-

8" 29 times. In Job 68, 1921: Sir. 452" SoLI occurs as a variant. Up. Aristeas § 185 4rt.

31. The Verb Uvai and its Cognates. a.. The simple verb iEVac does not occur in the LXX. It has therefore to be studied in its compounds. The regular inflexion of the imperfect in Attic is supposed to be iqv, Zen, ia, though in Plat. Euthyd. 293 A we have 1st person singular jq5leiv. 'Hcpias therefore (Sus. 0'l may be considered classical.

In the former of these a0c2s must be from aoE~, a cognate thematic form to &¢itl but without the reduplication.

In the latter we have a new formation which treats the reduplication as though it were itself the stem. Of this new verb we have the following parts -

d. In addition to this we find a verb of new formation like ajsiw -

auviwv Dan. O 81, "" and passim. v,rviovrwv (gen. pl.) ii Chr. 30n.

In ii Chr. 26' o-wtovros and ii Esd. 8'e o-vvtovras the accent seems to be misplaced.

The new participle avviwv has not entirely ousted the -pr. form in the LXX. We have ovule's Ps. 3211 : of o-uvtEVres Dan. 128: avviEVras Dan. OO 1:4 rruv QvrviEVrwv Dan. 113~.

e. The 3d person plural of the 1st aorist qKav, which occurs in Xen. Anab. IV 5 § 18, is used in the LXX in its compound aojKQv.

f. The verb arvim, is to be met with also in the Apostolic Fathers -

g. The 2d person singular present middle rpoip in Job 7's is doubtless formed on the analogy of Xvp, but might be reached from ,rpo'EOac by loss of o· and contraction.

32. The Imperatives lLv&am and gw6o-ra, etc. It is the by-forms in -w which account for these imperatives (avdwra = a v4ara-a). 'Avaiara in the LXX is used interchangeably with avaiarn& Thus in Dan. 71 0' has avaara, while © has av4vrq0i. But the same writer even will go from one to the other. Thus in iii K. 19 we have avaorV0& in v. 5 and avuara in v. 7, and again in iii K. 20 avamra in v.15 and avgorn& in v.18. So also Ps. 4321, ff avdarj0i . . . a v4mra. 'Aoroo-ra occurs in Job 7'e, 14°, 21".

So in N.T., where we find in addition the 3d person singular and the 2d person plural.

KQraflQrw Mt . 27".

dvapara Rev. 1P.

EopaKas ii K.1811. Maintained by some to be the true Attic form. Eppr~yuis for Eppwyws. Job 321°.

EQBELV for EQBGELV. Lvt. 7", 1114, 171°, 191~ 21: Sir. 201°. Old poetic form. Horn. Il. XXIV 415 : Od. IX 479, X 273.

In the Greek of the LXX roo is used for ~roi; just as we commonly say I where' for I whither.'

lid occurs only in a doubtful reading in Jer. 21; and has there the sense of wo"v.

Similarly ov' is used for ol, which is not found at all. Jer. 51r° ou idY,8a&'aps haa2

35. Homerisms. The Ionic infusion which is observable in the Greek of the LXX may possibly be due to the use of Homer as a schoolbook in Alexandria. This would be a vera causa in accounting for such stray Ionisms as Kuvopv&'qs, /WXatp;1, E7rcSEjB9K4,p, and the use of owaipW in the Papyri; possibly also for yauov, yaeact. Such forms also as loraoc8os, Way, Iravwuv (Sir. 431, Heoatfos, xaAKaos, Xet'mppos, irokeworjs, have an Homeric ring about them.

36. Movable Consonants. v I¢eAKUVTucov is freely employed before consonants, as in Gen. 31'x, 41°" : Dt. 191: Ruth 2a : J dg. 1611.

To aXpc and p,Wpc s is sometimes appended before a vowel and sometimes not.

'Avr7Kpv and alvr"crcpus differ from one another by more than the Q. The former does not occur at all in the LXX, the latter in Swete's text only once, iii Mae. 518 aivrcKpvs avarcJlcBiwac airro"v.

In the Revisers' text of the N.T. we find dXpc before a consonant in Gal. 4s; olXpcs ov i Cor. llaa, 1515: Gal. 319) 419: Hb. 313; p,focs ow Mk. 138° ; Ic~0cs a1',caros Hb. 12' ; a vrcKpv Xiov Acts 201.

8'l. Spelling. In matters of spelling Dr. Swete's text appears to reflect variations in the Mss.

c. In the spelling of aap,flavecv p. appears in parts not formed from the present stem, as -

This may indicate that the syllable in which the p, occurs was pronounced with a. In modern Greek wa stands for b, and we seem to find this usage as early as Hermas ( Vas . 1111 § 4), who represents the Latin subsellium by over_acov. Cp. `A/A/3aKOVp, for Habakkuk.

d. The doubling of P in the augment of verbs is often neglected, as -

SYNTAX

CONSTRUCTION OF THE SENTENCE, 38–43

38. The Construction of the LXX not Greek. In treating of Accidence we have been concerned only with dialectical varieties within the Greek language, but in turning to syntax we come unavoidably upon what is not Greek. For the LXX is on the whole a literal translation, that is to say, it is only half a translation--the vocabulary has been changed, but seldom the construction. We have therefore to deal with a work of which the vocabulary is Greek and the syntax Hebrew.

39. Absence of μέν and δέ.How little we are concerned with a piece of Greek diction is brought home to us by the fact that the balance of clauses by the particles μέν and δέ, so familiar a feature of Greek style, is rare in the LXX, except in the books of Wisdom and Maccabees. It does not occur once in all the books between Deuteronomy and Proverbs nor in Ecclesiastes, the Song, the bulk of the Minor Prophets, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel; and in each of the following books it occurs once only--Leviticus (27⁷), Numbers (22³³), Tobit (14¹⁰), Haggai (1⁴), Zechariah (1¹⁵), Isaiah (6²). Where the antithesis employed, it is often not managed with propriety, e.g. in Job 32⁶. As instances of the non-occurrence of one or both of the particles where their presence is obviously required we may take--

Gen. 27²² Ἡ φωνὴ φωνὴ Ἰακώβ, αἱ δὲ χεῖρες χεῖρες Ἠσαύ.  Jdg. 16²⁹ καὶ ἐκράτησεν ἕνα τῇ δεξιᾷ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἕνα τῇ ἀριστερᾷ αὐτοῦ  ii K. 11²⁵ ποτὲ μὲν οὕτως καὶ ποτὲ οὕτως  iii K. 18⁶ μιᾷ . . . ἄλλῃ.

40. Paratactical Construction of the LXX. Roughly speaking, it is true to say that in the Greek of the LXX there is no syntax, only parataxis. The whole is one great scheme of clauses connected by καί, and we have to trust to the sense to tell us which is to be so emphasized as to make it into the apodosis. It may therefore be laid down as a general rule that in the LXX the apodosis is introduced

50

SYNTAX

CONSTRUCTION OF THE SENTENCE, 38–43

38. The Construction of the LXX not Greek. In treating of Accidence we have been concerned only with dialectical varieties within the Greek language, but in turning to syntax we come unavoidably upon what is not Greek. For the LXX is on the whole a literal translation, that is to say, it is only half a translation--the vocabulary has been changed, but seldom the construction. We have therefore to deal with a work of which the vocabulary is Greek and the syntax Hebrew.

39. Absence of μέν and δέ.How little we are concerned with a piece of Greek diction is brought home to us by the fact that the balance of clauses by the particles μέν and δέ, so familiar a feature of Greek style, is rare in the LXX, except in the books of Wisdom and Maccabees. It does not occur once in all the books between Deuteronomy and Proverbs nor in Ecclesiastes, the Song, the bulk of the Minor Prophets, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel; and in each of the following books it occurs once only--Leviticus (27⁷), Numbers (22³³), Tobit (14¹⁰), Haggai (1⁴), Zechariah (1¹⁵), Isaiah (6²). Where the antithesis employed, it is often not managed with propriety, e.g. in Job 32⁶. As instances of the non-occurrence of one or both of the particles where their presence is obviously required we may take--

Gen. 27²² Ἡ φωνὴ φωνὴ Ἰακώβ, αἱ δὲ χεῖρες χεῖρες Ἠσαύ.  Jdg. 16²⁹ καὶ ἐκράτησεν ἕνα τῇ δεξιᾷ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἕνα τῇ ἀριστερᾷ αὐτοῦ  ii K. 11²⁵ ποτὲ μὲν οὕτως καὶ ποτὲ οὕτως  iii K. 18⁶ μιᾷ . . . ἄλλῃ.

40. Paratactical Construction of the LXX. Roughly speaking, it is true to say that in the Greek of the LXX there is no syntax, only parataxis. The whole is one great scheme of clauses connected by καί, and we have to trust to the sense to tell us which is to be so emphasized as to make it into the apodosis. It may therefore be laid down as a general rule that in the LXX the apodosis is introduced

51

by καί. This is a recurrence to an earlier stage of language than that which Greek itself had reached long before the LXX was written, but we find occasional survivals of it in classical writers, e.g. Xen. Cyrop. I 4 § 28. καὶ ὁδόν τε οὔπω πολλὴν διηνύσθαι αὐτοῖς καὶ τὸν Μῆδον ἥκειν. Here it is convenient to translate καί 'when,' but the construction is really paratactical. So again Xen. Anab. IV 2 § 12 Καὶ τοῦτόν τε παρεληλύθεσαν οἱ Ἕλληνες, καὶ ἕτερον ὁρῶσιν ἔμπροσθεν λόφον κατεχόμενον. Cp. Anab. I 8 § 8, II 1 § 7, IV 6 § 2; also Verg. Æn. II 692--

Vix ea fatus erat senior, subitoque fragore

intonuit laevom.

In the above instances the two clauses are coördinate. But in the LXX, even when the former clause is introduced by a subordinative conjunction, καί still follows in the latter, e.g.--

Gen. 44²⁹ ἐὰν οὖν λάβητε . . . καὶ κατάξετε κτλ.  Ex. 13¹⁴ ἐὰν δὲ ἐρωτήσῃ . . . καὶ ἐρεῖς κτλ. Cp. 7⁹.  Josh. 4¹ καὶ ἐπεὶ συνετέλεσεν πᾶς ὁ λαὸς διαβαίνων τὸν Ἰορδάνην, καὶ εἶπεν Κύριος.

Sometimes a preposition with a verbal noun takes the place of the protasis, e.g.--

Ex. 3¹² ἐν τῷ ἐξαγαγεῖν . . . καὶ λατρεύσετε.

In Homer also καί is used in the apodosis after ἐπεί (Od. V 96), ἦμος (Il. I 477: Od. X 188), or ὅτε (Od. V 391, 401: X 145,157, 250).

The difficulty which sometimes arises in the LXX in determining which is the apodosis amid a labyrinth of καὶ clauses, e.g. in Gen. 4¹⁴, 39¹⁰, may be paralleled by the difficulty which sometimes presents itself in Homer with regard to a series of clauses introduced by δέ, e.g. Od. X 112, 113; XI 34–6.

41. Introduction of the Sentence by a Verb of Being. Very often in imitation of Hebrew idiom the whole sentence is introduced by ἐγένετο or ἔσται.

Gen 39¹⁹ ἐγένετο δὲ ὡς ἤκουσεν . . . καὶ ἐθυμώθη ὀργῇ. Cp. vs. 5, 7, 13.  iii K. 18¹² καὶ ἔσται ἐὰν ἐγὼ ἀπέλθω ἀπὸ σοῦ, καὶ πνεῦμα Κυρίου ἀρεῖ σε εἰς τὴν γῆν ἣν οὐκ οἶδας.

In such cases in accordance with western ideas of what a sentence ought to be, we say that καί introduces the apodosis, but it may be that, in its original conception at least, the whole construction was paratactical. It is easy to see this in a single instance like--

Gen 41⁸ ἐγένετο δὲ πρωὶ καὶ ἐταράχθη ἡ ψυχὴ αὐτοῦ,

Vix ea fatus erat senior, subitoque fragore

intonuit laevom.

In the above instances the two clauses are coördinate. But in the LXX, even when the former clause is introduced by a subordinative conjunction, καί still follows in the latter, e.g.--

Gen. 44²⁹ ἐὰν οὖν λάβητε . . . καὶ κατάξετε κτλ.  Ex. 13¹⁴ ἐὰν δὲ ἐρωτήσῃ . . . καὶ ἐρεῖς κτλ. Cp. 7⁹.  Josh. 4¹ καὶ ἐπεὶ συνετέλεσεν πᾶς ὁ λαὸς διαβαίνων τὸν Ἰορδάνην, καὶ εἶπεν Κύριος.

Sometimes a preposition with a verbal noun takes the place of the protasis, e.g.--

Ex. 3¹² ἐν τῷ ἐξαγαγεῖν . . . καὶ λατρεύσετε.

In Homer also καί is used in the apodosis after ἐπεί (Od. V 96), ἦμος (Il. I 477: Od. X 188), or ὅτε (Od. V 391, 401: X 145,157, 250).

The difficulty which sometimes arises in the LXX in determining which is the apodosis amid a labyrinth of καὶ clauses, e.g. in Gen. 4¹⁴, 39¹⁰, may be paralleled by the difficulty which sometimes presents itself in Homer with regard to a series of clauses introduced by δέ, e.g. Od. X 112, 113; XI 34–6.

41. Introduction of the Sentence by a Verb of Being. Very often in imitation of Hebrew idiom the whole sentence is introduced by ἐγένετο or ἔσται.

Gen 39¹⁹ ἐγένετο δὲ ὡς ἤκουσεν . . . καὶ ἐθυμώθη ὀργῇ. Cp. vs. 5, 7, 13.  iii K. 18¹² καὶ ἔσται ἐὰν ἐγὼ ἀπέλθω ἀπὸ σοῦ, καὶ πνεῦμα Κυρίου ἀρεῖ σε εἰς τὴν γῆν ἣν οὐκ οἶδας.

In such cases in accordance with western ideas of what a sentence ought to be, we say that καί introduces the apodosis, but it may be that, in its original conception at least, the whole construction was paratactical. It is easy to see this in a single instance like--

Gen 41⁸ ἐγένετο δὲ πρωὶ καὶ ἐταράχθη ἡ ψυχὴ αὐτοῦ,

Nb. 21⁹ καὶ ἐγένετο ὅταν ἔδακνεν ὄφις ἄνθρωπον, καὶ ἐπέβλεψεν ἐπὶ τὸν ὄφιν τὸν χαλκοῦν καὶ ἔζη.  And there was when a serpent bit a man, and he looked on the brazen serpent, and lived. Cp. Gen. 42³⁵, 43^{2, 21}: Jdg. 14¹¹.

42. Apposition of Verbs. Sometimes the καί does not appear after ἐγένετο, ἐγενήθη, or ἔσται, thus presenting a construction which we may denote by the phrase Apposition of Verbs.

Jdg. 19³⁰ καὶ ἐγένετο πᾶς ὁ βλέπων ἔλεγεν . . .  i K. 31⁸ καὶ ἐγενήθη τῇ ἐπαύριον, ἔρχονται οἱ ἀλλόφυλοι.  Gen. 44³¹ καὶ ἔσται ἐν τῷ ἰδεῖν αὐτὸν μὴ ὂν τὸ παιδάριον μεθ᾿ ἡμῶν, τελευτήσει.

In two versions of the same Hebrew we find one translator using the καί and the other not.

iv K. 19¹ καὶ ἐγένετο ὣς ἤκουσεν ὁ βασιλεὺς Ἑζεκίας, καὶ διέρρηξεν τὰ ἱμάτια ἑαυτοῦ.  Is. 37¹ καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ ἀκοῦσαι τὸν βασιλέα Ἑζεκίαν, ἔσχισεν τὰ ἱμάτια.

43. Δέ in the Apodosis. The use of δέ to mark the apodosis, which is found occasionally in classical authors from Homer downwards, is rare in the LXX.

Josh. 2⁸ καὶ ἐγένετο ὡς ἐξήλθοσαν . . . αὕτη δὲ ἀνέβη.

THE ARTICLE, 44, 45

44. Generic Use of the Article. This is due to following the Hebrew.

i K. 17³⁴ ὁ λέων καὶ ἡ ἄρκος = 'a lion or a bear,' 17³⁶ καὶ τὴν ἄρκον ἔτυπτεν ὁ δοῦλός σου καὶ τὸν λέοντα.  Amos 5¹⁹ ὃν τρόπον ἐὰν φύγῃ ἄνθρωπος ἐκ προσώπου τοῦ λέοντος, καὶ ἐμπέσῃ αὐτῷ ἡ ἄρκος.  Is. 7¹⁴ ἰδοὺ ἡ παρθένος ἐν γαστρὶ λήμψεται.

45. Elliptical Use of the Feminine Article. The use of the feminine article with some case of χώρα or γῆ understood is not due to the influence of the Hebrew.

ἡ ὑπ᾿ οὐρανόν Job 18⁴.

τὴν ὑπ᾿ οὐρανόν Job 1⁷, 2², 5¹⁰, 9⁶, 28²⁴, 34¹³, 38²⁴.

τῆς ὑπό τὸν οὐρανόν Ex. 17⁴: Prov. 8²⁸, ii Mac. 2¹⁸.

τὴς ὑπ᾿ οὐρανόν Job 38¹⁸.

τῇ ὑπ᾿ οὐρανόν Esther 4¹⁷: Baruch 5³.

So in N.T.--

Lk. 17²⁴ ἡ ἀστραπὴ ἀστράπτουσα ἐκ τῆς ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανὸν εἰς τὴν ὑπ᾿ οὐρανὸν λάμπει.

GENDER, 46, 47

46. Elliptical Use of the Feminine Adjective. There is nothing about the feminine gender which should make ellipse more frequent with it than with the masculine or neuter. Only it happens that some of the words which can be most easily supplied are feminine. This elliptical use of the feminine adjective (or of adv. = adj.) is a feature of Greek generally. It is not very common in the LXX. Instances are--

ἐπ᾿ εὐθείας (ὁδοῦ) Josh. 8¹⁴.

ἐν τῇ εὐθείᾳ Ps. 142¹⁰.

τῆς πλατείας Esther 4¹.

τὴη σύμπασαν (γῆν) Job 2², 25².

ἕως τῆς σήμερον (ἡμέρας) )ii. Chr. 35²⁵.

τὴν αὔριονiii. Mac. 5³⁸.

ἐβόησεν μεγάλῃ (τῇ φωνῇ)iv K. 18²⁸.

εἰς τὴν ὑψηλήν (χώραν))ii Chr. 1³.

In the N.T. this idiom occurs much more frequently. Take for instance Lk. 12^{47, 48} δαρήσεται πολλάς . . . ὀλίγας (πληγάς).

Cp. also--

τὴν πρὸς θάνατον (ὁδόν) Eus. H.E. II 23.

οὐκ εἰς μακράν Philo Leg. ad. C. § 4.

ἐπ᾿ εὐθείας Philo Q.O.P.L. § 1.

ἐπὶ ξένης (χώρα or γῆς) Philo Leg. ad. C. § 3.

πεδιάς τε καὶ ὀρεινή ibid. 7.

τῇ πατρίῳ (γλώσσῃ) Jos. B. J. Proœm. 1.

τὰς περιοίκους (πόλεις) ibid. 8.

47. Feminine for Neuter. The use of the feminine for the neuter is a pure Hebraism, which occurs principally in the Psalms.

Jdg. 15⁷ ἐὰν ποιήσητε οὕτως ταύτην, 21³ εἰς τί . . . ἐγενήθη αὕτη;  i K. 47 οὐ γέγονεν τοιαύτη ἐχθὲς καὶ τρίτην.  Ps. 26³ ἐν ταύτῃ ἐγὼ ἐλπίζω, 26⁴ μίαν ᾐτησάμην . . . ταύτην ἐκζητήσω, 31⁶ ὑπὲρ ταύτης προσεύξεται πᾶς ὅσιος, 117²³ παρὰ Κυρίου ἐγένετο αὕτη, 118⁵⁰ αὕτη με παρεκάλεσεν, 118⁵⁶ αὕτη ἐγενήθη μοι.

In the N.T. this license only occurs in Mk. 12¹¹, Mt. 21⁴² in a quotation from Ps. 117²³.

NUMBER, 48, 49

48. Singular for Plural. Sometimes in imitation of Hebrew idiom we find the singular used in the sense of the plural. When the article is employed along with a singular noun, we have the Generic Use of the Article (§ 44), but the presence of the article is not necessary.

Ex. 8⁶ ἀνεβιβάσθη ὁ βάτραχος (= frogs), 8¹⁸ ἐξαγαγεῖν τὸν σκνῖφα, 10¹³ καὶ ὁ ἄνεμος ὁ νότος ἀνέλαβεν τὴν ἀκρίδα, 10¹⁴ οὐ γέγονεν τοιαύτη ἀκρὶς.  Jdg. 7¹² ὡσεὶ ἀκρὶς εἰς πλῆθος (cp. Judith 2²⁰ ὡς ἀκρίς), 21¹⁶ ἠφανίσθη ἀπὸ Βενιαμὶν γυνή.  iv K. 2¹² ἅρμα Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἱππεὺς αὐτοῦ.  Ezk. 47⁹ ἔσται ἐκεῖ ἰχθὺς πολὺς σφόδρα.

This throws light on an otherwise startling piece of grammar--

Jdg. 15¹⁰ εἶπαν ἀνὴρ Ἰούδα.

49. Singular Verb with more than One Subject. In accordance with Hebrew idiom a singular verb often introduces a plurality of subjects, e.g.--

iv K. 18²⁶ καὶ εἶπεν Ἐλιακεὶμ . . . καὶ Σόμνας καὶ Ἰώας, 18³⁷ καὶ εἰσῆλθεν Ἐλιακεὶμ κτλ.

This may happen also in Greek apart from Hebrew.

Xen. Anab. II 4 § 16 Ἔπεμψέ με Ἀριαῖος καὶ Ἀρτάοζος.

CASE, 50–61

50. Nominative for Vocative. a. The use of the nominative for the vocative was a colloquialism in classical Greek. It occurs in Plato, and is common in Aristophanes and Lucian. When so employed, the nominative usually has the article. As in Hebrew the vocative is regularly expressed by the nominative with the article, it is not surprising that the LXX translators should often avail themselves of this turn of speech.

iii K. 17¹⁸ τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί, ὁ ἄνθρωος τοῦ θεοῦ; 18²⁶ ἐπάκουσον ἡμῶν, ὁ Βάαλ.  Cp. iii K. 20²⁰: Ps. 21¹, 42².

For an instance of the nominative without the article standing for the vocative take--

Baruch 4⁵ θαρσεῖτε, λαός μου.

The nominative, when thus employed, is often put in apposition with a vocative, as--

iii K. 17²⁰ Κύριε, ὁ μάρτυς τῆς χήρας, 17²¹ Κύριε ὁ θεός μου.

b. In the N.T. also the nominative with the article is often put for the vocative.

Mt. 11²⁶ ναὶ ὁ πατήρ.  Lk. 8⁵⁴ ἡ παῖς, ἔγειρου.  Mk. 9²⁵ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἄλαλον . . . ἔξελθε.  Lk. 6²⁵ οὐαὶ ὑμῖν, οἱ ἐμπεπλησμένοι νῦν.  Col. 3¹⁸ αἱ γυναῖκες, ὑποτάσσεσθε.  Eph. 6¹, Col. 3²⁰ τὰ τέκνα, ὑπακούετε.

The use of the nominative without the article for the vocative is rare in the N.T., as it is also in the LXX. In Lk. 12²⁰ and i Cor. 15³⁶ we find ἄφρων put for ἄφρον, and in Acts 7⁴² οἶκος Ἰσραήλ does duty as vocative.

As instances of apposition of nominative with vocative we may take--

Rom. 2¹ ὦ ἄνθρωπε πᾶς ὁ κρίνων.  Rev. 15³ Κύριε ὁ θεὸς, ὁ παντοκράτωρ.

In Rev. 18²⁰ we have vocative and nominative conjoined--

οὐρανὲ, καὶ οἱ ἅγιοι.

51. Nominative Absolute. Occasionally we get a construction in the LXX, which can be described only by this name.

Nb. 22²⁴ καὶ ἔστη ὁ ἄγγελος τοῦ θεοῦ ἐν ταῖς αὔλαξιν τῶν ἀμπέλων, φραγμὸς ἐντεῦθεν καὶ φραγμὸς ἐντεῦθεν.  Nb. 24⁴ ὅστις ὅρασιν θεοῦ εἶδεν, ἐν ὕπνῳ, ἀποκεκαλυμμένοι οἱ ὀφθαλμοὶ αὐτοῦ.

As this construction arises out of a literal following of the Hebrew, it would be superfluous to adduce Greek parallels. Like effects might be found, but the cause would be different.

52. Nominative of Reference. What is meant by this term will be best understood from the examples--

Job 28⁷ τρίβος, οὐκ ἔγνω αὐτὴν πετεινόν.  Ps. 102¹⁵ ἄνθρωπος, ὡσει χόρτος αἱ ἡμέραι αὐτοῦ.

To throw out the subject of discourse first, and then proceed to speak about it, is a Hebraism, but at the same time it is a common resource of language generally.

So in N.T.--

Acts 7⁴⁰ ὁ γὰρ Μωσῆς οὗτος . . . οὐκ οἴδαμεν τί ἐγένετο αὐτῷ.  Rev.3¹² ὁ νικῶν, ποιήσω αὐτὸν στῦλον ἐν τῷ ναῷ τοῦ Θεοῦ μου.

53. Nominativus Pendens. The nominative which is left without a verb owing to a sudden change of construction is a familiar feature

56

in classical Greek, especially if this be at all colloquial. It is not however very common in the LXX.

Dan. O’ 7¹⁵ καὶ ἀκηδιάσας ἐγὼ . . . ἐτάρασσόν με.

Such cases can generally be explained on the principle of construction according to the sense.

It is seldom that we meet with so violent an anacoluthon as the following in the N.T.--

Mk. 9²⁰ καὶ ἰδὼν αὐτὸν, τὸ πνεῦμα εὐθὺς συνεσπάραξεν αὐτόν.

54. Accusative for Vocative. The accusative for vocative might seem an impossibility, yet here is an instance of it.

Ps. 51⁶ ἠγάπησας πάντα τὰ ῥήματα καταποντισμοῦ, γλῶσσαν δολίαν.

55. Accusative of Time When. In connexion with classical Greek we think of Time When as being expressed by the genitive or dative, rather than by the accusative, though the latter also is used. The employment of the accusative became more frequent after the classical period, and alone survives in the modern language.

Gen. 43¹⁶ μετ᾿ ἐμοῦ γὰρ φάγονται οἱ ἄνθρωποι ἄρτους τὴν μεσημβρίαν.

Ex. 9¹⁸ ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ὕω ταύτην τὴν ὥραν αὔριον χάλαζαν.

Dan. Θ 9²¹ ὡσεὶ ὥραν θυσίας ἑσπερινῆς (O’ has ἐν ὥρᾳ).

So also sometimes in N.T.--

Jn. 4⁵² χθὲς ὥραν ἑβδόμην ἀφῆκεν αὐτὸν ὁ πυρετός.  Rev. 3³ καὶ οὐ μὴ γνῷς ποίαν ὥραν ἥξω ἐπὶ σε.

56. Cognate Accusative. a. By a Cognate Accusative is here meant that particular form of the Figura Etymologica in which a verb is followed by an accusative of kindred derivation with itself, irrespective of the question whether it be an accusative of the external or of the internal object. We have both kinds of accusative, together in the following verse, where θήραν = venison.

Gen. 27³ ἐξέστη δὲ Ἰσαὰκ ἔκστασιν μεγάλην σφόδρα καὶ εἶπεν “Τίς οὖν ὁ θηρεύσας μοι θήραν;”

b. The great frequency of the cognate accusative in the LXX is due to the fact that here the genius of the Hebrew and of the Greek language coincides. Besides being a legitimate Greek usage, this construction is also one of the means employed for translating a constantly recurring Hebrew formula. Sometimes the appended accusative merely supplies an object to the verb, as in such phrases

57

as δάνιον δανείζειν, διαθέσθαι διαθήκην, διηγεῖσθαι διήγημα, ἐνύπνιον ἐνυπνιάζεσθαι, ἐπιθυμεῖν ἐπιθυμίαν, θύειν θυσίαν, νηστεύειν νηστείαν, ὁρισμὸν ὁρίζεσθαι, πλημμελεῖν πλημμέλησιν or πλημμελίαν, προφασίζεσθαι προφάσεις. At other times it is accompanied by some specification, as--

Nb. 18⁶ λειτουργεῖν τὰς λειτουργίας τῆς σκηνῆς τοῦ μαρτυρίου.  Dan. 11² πλουτήσει πλοῦτον μέγαν.  i Mac. 2⁵⁸ ἐν τῷ ζηλῶσαι ζῆλον νόμου.

c. Sometimes the cognate accusative is conveyed in a relative clause, as--

Ex. 3⁹ τὸν θλιμμὸν ὃν οἱ Αἰγύπτιοι θλίβουσιν αὐτούς.  Nb. 1⁴⁴ ἡ ἐπίσκεψις ἣν ἐπεσκέψαντο.  1 K. 2²³ ἡ ἀκοὴ ἣν ἐγὼ ἀκούω.

d. By other changes of construction we have still the figura etymologica, but no longer a cognate accusative. Thus, starting from the common phrase δοῦναι δόμα, we have δεδομένοι δόμα (Nb. 3⁹) and δόμα δεδομένον (Nb. 18⁶).

e. In one instance the cognate accusative is reinforced by a still further application of the etymological figure--

Gen. 47²² ἐν δόσει γὰρ ἔδωκεν δόμα τοῖς ἱερεῦσιν.

This is not due to the Hebrew.

f. In a wider sense the term 'cognate, accusative' includes an accusative of kindred meaning, though not of kindred derivation, as--

Jdg. 15⁸ ἐπάταξεν . . . πληγὴν μεγάλην.

g. Instances of cognate accusative are common enough in the N.T., e.g.--

i Jn. 5¹⁶ ἁμαρτάνοντα ἁμαρτίαν μὴ πρὸς θάνατον.  Mt: 2¹⁰ ἐχάρησαν χαρὰν μεγάλην σφόδρα.  Jn. 7²⁴ τὴν δικαίαν κρίσιν κρίνετε.

There also it occurs sometimes in a relative clause--

Mk. 10³⁸ τὸ βάπτισμα ὃ ἐγὼ βαπτίζομαι.  Jn. 17²⁶ ἡ ἀγάπη ἣν ἠγάπησάς με.  Eph. 4¹ τῆς κλήσεως ἧς ἐκλήθητε.

h. We have a triple use of the etymological figure in--

Lk. 8⁵ ἐξῆλθεν ὁ σπείρων τοῦ σπεῖραι τὸν σπόρον αὐτοῦ.

i. That the playing with paronymous terms is in accordance with the spirit of the Greek language may be seen from the frequent employment of the device by Plato, e.g.--

Prot. 326 D ὥσπερ οἱ γραμματισταὶ τοῖς μήπω δεινοῖς γράφειν τῶν παίδων ὑπογράψαντες γραμμὰς τῇ γραφίδι οὕτω τὸ γραμματεῖον διδόασι.  

58

Hip. Maj. 296 C Ἄλλα μέντοι δυνάμει γε δύνανται οἱ δυνάμενοι· οὐ γάρ που ἀδυναμίᾳ γε.

57. Accusative in Apposition to Indeclinable Noun. In the LXX an indeclinable noun is sometimes followed by an accusative in apposition to it, even though by the rules of grammar it is itself in some other case, e.g.--

Is. 37³⁸ ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ Νασαρὰχ τὸν πάταχρον αὐτοῦ.  iv K. 1² ἐν τῷ Βάαλ μυῖαν θεὸν Ἀκκαρών.

Perhaps it would be more satisfactory if this and § 54 were thrown together under a head of Bad Grammar, a category which the reader might be inclined to enlarge.

58. Genitive Absolute. Strictly speaking, a Genitive Absolute is a clause in the genitive which does not affect the general construction. It ought not therefore to refer either to the subject or the object of the sentence. Even in classical authors however the so-called genitive absolute is sometimes not employed with the precision which grammarians might desire, e.g.--

Plat. Rep. βιαζομένων δὲ καὶ ἀντιτεινόντων ἀλλήλοις . . . ὡμολόγησαν.  Xen. Cyrop. I 4 § 2 καὶ γὰρ ἀσθενήσαντος αὐτοῦ οὐδέπορε ἀπέλειπε τὸν πάππον.  Xen. Anab. I 2 § 17 θᾶσσον προϊόντων . . . δρόμος ἐγένετο τοῖς στραριώταις.

The genitive absolute is often employed in the same loose way in the LXX.

Tob. 4¹ ὅτε ἤμην ἐν τῇ χώρᾳ μου . . . νεωτέρου μου ὄντος.

Dt. 15¹⁰ οὐ λυπηθήσῃ τῇ καρδίᾳ σου διδόντος σου αὐτῷ.

Ex. 2¹⁰ ἁδρυνθέντος δὲ τοῦ παιδίου, εἰσήγαγεν αὐτὸ.

Ex. 5²⁰ συνήντησαν δὲ . . . ἐρχομένοις . . . ἐκπορευομένων αὐτῶν.

So in N.T.--

Mt. 1¹⁸ μνηστευθείσης τῆς μητρὸς . . . εὑρέθη.  Acts 21¹⁷ γενομένων δὲ ἡμῶν εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα ἀσμένως ἀπεδέξαντο ἡμᾶς οἱ ἀδελφοί.  ii Cor. 4¹⁸ κατεργάζεται ἡμῖν, μὴ σκοπούντων ἡμῶν.

59. The Genitive Infinitive of Purpose. The genitive of the verbal noun formed by prefixing the article to the infinitive, which we may call for convenience the Genitive Infinitive, is one of the regular ways of expressing purpose in Biblical Greek, corresponding to our use of 'to.' The construction is not entirely unknown to classical authors (e.g. Plat. Gorg. 457 E τοῦ καταφανὲς γενέσθαι) and is especially

59

favoured by Thucydides. There is nothing in the Hebrew to suggest it. The following will serve as examples--

Jdg. 16⁵ καὶ δήσομεν αὐτὸν τοῦ ταπεινῶσαι αὐτόν.  Ps. 9³⁰ ἐνεδρεύει τοῦ ἁρπάσαι πτωχόν.  Job 1¹⁹ ἦλθον τοῦ ἀπαγγεῖλαί σοι,

So also frequently in N.T., e.g.--

Mt. 13³ ἐξῆλθεν ὁ σπείρων τοῦ σπείρειν.  James 5¹⁷ προσηύξατο τοῦ μὴ βρέξαι.

60. Other Uses of the Genitive Infinitive. a. The genitive infinitive of purpose is only one use out of many to which this syntactical device is applied. Take for instance--

Ex. 14⁵ Τί τοῦτο ἐποιήσαμεν τοῦ ἐξαποστεῖλαι τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἰσραὴλ τοῦ μὴ δουλεύειν ἡμῖν (= ὥστ μὴ δουλεύειν);

Purpose is not expressed in either of these cases. In the former we have what may be called the Explanatory Use of the Genitive Infinitive; in the latter we have something which represents 'from serving us' in the original, but which we shall nevertheless class as a Genitive Infinitive of Consequence, since it is only thus that the Greek can be explained.

b. The Explanatory Use of the Genitive Infinitive is common in the LXX, e.g.--

Gen. 3²² Ἰδοὺ Ἀδὰμ γέγονεν ὡς εἷς ἐξ ἡμῶν, τοῦ γινώσκειν καλὸν καὶ πονηρόν.  Ex. 8²⁹ μὴ προσθῇς ἔτι, Φαραώ, ἐξαπατῆσαι τοῦ μὴ ἐξαποστεῖλαι τὸν λαὸν.  Ps. 26⁴ ταύτην (§ 47) ἐκζητήσω· τοῦ κατοικεῖν με κτλ.

So in N.T.--

Acts 7¹⁹ ἐκάκωσεν τοὺς πατέρας ἡμῶν, τοῦ ποιεῖν ἔκθετα τὰ βρέφη αὐτῶν.  Gal. 3¹⁰ ὃς οὐκ ἐμμένει ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς γεγραμμένοις . . . τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτά.

c. As an instance of the Genitive Infinitive of Consequence we may take--

Ex. 7¹⁴ βεβάρηται ἡ καρδία Φαραὼ τοῦ μὴ ἐξαποστεῖλαι τὸν λαόν.

So in N.T.--

Hb. 11⁵ Ἑνὼχ μετετέθη τοῦ μὴ ἰδεῖν θάνατον.

d. What is called in Latin Grammar the 'prolative infinitive' after 'extensible' verbs, or more simply, the latter of two verbs, is also commonly expressed in the LXX by the genitive infinitive, e.g.--

Ps. 39¹³ οὐκ ἠδυνήθην τοῦ βλέπειν.  ii Chr. 3¹ ἤρξατο τοῦ οἰκοδομεῖν.  Gen. 18⁷ ἐτάχυνεν τοῦ ποιῆσαι αὐτό.

So in N.T.--

Acts 3¹² ὡς . . . πεποιηκόσιν τοῦ περιπατεῖν αὐτόν, 15²⁰ ἐπιστεῖλαι . . . τοῦ ἀπέχεσθαι, 27¹ ἐκρίθη τοῦ ἀποπλεῖν.

61. Cognate Dative. a. Another form of the figura etymologica which abounds in the LXX may be called Cognate Dative. As in the case of the cognate accusative its frequency is in great measure due to the coincidence of idiom in this particular between Greek and Hebrew. Let us first show by a few examples from Plato that this construction is in accordance with the genius of the Greek language.

Crat. 385 B λόγῳ λέγειν.  Phdr. 265 C παιδίᾳ πεπαῖσθαι.  Symp. 195 B φεύγων φυγῇ τὸ γῆρας.  Crat. 383 A φύσει . . . πεφυκυῖαν.  Cp. 389 C, D. Phileb. 14 C φύσει . . . πεφυκύτα.

b. But while we have to search for this idiom in classical Greek, it thrusts itself upon us at every turn in the Greek of the LXX, owing to its aptness for rendering a mode of expression familiar in the original.

c. Corresponding to the cognate dative in Greek, we find in Latin also a cognate ablative as a rare phenomenon, e.g.--

curricu1o percurre Ter. Heaut. 733.  Cp. Plaut. Most. 349 qui non curro curriculo domum.

occidione occisum Cic. Fam. XV 4 § 7. Cp. Liv. II 51 § 9.

d. The instances of cognate dative of most frequent occurrence in the LXX are ἀκοῇ ἀκούειν, ζωῇ ζῆν, θανάτῳ ἀποθανεῖν, θανάτῳ θανατοῦσθαι, σάλπιγγι παλπίζειν. But besides these there are many others, as--

e. From the foregoing instances it is an easy step to others in which the substantive is of kindred meaning, though not of kindred derivation with the verb.

Gen. 1¹⁶ βρώσει φαγῇ, 31¹⁵ κατέφαγεν καταβρώσει.  Ex. 19¹², 21^{16, 17} θανάτῳ τελευτᾶν.  Ex. 22²⁰ θανάτῳ ὀλεθρευθήσεται.  Nb. 11¹⁵ ἀπόκτεινόν με ἀναιρέσει, 35²⁶ἐξόδῳ ἐξέλθῃ.  >Ezk. 33²⁷ θανάτῳ ἀποκτενῶ.

f. Instances of the cognate dative are to be found also in the N.T., though not with anything like the frequency with which they occur in the LXX.

Jn. 3²⁹ χαρᾷ χαίρει.  Lk. 22¹⁵ ἐπιθυμίᾳ ἐπεθύμησα.  Acts 4¹⁷ ἀπειλῇ (margin) ἀπειλησώμεθα, 5²⁸ παραγγελίᾳ παρηγγείλαμεν, 23¹⁴ ἀναθέματι ἀνεθεματίσαμεν.  James 5¹⁷ προσευχῇ προσηύξατο.  Gal. 5¹ τῇ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἡμᾶς Χριστὸς ἠλευθέρωσε.

g. The expression in ii Pet. 3³ ἐν ἐμπαιγμονῇ ἐμπαῖκται, while not exactly parallel with the foregoing, belongs to the same range of idiom; so also Rev. 2²³ ἀποκτενῶ ἐν θανάτῳ.

ADJECTIVES, 62-65

62. ἥμισυς. In Attic Greek ἥμισυς, like some other adjectives, mostly of quantity, has a peculiar construction. It governs a noun in the genitive, but agrees with it in gender. Thus--

Plat. Phædo 104 A ὁ ἥμισυς τοῦ ἀριθμοῦ ἅπας.  Thuc. V 31 § 2 ἐπὶ τῇ ἡμισείᾳ τῆς γῆς.  Demosth. p. 44, iv 16 τοῖς ἡμίσεσι τῶν ἰππέων.

This idiom is kept up by Hellenistic writers, such as Philo, Strabo, and the translator of Josephus' Jewish War. It is however

62

very rare in the LXX, occurring only in the following passages--

iii K. 16⁹ ὁ ἄρχων τῆς ἡμίσους (§ 11) τῆς ἵππου.  Josh. 4¹², i Chr. 5²³ οἱ ἡμίσεις φυλῆς Μανασσή.  Tob. 10¹⁰ τὰ ἥμισυ (sic) τῶν ὑπαρχόντων.  Ezk. 16⁵¹ τὰς ἡμίσεις τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν.  i Mac. 3^{34, 37} τὰς ἡμίσεις τῶν δυνάμεων.

Elsewhere instead of the Attic idiom we find τὸ ἥμισυ or ἥμισυ, irrespective of the gender and number of the noun which follows, e.g.--

63. πᾶς. a. In classical Greek the rule for πᾶς in the singular is that with the article it is collective, without the article it is distributive--

πᾶσα ἡ πόλις = all the city.

πᾶσα πόλις = every city.

πᾶς differs from ordinary adjectives in taking the predicative position in an attributive sense. Thus while ἀγαθὴ ἡ πόλις means 'the city is good,' πᾶσα ἡ πόλις means 'all the city.' πᾶς may however also take the attributive position, like any other adjective. When it does so, the collective force is intensified--

πᾶσα ἡ πόλις = all the city.

ἡ πᾶσα πόλις = the whole city.

Thus Plato's expression (Apol. 40 E) ὁ πᾶς χοόνος is rendered by Cicero (T.D. I § 97) perpetuitas omnis consequentis temporis. For other instances of this use in classical authors we may take--

Hdt. VII 46 ὁ πᾶς ἀνθρώπινος βίος.  Plat. Rep. 618 B ὁ πᾶς κίνδυνος, Phileb. 67 B οἱ πάντες βόες = all the oxen in the world.  Xen. Anab. V 6 § 5 of οἱ πάντες ἄνθρωποι.

In such cases there is an additional stress gained by the unusual position assigned to πᾶς.

b. In the LXX the same distinction seems to be maintained. It is true a writer will go from one to the other, e.g.--

Jdg. 16^{17, 18} καὶ ἀνήγγειλεν αὐτῇ τὴν πᾶσαν καρδίαν αὐτοῦ . . . καὶ εἶδεν Δαλειδὰ ὅτι ἀπήγγειλεν αὐτῇ πᾶσαν τὴν καρδίαν αὐτοῦ--

but so in English we might first say he told her his whole heart, and then add and she saw that he had told her all his heart.

Other instances of the strongly collective force of πᾶς in the attributive position are--

Gen. 45²⁰ τὰ γὰρ πάντα ἀγαθὰ Αἰγύπτου ὑμῖν ἔσται.  Josh. 4¹⁴ ἐναντίον τοῦ παντὸς γένους Ἰσραήλ.  Wisd. 7⁹ ὁ πᾶς χρυσὸς.  ii Mac. 8⁹ τὸ πᾶν τῆς Ἰουδαίας . . . γένος.

Still there is a tendency in the LXX to assimilate πᾶς to adjectives generally and to employ it in the attributive position without any special emphasis.

c. Neither is the rule that πᾶς without the article is distributive at all closely adhered to, e.g.--

Ex. 8¹⁶ ἐν πάσῃ γῇ Αἰγύπτου, 16⁶ πρὸς πᾶσαν συναγωγὴν υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ.  i K. 7² πᾶς οἶκος Ἰσραήλ.

d. In the plural of οἱ πάντες is rare, but may be found--

Jdg. 20⁴⁶ οἱ πάντες οὗτοι.  i Mac. 2³⁷ Ἀποθάνωμεν οἱ πάντες ἐν τῇ ἁπλότητι ἡμῶν.  ii Mac. 12⁴⁰ τοῖς δὲ πᾶσι σαφὲς ἐγένετο  Cp. Aristeas § 36 τοῖς πᾶσι . . . πολίταις.

Αἱ πᾶσαι is still rarer, but see--

iii Mac. 1¹ παραγγείλας ταῖς πάσαις δυνάμεσιν.

Τὰ πάντα is comparatively common, occurring, e.g., in Gen. 1³¹, 9³: Ex. 29²⁴: Lvt. 19¹³: ii Mac. 10²³, 12²²: iii Mac. 2³.

e, In the N.T. the collective use of πᾶς followed by the article is clearly marked in many passages, e.g.--

Gal. 5¹⁴ ὁ . . . πᾶς νόμος.  Mt. 8³⁴ πᾶσα ἡ πόλις ἐξῆλθεν.

Also the distributive use of πᾶς without the article, as in i Cor. 11^{4, 5} πᾶς ἀνήρ . . . πᾶσα δὲ γυνή. In Rom. 3¹⁹ we have the two usages brought into contrast--ἵνα πᾶν στόμα φραγῇ, καὶ ὑπόδικος γένηται πᾶς ὁ κόσμος τῷ Θεῷ.

On the other hand there are also instances of πᾶς in the singular and without the article being used collectively, e.g.--

Eph. 2²¹ πᾶσα οἰκοδομή.  Mt. 2³ πᾶσα Ἱεροσόλυμα.  Acts 2³⁶ πᾶς οἶκος Ἰσραήλ.

f. In the plural οἱ πάντες is more common in St. Paul than in the LXX. Take for instance--

Phil. 2²¹ οἱ πάντες γὰρ τὰ ἑαυτῶν ζητοῦσιν.  Cp. ii Cor. 5¹⁴.  i Cor. 10¹⁷ οἱ γὰρ πάντες ἐκ τοῦ ἑνὸς ἄρτου μετέχομεν.  Cp. Eph. 4¹³.

64

Rom. 11³² συνέκλεισεν γὰρ ὁ Θεὸς τοὺς πάντας εἰς ἀπείθειαν.  ii Cor. 5¹⁰ τοὺς γὰρ πάντας ἡμᾶς κτλ.  i Cor. 9²² τοῖς πᾶσι γέγονα πάντα.

In Acts 19⁷ we have οἱ πάντες ἄνδρες.

Τὰ πάνταoccurs in Rom. 8³², 11³⁶: i Cor.15²⁷, 12^{6, 19}: Eph. 5¹³: Acts 17²⁵: Mk. 4¹¹ and perhaps in other passages.

64. Comparison of Adjectives. Owing to the peculiarity of Hebrew syntax the treatment of this subject mostly falls under the head of Prepositions. We need only notice here that the positive may be put for the comparative, and μᾶλλον >omitted at will or inserted even after a comparative.

Gen. 49¹² λευκοὶ οἱ ὀδόντες αὐτοῦ ἢ γάλα.  Dt. 7¹⁷ πολὺ τὸ ἔθνος τοῦτο ἢ ἐγώ, 9¹ ἔθνη μεγάλα καὶ ἰσχυρότερα μᾶλλον ἢ ὑμεῖς.

So in N.T.--

Mt. 18^{8, 9} καλόν σοί ἐστιν εἰσελθεῖν . . . ἢ . . . βληθῆναι.  Cp. Mk. 9^{43, 45}.

65. Omission of μᾶλλον. The comparison of attributes may be effected by the use of verbs as well as of adjectives. In such cases the omission of μᾶλλον is common in the LXX.

Nb. 22⁶ σχύει οὗτος ἢ ἡμεῖς, 24⁷ ὑψωθήσεται ἢ Γὼγ βασιλεία.  Hos. 7⁶ ἔλεος θέλω ἢ θυσίαν.  ii Mac. 7² ἕτοιμοι γὰρ ἀποθνῄσκειν ἐσμὲν ἢ πατρῴους νόμους παραβαίνειν.

Cp. Aristeas § 322 τέρπειν γὰρ οἴομαί σε ταῦτα ἢ τὰ τῶν μυθολόγων βιβλία.

PRONOUNS, 66-71

66. Superfluous Use of Pronoun. A pronoun is sometimes employed superfluously after the object, direct or indirect, has been already expressed, e.g.--

Ex. 12⁴⁴ καὶ πᾶν (sic) οἰκέτην ἢ ἀργυρώνητον περιτεμεῖς αὐτόν.

Nb. 26³⁷ καὶ τῷ Σαλπαὰδ υἱῷ Ὅφερ οὐκ ἐγένοντο αὐτῷ υἱοί.

The above may be considered as deflexions of the Nominative of Reference (§ 52) into an oblique case by Attraction.

So in N.T.--

ii Cor. 12¹⁷ μή τινα ὧν ἀπέσταλκα πρὸς ὑμᾶς, δι᾿ αὐτοῦ ἐπλεονέκτησα ὑμᾶς;  Mt. 25²⁹ τοῦ δὲ μὴ ἔχοντος, καὶ ὃ ἔχει ἀρθήσεται ἀπ᾿ αὐτοῦ.  Rev. 2^{7, 17} τῷ νικῶντι δώσω αὐτῷ. Cp. 6⁴.

In Josh. 24²²-- ὑμεῖς ἐξελέξασθε Κυρίῳ λατρεύειν αὐτῷ--Κυρίῳ should be τὸν Κύριον (which A has). Then λατρεύειν αὐτῷ would be an explanatory clause added after the usual manner.

67. Frequent Use of Pronouns. Apart from any Semitic influence there is also a tendency in later Greek to a much more lavish use of pronouns than was thought necessary by classical authors. We have seen already (§ 13) that the missing pronoun of the 3d person was supplied. The possessive use of the article moreover was no longer thought sufficient, and a possessive genitive was added, e.g.--

Gen. 38²⁷ καὶ τῇδε ἦν δίδυμα ἐν τῇ κοιλίᾳ αὐτῆς.

So in N.T.--

Mt. 19⁹ ὃς ἂν ἀπολύσῃ τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ.  i Pet. 2²⁴ αὐτὸς ἀνήνεγκεν ἐν τῷ σώματι αὐτοῦ.

68. Ἀδελφός as a Reciprocal Pronoun. The use of ἀδελφός as a reciprocal pronoun is a sheer Hebraism, e.g.--

Ex. 10²³ καὶ οὐκ εἶδεν οὐδεὶς τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ = they saw not one another.

69. Hebrew Syntax of the Relative. a. One of the most salient characteristics of LXX Greek is the repetition of the pronoun after the relative, as though in English, instead of saying 'the land which they possessed,' we were to say habitually 'the land which they possessed it,' and so in all similar cases. This anomaly is due to the literal following of the Hebrew text. Now in Hebrew the relative is indeclinable. Its meaning therefore is not complete until a pronoun has been added to determine it. But the relative in Greek being declinable, the translator was forced to assign to it gender, number, and case, which rendered the addition of the pronoun after it unnecessary. Nevertheless the pronoun was retained out of regard for the sacred text. As instances of the simplest kind we may take the following--

Nb. 35²⁵ ὃν ἔχρισαν αὐτὸν, 13³³ τῆς γῆς ἣν κατεσκέψαντο αὐτήν.  Is. 62² ὃ ὁ κύριος ὀνομάσει αὐτό.  Gen. 1¹¹ οὗ τὸ σπέρμα αὐτοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ.  Dt. 4⁷ ὧ ἐστιν αὐτῷ.  Ps. 18⁴ ὧν οὐχὶ ἀκούονται αἱ φωναὶ αὐτῶν.  Ex. 6²⁶ οἷς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς.

b. Where the relative is followed by ἐάν the same construction is employed, e.g.--

Nb. 17⁵ ὁ ἄνθρωπος ὃν ἐὰν ἐκλέξωμαι αὐτόν, 19²² παντός, οὗ ἐὰν ἅψηται αὐτοῦ ὁ ἀκάθαρτος.

c. Sometimes a demonstrative takes the place of the personal pronoun--

Gen. 3¹¹ οὗ ἐνετειλάμην σοι τούτου μόνου μὴ φαγεῖν.

d. In all the foregoing instances the appended pronoun is in the same case as the relative, but this is not necessary.

Nb. 3³ οὓς ἐτελείωσαν τὰς χεῖρας αὐτῶν ἱερατεύειν.

The construction here, though determined by the Hebrew, happens to agree with the Greek Accusative of the Part Affected.

e. Very often there is the same preposition both before the relative and before the appended pronoun--

Ex. 34¹² εἰς ἣν εἰσπορεύῃ εἰς αὐτήν.  Nb. 11²¹ ἐν οἷς εἰμι ἐν αὐτοῖς.  Gen. 28¹³ ἡ γῆ ἐφ᾿ ἧς σὺ καθεύδεις ἐπ᾿ αὐτῆς.

f. Occasionally the preposition is the same, but the case it governs is different, e.g.--

Jdg. 16²⁶ ἐφ᾿ οἷς ὁ οἶκος στήκει ἐπ̓ αὐτούς.  Josh. 24¹³ γῆν ἐφ᾿ ἣν οὐκ ἐκοπιάσατε ἐπ᾿ αὐτῆς.

g. Sometimes the preposition is confined to the appended pronoun. Then the problem arises, Into what case is the relative to be put?--a problem which is solved differently in different passages. In some the case chosen coincides with that of the pronoun following, e.g.--

Gen. 24⁴² τὴν ὁδόν μου, ἣν νῦν ἐγὼ πορεύομαι ἐπ᾿ αὐτήν.  Ex. 25²⁸ τοὺς κυάθους, οἷς σπείσεις ἐν αὐτοῖς.  Gen. 21²³ τῇ γῇ ἧ σὺ παρῴκησας ἐν αὐτῇ.

In others it does not--

Nb. 14³¹ τὴν γῆν ἣν ὑμεῖς ἀπέστητε ἀπ᾿ αὐτῆς, 19² ἧ οὐκ ἐπεβλήθη ἐπ᾿ αὐτὴν ζυγός.  iii K. 17¹ ὧ παρέστην ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ.

h. Sometimes the relative has a different preposition from the pronoun following--

Nb. 13²⁰ τίς ἡ γῆ εἰς ἣν οὗτοι ἐνκάθηνται ἐπ᾿ αὐτῆς . . . τίνες αἱ πόλεις εἰς ἃς οὗτοι κατοικοῦσιν ἐν αὐταῖς. For other instances see Ex. 6⁴: Nb. 15³⁹: Dt. 1²², Dt. 1³³, Dt. 28⁴⁹.

i. Sometimes the preposition is the same, but instead of a mere pronoun we have a phrase, e.g.--

Gen. 24³⁸ ἐν οἷς ἐγὼ παροικῶ ἐν τῇ γῇ αὐτῶν.

j. The construction of which we have been speaking is not confined to the simple relative, e.g.--

Gen. 41¹⁹ οἵας οὐκ εἶδον τοιαύτας.  Ex. 9^{18, 24}, 11⁶ ἥτις τοιαύτη οὐ γέγονεν.

k. The habitual repetition of the pronoun in the LXX is a mere Hebraism, though a search among Greek writers might reveal traces of a somewhat similar usage arising independently. Here are a few instances--

Plat. Tim. 28 ὅτου μὲη οὖν ἂν ὁ δημιουργός . . . τὴν ἰδέαν καὶ δύναμιν αὐτοῦ ἀπεργάζηται, Parm. 130 E ὧν τάδε τὰ ἀλλὰ μεταλαμβάνοντα τὰς ἐπωνυμίας αὐτῶν ἴσχειν. Arist. Cat. 5 § 38 οἷον ἐπὶ μὲν τῶν ἄλλων οὐκ ἂν ἔχοι τις τὸ τοιοῦτο προενεγκεῖν.

l. In the N.T. this Hebrew syntax of the relative occurs not infrequently.

Philemon¹² ὃν ἀνέπεμψά σοι αὐτόν.  Gal. 2¹⁰ ὃ καὶ ἐσπούδασα αὐτὸ τοῦτο ποιῆσαι.  Acts 15¹⁷ ἐφ᾿ οὓς ἐπικέκληται τὸ ὄνομά μου ἐπ᾿ αὐτούς.  Mk. 7²⁵ ἧς εἶχε τὸ θυγάτριον αὐτῆς πνεῦμα ἀκάθαρτον. Cp. Mk. 1⁷: Lk. 3¹⁶: also Mk. 13¹⁹, 9³.

Instances are most frequent in the very Hebraistic book of Revelation. See Rev. 3⁸, 7^{3, 9}, 13⁸, 20⁸. Cp. i Clem. 21⁹ οὗ ἡ πνοὴ αὐτοῦ ἐν ἡμῖν ἐστίν.

70. ἀνήρ = ἔκαστος. The use of ἀνήρ as a distributive pronoun is a pure Hebraism.

iv K. 18³¹ πίεται ἀνὴρ τὴν ἄμπελον αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἀνὴρ τὴν συκῆν αὐτοῦ φάγεται.  Jdg.16⁵ ἡμεῖς δώσομέν σοι ἀνὴρ χιλίους καὶ ἑκατὸν ἀργυρίου.

71. ὅστις for ὅς. Except in the neuter singular ὅ τι, as in Josh. 24²⁷, and in the expression ἔως ὅτου, as in i K. 22³, or μέχρι ὅτου, which is found only in the Codex Sinaiticus version of Tob. 5⁷, ὅστις occurs in Swete's text only in the nominative, singular or plural. In meaning it is often indistinguishable from ὅς..

Ex. 20² Ἐγώ εἰμι Κύριος . . . ὅστις ἐξήγαγόν σε.  Cp. Dan. Θ 6²⁷.  Ps. 89⁴ ἡ ἡμέρα ἡ ἐχθές ἥτις διῆλθεν.  Cp. Nb. 14⁸.  i K. 30¹⁰ διακόσιοι ἄνδρες οἵτινες ἐκάθισαν πέραν τοῦ χειμάρρου.  Cp. Ex. 32^{4, 9}: Nb. 1⁵: i Mac. 13⁴⁸.  Jdg. 21¹² τετρακοσίας νεάνιδας παρθένους, αἵτινες οὐκ ἔγνωσαν ἄνδρα.

Οἵτινυς = οἵ occurs several times in Aristeas--§§ 102, 121, 138, 200, 308.

The same use of ὅστις for the simple relative is found in the N.T., e.g.--

Col. 3⁵ τὴν πλεονεξίαν, ἥτις ἐστὶν εἰδωλολατρία.  Acts 8¹⁵ τὸν Πέτρον καὶ Ἰωάννην· οἵτινες καταβάντες κτλ.  i Tim. 6⁹ ἐπιθυμίας . . . αἵτινες βυθίζουσιν τοὺς ἀνθρώπους.  Gal. 4²⁴ ἅτινά ἐστιν ἀλληγορούμενα.

VERBS, 72-84

72. Analytic Tenses. By an Analytic Tense is meant one which is formed with an auxiliary instead of by an inflexion, as in English 'is coming' for 'comes.' No reader of the LXX can fail to be struck by the frequency of such forms. It results from the fact that both languages combine to produce them. They are suggested by the great use made of the participle in Hebrew, while at the same time there was a strong tendency towards the employment of such forms within the Greek language itself. They are to be found in the best writers, both in prose and poetry, from Homer downwards. Plato often has recourse to them, partly for the sake of philosophical precision, and partly, it must be confessed, because in his later style he preferred two words to one. In the Laws πρέπον ἐστί almost altogether displaces πρέπει.

b. Γίγνεσθαι may be used as an auxiliary instead of εἶναι.

Ps. 72¹⁴ ἐγενόμην μεμαστιγωμένος.  Is. 30¹² πεποιθὼς ἐγένου.  Nb. 10³⁴ ἐγένετο σκιάζουσα.  Ps. 125³ ἐγενήθημεν εὐφραινόμενοι.  >Ex. 17¹² ἐγένοντο . . . ἐστηριγμέναι.  Sir. 13⁹ ὑποχωρῶν γίνου, 18³³ μὴ γίνου . . . συμβολοκοπῶν.

c. Sometimes the verbal adjective is used in place of the participle.

Is. 18³ ἀκουστὸν ἔσται.  Dt. 4³⁶ ἀκουστὴ ἐγένετο.  Gen. 45²: Is. 48³ ἀκουστὸν ἐγένετο.  Is. 23⁵ ὅταν δὲ ἀκουστὸν γένηται.  Dt. 30⁵ πλεοναστόν σε ποιήσει.

d. When a causative form is wanted corresponding to ἀκουστὸν γενέσθαι recourse is had to ἀκουστὸν ποιεῖν, e.g.--

Sir. 46¹⁷ ἀκουστὴν ἐποίησεν τὴν φωνὴν αὐτοῦ.  Cp. Ps. 105², 142⁸: Jer. 27², 38⁷: Is. 30³⁰, 45²¹, 48^{5, 6, 20}, 52⁷, 62¹¹.

e. In the N.T. these analytic tenses are relatively even commoner than in the LXX.

f. Besides εἶναι other auxiliaries are used in the N.T.--

ii Cor. 6¹⁴ μὴ γίνεσθε ἑτεροζυγοῦντες.  Col. 1¹⁸ ἵνα γένηται . . . πρωτεύων.  Rev. 3² γίνου γρηγορῶν.  Acts 8¹⁶ βεβαπτισμένοι ὑπῆρχον.

With the last example cp. Aristeas § 193 εἰ μὴ πεποιθὼς ὕπάρχοι.. The same author has κεχαρισμένος ἔσῃ in § 40 and ἰσχῦόν ἐστι in 241.

g. Instances of analytic tenses occur here and there in Josephus, e.g.--

B.J. I 31 § 1 καὶ τοῦτο ἦν μάλιστα τάρασσον Ἀντίπατρον.

Ant. II 6 § 7 τί παρόντες εἴημεν.

h. Also in the Apostolic Fathers--

ii Clem. 17⁷ ἔσονται δόξαν δόντες.  Barn. Ep. 19⁴ ἔσῃ τρέμων, 19⁶οὐ μὴ γένῃ ἐπιθυμῶν. Cp. 19⁹. Herm. Past. Vis. III 4 § 2 ὑπερέχοντες αὐτούς εἰσιν, Sim. V 4 § 2 ἔσομαι ἑωρακώς . . . ἀκηκοώς, IX 13 § 2 ἔσῃ . . . φορῶν, Mdt. V 2 § 8 ἔσῃ εὑρισκόμενος, Sim. IX 1 § 8 εὐθηνοῦν ἦν, IX 4 § 1 ὑποδεδυκυῖαι ἦσαν . . . ὑποδεδ⍣κεισαν.

73. Deliberative Use of the Present Indicative. The deliberative use of the present indicative is not unknown in Latin, especially in Terence, e.g. Phorm. 447 quid ago? Cp. Heaut. 343: Eun. 811: Ad. 538. It occurs also in the Greek of the LXX.

Gen. 37³⁰ ἐγὼ δὲ ποῦ πορεύομαι ἔτι;

So in N.T.--

Jn.11⁴⁷ τί ποιοῦμεν; What is our course?

74. The Jussive Future. a. The Jussive Future is rare in Attic Greek, and, when it does occur, is regarded as a weak form of imperative. In the LXX, on the other hand, it is very common, and is employed in the most solemn language of legislation. From the nature of the case it is not used in the first person. It may be employed in command or in prohibition. As instances of the former we may take--

Lvt. 19¹⁸ ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν.  Cp. Ex. 34^{18, 20}: iii K. 17¹¹.  Lvt. 19¹⁹ τὸν νόμον μου φυλάξεσθε. Cp. Lvt. 11⁴⁴.  Lvt. 19²² καὶ ἐξιλάσεται ὁ ἱερεὺς. Cp. Lvt. 19^{20, 21}.

b. Very often the jussive future follows an imperative.

Gen. 40¹⁴ μνήσθητί μου . . . καὶ ποιήσεις. Cp. Gen. 44⁴: Ex. 7²⁶, 9^{1, 13}: Nb. 15^{2, 17}: iii K. 17¹³.  Josh. 8⁴ μὴ μακρὰν γίνεσθε . . . καὶ ἔσεσθε πάντες ἕτοιμοι. Cp. Nb. 13¹⁸.

c. Of the use of the jussive future in prohibition we have a conspicuous example in the Ten Commandments (Ex. 20^13-17: Dt. 5^17-21)--Οὐ μοιχεύσεις, Οὐ κλέψεις κτλ. So also--

Dt. 6¹⁶ οὐκ ἐκπειράσεις Κύριον τὸν θέον σου. Cp. Nb. 22¹²: Ex. 22²⁸: Lvt. 19^12-19.

d. In the case of the jussive fpture we have ov in prohibition, because the formula was originally one of prediction.

e. Occasionally there is a transition from the jussive future οὐ μή with subjunctive--

Nb. 23²⁵ οὔτε κατάραις καταράσῃ μοι αὐτὸν, οὔτε εὐλογῶν μὴ εὐλογήσῃς αὐτόν.

f. In the N.T. the jussive future is often used in passages quoted from the LXX. In Matthew it is employed independently.

Mt. 5⁴⁸ ἔσεσθε οὖν ὑμεῖς τέλειοι, 6⁴⁵ οὐκ ἔσεσθε ὡς οἱ ὑποκριταί, 20^26-28 οὐχ οὕτως ἔσται ἐν ὑμῖν . . . ἔσται ὑμῶν δοῦλος, 21³ καὶ ἐάν τις ὑμῖν εἴπῃ τι, ἐρεῖτε κτλ,

75. The Optative. a. The pure optative, i.e. the optative as employed to express a wish, is of frequent occurrence in the LXX, as might be expected from the character of the contents, so much of which is in the form either of aspiration or of imprecation. But the use of the optative where in Latin we should have the historic tenses of the subjunctive is hardly to be found outside of Maccabees.

ii Mac. 3³⁷ οῦ δὲ βασιλέως ἐπερωτήσαντος τὸν Ἡλιόδωρον, ποῖός τις εἴη ἐπιτήδειος.  iv Mac. 17¹ ἔλεγον δὲ καὶ τῶν δορυφόρων τινὲς ὡς . . . ἵνα μὴ ψαύσειέν τις τοῦ σώματος αὐτῆς, ἑαυτὴν ἔρριψε κατὰ τῆς πυρᾶς.

The established practice is for the subjunctive to follow the historic tenses in a final clause--

Ex. 1¹¹ ἐπέστησεν . . . ἵνα κακώσωσιν, 9¹⁶ διετηρήθης ἵνα ἐνδείξωμαι.  Wisd. 16¹¹ διεσῴζοντο ἵνα μὴ . . . γένωνται. Cp. 16¹⁸.

Cp. Aristeas §§ 11, 18, 19, 26, 29, 42, 45, 111, 175, 193.

b. In the N.T. also the subjunctive is regularly employed in final clauses after an historic tense, e.g.--

Tit. 1⁵ τούτου χάριν ἀπέλιπόν σε ἐν Κρήτῃ, ἵνα τὰ λείποντα ἐπιδιορθώσῃ.

c. The pure optative is said to occur 35 times in the N.T., always, except in Philem²⁰, in the 3d person.

In Luke-Acts the optative is commonly employed in dependent questions, e.g.--

Luke 18³⁶ ἐπυνθάνετο τί εἴη τοῦτο,

with which contrast

Mk. 14¹¹ ἐζήτει πῶς εὐκαίρως αὐτὸν παραδῷ.

Outside of Acts the optative with εἰ is found only in four passages--i Cor. 14¹⁰, i Cor. 15³⁷ (εἰ τύχοι): i Pet. 3^{14, 17}.

76. Conditional without ἄν. Occasionally we find the apodosis in a conditional sentence devoid of ἄν.

Nb. 22³³ καὶ εἰ μὴ ἐξέκλινεν, νῦν οὖν σὲ μὲν ἀπέκτεινα, ἐκείνην δὲ περιεποιησάμην.  Contrast 22²⁹ and compare ii K. 22²⁷.

77. Infinitive of Purpose. The use of the infinitive to express purpoge, as in English, is common to all stages of the Greek language, but abounds more in the LXX than in classical Greek.

Gen. 37²⁵ ἐκάθισαν δὲ φαγεῖν ἄρτον.  Cp. 39¹⁴, 42^{7, 27}, 43²²: Ex. 14¹¹: Nb. 22²⁰: Job 2¹.

Of the use of the infinitive with the article to express purpose we have had occasion to speak already (§ 59).

78. Infinitive of Consequence. This construction is of doubtful propriety in Attic Greek. In the LXX it is much less common than the Infinitive of Purpose.

Ex. 11¹ καὶ οὐκ εἰσ̥κουσεν ἐξαποστεῖλαι τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἰσραήλ.

79. Paucity of Participles. The small use made of participles in the LXX, as compared with classical Greek, is a natural result of the paratactical construction which reigns throughout. The same is the case, though to a less extent, in the N.T. Take for instance--

Mk. 14¹⁶ καὶ ἐξῆλθον οἱ μαθηταί, καὶ ἦλθον εἰς τὴν πόλιν, καὶ εὗρον καθὼς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς· καὶ ἡτοίμασαν τὸ πάσχα.

The participle has disappeared in the modern language. Doubtless the influence of Biblical Greek was among the causes of its decline.

80. Misuse of the Participle. The misuse of the participle marks a stage of its decline. We find this tendency already manifesting itself in the LXX. Such an anacoluthon indeed as the following--

Ex. 8¹⁵, 9⁷ ἰδὼν δὲ Φαραώ . . . ἐβαρύνθη ἡ καρδία αὐτοῦ

may be passed over, as it might easily be paralleled from the most strictly classical writers. But we find sentences in the LXX in which a participle is the only verb. Sometimes this arises from following the Hebrew as in--

Jdg. 13^{19, 20} καὶ Μανῶε καὶ ἡ γυνὴ αὐτοῦ βλέποντες, 14⁴ καὶ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ ἐκείνῳ οἱ ἀλλόφυλοι κυριεύοντες ἐν Ἰσραήλ.

More often it does not, as in--

Ex. 12³⁷ ἀπάραντες δὲ οἱ υἱοὶ Ἰσραήλ, 15¹⁸ κύριος βασιλεύων τὸν αἰῶνα.  Jdg. 4¹⁶ καὶ Βαρακ διώκων.

Moreover we find a participle coupled with a finite verb by καί. When the subject of the two is the same, it is open to us to say that it is not copulative, but merely emphasizes the verb, as in--

Nb. 2111 καὶ ἐξάραντες (Hb. impf.) ἐξ Ὠβώθ, καὶ παρενέβαλον ἐν Χαλγαεί, 22²³ καὶ ἰδοῦσα ἡ ὄνος . . . καὶ ἐξέκλινεν.

Hardly so however when the subject is different.

Ex. 12³⁰ καὶ ἀναστὰς Φαραώ . . . καὶ ἐγενήθη κραυγὴ.  Nb. 22²³ καὶ ἰδὼν Βαλάκ . . . καὶ ἐφοβήθη Μωάβ.

81. The Intensive Participle. On the other hand there is a cause in operation in the LXX tending to an unnecessary use of participles. For in place of a cognate dative we often find the participle used along with a finite form of the same verb, to convey the intensive force that is accomplished in Hebrew by the addition of the infinitive to the finite verb, e.g.--

Gen. 22¹⁷ εἰ μὴν εὐλογῶν εὐλογήσω σε, καὶ πληθύνων πληθυνῶ τὸ σπέρμα σου.  Jdg. 11²⁵ μὴ μαχόμενος ἐμαχέσατο μετὰ Ἰσραὴλ ἢ πολεμῶν ἐπολέμησεν αὐτόν;

We might fill pages with instances of this idiom, but a statement of its frequency must suffice. This emphatic use of the participle is a more unmitigated Hebraism than the other forms of the etymological figure. The cognate accusative is quite Greek and the cognate dative is to be found in pure Greek, but we should search in vain among classical authors for the intensive use of the participle. There is a clear instance indeed in Lucian (Dialogi Marini IV 3 186 ἰδὼν εἶδον), but it is interesting to remember that Lucian himself came from the banks of the Euphrates. In Hdt. V 95 αὐτὸς μὲν φεύγων ἐκφεύγει there is a difference of meaning between the participle and the finite verb--he himself escapes by flight.

In the N.T. we have one instance, other than a quotation, of this Hebraism, namely--

Eph. 5⁵ ἴστε γινώσκοντες,

but both the reading and the interpretation of this passage are disputed.

82. Other Varieties of the Etymological Figure. In Josh. 17¹³ ἐξολεθρεῦσαι δὲ αὐτοὺς οὐκ ἐξωλέθρευσαν the infinitive absolute of the Hebrew is represented in Greek by the infinitive, instead of by a participle or a cognate dative, so that sheer nonsense is made of the translation.

In another passage, where the Greek departs from our Hebrew, an adjective takes the place of the participle--

Jdg. 5³⁰ οἰκτείρμων οἰκτειρήσει.εἰς

Sometimes we find an adverb in place of the participle--

Ex. 15¹ ἐνδόξως γὰρ δεδόξασται.  Nb. 22¹⁷ ἐντίμως γὰρ τιμήσω σε.  Prov. 23¹ νοητῶς νόει, 27²³ γνωστῶς ἐπιγνώσῃ.

The following turns of expression may also be noticed--

Jdg. 11²⁵ ἐν ἀγαθῷ ἀγαθώτερος.  Dt. 18⁸ μερίδα μεμερισμένην.  i K. 1¹¹ δώσω αὐτὸν ἐνώπιόν σου δοτὸν.

83. Middle and Passive Voices. In later Greek the boundary lines between the middle and passive voices are not clearly demarcated. Even in classical authors we find the future middle used in a passive sense, as it is also in--

Ex. 12¹⁰ οὐκ ἀπολείψετε ἀπ᾿ αὐτοῦ ἕως πρωὶ, καὶ ὀστοῦν οὐ συντρίψετε ἀπ᾿ αὐτοῦ.

The same seems to be the case with ξυρήσωμαι and ἐξυρήσατο in Jdg. 16^{17, 22}.

So in N.T.--

i Cor. 6¹¹ ἀλλὰ ἀπελούσασθε, ἀλλὰ ἡγιάσθητε, ἀλλ᾿ ἐδικαιώθητε, 10² καὶ πάντες εἰς τὸν Μωσῆν ἐβαπτίσθησαν,

though here Riddell's semi-middle sense of the verb might plausibly be brought in by way of explanation.

Instances of passive form with middle meaning are common in the LXX-

Nb. 22³⁴ ἀποστραφήσομαι I will get me back again.  Jdg. 15⁹ ἐξερρίφησαν spread themselves, 16²⁰ ἐκτιναχθήσομαι shake myself, 16²⁶ ἐπιστηριχθήσομαι support myself.  iii K. 17³ κρύβηθι hide thyself, 18¹ πορεύθητι καὶ ὄφθητι τῷ Ἀχαάβ go and shew thyself, 20²⁵ ἐπράθη sold himself.

So in N.T. in Luke 11³⁸ ἐβαπτίσθη is used for ἐβαπτίσατο.

84. Causative Use of the Verb. a. The causative use of the verb which is found in the LXX may be set down with confidence as a Hebraism. Βασιλεύειν according to the Greek language means 'to be king,' but it is frequently employed in the LXX in the sense of 'to make king,' e.g.--

Jdg. 9⁶ ἐβασίλευσαν τὸν Ἀβειμέλεχ.  i K. 8²² βασίλευσον αὐτοῖς βασιλέα, 15¹¹ ἐβασίλευσα τὸν Σαοὺλ εἰς βασιλέα.

There are all together thirty-six occurrences of the word in this causative sense.

b. Classical Greek again knows βδελύσσεσθαι in the sense of 'to loathe' or 'to abominate,' but not βδελύσσειν in the sense of 'to make abominable,' as in--

Ex. 5²¹ ἐβδελύξατε τὴν ὀσμὴν ἡμῶν ἐναντίον Φαραώ.  Lvt. 11⁴³ καὶ οὐ μὴ βδελύξητε τὰς ψυχὰς ὑμῶν.  Cp. Lvt. 20²⁵: i Mac. 1⁴⁸.

c. Still more strange to classical Greek is the sense of 'to make to sin' often imposed upon ἐξαμαρτάνειν, e.g.--

iv K. 17²¹ καὶ ἐξήμαρτεν αὐτοὺς ἁμαρτίαν μεγάλην.

This is the prevailing sense of the word in the LXX, which is found all together twenty-eight times, mostly in the phrase ὃς ἐξήμαρτεν τὸν Ἰσραήλ..

d. In this causative use of the verb is to be found the explanation

77

of Ex. 14²⁵ καὶ ἤγαγεν αὐτοὺς μετὰ βίας, where the R.V. margin has 'made them to drive.' Other similar instances are--

Ex. 13¹⁸ ἐκύκλωσεν = he led round.  i K. 4³ κατὰ τί ἔπταισεν ἡμᾶς κύριος σήμερον;   Ps. 142¹¹ ζήσεις με.

85. Reduplication of Words. In Greek we are accustomed to reduplication of syllables, but not to reduplication of words. This primitive device of language is resorted to in the LXX, in imitation of the Hebrew, for at least three different purposes--

(1) intensification,

(2) distribution,

(3) universalisation.

(1) The intensifying use.

σφόδρα σφόδρα Gen. 30⁴³: Ex. 1^{7, 12}: Nb. 14⁷: Ezk. 9⁹: Judith 4².

σφόδρα σφοδρῶς Gen. 7¹⁹: Josh. 3¹⁶.

To the same head may be assigned--

Ex. 8¹⁴ συνήγαγον αὐτοὺς θιμωνιὰς θιμωνιάς.  Dt. 28⁴³ ὁ προσήλυτος ὁ ἐν σοί ἀναβήσεται ἄνω ἄνω, σὺ δὲ καταβήσῃ κάτω κάτω.

In all the above instances perhaps the kind of intensification involved is that of a repeated process.

(2) The distributive use.

εἷς εἷς i Chr. 24⁶.

δύο δοο Gen. 6¹⁹, 7³: Sir. 36¹⁵.

ἑπτὰ ἑπτά Gen. 7³.

χιλίους ἐκ φυλῆς, χιλίους ἐκ φυλῆς Nb. 31⁶.

τὸ πρωὶ πρωί i Chr. 9²⁷.

ἐργασίᾳ καὶ ἐργασίᾳ ii Chr. 34¹³.

In pure Greek such ideas would be expressed by the use of ἀνά or κατά. Sometimes we find κατά employed in the LXX along with the reduplication, as in--

Dt. 7²² κατὰ μικρὸν μικρόν.  Zech. 12¹² κατὰ φυλὰς φυλάς.

The idea 'year by year' is expressed in many different ways--

ἐνιαυτὸν κατ᾿ ἐνιαυτόν Dt. 14²¹: i K. 1⁷: ii Chr. 24⁵>

κατ᾿ ἐνιαυτὸν ἐνιαυτόν i K. 7¹⁶.

ἐνιαυτὸν ἐξ ἐνιαυτοῦ Dt. 15²⁰.

τὸ κατ᾿ ἐνιαυτὸν ἐνιαυτῷ iii K. 10²⁸.

τὸ κατ᾿ ἐνιαυτὸν ἐνιαυτόν 2 Chr. 9²⁴.

(3) The universalising use.

ἄνθρωπος ἄνθρωπος = whatsoever man Lvt. 17^{3, 8, 10, 13}, 18⁶, 20⁹, 22¹⁸: Ezk. 14^{4, 7}.

ἀνδρὶ ἀνδρί Lvt. 15³.

Of the above three uses the distributive is the only one which is to be found in the N.T.

Mk. 6⁷ δύο δύο, 6³⁹ συμπόσια συμπόσια, 6⁴⁰ πρασιαὶ πρασιαὶ.

So also in the Pastor of Hermas--

Sim. VIII 2 § 8 ἦλθον τάγματα τάγματα, 4 § 2 ἔστησαν τάγματα τάγματα.

86. Expressions of Time. a. 'Year after year' is expressed in ii K. 21¹ by a nominative absolute ἐνιαυτὸς ἐχόμενος ἐνιαυτοῦ without any pretence of grammar.

b. The use of the word 'day' in vague expressions of time is a Hebraism, e.g.--

Gen. 40⁴ ἡμέρας = for some time.  Cp. Dan. O’ 11⁹.  Jdg. 15¹ μεθ᾿ ἡμέρας = after some time.  Cp. iii K. 17⁷.  iii K. 18¹ μεθ᾿ ἡμέρας πολλὰς = after a long time.

c. 'Day by day' (Hb. day, day) is expressed in Gen. 39¹⁰ by ἡμέραν ἐξ ἡμέρας (cp. Lat. diem ex die). In Esther 3⁴ καθ᾿ ἑκάστην ἡμέραν is correctly used as the Greek equivalent for the phrase day and day, which St. Paul (ii Cor. 4¹⁶) has reproduced word for word in the form ἡμέρᾳ καὶ ἡμέρᾳ.

d. The use of 'yesterday and the day before' as a general expression for past time = heretofore is a Hebraism which presents itself in the LXX under a variety of slight modifications.

ἐχθὲς καὶ τρίτην i K. 4⁷, 10¹¹: ii K. 3¹⁷, 5²: i Chr. 11².

ἐχθὲς καὶ τρίτην ἡμέραν Gen. 31^{2, 5}: Ex. 5^{7, 14}: Josh. 4¹⁸: i K. 14²¹, 19⁷, 21⁵: i Mac. 9⁴⁴.

ἐχθὲς καὶ τρίτης Ruth 2¹¹: iv K. 13⁵: Sus. Θ¹⁵.

ἀπ̓ ἐχθὲς καὶ τρίτης ἡμέρας Josh. 3⁴.

πρὸ τῆς ἐχθὲς καὶ τρίτης Dt. 19⁴.

πρὸ τῆς ἐχθὲς καὶ πρὸ τῆς τρίτης Ex. 21²⁹.

πρὸ τῆς ἐχθὲς καὶ πρὸ τῆς τρίτης ἡμέρας Ex. 21³⁶.

πρὸ τῆς ἐχθὲς οὐδὲ πρὸ τῆς τρίτης Dt. 4⁴², 19⁶.

πρὸ τῆς ἐχθὲς οὐδὲ πρὸ τῆς τρίτης ἡμέρας Ex. 4¹⁰.

In Joshua 20⁵, which occurs only in the Codex Alexandrinus, we

79

have ἀπ᾿ ἐχθὲς καὶ τρίτην, where ἐχθὲς-καὶ-τρίτην is treated as a single indeclinable noun.

e. 'Just at that time' is expressed variously as follows--

αὐθωρί Dan. O’ 3¹⁵.

αὐτῇ τῇ ὥρᾳ i Esd. 8⁶⁵: Dan. 3⁵, Θ 3¹⁵.  Cp. Acts 22¹³.

ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ ὥρᾳ Dan. Θ 5⁵.  Cp. Lk. 12¹², 13¹, 20¹⁹.

ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ καιρῷ Tob. 3¹⁷. Cp. Lk. 13¹.

87. Pleonastic Use of ἐκεῖ and ἐκεῖθεν. Just as a personal pronoun is supplied after the relative (§ 69), so a demonstrative adverb of place is supplied after a relative adverb or after some phrase equivalent to one.

Gen. 33¹⁹ οὗ ἔστησεν ἐκεῖ τὴν σκηνὴν αὐτοῦ.  Cp. Gen. 39²⁰, 40³: Ex. 21¹³.  Ex. 20²⁴ οὗ ἐὰν ἐπονομάσω τὸ ὄνομά μου ἐκεῖ.  Dan. Θ 9⁷ οὗ διέσπειρας αὐτοὺς ἐκεῖ.  iii K. 17¹⁹ ἐν ὧ αὐτὸς ἐκάθητο ἐκεῖ.  Cp. Gen 39²⁰: Ex. 12¹³.  Gen. 31¹³ ἐν τῷ τόπῳ ᾧ ἤλειψάς μοι ἐκεῖ στήλην.  Nb. 14²⁴ εἰς ἣν εἰσῆλθεν ἐκεῖ.  Cp. 15¹⁸, 35²⁶: Dt. 4²⁷.  Ex. 8²² ἐφ᾿ ἧς οὐκ ἔσται ἐκεῖ.  iv K. 1⁴ ἡ κλίνη ἐφ᾿ ἧς ἀνέβης ἐκεῖ.  Dt. 9²⁸ ὅθεν ἐξήγαγες ἡμᾶς ἐκεῖθεν.  Nb. 23¹³ ἐξ ὧν οὐκ ὄψῃ αὐτὸν ἐκεῖθεν.  Dan. O’ 9⁷ εἰς ἃς διεσκόρπισας αὐτοὺς ἐκεῖ.

This idiom, which is thoroughly Hebrew, is to be explained on the same principle as in § 69. In the N.T. it is found only in Revelation--

Rev. 12⁶ ὅπου ἔχει ἐκεῖ τόπον, 12¹⁴ ὅπου τρέφεται ἐκεῖ, 17⁹ ὅπου ἡ γυνὴ κάθηται ἐπ᾿ αὐτῶν (=ἐκεῖ).

88. πᾶς with οὐ and μή. a. The use of πᾶς with a negative particle, where in classical Greek οὐδείς or μηδείς would be employed, is a Hebraism, even though in certain cases the resulting expression may be paralleled from pure Greek usage.

The πᾶς may either precede or follow the negative (οὐ, μή, μηδέ, οὐ μή) without difference of meaning.

b. We will first take instances from the LXX where the πᾶς precedes the negative.

Ex. 12⁴³ πᾶς ἀλλογενὴς οὐκ ἔδεται ἀπ̓ αὐτοῦ.  Cp. 12⁴⁸: Ezek. 44⁹.  Dan. O’ 5⁹ πᾶς ἄνθρωπος οὐ δύναται.  Cp. Dan. O’ 2¹⁰.  Hbk. 2¹⁹ πᾶν πνεῦμα οὐκ ἔστιν ἐν αὐτῷ.  i Mac. 2⁶¹ πάντες . . . οὐκ ἀσθενήσουσιν.  Ex. 22²² πᾶσαν χήραν καὶ ὀρφανὸν οὐ κακώσετε.  Jer. 17²² πᾶν ἔργον οὐ ποιήσετε.  Cp. Ex. 12^{16, 20}: Nb. 28¹⁸: Jdg. 13¹⁴.

So in N.T.--

Rom. 10¹² πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων ἐπ ̓ αὐτῷ οὐ καταισχυνθήσεται.  Cp. Eph. 4²⁹, 5⁵.  Rev. 18²² πᾶς τεχνίτης . . . οὐ μὴ εὑρεθῇ ἐν σοὶ ἔτι.  ii Pet. 1²⁰ πᾶσα προφητεία γραφῆς ἰδίας ἐπιλύσεως οὐ γίνεται.  i Jn. 2²¹ πᾶν ψεῦδος ἐκ τῆς ἀληθείας οὐκ ἔστιν.  Cp. i Jn. 3^{6, 10, 15}, 4³, 5¹⁸: Rev. 22³.

c. In the following passages of the LXX the πᾶς follows the negative--

Ps. 142² οὐ δικαιωθήσεται ἐνώπιόν σου πᾶς ζῶν.  Eccl. 1⁹ οὐκ ἔστιν πᾶν πρόσφατον ὑπὸ τὸν ἥλιον.  Ex. 20¹⁰: Dt. 5¹⁴ οὐ ποιήσετε ἐν αὐτῇ πᾶν ἔργον.  Cp. Ex. 20¹⁶.  ii K. 1511 οὐκ ἔγνωσαν πᾶν ῥῆμα.  Tob. 12¹¹ οὐ μὴ κρύψω ἀφ᾿ ὑμῶν πᾶν ῥῆμα.  Ps. 33¹¹ οὐκ ἐλαττωθήσονται παντὸς ἀγαθοῦ.  Jdg. 13⁴ μὴ φάγῃς πᾶν ἀκάθαρτον.  Tob. 4⁷ μὴ ἀποστρέψῃς τὸ πρόσωπόν σου ἀπὸ παντὸς πτωχοῦ.

So in N.T. --

Rom. 3²⁰ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου οὐ δικαιωθήσεται πᾶσα σὰρξ.  Cp. Gal. 2¹⁶: Mt. 24²².  Lk. 1³⁷ οὐκ ἀδυνατήσει παρὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ πᾶν ῥῆμα.  Acts 10¹⁴ οὐδέποτε ἔφαγον πᾶν κοινὸν.  i Cor. 1²⁹ ὅπως μὴ καυχήσηται πᾶσα σὰρξ.  Rev. 21²⁷ οὐ μὴ εἰσέλθῃ εἰς αὐτὴν πᾶν κοινὸν.

PREPOSITIONS, 89-98

89. Prominence of Prepositions. The prominence of prepositions in the LXX is partly a characteristic of later Greek generally and partly due to the careful following of the Hebrew. But while prepositions are employed to express relations for which in classical Greek cases would have been thought sufficient, there is at the same time a tendency to blur some of the nice distinctions between the uses of the same preposition with different cases.

90. εἰς. a. εἰς in classical Greek denotes motion or direction: in Biblical Greek it denotes equally rest or position, and may be translated by 'at' or 'in' as well as by 'to,' e.g.--

Gen. 37¹⁷ πορευθῶμεν εἰς Δωθάειμ . . . καὶ εὗρεν αὐτοὺς ἐν Δωθάειμ.  Josh. 7²² ἔδραμον εἰς τὴν σκηνὴν . . . καὶ ταῦτα ἦν ἐγκεκρυμμένα εἰς τὴν σκηνήν.ῳ Jdg. 14¹ καὶ κατέβη Σαμψὼν εἰς Θαμνάθα, καὶ εἶδεν γυναῖκα εἰς Θαμνάθα.

For examples of the former meaning only we may take--

Gen. 42³² ὁ δὲ μικρότερος . . . εἰς γῆν Χανάαν.  Nb. 25³³ τὴν γῆν εἰς ἣν ὑμεῖς κατοικεῖτε.  Judith 16²³ ἀπέθανεν εἰς Βαιτυλουά.

b. In the N.T. εἰς denoting rest or position is very common.

Mk. 2¹ εἰς οἶκον = at home.  Cp. Lk. 9⁶¹: Mk. 10¹⁰.  Mk. 13³ καθημένου αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸ ὄρος τῶν ἐλαιῶν.  Jn. 1¹⁸ ὁ ὢν εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ πατρὸς.  Acts 21¹³ ἀποθανεῖν εἰς Ἰερουσαλήμ.

Cp. also Eph. 3¹⁶: i Pet. 3²⁰, 5¹²: Mk. 1^{9, 39}, 13⁹: Luk. 4²³, 11⁷: Jn. 9⁷, 20⁷: Acts 7⁴, 8⁴⁰, 25⁴.

The obliteration of the distinction between rest and motion is one of the marks of declining Greek. In the modern language εἰς has usurped the functions both of ἐν and πρός.

c. The use of εἰς with the accusative after εἶναι and γενέσθαι as practically equivalent to the nominative may safely be regarded as a Hebraism.

d. i Chr. 11²¹ ἦν αὐτοῖς εἰς ἄρχοντα, 17⁷ εἶναι εἰς ἡγούμενον.  iii K. 20² ἔσται μοι εἰς κῆπον λαχάνων. Cp. Gen. 48: i Chr. 11⁶.  i K. 17⁹ ἐσόμεθα ὑμῖν εἰς δούλους.  Jer. 38³³ ἔσομαι αὐτοῖς εἰς θεὸν, καὶ αὐτοὶ ἔσονταί μοι εἰς λαόν.  Cp. Jer. 38¹: Gen. 48¹⁹: ii K. 7¹⁴.  Gen. 2⁷ ἐγένετο ὁ ἄνθρωπος εἰς ψυχὴν ζῶσαν.  Ex. 2¹⁰ ἐγενήθη αὐτῇ εἰς υἱόν.  i K. 4⁹ γένεσθε εἰς ἄνδρας.

πρός in one passage takes the place of εἰς.

Sir. 46⁵ μία ἡμέρα ἐγενήθη πρὸς δύο.

e. In the New Testament this idiom occurs both in quotations from the Old and otherwise.

i Jn. 5⁸ καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν εἰσιν.>  Lk. 3⁵ ἔσται τὰ σκολιὰ εἰς εὐθείας (Is. 40⁴.  ii Cor. 6¹⁸ ἔσεσθέ μοι εἰς υἱούς καὶ θυγατέρας (ii K. 7⁸: Is. 43⁶.  Mt. 19⁵ ἔσονται οἱ δύο εἰς σάρκα μίαν (Gen. 2⁴).  Mt. 21⁴² ἐγενήθη εἰς κεφαλὴν γωνίας (Ps.117²²).  Lk. 13¹⁹ ἐγένετο εἰς δένδρον.  Cp. Rev. 8¹¹11.  Jn. 16²⁰ ἡ λύπη ὑμῶν εἰς χαρὰν γενήσεται.

The same usage is to be found also in the Apostolic Fathers--

Herm. Past. Sim. IX 13 § 5 ἔσονται εἰς ἓν πνεῦμα, εἰς ἓν σῶμα.  i Clem. 11² εἰς κρίμα καὶ εἰς σημείωσιν . . . γίνονται.  Ign. Eph. 11¹ ἵνα μὴ ἡμῖν εἰς κρῖμα γένηται.

f. The employment of εἰς to express the object or destination of a thing might easily be paralleled from classical Greek, but its frequent

82

use in the LXX is due to its convenience as a translation of the corresponding Hebrew.

Gen. 34¹² καὶ δώσετέ μοι τὴν παῖδα ταύτην εἰς γυναῖκα.  Ps. 104¹⁷ εἰς δοῦλον ἐπράθη Ἰωσήφ.  iii K. 19 χρίσεις τὸν Ἁζαὴλ εἰς βασιλέα.  Gen. 12 ποιήσω σε εἰς ἔθνος μέγα.

When the verb is active and transitive, as in all but the second of the above instances, εἰς might be dispensed with as far as Greek is concerned. When a verb of being is employed, this use runs into the preceding--

Gen. 1²⁹ ὑμῖν ἔσται εἰς βρῶσιν, Gen. 1¹⁴ ἔστωσαν εἰς σημεῖα.

g. The use of εἰς with the accusative, where classical Greek would simply have employed a dative, is shown by the Papyri to have been a feature of the vernacular Greek of Alexandria.

Ex. 9²¹ ὃς δὲ μὴ προσέσχεν τῇ διανοίᾳ εἰς τὸ ῥῆμα κυρίου κτλ.

So in N.T.--

i Cor. 16¹ τῆς λογίας τῆς εἰς τοὺς ἁγίους (the collection for the saints).

91. ἐν. a. Although ἐν, was destined ultimately to disappear before εἰς, yet in Biblical Greek we find it in the plenitude of its power, as expressing innumerable relations, some of which seem to the classical student to be quite beyond its proper sphere. One principal use may be summed up under the title of "The ἐν of Accompanying Circumstances." This includes the instrumental use, but goes far beyond it. Under this aspect ἐν invades the domain of μετά and σύν. In most cases it may be rendered by the English 'with.'

Hos. 1⁷σώσω αὐτοὺς ἐν κυρίῳ θεῷ αὐτῶν, καὶ οὐ σώσω αὐτοὺς ἐν τόξῳ οὐδὲ ἐν ῥομφαίᾳ οὐδὲ ἐν πολέμῳ οὐδὲ ἐν ἵπποις οὐδὲ ἐν ἱππεῦσιν.  Cp. i K. 17^{45, 47}: i Mac. 3¹².  Ex. 6¹ ἐν γὰρ χειρὶ κραταιᾷ κτλ. (But in Ex. 3¹⁹ we have ἐὰν μὴ μετὰ χειρὸς κραταιᾶς.)  Cp. Ex. 3²⁰: Jdg. 15^{15, 16}.  Jdg. 14¹⁸ εἰ μὴ ἡροτριάσατε ἐν τῇ δαμάλει μου.  Cp. iii K. 19¹⁹.  iv K. 18¹⁷ ἐν δυνάμει βαρείᾳ.  In the parallel passage Is. 36² μετὰ δυνάμεως πολλῆς.  i Mac. 4⁶ ὤφθη Ιουδας . . . ἐν τρισχιλίοις ἀνδράσιν.

So in N.T.--

i Cor. 4²¹ ἐν ῥάβδῳ ἔλθω πρὸς ὑμᾶς; Cp. i K.17⁴³: Ps. 2⁹.  Eph. 6² ἐντολὴ πρώτη ἐν ἐπαγγελίᾳ.  ii Pet. 3¹⁶ ἐν ἀνθρώπου φωνῇ.  Mt. 9³⁴ ἐν τῷ ἄρχοντι τῶν δαιμονίων ἐκβάλλει τὰ δαιμόνια. Cp. Mt. 12²⁴, 25¹⁶.  Mt. 26⁵² ἐν μαχαίρῃ ἀπολοῦνται.

b. The ἐν of accompanying circumstances is not wholly foreign to classical Greek, though the extended use made of it in Biblical diction is.

Eur. Tro. 817 ὦ χρυσέαις ἐν οἰνοχόαις ἁβρὰ βαίνων.

c. In another of its Biblical uses ἐν becomes indistinguishable from εἰς, as in--

Ex. 4²¹ πάντα τὰ τέρατα ἃ ἔδωκα ἐν ταῖς χερσίν σου.  Jdg. 13¹ παρέδωκεν αὐτοὺς Κύριος ἐν χειρὶ Φυλιστιείμ. Cp. Jdg. 15^{12, 13}, 16^{23, 24}.  Is. 37¹⁰ οὐ μὴ παραδοθῇ Ἱερουσαλὴμ ἐν χειρὶ βασιλέως.  Tob. 5⁵ πορευθῆναι ἐν Ῥάγοις. Cp. Tob. 6⁶, 9².

So in N.T.--

ii Cor. 8¹⁶ χάρις δὲ τῷ θεῷ τῷ διδόντι τὴν αὐτὴν σπουδὴν ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ Τίτου.  Mt. 14³ ἔθετο ἐν φυλακῇ.  Jn. 3³⁵ πάντα δέδωκεν ἐν τῇ χειρὶ αὐτοῦ.  Rev. 11¹¹ πνεῦμα ζωῆς ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ εἰσῆλθεν ἐν αὐτοῖς.

92. ἀπό. a. ἀπό in the LXX is often little more than a sign of the genitive, like our English 'of,' provided that the genitive be partitive.

Ex. 12⁴⁶ καὶ ὀστοῦν οὐ συντρίψετε ἀπ᾿ αὐτοῦ.  Josh. 9 οὐκ ἦν ῥῆμα ἀπὸ πάντων ὧν ἐνετείλατο Μωυσῆς τῷ Ἰησοῖ ὃ οὐκ ἀνέγνω Ἰησοῦς.  iii K. 18¹³ ἔκρυψα ἀπὸ τῶν προφητῶν Κυρίου ἑκατὸν ἄνδρας.  Joel 2²⁸ ἐκχεῶ ἀπὸ τοῦ πνεύματός μου.  ii Esd. 11² εἷς ἀπὸ ἀδελφῶν μου.

So in N.T.--

Lk. 6¹³ ἐκλεξάμενος ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν δώδεκα.  Jn. 21¹⁰ ἐνέγκατε ἀπὸ τῶν ὀψαρίων ὧν ἐπιάσατε νῦν.

b. ἀπό = 'by reason of' is another unclassical use which occurs in the LXX.

Gen. 41³¹ αὶ οὐκ ἐπιγνωσθήσεται ἡ εὐθηνία ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἀπὸ τοῦ λιμοῦ.  Ex. 2²³ καὶ κατεστέναξαν οἱ υἱοὶ Ἰσραὴλ ἀπὸ τῶν ἔργων, 3⁷ καὶ τῆς κραυγῆς αὐτῶν ἀκήκοα ἀπὸ τῶν ἐργοδιωκτῶν.  Ps. 11⁶ ἀπὸ τῆς ταλαιπωρίας τῶν πτωχῶν . . . ἀναστήσομαι.  Sir. 20⁶ ἔστιν μισητὸς ἀπὸ πολλῆς λαλιᾶς.  Nahum 1⁶ αἱ πέτραι διεθρύβησαν ἀπ᾿ αὐτοῦ.

In this way ἀπό becomes = ὑπό, as in Dan. 0’ 1¹⁸.

So in N.T.--

Hb. 5⁷ εἰσακουσθεὶς ἀπὸ τῆς εὐλαβείας.  Lk. 19 ὐκ ἠδύνατο ἀπὸ τοῦ ὄχλου, 24⁴¹ ἀπιστούντων αὐτῶν ἀπὸ τῆς χαρᾶς.  Cp. Acts 12¹⁴, 22¹¹.  Jn. 21⁶ οὐκέτι αὐτὸ ἑλκύσαι ἴσχυον ἀπὸ τοῦ πλήθους τῶν ἰχθύων.

Of ἀπό = ὑπό see instances in Lk. 9²², 17²⁵: Acts 20⁹.

c. The combination ἀπό . . . ἕως is a Hebraism. It may be rendered "from . . . unto," as in--

Dt. 8³⁵ ἀπὸ ἴχνους τῶν ποδῶν σου ἕως τῆς κορυφῆς σου,

or "both . . . and," as in--

Ex. 9²⁵ἀπὸ ἀνθρώπου . . . ἕως κτήνους.

>Sometimes καί precedes the ἕως--

Jdg. 15⁵ ἀπὸ . . . καὶ ἕως . . . καὶ ἕως both . . . and . . . and.  Cp. Sir. 40³: Jer. 27³.

93. μετά. μετά with genitive = 'in dealing with' is a Hebraism.

Jdg. 15³ ὅτι ποιῶ ἐγὼ μετ᾿ αὐτῶν πονηρίαν.

So in N.T.--

Lk. 10³⁷ ὁ ποιήσας τὸ ἔλεος μετ᾿ αὐτοῦ: Acts 14²⁷.  Cp. Herm. Past. Sim. v 1 § 1: i Clem. 61³.

94. ὑπέρ. a. The frequent use of ὑπέρ in the LXX to express comparison is due to the fact that the Hebrew language has no special form for the comparative degree. We therefore sometimes find the LXX representing the original by the positive with ὑπέρ.

Ruth 4¹⁵ ἥ ἐστιν ἀγαθή σοι ὑπὲρ ἑπτὰ υἱούς.  Cp. i K. 1⁸, 15²⁸: iii K. 20²: ii Chr. 21¹⁴.  i K. 9² ὑψηλὸς ὑπὲρ πᾶσαν τὴν γῆν.  i Chr. 4⁹ ἔνδοξος ὑπὲρ τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς αὐτοῦ.  Sir. 24²⁰ ὑπὲρ μέλι γλυκύ.  Ezk. 5¹ ῥομφαίαν ὀξεῖαν ὑπὲρ ξυρὸν κουρέως.

b. More often however the comparative is used, but the construction with ὑπέρ still retained.

Jdg. 15² ἀγαθωτέρα ὑπὲρ αὐτήν.#8195; Cp. Jdg. 11²⁵.  Jdg.18²⁶ δυνατώτεροί εἰσιν ὑπὲρ αὐτόν.  Ruth 3¹² ἐγγίων ὑπὲρ ἐμέ.  iii K. 19⁴ κρείσσων . . . ὑπὲρ τοὺς πατέρας.  Cp. Sir. 30¹⁷.  Hbk. 1⁸ ὀξύτεροι ὑπὲρ λύκους.  Dan. 0’ 1²⁰ σοφωτέρους δεκαπλασίως ὑπὲρ τοὺς σοφιστάς.

§ 4: Xen. Mem. 14 § 14: Hdt. VII 103. It is therefore not surprising that it should have been employed by the translators in the same way as Vare'p.

Op. 0' 113. Dan. OO 77 BLaOopov 7repLQV-ms 7rapd iravra Td Ajpla. i Esd. 435 iaXvpoTEpa 7rapd iravra. Dan. 0' 1113 uct'toya 7rapa'

97. New Forms of Preposition. a. Besides the more liberal use made of the prepositions already current in classical Greek, we meet also in the LXX with new forms of preposition.

b. a7r4vw0eY occurs in Swete's text in Jdg. 161° : ii K. 112°- 24, 2021: iii K. 153: iv K. 23. It not unnaturally gets confused in some places with the classical braVw0ey, which is very common in the LXX, having been found a convenient rendering of certain compound prepositions in the Hebrew.

c. $7roK9To)0ev, which is only used as an adverb in classical Greek, assumes in the LXX the function of a preposition, e.g. -

d. evavri, drevavra, and Kartvavrt are prepositions unknown to classical authors, though v7re'vavrt is to be found in Polybius.

Evavr& in many passages of the LXX has been replaced in Swete's text by evavriov, but there are still numerous instances of it left, e.g. Ex. 2812 23. 34, 291°· 23, 24, 21, `s. '2. In N.T. it occurs in Lk. 18, Acts 811.

d7r&avrt is also common, e.g. Gen. 32', 2111, 2319, 259, 49". In the N.T. it occurs in the sense of I contrary to' in Acts 17'.

e. Evwrcov is another preposition unknown to classical authors, but extremely common in Biblical Greek, as being an apt equivalent for certain Hebrew forms of expression. Deissmann gives instances of its adverbial use in the Papyri, so that we need not suppose it to have been invented by the translators of the O.T. In the N.T. it occurs frequently in Luke-Acts, Paul, and Revelation, but is not used in Matthew or Mark.

KaTEvw7rcov occurs in the LXX in Lvt. 41': Josh. 16, 37, 2144, 239: Esther 51: Dan. O 5". In N.T. in Eph. 1': Col. 1': Jude2'.

f. oirl'a-w as a preposition is unclassical, but extremely common in the LXX.

In the N.T. it occurs in i Tim. 515: Acts 537, 2010: Mt. 4'9,1011,162' Lk. 142 : Jn. 1219: Rev. 133.

g. Karoreu8E(v) is construed with a genitive in Hom. Od. XII 148, but its classical use is almost wholly adverbial, whereas in the LXX, in which it occurs twenty-four times in all, it is mainly prepositional.

In ii Chr. 3431 we have o.7ro o7rio8Ev Kvpiov. Cp. Eccl. 11° d7ro EM. 7rpoQBEv jtmwv.

h. KVKXO'BEV occurs in the LXX as a preposition in iii K. 1811: Sir. 501'A: Jer. 1711, 311' : i Mac. 1417.

K~Kaw is sometimes used in the same way, as in iii K.18111: Sir. 23'8: Is. 62: Jer. 39".

i. Other prepositions that may be briefly noticed are ~xop,Eva aerpas Ps. 1408, EQ(UTEpov T~4 KOXVUa1?0paS Is. 2211.

98.. Prepositions after Verbs. The great use made of prepositions after verbs is one of the main characteristics of Biblical Greek. It

b. In Hellenistic Greek the use of d with the subjunctive becomes common, e.g. -

Arist. E.E. II 1 § 17 el' ;j $vOpwaros, 8 § 9 A:i Tis wpoQ8p, 18 cc' yap arOK'fcavy, 10 § 21 El rOXEpCOQm Philo II 19, De Abr. § 25 et' cppavOos ;j. Jos. B.J. 131 § 1 ell . . . aQ9evilag, Ant. 12 § 3 el' Kai vvpfllj.

We should therefore antecedently expect to find this construction in the LXX, and yet it is seldom found. It occurs in Jdg. 118, where an indicative and subjunctive are both made dependent on ellcl

-El E7rta7pEOETE pc ZjAE6s vapard~ao~aoea6 ly vLOIS 'Appiuv jai vapasui KvpA,os allTOM EVw7rLOV E/AOV. In fit. 85 Swete's text has ra&v6-ac in place of 7raa&7imrl. In i K. 14"' ei PcaraOw o=aw -rwv aUoovXwv is so punctuated as to become an instance of a interrogative (§ 100). In Sirach 2226 EC KaKd pOC Ovpfq, the avu/8,rj has given place to O'Vp,8jQETaI.